Jeopardy!

YESTERDAY'S QUESTION
Who is Britney Spears?

DOUBLE JEOPARDY!
Top 40 Albums for $1200

He charted with Bat Out of Hell and Bat Out of Hell II: Back into Hell.

Meet the new boss...

You know how the rest goes. Back in July I posted about a story in the Sydney (Australia) Morning Herald in which two men, both claiming to be eyewitnesses, separately described how interim Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi had murdered six suspected insurgents by shooting them in the head in a police compound just days before the so-called "transfer of power" in June.

The story was almost totally ignored in the US news media and disappeared from the radar. But now it's moving back on. According to the Morning Herald for January 19, this week's issue of The New Yorker will feature a long profile of Allawi by correspondent Jon Lee Anderson that will provide an additional source for the charge.

Writing about his research in Jordan in December, Anderson says: "A well-known former [Jordanian] government minister told me that an American official had confirmed that the killings took place, saying to him, 'What a mess we're in - we got rid of one son of a bitch only to get another one'."

The article will also reveal that Anderson was present during an interview conducted by the Herald's reporter with one of the men who said they saw the event take place.

Well, as FDR once said of Anastasio Somoza Garcia in Nicaragua, "He may be a son of a bitch, but he's our son of a bitch." And that is, after all, what's important, isn't it?

Big shock

Or a bigger shock. Or, to be technically accurate, more shocks. AP for January 21 reports that

Taser International Inc. has changed how one of its stun gun models delivers its electric charge after some police officers said some combative suspects had been able to regain partial mobility while they were being stunned, the company said Friday.

The change will make the X26 stun gun about 14 percent more powerful, The New York Times reported.

Apparently, the device now gives a rapid series of shocks lasting two seconds followed by a slower series for two seconds. The change will result in the rapid series of shocks continuing for the entire five seconds.

Laughably, even though the result will be to subject victims to a greater number of shocks and is specifically intended to prevent the possibility of someone "regaining partial mobility" during the attack, the company denied this was a case of making the device more powerful, likening it to a "software upgrade." I wonder if anyone reminded the company flack making the announcement that software upgrades are frequently described as making the application "more powerful."

Footnote: Taser Inc. is the target of various probes.

The Securities and Exchange Commission and the Arizona Attorney General have said they are looking into claims Taser has made about safety studies for its stun guns. The SEC also is reviewing a $1.5 million, Dec. 31 sale by Taser to a firearms distributor that some analysts have questioned because it appears to inflate sales to meet annual projections.

That last item interests me because it carries the implication that the buggers aren't selling as well as the corporate honchos expected, which I would regard as good news.

Getting off to a good start

Apparently I'm not the only one who raised an eyebrow and thought "Does he realize what he's saying?"

President Bush turned from inaugural pageantry to a daunting second-term agenda Friday while his administration scrambled to explain his newly declared goal of ending tyranny around the world.

The president's expansive pledge, the major theme of his inaugural address, raised questions about whether Bush intended to apply new standards to allies or partners that are not ideal democracies, or aren't democracies at all. Saudi Arabia, Egypt, China and other countries fit that description,

as do some other allies in our War on Terrorism^{(c)(reg.)(pat. pend.)}, such as Uzbekistan.

But not to worry, State Department spokesman Richard Boucher

cited municipal elections in Saudi Arabia as one democratic advance, and he said the United States has long raised objections to human rights violations in China.

Uh-huh. In other words, either he didn't realize what he was saying or he didn't mean it. So breathe easier, all you pro-American, pro-capitalist dictators out there: He didn't mean you.

Footnote: Re Saudi Arabia: Anyone else remember how during Shrub Daddy's administration, our support of Saddam Hussein in the face of his horrendous human rights violations was explained away with the statement he was "taking steps in the right direction?"

Know your enemy

I said Shrub and the Shrubberies are not invulnerable and they're not. But it is wise to keep in mind just what kind of people they are.

They are bold-faced liars and malignant hypocrites: Bill O'Reilly recently said of the ACLU "Fascism, fascism, fascism. Okay? Ah, drive me nuts! Hitler would be a card-carrying ACLU member. So would Stalin. Castro probably is. And so would Mao Zedong."

They are suffused with arrogance and believe they are beyond the law:

In a stunning legal attack, Ohio's Republican Attorney General has moved for sanctions against the four attorneys who sued George W. Bush et. al. in an attempt to investigate the Buckeye State's bitterly contested November 2 election.

