Triad Today

In the 2018 mid-term elections, Greensboro attorney Kathy Manning, a Democrat, challenged incumbent Republican Ted Budd, who was seeking his second term in Congress. The two candidates first appeared together on Triad Today in October of that year, and their interaction was, at times, contentious. Budd went on to win re-election, and Manning won her own seat two years later, representing the newly formed 6th Congressional district which encompasses all of Guilford and part of Forsyth. This weekend, the pair will once again appear jointly on Triad Today, but not as adversaries. This time around, the two Congressional colleagues will report on and discuss public policy initiatives that affect our nation. This special voter education edition of Triad Today was taped on June 2 when Budd and Manning were home on break from Washington. Here are some highlights of our 30-minute conversation.

JL: Thanks to the stimulus checks and extended unemployment benefits, millions of people are in no hurry to go back to work, and employers are having trouble finding employees. Did the government offer too much Pandemic relief, just enough? Or not enough?

KM: I think it’s important to remember that we were in a situation where we had had almost half a million deaths in this country from COVID. We had just gotten a vaccine developed, but we had no plan by the prior administration to get vaccines and get shots in arms. So I was so proud to be able to work for and vote for the American Rescue Plan, and with that plan, we’ve gotten shots in arms. We’ve gotten money to people who were not able to buy food, so people are not going hungry. It helped a lot of people.

TB: During the Trump administration in the last Congress, I think it started out being just enough, but then it became more and more, and later on we saw packages, particularly under the Biden administration, like the American Rescue Plan, ostensibly to help with COVID, but only 10% of it actually dealt with COVID. Even a smaller fraction even dealt with vaccines. Now we need to get people back into the workforce.

JL: Last year, there were 612 mass shootings in the United States. This year so far, there have been over 200 more, yet Congress still hasn’t passed a comprehensive package to curb gun violence. What are you waiting for?

KM: I was thrilled to be able to vote for two gun safety bills that have passed the House. The first one would put in place universal background checks, and that is something that is supported by 90 percent of Americans.

TB: We want to keep firearms out of the hands of dangerous individuals, including somebody with terrorist intent, criminal intent, and right now, what we’re especially dealing with is mental illness.

JL: Let’s talk about the January insurrection. House Democrats and 39 Republicans voted to create a bipartisan commission to study what happened. Ted, you voted against the commission. Why?

TB: Because it is already being investigated by the FBI, by DOJ, and by the Washington DC police, so there’s already investigations going on, so what we want to do is de-politicize it. We don’t need a politicized commission that makes it a public spectacle.

KM: I was in the House gallery that day. I was in the last group brought out to safety… We have a right to know what happened, so of course, I voted in favor of it. We want to know the truth. We want to know what happened, how it got to that point, and how we can stop it in the future.

JL: What is Congress doing to reform law enforcement?

KM: I was pleased to vote for the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act, and that Act would ban some of the atrocities like chokeholds, no-knock warrants, and it would create a national database so that a police officer fired for abusive practices in one jurisdiction, can’t be hired by another jurisdiction.

TB: I would want to support things like the Community Policing Act and make sure we invest in our police. We should never defund our police. It’s a horrible solution.

In the early 1980’s when The Love Boat was navigating prime time waters, and The Mary Tyler Moore Show and McHale’s Navy were still in re-runs, an Entertainment Tonight poll named Gavin MacLeod the most recognizable man on TV. If they had taken a poll of the most likeable star, he would have topped that list too. Truth is, everybody liked Gavin.

Love Boat guest star Suzanne Somers told me: “Gavin was the true definition of a star, but more than that, he was a light. He lit up the room, and everyone loved him. He makes everyone in the room feel fortunate that they are there.”

My friend Jerry Mathers was another guest star who could attest to Gavin’s genuinely warm personality: “It was so much fun ‘sailing’ on The Love Boat with my Leave it to Beaver family. Gavin was so gracious and engaging, and he made working on the production such a wonderful experience for us all!”

And then there was Happy Days mom, Marion Ross, who not only appeared on The Love Boat, she married the Captain! In real life, Marion and Gavin were long time friends and co-stars dating back to their work on 1959’s Operation Petticoat, so she was a natural choice to play Emily Stubing in a number of episodes. Marion told me, “We had a great romance on The Love Boat. Gavin was a wonderful man, and a wonderful talent.” (by the way, Marion still has the cake topper from their on-screen wedding).

I first got to know Gavin back in 2013 when I interviewed him about his newly released autobiography, This is Your Captain Speaking: My Fantastic Voyage Through Hollywood, Faith and Life. He was 82 at the time, and I asked him why he waited so long to write his memoirs. Said Gavin, “I only have a few years left, and I wanted to do it while I could still remember.” In the years since then, we stayed in touch, and I always enjoyed our conversations. Sadly, I will no longer have the privilege of speaking with one of the nicest men I’ve ever known. Gavin passed away on May 29. He is survived by his wife Patti, and four children. Gavin MacLeod was 90.    

Born Allan George See, Gavin grew up in the town of Pleasantville, NY, and was bitten by the acting bug in kindergarten, where he starred in a Mother’s Day play.

Gavin:  My teacher used to say I was the cutest boy in the class (because) I had won the Charming Child contest from the New York Daily Mirror. I played the part of a little boy who was trying to decide what to give his mother for Mother’s Day. He had no money, so he went into the forest and a bear said, “The thing to give your mother is a bear hug”. So I gave the girl who was playing my mother a big hug, and the audience applauded. I thought, “They like me! I want to do more of this!” And that was the beginning of me wanting to be an actor.

