Tonight will mark not the passing of a torch, but instead the end of an era. Tonight, the last episode of The Late Show will air. Media historians in the future will probably look back at this as a turning point, signalling the end of the dominance of late-night broadcast television comedians to provide humor and ridicule about current events and the news. For me, this is a sad milestone.

Just to warn everyone up front: this is going to be more of a personal memoir than a deep analysis of popular culture trends. By writing it, I am definitely "dating" my own experiences as a member of the post-baby-boom generation. "The Posties" never really caught on, but I still like it as a "cusp of two generations" moniker. Later, we were called the "Me Generation" or perhaps the "MTV Generation" (or perhaps somewhere between the two), but I still like the breakfast-cereal zing of being one of the "Posties."

Sorry... where was I? Oh, right, warning everyone that this would be a dated and rather personal look back.

Continue Reading »

We are now well into the primary election season, so it's time to take a look at the biggest burning question Democrats have at the moment: will they be able to ride a blue wave in November that is big enough to flip control of the U.S. Senate, or is this merely starry-eyed optimism run amok?

I should begin by saying that there is no clear answer to that question yet -- it's still far too early to make such predictions with any degree of accuracy. But the subject is back in the news after Donald Trump gave his endorsement to Ken Paxton in Texas, who is facing sitting Senator John Cornyn in a Republican primary runoff election next Tuesday. The winner of this contest will take on Democrat James Talarico in November.

But before we contemplate the repercussions of Trump's nod in Texas, let's take an overview of the national situation first. The current split in the Senate is effectively 47 Democrats (technically 45 Democrats and two Independents) to 53 Republicans. Because Republicans hold the White House, the vice president casts tie-breaking votes, meaning Democrats would have to pick up four seats to regain control (leaving the chamber 51-49 in their favor). Even for a midterm with a historically unpopular president, that's a steep hill to climb -- especially since the map of which seats are up for election isn't all that favorable to the Democrats.

Continue Reading »

Can Congress manage to solve a problem that a huge majority of Americans agree exists -- but also one that people are fiercely divided on the best solution to? Or will the clock run out yet again, leaving us all in the dark?

Yes, those were intentional puns. Because the subject at hand -- once again -- is the changing of time twice a year, from standard to daylight savings and then back again. Almost everybody hates the changes -- that is the part we all agree upon. But what to do about it leaves people almost evenly divided, between those who want standard time year-round and those who prefer permanent daylight time.

I've written about this effort previously, as multiple Congresses have tried to tackle the problem, only to then ultimately decide that it's just not worth the hassle of half the country winding up seriously annoyed at the change. But maybe this time will be different? Sorry, but it's almost impossible not to work "timely" jokes into this discussion, intentional or not.

Continue Reading »

This Wednesday, we will hit a political milestone which is rather grim for me to contemplate (please read this as a trigger warning: this is going to be a very dismal column, so please stop reading now if you aren't in the mood for that sort of thing). On May 20th, Donald Trump will have been in office for exactly one-third of his second term. It will mark 16 months from when he was sworn in -- but the grim part is that this means we've still got twice as long as what we've all just been through before his term will finally be over. When you consider what has already happened so far, contemplating another 32 months of it is downright frightening.

With Trump, the only constant is that no matter how many times you think to yourself: "Well, he's hit rock bottom -- surely he couldn't do anything worse than this!" the hard reality is that he always manages to outdo himself -- often within the same week.

Continue Reading »

We began writing this column series lo these many years ago to help tongue-tied Democrats formulate snappy lines to use when being interviewed on television and/or to use in their campaign ads. These days, however, we have to wonder whether we should just pack it in and not even bother. We say this because Donald Trump keeps providing the best talking points Democrats could ever hope for, serving them up on a weekly basis. And this week's was an absolute doozy.

When a reporter asked Trump if Americans' financial situation was motivating him to make a deal with Iran as soon as possible, Trump responded: "Not even a little bit... I don't think about Americans' financial situation. I don't think about anybody."

Continue Reading »

With less than a month to go before California holds its primary election, it now looks as if the state's Democrats are going to avoid disaster. That is good news for Democratic voters in the state, who outnumber Republican voters by about 3-to-2. But even the fact that we got so close to disaster is going to spur efforts to reform the state's current primary system.

