New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, a leader in a movement among city officials for gun control, addressed President Obama's statement on the Connecticut school shootings by saying that "meaningful action is not enough."

"We need immediate action," he said. "We have heard all the rhetoric before. What we have not seen is leadership - not from the White House and not from Congress. That must end today. This is a national tragedy and it demands a national response. My deepest sympathies are with the families of all those affected, and my determination to stop this madness is stronger than ever."

Bloomberg's office sent out a Twitter link to an online petition called Demand a Plan. On social media, another link is being circulated to sign names to a petition on the White House's We the People site, force the administration to respond to a call to "have a conversation about increased regulation of firearms."

Bloomberg's full statement is below.

Hank Williams Jr. appeared on ABC's "The View" to slam ESPN and the Walt Disney Co. for dropping him for comments he made about President Obama.

"The bottom line is, Mickey is a mean mouse," he said, as host Barbara Walters pointed out that ABC and ESPN are owned by Disney.

On "Fox & Friends" last week, Williams was commenting onObama's golf game with House Speaker John Boehner in the midst of debt negotiations.

"It'd be like Hitler playing golf with (Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin) Netanyahu," he said.

On "The View," he slammed ESPN for dropping his line "Are you ready for some football?" and said, "I guess it is called on stepping on the toes of freedom of speech."

But he also said that he was not comparing Obama to Hitler, but using an analogy.

"That golf game, a bunch of politicians that are out there joking and kiving and high fiving, was so inappropriate with what this country is going through," Williams said.

But Walters said that his very presence on "The View" proves that freedom of speech is supported by the network.

Williams' appearance can be viewed here.

Update: Williams' reps say his new single "Keep the Change" has logged 150,000 free downloads in its first day.

On Tuesday I wrote about an FBI search of a SAG member's apartment for evidence that he'd uploaded a copy of "The King's Speech" and other Oscar-season pics to a file sharing site. He has not yet been charges with any crime, nor has he been arrested. But a copy of the FBI's affadavit to obtain a search warrant, with redactions, can be found here.

A followup to my posts on George Clooney and the Satellite Sentinel Project, which he co-founded and is being funded primarily by Not On Our Watch.

The project says that the Sudan army has dispatched troops along the north-south border, but the org says that they don't appear prepared to be moving forward.

Clooney, humanitarian groups and other industry activists launched the project in advance of Southern Sudan's vote on independence as a way to monitor the situation and, perhaps, provide a check to prevent violence.

Preliminary results showed the south voting for independence, but the worries are that the Sudanese government will try to seize territory or try to undermine the election altogether.

“These first images and analysis have deepened our understanding of the evolving situation following Southern Sudan’s historic vote on independence," Clooney said in a statement. "Although the SAF in South Kordofan apparently remains a force largely in hiding, we showed they are field-deployed, and they are controlling major roads by running checkpoints. Though they are not showing signs of advancing, we confirmed that they’re equipped with helicopter transport, artillery, armored personnel carriers and trucks. Our first report represents the best recent information on the military situation in Sudan publicly available.”

The complete report is here.

The project is believed to be the first "sustained, public effort" to monitor potential hotspots and threats to security along a border. Clooney conceived of the project on a trip to South Sudan in October with John Prendergast, co-founder of the Enough Project.

Retired U.S. Army Maj. Gen. James "Spider" Marks told the GlobalPost that with the satellite project, "Now the Sudan army know we are watching and if they sneeze, we'll know it. The public knowledge of this security information may galvanize the United Nations. It may encourage negotiations. It may encourage the U.N. to lay out a firm stand with the Sudanese army where the U.N. establishes a presence that encourages the Sudanese army to back off." 

This morning Organizing for America sent an email to supporters with a link to vote on each of the 20 video ad finalists out of thousands who submitted 30-second health care reform messages. The winner will air on national television.

Many of the videos cleverly and humorously make a general case for Obama's health reform plan or point out the absurdity of insurance denials based on pre-existing conditions, such as "Serve and Protect," submitted by Jeremy Beiler, in which a  police officer doesn't stop a burglar from stealing a woman's property because her house has a pre-existing condition.

There are also more serious videos such as "I Deserve Health Care" by Eric Hurt which features children at a playground predicting ailments they will have in the future that their parents won't be able to pay for. One child even says that two years from now she will be diagnosed with leukemia and will die because her parents won't be able to afford health care.

But the two videos that stand out the most deal with the hotly debated public option. It will be interesting to see if either these explicitly pro-public option messages are chosen given the turmoil in the Senate regarding inclusion of a government-run program in the health reform bill.

Just today, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) announced he will join a Republican filibuster unless the public option is removed. This comes on the heels of Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) making a bold move by including a public option in the final bill. 

With Reid firmly behind the public option, pressure is mounting on the White House to take a strong stand in support of the public option. Progressives have been dismayed that President Obama has not pushed the government-run program enough.

But what if one of the pro-public option videos is chosen for the national TV spot? Will it force Obama's hand?

In addition to the American public, a panel of celebrities and politicos will also vote on the submissions. Panelists include musician will.I.am, animator Seth MacFarlane, actress Kate Walsh, Obama for America campaign manager David Plouffe and Democratic National Committee Chairman Tim Kaine.

-- Josh Marks

In a rare early session, the Court heard arguments last month on whether the movie, a slamming indictment of then-presidential candidate Hillary Clinton that was made by conservative group Citizens United, in part with corporate money, is essentially a campaign ad.  Campaign finance laws prohibit corporations from engaging in “electioneering communications” on TV within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of an election.

Free speech advocates have come to Citizens United’s defense, warning that the government’s efforts to decide just what is “electioneering communication” is too broad to pass muster. “Unconstitutionally vague,” attorney Floyd Abrams writes on behalf of Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). Even the American Civil Liberties Union has filed a brief supporting Citizens United, which still sells another documentary it made called “ACLU: At War with America.”

But in the documentary community --- or the traditional version of it --- First Amendment concerns aren’t quite so clear cut.

Eddie Schmidt, the president of the International Documentary Assn., says that while he’s a member of the ACLU, he disagrees with their position in this case, citing the ramifications of corporate money being treated as free speech.

 “I personally don’t think that having these laws upheld would prohibit great films from getting made or seen,” he says. “Most documentaries are made about issues and humanity in general, and rarely are they hatchet jobs on a candidate.” He adds that it is apparent that “Hillary” is an “infomercial.” “It is clear that this is coming to you from an advocacy group; it is not coming to you from a filmmaker.”