Like most struggling young New York actors of that era, Allan (by then known as Gavin MacLeod) took other jobs while waiting for his big break. He worked as an usher at Radio City Music Hall, and as a cashier at Jim Downey’s Steak House, a popular hang-out in the heart of the theatre district. Over time, Gavin got used to meeting big stars, but he wasn’t prepared for one particular customer who came in for a bite after working all day at the Actors Studio.

Gavin: One night I looked up across the bar and there was Eli Wallach with Marilyn Monroe. She had on an open blouse and a sweater over her shoulder, and was wearing no make up. And I thought, “Oh my God, it’s Marilyn Monroe!” They came over and sat down right across from me. She didn’t know I was an actor then, she just thought I was a young guy with a bad hair piece. I said, “Hello, how are you and how do you like New York?”. And Marilyn said, “It’s so different here. Everybody is so nice to me”. Then I said, “Well you’re the most beautiful thing I’ve ever seen”, and she laughed. And I said, “You know what I’m going to do when I get home at 1:30 in the morning? I’m going to call all of my friends and tell them I met Marilyn Monroe”.  That’s when she really laughed.

A year later, Gavin made it to Broadway as a replacement actor in A Hatful of Rain, and from there he appeared in a number of live TV dramas. Then in 1962 he landed the role of sailor Joseph Happy Haines in McHale’s Navy, and all was well until his friend Ted Knight came aboard to do a cameo.

Gavin: Ted said, “Gavin how can you do this? You’re just a glorified extra”. What he said began to weigh on me, and I started drinking every day after work. I wasn’t myself. I was sort of disintegrating.

Gavin left McHale’s Navy, stopped drinking, and was selective about the roles he took in film and on television. The move paid off, and he was offered the role of Lou Grant in The Mary Tyler Moore Show. But MacLeod thought he’d be more believable as Mary’s buddy Murray Slaughter, and the rest is comedy history. The Lou Grant role went to Ed Asner who came to know Gavin as a trusted and loyal friend, as evidenced by this story that Ed related to me recently:

“When my wife and I were having trouble, Gavin was such a good friend that he would drop by and offer to help me or Nancy, and he became a good friend to both of us. He was the only one from the show who offered his support, and his offer of friendship to her and me was a noble act.”

The Mary Tyler Moore Show ended production in 1977, and within two weeks, Aaron Spelling asked Gavin to assume the helm of The Love Boat as Captain Merrill Stubing. After making 250 voyages and winning 4 EMMYs, The Love Boat ended its run in 1987, but Gavin continued on as the face of Princess Cruise Lines. Meanwhile he turned down choice roles on TV in order to appear in religious films and devote his life to Christ.

Given Gavin’s immense popularity over the years, I once asked him if there was ever a time when fame went to his head. Said Gavin, “No, because I know how things can change overnight. I never believed all of the publicity. I don’t want to seem unduly humble, but I am a very grateful person. God has really had His hand on my life.” The Captain has spoken.

In March of 1991, NBA superstar Charles Barkley and his Phoenix Suns were playing in New Jersey when a hometown fan shouted racist slurs at him. Sir Charles responded by spitting at the fan, but his aim was off, and the spittle hit a little girl. Afterward, the press hammered Barkley about not being a good role model, and he snapped back, by saying that he didn’t want to be a role model. Barkley felt that parents, not jocks, should be who kids look up to. I agree 100% with that sentiment, unfortunately, athletes can’t control who chooses to admire them. Moreover, young people are more observant than we sometimes give them credit for, and what they see their heroes do, can inform how they themselves act in their own life. And that brings me to Naomi Osaka, a 23-year-old, four-time Grand Slam tennis champion.

Last week while competing at the French Open, Osaka refused to attend any post game press conferences, something that is required of pro athletes in most major sports, including tennis. Officials at the Open asked her to reconsider, and, according to Associated Press reporter Doha Madani, even attempted to “check on her well being.” But Osaka stood her ground, so tournament officials fined her $15,000. After that, the popular player announced that she was withdrawing from the French Open. Writing on social media, Osaka said she refused to attend any press conferences because she, “often felt that people have no regard for athletes’ mental health.” But the confusion comes in the fact that Osaka had issued two different statements to explain her boycott of press conferences.

As Madani reported, Osaka’s first statement made it clear that she refused to show up for pressers simply because she did not want to answer, “the same questions over and over again.” But in a later statement, she put an entirely different spin on the matter, by playing the mental health card, and saying that she suffers long bouts of depression, and “suffers great anxiety when faced with having to answer questions from journalists.” 

Let me point out that Osaka is an adult and a professional. She signed on to play in the WTA, knowing what was expected of her and every other player. What’s more, Osaka has had no problem with benefitting financially from the system. Last year alone, she made over $37 million dollars, and most of that came from endorsements from companies who expect their stars to promote themselves and their products at every opportunity. In that regard, Osaka’s dramatic walk-out violated both the letter and the spirit of her contractual obligations, and left the French Open without one of its biggest draws. Speaking with the Associated Press, tennis star Rafel Nadal put the matter into perspective, saying, “Without the press, without the people who are normally traveling and writing about the achievements we are having around the world, probably we would not be the athletes that we are today.”

Still, it should be noted that anxiety and depression are very real disorders which deserve our attention, especially because an increasing number of Americans suffer with them. In fact, the AP reports that according to a recent CDC survey, the number of adults with symptoms of a depressive disorder, rose from 36% to 41% since last August, and nearly 12% of those folks “did not get the help they needed.”  

