About Me

My photo
This blog is the work of an educated civilian, not of an expert in the fields discussed.

Friday, July 18, 2025

An End of an Era: Colbert Leaving Next May


Stephen Colbert's contract has not been renewed. It was a surprise, and there is some speculation that it is politically motivated.

There has been growing speculation that both Colbert and Jon Stewart, who hosts one broadcast of Comedy Central’s “Daily Show” each week, could be under growing scrutiny from executives at Skydance Media, which is slated to acquire Paramount Global, the parent of both CBS and Comedy Central. David Ellison, who leads Skydance, has projected an image of being intrigued by the politics espoused by President Donald Trump, who Colbert and Stewart routinely skewer in monologues and commentary.

They say it is a purely financial decision. Late night is no longer as profitable. Still, he has been a money maker. And, they are not replacing him. 

They were going to renew (well before) the contract of the show after his. Then, she didn't want to do it. And now they will have no one. 

I am not a consistent watcher of the show. His monologues can be funny. OTOH, they are often too Trump-focused. He needs to diversify more. Yes, you have to talk about him. There is other news out there. 

I check when the interviews look interesting. The "B" segment can be amusing. The "meanwhile" segment always seems tiresome. 

He always seems like a good person with a depth that sometimes comes out. I think maybe not enough, including really creative bits that he sometimes does.

The opening monologue when he came back was both funny and took a dig at his company.


Colbert in recent years seems to be on half-time. He has a lot of vacation time. He has four episode weeks. And then he does his "questions" segment with a guest or something that makes even one of the four episodes seem a sort of "bonus" episode. So it sometimes seems to be three episodes.

I am not sure how much he is really into the job. Not saying he is phoning it in. Still. He has been doing this for about a decade. Doesn't seem like he is on a high lately. Is he, deep down, too upset at the news? Don't think he needs the money. And, he can do other stuff.

Okay. So, hopefully, he uses his final days to give us something special. And, wish him well for what he decides to do next. I don't like his toon news segment.


Megan Stalter was a voice actor on that show. She popped up in a strange segment on Monday. The audience (and Colbert) seemed uncomfortable. That doesn't usually happen -- some in the audience appeared to simply not like the bit she was doing. 

Colbert often had authors and other less known guests on his Comedy Central show. The interviews were often quite good. He sometimes has them on the late-night show. They are good. I think he should have a few authors and other such people regularly.

I'm not crushed, but huh. Let's see how this goes.

ETA: Trump has gleefully responded to the news. What would you expect? Overall, I don't think the financial argument is just a pretext. Still, it's hard to totally believe that is all that is at stake here.

Also, a reminder of Colbert's basic goodness. He should probably provide a few more commentaries on the show. I'm not talking a daily testimonial or something. Still, when he gets serious and talks from the heart, it is often good television.  

Thursday, July 17, 2025

Eric Adams Receives (Limited) Support from Police

13 Law Enforcement Unions Endorse Eric Adams in N.Y.C. Mayor’s Race

Not surprising that law enforcement unions endorse a former police officer over a Republican who cosplays as one. Plus, Adams is the semi-MAGA candidate.

Numbers can be misleading:

The largest NYPD union, the Police Benevolent Association, was not at the event. Sources told CBS News New York the PBA wants to go through its own endorsement process and has not yet made a decision on who it will support in the mayor's race.  

He also has problems with stability:

He cycled through three police commissioners before Jessica Tisch’s appointment in November, the first mayor to have that many in a single term since the 1930s.

Zohran Mamdani has left open keeping Jessica Tisch. People have assumed he is just about defunding the police. The guy who is seriously about gaining power to destroy the institutions he oversees is Trump.

Adams' law enforcement endorsements come at a critical time in the campaign, after former interim NYPD Commissioner Tom Donlon filed a lawsuit Wednesday accusing the mayor and top brass of running the department as a criminal organization. 

In the lawsuit, Donlon claims that he was commissioner in name only and was removed from the role when he tried to report corruption and misconduct. He accused the mayor of giving real authority to NYPD members who were loyal to him, alleging the group operated without oversight, enabling sexual predators and burying misconduct investigations. 

Adams has a history of helping sexual predators. See his relationship with Donald Trump. More:

His lawsuit follows one filed last week by four former NYPD chiefs who claim they were retaliated against by the Adams administration after they blew the whistle on corruption within the department’s highest ranks. 

Okay. There is a reason that Democrats weren't going to vote for this guy in the primary. The polls suggest Adams still has significant support, though he would lose in a one-on-one campaign versus Mamdani (Cuomo would win there). 

Republicans are bad at being fiscal conservatives. They have a reputation for being better than Democrats. They are not. 

They also have a reputation for being tough on crime. That is also a mixed thing, especially regarding results. Trump has supported lots of criminals, including himself.

Eric Adams is a bad choice. He isn't even that strong, one issue you would think would help him. Being indicted didn't help there. But there is a lot more. 

Cuomo, who lost the primary and has his own problems with the law, is also a bad choice. Let's vote for the other Democrat, who is also conveniently running on that line. 

If you are a Republican, maybe you want to vote for Curtis Sliwa. I don't think he has the experience and serious policy chops to warrant that. Still, I understand the sentiment on a partisan level. Better than voting for Adams or Cuomo, probably.

Cuomo these days might be Trump's choice, now that Trump made Adams his you know what. Cuomo definitely has Trump-lite vibes in various respects. 

Vote Mamdani. It isn't too hard. If you aren't a progressive, just consider the alternatives.

If you are a conservative, fine, vote Sliwa if that is your jam. Mamdani will only lose, however, if there is a serious failure from the Democratic side. And, even then, splitting the vote will ease the blow. 

