O’Donnell started off by playing a clip from Marianne Gingrich‘s bombshell interview with ABC News, in which she claims her then-husband tried to enlist her in an “open marriage.”

Touré made the excellent point that what Marianne Gingrich described wasn’t actually an “open marriage.”

“He’s saying, hey, I got a mistress, are you going to roll with that or not?” Touré said. ”That’s not an open marriage. That’s ridiculous leveraging.”

He then went on to deepen the distinction, making the case for “honest” open marriages. Practically speaking, though, it;s tough to imagine such an arrangement ever being truly equal, since modern-day culture (even in Europe) places most of the risks inherent in such behavior disproportionately on women. It’s like a fish telling a land mammal, “Let’s go swimming!”

O’Donnell then asked Taylor “What is the difference between Newt’s proposal for an open marriage, and Bill Clinton simply executing an open marriage, pretty much throughout, as far as we can tell, every year?”

Taylor had a bumper sticker-ready response. “The only thing open, in an open marriage, is somebody’s legs at the wrong time.”

“I mean, that’s sort of the long and short of it,” she continued. “You know, we have a name for that in America. It’s called roommates. You just don’t get married if you’re not willing to put together what is a very tight social contract, that involves finances and possibly children and households, and yes, sex too.”

Taylor also agreed that the Southern Baptist culture of forgiveness would probably prevent these revelations from hurting Gingrich too much. “I think you’re dealing with an electorate, you know, I’m a proud Christian and a proud Southern woman. And one of the things that we believe in is reconciliation.”

On the subject of Gingrich’s recently escalated racial drumbeat, Goldie said “Newt Gingrich has been doing this for 30 years. He’s been thumping the drum of racial insensitivity for 30 years, stoking people’s fears…They put us all in the same boat. black and white, all of us poor, and got us all rowing in different directions against each other.

“He’s doing this purposely,” Taylor continued, “so he can drum up a very specific base that he knows will turn out in this GOP primary. Those people vote like stormtroopers, and if he can get them to his side, he cannot lose.”

Touré brought the subject back around to Gingrich’s wandering lightsaber. “The open marriage came out today, and there’s something in a news, political sense, sexy about…”

“Whoa, whoa, wait,” O’Donnell interrupted. “Open marriage involving Newt Gingrich is not sexy…”

“It’s gross, in a Jabba the Hutt way, but it’s a lightning rod issue in that sort of way. and sure, it’s the thing that people wanted to hear about. Hey, Newt, what do you think about this? So as John King, you’ve got to ask him, and Newt Gingrich’s response in terms of blaming the media is so gross and offpoint. It’s not the media’s problem here. It’s whether or not he did this, and he seems to have had disgusting behavior toward his wives repeatedly, and whether or not his wife is telling the truth.”

It looks like Taylor is probably right that Gingrich’s marital history won’t hurt him in this weekend’s South Carolina primary, but I think she gives that electorate too much credit. That Christian forgiveness seems to end at the line between red and blue.

Here’s the clip, from MSNBC:

To give the following story more context, another national anthem-related controversy arising from Indiana this year involved a high school student who decided to put her own musical spin on the national anthem. As a reward for her artistic creativity, the school disciplined her for straying from the original melody, calling it “unrecognizable, unacceptable and disrespectful to soldiers who died for our country. The school eventually issued a public apology, but the fact that this was a controversy even for five seconds was quite mind-boggling.

RELATED: Glenn Beck “Offended” That Super Bowl Players Didn’t Respect The National Anthem

Now that we have all the proper context in place, let’s direct our attention to Indiana State Senator Vaneta Becker. She is currently pushing for new legislation that would take strong action against those who have the nerve to deviate the national anthem from its intended melodic rhythms.

[Becker] has introduced a bill that would set specific “performance standards” for singing and playing “The Star-Spangled Banner” at any event sponsored by public schools and state universities.

The law also would cover private schools receiving state or local scholarship funds, including vouchers.

