Friday, February 18, 2005

Feb 17, 2005

The House has given overwhelming approval to a bill to drastically increase the maximum fine for broadcast indecency.

The bill passed 389-38 on Wednesday would increase the maximum fine from $32,500 to $500,000 for a company and from $11,000 to $500,000 for an individual entertainer. A similar bill has been introduced in the Senate, where it has broad bipartisan support.

I don’t know about you but I did not send my representatives to Washington to act like Iranian Mullahs. I sent them there to solve problems, not monitor TV content or decide for me what I, or any other American, should not see, hear, read, say or write.

What breathtaking chutzpah! And what a breathtaking waste of the time voters allotted them to deal with real problems, like war, peace, poverty, climate change, deficits, jobs…
No, none of that. First they had to address indecency. It would semm that for these phony dimwits Super Bowl 38 was a kind of 9/11 event. When Janet Jackson’s tit crashed into the eyeballs of millions of Americans, the whole world changed for politicians.

The casualties from that disasterous event have been staggering in ever since – young children, who had not seen a such a sight since their mothers weaned them, were forever scared. So in response, still flushed from banging their interns, members of congress rushed to vow they would not let those young victims go undressed - I mean unredressed.

But the wave of indecent terror stuck again. Radio slock-jock, Howard Stern, keeps saying words from the Oxford Dictionary of American Slang outloud on the air. Again, politicians -- including one who just moments earlier had finished telling a fellow senator on the US Senate floor to “go fuck himself” -- huffed, puff and pontificated on what an outrage it is to have such language floating around on government-regulated airwaves.

So this week they decided enough is enough. Led by such paragons of purity -- the soon to be indicted Tom DeLay -- House members created new punishments for what they define as "indecent content." The sight of a woman’s breast while never again scar our youth. Howard Stern types will never again be allowed to go unpunished from saying out loud words describing human reproductive functions or organs. Finally, our children will be spared the trauma of hearing anything that might hint at how they got here.

Of course none of this affects drug companies, which will still be allowed to bombard us and our kids with the good news that, if daddies hemorrhoids are itching and burning, they just thing. And during those special father-child sport watching moments they will still be able to reassure junior that if daddy can no longer get an erection, they have a pill that will not only fix that but also "produce a long-lasting, quality experience.”

You see, unlike Howard Stern, drug companies know how to deliver these kind of sensitive messages responsibly. For example, when talking about how good their erectile disfunction drug works on father's flacid friend, they also offer helpful safety tips, such as, “If an erection lasts more than four hours seek immediate medical attention.”

So you see, there is on-air indecency and there is public service. Congress knows the difference. For example, Howard Stern talking out loud about bathroom functions.. that's indeceny. But when a major corporation do it as part of a sales pitch, it's a public service.

Hey boys and girls, when people get older, like your parents, they often start wetting their pants again. That's called being incontinent. But not to worry, we sell a solution for that too - adult diapers.

God bless Proctor and Gamble, Pfizer and all those other companies who openly and graphically inform us by TV and radio that even the most private of body parts and functions has a rightful place on our airwaves and our dinner tables.

No comments: