According to the BBC, other nominees for the category are Curb Your Enthusiasm, Nurse Jackie, The Office and Modern Family. However, the programme with the highest nominations is HBO’s World War 2 series – The Pacific, with 24. It will run agains other mini-series which includes Return To Cranford. Other potentially high achievers include Mad Men, which has 17 nominations including the best drama series. Mad Men will contend against True Blood and Lost. This year’s award event promises to be exciting as ever.

They had an Olympics-sized opportunity. And they failed. The executives at NBC decided the Marriage Ref was one of the few new shows they were going to push hard to their millions of new viewers during the Winter Games. It was a gamble. And it’s proving to be a losing one.

The Marriage Ref is a show created by (and starring) Jerry Seinfeld. Being that he was responsible for what made NBC unstoppable in the 90’s, the executives must have thought he was their savior for the new decade. They were wrong.

The Marriage Ref shows clips from real husbands and wives involved in some dispute. Husband wants a stripper pole in the bedroom, wife doesn’t. Husband wants their dead dog mounted in the living room, wife doesn’t. You get the idea.

What makes this different than the dozens and dozens of reality shows already out there is that actual celebrities come on stage to judge the argument and decide a winner. It’s obvious Seinfeld has connections. Marriage Ref showcased some MAJOR celebrities like Alec Baldwin and Madonna. That’s nothing to sneeze at.

But unfortunately that’s not enough to polish this turd. The show just isn’t that funny. It isn’t even all that original. Now I understand humor and taste is subjective. My opinion may not be the same as yours. But the numbers show that although many people have sampled the show, most are choosing to not come back for more.

Its premiere episode aired immediately after the Olympics’ closing ceremony. It drew a pretty huge audience, 14.4 million viewers to be specific. It was the number one show on TV at its first airing.

However its second episode came in 2nd (out of the top 3 networks). With just 7.7 million viewers it just barely squeaked by the 3rd place of ABC’s Private Practice. Its most recent episode got about 2 million LESS viewers than Private Practice. At about 6 million viewers, its ratings are not much better than what Leno had in Primetime before he was canceled.

It doesn’t take much of a referee to know the Marriage Ref has struck out.

Image via CrunchBase

Noah “Puck” Puckerman is more than just a man with a Mohawk. Over the recent episodes we’re seeing a more sensitive Puck on the show. As a soon-to-be father, Puck is doing what he can to give Quinn money…even if it means stealing from the bake sale.

Mark Wayne Salling plays Puck, the bad boy the nation is falling in love with. Salling is 27 years old, born and raised in Dallas Texas. So, a southern boy. I wonder if he ever had a southern accent… boy, that’d be sexy. I imagine his Texan roots didn’t hurt him land a role on an episode of “Walker, Texas Ranger” back in 1999. That seems like a long time ago for a guy who’s playing a teen on TV now.

Other than “Walker, Texas Ranger”, Salling really has only had 2 other gigs on his acting resume. And they both have a scary theme…literally. He had a part in the 1996 horror “Children of the Corn: The Gathering” and then ten years later was in a movie called “The Graveyard”.

While he’s had surprisingly few acting jobs, Salling is proving himself as a great actor. And don’t forget about his musical ability. When you see him with a guitar in Glee, he’s probably not faking it. Growing up, Salling would play guitar in local bands and dabble in songwriting. Actually, dabbling is an understatement. He’s written songs for recording artists like Josh Green and Danielle McKee.

His musical interests started very early. In a recent interview, Salling says he started playing piano at age 5, and writing his own music at 6 or 7.

What’s on his iPod? Oddly enough it’s probably “smooth jazz”. Strange, I know. But he was influenced in the 90’s by the grunge scene, bands like Pearl Jam.

Salling says the TV shows he’s most likely to watch are the Simpsons and Family Guy. While I’m sure he’s telling the truth, I can’t help but wonder if he’s not revealing a few other favorites, instead feeling obligated to mention only on the same network as Glee. But hey, don’t bite the hand that feeds you.

If you can’t get enough of Puck (and horror flicks aren’t you’re thing), check out Salling’s new musical venture. He sings, writes and plays guitar for a solo project entitled “Jericho”. Here’s a taste of his music, in addition to an interview he did before he joined the hit show Glee.

