You may recall the trying circumstances behind attempting to book a room last year for the San Diego Comic Con. I wrote about that here. And this year, our group who go every year expected it, rightly, to be even worse. (Which at the same time was difficult to imagine.)

I’m out of town on business and just got back to my room and checked email and there’s the message I was expecting but dreading: for the first time, my group of compadres who go to the San Diego Comic Con every year failed to get us a room.

Here was the first message in the series, from good friend Paul (who last year succeeded in getting us one of these precious few con-rate rooms). Bear in mind, there are about 125,000 attendees at this convention, most of them needing a room — and I believe last year there were 9600 rooms initially allocated to this convention. That didn’t make the defeat sting any less for Paul, who entitled this message “Miserable Failure”:

I am sad to report that I failed to get a room reservation through the Comic-Con today. I was able to get to the point of confirmation and then the reservations system gave me an error message. When I retried to book the system froze for minutes on end. I did call the number listed for Travel Planners if there was a problem in reserving a room. The only thing they could do was put me on a wait list for the Sheraton Suites.

I tried my best but was thwarted by the computers at Travel Planners.

Miserably your,

Paul

I like the intentionality of “Miserably your, … Paul.” Because I don’t think that’s a typo: I think that in this case he is indeed, miserably our Paul. I can picture his shoulders slumping in defeat. Paul and fellow Con roommate Trey each volunteered for this mission, and I know that each wanted to end the story with himself as Galahad on a charger.

Here was Trey’s response posted to the seven of us:

I had no better luck on the phone. I gave up by 10:30. As long as we still have Sheraton Suites (right?), the higher room rate divided by the bunch of us is better than sleeping out in the cold or squeezing into a room at The M (though smoking cigars on the roof with Lee was pretty fun); I believe you have landed us the best available option, and for that I’m grateful. BTW: you sound like a supervillain on the order of Galactus on your speakerphone. With a slight Jersey accent.

From this speakerphone reference, I can only assume that these two were in constant communication as they tried to coordinate a room-reservation strategy, even as they saw that strategy go the way of, say, Rudy Giuliani’s recent strategy. By now, while I was still downstairs on my feet lecturing about something or other at this USC off-site function, heartfelt condolences were pouring in to Paul and Trey. As so many of us do sometimes, Larry wanted to blame the system:

Paul, amid the Super Tuesday hoohaw, I was wondering how you were faring. Ugh.
This can’t keep going like this–they have to retool the system somewhere.

Larry

Subtext:  It’s out of your hands, Paul. You did your best. And, it turns out, Paul had long ago initiated a backup plan:

I did reserve a room at the Sheraton Suites at the best available rate. It is higher than the Con rate, but it is better than any other option.

As for Trey’s option of sleeping out in the cold, I seem to remember San Diego was pretty damn hot the last two years.

Paul

Which elicited a cheer from Terence:

Great work, Paul!

And if one of us has to work the corner so we can afford the higher rate, so be it (I’m thinking Trey would make us the most cash. Lee a close second).

— Pimp-Daddy Terence

I don’t know why I would earn less than Trey, but this is an honor I’m willing to cede.

So:  We have a room, but it’s not a “Con” room at the convention rate. It’s not the fact of the extra expenditure that troubles me. I don’t need any more things in my life, but I’m always willing to spend on experience. This annual excursion of seven good friends is money well-spent. What stings is the sense of being excluded in this way from something I’ve been included in for 20 years. There are the special, lucky few who got a room at Con rate — and we weren’t among them. We don’t need the Con rate; we just want it. (And, as others noted, we’re lucky to have gotten a room at all.) At this moment, I’m relating to the sentiment one often hears from those who have championed their niche hobby, but who now feel that their peculiar area of pop subculture , one they inhabited long before almost anyone took notice, has, like the San Diego Comic Con, now started to feel too pop-ular.

Mike Gravel is still in the race.

I remember in 1980 when George Bush the First won some early contest and said he had “big mo” (for “momentum.”) This was uttered shortly before Ronald Reagan cleared the rest of the map, erasing any trace of Bush’s big mo.

I relate that as a preface to my reading of our current situation: At least from this office in greater Los Angeles, Obama seems to have the big mo. I don’t think there was much excitement about Hillary Clinton to begin with — this observation is colored not only by my tracking of media reports, but also my personal experience as a state party delegate — but now there’s even less. People don’t like her, and let’s not forget:  Yes, elections are a popularity contest. Some don’t like her positions, some don’t like her judgment (that would be me), and some just don’t like her (that would be many people across the spectrum). Her alternative, Barack Obama, seems better positioned in every way:  people aren’t attacking his ideas, he’s seen as having shown better judgment (by people including me), and people in general seem to like him (including Republicans).