The association itself, however, has taken no position.

D.A. Pennebaker, the veteran filmmaker who with Chris Hegedus made the 1993 movie “The War Room,” says he recognizes the problem of releasing such a partisan documentary so close to a primary or election with little chance for the other side to mount an equal response.

“You don’t have a chance to weigh [the documentary] in some way and decide what is the truth, which is basically what is behind the First Amendment. You want to be able to get at the truth by hearing different voices,” he says.

Nevertheless, he wonders whether the case is a bit futile. With so many avenues to release a movie now, including the Internet, he has the sense that “they are arguing about bicycle parts and no one is riding bicycles anymore.”

“No matter who says it is legal or illegal, there is a way to get it out,” he says. “Hillary” was always available on DVD.

Alexandra Pelosi, the maker of the 2000 election documentary “Journeys with George” as well as works about the 2004 and 2008 campaigns, told Variety in March that, “as a viewer, I wouldn’t want to watch this movie. And I wouldn’t want anyone to make a movie like this about anyone I know.”

“But,” she added, “liberals have been making documentaries for a long time, and now that conservatives are doing it, we are all offended?”

In many ways “Hillary, the Movie” evokes a trend in the world of non-fiction filmmaking over the past decade or so: Projects strident and unabashed in their point of view.

The case has its roots in Michael Moore’s 2004 documentary “Fahrenheit 9/11.” That summer, Bossie filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission, claiming that its scathing portrayal of President George W. Bush amounted to “express advocacy” against his candidacy. In fact, there was concern among the film’s distributor, Lionsgate, of the extent to which it could feature Bush in commercial spots promoting the movie and the DVD so close to the election.

The FEC rejected Bossie’s complaint in 2005, concluding that the movie was a “bona fide commercial activity” exempt from the federal regulations, and that its ad spots could not be seen as “electioneering.”

Those are the same laws that Bossie is now fighting. Ted Olson, who is representing Citizens United, argues that the situation with “Fahrenheit” is in some respects “analogous” to “Hillary.” Abrams writes that Moore “wiggled away from the FEC’s reach” in releasing the movie.

Chris Lehane, the Democratic political consultant who worked on the campaign for "Fahrenheit"’s release, does not share the comparisons. The McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform was an attempt to reign in corporate spending in campaigns, he notes, and “the best you may be able to do is an approach similar to what constitutes the standard in determining whether something is pornography or not --- the famous ‘you know it when you see it standard.’” “Hillary,” he argues, was a “fig leaf for a shadowy political campaign” whereas Moore’s films and other documentaries are “actual real, commercial endeavors.” Moore has shared similar sentiments in comments he has made about the case while promoting "Capitalism: A Love Story."

There’s another distinction that concerns the Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press: the exemption for journalists. The group’s counsel, Lucy Dalglish, writes that the law doesn’t take into account non-traditional journalists distributing their work in new ways, and that “Hillary” is “objectively indistinguishable from other news media commentary.” The case, she writes, has “created uncertainty about where the line between traditional news commentary and felonious advocacy lies.”

In other words, it’s a movie the government has banned from TV. That may send a chill in some quarters, but in the language of Hollywood, it’s known as a marketing pitch.

U.S. District Court Judge Vaughn Walker has ruled that organizers of the campaign for Proposition 8 must turn over "all e-mails, memos and reports dealing with its strategy, voter messages and rationale for preventing gay couples from marrying" to the Ted Olson and David Boies legal team.

Olson and Boies are pursuing a federal court challenge to Proposition 8, led by political consultant Chad Griffin and backed by Hollywood figures like Rob Reiner and Bruce Cohen.

Andrew Pugno, the attorney for Protect Marriage, which ran the Prop 8 campaign, tells the AP that the ruling is like "Alice in Wonderland" and says he may appeal.

Griffin says that Walker's ruling "gives us the opportunity to seek evidence that will help prove that in a court of law.”

Journalist Karen Ocamb, who this week launched a new blog centered on LGBT issues in Southern California, reports that it was a big day for advocates of campaign disclosure. In Maine, the group National Organization for Marriage has been campaigning for a same-sex marriage ban on the November ballot, but the state ethics commission there agreed to launch an investigation into the group's fund-raising practices. Fred Karger, a Southern California activist, sought the investigation as he has been tracking down who is funding their efforts.

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger was on CNN's "The Situation Room" today and was asked whether he would pardon Roman Polanski.

It wasn't a definitive no...but not a yes either.

“I would not treat his situation any differently than anyone else. … It shouldn’t be treated differently,” he said.

He said of the overall case: "It doesn't matter if you are a big-time movie actor or a big-time movie director or producer. I think that he is a very respected person, and I am a big admirer of his work. But nevertheless, I think he should be treated like everyone else."

Schwarzenegger also said, "Hollywood has always been very liberal. …You may call it out of touch but that’s just the way they think. They think differently about all of this.”

A spokesman for the governor said that he would review the case but was uncertain whether he had the authority to grant clemency in this instance.

But the petition signed by Hollywood notables demanding his release has not created a sense of fallout, as of yet, anyway. Harrison Ford, who signed, appeared with Schwarzenegger on Wednesday at the governor's climate conference.

Meanwhile, Whoopi Goldberg has clarified her remarks on the case, telling MSNBC that she was referring to the legal charge at the time.

John Horn and Tina Daunt of the Los Angeles Times ask of the Polanski case, "How can Hollywood (where it's almost impossible to find anyone publicly condemning Polanski) and almost everyone else see the same story in an opposite light? Is it proof that the movie business is amoral, or just that it believes that Polanski has suffered in his personal and professional life and paid his debt to society? Is Hollywood's position that we're-better-than-you elitist while the rest of the country's is everybody-obeys-the-law populist?"

Peg Yorkin of the Feminist Majority Foundation tells them, "My personal thoughts are let the guy go. It's bad a person was raped. But that was so many years ago. The guy has been through so much in his life. It's crazy to arrest him now. Let it go. The government could spend its money on other things."

And Harvey Weinstein, who is circulating the pro-Polanski petition, and says that the U.S. government is "acting irresponsibly and criminally," says in an interview that he's not convinced that public opinion is running against the filmmaker.

Weinstein says, "Hollywood has the best moral compass, because it has compassion. We were the people who did the fundraising telethon for the victims of 9/11. We were there for the victims of Katrina and any world catastrophe."

Perhaps --- but such an argument so won't win over those outraged at the petition. As Steve Lopez of the Times writes, "that has no bearing on the crime in question."