Here’s Mark Salling talking about himself playing a “douchebag”

As I watch the latest episode of Glee, I’m left thinking about how this show is really unlike anything else on television, now or ever. On its surface, an uninformed viewer may mistake this for another “teen drama”. A show set around high school kids, struggling through crushes and cliques and all those other high school clichés. It seems we’ve had these shows throughout recent decades. I grew up with Saved By the Bell, Head of the Class and 90210 (the original). Maybe some of you can look back to Square Pegs, or even further back to Welcome Back Kotter. We all got to see how high school was supposed to look like. How the class clown always had a joke, how the jock could never get the answer right and how you could always trust the teacher to help you do the right thing.

Image via Wikipedia

Well, those times are gone… and thank goodness!

The scenarios and plot lines in Glee are nothing like the traditional teen drama we adults grew up with. Take the latest episode for example, Episode 6 “Vitamin D”. You see teens abusing a supplement to get extra energy. This concept is not new to teen shows. Heck, even Saved By the Bell had the brainy girl freaking out on some over-the-counter uppers. But in Glee, this “vitamin” is given to them by the school nurse (who doesn’t even have the medical experience to know you should feed a fever and starve a cold. Oh, wait. Is it starve a fever and feed a cold?). Anyway, we see an authority figure make the big screw-up. And instead of getting an after-school-special-like-lesson, it’s just pure humor. No life lesson learned. No person in authority stopping a careless teen from making a major mistake. And for this, I thank you Glee.

Now, Glee isn’t completely exempt from the trappings of teen dramas. Take for example the current ones on the CW. 90210 and Gossip Girl are two dramas based on the lives of overly-privileged, overly-dramatic teens. Of course, these “teens” are played mostly by actors in their mid-20’s. In Glee, we pretty much see the same thing. While some of the actors really are teens – barely (like Kurt Hummel, played by 19 year-old Chris Colfer), some actors are much older (jock turned singer Finn Hudson is played by 27 year-old Cory Monteith). I am surprised by the actual ages of some of these Glee actors. They play teenage-angst so well.

Image via Wikipedia

Now keep in mind, I am giving you the viewpoint of a 30-something person. I do wonder what a teenager thinks about the show and its scenarios. Specifically, teens that hasn’t yet made it to high school and only has the TV to enlighten them of what’s to come. Hopefully, they can see that high school is as ridiculous as this show portrays. That the adults don’t always have all the answers. And that it’s really up to them to make their own path in life.

Based on the lives of 3 teenagers and their parents, this comedy is one of my favourites purely because it highlights the humorous differences between two generations. In the latter series, the introduction of a grand-father and a nephew just mixes it up a bit more. If you are a teenager or a parent of a teenager, I highly recommend you watch this one because it truly is one that you will find you relate to. Originally titled ‘8 Simple Rules For Dating My Daughter’, this sitcom was based on the book of the same title by a humour columnist W. Bruce Cameron. This show has no flaws in terms of the stereotypical characters that each of the 3 teenage siblings has been given and the kinds of characters the parents hold. This is a must watch for anyone irrespective of whether you are a teen or if you know a teen; you will relate to certain bits somehow!

Everybody Loves Raymond

I love Ray Romano and I love the sarcastic voice he carries every single time in this comedy where he has certain situations based on his own life! Again, what is really good about the acting of this TV comedy is that the characters’ roles are so defined. You’ve got to love the ever-caring but over-protective Marie and the lovable Frank with his harsh comments that sound incredibly hilarious! Everything about this sitcom is just right! The hilarious one liners are what will really make you laugh until you have tears pouring out of your eyes. Just based on an ordinary family, it’s amazing how you can create a really good comedy out of it!

South Park

This animated sitcom has some of the best humour I’ve ever seen! Although infamous for multiple reasons, the dark, satirical humour over various topics is one that will squeeze a chuckle out of you no matter what. Based on the lives of Cartman, Stan, Kenny and Kyle, four school going children living in South Park, I love the satire that this show carries and the one-liners will make you roar with laughter. Right from the World of Warcraft to Canada, this show deals with it all and you’ve really got to understand the situation going on before you can chuckle. Although intended for mature audiences, the mindset of this is quite young adult-like so I have no doubt that you will enjoy this thoroughly.