Performers would have to sign a contract agreeing to follow the guidelines. Musicians — whether amateur or professional — would be fined $25 if it were deemed they failed to meet the appropriate standards.

Becker was inspired to write the bill after a constituent contacted her to complain that at a school function, the words to “The Star-Spangled Banner” were changed for the purposes of satire. This did not sit well with Becker at all, for she believes that the national anthem “is [not] something we ought to be joking around with.”

She clarified that the bill is not intended to punish vocalists for singing off-key (this isn’t The Voice, people), its sole purpose is to punish people “who make intentional changes” to the lyrics. But here’s where the bill starts to make just a little less sense:

The bill calls for schools to maintain audio recordings of all performances for two years and develop a procedure for dealing with complaints if a musician is alleged to have strayed from the approved lyrical or melodic guidelines.

“I don’t think it would be very difficult for schools,” Becker said. “You could record it on a lot of cellphones or like a small recording device (or) a CD.”

It’s like Simon Cowell and Big Brother rolled up into one loving basket of legal authority.

So you can make the argument that the national anthem is a sacred part of the American identity and it deserves to be sung the way Francis Scott Key intended it. But music is a form of art, and art has always been and will always be a subjective experience. Painters, performers, and filmmakers have always experimented with cultural traditions in order to give them a new twist, and whether you appreciate it or not is a matter of taste.

In fact, in making her arguments about preserving the artistic integrity of the original song, Becker sounds a lot like Star Wars traditionalists. I know that sounds random, but bear with me. George Lucas famously made some digital alterations to the three original films before they were rereleased on DVD and Blu-Ray, which raised the ire of a lot of Star Wars fans. Hardcore fans organized a boycott of the new releases this year, explaining it was “about film preservation and our cultural heritage.” So if you leave aside the fact that she wants to make her personal beliefs into a law, Becker’s position is not far outside the mainstream when it comes to presenting art as it was originally created.

RELATED: Superbowl 2010: Carrie Underwood’s Star-Spangled Banner

But what about the forcefulness or the bravado of the national anthem? Would that be called into consideration? For example, when actress Zooey Deschanel sang the national anthem during the fourth game of the World Series this year, she opted to sing it more low-key than past singers. Somehow this inspired outrage, including this gem from Grantland writer Natasha Vargas-Cooper:

Where is the drama of a sweat-drenched Whitney Houston, steeped in struggle, unhinging her jaw to bellow out Our Song? The drums of war echo in her crack-ravaged throat! What the fuck has Zooey DeeDee earned the right to do besides twirl around in a baby doll dress with her face slathered in gluten-free cupcake frosting?

Once again, art is subjective. What’s odd about this particular piece of legislation is not that Becker is trying to infringe on personal liberty, as civil libertarians might phrase it, but that she is trying to infringe on personal taste. Freedom of expression is just as important as freedom of speech, and there’s really nothing horrible about students expressing themselves in a unique way through the national anthem.

Though it might bother the music teachers.

After a decade-long manhunt, Osama Bin Laden was captured and killed Sunday by a team of Navy Seals. Celebrations erupted around New York and across the country.
Immediately after the location of Osama’s hide-out was made public, the compound began to accrue dozens of satirical reviews.

The history-making event was met with a broad range of reactions on Twitter and Facebook, from jubilation, to pure rage-inducing ignorance.

Among the worst reactions were those from teens too young to remember the pre-9/11 world.

As with any major news story, reactions also inspired thousands of hilarious image macros and internet memes.

No later than doubters began demanding to see pictures of the body did an image of a dead Osama emerge. Unfortunately, the image proved to be fake.

Other news on our radar:

We compared the outfits of Royal Wedding attendants to their celebrity look-alikes n 10 Royal Wedding Doppelgangers.

Baby animals are already adorable, but placing them next to stuffed animal versions of themselves is a sight to behold.