So why then do I have the right to imply that Osaka is spoiled and selfish? After all, I’ve never played professional tennis, and I’m not an expert on anxiety and depression. But my bona fides include covering stars in every major sport, including interviews with Billie Jean King and Martina Navratilova at a time when they were struggling with how and when to come out, and in an era when sponsors would run away from gay stars. Osaka is fortunate to live in a more enlightened and politically correct era, which explains why her sponsors have stuck by her. King and Navratilova, meanwhile, went through hell, day in and day out as journalists and lovers threatened to expose them. They knew all too well what anxiety and stress were all about, and yet they showed up for press conferences and stayed around to answer all sorts of questions for as long as they were needed, and that included spending one-on-one time with me when I was free-lancing for ESPN and CNN. Billie Jean and Martina were role models to young women everywhere, and they accepted their responsibilities to their sport, their sponsors, and their fans, despite whatever personal stresses and traumas they were experiencing at the time. 

And so, depending upon which of her explanations you believe, Naomi Osaka is either unwilling to answer questions from the press, or she’s unable to answer questions from the press. Only she knows which is really the case. If it’s the former, then she should continue to be fined for skirting her duties. If it’s the latter, then I wish her well with treatment and recovery. Either way, though, the message that she is sending to young people by boycotting press conferences and withdrawing from tournaments, is that it’s OK to quit. It’s OK to walk away from your responsibilities, and bite the hand of the sport that feeds you. And, it’s OK to go back on your word. Perhaps Miss Osaka’s symbolic spit is targeted at adults who don’t respect her emotional state, but her spittle is also hitting impressionable kids in the process. A tennis role model should have better aim.

In the 2007 documentary “Who is Norman Lloyd?” the late Karl Malden replied to the query as follows: “If you don’t know Norman Lloyd, you SHOULD know Norman Lloyd because Norman Lloyd is the history of our industry.”

And what a history he had. In his twenties, Norman was directed on stage by Orson Welles. In his thirties, he was directed in films by Charlie Chaplin and Alfred Hitchcock. In his fifties and sixties, he produced and directed award-winning episodic television, and in his seventies, Norman won acclaim starring on St. Elsewhere. In his eighties, he was directed by Martin Scorsese, and in his nineties, he co-starred with the likes of George Clooney and Cameron Diaz. Norman had a distinctly regal voice and a distinctly wicked sense of humor. He was a great storyteller and an even greater listener. And I’ve never known anyone to match his energy level. Set designer Roy Christopher once remarked, “Norman’s creative motor was always running.” I guess that’s why I always thought Norman would live forever but forever came too soon. He passed away on the morning of May 11. Norman Lloyd was 106 years old. 

I first got to know Norman and his wife Peggy nearly 30 years ago when I was doing research for a series of articles on St. Elsewhere (Peggy passed away in 2011). I had been in broadcasting for some time by then but was just beginning to test my writing wings. Norman opened doors for me, which eventually led to my new mid-life career as an author and columnist. I dare say Norman opened a lot of doors for a lot of people, mainly because he was a nice guy, but probably because he believed in paying it forward. In the early 1950s, Norman refused to name names for the House Un-American Activities Committee, so they blacklisted him. He was rescued out of exile by his friend Alfred Hitchcock, who wouldn’t be bullied or intimidated by HUAC. Norman never forgot Hitch’s courage and loyalty, so it’s no surprise that he helped a lot of actors and directors by hiring them to work on Alfred Hitchcock Presents. One of those actors was James Best, who later gained fame as Sheriff Roscoe P. Coltrane in The Dukes of Hazzard. I once asked Jim to comment on his friend Norman. 

Best: “Having worked with hundreds of directors in my career, I found very few that had Norman’s qualities. He was most kind, gracious, and patient with his actors. He is in all respects a complete gentleman in his personal life, and I found it a genuine pleasure just to be in the presence of such a talented man.” 

After the Hitchcock TV series ended, Norman’s considerable producing and directing skills were in great demand. So were his talents as an actor, which landed him numerous guest roles on television. Then came a six-year run on the groundbreaking medical drama St. Elsewhere,” in which Norman portrayed Dr. Daniel Auschlander, a role he called more like himself than any other. Ed Begley Jr. and Howie Mandel also portrayed doctors on the show and had the utmost respect for Norman. 

Mandel: “I love Norman Lloyd. He is a legend. I have spent hours like a little kid while he regaled us with stories of Hitchcock. He teaches, he entertains. He is a legend.”

Begley: “I worked with Norman Lloyd the actor and Norman Lloyd, the director, and no one informed me better on the art of storytelling than that talented man. He is a constant inspiration and my eternal friend. I’m so lucky to have had him in my life for 40 years.”

St. Elsewhere producer Tom Fontana was particularly in awe of Norman’s incongruous youthful spirit and longevity.

Fontana: “Norman was a combination of Peter Pan and Father Time.”

For Norman, there was no slowing down after St. Elsewhere. Film and TV roles poured in, including that of a stern schoolmaster opposite Robin Williams in Dead Poets Society.” In 2000, Norman appeared in a live TV adaptation of Fail Safe,” produced by and starring George Clooney. Later, when Norman turned 100, Clooney took a break from honeymooning to email me his thoughts on his friend reaching the century mark. 

Clooney: “Norman is not just the consummate professional, he’s also the consummate gentleman. In a town of two-dimensional sets designed to look like the real thing, Norman IS the real thing. Congratulations, Norman, on reaching mid-life!”

I will always cherish the telephone visits I had with Norman over the years. Toward the end, he took more naps and was hard of hearing but still maintained his quick wit. The following is one of my favorite exchanges with Norman from a few years ago.