The Big Bang Theory

Where can I start with The Big Bang Theory? It is my favourite American sitcom EVER! This sitcom explores the lives of four lady-love starved scientists (or geeks) Raj, Howard, Leonard and best of all, Sheldon. Again, each one of their characters is so defined and each and every one of them has something funny going on. I love the way the directors have really delved deeper into the lives of geeks and portrayed them as pretty unfortunate but I do like the occasional introduction of some love. The mix is delivered through the involvement of Penny, one of the teenagers in ‘8 Simple Rules’ who is the blond hottie whose love Leonard vies for. This sitcom is different, hilarious and a must watch for anyone who wants to get their everyday dose of giggles.

Friends

Although ‘The Big Bang Theory’ is my favourite, no one can steal the crown of American sitcom that has always belonged to Friends. This show is based on the lives of 6 friends, Ross, Rachel, Monica, Chandler, Phoebe and Joey and this certainly is the king of American comedy. Everything about this sitcom is admirable right from the hilarious roles that the actors of each of the characters portray to the sarcastic one liner and absolutely amusing situations. It is a mix of emotions once the series ends but with 10 series, I can confirm without any doubt that this is one of America’s most successful comedies. I love it so much that I decided to write this article on it. With millions of views watching it as it was telecasted then and even now, people all around the globe watch this sitcom STILL and continue to love it like they always used to. Friends truly deserves the top spot on my favourite 5 American sitcoms.

One reason these news spoofs are relevant today, is that many ‘real’ news/mainstream programs/networks have in effect become incorporated and a means of infotainment- spending too much time on relatively unimportant [if not out right frivolous] sentimental, sensational, or celebrity gossip news; instead of doing in-depth reporting on issues which could affect peoples lives for years if not decades to come. Real news in essence is not news for it is being manipulated by corporate interest. In spoofing the news such shows are giving a more accurate picture of what is happening. According to the 2004 National Annenberg Election Survey (NAES04), viewers (in particular young) of The Daily Show were more informed on issues than viewers who relied solely on mainstream/conventional network news. “In recent years traditional journalists have been voicing increasing concern that if young people are receiving political information from late-night comedy shows like The Daily Show, they may not be adequately informed on the issues of the day. This data suggests that these fears may be unsubstantiated. We find no differences in campaign knowledge between young people who watch Leno and Letterman -programs with a lot of political humor in their opening monologues — and those who do not watch late-night. But when looking at young people who watch The Daily Show, we find they score higher on campaign knowledge than young people who do not watch the show, even when education, following politics, party identification, gender, viewing network news, reading the newspaper, watching cable news and getting campaign information on-line are taken into account (NAES04) .”

Objectivity is a skill which involves the ability to describe and perceive something accurately and unbiased without being influenced by individual perceptions, emotions, and prejudices -a unique and admirable skill. Objectivity has meaning but in reality, it is greatly influenced by an individual’s point of view via perceptions, emotions, etc. thereby determining the extent they can be biased or slant their point of view. The point of objectivity is the presumption is that the presenter will be more factual and “fair and balanced,” the famous tagline of Fox News Channel – even through there is evidence that they are anything but. As important if not more so is “objectivity” that is factual and not deceptive. It is one thing to be persuasive but quite another to be deceptive. Does “fair and balanced” mean that you give all sides’ equal say? So do you give one who is obviously wrong an equal voice as that of one who is obviously right? Such questions must be taken into consideration when ascertaining if The Daily Show and similar programs are biased.

The Daily Show, although comedic and satirical in nature, is simply informing and presenting issues in a factual manner. Stewart asserts that the show is not a liberal organization with a political agenda. Its point of view maybe more liberal, but in line with satire, the show’s primary focus is comic. Those that are in power, be it Democrat or Republican, are the target, especially if they are not functioning accordingly. A variety of guest – democrats, republicans, international leader, etc. – have appeared on the program. The Daily Show as a principal source of news for young people is a notion that Stewart and program staff reject for it is insulting the knowledge base of the viewers. This being the “age of information osmosis”, a phrase coined by Stewart, there is not a single news source. “Our show would not be valuable to people who didn’t understand the news because it wouldn’t make sense. We make assumptions about your level of knowledge that… if we were your only source of news, you would just watch our show and think, ‘I don’t know what’s happening (Stewart).”