Kate Middleton’s brother is in hot water over a whole slew of nude photos.
In honor of Star Wars Day on May 4th, we rounded up 30 behind-the-scenes images from the films.

When the Wall Street Journal’s Steve Moore bemoaned the fact that we don’t currently have missile defense, Maddow attacked the idea:

“That’s the whole idea of SDI. We’ll protect ourselves by shooting missiles with other missiles. It’s never worked in a test, we’ve spent billions on it. And anybody who knows the physics of it, knows it can never work.”

Moore disputed Maddow’s conclusion that it’s never worked in tests, and Maddow concluded it’s a “hysterical fantasy” to think it would work.

However, more interesting than the back-and-forth between these two, was Stockman’s intriguing question: against whom exactly would we need a missile defense system? Assuming his suggestion is based on an assumption that America’s nontraditional enemies will use other, more modern means to attack and not on a belief that America no longer has any enemies, then Stockman’s point is an important one. As he suggested, China may be increasing in power, but they know better than to want to blow up America when our Walmarts continue to sell so many of their products.

Watch the clip from HBO below:

It all started with his describing Van Jones’ goal of getting people to “stop living a life of theory” and get into action as similar to the Force. You can either use that for good or use it for evil. Beck then explained how progressive radicals like Frances Fox Piven (whom he spent most of the episode going against) use it for evil by getting citizens to “feel the anger” like the evil Sith lords. It’s an odd analogy but at least it’s a better way to describe the Force than as a bunch of Midi-chlorians.

Now, I haven’t been an expert on anything Star Wars in many, many years (did you know the aliens in the Mos Eisley bar had names? I used to!), so I can’t say who made their comparison better, Stewart or Beck. I can say that definitely Beck won in one way and that would be in length. Stewart only gave one segment over to the Holy Trilogy (and that other trilogy). By the end of the show, Beck was still off-handedly comparing community organizers to Ewoks and quoting Yoda.

Clearly the Force is strong with this one.

Just like Luke defeated the Evil Empire and blew up the Deathstar, so too did Obama defy outrageous odds in getting elected as The New Hope. But the celebration quickly ended as the “Republic-an Empire” struck back, with a string of political victories that made the young Jedi knight (Obama) look weak and impotent. There’s even the frozen planet of Hoth with the cave Wampa monster (who like Sarah Palin, can see the planet Tatooine from her cave.)

The twisted analogy ends with Jabba the Hutt and his chosen bounty hunter Boba Fett getting defeated as lameduck Return of the Jedi. (The repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell? Celebrated by dancing Ewoks on the planet Endor!)

Even if the metaphor is less than exact, it didn’t make the segment any less entertaining — who doesn’t enjoy an entertainer breaking with laughter a la Harvey Kormon? Watch the following segment from Comedy Central below:

(Editor’s note – thanks to Star Wars expert Nate Hall, age 7, who provided necessary expertise on this this post.)

It always seemed the sexually frustrated C-3PO had a weird crush on R2-D2, but it seems after years of R2 ignoring his advances, C-3PO has finally moved on and found a way to entertain himself. Now presenting the C-3PO tape dispenser, where C-3PO has learned to lean back, smile, and enjoy anyone reaching near his crotch. Available at children’s toy stores everywhere.

(h/t Buzzfeed)

During a long and prolific career, James Earl Jones undoubtedly has accumulated a great deal of wisdom and experience. It’s a shame that he chose not to share much of it with his audience. Jones, who turns 80 in January, will be starring  in “Driving Miss Daisy” on Broadway beginning this fall. But when asked to discuss how rehearsals were going, or what we can expect from his role as “Hoke,” Jones responded that we’ll have to wait and see. It was one example of many sidesteps from the veteran actor. He delivered all of his non-answers with a gentle smile and genuine humility, but it left us wanting to hear more about what he thought, felt, remembered, and loves about his theatrical career.