Updated

The arrest of Roman Polanski is the type of thing that the White House wouldn't want to touch with a ten foot pole, but spokesman Robert Gibbs couldn't avoid it when he was asked about it at today's press briefing.

Q: Will the President pardon Polanski?  Will he, or not?

GIBBS:  I don't know of any pending pardon request, Lester.

Q: Does he believe pedophiles should not be prosecuted?

GIBBS:  The President believes pedophiles should be prosecuted, Lester.

Q: Thank you.

Patrick Goldstein of the Los Angeles Times writes that his e-mail has been running about 100-to-1 against his post earlier this week that questioned why the Los Angeles County D.A.'s office was pursuing Polanski now, in the face of budget cuts.

"I didn't say Polanski should be pardoned or let off the hook, since what he did was reprehensible. He is guilty as charged. I did say that we should concentrate on doing a better job of tracking down the bad guys who are breaking the law right now in our own backyard. The response to my argument was divided, to say the least. People inside Hollywood nodded their heads in agreement. People outside of showbiz were outraged."

But he challenges the notion that this is a clear-cut left right divide, noting blog posts against Polanski on the Huffington Post and citing the case of G. Gordon Liddy.

He also writes, "President Jimmy Carter, the ultimate squishy moral relativist in the eyes of the right, commuted Liddy's sentence to eight years ("out of the interest of equity and fairness") while LSD guru Timothy Leary, who'd once been arrested and prosecuted by Liddy, cheerfully went out on the lecture circuit with his former adversary to make some quick dough. Liddy now makes his living as a radio talk show host, where he periodically advises good honest citizens -- as he did several times in 1994 -- how to fend off agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, saying that if the agents come armed, people should "go for a head shot; they're going to be wearing bulletproof vests."

"We don't need to worry about Liddy anymore -- he's obviously been rehabilitated. But not Polanski. He hasn't served his time. He skipped town, sensing, as most people involved with the case have since concluded, that the judge had his own agenda and was going to bring the hammer down on him. But worrying about judicial fairness when it comes to a sexual predator would inject a layer of complexity into this affair that most people don't want to hear. Call it justice or call it vengeance, but people are town-hall-style angry that Polanski got off scott free, just as they are mad at the bankers on Wall Street who got bailed out -- after socking away millions in profit -- while regular folks got the shaft."

Update: Count Ezra Klein, liberal blogger for the Washington Post, among those who don't buy the Polanski defense.

More outrage at Whoopi Goldberg's comments on "The View" here. She said, "We're a different kind of society. We see things differently. The world sees 13 year olds and 14 year olds in the rest of Europe... not everybody agrees with the way we see things. [...] Would I want my 14 year old having sex with somebody? Not necessarily..."

Peter Bart recalls helping to lure Polanski to Hollywood to direct "Rosemary's Baby," but finding that the director's personal life was like a "living cauldron."

He writes, "Two years ago, I spent time with him at the Cannes Film Festival, and he seemed to be in a buoyant mood. But when I asked him whether he’d ever like to live in Hollywood again, he was nervous and indecisive. It seemed as though he wanted the right to return and deal with the problems of the past. At the same time his life in Hollywood had, in some ways, been a re-run of the nightmares of his past.

"Under the present circumstances, I hope he will never return whether by choice or by mandate of the court. Though I acknowledge that his crime was a hideous one, Roman Polanski is an artist who has suffered greatly, who has caused and survived great danger and who, after all, deserves to live his life."

The state Republican convention took place in Indian Wells over the weekend, and former eBay CEO Meg Whitman, now running for governor, spent a great deal of time apologizing for having a spotty record of voting and registering to vote. She called it "inexcusable," but left unanswered was the question of why she didn't bother to get to the polls.

Today, however, the campaign came up with a new approach: Sonny Bono didn't vote, either.

Joe Garofoli of the SF Examiner reports, "In their daily missive to reporters Monday, Team Whitman notes that the late Sonny's wife, Rep. Mary Bono Mack, R-Palm Springs, told The Desert Sun that Meg and Sonny shared a proclivity for not voting:

"(He) hadn't even registered to vote before he ran for mayor (of Palm Springs)," Bono Mack recalled Sunday at the California Republican Party Convention in Indian Wells. "He went on to be a successful mayor and a successful member of Congress." "

This may backfire, and just as easily extend the lifespan of a story that may ultimately have little impact with voters. One of Whitman's chief rivals, Steve Poizner, has asked her to bow out of the race.

The latest Rasmussen Poll shows that Whitman, Poizner and Tom Campbell, the three Republicans vying for the nomination, all trail expected Democratic candidate Jerry Brown by roughly equal margins. But they all have leads over Brown's chief rival, Gavin Newsom, who has declared and is looking for a good bounce. An endorsement from Bill Clinton could help, at the very least from fund-raising. Clinton will be at the Biltmore Hotel on Oct. 5 at a $500-per-person event for Newsom, with co-chair levels going for $5,000 per person. They will also hold an event at Los Angeles City College.

Where Whitman is doing much better than her GOP rivals is in entertainment and media industry support. Her list of recent contributors includes Michael Lynton, Bruce Ramer, Harry Sloan, Gordon Crawford, Charles Ergen and Terry Semel, as well as actress Jami Gertz. GE CEO Jeffrey Immelt has contributed, as has his predecessor, Jack Welch.

Michael Moore's "Capitalism: A Love Story" got off to a solid start on its first day in a limited release, taking in $62,000 in four theaters in New York and Los Angeles.

But Moore says via Twitter that a backlash has begun. "CBS has cancelled me on its Mon. morning show. After I criticized ABC/Disney on GMA, they didn't want me to do the same on CBS."

On Friday, Moore appeared on "Good Morning America" and criticized the company for retaining employees as "permanent freelancers," those who have worked for the network for some time yet don't enjoy the same benefits as full-time and full-fledged employees.

No word yet from CBS, but the cancellation of his appearance surely won't hurt his publicity blitz, as he has appeared everywhere from "Real Time with Bill Maher" to "The Jay Leno Show" to "Larry King Live."

He had been the communications chief of the National Endowment for the Arts before stepping aside amid conservative groups furor over a conference call they charge was an effort to push President Obama's agenda.

It also comes after an unending assault from bloggers as well a commentators like Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh, as well as inquiries from Republican congressmen.

The NEA issued a statement, per ABC News: "This afternoon Yosi Sergant submitted his resignation from the National Endowment for the Arts. His resignation has been accepted and is effective immediately." 