JL: Has anyone ever offered you a part in a film in which you would have to appear nude?

Lloyd: No, I’ve never been that fortunate (laughs). If I had, my career would have ascended. It would have been enormous. I would, of course, have had a great fan club of the female persuasion.

JL: So what’s the secret to your longevity?

Lloyd:  I eat reasonably and play tennis, and I believe having a positive attitude is very important. I will make a confession. I do take a shot of bourbon before dinner.

JL: Is that to get your confidence up in case a nude role does come along?

Lloyd: I don’t need that. I can go do it without the booze. [laughs]

It’s a rare thing for someone to be so accomplished in so many fields for so long, yet Norman did just that, having excelled as an actor, director, writer, and producer. But ask him which he prefers, and the answer always came quickly.

Lloyd: “When you start as an actor as I did, no matter what else you do, you’re always an actor.”

The late Hume Cronyn once described his friend Norman as “The Ultimate Pro,” and when I asked Norman to respond to that compliment, he said, “sounds like a fitting epitaph someday.” And so it is.

Philip Segal III was a hometown boy who made good. He was a graduate of Grimsley High School and N.C. State University. He was an avid sports fan with a particular love for ice hockey. Segal was also the founder of Havana Phil’s Cigar Company in Greensboro, where today, patrons can purchase and enjoy the finest smokes from around the world. Phil was well known and well liked, and he left us way too soon. Segal died in 2018 at the age of 60 from stomach cancer.

Since Phil’s passing, his wife Kimberley and son, Philip IV, have taken over the business, but they have also dedicated themselves to educating folks about stomach cancer and fighting to find a cure. The forum they chose for their mission is an annual fundraising golf tournament, but the popular event was put on hold last year due to the COVID pandemic. Now, thanks to recent rulings by Governor Cooper and the CDC, the Philip Segal III Memorial Golf Tournament is back in full swing, and participants will tee off on Thursday, June 10 at Grandover Resort.

Proceeds from the golf tournament will benefit Debbie’s Dream Foundation, an organization dedicated to raising awareness about stomach cancer, advancing funding for research, providing education and support to patients, families and caregivers, and, ultimately, finding a cure for the disease.

“It was important to me and my son to choose an organization that supports stomach cancer research,” said Kimberley Segal. “It also means a lot to us that Debbie’s Dream Foundation works closely with caregivers and supports families who are dealing with stomach cancer.”

This year’s fundraiser has been expanded to include two other events. A cigar party along with silent and live auctions will be held on the evening of the golf tournament, and a charity ice-hockey game will take place on Saturday, June 12.

“The auctions will feature lots of sports memorabilia, including items from Dad’s beloved N.C. State University, as well as from his favorite sport, ice hockey,” said Phil Segal IV. “That ties into our other big event on June 12, when folks can come out and play a game of ice hockey at the Icehouse.”

In addition to raising money for Debbie’s Dream Foundation, one of the events will also benefit a long-time employee and friend of Segal III.

“The live auction will raise money for a man known affectionately as Big Ed, who was one of my Dad’s dearest friends and a loyal employee. Big Ed is in need of a kidney transplant, and we want to help any way we can,” said Phil Segal IV.

Check-in for the golf tournament on June 10 is 6:30 a.m., with a shotgun start at 8 a.m. The entry fee is $150 per player and $600 for a foursome. Companies and individuals can also purchase sponsorships ranging from $150 to $2,500. All sponsorships include golf, lunch, prizes, and admission to the cigar party and auctions. Face-off for the hockey game on June 12 is 4 p.m. at the Icehouse in Greensboro. To learn more about the event, visit the event page at DebbiesDream.org or at HavanaPhil.com. To play in the ice hockey game, email pcookk@aol.com.
 
 

According to the CDC, the percentage of high school students who drink and drive has decreased by 54% since 1991. That’s the good news. The bad news is that one in ten teenagers still drinks and drives, and according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), over 2,500 of them die in alcohol related crashes each year. Fortunately, one Triad company is working to reduce those numbers.

David Daggett, an attorney with Daggett Shuler, created the “Safe Sober Prom Night” program 31 years ago, and since then, he, his partner Griff Shuler and their army of volunteers have reached out to area teens with a message of responsible behavior. The SSPN program simply requires high school students to sign a pledge that they will not drink and drive, and thus far, over 600,000 teens have taken that pledge.

David and Griff appeared on a recent episode of Triad Today to talk about how “Safe Sober Prom Night” came about, and where it’s headed.

David: “We started the program with an awareness of the dangers of alcohol and drugs for young people, then based it on the most positive force there is, which is positive peer pressure. Then we also got the community involved in the program. In the early days, students were resistant. Nowadays we tell the volunteers to stand back because there’s an avalanche of students just waiting to sign the pledge.”

And every teen who takes the pledge receives a custom-designed t-shirt, which they wear as a badge of honor.

David: “The t-shirts are a tangible reminder of the program, and that’s been sort of a hallmark of positive peer pressure.”

Obviously the program has been a big hit with t-shirt-wearing teens, but it is also recognized and appreciated by school officials.

Griff: “Some of the feedback we get is from school administrators and principals who say the program has made a difference in their schools, and that’s what we love to see, which is students making the decision to sign the pledge to be safe and sober.”

Until now, Daggett Shuler’s efforts have been focused on keeping kids safe and sober during prom season, but the COVID-19 pandemic necessitated a different approach, which has now resulted in new branding, and an expansion of the program.