The controversy surrounding the 2000 Presidential Election, focused on the recount process in the state Florida for the 25 electoral votes which was the decisive factor in winning the Presidency. Under unusual circumstances, Democratic Presidential nominee as well as then Vice President, Al Gore, received more of the popular vote that Republican Candidate nominee and then Governor of Texas, George W. Bush. Other disturbing factors were prevalent in that the ‘real’ news media either failed to report or under reported, at least when it mattered. With the help of Katherine Harris, Secretary of State for the State of Florida and other key Bush insiders, thousands of voters – mainly black and other democratic leaning constituencies – were unjustifiably purged from registration roles. The only reason the election received so much coverage as it did is because Gore contested the results. Similar allegations were made in the 2004 Presidential Election which got even less press, because Democratic nominee/Junior U.S. Senator of Massachusetts, John F. Kerry (a distant relative of Bush) did not contest the results. The mainstream media helped to conveniently ‘scapegoat’ Ralph Nader for Gore’s loss. No one ever hinted that Nader used unethical or illegal tactics to win votes. The more difficult question was not asked or even answered- did Bush and his insiders use unethical or even illegal tactics to subvert the 2000 election in his favor?

Initially, many major networks declared Gore had won Florida’s 25 electoral votes. Fox News Channel’s election night “decision desk” at the helm journalist/media consultant John Ellis projected Bush as the winner. In less than four minutes, in a stampede fashion, other networks aligned with Fox in declaring Bush as the winner in Florida, thereby capturing the Presidency. John Prescott Ellis is Bush’s first cousin. Launched in October of 1996, Fox News Channel was founded by Australian-American media mogul, Rupert Murdoch. Owned by Fox Entertainment Group, an auxiliary of News Corporation, Fox News Channel is an American-based cable news and satellite news channel. Although they vehemently deny bias in their reporting and consider themselves not be apart of mainstream news media, the channel is widely known for purporting its conservative political positions and has the largest number of regular viewers for a cable news network.

The Daily Show’s coverage of the 2000, as well as 2004 Presidential Election, propelled the show as well as Stewart to new levels of critical respect and popularity. The shows coverage of both elections was entitled Indecision 2000 and Indecision 2004, a phrase accurately epitomizing their nature. Both consisted of a series of episodes which covered the primaries leading up to the general election. Stewart contends that the elections, in particular the 2000 election recount, shaped the editorial voice for the show.

The doomed nature of the U.S. is not due to satirical news shows like The Daily Show. The fundamental problem is rapacious corruption and skull dagger in all aspects of society, in particular the government and business sector in which the so called news media misreports/‘spins’, aids and abets and/or fails to report essential and crucial truths. A free press, as guaranteed in the 1rst. Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, is supposed to be a press free to report facts relative to the people’s right to know relevant truth. Relevance, precision, accountability to the public, and fair representation of the context of events and facts reported, to name a few, are the fundamental tenets of journalism A press free from undo corporate, political, government, military, special interest- influence. It should not in effect be ‘spinning‘ the truth, failing to report the facts, or even failing to ask pertinent challenging questions. Thus the news media incorporated is abrogating its constitutionally guaranteed charge and duty.

Would it be fare to say that if Gore had been President there likely wouldn’t have been an Iraq war, a trillion dollar deficit, $4.50/gallon gas price, or a current economic crisis so severe no viable/sane solution is in site? How it possible is that one network could propel others to reverse a decision that would have such a cataclysmic affect? In assessing his approach to The Daily Show, writer Ben Karlin states “The main thing, for me, is seeing hypocrisy. People who know better saying things that you know they don’t believe.(Larris)” In essence the public is willfully being deceived – being told what others think they want to hear as opposed to what they need to hear. Integrity and a host of other journalistic principles are being violated only to harbinger an array of future doom/decay to come. Prayerfully there will come a day, when another man’s heaven will not be another man’s hell. If there is an ounce of truth in The Daily Show opposed to an array of lies often times purported in conventional media, then maybe they are better off watching.

