President Barack Obama has been briefly heckled as he addressed students at the largest US Catholic university, amid a row over abortion rights.
Anti-abortion activists have protested against the president's visit to Notre Dame, in Indiana.
Protests and vigils have been held on and around campus, with several people arrested before Mr Obama's speech.
Mr Obama, who received an honorary degree, defended the right to abortion but said the procedure should be rare.
After entering the White House in January the president also quickly moved to reverse a Bush-era ban on embryonic stem-cell research, angering many social conservatives.
There are approximately 60 million Roman Catholics in the US, with almost half of them supporting abortion rights, research suggests. Some 42% believe abortion should be illegal.
'Inappropriate'
Wearing the blue robes of Notre Dame, Mr Obama was welcomed onto the stage with a lengthy ovation from students and staff.
Support for the president's visit was strong among those in the audience, who watched him receive an honorary degree before delivering the commencement, or graduation, address
He was interrupted soon after beginning his speech, prompting a majority of those in the audience to cheer the president, who asked for calm and told listening graduates: "We don't do things the easy way."
The AFP news agency said four men heckled the president, shouting "abortion is murder" and "stop killing babies" before being escorted from the auditorium.
Mr Obama laid out his views on abortion in clear terms, describing it as "a heart-wrenching decision for any woman".
To sustained applause, he outlined steps he supported
Let's work together to reduce the number of women seeking abortions by reducing unintended pregnancies, and making adoption more available, and providing care and support for women who do carry their child to term," he said.
The decision to invite Mr Obama to Notre Dame, the largest Catholic university in the US, has been fiercely criticised.
Many activists and Church leaders have directed their ire at university authorities they accuse of betraying Catholic principles.
"It is clear that Notre Dame didn't understand what it means to be Catholic when they issued this invitation," said Cardinal Francis George, president of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops.
Bishop John D'Arcy, of the diocese where Notre Dame is located, said he would boycott the graduation for the first time in his 24 years as bishop, the Chicago Tribune reported.
And conservative critics have described the awarding of an honorary degree as "inappropriate".
Avoiding caricatures
Addressing his critics indirectly, Mr Obama told academics and graduates at Notre Dame that he did not want the debate around abortion to go away.
Conceding that the views of opposing advocates were "irreconcilable", he said each side would continue to make its case with conviction.
"Surely we can do so without reducing those with differing views to caricature?" he asked.
A strong majority of students were reported to be in favour of the president's visit, but a petition containing some 360,000 names was delivered to the university as a mark of protest.
Overnight, students opposed to abortion rights attended an all-night prayer vigil to protest against Mr Obama's visit, and an estimated 200 people attended a prayer session at Alumni Hall Chapel.
More than 100 protesters gathered and 23 marched onto the campus on Saturday, the Associated Press reported. Police arrested 19 for trespassing, with four also charged with resisting police.
A university spokesman said none of those arrested were students, AP added.
Sunday, May 17, 2009
Sri Lanka battles Tiger remnants
International concern is growing over the fate of civilians in northern Sri Lanka as fighting continues despite reports of a Tamil Tiger ceasefire.
Sri Lanka's government said troops were engaged in "final brushing up" hours after a website linked to the rebels said the Tigers were laying down arms.
EU ministers are expected to call on Monday for an independent inquiry into claims civilians have been targeted.
Both sides say the other has killed civilians in the closed off war zone.
The inquiry calls come as the final act appears to be being played out in a long and bitter 26-year civil war which has left some 70,000 people dead.
See a map of the conflict region
Sri Lanka's army says the last LTTE (Tamil Tiger) fighters have been penned in a 1.5 square kilometre patch of jungle.
On Sunday the Tigers chief of international relations, Selvarasa Pathmanathan, said in a statement on the Tamilnet website: "This battle has reached its bitter end."
A later statement appeared to modify the rebel position, saying the LTTE was "prepared to silence its guns if that is what needed by the international community to save the life and dignity of the Tamil people".
The country's President Mahinda Rajapaksa has already claimed victory, declaring on Saturday that Sri Lanka had been made free from "barbaric acts".
Europe 'appalled'
In Brussels the EU issued a draft statement ahead of a meeting of foreign ministers on Monday, expressing a sense of outrage at the reports of civilian casualties on both sides.
The statement said the EU was appalled both at the high numbers of casualties and at the use of heavy weapons in the conflict
The EU is pushing for the UN Human Rights Council to convene a special session on Sri Lanka, just as it has in the past done for Burma, Darfur and the Palestinian territories, reports the BBC's Oana Lungescu, in Brussels.
A pledge of aid came from the UK, which offered £5m ($7.5m) to help avoid a "humanitarian catastrophe".
"It is essential that we get food, medicines and shelter in as soon as possible to save lives, and thereafter that we help people to return to their homes as soon as they safely can," said Hillary Benn, the UK's international development secretary.
Diplomats say the EU has limited leverage, our correspondent notes, although it could remove preferential trade access worth $150m (£100m) if the country is found to be in breach of international human rights obligations.
Reports differ on the numbers of civilians caught up in the last battles, with the government saying that all those who had been trapped in Sri Lanka's northern war zone had escaped.
The rebel spokesman, though, said more than 25,000 were injured and in need of attention.
The government said it did not respond to statements released on Tamilnet, and asserted that 50,000 Tamil civilians had left the war zone in recent days.
The UN has told the BBC the army figures reinforced its view that Sri Lanka's authorities were ill-prepared for the huge influx of internally displaced people.
Refugee camps inland are already badly strained accommodating the huge numbers of those who have fled the conflict.
Leader at large?
The fighting is drawing to a close without any official word on the fate of the Tamil Tigers' leader, Velupillai Prabhakaran.
Some reports have suggested he has died, but - as with all information from the war zone - there has been no confirmation.
The army had suspected that Prabhakaran, who formed the Tigers in 1976, would fulfil his long-held pledge to take his own life rather than face capture.
Reports suggested some of the last remaining Tigers launched themselves in suicide attacks at government troops, but there was no word on whether Prabhakaran was among them.
President Rajapaksa is expected to give a nationally televised news conference in parliament on Tuesday, when reports suggest he may officially declare the war over.
More than 70,000 people have died in the bitter war for a Tamil homeland.
Sri Lanka's government said troops were engaged in "final brushing up" hours after a website linked to the rebels said the Tigers were laying down arms.
EU ministers are expected to call on Monday for an independent inquiry into claims civilians have been targeted.
Both sides say the other has killed civilians in the closed off war zone.
The inquiry calls come as the final act appears to be being played out in a long and bitter 26-year civil war which has left some 70,000 people dead.
See a map of the conflict region
Sri Lanka's army says the last LTTE (Tamil Tiger) fighters have been penned in a 1.5 square kilometre patch of jungle.
On Sunday the Tigers chief of international relations, Selvarasa Pathmanathan, said in a statement on the Tamilnet website: "This battle has reached its bitter end."
A later statement appeared to modify the rebel position, saying the LTTE was "prepared to silence its guns if that is what needed by the international community to save the life and dignity of the Tamil people".
The country's President Mahinda Rajapaksa has already claimed victory, declaring on Saturday that Sri Lanka had been made free from "barbaric acts".
Europe 'appalled'
In Brussels the EU issued a draft statement ahead of a meeting of foreign ministers on Monday, expressing a sense of outrage at the reports of civilian casualties on both sides.
The statement said the EU was appalled both at the high numbers of casualties and at the use of heavy weapons in the conflict
The EU is pushing for the UN Human Rights Council to convene a special session on Sri Lanka, just as it has in the past done for Burma, Darfur and the Palestinian territories, reports the BBC's Oana Lungescu, in Brussels.
A pledge of aid came from the UK, which offered £5m ($7.5m) to help avoid a "humanitarian catastrophe".
"It is essential that we get food, medicines and shelter in as soon as possible to save lives, and thereafter that we help people to return to their homes as soon as they safely can," said Hillary Benn, the UK's international development secretary.
