A few morsels to chew, before greeting 2005 and bracing myself for Bush's coronation. It's sure to be an inappropriately pompous and extravagant affair - costing, we're told, more than Bush is promising in aid to southeast Asia, and befitting the sweeping "mandate" claimed by a man who enters his term with the lowest approval rating of any incumbent president in 50 years.

As we close out this Year of the Moral Values Revolution, it seems only fitting to point out a few interesting discrepancies. First, the epidemic of indecency complaints to the FCC appears to have been generated entirely by one group, the Parents Television Council. Via Eric Alterman and CNN Money, Mediaweek recently analyzed the complaints:

"In an appearance before Congress in February, when the controversy over Janet Jackson’s Super Bowl moment was at its height, Federal Communications Commission chairman Michael Powell laid some startling statistics on U.S. senators.

The number of indecency complaints had soared dramatically to more than 240,000 in the previous year, Powell said. The figure was up from roughly 14,000 in 2002, and from fewer than 350 in each of the two previous years. There was, Powell said, “a dramatic rise in public concern and outrage about what is being broadcast into their homes.”

What Powell did not reveal—apparently because he was unaware—was the source of the complaints. According to a new FCC estimate obtained by Mediaweek, nearly all indecency complaints in 2003—99.8 percent—were filed by the Parents Television Council, an activist group.

This year, the trend has continued, and perhaps intensified.

Through early October, 99.9 percent of indecency complaints—aside from those concerning the Janet Jackson “wardrobe malfunction” during the Super Bowl halftime show broadcast on CBS— were brought by the PTC, according to the FCC analysis dated Oct. 1. (The agency last week estimated it had received 1,068,767 complaints about broadcast indecency so far this year; the Super Bowl broadcast accounted for over 540,000, according to commissioners’ statements.)

The prominent role played by the PTC has raised concerns among critics of the FCC’s crackdown on indecency. “It means that really a tiny minority with a very focused political agenda is trying to censor American television and radio,” said Jonathan Rintels, president and executive director of the Center for Creative Voices in Media, an artists’ advocacy group."

And as if we needed further proof that the Republicans are all about "values" (as defined by symbolic posturing), and not ethics (ie, actual principles that shape behavior), the House is preparing to weaken their pesky ethics rules:

Republican leaders are considering a change in House ethics rules that could make it harder to discipline lawmakers.

The proposal being circulated among House Republicans would end a general rule against any behavior that might bring "discredit" on the chamber, according to House Republican and Democratic leadership aides.

House members would be held to a narrower standard of behavior in keeping with the law, the House's rules and its ethics guidelines.

Other proposed changes to the ethics committee's rules being circulated in a "Dear Colleague" letter from House Rules Chairman David Dreier, R-Calif., would let House members respond to any admonishment before a letter goes out from the committee, and would end an investigation if there is a tie vote.

House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., plans to bring the proposal before a meeting of all House Republicans next week "and see what they think," said Hastert spokesman John Feehery.

Oh, and the Christian Right is apparently too busy mounting the Moral Values Revolution to direct web attention to the most heartbreakingly immeasurable human disaster in memory.

But you can find ways to help on Google. And let me add Lutheran World Relief's Wave of Giving campaign.

Great NYT editorial yesterday:

December 30, 2004

EDITORIAL
Are We Stingy? Yes President Bush finally roused himself yesterday from his vacation in Crawford, Tex., to telephone his sympathy to the leaders of India, Sri Lanka, Thailand and Indonesia, and to speak publicly about the devastation of Sunday's tsunamis in Asia. He also hurried to put as much distance as possible between himself and America's initial measly aid offer of $15 million, and he took issue with an earlier statement by the United Nations' emergency relief coordinator, Jan Egeland, who had called the overall aid efforts by rich Western nations "stingy."

"The person who made that statement was very misguided and ill informed," the president said.

We beg to differ. Mr. Egeland was right on target. We hope Secretary of State Colin Powell was privately embarrassed when, two days into a catastrophic disaster that hit 12 of the world's poorer countries and will cost billions of dollars to meliorate, he held a press conference to say that America, the world's richest nation, would contribute $15 million. That's less than half of what Republicans plan to spend on the Bush inaugural festivities.

The American aid figure for the current disaster is now $35 million, and we applaud Mr. Bush's turnaround. But $35 million remains a miserly drop in the bucket, and is in keeping with the pitiful amount of the United States budget that we allocate for nonmilitary foreign aid.

According to a poll, most Americans believe the United States spends 24 percent of its budget on aid to poor countries; it actually spends well under a quarter of 1 percent.

Bush administration officials help create that perception gap. Fuming at the charge of stinginess, Mr. Powell pointed to disaster relief and said the United States "has given more aid in the last four years than any other nation or combination of nations in the world." But for development aid, America gave $16.2 billion in 2003; the European Union gave $37.1 billion. In 2002, those numbers were $13.2 billion for America, and $29.9 billion for Europe.

Making things worse, we often pledge more money than we actually deliver. Victims of the earthquake in Bam, Iran, a year ago are still living in tents because aid, including ours, has not materialized in the amounts pledged. And back in 2002, Mr. Bush announced his Millennium Challenge account to give African countries development assistance of up to $5 billion a year, but the account has yet to disperse a single dollar.

Mr. Bush said yesterday that the $35 million we've now pledged "is only the beginning" of the United States' recovery effort. Let's hope that is true, and that this time, our actions will match our promises.

After the president's press conference charade a couple weeks ago (aptly tagged by Chris Suellentrop the "don't ask, don't tell press conference") I mentioned how much fun it was to be governed by secret committees and rules. CJR's Campaign Desk blog, which keeps doing the work reporters will not, lists just a few examples in what I fondly regard as an ongoing Bush thriller, The Case of the Disappearing Democracy.

As the Bush administration prepares to begin its second term, much has been written about the president's intolerance for dissent or even raised eyebrows among those closest to him. Less attention, however, has been paid to efforts by the White House to restrict access to vast amounts of information and to create an atmosphere in which secrecy is rewarded and criticism silenced.

This is the type of story -- a gradual erosion instead of a single, headline-grabbing event -- that most in the press tend to overlook. Yet in the coverage of government, it may be the most significant event of all.

Do read it.

About that climate warming that Bush says isn't happening...
the permafrost is starting to melt. While you're at the BBC site, check out this very educational feature on a groaning planet.

AARP must be trying to salvage their image after the selling out on Medicare reform. Suddenly they're all for seniors, again, and planning to fight social security privatization.

Let me close 2004 with the unmatchable words of Molly Ivins: "Well, friends, the old ball is starting another orbit of the sun, giving us all a chance to do better this time. Let's not blow it, because we sure look like dogmeat after this one."