Bibliography

Flaherty, Mike (2009-01-20). “Stewart has real flair for fake news.” Variety. http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117998822.html?categoryid=3523&cs=1. Retrieved on 2009-01-22.

Larris, Rachel (2005-05-02). “The Daily Show Effect: Humor, News, Knowledge and Viewers.”. Georgetown University. http://cct.georgetown.edu/academics/theses/RachelLarris.pdf. Retrieved on 2008-08-22.

Jon Stewart. (2002). A Conversation with Jon Stewart [Video]. Harvard Institute of Politics: Harvard University.

The 2004 National Annenberg Survey. The Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania. www.AnnenbergPublicPolicyCenter.org

Winstead, Lizz (2008-04-23). “Q & A With Daily how Creator Lizz Winstead.”. Westword. http://blogs.westword.com/latestword/2008/04/qa_with_daily_show_creator_liz.php. Retrieved on 2008-07-09.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=111816&title=2000-election-coverage

www.wsws.org/articles/2000/nov2000/fox-n17.shtml – 30k

elections.foxnews.com/2008/08/28/gore-not-another-2000/ – 55k

First premiered on 24th of September 1994 on NBC and created by David Crane and Marta Kauffman, a time of ultimate comedy began, featuring the 6 friends, Ross, Rachel, Monica, Chandler, Joey and Phoebe. Almost everything about this show is iconic, starting from the theme song “I’ll Be There For You” by The Remembrandts to the 6 friends. With 10 series and 236 episodes, ‘Friends’ became a global phenomenon and even now, countries right from the UK to India know of ‘Friends’ and because it features still on their television channels, people still watch it. ‘Friends’ was in fact so great that on the 6th of May 2004, when the finale was shown, 52.5 million viewers from America tuned in, which became the fourth most-watched series finale in the history of television. But I just thought what makes ‘Friends’ so popular. The answer is simple – the six actors.

Every time you watch ‘Friends’ you will laugh at Chandler’s sarcastic one liners or Phoebe’s capricious behaviour even if you watch it a hundred times. The roles of each of the 6 characters have been sculpted so beautifully that ‘Friends’ wouldn’t be ‘Friends’ if even one of them left. The mantra between the 6 of them is so impeccable that each of their characters are linked to each other and if one of them was absent, the gap would be so great that nothing would be able to bridge it. Each one of the 6 has a set of characteristics linked to them and the fact that no one dominates the show means that we just grow to love them a lot. Even 5 years after ‘Friends’ showed it’s finale to the world, you can picture the actors the moment someone says their name on screen. Joey will always be Matt LeBlanc, Chandler will always be Matthew Perry, Monica will always be Courtney Cox Arquette, Ross will always be Davic Schwimmer, Rachel will always be Jennifer Aniston and Phoebe will always be Lisa Kudrow. You can never picture Joey to be some one else or for that matter, any of the other characters. It can be right to say that even these actors have become the characters they portray. Even offstage, the 6 have become best friends and one true example of this is Jennifer Aniston who is the godmother of Courtney Cox Arquette’s daughter, Coco Riley Arquette. When there is such a great connection between people, the audience immediately warms to them and begins to love them.

That is not all but these characters are who the entire sitcom is based on. The sitcom isn’t based on their lives but if you think about it, it is really them and how they take on life. Nearly each and every one of them has their own individual story and what is brilliant is that there will be a lot of people in this world who can relate to them and who share their story up to a certain extent. The characters are the piece de resistance of ‘Friends’ and make it the success it is today. It isn’t just the main characters who make ‘Friends’ the comical experience of the TV world but even recurring characters. Who can forget Gunther vying for Rachel’s love or Janice with her “OH MY GOD!” and her braying laughter? Even little characters like these add invaluably to the story to make it as we watch it today. These minor characters may not be extremely relevant to the grand scheme of things but they tie the story together and add in that bit of finesse to it in a very comical fashion. You’ve just got to give it up to the creators of ‘Friends’ that TV would be incomplete without it today.

