Better (sniffle), thanks for asking...

Looks like Rudy might be setting the stage (see: Between the Lines #1). The NYTimes reports:

Rudolph W. Giuliani scaled back his weekend schedule in New Hampshire on Friday as he recovered from the illness that led him to be hospitalized overnight this week for what his aides called “flulike symptoms.”
His campaign lightened Mr. Giuliani’s weekend schedule by canceling some of the events it had planned for him in New Hampshire.

Still, the campaign declined to say precisely what the symptoms were, which tests were performed at a hospital in St. Louis, or what doctors believe caused the symptoms. Mr. Giuliani ended his race for the United States Senate in 2000 after receiving a diagnosis of prostate cancer.

He never quit Giuliani Partners and refuses to make the client list public. He gave paid speeches instead of sitting on the 9/11 Commission. Then there's Judy and the puppies.


Clearly trying to suck the youth out of small children didn't do the trick. Watch this space.

Good for me. Bad for politicians and Britney.

So excited to read that The Daily Show and Colbert will return along with Leno, Letterman, et al in January.

GOOD PR FOR THE WRITERS.

The writers union has made interim deals with certain production companies that allow them to produce new episodes of their talk shows and some awards shows, even though the strike continues. It is very smart to give the waiver for the Oscars (but not Globes), late shows and Colbert/Stewart, from a PR perspective, to keep the public on their side. Won't hurt that many of these personalities fronting these shows are guild members who will keep the strike in the publics mind, or sympathetic to the guild.

From a purely pragmatic standpoint, those audiences and timeslots don't really avail themselves to replacement programming for very long before the audience looks elsewhere. And lots of young men watch those shows, the most highly coveted of all the audience by advertisers. If they replace Colbert/Daily Show in their routine, they may not come back - EVER.

People keep asking me HOW they can do that. I know the production companies are the key. Lettermans company, Worldwide Pants, produces his show and Craig Ferguson, for instance. So they were able to make an interim deal. Technically, anyone can make an interim deal with the union. But the writers are very carefully choosing them.

Networks and studios production companies arent going to be granted that same interim deals, for negotiation leverage - which is interesting because the late night shows are cash cows for the networks.

The next question is, Should a guest cross the picket line and appear?

Right now, my answer is going to be based on how the hosts handle the tone of the show upon returning. Like after 9/11, the hosts will have to make it ok to be there - or not. See who else is confirmed. Pencil yourself in, but don't confirm until after the first monologue.

UPDATE: The shows are returning without writers, which is a big risk for the hosts (hate to see how much of their banter and spontaneous reactions are pre-scripted), which makes them long interview shows, which is potentially good for the guests. More time to talk and plug and the picket lines issue should be settled.

Interesting to note that Letterman may make a deal with the writers to have them come back. His production company is uniquely situated to do so.

Between the Lines

One of the things TRCB hopes to do is read between the lines for the real stories. I have been talking to friends about this one for a few days, then Rudy helped move my theory along.

Rudy Giuliani will drop out of the race sighting health issues before he can be branded a loser.

Why? He makes too much money from being perceived as a dragon slayer (see: I wasn’t fired, or the Henry defense, as it will come to be known). Under a Dem admin, he can expect nothing in the way of government contracts. He will have no real influence with which to lobby the admin, especially if he spends a year calling them names.

Back story
Things could be worse under a Republican admin for him. He plays hard and for keeps. Willard Romney and the Rev. Gov. Huckabee arent going to be forgiving. And, John McCain? Well, prepare yourself, Rudy, for the mother of all cranky old men yelling "Get off my lawn" when it's the White House grounds.

The tough guy of 9/11 turned his plane back over flu-like symptoms? Reporters traveling with him reported no coughing, sneezing or signs of, shall we say, gastro-intestinal trouble. His firewall states are in trouble. His reputation is in tatters.

Use the Henry defense and play the health card.

So why do I think this? Here's where TRCBs PR background comes in. This is the WORST possible way to deal with illness on the campaign trail. You have had life threatening cancer, you do what Cheney did - full disclosure. First rule of crisis PR? Control the story. So why be mysterious and let the public think your candidate could be sick?

Their version seems to be leading somewhere... OUT (but not until after he loses SC and FLA, which can be blamed on a shortened schedule to accommodate this mystery illness). Don't expect to hear that excuse right away, though. Only during the rehabilitation/historical revisionist phase.

But if Willard keeps getting caught in his offensive lies on a daily basis and the Rev. Gov. Huckabee flames out when people think, 'do I want someone who doesn't believe in evolution to be President of the United States?' - it could turn around, but I don't think so.

America's Mayor. Person of the Year. Knight of the British Empire. Loser in a primary?
I don't see it happening.

Drive-By PR (An occasional feature of unsolicited advice)

In response to questions about what happens next:
Jaime Lynn has to leave the show. Nick wont let her be a pregnant 16yo on air. There are certainly morals clauses in her talent contract that allow Nick an easy out. But the network has to appear to be 100% behind the talent (it has ramifications for other talent), but also fear any backlash, Christian boycotts and bad press.

Besides, it's always better to quit, than be fired.

Ask my last, first date. The Henry defense we will call it for now.

My advice? Take the million and go home. Have the baby. Name it Christian or Grace, not Apple or Tallulah. Stay home, dont get married and raise your kid for 2 years. Then do a nice People cover. Cry to Barbara Walters and TRIUMPH OVER ADVERSITY (we love that).

Then go all girl power. Be a strong mom. Yell at the paparazzi because you fear for your child (see Julia Roberts). Protective moms get away with anything and will make you a survivor (without any of those pesky addiction issues). Then the gays will love you.

And we run everything.

Defending Lynne Spears

Im so tired of people striking out at Lynne Spears for doing an interview with a tabloid about Jaime Lynn's pregnancy. First rule of crisis PR is get out in front of the story and tell it yourself. And since Jaime Lynn will most likely be fired from Nickelodeon and her future career opportunities just became significantly limited. I am reminded of Monica Lewinsky who said that she knew right away that she would never have a normal life, so she was going to have exploit her earning potential fully while she could. After all, the negative ramifications would never go away (jokes, photographers, gossip, security risks), but her chance to cash in would.

Considering the circus that has grown up around Britney and Jaime Lynn has, in turn, grown up around it, it is the height of hypocrisy for Tom ONeill from US Weekly on Countdown and Bonnie "The Devil" Fuller in HuffPo decrying the outrage, then profiting from it.

Disgusting.

You Tube Causes Vigilantism

Who says the Intertubes cause lethargy in kids? Interesting side effect to UGC phenomenon:

YouTube peer pressure made clerk resist robber
The Associated Press
ELMWOOD PARK, N.J. -- When a thief started taking cash from his register on the weekend, Dunkin' Donuts employee Dustin Hoffmann fought back by clobbering the man with a ceramic mug.

But Hoffmann admits he was less worried about the stolen cash than how he might look on the video-sharing site YouTube.

"What was going through my mind at that point was that the security tape is either going to show me run away and hide in the office or whack this guy in the head, so I just grabbed the cup and clocked the guy pretty hard,'' Hoffmann told The Record of Bergen County.

"There are only a few videos like that on YouTube now, so mine's going to be the best,'' he said. "That'll teach this guy.''

That sound you hear...

Is the sound of public opinion turning against Britney.

From a friend:
16-Year-Old Jamie Lynn Spears Is Pregnant
Posted Dec 18th 2007 7:17PM by TMZ Staff
Jamie Lynn Spears, 16, has confirmed to OK! Magazine that she is pregnant. Oh. My. God.
A source tells us the interview, which hits stands tomorrow, is six pages and is on the record with Jamie Lynn and her mother. She tells the mag that the father is Casey Aldridge, who she has been dating for some time and first met at church. Brit's younger sister, star of Nick's "Zoey 101," says she's keeping the baby.
Sources tell us that she has not yet told her older sister. Well, she knows now.
UPDATE: Nickelodeon issued the following statement this afternoon: "We respect Jamie Lynn's decision to take responsibility in this sensitive and personal situation. We know this is a very difficult time for her and her family, and our primary concern right now is for Jamie Lynn's well being."

So much for Britneys impending miscarriage (though it could still 'happen' as a sympathy ploy). Stay tuned. Or, go live your life. I'll stay tuned. Do you really care?

Im afraid the biggest loser in this whole issue might be Lynne Spears, a sweet, devoted and GOOD mother. She keeps getting grouped with Dina Lohan and Kathy Hilton. Jane Carter is the actual 3 leg of that stool. Lynne Spears and Lynn Harless (Justin's mother) were the two most engaged 'stage' moms I have ever seen. Together they helped raise many of those kids from Mickey Mouse and NSync.

I remember having plans with Lynn Harless one night. She called to cancel and told me it was because, "Justin sounded like he was getting a little too big for his britches. I need to go out on the road and remind him who he is."

More mom, than stage.

Year End Charts

Excellent year-end review from Billboard here and the full charts for 07 here.

Pop
The Billboard 200
#1 Daughtry
Daughtry

The Billboard Hot 100
#1 Irreplaceable
Beyonce

Adult Top 40
Hot Adult Top 40 Songs
#1 Maroon 5
Makes Me Wonder

Hot Latin Songs
#1 Mi Corazoncito
Aventura

Hot Dance Club Play Singles
#1 I Need Someone
Ralph Falcon

Hot Dance Singles Sales
#1 Every Day Is Exactly The Same
Nine Inch Nails

Main Stream Rock
#1 Papa Roach
Forever

Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs
#1 Lost Without U
Robin Thicke

Top Rap Album
#1 Kingdom Come
Jay-Z

Hot Rap Singles
#1 Make Me Better
Fabolous Featuring Ne-Yo

Truth about Travolta

Because you have to parse the corporate angle out of everything Page 6 says, the real story isn't that Travolta was dumped from the film, I am told that this is a by-product of when the studio decided to go in a comedy/parody direction.

John Travolta Booted From "Dallas" Film
NY Post | Page Six | December 17, 2007 07:38 AM
John Travolta has been dropped from the "Dallas" movie after being promoted as the project's anchor for more than two years. Insiders tell Page Six that Travolta, who was just nominated for a Golden Globe for donning a fat suit for his drag role in "Hairspray," was "let go about two weeks ago. He had the role of J.R. Ewing taken from him and given to Ben Stiller."

However, a rep for Stiller denies the comic actor accepted or was offered the part.

Rather than blame the film, which would come back to haunt it at release time, why not blame the actor? News of a film that tossed its lead, director and script, can kill a film before its made.

Oh, look. Dallas is being produced by 20th Century FOX (News Corp), corporate overlord to the NY Post and Page 6.

This is why Fox Business is tanking. Finance will let you fool the public with tilted 'news', but don't mess with their money by angling their financial news. Wall St don't play that.

So why do we?

Rumor MIll

BritBrit
The corporate porn/pro-wrestling tour that is the tabloid life may be about to claim its first casualty and the industry is predicting another.

A tabloid writer told me this morning that he expects a Britney miscarriage any day now. Since the story has been run by more than one of the magazines, it might have originated from an outside source. Either way, someone has to cover their tracks soon!

No fewer than 3 people involved in the media circus said to me today that the caravan of paparazzi hanging out on Mulholland is going to kill someone and soon. I drive by there most days and count up to 25 cars waiting around on one of the most treacherous residential roads I have ever traveled.

Soon. That was the word they all used.

THE Strike
Don't look for production to start up again until April at the soonest. Do look for me, wandering the streets in search of entertainment.

Or, maybe Dodd...

Certainly my hero of the day, if ever there was one.

Sam Stein
The Huffington Post
Dodd's Filibuster Threat Stalls Wiretap Bill
December 17, 2007 07:56 PM

Senator Chris Dodd won a temporary victory today after his threats of a filibuster forced Democratic leadership to push back consideration of a measure that would grant immunity to telecom companies that were complicit in warrantless surveillance.

The measure was part of a greater bill to reorganize the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Earlier on Monday, the Senate, agreed to address a bill that would have overhauled FISA, authorized the monitoring of people outside the United States, given secret courts the power to approve aspects of surveillance, and granted telecom companies retroactive immunity for past cooperation.

But the threat of Dodd's filibuster, aimed primarily at the latter measure, persuaded Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-NV, to table the act until January. A compromise on the immunity will ostensibly be worked out in the interim period.

I have been watching CNN for 4-5 hours today and didn’t hear this story mentioned ONCE. Gee, Time Warner. Issue with warrantless wire tapping? Reid tried to be too clever with a trick to send both competing bills to the floor, but rules dictate that the first bill out of committee goes first on the floor, and the version without the immunity was considered a fall back, if you will.

Reid was inundated with calls and emails (all of which were, ironically, scooped up and sorted for future actions). Doesn’t that idea just work against the “If you have nothing to hide” or “We are only watching the bad guys” arguments? The act of sorting is spying. And if they are data mining, seems I write an awful lot of words that would be interesting to a data mining program. Just clearing me means I have been spied on.

See why they are so afraid? Beyond the lies and timeline problems, the financial risk is too much OF COURSE.

Not to be too much of a conspiracy theorist here after the TW comment, but Hillary could be running against GWB (and showing her experience at the same time, thus trumping Obama) by speaking out against the things he has done that she is going to change – like torture, wiretapping, Justice Dept, any of the 1100 signing statements (compared to the first Clinton dynasty’s 200 in 8 years) instead of taking their money and staying mum.

It’s called leadership, statesmanship, public service - not politics.

UPDATE

I had a thought.

Why would 76 senators support retro-active immunity for the telecoms?

First, the right.
Wired reported that there seems to be a correlation between the telecom company Qwest, the one company that did not give in to government requests, and federal contracts as far back as Feb 2001 (also reported by Stace). The admin wants to protect itself from whatever carrots and sticks were used, up to and including the Department of ‘Justice’ to get its way PRIOR to 9/11.

The White House doesn’t want to protect the telecoms, it needs it to protect itself.


The Left
Duplicity
Too many of the members of the congressional leadership were in fact briefed on many of these issues and didn’t raise concerns because, the tide was not in that direction at the time, what with terror plots in every mosque and and a couple wars to manufacture. They didn’t ask, protest or do enough at the time and its coming back to haunt them. Picture Sen Clinton’s Iraq vote fallout spread across both parties on issues that go beyond privacy and reflect the corruption.

and Power
The scandals cut right across every govt department and branch, the intelligence community, military, political fields – even the media companies that would act as a watch dog (see why they are rushing the new ownership rules? Once you’re invested in gov’t, you work to protect it).

We over-reacted and once we did, all the political weak-knees in Congress gave in, believing they wanted to be on the winning team.

I love my country. Can I have it back, please?

Alexis de Tocqueville
"Liberty has never come from the government. Liberty has always come from the subjects of government. The history of liberty is the history of resistance. The history of liberty is a history of the limitation of governmental power, not the increase of it.”

'08ing Change

I have been working on a long endorsement for the upcoming primary. Even though its in February, it will be decided long before then, I fear. The only real way to have a voice is with your money and your time. So the time to act, is now, if you havent already.

My short endorsement, therefore, is based on one thing only. It is time to change how we do politics in this country. Until there is another or a 3rd party candidate that I can work with (Gore/Bloomberg), I have decided to support Barack Obama.

His low key style may turn off a lot of people, but he wont engage. I respect that. The Republicans have been defining the issues and the agenda for too long.