[They] were named by Attorney General James Petro in a filing with the Ohio Supreme Court. Petro charges the November Moss v Bush and Moss v. Moyer filings by the Election Protection legal team were "frivolous." Petro is demanding court sanctions and fines.

The motion was filed at the request of the Secretary of State, GOPpie J. Kenneth Blackwell. The state Supreme Court had dismissed the suits at the request of the plaintiffs after Blackwell and others in the state government refused to supply documents and refused to be deposed in connection with the suit, making winning it impossible.

In a sharp letter to Petro, Rep. John Conyers said he has "serious doubts about the validity" of Petro's motion, labeling it "far-fetched" and "overtly partisan." He noted the report issued as a result of his (Conyers') investigation into irregularities in the Ohio election as proof against the claim the suit was frivolous.

It is also noteworthy that the Ohio Secretary of State intentionally delayed certifying the vote, thereby insuring that the recount could not be completed by the date the electoral college met on December 13. The Ohio Secretary State also refused to respond to numerous questions regarding the irregularities submitted to him by several members of the House Judiciary Committee, has refused to respond to a single concern set forth in the Judiciary Report, and also sought a protective order to avoid any discovery related to the legal challenges.

Conyers challenged Petro to make public a list of sanctions cases "brought and considered" since January, 2003, particularly those under Ohio election laws. I think we can assume he'll get as much cooperation on this latest request as he has on the previous ones.

They are financially and politically corrupt: In the January 18 issue of Salon, Peter Dizikes has a list of 34 scandals connected to the Shrub administration. Too many to list here, they include wrongful corporate favoritism, illegal campaign contributions, felonious disruption of election campaigns, lying about post 9/11 air quality in New York City, and ignored conflict-of-interest laws right up to President AWOL's Texas Air National Guard disservice, torture at Abu Ghraib and Guantánamo Bay, Iraq, and the outing of Valerie Plame - not to mention six investigations involving Halliburton and a few others that will make you go "oh, yeah! I'd forgotten that!"

And finally for the moment, they are whining crybabies when things don't go just the way they want: They are still challenging the result of the Washington governor's race.

Republicans hoping for a new vote in the bitterly disputed Washington governor's election asked a county judge Thursday to hurry along the case. ...

The Republicans want [Judge John] Bridges to order a revote....

These are the same people who, when it appeared their guy, Dino Rossi, had beaten Chris Gregoire by 42 votes, were screaming at her to give it up and go away and stop making a fuss. Now that the final results say she won by 129 votes, more than triple Rossi's supposed margin, they're running around, stomping their feet, blubbering "No fair! No fair! We call do-over!" Just like the spoiled brats they are.

Footnote: One Shrubbery, headed from the inaugural parade to some fat cat private party or another, said to a group of demonstrators staging a die-in "You lost. Get over it."

Somebody shoulda said "Tell it to Dino Rossi."

Jeopardy!

YESTERDAY'S QUESTION
What is DuPont?

DOUBLE JEOPARDY!
Top 40 Albums for $400

She topped the album charts with ...Baby One More Time in 1999 and did it again with In the Zone in 2003.

One day at a time

Updated As our National Day of Mourning - or at least what in a rational world would have been - comes to a close, let's not forget that it did not pass unopposed.

- There were, it seems, a few thousand people in DC, spread out across several protests. ANSWER said there were over 10,000. Based on the pictures I've seen that appears to be rather exaggerated (which they have a habit of doing; I once was at a demo of about 200 people they organized in Boston only to see the next day they claimed over 1,000 attended) - but it's also more than reasonable to regard the press numbers as underestimates, since there were apparently a good number of people strung out along the sidewalks on both sides of the route who don't appear to be included in the media accounts I've seen. So say somewhere between "a few" and "several" thousand.

- Reuters described the "mood along the parade route" as "decidedly anti-Bush."

- CNN mentioned protests in New Orleans; Baltimore; Akron, Ohio; San Francisco; Louisville, Kentucky; Las Vegas; and Austin, Texas.

- United for Peace and Justice had a list of 125 planned protests in 22 states, which is an incomplete list because I know of two additional protests in a 23^rd state not included there. I'm sure there were others also missed.

Shrub and the Shrubberies will try to make the most of his so-called "mandate" of barely more than 1/2 of voters. But this man, who people around the world see as "cocky, shallow, and dangerous," enters office with the lowest second-term approval rating of any president in more than 50 years, with support for his war collapsing, and with even House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Bill Thomas (R-CA, 22) calling his Social Security plan "a dead horse."