David: “There were no proms last year, and very few this year, so we’re modifying and expanding the program from “Safe Sober Prom Night” to “SafeSober.com”. Now, in addition to spreading a message of sobriety during prom season, we can address graduations, back-to-school events, freshman orientation, and other activities. We can be much more versatile year round, and connect with the students where they are.”

Of course, Daggett Shuler will continue to give out t-shirts to participating teens, and that means holding an annual competition for the best t-shirt design. But “SafeSober.com” is about much more than just t-shirts. It’s about saving lives.

David: “In what Griff and I do professionally we’ve seen lives shattered due to drinking and driving issues. “SafeSober.com” will help a generation of kids, and that makes our community better today, and into the future. We now have grandkids of our first “Safe Sober Prom Night” students who are taking the pledge, and that’s pretty gratifying.”

For more information, visit SafeSober.com.

Much has been said about the importance of adult role models, and the positive impact they can have on children. But for those of us little buckaroos who grew up in the 1950s, there was no finer role model than Johnny Crawford, himself just a kid when he starred as Mark McCain on the hit TV series The Rifleman. On screen, Johnny seemed like a great guy, so we just assumed he was like that in real life. Turns out, we were right. Johnny could ride and rope with the best of them. He was a talented actor and an accomplished musician. He had a genuine smile, and a genuine interest in people. He had a great sense of humor, and an even greater sense of humility. He was the kind of guy you wanted to be like, whether you watched him as a kid or got to know him as an adult. I was lucky. I got to do both.

Johnny’s big break came in 1955 when Walt Disney tapped him to be one of the original Mouseketeers on the new Mickey Mouse Club television series. But when producers decided to pare down the large group, Johnny was an early casualty.

“They went from twenty-four Mouseketeers down to twelve,” he told me, “and I was let go after the first season. It was very disappointing, but having done The Mickey Mouse Club gave me confidence.”

In fact, young Crawford’s talents were in constant demand, and he stayed busy as a guest star in numerous TV series. That led to an audition for The Rifleman. In an interview with TV Guide, Rifleman star Chuck Connors said, “The producers and I interviewed 20 or 30 kids to play Mark. Then Johnny came in the room, and before we even talked to him I said, ‘That’s him. That’s the Rifleman’s son!’”.

During the run of The Rifleman, Crawford was nominated for an EMMY, and became a teen heart throb with hit songs like “Cindy’s Birthday”, which reached number 8 on the Billboard charts. But unlike so many child actors who struggle with the transition to adulthood, Johnny stayed out of trouble, and stayed active, first in film, then in the Army, and later as the leader of his own orchestra. In 1990 he reconnected with his high school sweetheart Charlotte Samco, and they married in 1995. In his later years, Johnny was a fan favorite at nostalgia conventions, while continuing to conduct his band and act. In 2019 he was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease, and he died on April 29, 2021 after battling COVID and a bout of pneumonia. Johnny Crawford was 75 years old.

I met Johnny in 2014 when he attended the Western Film Festival in Winston-Salem, and in the years since I would call him on his birthday and exchange holiday cards. Our last conversation was just prior to his Alzheimer’s diagnosis, and we talked about his role in Bill Tilghman and the Outlaws, a western film in which he portrayed silent movie star William S. Hart. Later that year, I interviewed Johnny’s pal, Paul Petersen (a fellow Mouseketeer and co-star of The Donna Reed Show), who told me about the diagnosis, and his plans to start a GoFundMe campaign to help pay for Johnny’s medical care. I asked Paul when he first knew that Johnny was sick.

“My wife and I, Tony Dow, Johnny and others were at the Hollywood Museum to honor Annette (Funicello), and we noticed that something was amiss with Johnny. He seemed to be a little confused, but we covered for him because that’s what you do for your friends. Later, when Charlotte had to put him in a facility, we knew what it was, and how severe it was.”

In one of my earliest conversations with Johnny, I was pleasantly surprised to learn that he was a regular guy, just like those of us who had watched him on TV every week.

“Yeah, I was just like you and other kids at the time. I watched B westerns on Saturday mornings. I had all of the toy guns, and the Hopalong Cassidy stuff, and cap pistols. We all played cowboys and indians, and my bicycle was my horse.”

In one of our more serious conversations, I asked Johnny to comment on the amount of violence in The Rifleman.

“The father/son relationship WAS the show. It gave the show a dimension that other shows didn’t have, which was a family of two people trying to make it in the Old West when it was pretty lawless. But it was always understood that killing was a last resort, and the violence wasn’t to be used frivolously.”

My funniest memory of Johnny was when I was introducing him for a TV segment. During my opening remarks, I held up various memorabilia to the camera, including a Rifleman comic book, and a 1973 Playboy magazine, featuring a revealing photo of Johnny from a film in which he had appeared. “You’re my hero,” I said. “For which one?,” he replied. We both had a big laugh.

Speaking of heroes, there were plenty of TV cowboys who I enjoyed watching as a kid, but it was Johnny Crawford who I wanted to hang out with. Six decades later I finally got my chance, and he didn’t disappoint. A real role model never does.

Donations to Johnny Crawford’s Alzheimer’s Fund can still be made at JohnnyCrawfordLegacy.com.
 
 

We are a nation that has become obsessed with side effects. First, we wanted to know the side effects of COVID-19, then we wanted to know the side effects of COVID vaccines. Collaterally, we wanted to know the side effects of COVID on our economy, and on our ability to financially support ourselves and our families. And why not? By late last year, the pandemic had destroyed millions of families and jobs with lightning speed, so once Joe Biden took office, he moved quickly to build upon existing relief measures, while creating others that would ease our collective burden. The problem is that no one accurately predicted the side effects which would result from massive government assistance. Ironically, Biden’s efforts to restore our economy on the macro level could be backfiring on the micro level.