 I am a massive fan of ‘Friends’ and even now, when I watch the finale, a heavy feeling creeps up my heart even though I know that ‘Friends’ will be telecasted from the beginning the next day. It is a real shame that we can’t watch it any more because the group don’t want to get back together even for a film but all we can do is cherish those moments we laughed at the gags and enjoy what has already been put into DVDs. You just cannot deny that ‘Friends’ has made a massive impact on the entire world and has changed the face of television.

Image Credit

In the 1920’s, three short, homely, and energetic vaudevillian comedians probably didn’t realize it at the time but they were on their way to a show biz journey that would eventually lead them to becoming household names for generations beyond their time. 

Moses Horowitz (“Moe Howard”), Louis Feinberg (“Larry Fine”), and Moe’s brother Samuel Horowitz (“Shemp Howard”) were performing as sidekicks to their leader and tyrannical offstage boss, Ted Healy.  Shemp would break from their act first and would be replaced by Moe’s other younger brother, Jerome, better known to the world as “Curly”.

In 1934, the three comedians would finally break away from Healy’s alcoholic and abusive tendencies and land a contract with Columbia Pictures, to become known forever as The Three Stooges. 

Image Credit

The Stooges escalated slapstick comedy to a new level, far beyond the slower and less violent tempo of the earlier pioneers of slapstick such as Laurel and Hardy.  In the end, their style would be imitated by future comedians for decades to come, which leads me into my discussion with Moe:

JJ:  Moe, you must feel proud of the fact that your work with the boys would be copied by future popular entertainers for generations beyond your careers which ended in 1970.

Moe:  Hey skillet head!  Who are you to call anybody “homely”?  Why I oughtaaa……

JJ:  Okay, Moe, my apologies!  (Moe then releases the painful knuckle-twist he has on my nose!)

Moe:  Actually, I’m gratified that our work has been revived many times in movie theatres, TV shows, and those touching entertainment remembrance specials.  However, for the last several years, the Stooges have seemed to have dropped out of sight.  It’s become almost sad to me that the possibility exists that our long run may coming to an end.

JJ:  Why do you think that may true, Moe?

Moe:  Women, in general, never really caught on to the Stooges or the slapstick stuff.  I think that’s because, women, by nature, don’t appreciate violence – even if it’s fake.  And, women are often the parent who has the most influence on their kids.  They try to protect their kids from harm.  In the 1970s, at a time of almost anything goes, we were already being criticized by politically correct pressure groups to tone down on TV violence and those groups were pushing the media and sponsors not to show our brand of humor. 

JJ:  So the possible decline of the Stooges has mainly to do with women?

Moe:  Maybe so, women don’t want their kids watching the Stooges but their kids sure love those violent video games!  I really think the video games don’t prompt the kids to violence anymore than cartoons or the Stooges.  I ran into George Carlin the other day – I loved his rant on today’s kids being turned into pansies by their neurotic parents….they wear bicycle helmets; kneepads; car seats; planned playtimes and on and on….George really nailed it.

JJ:  Now I know I’ve figured out where you got your inspiration for your “Woman Haters” movie!

Moe:  Well, when you think about it, how many women will even bother to read this article?

JJ:  Yeah, you have a point.

Moe:  Actually, it seems people want more sophisticated or complex humor today.  Political stuff, social messages, blah, blah.  But, in our defense, we did some political stuff and eased political satire into our act on many occasions.  But, the plots and premises were pretty simple.

JJ:  Yeah, the Nazi spoofs were phenomenal, and timely, too….your Hitler was simply the best.

Moe:  Thank you, porcupine.

JJ:  I’ve heard it said that you and the boys were only offered year-to-year contracts and never got a raise in 23 years.

Moe:  That’s true…Columbia kept telling us our brand of humor was not going to last so we were glad to keep the act going and we’d sweat out a new contract every year.  Sometimes, I look back and see how we were being taken by Columbia.  But, we paid our bills and lived comfortable.

JJ:  I’d be remiss if we didn’t talk about Curly. 

Moe:  “Babe” (Curly) was our youngest of five brothers.  As a boy, he had athletic skills and was a good basketball player.  He loved to dance and listen to music and was an accomplished ballroom dancer.  He played ukulele and could sing.  He wasn’t a good student but he was in demand socially, with his beautiful singing voice.