The White House issued a statement earlier this week pledging new guidelines to ensure that a wall is kept between its agenda and that of other agencies. Update: The new guidelines are here.

Sergant had left his post earlier this month but remained at the agency in another unspecified post.

When I first heard yesterday that Jerry Lewis would be getting the Jean Hersholt Humanitarian Award at the coming Academy Awards, my first reaction was laughter.

It wasn't because Lewis is a comic, but that he is a comic with insane sensibilities, as likely to stage a pratfall as he is to outrageous pronouncements. What immediately came to mind was a flap last month in which he used an anti-gay slur in a television interview, then apologized. He did the same thing last year during the telethon, and also issued an apology.

Then my thoughts immediately turned to the environment in Hollywood following the passage of Prop 8, where donor rolls are being scrutinized and those who contributed to the effort to ban same-sex marriage have been targeted with threats of boycott. Already, those efforts have extended to the Sundance Film Festival, which has been screening films at a multiplex at a theater chain whose own contributed to Prop 8.

Adding insult to injury was today's near snubbing of "Milk" by the Golden Globes.

So could the Academy Awards be next? As a fellow editor here quips, imagine it: An Oscar ceremony without a gay audience. Who's left?

The selection of recipients of honorary awards usually doesn't reach the level of vetting of an Obama cabinet pick, but some legendary figures have been denied accolades for making controversial comments. A veteran TV star, for instance, was denied entrance into the TV Academy's Hall of Fame because of a history of racial slurs.

The Motion Picture Academy surely focused on Lewis' volume of good deeds with the MDA telethon, and it's a wonder on that level why he was not given this award many years ago. But the post-Prop 8 environment is different. Anger is still out there, and sensitivities are high. There already are reports of calls coming in to the Academy, but it remains to be seen whether this would really rise to the level of, say, the protest over an honorary award to Elia Kazan over his past testimony during the Hollywood blacklist. It's hard to see it. I called the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, and save for mine, they had yet to receive any press inquiries.

Perhaps it will be a question of relevance, as Lewis is not exactly on a career trajectory, and he will merely be seen for who he is: A tempermental comic, prone to the occasional moments of insanity.

You know how John McCain aide Martin Eisenstadt claimed that Sarah Palin didn't know Africa was continent? Maybe Palin didn't know (I'll bet she does now!), but that McCain leak never happened because Martin Eisenstadt doesn't exist. He's actually Eitan Gorlin who, with Dan Mirvish, crafted an elaborate hoax designed to lampoon the gluttonous 24-hour news cycle. That, and help the filmmakers pitch a TV show. (Frankly, if it weren't for the fact that I've known Dan since he co-founded Slamdance in 1995, I'd still doubt the veracity; "Eitan Gorlin" looks like a family name that comes from a long line of anagrammers.) Richard Perez-Pena has the story, "A Senior Fellow at the Institute of Nonexistence;" I'll have an interview with Mirvish later today. (Posted by Dana Harris) [NYT]

Looks good, doesn't it? Unfortunately, it's a well-designed and utterly phony spoof, one that was handed out in New York this morning at subway stations around the city. Writes Sewell Chan:

The paper is dated July 4, 2009, and imagines a liberal utopia of national health care, a rebuilt economy, progressive taxation, a national oil fund to study climate change, and other goals of progressive politics.

The hoax was accompanied by a Web site that mimics the look of The Times’s real Web site. A page of the spoof site contained links to dozens of progressive organizations, which were also listed in the print edition.

(A headline in the fake business section declares: “Public Relations Industry Forecasts a Series of Massive Layoffs.” Uh, sure.)

Later on Wednesday morning, the Yes Men issued a statement claiming credit for the prank. The statement said, in part:

In an elaborate operation six months in the planning, 1.2 million papers were printed at six different presses and driven to prearranged pickup locations, where thousands of volunteers stood ready to pass them out on the street.

The Yes Men were also the subject of a 2003 documentary directed by Chris Smith, Sarah Price and Dan Ollman. [NYT]

Sen. Dianne Feinstein is trying to make sure that if the hottest ticket of 2009 gets any hotter, it could be illegal. The California Democrat, who heads up the congressional committee overseeing inaugural ceremonies, is asking Internet sites like eBay not to sell scalped tix to Barack Obama’s inauguration in January, the AP is reporting.

She is also is writing a bill that would make it a federal crime to scalp Inauguration Day tickets.

“Her staff is drafting the bill now and the senator has said she hopes to have something to introduce some time next week after the lame duck session of Congress begins,” Carole Florman, spokeswoman for the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies, told WilshireandWashington.com.

The feds are expected to print some 240,000 tickets to be distributed free to the public via their congressional offices. The tix, which will guarantee a place for the holder to watch the swearing-in of the nation’s first black president, won’t arrive in those offices until a few days before the Jan. 20 event. But online reports are already circulating of people offering to sell the tix they anticipate they’ll get for upward of $40,000.

--William Triplett

How did indie film become inextricably linked with Prop. 8? First, there was the question of whether an earlier release date for Focus Features' "Milk" might have helped defeat the ban on gay marriage. Now there's talk of a 2009 Sundance Film Festival boycott -- the connection being that Sundance, like the Mormon church, is based in Utah. However, Mormons devoted tens of millions in both dollars and man-hours to support the California constiutional amendment that defines marriage as a heterosexual act; Sundance, of course, did not.

The idea of a Sundance boycott was initiated by John Aravosis, a gay-rights activist who writes americablog.com and has also organized boycotts of Dr. Laura Schlesinger's TV show, Microsoft and Ford over gay rights issues. Avarosis told Brock Vergaris, "Large donors are involved who are very interested in organizing a campaign, because I do not believe in frivolous boycotts. The main focus is going to be going after the Utah brand. At this point, honestly, we're going to destroy the Utah brand. It is a hate state."

Vergaris points out that a boycott "would likely do the most harm in Salt Lake City and Park City — two of the state's most liberal cities and those with some of the smallest percentages of Mormons in the state." And the Sundance Film Festival responded Monday with this statement: "Sundance Institute was founded on the idea of championing diversity and freedom of expression. It would be a grave disappointment to us if our Festival were to be singled out for a boycott, especially as we celebrate 25 years of showcasing independent voices."

