CNN.com - Some pull 'Doonesbury' over Rove moniker - Jul 27, 2005

Moniker = nickname. Read my blog and learn a new word everyday? =)

The iteration of what happened in the comic strip is reproduced here by means of cribbing off the actual article. "In the strip, Bush and an aide are lamenting the problems the administration has had over allegations that Rove leaked the name of a CIA officer to reporters.

Bush says, "Karl's sure been earnin' his nickname lately."

The unnamed aide says, "Boy Genius? I'm not so sure sir ..."

Bush then says, "Hey Turd Blossom! Get in here.""

Yep, it seems that the word turd is so offensive (despite the fact that it is an actual nickname used by Bush for Karl Rove) that a few editors have decided to pull the strip instead of publishing it. I personally think that this is so ironic on so many levels that it is mind blowing (not unlike Huxley's Brave New World which I'm absolutely certain he wrote while taking LSD. It might have been confirmed by him but I have no idea).

1. That we're actually concerned about the word 'turd' over the possibility that Karl Rove indeed was the person who leaked the name for political ends and Bush has seemingly renaged on a promise to fire which ever Senior Official who was involved in the leak in the first place.

2. That we're concerned about a word which most people would not understand the meaning of.

3. That we are concerned about a word in a comic strip that is almost only read and understood by someone who ACTUALLY reads up on current affairs i.e. your above average reasonable person. So these adults can't read the word turd without their eyes burning and their brains melting?

But this raises an important issue that is stewing in American politics and the media right now. Ever since Janet Jackson's wardrobe misfunction, the FCC has fined the media companies more in the past year than they have in the past decade. Admittedly, the fine of a couple of million is pretty much a minute fraction of a trillion dollar industry but what is significant of this development is that it was due to pressure from Congress that forced the FCC into a content regulator of indecency like never before. Couple this with an Executive fixated on their (or his) version of moral values and it should be evident why the media companies feel like a frog in a slowly boiling pan (if they are feeling optimistic) or a rabbit caught in the headlights of an 18 wheeler (if they're feeling a tad more pessimistic).

Either way (fast or slow), there have been moves in Congress to expend: 1. the definition of indecency and 2. to other forms of media that were previously exempt from this ruling i.e. cable and satelite.

The media groups are fighting back of course, not simply with their standard 1st Amendment ruling on the freedom of speech but also more importantly by arguing that technology (in the form of the V chip and set top boxes that allow their users to block certain shows or types of shows) has the capacity to give those who really ought to be governing what ought or ought not be shown i.e. the viewers and the parents of children.

This is a battle that has its rises and ebbs. It's a neverending cycle of 'progression' and 'regression' (mostly depending on your own personal political ideology). But it should be interesting to watch how it turns out anyway (sorta like the US Supreme Court confirmation).

Peace!