Diplomats say the EU has limited leverage, our correspondent notes, although it could remove preferential trade access worth $150m (£100m) if the country is found to be in breach of international human rights obligations.
Reports differ on the numbers of civilians caught up in the last battles, with the government saying that all those who had been trapped in Sri Lanka's northern war zone had escaped.
The rebel spokesman, though, said more than 25,000 were injured and in need of attention.
The government said it did not respond to statements released on Tamilnet, and asserted that 50,000 Tamil civilians had left the war zone in recent days.
The UN has told the BBC the army figures reinforced its view that Sri Lanka's authorities were ill-prepared for the huge influx of internally displaced people.
Refugee camps inland are already badly strained accommodating the huge numbers of those who have fled the conflict.
Leader at large?
The fighting is drawing to a close without any official word on the fate of the Tamil Tigers' leader, Velupillai Prabhakaran.
Some reports have suggested he has died, but - as with all information from the war zone - there has been no confirmation.
The army had suspected that Prabhakaran, who formed the Tigers in 1976, would fulfil his long-held pledge to take his own life rather than face capture.
Reports suggested some of the last remaining Tigers launched themselves in suicide attacks at government troops, but there was no word on whether Prabhakaran was among them.
President Rajapaksa is expected to give a nationally televised news conference in parliament on Tuesday, when reports suggest he may officially declare the war over.
More than 70,000 people have died in the bitter war for a Tamil homeland.
Rahul Gandhi speaks after landslide victory in Lok Sabha elections 2009
Q What is the message being sent out by the electorate? Is this the rejection of caste, religion and regional politics? What does this mean?
RG: As I have stated in my press conference, India is progressing very quickly and the Congress party believes that this progress belongs to everybody. It does not belong to a small group of people. It belongs to the large mass of people of this country. I think the policies we had made in the last five years, particularly programmes like NREGS & loan waiver, have sent a message that we are not going to let this country develop with a huge portion of it lagging behind. If this country progress, everybody will benefit. A person who has given us everything, who works everyday of their life in extremely hard conditions will also benefit. Congress party is going to stand by that person...
Q Priyankaji, will you be part of this government or will you work for the party?
PG: I will do exactly what I am doing!
Q Do you now need Mulayam Singh Yadav? Do you, at all, need SP to be part of this government?
RG: These are decisions taken by senior members of the Congress party, the Prime Minister and Congress President. I personally feel that the people of UP feel they need a government that works and have rejected politics of religion and caste. They have voted for politics of development in UP and that is what the Congress party will try to deliver over the next three years and certainly beyond that.
Q On L K Advani
RG: I would like to say one more thing. I think that our opposition fought a hard election, and Advaniji in particular fought a strong election. I have fundamental differences with Mr Advani in terms of secular politics. But as a senior person who is 80 plus, I think he fought this election with a lot of grit.
Q Manmohan Singh has said that he wishes you become part of his cabinet. What will you say?
RG: I have answered this in English. I think that the mandate is in favour of youth and the poor people of this country. I want the youth of this country to participate in politics with ease. Whatever we are doing in Youth Congress, we want to organize it in the coming days. As I said in a press conference, we need an organization of young people and that is going to be built over the next 2, 3 or 5 years
Q Priyanka has worked a lot for your and Soniaji’s campaign. How much credit will you give her for the results in UP?
RG: (smiling) just ask her! (Priyanka intervenes)
PG: All the credit goes to him, he has all the credit.
RG: I’ll tell you. Nobody can lay sole claim on this achievement as it is complete teamwork. If you ask me how much credit I give Priyanka, I’ll say that 100% credit goes to our team.
Q Then when is Rahul bringing in Priyanka?
RG: She will answer that question better. But the credit doesn’t go to one person. And this credit don’t belong to us either, this credit goes to the people of UP. The people of UP told us that they are tired of the way politics is being done currently. They asked us to bring about a change in UP. In fact our challenge has started from today. You can view it from the election point of view, but I don’t view it like that. For many years UP is lagging behind and being the largest state of this country it has to be number one in term of development. So just by winning 20 or more seats is just a beginning for us. This is really a small beginning. We have to work for the people of UP wholeheartedly. And that work will not be done by Rahul Gandhi alone. It would be completed by Rahul Gandhi along with the youth of this state.
I think that the people of UP are tired of the way politics has been done in last 20 years. Now we have to provide a new kind of politics to UP. And we will try our best that in the next 3 years we can give a new Congress to UP which can bring about change in the state. We will try to provide you such an organization.
Q What will be the agenda now, for reviving Congress all across India, UP being the focus area?
RG: I will not revive Congress. I will involve the youth of this country in politics. Our country has 70 % youngsters and we need some youngsters in politics. There are not enough of them in politics (Smiling) and I think we are on a lookout for them, and I know that lots of youngsters are listening to me. Come and join us.
Q How many youngsters will be there in the cabinet?
RG: (Smiling) You will get some youngsters in the ministry.
I have said again and again that I don’t view my job as winning or losing elections. I view my job as a duty I have. And I don’t view it in short term, I view it in a relatively long term. My job, as I see it right now, is to try to change the politics in this country using youngsters and unleashing the energy of these youngsters in this country. Seriously, my job would be no different, had I lost these elections. I would have been the same. My job has not changed in the least. My job is to try and empower youngsters in this country and I will continue to do my job whether I lose or win. Thank you very much. Have a nice evening.
excerpts from pressbdrief.in
RG: As I have stated in my press conference, India is progressing very quickly and the Congress party believes that this progress belongs to everybody. It does not belong to a small group of people. It belongs to the large mass of people of this country. I think the policies we had made in the last five years, particularly programmes like NREGS & loan waiver, have sent a message that we are not going to let this country develop with a huge portion of it lagging behind. If this country progress, everybody will benefit. A person who has given us everything, who works everyday of their life in extremely hard conditions will also benefit. Congress party is going to stand by that person...
Q Priyankaji, will you be part of this government or will you work for the party?
PG: I will do exactly what I am doing!
Q Do you now need Mulayam Singh Yadav? Do you, at all, need SP to be part of this government?
RG: These are decisions taken by senior members of the Congress party, the Prime Minister and Congress President. I personally feel that the people of UP feel they need a government that works and have rejected politics of religion and caste. They have voted for politics of development in UP and that is what the Congress party will try to deliver over the next three years and certainly beyond that.
Q On L K Advani
RG: I would like to say one more thing. I think that our opposition fought a hard election, and Advaniji in particular fought a strong election. I have fundamental differences with Mr Advani in terms of secular politics. But as a senior person who is 80 plus, I think he fought this election with a lot of grit.
Q Manmohan Singh has said that he wishes you become part of his cabinet. What will you say?
RG: I have answered this in English. I think that the mandate is in favour of youth and the poor people of this country. I want the youth of this country to participate in politics with ease. Whatever we are doing in Youth Congress, we want to organize it in the coming days. As I said in a press conference, we need an organization of young people and that is going to be built over the next 2, 3 or 5 years
Q Priyanka has worked a lot for your and Soniaji’s campaign. How much credit will you give her for the results in UP?
RG: (smiling) just ask her! (Priyanka intervenes)
PG: All the credit goes to him, he has all the credit.
RG: I’ll tell you. Nobody can lay sole claim on this achievement as it is complete teamwork. If you ask me how much credit I give Priyanka, I’ll say that 100% credit goes to our team.
Q Then when is Rahul bringing in Priyanka?
RG: She will answer that question better. But the credit doesn’t go to one person. And this credit don’t belong to us either, this credit goes to the people of UP. The people of UP told us that they are tired of the way politics is being done currently. They asked us to bring about a change in UP. In fact our challenge has started from today. You can view it from the election point of view, but I don’t view it like that. For many years UP is lagging behind and being the largest state of this country it has to be number one in term of development. So just by winning 20 or more seats is just a beginning for us. This is really a small beginning. We have to work for the people of UP wholeheartedly. And that work will not be done by Rahul Gandhi alone. It would be completed by Rahul Gandhi along with the youth of this state.