Further, Hillary Clinton has shown her true side. I respect Hillary Clinton very much and would support her candidacy and presidency, fully. I love Bill Clinton. He is a national treasure. I get choked up thinking about him. But he and his wife are ruthless politicians. Just because I support their goals, I do not have to support their tactics. They play the Republican game and it has to stop.

A Hillary admin will be restoration in some ways, which I am fine with, but a new president should have their own agenda to administer and protect. She will have to defend the past Clinton administration. Or, at a minimum it is another red herring to toss into any real debate for the right. She will have to hire the striking writers to create enough one-liners to sustain us for the next 4-8 years.

She is too pro-business (for their money) and pro-telecoms, in particular (who should be broken down and their mgmt in jail). Her health plan is a sell-out.

Sen. Obama, as cliché and on message as this sounds, gives me HOPE. I want to vote FOR someone this go, and he is the only candidate I can vote for, not as a defense against another.

On the right, I have given money to Ron Paul to keep him in there, to keep talking about his issues, which I support in many ways (knowing that the compromise needed under a Pres Paul would be OK by me. His actual ideas would take generations to employ and I support the goals, if not the actions). Besides, under Pres Paul, at some point I would wake up or sober up and have to see who really won in 08.

Huckabee seems to me to be who Americans say they are in polls and the pulpit. America's Decadent Puritans, as The Economist properly called us.

Hillary is who we really are. Compassionate and passionate, if too pragmatic to the point that we have lost our way.

To be President you don't have to have all the answers. Our great presidents were inspirational leaders who knew what questions to ask - and the first consideration wasn't political.

President Obama is who I hope we become.

Back Story

People are turned off of Giuliani and Romney. Huckabee is saying things in a way that is resonating with the public. A Huckabee v Obama race would be interesting for us as a country. I would love to debate ideas like the role of religion, science, foreign policy, privacy, presidential power - instead of hate and division as Kang (Hillary) and Kodos (Giuliomney) promise (pardon the Simpsons reference).

My current bet is McCain becomes the compromise candidate (like John Kerry in Iowa in 04) in 08 for the right (compromise because of his experience over Obama and Hillary).

Romney is running to win a primary, praising Pres Bush, but voters know the primary this time, is the real race, in many ways. Giuliani is a nightmare waiting to happen. Romney IS John Kerry, with election Tourrettes. But, I still think McCain is gonna be their standard bearer.

If you think Im nuts for thinking that Huckabee is going to be a player, this is why Huckabee will beat Romney, from HuffPo:

"During an appearance on Meet the Press today, Mitt Romney took another swipe at his chief primary opponent, Mike Huckabee, calling on him to apologize to President Bush for describing the current U.S. foreign policy as "arrogant bunker mentality."

"That's an insult to the president and Mike Huckabee should apologize to the president," Romney said when read Huckabee's statement by moderator Tim Russert. "To say that the president is arrogant and has a bunker mentality, that's when he went over the line."

Huckabee responded during his Sunday appearance on CNN's Late Edition With Wolf Blitzer, accusing Romney of taking his article out of context and flip-flopping on the Iraq War troop surge." Gov Huckabee:

Well, I think he needs to read the article.It would really help if he would do that.Because if he did, he would see that there's no apology necessary to the president. I'm the one who actually supported the president's surge... So, you know, I don't have anything to apologize for. But I'm running for president of the United States.I've got to show that I do have my own mind when it comes to how this country ought to lead, not only within its own borders but across the world. And what I demonstrated in that article -- and I invite people to actually read it and not just take what my opponents say that it says, what they're going to see is that I believe America has to have the strongest possible military on the face of the planet.So strong that nobody wants to engage us in battle. But also a nation that recognizes that we do better when we are partners with the entire world standing against the threat of Islamo-fascism than when we simply say that we're going to do it our way, and if you don't want to do it our way, then we brand you as being with the other side