Sundance, which is about a week away from locking down its 2009 lineup, already has its defenders, Eugene Hernandez reports. Allison Anders ("Gas Food Lodging") wrote on Facebook, "Sundance was for decades one of the tiny few hands that fed gay filmmakers, women filmmakers, browns, blacks, reds and everyone underrepresented on the screen... If people continue to misplace their rage over Prop 8 passing, they will change not one thing." Ross Katz ("Lost in Translation") also chimed in on FB: "The idea of boycotting Sundance is totally misguided... They offer a voice - a loud, uncompromising voice - for filmmakers of all ethnicities, sexual orientations, political bents. Those voices are shouted from the mountain tops of Park City. If anything, take the amazing platform that Sundance is, and run with it." [AP, indieWIRE]

David Mamet's transformation from "brain-dead liberal" to conservative got plenty of play last week, after he penned a 2,500-word essay in the Village Voice.

But Andrew Klavan writes in the Los Angeles Times that it is "wonderful news for the culture, far better, I fear, than many conservatives will appreciate."

He writes, "The big question is whether the good men and women of the right will realize what a gift they have been given in Mamet. Will they turn out for his plays and embrace their excellence? His is a hard language of four-letter words and scorching insights. Will rightists, despite their commitment to good behavior and values, remember that art is an examination of the world as it is, not as we would have it be?"

Klavan writes that Mamet will "come to find out just how small-minded, exclusionary and intellectually corrupt many on the left can be" and "will also discover a right wing he never knew."

I can think of more than a few playwrights who would challenge this next graph, which casts the right as more open-minded than the liberal dominated creative class:

"He will discover thinkers who seek historical and moral truth as if it really mattered, and writers who defend liberty as if it were what in fact it is: the prerequisite of full humanity. Rather than the low and tiresome obsession of the left with the color of people's skins, he will find people who embrace a philosophical colorblindness. He will meet women of intelligence and competence who -- mirabile dictu -- don't despise men and manliness but openly admire them. Yes, he will find that a gathering of right-wingers is less welcoming to gay people than the left is, but he will also watch something astounding unfold. Unlike liberals, rightists, after a period of open discussion and thought, will actually admit when they're wrong and change their minds. This anti-gay prejudice will fall -- it's falling now."

Call me a bit skeptical of the latter. What isn't mentioned is that many so-called "creative" conservatives long have bristled at the religious right, in particular its targeting of the gay community. If anything, Hollywood conservatives have had to go to great lengths to distance themselves from the "red-meat" aspects of the religious right, especially when it poses a challenge to freedom of speech, while maintaining their commitment to conservative principles on national security, the environment and other issues. And perhaps Mamet, in his use of "four-letter words and scorching insights," will offer a refreshing challenge to social conservatives, who seem to thrive on the notion that the creative class in Hollywood and New York is stacked up against them.

Payback for payola investigations?

Radio stations are having a field day with the Eliot Spitzer story. ("I guess Spitzer does believe in pay-to-play after all!").

There's this YouTube clip saluting Spitzer's "moral crusade against our so-called corrupted industry" and wondering what he did with the more than $40 million in settlements he exacted from radio.

According to Radio-Info.com, "some stations continue to salute the Spitzer folly with promotions like Keymarket's in Pittsburgh. Its country "Froggy" uses the sounder from the old "Dragnet" TV show to give away copies of Sara Evans' greatest hits, which includes the tune "Cheatin'." Grand prize is two nights at the Super 8 near Cheat Lake, WV. And on satellite, Sirius put up a short-term "Client 9 Radio" talk channel, to discuss both Spitzer's own predicament and wider issues."

There's also this "Daily Show" trailer:

Steven Spielberg took a lot of flack this week from Chinese government officials and media sources, but experts say that his decision to pull out of the Beijing Olympics may end up having just the desired impact.

From the New York Times:

"Amid the international outrage over the bloodshed in Darfur, frustration has increasingly turned toward China, Sudan’s biggest trading partner and international protector, culminating in Steven Spielberg’s decision last week to withdraw as artistic adviser to the Beijing Olympics.

"And it may be working.

"China has begun shifting its position on Darfur, stepping outside its diplomatic comfort zone to quietly push Sudan to accept the world’s largest peacekeeping force, diplomats and analysts say.

"It has also acted publicly, sending engineers to help peacekeepers in Darfur and appointing a special envoy to the region who has toured refugee camps and pressed the Sudanese government to change its policies."

More here.

In his decision to pull out of the Games, Spielberg cited some of the actions of the Chinese government, but concluded that the only measurement were the conditions on the ground, where the crisis shows little sign of improvement.

I'm catching up on a few items, but Dana Harris on our sister blog, Scribe Vibe, reported yesterday that the studios' new PR strategist firm of Fabiani & Lehane lost a consulting gig with a coalition of unions for taking the pro-management work.

A spokesman for Change to Win, a grouping of seven unions including SEIU, the Teamsters and the Laborers, said "Change to Win had a general consulting contract with Chris Lehane. That contract was terminated upon discovery of his role supporting the studios in the writers guild strike. As you know, Change to Win and its affiliates stand solidly behind the writers in their struggle for fairness, so we did not think twice about this decision."

Jane Hamsher on firedoglake.com quotes SEIU's Andy Stern: "By the end of the week, I believe Chris Lehane will have no union clients because of his work for the AMPTP. His days are numbered in the labor movement."

Ann Coulter once again has stirred things up, this time with a comment she made on Donny Deutsch's CNBC show "The Big Idea" that "We just want Jews to be perfected."

Coulter was talking about her ideal of a Christian America. "It would look like New York City during the Republican Convention."

Deutsch asked her what she meant. “People were happy. They’re Christian. They’re tolerant. They defend America.”

Later, she tried to elaborate.

DEUTSCH: So you don't think that is offensive?

COULTER: No. I’m sorry. It is not intended to be. I don’t think you should take it that way, but that is what Christians consider themselves: perfected Jews. We believe the Old Testament. As you know from the Old Testament, God was constantly getting fed up with humans for not being able to, you know, live up to all the laws. What Christians believe — this is just a statement of what the New Testament is — is that that’s why Christ came and died for our sins. Christians believe the Old Testament. You don’t believe our testament.

Media Matters for America, a liberal watchdog group, first pointed out the exchange to media outlets that otherwise were not aware of it. According to the New York Times, the National Jewish Democratic Council is petitioning news orgs to drop her as a commentator.

Deutsch told Adweek, "I was offended. And then, and this was interesting, she started to back off and seemed a little upset.”

Asked to gauge her reaction, Mr. Deutsch said, “I think she got frightened that maybe she had crossed a line, that this was maybe a faux pas of great proportions. I mean, did it show ignorance? Anti-Semitism? It wasn’t just one of those silly things.