I think that the people of UP are tired of the way politics has been done in last 20 years. Now we have to provide a new kind of politics to UP. And we will try our best that in the next 3 years we can give a new Congress to UP which can bring about change in the state. We will try to provide you such an organization.
Q What will be the agenda now, for reviving Congress all across India, UP being the focus area?
RG: I will not revive Congress. I will involve the youth of this country in politics. Our country has 70 % youngsters and we need some youngsters in politics. There are not enough of them in politics (Smiling) and I think we are on a lookout for them, and I know that lots of youngsters are listening to me. Come and join us.
Q How many youngsters will be there in the cabinet?
RG: (Smiling) You will get some youngsters in the ministry.
I have said again and again that I don’t view my job as winning or losing elections. I view my job as a duty I have. And I don’t view it in short term, I view it in a relatively long term. My job, as I see it right now, is to try to change the politics in this country using youngsters and unleashing the energy of these youngsters in this country. Seriously, my job would be no different, had I lost these elections. I would have been the same. My job has not changed in the least. My job is to try and empower youngsters in this country and I will continue to do my job whether I lose or win. Thank you very much. Have a nice evening.
excerpts from pressbdrief.in
Saturday, May 16, 2009
UPA trashes predictions, makes strong comeback
With the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) trashing all predictions of a tight race, Manmohan Singh (76) will take fresh oath this week, only the second Indian Prime Minister since Jawaharlal Nehru in 1962 to return to power after a full five-year term.
With 206 seats — 61 more than 2004 — India’s grand old party ran up its best tally in 18 years, winning urban and rural seats from across the country. (Listen to podcast: Part 1, Part 2)
The victory also boosted the standing of party general secretary Rahul Gandhi (39) who led the charge into India’s most populous state, Uttar Pradesh — where the Congress won 21 seats, the highest in 25 years.
Latest results and leads indicate the UPA is around a dozen seats short of the halfway mark of 272 in a House of 543. The alliance will bridge the gap through independents and smaller outfits.
With 60 per cent of India now under 35 years of age, expect to see some younger MPs getting ministerial berths, as it happened in 1984 when Rajiv Gandhi led the Congress to 404 seats, its best showing ever. The party won 232 seats in 1991.
“People have appreciated the work done by us,” said Congress president Sonia Gandhi, beaming, as Singh stood stoically by her side.
“We worked for them with sincerity.”
As Sonia spoke to reporters at her 10, Janpath residence on Saturday, Congress workers across the country distributed sweets, burst crackers and danced in the streets.
With the Left and the BJP tally declining, the verdict is being seen as an approval of the UPA government’s policies, particularly the redistribution of wealth to India’s poorest through unprecedented welfare schemes that totalled nearly Rs 1,00,000 crore in rural development, agriculture, health and education.
The Prime Minister’s image — as an able and incorruptible administrator and reformer — coupled with urban makeovers, helped the party deliver all seven seats in Delhi and all six in Mumbai to the Congress.
For the BJP it was back to square one, plummeting from its 2004 figure of 138 to 116 on Saturday, close to its 1991 tally when it began its ascendancy to become India’s ruling party by 1998.
Its best performance was 182 seats in 1999.
The 15th Lok Sabha election also rejected the concept of a non-BJP, non-Congress third front pushed by the Left, particularly the CPM, which declined in its bastions of West Bengal and Kerala.
Sonia’s popularity grew over the last five years after she renounced the post of prime minister in 2004, and later when she resigned as a Parliament member when the BJP tried to build a campaign against her that she was holding an office of profit.
With 206 seats — 61 more than 2004 — India’s grand old party ran up its best tally in 18 years, winning urban and rural seats from across the country. (Listen to podcast: Part 1, Part 2)
The victory also boosted the standing of party general secretary Rahul Gandhi (39) who led the charge into India’s most populous state, Uttar Pradesh — where the Congress won 21 seats, the highest in 25 years.
Latest results and leads indicate the UPA is around a dozen seats short of the halfway mark of 272 in a House of 543. The alliance will bridge the gap through independents and smaller outfits.
With 60 per cent of India now under 35 years of age, expect to see some younger MPs getting ministerial berths, as it happened in 1984 when Rajiv Gandhi led the Congress to 404 seats, its best showing ever. The party won 232 seats in 1991.
“People have appreciated the work done by us,” said Congress president Sonia Gandhi, beaming, as Singh stood stoically by her side.
“We worked for them with sincerity.”
As Sonia spoke to reporters at her 10, Janpath residence on Saturday, Congress workers across the country distributed sweets, burst crackers and danced in the streets.
With the Left and the BJP tally declining, the verdict is being seen as an approval of the UPA government’s policies, particularly the redistribution of wealth to India’s poorest through unprecedented welfare schemes that totalled nearly Rs 1,00,000 crore in rural development, agriculture, health and education.
The Prime Minister’s image — as an able and incorruptible administrator and reformer — coupled with urban makeovers, helped the party deliver all seven seats in Delhi and all six in Mumbai to the Congress.
For the BJP it was back to square one, plummeting from its 2004 figure of 138 to 116 on Saturday, close to its 1991 tally when it began its ascendancy to become India’s ruling party by 1998.
Its best performance was 182 seats in 1999.
The 15th Lok Sabha election also rejected the concept of a non-BJP, non-Congress third front pushed by the Left, particularly the CPM, which declined in its bastions of West Bengal and Kerala.
Sonia’s popularity grew over the last five years after she renounced the post of prime minister in 2004, and later when she resigned as a Parliament member when the BJP tried to build a campaign against her that she was holding an office of profit.
India boosts 'strategic presence' along Chinese border
India is strengthening its strategic depth and presence along the Chinese border in the Ladakh region of Jammu and Kashmir. The purpose is to maintain vigil over the Chinese road from Lhasa to Xijiang in the Tibetan Autonomous Region. The road passes through the strategic mountainous area of Aksai Chin.
The construction of Indian roads in the region is a follow-up action after the country reactivated its two strategically important airfields in May and November last year after more than four decades.
The idea is to build India’s “strategic presence” there as new global realities and challenges are emerging on the borders, said an Army officer on condition of anonymity.
These roads will connect Daulat Beg Oldie and Fukche air fields which were reactivated on May 31 and November 4, 2008, for the first time after the Sino-Indian war of 1962.
“The roads are being constructed from both the eastern and western flanks,” confirmed minister of tourism Nawang Rigzin Jora, who represents Leh constituency in the J&K Assembly. He said work is in progress.
While the minister did not reveal much about the reasons for these roads, the army officer recalled: “We had lost Aksai Chin because of our absence there. But now we have realised that the presence in all the fields is required with the twin objective to strengthen ourselves strategically and make our presence felt there. We can also keep tabs on the Chinese activities in the Aksai Chin region.”
The argument for building roads is that there cannot be a permanent dependence on the air presence, though there are plans to land fighter planes. The AN-32 and medium sized transport plane IL-76 have already landed there.
The Indian Air Force’s (IAF) fixed-wing aircraft (AN-32) landed at Daulat Beg Oldie (DBO). Following this, IL-76 planes made sorties over the region and landed in the airfield.
The Advanced Landing Ground (ALG), where the aircraft landed at DBO, has an unpaved surface and is located in the Aksai Chin area at a height of 16,200 feet near the strategic Karakoram Pass, very close to the Line of Actual Control (LAC) with China.
DBO is an important army forward area post linking the ancient silk route to China. This base was built during the India-China conflict in 1962. Packet aircraft of the IAF operated from DBO between 1962 and 1965. In 1996, an earthquake caused some loosening of the surface soil, making this base unfit for further fixed-wing aircraft operations.
But now everything has been repaired and the airfield is functional.
The construction of Indian roads in the region is a follow-up action after the country reactivated its two strategically important airfields in May and November last year after more than four decades.