Federal, state, and local relief measures have included such things as: extended unemployment benefits, with $300 added on; a series of stimulus checks to individuals, with additional amounts per each child; extended deadlines for paying taxes to the IRS; deferment of student loan payments; a moratorium on foreclosures; a moratorium on evictions for not paying rent; and, in some cases, deferment of utility payments. In addition, Biden is proposing a $1.8 trillion dollar “American Families Act” which, among other things, will extend the original pandemic-related paid leave plan through September for employers who want to participate. It would give workers up to 12 weeks of guaranteed pay for parental, family, and personal illness leave, three days of bereavement leave, and would extend the child tax credit program. And while these and other measures have been a welcome sight to struggling families, the unintended side effect has been a false sense of security among many of those who lost their jobs due to pandemic-related closures, and are now in no hurry to return to work.

Take Johnstown, Pennsylvania, for instance. According to a story in the Tribune Democrat, a recent survey of 34 area companies showed that there were 580 job openings and very few takers. Debra Balog, director of Johnstown Regional Industries Workforce Development told the Trib, “Local companies across the board are hiring, but job-seekers are light. Stimulus checks and unemployment benefits with $300 extra during the pandemic, may have been disincentives to work.”

Then there’s Peachtree City, Georgia, where M.A. Industries has an abundance of job openings, but is having trouble finding people who want to work. Back in February, owner Bill Martin told NPR, “I keep hearing about all the unemployed people. I certainly can’t find any of those folks.”

And here in the Piedmont, the stories are similar. A local landscaping company with hundreds of clients, can’t find anyone to mow grass. A large North Carolina-based company recently hired 80 people, but within a week, 60 of them quit because they didn’t want to go through the required training. And at a recent, well publicized Triad job fair that normally attracts hundreds of job seekers, only 2 people showed up.

According to the Labor Department, America lost over 20 million jobs during the throes of the pandemic, and only a little more than half of those have been recovered. Yet, job openings are at a five-month high, and employers are struggling to find workers. And while it’s true that, early on, many folks were afraid to accept a job that might require them to work around other people, that fear is virtually moot, now that half of all adults have been vaccinated. It’s also true that many people who worked remotely prior to being laid off, are holding out for jobs that will allow them to continue to work from home. But as ZipRecruiter executive Julia Pollak told NPR, “The problem is that those are not the jobs available right now.”

Don’t get me wrong. I support most of the relief efforts put in place by the federal and state governments. After all, extraordinary times demand extraordinary measures. But sometime soon, the bill for all of this assistance will come due. So will loan payments, rent, taxes, healthcare and utility bills. When that happens, those who have let a plethora of job openings pass them by, may suffer some unpleasant financial side effects.

Scarlett O’Hara, one of fiction’s greatest procrastinators, is noted for saying, “I’ll think about that tomorrow. Tomorrow is another day.” Right now, the government is making it easy for some of us to sit at home and put off looking for a new job, but we might be better served to plan for tomorrow by looking for a job today.
 
 

I suppose it’s natural to blame someone else for our own mistakes and short-comings, or when something happens that we don’t like. We blame the teacher when we get a bad grade, and we blame the boss when we get fired. It’s always someone else’s fault but ours. We’re all guilty of this behavior, even politicians. In 2016 Hillary blamed Bernie Sanders and James Comey for her loss to Donald Trump, and in 2020, Trump blamed fake ballots and fake news for his loss to Joe Biden. But the worst kind of “blame game” is when a spouse blames a third party for the dissolution of a marriage.

Here’s how it goes: Jane and Joe have been married for 10 years, then Joe has an affair with Betty, and leaves Jane. Not only will Jane probably get a big divorce settlement from Joe, but she sues Betty for breaking up the marriage in the first place. The legal term for this archaic madness is “Alienation of Affection”, and, believe it or not, it is still legal in six states, including our beloved North Carolina. State Representative Pricey Harrison of Guilford wants to change that, and hopes that House bill 489 (which she co-sponsored) will do the trick.

Harrison recently told the Winston-Salem Journal’s Richard Craver that more than 200 Alienation of Affection cases are filed each year in North Carolina, “some of which have resulted in multi-million dollar verdicts…and are often used to create problems for a defendant, such as attorney’s fees, or to intentionally inflict emotional distress, or as leverage in a divorce or custody proceeding.” Said Harrison, “I, like many, feel that these laws are outdated, based on 17th century English law that viewed a married woman as her husband’s chattel.”

The legal precedent may be four centuries old, but you only have to go back a few years to understand how bad it is. In 2010, a North Carolina wife was awarded $9 million dollars in a suit against her husband’s mistress. That same year, a wife prevailed in court against her best friend, who she said, seduced her husband. Not long after that, a Burke County wife was awarded $1 million dollars because she said her husband’s secretary dressed provocatively at work, resulting in an affair that destroyed her marriage. In 2012, the wife of former Winston-Salem DASH co-owner Flip Filipowski sued Flip’s alleged mistress for $20 million dollars. In a 2017 case involving a married Forsyth County physician and his mistress, the North Carolina Court of Appeals ruled that Alienation of Affection was constitutional. And last year, former state senator Rick Gunn was sued by a Wake County husband, who claimed that Gunn was having an affair with his wife, which broke up a 20-year marriage.