He is not invulnerable, as much as his spin team tries to make him seem so and as much as we sometimes let ourselves believe. So keep on keepin' on.

Updated to include ANSWER's figure.

The Forrest Gump "Stupid Is As Stupid Does" Award, 1st Runner-up

In the event the award winner is unable to complete their duties, the first runner-up shall take their place as the award-holder. From Thursday's New York Times:

A federal district judge ruled on Wednesday that the foreigners imprisoned at the naval base at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, had no legal way to challenge their detentions in federal court.

The judge, Richard J. Leon of the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia, said the seven prisoners who brought a claim in his court could not be granted what they had asked for, writs of habeas corpus that would have required the federal courts to consider whether they were lawfully detained.

Judge Leon said the courts could not do this even though the Supreme Court ruled last June that the prisoners had the right to invoke the habeas corpus law in asking federal judges for relief. He made a distinction between the right to file for a habeas corpus petition before a judge and the right to obtain one. ...

"No viable legal theory exists by which it could issue a writ of habeas corpus under these circumstances," he wrote. Courts, he ruled, could not evaluate the lawfulness of the actions of a president who detained "nonresident aliens, outside of the United States, during a time of armed conflict."

Do you get that? Leon has ruled that while prisoners may file for habeas corpus relief, there is absolutely no way they can get it because the president floats in a separate dimension entirely outside the reach of law. Put another way, Leon has ruled that what the Supreme Court meant was that prisoners are free to engage in an utterly useless, futile exercise with a pre-determined outcome.

Not only is that about the insanely bizarrest, head-scratchingest, jaw-droppingest, stupidest bit of crap I've come across in one hell of a long time - it's equivalent to saying that the First Amendment guarantee of freedom of speech doesn't apply to any public expression because it says you're free to speak but doesn't say the government has to allow anyone to hear you - but if I was a Supreme Court justice, I would be outraged. Even if I'd been in the minority on the original decision I'd be outraged. Because this ruling makes fools of the Justices, openly thumbs its nose at them, portrays them as so thuddingly dense that they would propose a legal right without there being any way to meaningfully exercise it. Just insane.

For that latter reason if no other, I don't see this decision standing. But if by some logically inconceivable shift it is, if the Supreme Court proves itself as ready to pucker up for Bush's ass as Judge Leon has, it will be time to stop talking citizen action and start talking citizen insurrection. Not violent insurrection, not for me, but a radical nonviolent one. A Gandhian one. An Orange Revolution one. A Solidarity one. An Otpor one. Because our entire government will at that point not simply have failed us, but will have failed us beyond the reach of even legal legitimacy.

The Forrest Gump "Stupid Is As Stupid Does" Award

Some years ago I wrote to a friend that

[i]n a real sense, the essence of any peace movement is to lose - because once any victory is won, it's time to move on.

The idea, as I explained it, was that the role of peace and justice advocates is

trying to push beyond, whether in the issues we address, the tactics we employ, or even the analysis we present, where society is already willing to go.... We have an obligation to say the things that otherwise wouldn't be said, to raise the issues that otherwise wouldn't be raised, to agitate and educate in ways that otherwise wouldn't be used for agitation and education. We have an obligation to be what others aren't yet willing to be, to perpetually say "We can do better."

Compare that to the right. Because their appeal is not to the hope that things can get better but to the fear that they are getting worse, not to the future but to the past, if they "win" they have nowhere to go. Instead, they have to keep piling on the same topics, the same fears, offering wilder and wilder tales, spinning more and more out of control, trying to reach new heights of fear, dread, and suspicion because the one thing they cannot allow is for people to feel comfortable about their present - because if they do so, they will start thinking about the future and that's where the reactionaries lose. So over time they inevitably become increasingly bizarre in their claims until they reach the certifiably stupid.

Case in point:

On the heels of electoral victories barring same-sex marriage, some influential conservative Christian groups are turning their attention to a new target: the cartoon character SpongeBob SquarePants.

Dr. James C. Dobson of the rightwing nuthatch known as Focus on the Family is charging that SpongeBob is part of a "pro-homosexual video" along with Barney, Jimmy Neutron, and other children's television characters. The video, made in the wake of 9/11, is intended to teach children about multiculturalism.

