SCARBOROUGH AND MAHER

What a smooth, careful, precarious conversation Scarborough and Maher had in their Newsweek Q & A chit-chat, hitting at what was not going right with Obama, the Republicans, the Democrats, Health Care, and Afghanistan.

Reading in the current issue of the magazine, how they bounced off each other was fascinating -- extra fascinating as they threw in sour-candy tidbits -- about Bush and Cheney, Pat Buchanan and Lou Dobbs.

Joe S. and Bill M. are very different, and similar.

I enjoy Bill Maher -- his pleasant, purring, sincerely wanting-to-know questions, his clever comments (that let you know he's much cleverer than you). There's something about him that's dangerous, as if the man is out for blood, listening for weakness, ready to dive in and sting.

I've seen Bill Maher in his party mode in the days when I was able to watch him and always watched -- suspensefully waiting for his male-superior, slightly sneering, flirtatious, solicitous attitude toward various glamorous female guests.

Nowadays, he's still seductive. He makes me laugh. If anyone (guest or host) tries to avoid a clear yes or no -- pow -- his coup de grace is deadly accurate!

A very valuable man, Bill Maher --there's no one quite like him. (I'm sorry we don't have HBO.) I'm immediately interested when he's announced as a guest on someone's show. He usually tears off the clothes othe other guy (the good manners, the cover-ups of social intercourse), and makes it fun and nasty, like quickie sex -- when it's over, slam-bam thank you ma'am -- you're discarded.

Scarborough is another kind of male-superior seducer. "Morning Joe" -- it's a great title but I can't drink down what he says, as if it's hot, good, wake-up coffee.

I keep seeing, hearing, and feeling meanness in him. I dislike the "I'm the boss, I know better, " attitude he projects when talking with his co-host Mika Brzezinski. And her ignoring it, her way of shrugging it off is --well --it's sad and repulsive -- to see her primping, ignoring the insults as she checks herself in the monitor-mirror.

Aside from Joe Scarborough's political ideas, which seem to be sort of "Mitt Romney" Republican, he's become overbearing, and so cocksure of himself, that I can't watch him without muttering "You're wrong!" at his image on the television, and tuning in another channel.

The fact is, as soon as I have more time, I'll get HBO just so I can see Bill Maher's show on Fridays, 10 p.m. He's an independent thinker who quite often comes up with interesting, constructive ideas.

If Joe Scarborough keeps developing, unchecked, I can't watch him. I don't want to listen to a man who can't deal with women as "people." (Note, I didn't say "deal with women as equals.") His observations, his opinions, even his intelligent analysis of issues, pisses me off!

NEW YEAR'S RESOLUTIONS

1. MAKE WORK DAY SHORTER ... 10 to 12 hours a day that I've been putting in on blogging -- it's too long! The moment the thought crosses my mind -- "I'm getting tired" -- stop! (Good resolution.)

2. EAT LESS SUGAR ... Eliminate what? No more peanut butter cups? But if I need energy before I do my barre exercise, I'll grab one (not two or three!)

3. SHAMPOO HAIR TWICE A WEEK. Unless the plumber can't install some sort of pump next week -- the only day the water doesn't stop unexpectedly is Sunday -- its awful, being stuck in the shower, no water, soap on my head.

4. AVOID THE MIRROR ... Unless I'm putting on makeup, or combing my hair (but raccoon eyes -- I better check if I'm wearing mascara -- raccoon eyes have to fixed.)

5.WRITE MY SISTER ... once a month? ... but that'll put pressure on her to write back, and she's too busy -- that's what she said in her last letter, so ... (not a good resolution.)

6. GO FOR A WALK ONCE A DAY ... If I have time, but I barely have time to take my daily barre -- maybe I'll wait till the weather's warmer.

Gee, these are not resolutions -- this is a tentative, iffy, perhaps, maybe, possibly doable list.

What about other stuff -- like cook dinner for JC more often ... order more paperbacks from half.com, but I don't have time to cook, or read, right now ... anyway, JC enjoys cooking, and there's no place for extra books, unless I donate a pile of old ones -- when? Not now, unless I make my day shorter -- golly, if I have any extra time, I need to keep up with the news on television and in my magazines ... and decide what to write about that's current, important ...

What about making a resolution to find more things I ought to do that I can put on a resolution list?

Maybe the whole idea of making New Year's Resolutions is something I've outgrown. And the thing I do automatically at the end of each day is what I need to do -- tidy my desk, and sort of loosely plan what I probably ought to do tomorrow.

Hmm.

I hereby resolve to keep doing what I've been doing.

WHAT'S IN A NAME?

What do we call this century we're in -- "The 21st Century," or "Century Twenty One?"

"That which we call a rose, by any other name would smell as sweet," says Juliet to her Romeo in Shakespeare's play. .

Can we get a sweeter, better name?