Not just that, he’s running a better campaign now. No matter how well-funded each Democratic candidate is (and their funding is at historic levels), neither can do penetration advertising buys in all those markets this Tuesday. So the trick is to capture the media every day with one story. If you’ve been checking in since Thursday’s debate, the candidate doing that has been Obama. He’s got all the news locked up again today, the angle being his tour with Teddy Kennedy and the seeming excited thrills Kennedy is generating on the trail.

(A side note:  With me personally, an endorsement from Kennedy is a negative endorsement. In some things I’m old-fashioned. One of those things is the belief that people who kill young girls and walk away from the scene should do prison time. I don’t care what their last name is. But as I said, I’m old-fashioned.)

I was invited to the debate but couldn’t attend. (Imagine my frustration at that.) But I did watch it later and there was Obama again, looking and sounding like what many of us would hope for in a president. He’s cool and thoughtful and seems real. Next to him was Hillary, her uncomfortable smile plastered on her face, her lips issuing — again — her obvious lies about why she initially supported the war in Iraq when really she didn’t. I actually felt sorry for her until I remembered someone else with her last name who lied to me for years. Those were certainly better times, but I didn’t like being lied to then (whether they were silly lies about “not inhaling” or lies told under oath), and those times could have been even better had that person focused more squarely on enacting a vision for the future — rather than being forced to deal with one personal failing after another. I don’t want the Clintons and their baggage back.

Obama expresses a hope of uniting the people in this country — and that’s what we need. I don’t think any one person can do that, but one person at the top certainly sets the tone. Don’t believe me? Look at the past seven years.

This Tuesday will mark the first time since moving to Los Angeles in 1988 that I won’t be in town on election day. I like to go and vote. I like to wait in line, I like to chat with other people waiting, I like to glance at the sign-in sheet to see if my neighbors have come yet, and I like to ask the poll workers about turnout. I especially like wearing the “I have voted” sticker all day. I remember when I was 18 or so and much of the family — my father, my mother, my sister, my brother-in-law, a kid or two, and I —  piled into a car and went to vote. My father said something corny about how we’d just “performed our duty” or something like that that I didn’t appreciate, but much as he made me wince I felt he was right. (And I think that most years my father and I canceled each other’s vote out — and my mother decided elections.)

While I’ll miss voting on election day, I won’t miss out on voting. Especially now when I think we really need a new broom to sweep clean. Last night when I got home I checked the mail and happily extracted from the pile my absentee ballot, opened it, and filled in the circle for Barack Obama.

I can’t begin to tell you how thrilled I am that John McCain won the Florida primary today. Perhaps we’ll have a real choice this fall, the most interesting in my adulthood, between McCain and Obama.

Once upon a time, I was a McCain supporter. I wish they had run him in 2000, instead of that boob whose friends stole the election for him. I don’t care for the Senator as much as I once did, given his truckling embrace of  Bush’s extremist evangelicals, or his silly assertion when surrounded by military and tanks and Blackhawk helicopters that a neighborhood in Baghdad was safe to “walk freely.” But I do respect his heroism and his character, at least most of it, and certainly in comparison to most of his colleagues.

And I’m interested in Obama. I was proud to make a donation in support of that South Carolina win. He’s thoughtful — imagine a thoughtful president — and he’s made every right call on foreign policy recently regarding Iraq, Iran, Pakistan and every place else we seem to be in a mess. His plan for Iraq seems reality-based:  no fake timetable, no jingoistic assertion that we’re in it ’til we win it. Looking into my crystal ball, I think that if he gets the nomination there’s a good chance he’ll ask Joe Biden to serve as vice-president or secretary of state; that would give me even more confidence. (And I fear that McCain would feel obliged to ask someone like Reverend Huckabee. I’ve got nothing against pastors, having been partly raised by a good one, except for those who want to do things like rewrite the Constitution to jibe with sacred text.) As his campaign has shown, Obama wants to unite people — but he isn’t afraid to brawl when he needs to.

I’m hoping we get to mull over this choice in November. In the meantime, it’s nice that we’re having an actual primary contest. Because, let us not forget, for the past year we were told this was a done deal:  Hillary vs. Rudy.  But as I noted here and here and most especially here when I was really mad about it, that was all mass-media hoohah, and I’m glad none of us fell for it. Now people are actually voting, and the pundits are revealed for what they really are:  showmen. Bad showmen.

If you’re in LA and feeling out of sorts, like what you really need is to go off on a bender and tear through the town, you could do worse than studying from the master.

The House of Representatives and the quote unquote president want to give my wife and me a check to help “stimulate” the economy. Depending upon the final details, we could get something like $2100 by May. The thing is, we don’t want it. And neither does anyone else we’ve asked about it.

Nobody at the recent Chamber of Commerce board meeting wanted it. There, it was widely viewed as an election-year ploy, and one probably favoring Democrats.

At the Chamber mixer the other night, nobody I spoke with there wanted it either.  Except they said it was intended to help Republicans retain the White House.

At the barber shop on Thursday none of the three barbers, nor any of the patrons, wanted it. Between barbers (one female, two male) and patrons, there were youngish and oldish, white and Hispanic, and several variations of the above — and nobody wanted the refund.

