Bushco’s Trash Talk Foils The FCC

Isn’t the irony of this story just too much?

As a result of potty mouth behavior by both Dubya and Cheney, the “family values” bunch took another hit yesterday when a federal appeals panel struck down a policy of the Federal Communications Commission stating that broadcasters must be fined for “fleeting expletives.” As the Times story notes…

…both network executives and top officials at the Federal Communications Commission said the opinion could gut the ability of the commission to regulate any speech on television or radio.

We all know what a “fleeting expletive” is, right? It’s when, say, Lebron James of the Cleveland Cavaliers basketball team goes up to grab a rebound, but is fouled and falls courtside onto some television camera and sound equipment people at courtside and utters words of exasperation (I believe a certain term which is actually an acronym starting with the letter “F” is heard almost immediately when this happens, and as we all know, this leads to the complete moral corruption for all time of anyone in the audience who happens to hear it since Bushco thinks that we’re too stupid to filter it out as accidental behavior).

And with that in mind, here is the utterly predictable response of FCC chairman Kevin J. Martin…

“I completely disagree with the court’s ruling and am disappointed for American families,” he said. “The court says the commission is ‘divorced from reality.’ It is the New York court, not the commission, that is divorced from reality.”

As the Times story notes, the action was brought against the FCC by the television networks who thought it was just a tad inconsistent that they were being fined for bad language while President Nutball and Deadeye Dick were swearing like sailors (and after all of this time, how dumb do the Bushco 28 percent or so “dead enders” have to be not to know that they’re being conned in the name of “American families”?).

“We are very pleased with the court’s decision and continue to believe that the government regulation of content serves no purpose other than to chill artistic expression in violation of the First Amendment,” said Scott Grogin, a senior vice president at Fox. “Viewers should be allowed to determine for themselves and their families, through the many parental control technologies available, what is appropriate viewing for their home.”

And when Fox doesn’t support the Repug regime for a change, you KNOW something is truly odious here (that’s because big money is at stake here, of course, and that always trumps some professed notion of conservatism).

I realize that this story isn’t finished, of course, since the inevitable appeal to the Supreme Court of Hangin’ Judge J.R. awaits (and anything can happen when that occurs). But for now, let’s savor the fact that Bushco’s typical overreach on this has hurt the agency it uses as its propaganda tool to the point where it must rewrite its indecency policy if it ever hopes to try and censure what it doesn’t like again.