Here's what you'll get in the first few minutes of MTV's new teen drama, Skins: Masturbation. Porn. References to "girl-on-girl." Parties, vomit, and a whole lot of prescription drugs. The plot of the first episode? Figure out how to get Stanley, a quirky, shy 16-year-old who's in love with his best friend's girlfriend, laid before his 17th birthday. How to do it? "We go to a party and get some girl'recaucusly spliffed," his friend tells him. "In her confused state, she comes to believe--momentarily, of course--that you're attractive. And then she bangs your brains out."

Sex, drugs, borderline date rape--it's no surprise Skins is making people mad, disgusted and ready to take action. It's a remake of the hit U.K. series of the same name (now in its fifth season), and MTV decided to bleep out swearing and take out the nudity that's rampant in the original.

The Parents Television Council condemned the series for its parental mockery, sexual objectification and overall "harmful, irresponsible, illegal, and adult-themed behavior." "Skins," the president of the council proclaimed, "may well be the the most dangerous show for children that we have ever seen." The Parents Television Council, in addition to targeting sponsors, called on lawmakers and feds to open an investigation regarding child pornography and exploitation on MTV’s “Skins.” The youngest actor on the sexually-charged drama is 15.

The cast is mostly Canadian (the show films in Toronto), but is made up of real high school students, most of them in their first high-profile roles. And that could be a problem for Skins. The PTC has called on lawmakers and feds to open an investigation regarding child pornography and exploitation on MTV’s “Skins.” The youngest actor on the sexually-charged drama is 15.

The controversy is supposed to help the marketing of Skins, but this time MTV may have slipped up. More than half a dozen advertisers, including in Taco Bell, Wrigley, Subway, Foot Locker, L’Oreal and Shick have all withdrawn their sponsorship of the show.

MTV plans to air all 10 episodes of the series, without altering any of the objectionable content - that according to reports. But I will bet the show gets cancelled. This time MTV went too far.

Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak declared he would surrender power in Septemberending his 30 year rule over the country. I just wish he would have waited one more day because I shot a commentary which the station decided not to run.

You can watch it to the right of this blog.

I originally wanted the Mubarak commentary to run yesterday, which would have been perfect. But managers asekd me, and I agreed, to run the SKINS commentary last night instead. I gave one of the manegsr a hadr time today because he said to me yesterday, "Mubarak is not going to resign tomorrow."

Anyway, there is a real chance for a real democracy now, if we handle this right. Much more tomorrow. I am certain I will do Egypt tomorrow - any ideas?

If you follow this blog, you will recognize the latest commentary. It is just an update of the one that was not aired last night because I could not update it after Mubarak's announcement.

The situation in Egypt is changing so fast, it is difficult to get a handle on it minute to minute. It does seem clear that the violence in the streets has been caused by roving gangs of Mubarak supporters. The real question is - where did they come from? Were they sent out by Mubarak himself?

It does seem clear that he does not want to give up power.

The question for America is - what do we do now? The Obama administration has already taken sides, expressing support for the “legitimate needs and grievances expressed by the Egyptian people,” as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton puts it. It’s promised – read “threatened” – a review of the $1.5 billion the US provides Egypt every year in foreign aid, most of that for military and other security programs. And President Obama has called for an “orderly transition” to a post-Mubarak government that “must begin now."

But the Egyptian president – whose one-man rule has lasted nearly 30 years – is digging in his heels, refusing to relinquish power until next September’s elections there.

In a tough statement, the Egyptian Foreign Ministry said foreign calls for a democratic transition to begin now were "rejected and aimed to incite the internal situation in Egypt."

"This appears to be a clear rebuff to the Obama administration and to the international community's efforts to try to help manage a peaceful transition from Mubarak to a new, democratic Egypt," Robert Danin, a former senior US official now at the Council on Foreign Relations, told the Reuters news agency.

While the administration is “planning for a full range of scenarios,” as White House spokesman Robert Gibbs put it , it has yet to reveal what those plans might be other than to reiterate what Obama said after speaking with Mubarak Tuesday night.

“Events have moved enormously quickly in a very volatile region of the world,” Gibbs said. “That simply demands that we continue to watch and continue to ensure that we are taking the steps to communicate directly with all of the entities of their government about what we expect in terms of nonviolence, what the world expects in terms of nonviolence, and the steps that need to take place in order to see that transition.”

While Gibbs refused to be pinned down on any degree to which the administration may be ratcheting up the pressure on Mubarak to leave sooner rather than later, again and again he emphasized the importance of change “now” – pointing out that since Obama used that word Tuesday night, “now means yesterday.”