The idea is to build India’s “strategic presence” there as new global realities and challenges are emerging on the borders, said an Army officer on condition of anonymity.
These roads will connect Daulat Beg Oldie and Fukche air fields which were reactivated on May 31 and November 4, 2008, for the first time after the Sino-Indian war of 1962.
“The roads are being constructed from both the eastern and western flanks,” confirmed minister of tourism Nawang Rigzin Jora, who represents Leh constituency in the J&K Assembly. He said work is in progress.
While the minister did not reveal much about the reasons for these roads, the army officer recalled: “We had lost Aksai Chin because of our absence there. But now we have realised that the presence in all the fields is required with the twin objective to strengthen ourselves strategically and make our presence felt there. We can also keep tabs on the Chinese activities in the Aksai Chin region.”
The argument for building roads is that there cannot be a permanent dependence on the air presence, though there are plans to land fighter planes. The AN-32 and medium sized transport plane IL-76 have already landed there.
The Indian Air Force’s (IAF) fixed-wing aircraft (AN-32) landed at Daulat Beg Oldie (DBO). Following this, IL-76 planes made sorties over the region and landed in the airfield.
The Advanced Landing Ground (ALG), where the aircraft landed at DBO, has an unpaved surface and is located in the Aksai Chin area at a height of 16,200 feet near the strategic Karakoram Pass, very close to the Line of Actual Control (LAC) with China.
DBO is an important army forward area post linking the ancient silk route to China. This base was built during the India-China conflict in 1962. Packet aircraft of the IAF operated from DBO between 1962 and 1965. In 1996, an earthquake caused some loosening of the surface soil, making this base unfit for further fixed-wing aircraft operations.
But now everything has been repaired and the airfield is functional.
Happily Ever Laughter
When you first meet Mavis and Jay Leno, it’s the electricity between them that gets you and their long-lasting love that makes them the anomaly. Two strongs can make one—they fit.
She arrives first—on time—doesn’t need hair or makeup and graciously agrees to be touched up, as a team is waiting. Unassuming, thoughtful and at ease, she exudes an air of total calm, a quiet dignity that you somehow know is deep and true. An intelligence and genuine concern lead her to bring me up to date on the condition of women in Afghanistan, her lifelong passion, even as she allows us to curl those curls because “my husband likes them wild.”
Then her husband enters, one of the most famous faces in the world, with white hair that begs to be smoothed (yet why would you—it’s the trademark that says, “Let me be, it’s who I am”) and a presence that makes everyone smile. Jay’s eyes are tired (he’s just returned from a trip to Detroit, where he entertained unemployed autoworkers), but they light up when they focus on his wife of 28 years. They touch, and the bond between them envelops everyone. Welcome to the Lenos’ love story.
I met Mavis a few years ago at our monthly book club. (She is a voracious reader whose passion is English history.) I was first struck by her depth of character and self-awareness—she is someone with a strong sense of purpose, compassion and curiosity. What I have come to know is that she’s someone who turns her wisdom into action. She works unceasingly with the Feminist Majority Foundation to help girls and women around the world gain rights through education so that human equality is realized.
Given the never-wavering glare on celebrity couples, I was impressed with their authentic relationship, one that feels grounded and decidedly non-Hollywood. Although I liked her before our interview, I told my husband of 34 years that in its aftermath, I had fallen in love with Mavis Leno. By that I mean the kind of unbridled universal love we feel for others when we realize what qualities they bring to humanity. What I learned from the Lenos’ love is how much a partner can help us discover such qualities in ourselves. Jay brings out the best in Mavis, and Mavis brings out the best in Jay. That has to be the definition of a perfect marriage.
Sue Smalley: Jay, I’ve heard Mavis talk about you so many times and how much in love she is. I guess I always felt you should share that story. Even just having your pictures taken a few moments ago, I could feel how happy you are being next to each other. You’re best friends, aren’t you?
Mavis and Jay Leno: [In unison.] Oh yeah.
JL: I had this discussion with Drew Barrymore on The Tonight Show. She was asking about being married, and I said, “You should always marry your conscience.” By that I mean, in show business—it happens in sports and politics, too—you go through the usual avarice, and you need someone who will go, “What are you doing? You don’t act like this.” If you wind up with someone who enjoys those things, you go to hell pretty much together. I spent half of my life trying not to disappoint my mother and the other half trying not to disappoint my wife. I mean, you have to respect the standard. You need to be able to look in the mirror.
SS: Mavis says, from the bottom of her heart, “He could never disappoint me.”
ML: No, because I truly know him, and he truly knows me. I met Jay in 1976. I’ve known him—
JL: Over 33 years.
ML: It was in January—I don’t remember the day. But at the time I thought, Holy s--t! That comedian is gorgeous! I had gone to the Comedy Store with my girlfriend because I was writing comedy with some partners. Friends kept saying, “You have to hang out at the Comedy Store and the Improv—you’ll meet people who can give you jobs.” The first time I went, they sat us front row center—that means you’re this far from the comic. And there was Jay.
SS: Was that at the very beginning of your career, Jay?
JL: Yeah, pretty much. But the interesting thing is, I’ve probably lived with five women—and every one of them was born on the same day. I can look at a woman and go, “September 5.” I don’t know why that is. I don’t look for a woman born on September 5, I just wind up attracted to them.
ML: Just casually, he asked what my birthday was, and I said, “September 5.” He started laughing. I remember it so clearly. I said, “What?” And he said, “Aw, nothing.”
JL: I remember I had Cathy Guisewite [of the “Cathy” comic strip] on, and I said, “I’m happily married...don’t take this wrong...I am attracted to you but in an odd way. Were you born on or around September 5?” And she said, “Yes, on September 5.” I said, “Sorry, I’m not flirting,” and then I explained. It made me laugh.
ML: When he finished his act the night we met, I needed to go to the ladies’ room. What I didn’t know was in the Comedy Store back then, that area was the only place for the comedians to hang out. So when I came out of the bathroom, he said, “Are you that girl in front?” and I said, “Yes, that was me.”
SS: Did you really notice her?
JL: Yeah!
ML: My friends spent most of their time at the Improv, so that’s where I started going. It just gradually evolved, you know? I had made up my mind when I was little that I would never get married or have children, so I had no agenda.
JL: Then I started to work. Her family were like church mice—they didn’t have two cents. I mean nothing—not even, like, taxes.
ML: My father was an actor. Enough said.
JL: But you know, I had this insurance policy, and I thought if something happened to me, my girlfriend wouldn’t be covered, but if we’re married, we’re covered, so...we might as well get married. Not the most romantic. Mavis didn’t even get an engagement ring until—
ML: He was going to get me one, but we had just bought a house, so why would I do that? I’m not that kind of person. So this is what he bought me 10 years ago. [Laughs and looks at the large diamond on her finger.]
SS: Mavis, your parents were happily married...why didn’t you want to marry?
ML: Maybe because my parents were not the typical American couple of that time. They had a very egalitarian relationship—actually, most of the traits I have that people consider feminine, I got from my dad, and the common sense, self-control and practicality is from my mother. When I was little, we would watch The Honeymooners. Here’s a very attractive woman, and whenever her husband is with Norton, what are they talking about? “How can we get away from the wives?” “If only it wasn’t for the wives.” Meanwhile, this woman has nothing to do, lives in this tiny place, cooks his dinner and listens to him talk. As a feminist even then, it was difficult to watch.
SS: You’re mad about it now.
ML: I am! I would see Lucy and other shows—if they wanted money, they had to ask for it, like they were a kid. That was not my plan for myself.
JL: My mother was from Scotland, had a horrible childhood—came to the country by herself when she was 11. My grandmother had run off with a younger guy, and my grandfather was stuck with six kids.
ML: His mom was the youngest.
JL: But he could only afford to take care of five, so they took her around the neighborhood as a servant girl to try to see if people would keep her for a few weeks.
ML: Jay, how are you telling this story? Her father took her there but not as a servant!