JJ:  It’s unfortunate and tragic that he died so young, and with a history of broken marriages and bouts of alcoholism.

Moe:  I prefer to talk about the comic genius who was so unique that people tried to copy him; like Lou Costello.  To me, Lou was an opportunist who almost completely copied Babe.   

JJ:  Chevy Chase also capitalized on using slapstick in his act.  Chris Farley performed outrageous physical slapstick routines, very much resembling the Stooges.  And how about Jim Carrey; he seems to abuse himself for a laugh.

Moe:  Absolutely, Babe was a rarity and very unique.  I think a lot of him was borrowed from those fine performers.

JJ:  It’s safe to say that Joe Besser or Joe DeRita were nowhere the talent of Curly.  However, if you could have had anyone you wanted at the time of Curly’s departure, who would that have really been?

Moe:  Farley would be an obvious choice – what an all-out, over-the-top performer!  Plus, he’s a great friend of mine.  But, I really think Michael Richards has something special as he showed with his Seinfeld character, Cosmo Kramer.  Again, a very unique style.  I think Michael would have been the right guy if there was such a thing as a replacement for Babe.  I wonder if he could have taken a punch?

Image Credit

JJ:  So how is Curly doing these days?

Moe:  He’s doing fine; thanks for asking….we’re having dinner tonight.

 Hot off the press and fresh to your computer screen, the yet again pointing finger at a celebrity who is just being human. I get so tired of how much the media enjoys tearing apart celebrities,they think they are doing a justice to the American people by exposing some huge ,dark secret when actually it turns out to be nothing more than just somebody who is trying to live their life and survive.

Surprise! Mary Louise Parker has big nipples and she exposed them on an episode of “weeds”, I’m sorry does that even make you want to know more? As it turns out the director was the real culprit,he demanded a nude scene.And yes I know…We all make our own decisions but sometimes there’s a thing called the wrong choice. And that is for Mary Louise Parker to determine for herself. I think the person who needs to be pointed at would be the one who so defiantly demanded this scene. I used to watch “Weeds”, and at that time I enjoyed the program and I have to say that if I had watched this ending episode, I don’t think my opinion would of changed for the show or Mary Louise Parker. So she has Big Nipples I can say I have a Big Butt, and I know I have not exposed it on National television but what would it matter, It is the Human Body the greatest work of art.

Why doesn’t the media get their heads out of the bushes and focus on what really matters; the Economy. I would like to see how the economy has effected the big stars of television/screen. Have they had to cut back on shopping on Rodeo Drive? Is their Refrigerators stocked or looking kinda skimpy? Do they continue their spa days or have they been reduced to spa months?

So many more important things happen in our everyday lives and wouldn’t it be nice to have some kind of mutual empathy for each other? Before that next article or picture makes it’s way to the Internet or to the Magazine, Stop and ask yourself would I have done the same thing? And then realize that even if your answer is No, You are not them and they are not you and that my friends is what makes this world so widely colorful and unique.

Mary Louise Parker is but one woman who in the line of thousands maybe even millions prove that they too have breast’s. And big ,small or flat at the end of it all it’s just a breast with a nipple.

The host of The Daily Show, Jon Stewart, has spent the better part of his last five shows ripping apart CNBC for their over-zealous pumping of the stock market right up to the moment it collapsed.

Aside from the obvious target of Rick Santoro, Jon has been having a field day with Mad Money’s Jim Cramer.  Cramer is perhaps the most egregious offender when it comes to convincing people to invest in stocks they know nothing about.  He also pitched stocks like Bear Stearns just days before bankruptcy.

Jim Cramer made the rounds of NBC stations and shows trying to defend himself and attack Jon Stewart a bit but it doesn’t seem to have done much to repair his reputation or that of CNBC.

What Jim Cramer and CNBC should have done was nothing.  Let it fizzle out. The joke would have died off pretty fast since nobody actually watches CNBC or honestly cares about Jim Cramer.  But we all love a good fight.

Instead, Jim Cramer went on The Daily Show last night like a lamb to the slaughter.  I don’t want to give away the ending but you can watch for yourself on Hulu or thedailyshow.com

Don’t miss it.

Image via Wikipedia