One reason that Alienation of Affection suits are unfair is that the accusing party has a pretty easy burden of proof to meet. According to MyFamilyLaw.com, a spouse only has to prove three things: that love existed between the married spouses; that love between the married spouses was destroyed ; and, that a third party’s malicious conduct contributed to the loss of affection. The problem is that jury awards are often based on the aggrieved party’s feelings and testimony, rather than on hard facts.

Alienation of Affection laws essentially condone extortion, and accept the premise that a lover can steal someone’s spouse. In the 2017 case of the married physician, the Court justified its ruling, saying, “…a broken marriage can mean the loss of all the benefits that a healthy marriage brings to a society. The state has a legitimate interest in protecting the institution of marriage, ensuring that married couples honor their vows, and deterring conduct that would cause injury to one of the spouses.”

Newsflash: It’s not Big Brother’s job to maintain or sustain marital relationships. And here’s another shocking truth: No one can break up a marriage except one or more of the spouses themselves. House bill 489 bears this out, and I wish Ms. Harrison success in getting it passed.
 
 

I suppose it’s natural to blame someone else for our own mistakes and short-comings, or when something happens that we don’t like. We blame the teacher when we get a bad grade, and we blame the boss when we get fired. It’s always someone else’s fault but ours. We’re all guilty of this behavior, even politicians. In 2016 Hillary blamed Bernie Sanders and James Comey for her loss to Donald Trump, and in 2020, Trump blamed fake ballots and fake news for his loss to Joe Biden. But the worst kind of “blame game” is when a spouse blames a third party for the dissolution of a marriage.

Here’s how it goes: Jane and Joe have been married for 10 years, then Joe has an affair with Betty, and leaves Jane. Not only will Jane probably get a big divorce settlement from Joe, but she sues Betty for breaking up the marriage in the first place. The legal term for this archaic madness is “Alienation of Affection”, and, believe it or not, it is still legal in six states, including our beloved North Carolina. State Representative Pricey Harrison of Guilford wants to change that, and hopes that House bill 489 (which she co-sponsored) will do the trick.

Harrison recently told the Winston-Salem Journal’s Richard Craver that more than 200 Alienation of Affection cases are filed each year in North Carolina, “some of which have resulted in multi-million dollar verdicts…and are often used to create problems for a defendant, such as attorney’s fees, or to intentionally inflict emotional distress, or as leverage in a divorce or custody proceeding.” Said Harrison, “I, like many, feel that these laws are outdated, based on 17th century English law that viewed a married woman as her husband’s chattel.”

The legal precedent may be four centuries old, but you only have to go back a few years to understand how bad it is. In 2010, a North Carolina wife was awarded $9 million dollars in a suit against her husband’s mistress. That same year, a wife prevailed in court against her best friend, who she said, seduced her husband. Not long after that, a Burke County wife was awarded $1 million dollars because she said her husband’s secretary dressed provocatively at work, resulting in an affair that destroyed her marriage. In 2012, the wife of former Winston-Salem DASH co-owner Flip Filipowski sued Flip’s alleged mistress for $20 million dollars. In a 2017 case involving a married Forsyth County physician and his mistress, the North Carolina Court of Appeals ruled that Alienation of Affection was constitutional. And last year, former state senator Rick Gunn was sued by a Wake County husband, who claimed that Gunn was having an affair with his wife, which broke up a 20-year marriage.

One reason that Alienation of Affection suits are unfair is that the accusing party has a pretty easy burden of proof to meet. According to MyFamilyLaw.com, a spouse only has to prove three things: that love existed between the married spouses; that love between the married spouses was destroyed ; and, that a third party’s malicious conduct contributed to the loss of affection. The problem is that jury awards are often based on the aggrieved party’s feelings and testimony, rather than on hard facts.

Alienation of Affection laws essentially condone extortion, and accept the premise that a lover can steal someone’s spouse. In the 2017 case of the married physician, the Court justified its ruling, saying, “…a broken marriage can mean the loss of all the benefits that a healthy marriage brings to a society. The state has a legitimate interest in protecting the institution of marriage, ensuring that married couples honor their vows, and deterring conduct that would cause injury to one of the spouses.”

Newsflash: It’s not Big Brother’s job to maintain or sustain marital relationships. And here’s another shocking truth: No one can break up a marriage except one or more of the spouses themselves. House bill 489 bears this out, and I wish Ms. Harrison success in getting it passed.
 
 

I can tell you from personal experience that hospice care is a blessing, and the professionals who administer that care are angels. Traditional hospice care is available to anyone who is diagnosed with a terminal illness, and has six months or less to live. In that regard, end-of-life care typically seeks to keep the patient comfortable and pain-free after aggressive medical treatments have been suspended. Hospice care also helps to facilitate quality time that the patient can spend with loved ones. And while it’s true that a serious illness can lead to the need for hospice care, it’s also true that such
illnesses can be treated and managed for years before hospice care is indicated or appropriate. That’s why Mountain Valley Hospice & Palliative Care has just expanded its services and facilities to help patients who can benefit from longer term comfort care.

Mountain Valley has cared for over 20,000 hospice patients since opening its first office 37 years ago, and today their service area includes 18 counties in North Carolina and Virginia. Earlier this month, the agency opened an office in Winston-Salem dedicated to serving patients with a serious illness.

“Over the years we’ve witnessed a growing need to reach and serve a widening population of patients facing serious illnesses, such as heart disease, lung disease,dementia, and cancer,” said Mountain Valley President and CEO Tracey Dobson. “The opening of this office reflects the organization’s commitment to ensure that patients with serious illnesses have access to high quality palliative care services, which can extend the life of the patient by months or even years.”