JL: But it gets to the comedy angle. My mother was not a depressed person, but I always sensed a sadness. Every time I could get my mother to laugh, it was like a huge gift. My dad was Italian and very outgoing. He would say, “Show people you’re Angelo’s boy.” My mother would say, “Whatever you do, don’t call attention to yourself.” So it was hilarious to be stuck in the middle. When I made it sort of big, I bought my dad a Cadillac, and of course, he had to get the white Cadillac d’Elegance with the red velour interior. My mother was mortified. They would drive down the street, and she would sit below seat level, and people would say, “I saw your father driving and yelling at somebody.” Sometimes if she saw people looking, she would roll down the window and go, “We’re not Cadillac people. My son got us this.” My father would yell, “Of course we’re Cadillac people! We’ve got a goddamn Cadillac! We’re driving the goddamn thing. It’s paid for!”
SS: And they were together their whole life?
JL: My dad was never sick a day in his life, but when my mother died, he was gone in nine months.
SS: Interesting how that happens.
JL: My mom took care of the inside of the house. Dad took care of the outside. We went through three ovens in my lifetime.
ML: She was like a short-order cook. There would always be steam coming out of the kitchen, pots boiling.
JL: Every breakfast, lunch, dinner—always a full thing. She didn’t even buy a box of spaghetti. She would make her own.
ML: I was crazy about Jay’s parents.
JL: We married on their wedding day, November 3.
SS: On purpose? As an honor?
JL: I thought my mom would like that—November 3, 1980.
ML: We had a very small wedding at a friend’s house with a couple friends.
JL: We didn’t tell anybody.
SS: Mavis, you didn’t want to get married, and now there’s such a connection. What changed your mind? Was Jay different?
ML: It was just that by the time we were together, I was 34. I had been a feminist for years, and I finally realized that fight was won, you know? I was past it, although that was an important gesture for me to make—that I could live without being married.
SS: What was it about Jay?
ML: Well, I was insanely in love with him—but I had had a long relationship before and never for one minute thought about marrying that guy. My belief was that I was a voyager, that I was just going to spend some time on this island and sail along and spend some time on that island. But with Jay, I realized all this time I’d been sailing, he was the destination.
SS: Jay, what was it about Mavis?
JL: Well, probably the sense that you don’t want to be somewhere else when you’re together. I mean, I’m home every night after work. I don’t go out—no boys’ night, card night or any of that stuff. I don’t feel the need.
ML: He thinks the same things are important that I think are important, the same things are wrong that I think are wrong. We have the same temperament, and we understand each other completely. Before Jay, I had the opposite experience with men to what most women have, because my father was so demonstrative. He must have told my mother he loved her a million times a day. So I always had relationships with men who were that same way—gave lots of presents but were flaky and unrealistic, tending toward the depressive. Stuff that means so much to women means nothing to me. Just be there when I need you, but the rest of the time, I take care of myself. And that was—and is—Jay.
SS: Interesting that Jay picked a woman who’s so strong. He looks at you with the admiring sense of someone who is her own person.
ML: Funny thing is, when we first got to know each other, in the ’70s, it was that in-between time with feminism. Men had stopped saying it was awful and started saying they were supporters, because they could get laid that way.
SS: So it was inauthentic?
ML: Yeah, but the thing with Jay was, from day one, he just saw me. I remember saying that I often felt I was from another planet, that I connected to people but I wished I could meet somebody from my own species. The first time talking to Jay, I said, “Oh! You’re one, too! Hi!”
SS: I think that may be the definition of “soul mate.”
JL: Well, I always look for qualities in women that I don’t have. I am attracted to the do-gooder—the rescue-a-cat type.
ML: Don’t be ridiculous—you’re the most do-gooder type in the world!
SS: I guess Jay means he values it in another person.
JL: I always tell guys, “Look like a man, think like a woman.” That’s the best way to get through life.
ML: I think we’re both saying the same thing—the quality we admire is somebody who aspires to goodness.
JL: Yeah.
ML: Here is who Jay is: When we were first going out, he’d get off at the Comedy Store late at night, and we’d go get groceries at the all-night Ralphs on Sunset. One night, there was this man harassing a woman. Suddenly, Jay yelled, “Honey! Hold on, we’re coming!” and he started walking across the lot, and the guy took off. Jay said to the girl, “Do you want to me hang around or follow you a little way? To make sure this guy...” She said no. I’d lived almost all my life in Hollywood, and there aren’t any men I ever went out with who would have done that. He didn’t even think twice. Right there, I said, “Okay!” I mean, a component of love, really, has to be admiration. Of course, I thought he was the sexiest thing I’d ever seen. I still do. And certainly, he was the funniest. He made me laugh till I almost died many times in the course of a lifetime.
JL: Yeah, it’s better than with women who are like, “I don’t get it...”
SS: I love thinking of those many nights you’ve been cracking up.
ML: I don’t think it’s an accident that comedians have the longest marriages in show business.
SS: Do they?
JL: Oh, yeah.
ML: Sure, think about it. Don Rickles, Bob Newhart, Bob Hope. You could go on and on. It’s a huge advantage. Being funny is just the best way to get through life in a relationship.
JL: I think that’s probably true.
ML: I mean, I can’t ever fight with him—he is very even-tempered.
JL: If you marry someone, there’s really nothing worth fighting about. I mean if you marry someone who is not crazy—that’s the first step. Because everything emanates from that. So when the wife says, “I have to do this.” Well, is this that important to you? All right, then.” It doesn’t matter that much, so why argue?
ML: Like I said, it’s the admiration. When Jay and I didn’t have that much money, when we were first married, we went to Monte Carlo because Jay was doing some stuff for—
JL: John Davidson.
ML: Yeah, The John Davidson Show. One night, Jay found a wallet lying on the ground. There was money and a work visa and, without thinking twice, Jay said we had to find this guy. He went back out in the square and just yelled—
JL: “Jean-Paul! Jean-Paul Tourneau!” I kept yelling, and this guy came running over, saying, “I am Jean-Paul!” like in one of those bad movies where the guy steps out of the dark and goes, “I am Jean-Paul—why you call my name?”
ML: That was funny, but the guy was in tears, you know. He was so glad to get it back. That’s Jay.
SS: You have the same values. And you laugh. Those are two key things to this marriage’s long life.
ML: Exactly. It’s really important to think the same things are funny. And the good examples—Jay’s and my parents’ happy marriages undoubtedly contributed. I think a lot of people have a very unrealistic idea of what a long relationship will be like.
JL: Happiness is a privilege, not a right. Read the fine print.
ML: People always say, “Work on a marriage.” I think if you work on knowing your own faults and trying to correct them, you’re not going to have to work on your marriage
JL: I got a job. I don’t need another.
ML: When we got married, it dawned on me that his then manager, who was a lawyer, would want a prenup, even though Jay didn’t have a lot of money then. So I decided to preempt it for him. I told Jay, “You know your manager is going to want a prenup. I’ll be perfectly happy to sign it, so don’t worry.” And Jay got mad. He said, “What? You’re already planning we’re going to get divorced?” We just trust each other in a really deep way.
SS: You really do fit.
ML: I knew a lot of funny and interesting people, but I didn’t know very many trustworthy people. But with Jay, I didn’t have to think about it. When a quality is there, it stands out.
JL: There are no jokes about wives. If someone is joking about their wife onstage, consciously or subcon-sciously, they mean it.
ML: Jay’s thing is, you elevate the powerless person and make fun of those who are misusing their power.
SS: It’s funny, Jay, because in the beginning you said Mavis is your conscience, and that’s exactly what you show in your jokes.
JL: The Wall Street guy you can nail, the plumber—
ML: If he asks someone in the audience, “What do you do, sir?” and the guy says, “I’m a plumber,” Jay will say, “Oh, someone who does an honest day’s work!” But if it’s a banker, he’ll say, “Oh, so you screw widows and orphans for a living.”
JL: Hopefully funnier than that...
ML: Am I a stand-up? No.