“But I didn’t really service it. It’s not the show I’m doing now. I think I handled it well, but it’s started to circulate and take on a life of its own.

Matt Lauer has landed one of the latest big "gets."

The embattled Idaho senator sits down for a "Matt Lauer Reports" prime time special on Tuesday, followed by an appearance on "Today" the next morning.

Lauer also will interview Craig's wife, Suzanne, in what is surely not the greatest news for the Senate's Republican leadership, which would prefer that the matter just go away.

Fox Attacks, the group made up of Brave New Films, MoveOn, Media Matters and other progressive orgs, released its own response to Fox's censoring Sally Field's Emmy acceptance speech: A compilation of clips where the word "goddam" was used on Fox News Channel. It's a challenge to Fox's contention that they had to cut the use of the word for fear of indecency fines --- not because her speech was anti-war.

Technically the FCC's indecency authority doesn't extend to cable, a.k.a. Fox News, although such networks often follow broadcast standards.

That, and other news, in today's Political Panorama.

Jimmy Carter's image as peacemaker-in-chief has been clouded by his recent comments about President Bush and especially by his recent book, "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid." The book has been blasted for factual inaccuracies and for its slant, and while Carter has been staunch and public defender of its content, the controversy has not yet abated.

The latest: The CBS shareholders meeting, where the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America presented a proposal calling for new standards of fact checking at Simon & Shuster, the book's publisher and a CBS division. The group's treasurer, Carol Greenwald, is a CBS shareholder.

While it's doubtful that such a move will go anywhere --- shareholders often bring up a host of issues from far flung parts of media conglomerates, while the CEOs grin and bear it --- Carter's book is destined to stay in the fray. Director Jonathan Demme is working on a documentary, "He Comes in Peace," that essentially follows Carter through his book tour earlier this year. It doesn't have a release date, but the issues surrounding "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid" are destined to be front and center in the doc. The title suggests that the movie will help rehab Carter's image, but Demme has said that it will capture a "dialogue" over the Israeli-Palestinian issue.

Demme got intimate access to Carter, but ironically was not given access to one of his speeches that could have ended the film. Brandeis University denied the filmmaker access to a speech there in January, what the university blamed on logistics but what Demme's reps blamed on worries that the university would be cast in an unfavorable light.

A New "Truth": "An Inconvenient Truth" director Davis Guggenheim says he's planning to discuss a follow up to the pic with Paramount officials, although it's too early to talk details.

Thompson's Role of a Lifetime: Time's Mark Halperin profiles Fred Thompson, arguing that one of his big advantages is that he has stayed consistent in the roles he's played. Halperin writes, "He is often cast as a person in power — a military official, the White House chief of staff, the head of the CIA, a Senator or even the President of the U.S. It could be called the Cary Grant approach to politics. As the legendary actor once explained his own style and success, 'I pretended to be somebody I wanted to be, and I finally became that person.'" The premise only goes so far: Thompson appears as President Ulysses S. Grant in "Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee." He'll take the power, but chuck Grant's legendary drinking habits.

Paul Simon's Choice: The singer talks up Chris Dodd.

The tiff between Rosie O'Donnell and Elizabeth Hasselbeck --- the first of many --- has provided a lot of mileage for various news outlets, not the least of which is ABC itself.

It all started with a discussion about Al Gore, his new book, and why he isn't running, and ended only when co-host Joy Behar demanded a commercial break.

It's drama fit for the Internet --- and perhaps proves the point of Gore's book, "The Assault on Reason," which is that there's little room for public discourse anymore. You know there's trouble when they go to split screens. In "The View"'s favor, it sure beats Maury Povich's paternity tests.

We're hypocrites, then, for doing this, but here's the L.A. Times play-by-play, and the full-video video posted on You Tube.

After she offered her regrets to Queen Elizabeth's invitation for dinner, Helen Mirren released a statement today, just to set the record straight that she was not, in fact, rebuffing Her Majesty. Work on a decidedly American project, and a sequel, "National Treaure 2," kept her in the states.

Via her publicist, Stan Rosenfield,

"I was honoured to be invited to dinner at the Palace. This was a gracious gesture and very appreciated by me. It was therefore hard to have to decline. I was contracted on that date to be working in South Dakota, in a situation which was impossible to change. I would have made every effort to attend if it had been humanly possible. I explained this to the Palace officials, and I believe they understood. I would never have the hubris or the rudeness to insult anyone who had the kindness to invite me to dinner."

Given that the Queen had other distractions --- President Bush's "17--," the Kentucky Derby, Mickey Rooney --- this is all probably well behind her. Maybe another invite could be in the offing?

Just to make sure, "National Treaure" publicist Michael Singer also confirmed that "a very challenging and uncompromising production schedule" prevented the meet up.

Over the weekend, blogs were filled with a variation of the headline, "Bill Maher Sorry the Assassination Attempt on Dick Cheney Failed."

But as Maher pointed out on Monday, he never actually said those words. The brouhaha came during a discussion he was having on HBO's "Real Time" about the removal of comments from HuffingtonPost.com in which some readers wrote that they wished Cheney were killed in bomb blast close to where he was visiting in Afghanistan.

"Don't get me wrong: I've never joined the Dick Cheney Fan Club," Maher wrote on HuffingtonPost.com, where he is, ironically enough, a contributing blogger. "But what I said Friday -- and what I believe -- is that the Vice President has presided over a bungled execution of a war in which thousands of our bravest continue to die. And I believe that were he not in power, our troops would likely come home sooner. But I don't wish him dead."

Here's an excerpt from the transcript. His guests on the show were Rep. Barney Frank, writer John Ridley and TV commentator Joe Scarborough.

FRANK: [overlapping] Excuse me, Bill, can I ask you a question? Do you decide what the topics are for this show?

MAHER: Yeah, I decide the topics. They don't go there. [laughter] And I ---

FRANK: [overlapping] But you --- you exercise control over the show ---

MAHER: [overlapping] But listen

FRANK: [overlapping]—the way she does with her blog.

MAHER: [overlapping] But I have zero doubt that if Dick Cheney was not in power, people wouldn’t be dying needlessly tomorrow. [applause]

RIDLEY: Okay, but—[voices overlap under applause]

SCARBOROUGH: But, let’s talk – let’s talk about your show for a second, very quickly. If somebody on this panel said they wished that Dick Cheney had been blown up, and you didn’t say—

FRANK: I think he did. [laughter]

SCARBOROUGH: Okay, did you say--

MAHER: No. No, I quoted that.