Eric Adams' having problems with the police underlines that the other options are not ideal. Cuomo has already lost. He had to resign being governor.

Again, it isn't THAT hard. 

Wednesday, July 16, 2025

Mets Update

Mets wound up a half game back of the Phils after basically breaking even in the final few series. Both teams have had some horrible baseball. Time to start fresh. The Mets component did well overall in the All Star Game. Diaz blew the save. This set up a new home run tiebreaker. Alonso was the third guy but wasn't needed. NL won. 

Tuesday, July 15, 2025

SCOTUS Summer Trump Enabling Watch: Department of Education

I discuss the latest Supreme Court enabling, a 6-3 no-explanation order allowing Trump to continue his efforts to abolish the Department of Education. Also, it's okay to call them illegitimate. And, Trump 2.0 lower court judicial confirmations begin. 

Saturday, July 12, 2025

Open Primary in NYC (and DEI Again)

In 2023, Common Cause New York issued a report on New York’s “unaffiliated” voters, who represent more than a million voters in New York City and are now the second largest voting bloc citywide.

A local op-ed opposed putting an open primary on the ballot in New York City. It did not necessarily oppose the concept. Nonetheless, it argued that more study should be provided. [ETA: Never mind.]

The argument appears reasonable. We are having an atypical mayoral election this year with at least one major third-party candidate (Eric Adams). The unaffiliated voters weren't the only ones unable to take part in the primary. The Republicans did not have a contested mayoral primary.

Mamdani appeals to a plurality of voters. Republicans are a minority (only about five members of the city council are Republican). The result is that there is a middle group who wish for a third candidate. Adams and Cuomo, however, are dubious options for certain non-ideological reasons.  

I think an open (or "jungle") primary in an area that is strongly one-party makes sense. The alternative might not result in a fair representation of the will of the electorate. Curtis Sliwa is not a typical Republican. 

OTOH, if we are going to change how we vote, it should be done carefully. So, I find the op-ed convincing. 

Diversity ensures representation among qualified persons across race, national origin, sex, gender, sexual orientation, disability, age, socioeconomic status, military status, shared ancestry, parental status, persons who live in rural communities, and more, so that institutions reflect the communities they serve.

DEI came up on another blog. It is a favorite target, and some people conclusively say it failed. I have talked about this issue before. It still bothers me.

DEIA (Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Access) is fundamentally a good thing. It is not just about race (or sex). It has quite a few aspects that few will oppose across the board (e.g., disability access or religious accommodations).  

DEI (the "A" is often left off) is used as a buzzword. It is more political theater than an honest attempt to address the substance. 

Some aspects will be controversial and/or problematic. Others are fine. Others are good. 

I will die on that hill. Well, I will die on many hills. 

Friday, July 11, 2025

SCOTUS Thoughts

The author (GM) of an upcoming book on Justice Robert Jackson's concurrence in Youngstown has been blogging about research for a new project involving the Bayh Subcommittee on constitutional matters. 

The first link talks about Justice Robert Jackson's concern about limiting executive power. The current Justice Jackson has also been quite vocal about that. Rightly so. She has also talked about it in interviews.

(There was a third Justice Jackson, but no one cares about him. Still, it's a good trivia question.) 

GM also cited something involving a college student's interview of five justices involved in Miranda v. Arizona. I was able to find it for free via the NYPL research database. 

Justice Harlan referenced justices being "umpires" on constitutional matters. The framers of the Constitution used the term as well, including about Congress. John Roberts didn't invent the term, though he did use it misleadingly as a matter of restraint. 

Justice Clark noted the Constitution as a "living document." At least one other justice said so during the Brown v. Board of Education oral argument.  This should be deemed obvious. 

Justices Black, Douglas, and Stewart also contributed. Justice White changed his mind about doing so. Justice Brennan turned down a request, noting he felt it improper. The student worked for someone in Congress, who helped smooth things along.  

Upcoming Execution

Michael Bernard Bell is scheduled to be executed by Florida next Tuesday. He murdered two people accidentally, thinking he was killing the person who took the life of his brother (officially in self-defense). 

(Since he killed two people, even if he was right, Bell would have murdered someone else in the process.)

Bell also fired into the crowd while running away. Plus, he was separately serving time for killing three people, including a toddler. So, yes, few people are going to be crying about his death.

His lawyers' latest bit is alleging testimony used to prosecute him was coerced and overall tainted. 

There is a final appeal pending at the Supreme Court on this issue. I will be shocked if it amounts to anything but a "brief" order merely stating the petition is denied. I will update when that happens.  

The primary problem (in my view) is that he was prosecuted thirty years ago. Breyer (see here) continues to be correct in flagging the problem was executing people after so much time. Ginsburg joined his dissent there, and Stevens talked about it separately. I wish another justice would flag the issue. Jackson is busy. What about Sotomayor?

Michael Bell is not reportedly causing trouble in prison (at least in the articles I saw). He should continue serving time for his heinous murders.  

ETA: Sotomayor and Kagan (not Jackson?) would have decided the claim relating to when federal courts can consider evidence that his lawyers allege was improperly withheld. No justice explained their vote.

When Sparks Fly

 

Meghan Markle was in two Hallmark Channel movies. I talk about them here. I rewatched (if a bit late) this one. It was pleasant, and my general sentiments are the same. 

Thursday, July 10, 2025

Continue to Say No to Cuomo

I respond to a discussion about an appeal to consistently supporting the Democratic nominee. I agree, but am still bothered, particularly that Cuomo's sex crimes continue to be underreported.