SS: My husband and I have been together 39 years. When I look back, I can see our relationship change. Do you find that in yours?
ML: A couple of periods were a little more difficult. When Jay got The Tonight Show, the first years were hard for me. All of a sudden, Jay had this day job, and every person on the planet was asking him for something. So I thought, I’m going to be the one who doesn’t ask for anything. Then it gave him relief at home, but that can also feel like distance. I don’t know if he was aware of it because he was so swamped by the job—just the time demands alone, and the pressure.
JL: It’s not really a high-pressure job. Do I look like I’m under pressure? Write joke, tell joke, get check. It couldn’t be simpler. You go to a place like Detroit, and you meet people with real jobs. Show business, let me tell you: The higher up you go, the more retarded people assume you are. They’ll say, “Jay drove here by himself! He drove to the studio alone—yes, he did! He came in his own car!” [Applauds.]
SS: You’re in a business where people are so self-important, and yet you remain the same.
JL: I think that’s the key—not to take yourself too seriously. It’s not high pressure unless you make it that way. It’s not like doing CPR. I was always happy with whatever level I was at. If you’re always looking for the next level, you’re not going to be happy.
ML: At that time, for me, he was gone a lot, and it was not only a new situation for him, it was a situation I had never experienced. And I didn’t know anybody to ask, “Well, how did you handle this?” So it took a little while before I figured it out.
SS: Did it make your relationship stronger?
ML: Absolutely, because you know, however steadfast your feelings for each other, your life circumstances are going to go all over the place. We’ve been through the death of my parents and his and the loss of Jay’s brother. We started off with not very much money, and now we have a lot. But we’ve stayed the same. The great thing about Jay is whatever he says, that’s it. It’s genuine.
JL: That’s right! I put my foot down. It’s the law!
ML: No. If he says, “Oh, I’ll do that,” then it’s done. When we were first together, if I wanted to talk to him about something, I would fall into the mode I had used with men in my past, where I would come in with a chip on my shoulder, all my arguments marshaled. But Jay would just say, “Okay.” Finally I realized I don’t need to do all that.
SS: You thought you could depend on him, and now, all these years later, you have all this documentation that the theory was correct.
ML: The whole thing is simple: Pick the right person; be the right person.
SS: That’s a great line.
ML: If I have one more conversation with a woman about what she wants in a man and how little she’s willing to give in return—I mean, wake up. When Jay and I lived together for a year before we married, he had an opportunity to be in a show in New York. He was actually nervous when he said, “I have this chance...” I thought, That’s great—why is he so rattled? And he said, “If I take it, I have to be in New York—would you move?” And I said, “Of course. Look, I’m with you now—I’m really with you.” And then he relaxed. I asked, “Would you turn it down if I didn’t want to?” and he got serious and said, “My career is for us. Everything I do is for us.” And the last wall inside me fell—I knew he would be on my side in everything. If you can’t do it for the person because you love them—
SS: Then you’re never going to do it. Mavis, do you still go to the show after all these years?
ML: Off and on, but we watch The Tonight Show together every night at home.
JL: Look, I always tell people, you don’t fall in love with a hooker. That’s what show business is. You can enjoy show business...and then go home.
She arrives first—on time—doesn’t need hair or makeup and graciously agrees to be touched up, as a team is waiting. Unassuming, thoughtful and at ease, she exudes an air of total calm, a quiet dignity that you somehow know is deep and true. An intelligence and genuine concern lead her to bring me up to date on the condition of women in Afghanistan, her lifelong passion, even as she allows us to curl those curls because “my husband likes them wild.”
Then her husband enters, one of the most famous faces in the world, with white hair that begs to be smoothed (yet why would you—it’s the trademark that says, “Let me be, it’s who I am”) and a presence that makes everyone smile. Jay’s eyes are tired (he’s just returned from a trip to Detroit, where he entertained unemployed autoworkers), but they light up when they focus on his wife of 28 years. They touch, and the bond between them envelops everyone. Welcome to the Lenos’ love story.
I met Mavis a few years ago at our monthly book club. (She is a voracious reader whose passion is English history.) I was first struck by her depth of character and self-awareness—she is someone with a strong sense of purpose, compassion and curiosity. What I have come to know is that she’s someone who turns her wisdom into action. She works unceasingly with the Feminist Majority Foundation to help girls and women around the world gain rights through education so that human equality is realized.
Given the never-wavering glare on celebrity couples, I was impressed with their authentic relationship, one that feels grounded and decidedly non-Hollywood. Although I liked her before our interview, I told my husband of 34 years that in its aftermath, I had fallen in love with Mavis Leno. By that I mean the kind of unbridled universal love we feel for others when we realize what qualities they bring to humanity. What I learned from the Lenos’ love is how much a partner can help us discover such qualities in ourselves. Jay brings out the best in Mavis, and Mavis brings out the best in Jay. That has to be the definition of a perfect marriage.
Sue Smalley: Jay, I’ve heard Mavis talk about you so many times and how much in love she is. I guess I always felt you should share that story. Even just having your pictures taken a few moments ago, I could feel how happy you are being next to each other. You’re best friends, aren’t you?
Mavis and Jay Leno: [In unison.] Oh yeah.
JL: I had this discussion with Drew Barrymore on The Tonight Show. She was asking about being married, and I said, “You should always marry your conscience.” By that I mean, in show business—it happens in sports and politics, too—you go through the usual avarice, and you need someone who will go, “What are you doing? You don’t act like this.” If you wind up with someone who enjoys those things, you go to hell pretty much together. I spent half of my life trying not to disappoint my mother and the other half trying not to disappoint my wife. I mean, you have to respect the standard. You need to be able to look in the mirror.
SS: Mavis says, from the bottom of her heart, “He could never disappoint me.”
ML: No, because I truly know him, and he truly knows me. I met Jay in 1976. I’ve known him—
JL: Over 33 years.
ML: It was in January—I don’t remember the day. But at the time I thought, Holy s--t! That comedian is gorgeous! I had gone to the Comedy Store with my girlfriend because I was writing comedy with some partners. Friends kept saying, “You have to hang out at the Comedy Store and the Improv—you’ll meet people who can give you jobs.” The first time I went, they sat us front row center—that means you’re this far from the comic. And there was Jay.
SS: Was that at the very beginning of your career, Jay?
JL: Yeah, pretty much. But the interesting thing is, I’ve probably lived with five women—and every one of them was born on the same day. I can look at a woman and go, “September 5.” I don’t know why that is. I don’t look for a woman born on September 5, I just wind up attracted to them.
ML: Just casually, he asked what my birthday was, and I said, “September 5.” He started laughing. I remember it so clearly. I said, “What?” And he said, “Aw, nothing.”
JL: I remember I had Cathy Guisewite [of the “Cathy” comic strip] on, and I said, “I’m happily married...don’t take this wrong...I am attracted to you but in an odd way. Were you born on or around September 5?” And she said, “Yes, on September 5.” I said, “Sorry, I’m not flirting,” and then I explained. It made me laugh.
ML: When he finished his act the night we met, I needed to go to the ladies’ room. What I didn’t know was in the Comedy Store back then, that area was the only place for the comedians to hang out. So when I came out of the bathroom, he said, “Are you that girl in front?” and I said, “Yes, that was me.”
SS: Did you really notice her?
JL: Yeah!
ML: My friends spent most of their time at the Improv, so that’s where I started going. It just gradually evolved, you know? I had made up my mind when I was little that I would never get married or have children, so I had no agenda.
JL: Then I started to work. Her family were like church mice—they didn’t have two cents. I mean nothing—not even, like, taxes.
ML: My father was an actor. Enough said.
JL: But you know, I had this insurance policy, and I thought if something happened to me, my girlfriend wouldn’t be covered, but if we’re married, we’re covered, so...we might as well get married. Not the most romantic. Mavis didn’t even get an engagement ring until—
ML: He was going to get me one, but we had just bought a house, so why would I do that? I’m not that kind of person. So this is what he bought me 10 years ago. [Laughs and looks at the large diamond on her finger.]