But SpongeBob has apparently become a camp figure among adult gay men, and so the video is, according to Dobson's assistant Paul Batura, "an insidious means by which the organization is manipulating and potentially brainwashing kids ... a classic bait and switch."

Mark Barondess, lawyer for the We Are Family Foundation, which produced the video, said the critics "need medication."

Word.

What they shoulda said

Item one: Secretary of State-in-waiting Can'tbe Right told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that

there remain "outposts of tyranny" in the world that require close attention, citing North Korea, Iran, Cuba, Belarus, Zimbabwe and Myanmar, also known as Burma.

Somebody shoulda said "And Saudi Arabia, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, the United Arab Emirates...."

Item two: She also insisted that

"We must remain united in insisting that Iran and North Korea abandon their nuclear weapons ambitions and choose instead the path of peace."

Somebody shoulda said "Uh, excuse me, but are you saying that any nation that possesses nuclear weapons is not pursuing a path of peace?"

Item three: At the same hearings, Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) pressed Rice about her statements in pitching for the Iraq war.

"Your loyalty to your mission you were given overwhelmed your respect for the truth, and I don't say it lightly," Boxer said.

"I have never, ever lost respect for the truth in service of anything," Rice replied coolly. ... "And I would hope that we can have this conversation ... without impugning my credibility or my integrity."

Boxer shoulda said "I couldn't possibly impugn either your credibility or your integrity, Ms. Rice, because to do that you'd have to have some."

Item four: During one counter-inaugural protest in DC today,

a group of anti-war protesters a block away [from the White House] unfurled a banner reading, "George Bush: Your wars shame U.S." Eight protesters lay down in the street pretending to be dead, with flowers strewn over their bodies.

The demonstration attracted the attention of Bush supporters who were leaving the VIP viewing stands....

"Aren't you guys cold?" one of the Bush supporters asked the prone demonstrators.

Somebody shoulda said "Yes - about as cold as a naked prisoner in a concrete cell in Abu Ghraib."

Sometimes ya just gotta laugh

"Poll: Nation split on Bush as uniter or divider"
- headline on CNN article, January 19, reporting a 49-49 split on the question

It really is rare to find a poll that can definitively answer a question.

Jeopardy!

YESTERDAY'S QUESTION
What is Taiwan? (Acceptable: Formosa)

JEOPARDY!
Same Birthday as Dr. King for $1000

Pierre of this Delaware family led the family business during its World War I gunpowder boom.

Avoiding the bends

I know blogging has been a little on the light side here of late. Truth is, I'm suffering from outrage overload and everything seems more of an outrage than everything else. So I'm just decompressing a bit while catching up on my real life.

More outrage tomorrow. 

What have we all been saying about image versus reality?

So Dan Bartlett, an advisor to President Napoleon, was on "Meet the Press" offering a slippery defense to charges that the Social Security Administration is actively pushing the White House line of an impeding "crisis." He replied by saying that employees wouldn't be asked to advocate "any specific prescription," which, of course, was not the charge and thus stands as a classic non-denial denial. So far, much as to be expected.

But Dan let something slip, we learn from the New York Times article:

Mr. Bush wants to allow workers to put some of their Social Security payroll taxes in private accounts that could be invested in stocks and corporate bonds. The president believes that "personal accounts are a part of the solution to the problem, to help give people a greater sense of return," Mr. Bartlett said.

A greater sense of return. Not a greater return, a greater sense of one. As long as the peasants can be kept distracted and happy with the songs and dances, the Emperor and his Lords and Ladies can go on their merry way.

Footnote: The Times also noted that SSA's marketing plan to press "solvency issues" came up shortly after the Armstrong Williams farce.

Mr. Bartlett said the administration was conducting a review to see if other journalists had been paid to promote administration policies.

Uh, you mean you don't know?

Too odd to let pass without notice

Jerry Springer, the man who made his name with a trash TV show featuring left-handed incestuous midgets proclaiming "I'm Not the Mother of My Baby!" has a new radio talk show. And guess what:

Springer promised to provide unabashed liberal views to counter the positions of President Bush in the first airing Monday of his radio show in Cincinnati, where he once served as mayor.

Springer, who will continue to host his more raucous TV show, called the war in Iraq immoral, saying it appeared to be focused on determining whether Iraq's Shiite majority or Sunni minority will be in charge as the country tries to grow into independence.

"Would you be willing to have your son or daughter die for that?" Springer said.