We did learn a bit about him. He struggled with a stutter for the early part of his life, surprising to many because he’s widely known for his booming and iconic voice. He says, to this day, he doesn’t hear his voice when he speaks. Jones’ stutter was discussed at length at the top of the evening, but no other topic seemed to resonate the same way and evoke memories and emotions in the actor. We’ve criticized Healy before for his style – he covers ground by moving chronologically through the actor’s life. Sections of the night dragged on as Healy – and then the audience during the Q&A portion – tried to get Jones to open up about subjects like race and tolerance and his own insecurities and fears.

One thing that Jones shared his views on are awards. He has received numerous honors, but warns that if awards are only “wonderful as trophies,” not as jumping off points to the next opportunity. While he has many achievements and great moments under his belt, Jones is perhaps best recognized as the voice of Darth Vader in the “Star Wars” films. He revealed that before him, the producers considered Orson Welles but deemed his voice to be too recognizable to hit the mysterious note. So they brought in Jones who said that his involvement lasted one day of shooting. “Star Wars” fans, he said, follow him everywhere, even in London last winter where he was performing “Cat on a Hot Tin Roof.”

Jones calls himself a “journeyman” who finds roles along the way. While other actors travel along a straighter path, Jones says he doesn’t have a plan. That waywardness has paid off in his career, leading to a diverse set of roles, but it also contributed to a scattered and ultimately disappointing discussion.

What They Said
“If you love words, you’ve got to be able to say them out loud. That’s what words are for.”
- James Earl Jones’ high school teacher helped him learn how to communicate better

“The only acting I did in high school, I was the rear end of a horse.”
- James Earl Jones has grown into larger parts since then

“We fell in love with the same character. It’s like when you fall in love with the same girl.”
- James Earl Jones says that he and Denzel Washington each brought their own flair to the lead in August Wilson’s “Fences”

“I did finally get Morgan Freeman out of my mind…and I can’t do that Hoke.”
– James Earl Jones will try to do justice to his “Driving Miss Daisy” role

What We Thought

• Healy had a hard time getting Jones to open up and answer his questions, particularly those directed at what Jones learned from roles and experiences. After it became clear that Jones was sticking to the facts, and not going down the road Healy wished, Healy could have shifted his questions in the other direction.
• Jones said that he enjoys being an actor because the profession allows you to explore parts of yourself that you wouldn’t otherwise. He said that he’s had a hard time personally distancing himself from the difficult roles he’s played in “cruel” plays. In fact, it made him physically ill to play “Big Daddy” in “Cat on a Hot Tin Roof.”

PANEL RULES!
Some audience behavior seems to repeat itself panel after panel. We’ll be updating a running list of “PANEL RULES!” that will help ensure that you are not the dweeb of the Panel Nerds.

Panel Nerds don’t like…Fawning Admirers
Too many questions during the audience segment weren’t actually questions. We give a pass to the guy who told Jones what an inspiration he was to the black community. We even accept the standard, cliche question asking which actor he most enjoyed working with. But this panel had some of the strangest other expressions of admiration we’d ever seen: One woman asked Jones to confirm he acted in a play in Connecticut many years ago; one talked about her relationship with Terry Southern, a friend of Jones’; one asked Jones to describe his voice in one word; and one brought Jones an early birthday gift. The whole spectacle made us long for requests for advice for young actors hoping to break into acting.

While this originally aired over three weeks ago, somehow we missed it. But praise be ye Internet gods who eventually seem to scour every Star Wars related mention, such as the following goofy segment. Enjoy.

The Mos Eisley Cantina is the bar from Star Wars, for you non-dorks, or Chalmun’s Cantina, for those of you so dorky, even I have standing to mock you. In an ad that’s sure to run constantly during the World Cup, Adidas has apparently gotten the green light to remake the iconic locale as a hangout for soccer players with a World Cup jones. And Snoop Dogg.

Okay, Snoop Dogg with a lightsaber is also actually pretty cool (assuming the surviving members of Run-DMC were unavailable), but it’s still jar-jarring to see the defining film of my generation turned into a sneaker ad. I imagine this is how my dad felt when they used Revolution in a Nike ad.