SS: Mavis, your parents were happily married...why didn’t you want to marry?
ML: Maybe because my parents were not the typical American couple of that time. They had a very egalitarian relationship—actually, most of the traits I have that people consider feminine, I got from my dad, and the common sense, self-control and practicality is from my mother. When I was little, we would watch The Honeymooners. Here’s a very attractive woman, and whenever her husband is with Norton, what are they talking about? “How can we get away from the wives?” “If only it wasn’t for the wives.” Meanwhile, this woman has nothing to do, lives in this tiny place, cooks his dinner and listens to him talk. As a feminist even then, it was difficult to watch.
SS: You’re mad about it now.
ML: I am! I would see Lucy and other shows—if they wanted money, they had to ask for it, like they were a kid. That was not my plan for myself.
JL: My mother was from Scotland, had a horrible childhood—came to the country by herself when she was 11. My grandmother had run off with a younger guy, and my grandfather was stuck with six kids.
ML: His mom was the youngest.
JL: But he could only afford to take care of five, so they took her around the neighborhood as a servant girl to try to see if people would keep her for a few weeks.
ML: Jay, how are you telling this story? Her father took her there but not as a servant!
JL: But it gets to the comedy angle. My mother was not a depressed person, but I always sensed a sadness. Every time I could get my mother to laugh, it was like a huge gift. My dad was Italian and very outgoing. He would say, “Show people you’re Angelo’s boy.” My mother would say, “Whatever you do, don’t call attention to yourself.” So it was hilarious to be stuck in the middle. When I made it sort of big, I bought my dad a Cadillac, and of course, he had to get the white Cadillac d’Elegance with the red velour interior. My mother was mortified. They would drive down the street, and she would sit below seat level, and people would say, “I saw your father driving and yelling at somebody.” Sometimes if she saw people looking, she would roll down the window and go, “We’re not Cadillac people. My son got us this.” My father would yell, “Of course we’re Cadillac people! We’ve got a goddamn Cadillac! We’re driving the goddamn thing. It’s paid for!”
SS: And they were together their whole life?
JL: My dad was never sick a day in his life, but when my mother died, he was gone in nine months.
SS: Interesting how that happens.
JL: My mom took care of the inside of the house. Dad took care of the outside. We went through three ovens in my lifetime.
ML: She was like a short-order cook. There would always be steam coming out of the kitchen, pots boiling.
JL: Every breakfast, lunch, dinner—always a full thing. She didn’t even buy a box of spaghetti. She would make her own.
ML: I was crazy about Jay’s parents.
JL: We married on their wedding day, November 3.
SS: On purpose? As an honor?
JL: I thought my mom would like that—November 3, 1980.
ML: We had a very small wedding at a friend’s house with a couple friends.
JL: We didn’t tell anybody.
SS: Mavis, you didn’t want to get married, and now there’s such a connection. What changed your mind? Was Jay different?
ML: It was just that by the time we were together, I was 34. I had been a feminist for years, and I finally realized that fight was won, you know? I was past it, although that was an important gesture for me to make—that I could live without being married.
SS: What was it about Jay?
ML: Well, I was insanely in love with him—but I had had a long relationship before and never for one minute thought about marrying that guy. My belief was that I was a voyager, that I was just going to spend some time on this island and sail along and spend some time on that island. But with Jay, I realized all this time I’d been sailing, he was the destination.
SS: Jay, what was it about Mavis?
JL: Well, probably the sense that you don’t want to be somewhere else when you’re together. I mean, I’m home every night after work. I don’t go out—no boys’ night, card night or any of that stuff. I don’t feel the need.
ML: He thinks the same things are important that I think are important, the same things are wrong that I think are wrong. We have the same temperament, and we understand each other completely. Before Jay, I had the opposite experience with men to what most women have, because my father was so demonstrative. He must have told my mother he loved her a million times a day. So I always had relationships with men who were that same way—gave lots of presents but were flaky and unrealistic, tending toward the depressive. Stuff that means so much to women means nothing to me. Just be there when I need you, but the rest of the time, I take care of myself. And that was—and is—Jay.
SS: Interesting that Jay picked a woman who’s so strong. He looks at you with the admiring sense of someone who is her own person.
ML: Funny thing is, when we first got to know each other, in the ’70s, it was that in-between time with feminism. Men had stopped saying it was awful and started saying they were supporters, because they could get laid that way.
SS: So it was inauthentic?
ML: Yeah, but the thing with Jay was, from day one, he just saw me. I remember saying that I often felt I was from another planet, that I connected to people but I wished I could meet somebody from my own species. The first time talking to Jay, I said, “Oh! You’re one, too! Hi!”
SS: I think that may be the definition of “soul mate.”
JL: Well, I always look for qualities in women that I don’t have. I am attracted to the do-gooder—the rescue-a-cat type.
ML: Don’t be ridiculous—you’re the most do-gooder type in the world!
SS: I guess Jay means he values it in another person.
JL: I always tell guys, “Look like a man, think like a woman.” That’s the best way to get through life.
ML: I think we’re both saying the same thing—the quality we admire is somebody who aspires to goodness.
JL: Yeah.
ML: Here is who Jay is: When we were first going out, he’d get off at the Comedy Store late at night, and we’d go get groceries at the all-night Ralphs on Sunset. One night, there was this man harassing a woman. Suddenly, Jay yelled, “Honey! Hold on, we’re coming!” and he started walking across the lot, and the guy took off. Jay said to the girl, “Do you want to me hang around or follow you a little way? To make sure this guy...” She said no. I’d lived almost all my life in Hollywood, and there aren’t any men I ever went out with who would have done that. He didn’t even think twice. Right there, I said, “Okay!” I mean, a component of love, really, has to be admiration. Of course, I thought he was the sexiest thing I’d ever seen. I still do. And certainly, he was the funniest. He made me laugh till I almost died many times in the course of a lifetime.
JL: Yeah, it’s better than with women who are like, “I don’t get it...”
SS: I love thinking of those many nights you’ve been cracking up.
ML: I don’t think it’s an accident that comedians have the longest marriages in show business.
SS: Do they?
JL: Oh, yeah.
ML: Sure, think about it. Don Rickles, Bob Newhart, Bob Hope. You could go on and on. It’s a huge advantage. Being funny is just the best way to get through life in a relationship.
JL: I think that’s probably true.
ML: I mean, I can’t ever fight with him—he is very even-tempered.
JL: If you marry someone, there’s really nothing worth fighting about. I mean if you marry someone who is not crazy—that’s the first step. Because everything emanates from that. So when the wife says, “I have to do this.” Well, is this that important to you? All right, then.” It doesn’t matter that much, so why argue?
ML: Like I said, it’s the admiration. When Jay and I didn’t have that much money, when we were first married, we went to Monte Carlo because Jay was doing some stuff for—
JL: John Davidson.
ML: Yeah, The John Davidson Show. One night, Jay found a wallet lying on the ground. There was money and a work visa and, without thinking twice, Jay said we had to find this guy. He went back out in the square and just yelled—
JL: “Jean-Paul! Jean-Paul Tourneau!” I kept yelling, and this guy came running over, saying, “I am Jean-Paul!” like in one of those bad movies where the guy steps out of the dark and goes, “I am Jean-Paul—why you call my name?”
ML: That was funny, but the guy was in tears, you know. He was so glad to get it back. That’s Jay.
SS: You have the same values. And you laugh. Those are two key things to this marriage’s long life.
ML: Exactly. It’s really important to think the same things are funny. And the good examples—Jay’s and my parents’ happy marriages undoubtedly contributed. I think a lot of people have a very unrealistic idea of what a long relationship will be like.
JL: Happiness is a privilege, not a right. Read the fine print.
ML: People always say, “Work on a marriage.” I think if you work on knowing your own faults and trying to correct them, you’re not going to have to work on your marriage
JL: I got a job. I don’t need another.