“Serious illness services are for patients who have a very advanced illness that is upstream from hospice. They may be struggling with symptoms, or with making decisions about what they want to have done for their healthcare,” said Kristie Szarpa, senior director of practice management for Mountain Valley. “It’s a complex process and it can be a very long journey, sometimes over many years, and so to walk that journey alone is a heavy load to bear.”

Mountain Valley’s serious illness team includes doctors, nurse practitioners, registered nurses, chaplains, and social workers. And, unlike end-of-life hospice care, palliative services for patients with a serious illness allows for traditional medical treatments to continue.

“All of your specialists, all of your interventions you might have such as chemo therapy or surgery, all that stays in place, and we are a supplement. We are another layer of the medical team to bring support, and our focus is a bit less on the disease, and a bit more on the symptoms,”

Mountain Valley’s new office is located at 3069 Trenwest Drive in Winston-Salem, and anyone with a serious illness is invited to make an appointment to discuss a palliative care plan.

“As with our hospice services, you don’t need a physician referral to set up a consultation to talk about serious illness services. The patient or their family members can call us directly,” said Dobson.

Hospice and serious illness services are covered by most insurance, but, as a non-profit agency, Mountain Valley will not turn anyone away who is in need of care and cannot pay. For more information, call (888) 789-2922 or visit www.MtnValleyHospice.org.
 
 

A wise man once advised me never to complain about a problem unless I was prepared to offer a solution, and, where possible, I’ve always tried to adhere to that advice in my newspaper columns. For example, I’ve criticized long-serving politicians by advocating for term limits, and I’ve criticized the practice of jailing people for smoking dope, by advocating for legalization of drugs. I’ve also proposed various solutions for solving our nation’s problem with gun violence, but I’ve since come to realize that neither my solutions nor those of anyone else, are likely to work, so long as we live in such a politically divided nation. Here, in no particular order, are some of the initiatives that have been proposed to combat gun violence:

Ban the Sale of Assault-Style Rifles

We tried this back in 1994, but six years later the law was repealed as soon as Republican George W. Bush took office. In the intervening two decades, assault rifle sales have enjoyed unchecked growth. Biden and his majority might re-institute a ban, but unless such a provision is formed into a Constitutional Amendment, then it’s subject to another repeal whenever Republicans re-gain control of government. Also, we now know that assault-style pistols can be just as deadly, as we discovered recently after the Boulder massacre. Thus, any new legislation must be careful to use the word “weapon” rather than just “rifle”. Finally, even if we suddenly made it illegal to purchase all guns, it won’t solve our overall problem, because currently there are more guns in circulation than there are people, so anyone who wants to commit murder, can easily get his hands on a weapon.

Regulate the Sale of Ammo

This hasn’t worked with gun sales, so why would it work with ammo? Also, most gun owners already have a stockpile of ammunition, and those who don’t, can beg, borrow, steal, or import what they need.

Ban the Manufacture of Large Ammo Clips

This would be a good idea except for two things. First, these mega mags are already plentiful, and second, any sicko determined to kill innocent people, can do so with a semi automatic handgun and several standard-size clips.

Confiscate Guns

If police went door to door to confiscate all weapons, it would violate the Second Amendment and start an all-out civil war. This is the ultimate fear of Q-Anon nuts, but it’s also a concern for law-abiding citizens who would get swept up in escalated gun violence.

Arm Every Citizen

There is a long-standing theory among many conservatives that if everyone was packing a gun, then one or more of us would be able to stop a demented shooter before he can massacre a lot of people. There is, however, no data to show that ordinary citizens would know how to react quickly enough to prevent a massacre, nor that they wouldn’t end up shooting an innocent person in the process.

Institute a Buy-Back Campaign

No matter how many cities seek to buy back guns from residents, those campaigns only collect a tiny fraction of guns already in existence. Besides, the kind of men who shot up Atlanta and Boulder would have never participated in such an initiative.

Install Metal Detectors

I have long been a proponent of requiring metal detectors in all schools, shopping malls, and other large public venues, and installing sophisticated remote monitoring and door lock devices. I still believe this is logistically viable, but unless subsidized by government, these upgrades would be cost-prohibitive for most businesses, churches, and schools.

Require Extended Waiting Periods

There’s nothing wrong with enacting a mandatory 90 day waiting period for purchase of a gun. But while such a delay could prevent some spur-of-the-moment murders, it would only prolong a planned massacre. A longer waiting period would, however, allow for more extensive background checks.

Enact Mandatory Background Checks

Most localities have a system in place for checking the background of someone who wants to purchase a gun. The problem is that unless the purchaser has been in jail or hospitalized for mental illness, a background check is useless. Some Sheriffs have suggested that such checks should include a shared national data base that red flags anyone who has been visited by police or social workers on multiple occasions, but never arrested or committed.

Hire More School Counselors

The one thing on which everyone agrees is that mass shooters are mentally ill. The problem is that we never seem to know about their illness until AFTER a massacre. Having a social worker or psychologist in every school would give us a fighting chance to detect early-warning signs of deviant behavior and violent tendencies. It’s an investment we should make, but it’s not a quick fix.

The reason why these and other measures won’t succeed right now is because our political leaders are working at cross purposes. While Biden is considering taking executive action to ban certain weapons, state legislatures are making it easier to own and carry a gun. For example, fifteen states now allow concealed carry without a permit, and nine other states are about to follow suit. And twelve states are now debating a law that would prohibit local police from enforcing any new federal gun control laws. Meanwhile the body count keeps rising from mass shootings.

No one is safe anymore, and the conservative leaders who should be concerned about that, seem to fear their political base more than they do the shooters.