Of course, the big difference with Star Wars is that it has already been tainted by a round of “enhancements” to the original films (including a ridiculous extended cantina scene), and a trio of increasingly muddled prequels. Now, I think there’s even a Star Wars-themed show on Food Network.

So, since being a Star Wars purist is a losing proposition, at least I can take solace in the fact that it has been sold out in the name of soccer, the Jar-Jar Binks of the sports world.

The full interview will be posted at Asylum later, and is even funnier than this, as Chuck dispenses invaluable advice about tattoos, refuses to say his porn star name out loud, and settles some eternal questions.

In this edition of Inside the White House Press Corps, Chip speaks frankly about the role of the Press Secretary, compares the Obama White House to the Bush administration, and much more.

In part 1 of our interview, Chip talks about being a good reporter, why he’s harder on Robert Gibbs than he might otherwise be, and what the Bush and Obama administrations have in common.

Transcript:

I’m Chip Reid, I’m with CBS News and i’ve been here at the White House since the beginning of the Obama administration. I also covered the Clinton White House on and off but did not cover George W. Bush at all, so it’s back to the future for me.

WHAT MAKES A GOOD WHITE HOUSE REPORTER?

Persistence. You work long hours..uh..eager to make contact with anyone and everyone who knows anything about what goes on here; old friends, new friends, people who used to work here. Everybody you can be in touch with at various departments. You know, having covered the hill for a long time, and worked on the hill for a long time before that, I’ve got a lot of friends up there. You really don’t just cover the White House, you cover Washington, so someone who has a lot of experience covering all the different branches really helps. But more than anything else, it’s just persistence.

CAN YOU THINK OF SOMEONE BESIDES YOURSELF WHO REALLY EMBODIES A WHITE HOUSE REPORTER?

Back when I was covering Clinton, I thought that…my gosh, the name escapes me…but there were a couple print reporters with the New York Times back then, and they were constantly working it. Constantly working the story, and I kind of used them as role models. You don’t just cover what the White House is giving you; you’re always looking for some other angle on this. If you’re going to sit here and get spoon fed by the White House, then you’re going to feel really stupid.

YOU TEND TO SORT OF PROBE A LITTLE HARDER, SOMETIMES YOU TAG-TEAM WITH HELEN, THERE.

Yeah, Helen and I do tag-team questioning sometimes. She loves to jump in if I’m not getting an answer to a question, and I try to do the same with her. I think it really helps in this briefing room for people to jump in and help each other and make Robert Gibbs realize that a question he may be treating as absurd or unfair is not, and I think it helps to show some unity in the room.

WHAT ONE THING WOULD YOU DO TO IMPROVE THE BRIEFING PROCESS

More openness, obviously. I understand that Roebrt’s got a job to do, and Mike McCurry had a job to do, and Dee Dee had a job to do, and all the people I’ve seen here and fought with here have a job to do. They work for the president and their job is to protect the president, but their job is also to inform the American people through us and by answering our questions. I understand the tension for them–that protecting the President comes first–but informing the Aerican people is also part of their job. They work for the American people, too. And we’re trying to get information for them–for our viewers and readers.

I may be saying something that’s going to be laughed at behind those closed doors, but more openness is what it’s all about. And it shouldn’t be a briefing where at the end, we walk back to our office and say “Well that was a waste of time.” And it can be deeply frustrating that no matter how hard we probe, sometimes very little comes out in these briefings. Some days, I would be better off working the phones for that hour than being in here.

I NOTICE VERY OFTEN WE END UP ASKING THE SAME QUESTION 8 or 9 TIMES WITHA LITTLE VARIATION TO PULL EVERYHTING OUT. DO YOU THINK IF I ASKED ROBERT OR BILL THAT PROTECTING THE PRES WOULD COME FIRST?