I wonder if there is some possibility of the pendulum swinging back. One of the things that drove the growth of right-wing talk radio was the sense among its audience that "the liberals run everything." (Actually, originally it was more like "government" or the even more vaguely defined "bureaucracy" was the source of all that was troubling them. As long as the supposedly liberal Dummycrats had a majority in Congress it was possible to equate "government" with "liberals." Now that that's no longer possible, the line of attack has shifted from "government" to the free-floating "liberals" being at fault for everything.) That doesn't mean it was true, of course, only that there was an audience eager to hear someone who could give them an easy focus for their anxiety.

But another factor was the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine, which for nearly 40 years required broadcasters to provide some balance in their coverage of public affairs and allow for a range of voices. In 1987, the Reagan-appointed majority on the FCC dumped the requirement and Reagan vetoed legislation to reimpose it. Central to the argument for dismissing the rule was the claim by corporate broadcasters that they could be trusted to provide - you'll pardon the expression - "fair and balanced" coverage on their own.

That notion should have raised a lot more suspicions at the time than it did (Why are you spending years and millions of dollars lobbying against a rule that only tells you to do what you say you'd do anyway?), but it helped sway the argument. Freed of any constraints, radio networks in particular started going with programming that was cheap and marketable and thus quite profitable, with the result that right-wing talk radio blossomed from late-night chatter about UFOs and 666 into the phenomenon we know now, as the corporations proved that their commitment to diversity was - gasp who would have believed it - just PR bullshit.

But the market - The Market - still works for them. One of the big reasons that left-wing talk radio has mostly been a flop is that while it's been left-wing and talk, it hasn't been radio. That is, it just hasn't been that interesting to listen to. It's important to remember that Rush Limburger was a radio man long before he became a right-wing hit man. He knows the medium and he knows how to use it. Most lefty attempts to compete relied on political personalities - Mario Cuomo, for example - which made for informative but very dull radio.

Air America - which to my mind is safely Democratic liberal rather than truly left - has tried to combat that by combining known names with radio people in a mix that works sometimes and not others and it still struggling to get real market traction. There are others out there, genuinely lefty people doing talk radio, but it's mostly regional if not actually local and they are names of which very few have heard.

(I think I'm going to make a project of trying to find some of them who stream their shows on the internet. Once I get a few, I'll post them here - maybe, if it's not too bulky, in a permanent right-column box. So if you have anyone to contribute - and know I will listen to them a few times before I put their names up - either put them in comments or email me.)

But Jerry Springer. Hmmm. A known name with both media and political experience. Right now, the show is apparently local, just Cincinnati, but hey, if it gets attention, it might make some media honchos take notice of the fact that now that we - the left - are on the outside, there might be a nicely exploitable market of liberal anger. And then the pendulum really would be starting on its overdue return swing.

They got higher standards up there, eh

I'd seen this story but it slipped my mind; thanks to Democratic Left Infoasis, I'm reminded of it again.

The Canadian edition of Time has named Maher Arar its Newsmaker of the Year for 2004. Who is Maher Arar? Well, now, if you were a regular reader of Lotus you would know about these things!

Just a reminder

Updated Be afraid, be very afraid. But don't worry.

Boston (AP, January 19) - The FBI notified area law enforcement Wednesday to be on the lookout for four possible terror suspects who may be headed to Boston.

A federal law enforcement official, speaking on condition of anonymity because the matter remains under investigation, told The Associated Press that the FBI's joint terrorism task force has not yet corroborated a tip that the suspects entered the United States through Mexico in recent days, possibly bound for Boston.

The official stressed the tip is one of many from around the country that routinely are forwarded to local task forces for further investigation. No credible, specific terror threat has been identified in connection with the latest tip. ...

FBI spokeswoman Gail Marcinkiewicz said the terror alert had not been raised for Boston.

"Basically, what you have here is information that we often get," she said. "It's been passed on to our law enforcement partners and we're working it aggressively."

"We get lotsa tips. Uncorroborated, ya know? But we pass them on to the locals just in case."

Okay - but so exactly why, then, is this a news story? What's the point?

Just a booster shot to maintain the desired level of confused, low-level panic, I suppose. Terrorists! Headed to Boston! Maybe! We're "working it aggressively!" So be afraid! Be very afraid! But don't worry, you're safe thanks to us! But be afraid! But whatever you do, don't worry! But be afraid!