Primary elections can be designed in a number of different ways. For the past 15 years, California has held what is usually called "top-two jungle primaries." Every candidate for every office from every party all appear on the same primary ballot, all jumbled together. The two candidates who finish in first and second places move on to the general election in November. All other candidates are out of luck, because there isn't even a write-in line on the November ballot.

This system has its benefits, but it also has its flaws -- some of which are pretty major. Reforming the system could involve just minor tweaks to the current system (such as allowing for write-in candidates on the general election ballot), or it could involve completely scrapping what we've got and choosing another system entirely.

Continue Reading »

The U.S. Senate did some interesting things today, including voting on yet another motion to end the war in Iran -- which would have actually passed if John Fetterman had voted with his fellow Democrats, since there are now three Republicans backing the idea. But what caught my eye was a 99-0 vote (!) that is mostly symbolic and merely a baby step, but it is at least a baby step in the right direction.

To state the obvious, very few things pass unanimously in the Senate these days. So a 99-0 vote is rather startling on any issue. All the senators voted to advance a measure proposed by John Kennedy, but there will be a few more votes before it actually passes the Senate. The measure would withhold senators' pay during government shutdowns. This is actually an issue that I have long advocated for (in fact, since George W. Bush was president), in one form or another. Especially after seeing how well it worked at the state level, here in California.

Before you get too excited about this prospect though, let's first examine why it is merely a baby step and why it may never actually happen. Note that word used there: withhold. The measure would not actually forfeit their pay, it would just be held back until the shutdown was resolved. Once the federal government was fully up and running and funded again, the senators would get all this back pay in a lump sum.

Continue Reading »

Donald Trump is stuck in a trap of his own making, it seems. He has finally met his match in stubbornness. And we're all paying the price for it. But Trump doesn't care -- which he will even flat-out admit, as he did today.

Trump was asked by a reporter to what extent "Americans' financial situations are motivating him" to quickly strike a deal to end the war with Iran. His answer: "Not even a little bit." He later expanded upon his answer: "I don't think about Americans' financial situation. I don't think about anybody."

[Aside: Look for these quotes to appear in a Democratic campaign ad near you, real soon now!]

Continue Reading »

The political highlight of this week was supposed to be Donald Trump flying to China to meet with Xi Jinping. Now there are doubts whether this will even happen, or whether it will be postponed yet again. This summit meeting was initially scheduled for the middle of last month, but it had to be postponed because of the war Trump had started with Iran. Trump had hopes of wrapping the whole war up in early April just before he went to China, but those hopes were (obviously) never realized. This time around, Trump could actually decide to start attacking Iran once again, unilaterally ending the fragile ceasefire and escalating his war of choice. If this happens, it is doubtful whether Trump would spend a few days in China during a critical phase of the conflict, but then again with Trump, you never know what he'll wind up doing.

Today the prospect of reaching a short-term deal with Iran seems to have fallen apart completely. Last week, the U.S. proposed a one-page deal (Trump famously refuses to read long documents) that would have had a solution to the short-term problems both countries faced, while pushing out until later negotiations on the longer-term issues. The Strait of Hormuz would have been opened, the U.S. blockade of Iranian ports would have ended, and the war would have been declared over. Then a 30-day period would have begun, where issues such as Iran's nuclear enrichment and U.S. sanctions would have been discussed, with a long-term deal to (hopefully) follow. That was the plan, at any rate.

Continue Reading »

As Donald Trump's war of choice stumbles and staggers into its third month, you'll be happy to hear that not everyone has been economically hit hard by the rise in prices it has caused. That's right -- there is one clear winner in all of this disruption. This headline sums it up: "Shell Reports Nearly $7 Billion Profit Amid 'Unprecedented Disruption'." Good to know that somebody's doing well, right?

Well... no. Not really. It's no comfort to everyone who is footing the bill for these monumental windfall profits to know that a whole lot of the money they are paying at the pump isn't because the price per barrel of oil has gone up, but is instead just going to line the pockets of Big Oil. But then, that's the way it has always worked, really.

Continue Reading »