That’s a good question. I’d like to hear their response, but certainly that’s what their job is. Robert’s in an interesting position, and I think it’s one reason people get a little more frustrated with him; because Robert knows so much. All of the other press secretaries I’ve worked with were not in the tiniest little circle, but Robert is. Robert knows what’s going on here. And I think that’s where people push him especially hard. It’s why I do. Because I know he knows. So I’m trying to get in that inner circle more than he wants us to get. He’s in the little meetings, in the big meetings and everything else. He’s in the inner circle, which was not true of Bill McCurry, it was not true of Danny Meyers or Bill Lockhart or any of the people I worked with in the Clinton years, but Robert Gibbs is right in there.

DOES THAT TENSION CARRY OVER INTO YOUR PERSONAL INTERACTIONS WITH ROBERT GIBBS?

I actually like the guy a lot. I think he’s really dedicated to protecting his boss, which I can understand. There’s a lot of loyalty in this White House; it’s a little more like the Bush White House than the Clinton White House.

That was one of the nice things about covering the Clinton White House; people would talk to you out of school more than they do here. It was a different operation, wider open. Clinton didn’t have–I’m not sure if it was the loyalty, that was part of it. But Clinton didn’t have the control.

Partly because Obama is a meticulously organized guy, and he wants information to come out in a meticulously organized way, but there’s also an intense loyalty here–kind of like there was with George W. Bush–which is why you’ve got to go to so many other sources to get the information.

Next: Part 2 -

But there is a lesson to be learned here: the best curators and custodians of any given piece of property, be it physical or intellectual, are most likely the people that truly love it most, even if they are not its creators.

It’s one of those ideas so straightforward in its goodness that you kick yourself for not having come up with it first. The concept is simple: take the movie with the biggest, strongest and most fanatical following of all time. Chop it into a couple thousand 15 second clips (thus avoiding any copyright issues). Ask the internet to collaborate by remaking any of these 15 second clips in any manner they choose. Gather the results. Shake, rinse, repeat.

What you get is Star Wars: Uncut, which released its first trailer last week:

This fanboy dream project is an amazing collective accomplishment and truly demonstrates how the web can as a function hive mind that remains made up of countless individual perspectives. As each fan remakes their own clip, we see how differently people can see and interpret the same beloved source of inspiration.

Star Wars: Uncut is funny and edgy and creative and versatile and more than anything else affectionate – the love for this classic that has clearly gone in to every 15-second scene is obvious. This entire non-commercial effort is all about the shared language of media and culture. While the Star Wars prequels were, in most estimations, all about profit, this patchwork remake is exactly the opposite: the participants have nothing to gain but the joy of the experience and maybe a bit of net notoriety. And, judging by the trailer, the result is the best Star Wars effort since The Empire Strikes Back (suck it , Jedi).

Star Wars: Uncut is the start of something new: a meta-indie production that retells a well known story, frame by frame, while at the same time telling the story of the people that know that story watching it.

Finally, the cosplay, the lining up around the block and camping out, the collecting, the purchasing of endless definitive editions of the films in multitudes of formats and the unending devotion that Star Wars fans have given their ever devolving franchise has paid off. The lesson here, though, is that to get that payoff, the fans had to take matters into their own hands.

But this year it really seems like something has changed.

It’s no longer news that we have moved past geek-chic to something akin to post-geek, but when people who I wouldn’t expect to know a Viper from a Raptor mused aloud about what to expect from the 39th annual Comic-Con International last week, I realized that this year, you are all paying attention.

Last year, an estimated 126,000 people attended Comic-Con’s four day San Diego event, and passes were sold out weeks ahead of time; similar numbers were estimated this year.  Compare that to the approximately 445 die hards that attended related events in 1970.  Somehow something that started as a gathering place for a bunch of like-minded oddball outsiders has become, according to the New York Times, “an event that has acquired major importance on the [entertainment] industry’s calendar; major studios promote their biggest coming projects, and television producers for shows like “Lost” and “24” try to stoke interest in their approaching seasons.”  Last year, Comic-Con was our go-to for content related to such (ex)-obscurities as Dr. Horrible’s Sing-Along Blog; this year, Dr. Horrible is not only nominated for an Emmy, but hosting them. It’s no wonder everybody is talking about Comic-Con.