FRANK: You don’t? Oh, you don’t believe that?

MAHER: No, I’m just saying that if he did die—

SCARBOROUGH: [laughter] Okay, but if – oh, let’s just say—

MAHER: [overlapping]—other people – more people would live. That’s a fact.

We should also note that Maher wasn't the one who dominated the show; it was Frank, and many of the other guests struggled to get a word in edgewise.

MSNBC is taking a page from politics with a campaign-style ad parodying the competition.

In the commercial, which started airing Tuesday, MSNBC takes shots at the on-air personas of both Fox and CNN in a bid to carve out space as an alternative to both.

It’s another sign the cable news race is getting rougher; last week Fox News Channel placed an ad in Television Week portraying Anderson Cooper as the “Paris Hilton of cable news.”

Fox News is portrayed as stocked with raving right-wingers tub-thumping for the Bush administration; its audience is represented by a cigar-smoking fat cat. CNN is represented with a thinly veiled caricature of Larry King, its viewers as shut-in septuagenarians.

"Let’s face it, there are a lot of choices out there,” the voiceover begins, with a woman first flipping to Fox News.

“You can pick someone who has an agenda,” it continues as a Fox viewer screams, “How can you question the authority of our commander-in-chief!”

“Or you can pick someone who is out of touch,” it says, switching to a geezer supposed to represent Larry King. “Oh, boy this is going to be great,” says an elderly viewer holding a cat.

As each channel is switched, the interior decor switches from stodgy to trailer-park chic to ultramodern as MSNBC personalities Tucker Carlson and Keith Olbermann hit the screen.

Ad represents a change in strategy for MSNBC, long a perennial underperformer, but now in its closest-ever competitive position with CNN.

“We’re looking to differentiate our brand from both Fox and CNN. The far more achievable goal is beating CNN,” said MSNBC spokesman Jeremy Gaines.“Now is the time for us to find our voice, given our recent ratings success.”

A Fox News rep was amused: “When you’ve been an embarrassment to your parent company for 10 years, it certainly never hurts to take chances.”

King’s viewers may be old, but he has more viewers in the 25-54 demo than MSNBC at 9 p.m.

---Michael Learmonth from New York.

No word yet on complaints about Sacha Baron Cohen's vulgar but profanity-free acceptance speech at the Globes last night, but TV watchdogs have their sights set on another incident that happened over the weekend.

On a broadcast of the Eagles/Saints game on Saturday, Fox showed a fan wearing a T-shirt with the phrase "fuck da Eagles," and now the Parents Television Council is urging its members to file indecency complaints with the FCC.

Emboldened by the FCC's past fines or simply by Philly members in their ranks, the PTC was particularly unforgiving. "There can be no doubt that this was an intentional airing of patently offensive language on the public airwaves," the watchdog org said. Fox had no delay on its broadcast, and spokesman Dan Bell told B&C,  "It was unintentional, inadvertent, and we apologize."

In a rather scathing indictment of the whole O.J. "If I Did It" affair, Salon's Sidney Blumenthal doubts that Fox's reversal on airing the project and publishing the book will have any impact on future sensational projects at the company. That's because Rupert Murdoch has mastered the art of surviving these controversies just fine and still come out ahead. Blumenthal, a journalist and former senior adviser to President Clinton, specifically points to Murdoch's ability to not only find which way the political winds are blowing, but to weather the storm.

"When the GOP took control of Congress in 1994 he not only founded a neoconservative magazine, the Weekly Standard, as a loss leader for influence, but also gave the new House speaker, Newt Gingrich, a $4.5 million advance for a book just as Congress was considering telecommunications legislation that would directly benefit Murdoch. In the furor after the book deal was disclosed, Gingrich felt compelled to return his advance. But Murdoch still got his benefit, which, in 1996, cleared the way for him to launch Fox News."

Blumenthal also notes the spectacle of Fox News coming out against the O.J. doc. 

"When Fox News talk-show host and self-described "traditionalist" Bill O'Reilly, warming up for his annual campaign against "the war on Christmas," jumped into the fray, seizing upon the O.J. interview as a platform for publicity, the controversy reached a critical mass of hilarity. O'Reilly proclaimed the cancellation of the Simpson interview "a culture war victory," and said, "News Corp. led by Rupert Murdoch did the right thing." Murdoch might be gratified that O'Reilly's bellowing promoted one Fox show, albeit at the expense of another. It's the only consolation Murdoch gained from the incident."

With the Democrats taking Congress, Barbra Streisand tells a concert crowd in San Jose: "We're in control now." On her 16-city concert tour, in which she does a skit with a Bush impersonator, she'd been berated by hecklers at several appearances during the midterm campaigns, and famously shot back at one with a verbal expletive. The skit is still in the show, but she finishes a duet of "Side by Side" with the faux Bush by singing "the country has come to its senses, time to mend the fences."

She tells the Los Angeles Times' Tina Daunt: "Celebrities have the unique ability to raise issues, reach people and influence opinion more than the everyday citizen," she added. "I think that it's our duty to use that influence to bring about positive change in the world."

Some of her big fans, however, don't agree. Entertainment Weekly interviews some of the most obsessed Streisand followers and concertgoers, one in Fort Lauderdale who says, "I prefer her as an entertainer, as opposed to being held hostage to hear her political views. Nobody wants to hear that crap."

Streisand even has an answer to that. In response to a heckler at that concert, she yelled back, "Just buy my records. Don't see me live!"

As "Borat" continues to top the box office charts, MSN provides a nifty round up of who among the film's victims have filed lawsuits or are threatening to file. In addition to fraternity members and villagers from Glod, Romania, there are plenty of others who are just plain upset at the fake TV news reporter from Kazakhstan. If you haven't seen the movie, just a taste: In just one segment Borat sings the praises of slavery and anti-semitism and brings feces to a dinner table.

Kathie Martin runs an etiquette school in Birmingham, Ala., and was upset when Borat showed her nude pictures of his son.

"Unless you can figure it out for yourself, you have no way of knowing you have been tricked into being part of a childish prank with an R rating attached," she told the Associated Press via e-mail.

"And even if you figure it out, you've signed a release that Mr. Cohen's people say relinquishes any rights on your part to take action against them."

Fox says that the lawsuits are without merit.

Contrary to the notion that the movie exposes America's crassness, Slate's Christopher Hitchens marvels that so many of the victims kept their cool as Borat performed his schtick.