ML: When we got married, it dawned on me that his then manager, who was a lawyer, would want a prenup, even though Jay didn’t have a lot of money then. So I decided to preempt it for him. I told Jay, “You know your manager is going to want a prenup. I’ll be perfectly happy to sign it, so don’t worry.” And Jay got mad. He said, “What? You’re already planning we’re going to get divorced?” We just trust each other in a really deep way.
SS: You really do fit.
ML: I knew a lot of funny and interesting people, but I didn’t know very many trustworthy people. But with Jay, I didn’t have to think about it. When a quality is there, it stands out.
JL: There are no jokes about wives. If someone is joking about their wife onstage, consciously or subcon-sciously, they mean it.
ML: Jay’s thing is, you elevate the powerless person and make fun of those who are misusing their power.
SS: It’s funny, Jay, because in the beginning you said Mavis is your conscience, and that’s exactly what you show in your jokes.
JL: The Wall Street guy you can nail, the plumber—
ML: If he asks someone in the audience, “What do you do, sir?” and the guy says, “I’m a plumber,” Jay will say, “Oh, someone who does an honest day’s work!” But if it’s a banker, he’ll say, “Oh, so you screw widows and orphans for a living.”
JL: Hopefully funnier than that...
ML: Am I a stand-up? No.
SS: My husband and I have been together 39 years. When I look back, I can see our relationship change. Do you find that in yours?
ML: A couple of periods were a little more difficult. When Jay got The Tonight Show, the first years were hard for me. All of a sudden, Jay had this day job, and every person on the planet was asking him for something. So I thought, I’m going to be the one who doesn’t ask for anything. Then it gave him relief at home, but that can also feel like distance. I don’t know if he was aware of it because he was so swamped by the job—just the time demands alone, and the pressure.
JL: It’s not really a high-pressure job. Do I look like I’m under pressure? Write joke, tell joke, get check. It couldn’t be simpler. You go to a place like Detroit, and you meet people with real jobs. Show business, let me tell you: The higher up you go, the more retarded people assume you are. They’ll say, “Jay drove here by himself! He drove to the studio alone—yes, he did! He came in his own car!” [Applauds.]
SS: You’re in a business where people are so self-important, and yet you remain the same.
JL: I think that’s the key—not to take yourself too seriously. It’s not high pressure unless you make it that way. It’s not like doing CPR. I was always happy with whatever level I was at. If you’re always looking for the next level, you’re not going to be happy.
ML: At that time, for me, he was gone a lot, and it was not only a new situation for him, it was a situation I had never experienced. And I didn’t know anybody to ask, “Well, how did you handle this?” So it took a little while before I figured it out.
SS: Did it make your relationship stronger?
ML: Absolutely, because you know, however steadfast your feelings for each other, your life circumstances are going to go all over the place. We’ve been through the death of my parents and his and the loss of Jay’s brother. We started off with not very much money, and now we have a lot. But we’ve stayed the same. The great thing about Jay is whatever he says, that’s it. It’s genuine.
JL: That’s right! I put my foot down. It’s the law!
ML: No. If he says, “Oh, I’ll do that,” then it’s done. When we were first together, if I wanted to talk to him about something, I would fall into the mode I had used with men in my past, where I would come in with a chip on my shoulder, all my arguments marshaled. But Jay would just say, “Okay.” Finally I realized I don’t need to do all that.
SS: You thought you could depend on him, and now, all these years later, you have all this documentation that the theory was correct.
ML: The whole thing is simple: Pick the right person; be the right person.
SS: That’s a great line.
ML: If I have one more conversation with a woman about what she wants in a man and how little she’s willing to give in return—I mean, wake up. When Jay and I lived together for a year before we married, he had an opportunity to be in a show in New York. He was actually nervous when he said, “I have this chance...” I thought, That’s great—why is he so rattled? And he said, “If I take it, I have to be in New York—would you move?” And I said, “Of course. Look, I’m with you now—I’m really with you.” And then he relaxed. I asked, “Would you turn it down if I didn’t want to?” and he got serious and said, “My career is for us. Everything I do is for us.” And the last wall inside me fell—I knew he would be on my side in everything. If you can’t do it for the person because you love them—
SS: Then you’re never going to do it. Mavis, do you still go to the show after all these years?
ML: Off and on, but we watch The Tonight Show together every night at home.
JL: Look, I always tell people, you don’t fall in love with a hooker. That’s what show business is. You can enjoy show business...and then go home.
Officials: Abducted SoCal boy reunited with mom
A 3-year-old boy abducted from his family home in San Bernardino nearly two weeks ago by two armed men was reunited with his mother today after police found him wandering a Mexican border town's streets, sheriff's officials said.
The reunion took place in the California border city of Calexico, a day after detectives and FBI agents received a call from officials in the neighboring Mexican city of Mexicali saying they found a boy that could be Briant Rodriguez, San Bernardino County sheriff's Lt. Rick Ells said.
Mother of kidnapped boy, 3, pleads for...Ells said a municipal police officer in Mexicali found the boy wandering the streets by himself late Thursday. The officer initially thought the child was from the neighborhood and took him to several houses seeking his family before leaving him in child protective custody, Ells said.
Mexican authorities did not realize who the child was and didn't issue an Amber alert until Friday afternoon, he said.
Ells said Briant's mother, Maria Rosalina Millan, and investigators boarded a plane to Calexico Friday night. An FBI agent crossed the border and handled immigration paperwork for the boy, who holds dual U.S. and Mexican citizenship, he said.
The FBI agent brought Briant back across the border for the reunion Saturday, Ells said.
Ells had no details about the child's condition or how long he had been left alone.
Investigators were continuing to investigate why Briant was abducted and why his family was targeted. Millan said two men burst into her home on May 3, tied up the family, stole money and other property then left with her youngest child.
The kidnappers had not demanded a ransom and the initial investigation pointed to the kidnappers being strangers to the family.
Federal and local investigators were looking at several theories, including that the Spanish-speaking kidnappers were from Mexico and may have had ties to organized crime there.
Authorities later released a photo of two men they said were the kidnappers. The blurred image was taken from a surveillance camera in a home-improvement store as the men bought tape believed to have been used to bind Millan and her children.
The family lives in a modest, single-story home in a lower-income area abutting the city of San Bernardino, about 60 miles east of Los Angeles.
The reunion took place in the California border city of Calexico, a day after detectives and FBI agents received a call from officials in the neighboring Mexican city of Mexicali saying they found a boy that could be Briant Rodriguez, San Bernardino County sheriff's Lt. Rick Ells said.
Mother of kidnapped boy, 3, pleads for...Ells said a municipal police officer in Mexicali found the boy wandering the streets by himself late Thursday. The officer initially thought the child was from the neighborhood and took him to several houses seeking his family before leaving him in child protective custody, Ells said.
Mexican authorities did not realize who the child was and didn't issue an Amber alert until Friday afternoon, he said.
Ells said Briant's mother, Maria Rosalina Millan, and investigators boarded a plane to Calexico Friday night. An FBI agent crossed the border and handled immigration paperwork for the boy, who holds dual U.S. and Mexican citizenship, he said.
The FBI agent brought Briant back across the border for the reunion Saturday, Ells said.
Ells had no details about the child's condition or how long he had been left alone.
Investigators were continuing to investigate why Briant was abducted and why his family was targeted. Millan said two men burst into her home on May 3, tied up the family, stole money and other property then left with her youngest child.
The kidnappers had not demanded a ransom and the initial investigation pointed to the kidnappers being strangers to the family.
Federal and local investigators were looking at several theories, including that the Spanish-speaking kidnappers were from Mexico and may have had ties to organized crime there.
Authorities later released a photo of two men they said were the kidnappers. The blurred image was taken from a surveillance camera in a home-improvement store as the men bought tape believed to have been used to bind Millan and her children.
The family lives in a modest, single-story home in a lower-income area abutting the city of San Bernardino, about 60 miles east of Los Angeles.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)