Updated with the news that the next day has brought the added details that the suspects are Chinese; their names and pictures were released. But don't be "unduly alarmed!" It means nothing! Really! Meanwhile,

Bruce Cheney, director of New Hampshire Emergency Services, said Massachusetts authorities asked his agency to be ready with radiological testing technicians in case Massachusetts needed them.

Gasp! What? Radiologi- It means nothing, I tell you! You're completely safe! We'll protect you! So be afraid! But don't worry!

Jeopardy!

YESTERDAY'S QUESTION
What is the Declaration of Independence?

JEOPARDY!
Same Birthday as Dr. King for $600

Lee Teng-Hui, born on this island in 1923, became the island's first native-born president.

Some things remain true

Among those things is that the standards are different for cops.

Los Angeles, California (AP, January 19) - A former Inglewood police officer who was fired for punching a black teenager and slamming him against a patrol car was awarded $1.6 million Tuesday by the jury in a discrimination lawsuit he and his partner brought against the city.

The jury voted 11-1 in favor of the verdict for Jeremy Morse, said defense attorney Gregory Smith. He said the jury was unanimous in awarding $810,000 to Morse's partner, Bijan Darvish, who had been disciplined in connection with the 2002 incident.

This cop, who is white, was caught on videotape punching Donovan Jackson, who was 16 years old and all of 5-foot-6 and 136 pounds - and who was handcuffed - and slamming him down on the hood of the car.

The tape also shows Morse putting a hand on the back of Jackson's neck, slugging him with his other hand and then trying to choke him.

Two other officers intervened, with at least one attempting to pull Morse away from Jackson.

Darvish then filed a false report claiming that the incident arose because of a "violent confrontation" between three cops and one skinny teenager. So Morse was fired and Darvish was disciplined.

The result? Morse was prosecuted twice for assault, but the charge was dismissed when two juries deadlocked. Darvish was acquitted of filing a false report. Mitchell Crooks, the guy who shot the videotape, was arrested on a three-year old charge after the police department, in what can only be considered either intimidation or payback, investigated his background. And now the two cops have been awarded big bucks because they, they say, were the targets of discrimination.

The city has not decided whether to appeal the verdict, though the chief of police said he was "shocked" at the "ridiculous" outcome and the mayor called it inflated and inappropriate. But if the city's plans aren't clear, one thing is: The rules for cops are indeed different.

Footnote: Morse claimed in his suit that he reacted to Jackson grabbing his testicles. The tape does not show any such thing happening. However, it is hypothetically possible that it did but the line of sight to the videocamera was blocked.

But I'd say that even if that's true, he still should have been fired, canned, dumped, and forgotten - because anyone who flies that far off the handle, who is so incapable of controlling himself in a tense moment that other police had to intervene, is not someone I want walking around with a badge and a gun, nor is he someone who should be pocketing a wad of cash as the fallout of his own irrational behavior.

Okay, it's officially reached stupid

The climate of doubt and self-censorship among TV and radio broadcasters has broken through to new levels of inanity.

Fox says it covered up the naked rear end of a cartoon character recently because of nervousness over what the Federal Communications Commission will find objectionable.

The latest example of TV network self-censorship because of FCC concerns came a few weeks ago during a rerun of a "Family Guy" cartoon. Fox electronically blurred a character's posterior, even though the image was seen five years ago when the episode originally aired.

A cartoon. First shown five years ago. No complaints.

A cartoon. And a cartoon cartoon; not a realistic animation, but a cartoon. A flippin' cartoon.

"We have to be checking and second-guessing ourselves now," Fox entertainment president Gail Berman said Monday. "We have to protect our affiliates."

But of course that's the point, isn't it? The FCC refuses to issue guidelines for offensiveness or indecency, saying in effect "we can't tell you what's offensive, but we know it when we see it and we'll go after you when we do." Broadcasters thus have no way to know in advance if something they present will run afoul of the FCC; they'll find out only when the fine is levied. And then, of course, it's too late.

The result is that the right-wing dominated agency has successfully gotten everyone running scared, "second-guessing" themselves, censoring themselves, undoubtedly being harsher on themselves, cutting more, limiting further, than the agency would (or, for that matter, could, either practically or legally). And the FCC can just pretty much sit by, occasionally going after someone here and there as an example to the rest, and watch them do it.

There really is a bit of The Trial in all this, as Joseph K., who never knows of just what he is accused, is eventually lead to assist in his own destruction.