Australia had a contest, to name the 2010's. The most interesting name was the "Ten-ties," or "Teenies." I had to read it twice and say "teenies" aloud, kept thinking it was a typom till I realized it was the "ten-ees." That seems too complicated. Also, we'd have to look for another name in 2020.

News.com gave $2000 to the person who suggested the century be called the "One-ders." They thanked the person for his "bright-eyed optimism.

Other suggestions: The NY Times suggested the "OHS." In Britain a PR firm suggested "The Zeros." Others suggestions were the "The Aughts," "Double Ohhs," or the "2 Ks."

Hmm.

Since 21 is the age of consent, why not call this century the "Age of Consent?" Or the "Grown-up Century?"

What about the "Age of Hope," "Age of Solutions," "The Fix Up Time?"

The dictionary says a century is "a period of one hundred years." That's 365 days x 100. Wow -- 36, 500? Okay! Let's call it the thirty-six five-hundred days of restoration of earth's treasures!

That's where I'm at -- we're into it already!

Thirty-six five-hundred days
To repair the air,
Make fair the land,
Share and care years.

That's my prayer.

'DI' AND MICHAEL J.

Nielsen Ratings tell us what's the biggest, best, most important, "must see, must buy" -- in movies, soap operas, plays, books, videos, podcasts, video games, music, sports -- as it creates the ratings and rankings for its advertisers, and markets.

And ratings influence us -- they teach us that what is popular is liked or admired by many -- and popular means that it's intended for, or suited to the taste of the general public, so we feel that what's popular is important, because it's the attitude held by many, many people, the people as a whole.

Before Nielsen, in 1930, there was Dan Starch, a Harvard Professor, who headed the Association of Advertising Agencies ( started in 1924), to measure advertising readership and radio viewers. Starch's associate, C. E. Hooper, in 1934, advanced how the measuring was done. Rather than general surveys, Hooper ratings were based on selected viewers, who listened to the radio at a given time.

A year later, George H. Gallup was employed by Gardner Cowles (publisher of newspapers and Look Magazine), to begin the Institute of Public Opinion, that became the Gallup Polls.

How do I know? I researched and wrote about rankings and ratings and how they affected my character Cordelia in silent films, talkies, radio and the early days of television -- it's in my virtual library on my Website -- "Somebody Book I, The Ropes in Radio."

Anyhow -- Nielsen ratings tell us that Michael Jackson's funeral had 31.4 million viewers. The more we remember him -- even his sharing his bed with young boys, his trial, his outrageous shopping trips, and him on a hotel balcony dangling his baby -- the more the weirdness of Michael Jackson fades. The tribute Madonna gave him in London, captures an essence of the man that's precious to millions, precious to me, too.

Death at an early age leaves us with an image of Michael Jackson, the artist -- still beautiful, magical, enchanting.

Death for Diana, Princess of Wales, left us and the world with an image of a young woman in her prime, an articulate, poetic, loving mother, an injured wife who tried to survive her husband's involvement with another woman, but couldn't.

Though she died in 1997, today she is still a heroine, an ideal, and a "real" Princess.

(For those who remember the fairy tale --"The Princess and the Pea" -- "real princess is different from an ordinary girl. When the half-dozen mattresses were piled high on top of one green pea, in the center of the bottom mattress, the ordinary girl slept like a lamb, but the real princess felt it, tossed and turned couldn't sleep a wink.)

The image of Princess Diana is her visiting HIV patients and sick children, embracing them regardless of what was wrong with them. And we remember her beauty, her taste in clothes, her fabulous wardrobe, her ups and downs emotionally, her weight problems -- issues with which most girls and young women can identify.

That 33.3 million people watched the funeral and burial, probably wins the prize, for the most watched funeral in history.

Former President Ronald Reagan's mid-day funeral drew 20.8 million people on June 11, 2004. A prime-time program on Reagan that same evening drew an estimated 35.07 million viewers (but it apparently falls into a documentary/tribute category).

Never to be forgotten are the deaths of JFK and RFK, and of course, the recent death of Ted Kennedy -- the death and funeral of Elvis Presley -- Grace Kelly's fabulous wedding and her funeral -- Diana's "Fairy Tale" wedding -- the funeral of Pope John Paul II -- and the day Apollo 11 landed on the moon.

Millions, probably billions have watched these events over the course of the years.

But the number that means something to me -- January, 2009, Obama's inauguration was watched by 38 million, on many, many multiple networks.

Digging into the numbers, I found more and more numbers and networks showing and proving that President Barack Obama's inauguration likely will have been watched by more people and on more platforms than any other televised event in U.S. history -- including the Super Bowl.

Inauguration day, and election eve, the crowd in Grant Park in Chicago changed history, and profoundly changed the world I'm living in.

And golly, I have to say that those two days will be held onto, hugged and cherished by me, till I'm no longer around.