Note the lack of reference to comics.

Here’s a secret: That was built into the DNA from the start.  Comic-Con became the festival of pure geek joy that it is (and one of the, if not the, defining entertainment industry events of the year) because since day one, name notwithstanding, is it has always been pan-geek.  Sci-fi authors and Star Trek personalities have been there since the start.  Luke Skywalker himself even made a movie set there.

But that is also why, with an entertainment industry that is interested in sequels, franchises and the already-proven value of any new investment in an entertainment property, Comic-Con has become the center of both the entertainment-industrial complex as well as the countless fan-universes that each franchise has created. It is no accident that the first modern blockbuster also provided the protoype for the merchandising and cross-promotion models driving franchises like Transformers to blockbuster status despite the barest critical assessment of their quality. Of course it was. It was custom-built for the Con.

Make no mistake ye cool kids, when it comes to how we spend our entertainment dollars, we are all geeks.  Star Trek, Harry Potter, Twilight and the Dark Knight don’t lie; we all want larger-than-life escapism and a little zombie terror here and there.  We want the other, the strange, the fantastic and the far off, and we vote with the dollars we spend on books, DVDs, downloads, movie tickets, toys, collectibles, miniatures and cosplay props (not to mention the clicks we spend on bittorrent trackers and blog posts). The SciFi Channel has even become the kinder, gentler SyFy, in an acknowledgment of how mainstream geek really is. (3.5 million viewers for the debut of their latest, Warehouse 13, is acknolwedgement too; that’s 1.1 million more than the Battlestar finale. Word spreads, eh geeks?)

Like some alien gestating to life in a slimy pod, geek culture ripened over the years in its (our) own obscure cons, from back when the cancellation of the very first Star Trek spawned modern fandom (and fanaticism).  And you know how that alien springs to life and starts spreading its seed all over the place? Right: cue the modern entertainment franchise of comics, books, films, blogs, series, webisodes, collectibles, podcasts and any other format yet to be dreamed up. So, with that in mind: how could the convention at which you most expect to see somebody wearing fangs without the slightest hint of self-consciousness not become ground zero of the entertainment world?

Because, importantly, it’s also establishing itself as a leader within it. Back to Dr. Horrible: An indie labor-of-love project launched on the side during the writer’s strike, launched on the web, became a critical and financial success — entirely outside the traditional models. In its initial limited run, it got over 2 millions streams in five days (and would have had more had demand not crashed the servers); a year later, its Amazon sales rank is #87 for Bestsellers, Movies & TV; with top five rankings across all its sub-categories. Like Comic-Con, Dr. Horrible is pan-geek: comic-book, sci-fi, fantasy, adventure, musical theater (two words for you here: Rocky Horror) — with the heroes, villains, inventors, outsiders, romantics and strivers plus the crucial morality play that underlies the best of each genre. The storylines may be fantastical, but the impulses couldn’t be more visceral.

Which is maybe why it’s all finally catching on. It’s a phrase us geeks know well, from bad zombie movies, from Twilight Zone episodes, from the collective subconscious that geekdom has shared since at least the first Comic-Con in 1970, and that should resonate with anyone that has consumed the smallest morsel of popular media in the past half decade or so: “One of us, one of us, one of us…”

Related:

Comic-Con 2009: The Hero Complex collection [LA Times]
The Winners & Losers of Comic-Con 2009 [Seattle PI]
Who Won Comic-Con’s Buzz Wars? Our 10 Picks [i09]

Ash Kalb is the general counsel of a New York-based telecommunications and technology company and an instrument-rated pilot.  He will be writing a weekly column on geek culture for Mediaite. He wishes he went to Comic-Con.