Nobody in my playwriting workshop is demanding it. No one said they’d send it back, but they don’t actually want it. And someone I know who really needs the money summed up what everyone I’ve discussed this with is saying:  This refund is a bad idea, because the country can’t afford any more debt. He and his wife would rather not have the check if the government would commit instead to balancing the budget.

I don’t think the refund is a clever ploy for either the Republicans or the Democrats. What I think it is is a bailout of lenders who have made very bad loans, as well as some icing for retailers. Yes, I expect that everyone who gets that check is going to perhaps make one extra house payment, or one more credit-card payment, or buy that iPhone that the guy interviewed in the L.A. Times last week said he’d been drooling over and could now buy with his government economic-stimulus refund check. And then the $300, or $600, or however much, will be gone, with no lesson learned by anyone.

And where will it go? Onto the ledger for my children and their children and all the other children who will be paying for it and for all the other excesses and mistakes of the last seven years. It will also go onto the ledger for the people of China, who will be paying for it until they start to shift their investments from dollars into euros — in other words, only for a little while.

So… if it isn’t a good idea to further mortgage the nation to hand out freebie checks to cover other mortgages on houses people shouldn’t have bought from people who were paid to sell things they knew people couldn’t afford, what would be a better idea?

Perhaps a public works project that actually results in needed improvements while feeding the economy.

Perhaps letting banks bear the brunt of their bad decisions. We privatize the income — note the hundreds of millions of dollars in bonuses paid during the housing bubble — but we socialize the bailout. Let’s not bail them out. Let’s let the housing market find its natural landing place, creating an opportunity for the millions of people around here at least who couldn’t ever afford to buy a house before.

Perhaps passing along a hard but necessary lesson for all of us:  that there are no free rides, that ultimately someone always has to pay — and this time, it should be us.

 A friend forwarded me an email from someone saying, with regard to Ronald Reagan, “Didn’t realize just how much he’s missed, until I read and remembered some of the stuff he said… and stood for.” Here are the Reagan pearls of wisdom included:

‘Here’s my strategy on the Cold War: We win, they lose.’

‘The most terrifying words in the English language are: I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’

‘The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they’re ignorant; it’s just that they know so much that isn’t so.’

‘Of the four wars in my lifetime, none came about because the U.S. was too strong.’

‘I have wondered at times about what the Ten Commandments would have looked like if Moses had run them through the U.S. Congress.’

‘The taxpayer: That’s someone who works for the federal government but doesn’t have to take the civil service examination.’

‘Government is like a baby: An alimentary canal with a big appetite at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other.’

‘The nearest thing to eternal life we will ever see on this earth is a government program.’

‘It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first.’

‘Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.’

‘Politics is not a bad profession. If you succeed, there are many rewards; if you disgrace yourself, you can always write a book.’

‘No arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is as formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women.’

‘If we ever forget that we’re one nation under God, then we will be a nation gone under.’

– Ronald Reagan

That got me to wondering what I would add for Ronnie, if I could:
“When I was a kid, we didn’t have homeless people — so as president, I created them.”

“Trading guns for hostages is a good way to arm the enemy and reinforce their bad behavior.”

“Mr. Gorbachev, tear down that wall. And help us run up our debt.”

“Bailouts for the rich. It was good then, and it’s good now.”

Yes, I’m on deadline with a large writing project. But now the script is finalized and we tape on Friday and Monday, so the smoke is lifting. And so look for more posts here.

At least, that’s what Chris Matthews thinks.

p.s. to the previous post:

So how many more delegates does the annointed frontrunner, Hillary Clinton, have over Barack Obama? (After all, this is a race for delegates — not the opinions of campaign reporters.)

None. They’re tied.

Democrats | Polls
Candidate Delegates
won to date / Super delegates committed / Delegates needed
Hillary Clinton 37 0 1,988
Barack Obama 37 0 1,988
John Edwards 18 0 2,007
Joe Biden 0 0 2,025
Chris Dodd 0 0 2,025
Mike Gravel 0 0 2,025
Dennis Kucinich 0 0 2,025
Bill Richardson 0 0 2,025

While we’re at it, here’s what it looks like on the Republican side:

Candidate Delegates
won to date Delegates needed
Mitt Romney 59 1,132
Mike Huckabee 34 1,157
John McCain 17 1,174
Fred Thompson 5 1,186
Ron Paul 4 1,187
Duncan Hunter 2 1,189
Rudy Giuliani 1 1,190
Sam Brownback 0 1,191
Tom Tancredo 0 1,191

You’ll note that one of that race’s “frontrunners,” Rudy Giuliani, has half the number of delegates as Duncan Hunter (or, as we like to call him, “Who?”). Mr. Giuliani’s number of delegates is: 1.

Still, that’s 1 more than Dennis Kucinich has. Bear that in mind the next time you see or hear from him.