Hitchens writes: "Oh, come on. Among the 'cultural learnings of America for make benefit glorious nation of Kazakhstan' is the discovery that Americans are almost pedantic in their hospitality and politesse. At a formal dinner in Birmingham, Ala., the guests discuss Borat while he's out of the room—filling a bag with ordure in order to bring it back to the table, as it happens—and agree what a nice young American he might make. And this is after he has called one guest a retard and grossly insulted the wife of another (and remember, it's "Americana" that is "crass")."

Despite a federal investigation, not to mention embarassment, TV stations are still using pre-packaged video press releases in their broadcasts without disclosing the source of the material.

Following up an earlier investigation, the Center for Media and Democracy found 48 instances in a six-month period where local stations aired the so-called "video news releases," reports sent out by PR firms to make their case about controversial topics. For instance, WTOK-TV in Meridian, Miss., aired a report riduculing claims that hurricanes were connected to global warming. But the report came to the station from a Washington D.C. lobbying firm that counts ExxonMobil among its clients.

The FCC launched an investigation of the practice in August. The feds had earlier warned that stations "must clearly disclose to members of their audiences the nature, source and sponsorship of the material."

Other examples cited in the Center's study:

"In 12 instances, television stations actively denied disclosure to their news audiences by editing out on-screen and verbal client notifications included in the original VNRs. WMGM-40 in Philadelphia aired a full-length VNR after making just one edit—to remove the on-screen disclosure. A WMGM-40 reporter re-voiced the VNR, following the original script nearly verbatim, but omitting the verbal disclosure at the end of the script.

"In four instances, television stations not only aired VNRs without disclosure, but showed PR publicists on screen, as though they were staff reporters. KHON-2 (Honolulu, HI) and KFMB-8 (San Diego, CA) allowed publicist Mike Morris to "report" on Halloween traditions (and promote his client, General Mills), while KVCT-19 (Victoria, TX) and KSFY-13 (Sioux Falls, SD) showed publicist Kate Brookes "reporting" on medical advancements (specifically, machinery produced by her client, Siemens)."

Update: Radio and Television News Directors Assn. says that the study contains inaccuracies and that some of the incidents cited were newsroom errors or isolated incidents. It's been critical of the FCC's inquiry, saying that it was an extraordinary step" of "inserting itself into broadcast newsrooms."

Variety's Elizabeth Guider reports that in Europe and elsewhere, there may be hatred toward U.S. policy but demand for U.S. TV shows is booming, led by dramas like "Lost" and "CSI." Hollywood studios may collect as much as $7 billion this year from the sale of TV shows and movies to foreign TV networks.

Meanwhile, Steve Bing has yet to comment on the fact that he spent $50 million on a California ballot proposition that lost. But he did talk to Art Torres, chairman of the California Democratic Party, who says that the press-shy producer is still "Very enthusiastic and spirited. I didn't notice one negative tone in his voice." Bing's support represented the largest individual contribution to a ballot proposition ever.

Russia will not allow "Borat" to be shown in the country because the film "contains material that some viewers may consider offensive to certain nationalities and religions," Yury Vasyuchkov of the licensing body was quoted in local press. Its prospects for release in Kazhakstan were doubtful, but this decision was somewhat of a surprise. It's believed that it is the first time that a non-pornographic movie has been banned by Russia's licensing body. A distribution subsidiary of Fox could appeal, but its prospects for release are considered unlikely.

Bev Harris, the subject of HBO’s documentary "Hacking Democracy," debuting Thursday, defended the project after Diebold charged that its facts were flawed.

For one, Diebold challenges a scene in which Finnish computer expert Harri Hursti was able to hack his way into a computer and change the results of a simulated election. Harris, who founded the voting watchdog group Black Box Voting, e-mails that an independent team studied the incident in a February report commissioned California Secretary of State Bruce McPherson.

They said that Hursti "was indeed able to change the election results by doing nothing more than modifying the contents of a memory card." The group of computer scientists did find the Diebold problems fixable, and McPherson later certified their use in the elections this year with the conditions that problems be fixed.

With the midterms just a week away, and concerns in the air about electronic voting systems, Diebold Election Systems has gone on the offensive against an HBO documentary called "Hacking Democracy" that debuts on Nov. 2.

In a letter to HBO Chairman Chris Albrecht, Diebold President David Byrd charges that the documentary "contains significant factual errors and does not meet HBO's standards for accuracy and fairness." Among other things, he asks for a rebuttal on the HBO web page, and that a disclaimer be shown by HBO immediately before, during and after the doc is shown.

"The material errors and material misrepresentations are so egregious that HBO should pull the documentary," Byrd writes. An HBO spokeswoman says that the cabler "stands by the film" and has "no intention of withdrawing it." She added that she had doubts whether Diebold officials had seen the film that is scheduled to be shown. "Of course, [the film] went through a lot of vetting," she said.

Diebold spokesman David Bear says that they have not seen the doc but got their information from HBO's website and from the accounts of reporters who have seen the doc, asking for a response.

Among the errors that Diebold cites is a scene depicting computer expert Harri Hursti hacking a Diebold machine in Florida. Diebold charges the attack was a "complete sham," and that Hursti himself has raised doubts that a system could be hacked. According promotional materials on HBO website, the doc focuses on a Seattle grandmother Bev Harris' quest to find out more about electronic voting, and what she discovers is that "the top-secret computerized systems counting the votes in America's public elections are not only fallible, but also vulnerable to undetectable hacking, from local school board contests to the presidential race."

The doc is produced by Sarah Teale. Diebold also raised questions about the doc's partisanship. In their letter (read the letter as a pdf file), Diebold also raises concerns that "Hacking Democracy" was "directed by the directors of 'VoterGate' and contains much of the same material. 'VoterGate' was produced with special thanks to Susan Sarandon and The Streisand Foundation.'"

CNN and NPR have refused to show ads for the upcoming release "Death of a President," a faux documentary which stages a fictional assasination of President Bush. "CNN has decided not to take the ad because of the extreme nature of the movie's subject matter," the cable television network said in a statement. The British project is being released by Newmarket Films in only about 100 theaters, but it is bound to create even more waves as its release approaches. Not that it would come up as an election issue, but candidates like Hillary Clinton already have distanced themselves from the pic. According to the Journal News, she called the movie "despicable."

Avoiding a potential public relations firestorm, NBC will not air Madonna's crucifixtion scene as part of its concert special.