In Cairo, it’s clear that officials are feeling the heat from Washington – and complaining about it.

This all could get worse before it gets better. On Friday there is a plan to storm the Presidential Palace and things could get even bloodier.

It makes you wonder if Mubarak was ever really going to step down at all.

Facebook, Twitter and YouTube have made us all agents of Freedom. Modern day communications are undoing what decades of repression wrought.

Despite attempts to block Twitter, Facebook and other sites (the government denies it was responsible), a Facebook page devoted to Friday's planned protests had more than 80,000 followers as of 2 p.m. ET Thursday, compared with some 20,000 the previous day.

Following Twitter comments with hashtags such as #Cairo, #jan25 and #Suez generates a huge flood of tweets. There is a breathless excitement about many entries, which are mainly in Arabic, English and French, but there are also scores of rumors, much invention and plenty of hyperbole.

There is no question that the Internet has tied us all together and has allowed people in opressed society to discover Freedom like never before. The Internet has become the first global democracy.

So sign in, reach out and change the world.

It was Tuesday. The day the blizzard was supposed to descend on the area. The TV weather people warned that it was going to be snow for most of the country, but something “much more dangerous” for us — ICE — freezing, pelting, car-wrecking, hip-crunching, power-line-snapping, tree-falling ICE. It was going to be a weather event so bad that the meteorologists forecast it as if they were reading a disaster movie trailer. I expected this huge ice storm to appear in the west with giant, rolling dark clouds and its own Hans Zimmer music.

As I sat amid the grocery bags looking out my kitchen window, rock salt at the ready, waiting for the ice pellets or hail or sleet or snow or freezing rain or actual ice cubes that never showed up, I remembered having countless conversations with TV weather people about the one word they hate to say, the same word that Fonzie used to have a problem with on Happy Days, the same word that George Bush couldn’t say at White House news conferences. It starts with a “w” and ends with a “g.” Fonzie, Bush and meteorologists stammer and stutter as they try and sound it out: w-r-Rah-o-o-n-n-g-a. Wrong.

The TV weather people have had to actively avoid saying that word a lot this winter. Remember the Saturday it was supposed to rain all day and instead it snowed all day? That ended up being over a foot of snow that the weather gurus missed completely. But did you hear one say the “W” word? Nope. Instead they employ forecast aversion tactics that they must have learned in weather school.

My favorite is when they actually blame the weather for changing. It’s not their fault. It’s the front that stalled or weakened or moved to the north. When they blame the storm’s movement, I love when they throw in the word “suddenly” to give themselves more cover. As if it happened within seconds, so fast that even their expert eyes couldn’t catch it. Correct me if I’m wrong, but if a weather pattern really changed “suddenly,” couldn’t that cause cataclysmic winds? Here is the real problem with this excuse: The job of a forecaster is to track storms and their movement. To blame the very thing you are supposed to know means you were w-r-ah- … that word.

Another tactic is to make certain that you outline every single possible scenario so that you are never wrong. This is why winter storm forecasts seem to go on forever. The time isn’t necessary to cover the weather but to cover their butts. The flow charts and the maps and the patterns are the meteorological equivalent of fine print. This way, when even the most bizarre thing happens, the weather people can say, “I specifically remember saying that a plague of locusts was a distinct possibility.”

And finally, the most common tactic is just to pretend you got it right eventually. It is the silly audience who watched the forecast at 10 p.m. and didn’t hear the update the next day at noon. Hey Nostradamus, we all could have gotten it right the next day at noon by looking out the window.

One of these days we are going to have a weather event so humongous that it will make weather history and the weathercaster involved will immediately be put on a pedestal and heralded as a shining exception of mass weather denial. It will happen when one meteorologist says: “I’m w-r-r-o.’

We’re working on it. One day I forecast it will happen. And if not, just remember I also said there was a distinct possibility that it would not happen.

I realized the Ben aversion early Super Bowl Sunday Morning. My brother called to ask where I was going to watch the game. When I asked him who he was rooting for he said, “Green Bay. I can’t root for Ben Roethlisberger . I have three daughters.”

When I reminded my brother that he cheers for Michael Vick, he answered like a politician who was waiting for that very question. “There are a couple of differences between the two. First, Michael Vick was considered a good guy before his crime and an even better man when he got out of prison. Roethlisberger was a jerk before and still is a jerk. Second, Vick admitted his crime, apologized for his crime and paid a heavy price. Roethlisberger has done none of that.”
It was a strong argument. My brother was able to root for Vick because he wants to be a better man. There is no clear signal that Roethlisberger has changed at all.

I then attended two Super Bowl parties, one for the game and one pre-game. I expected to be surrounded by Pittsburgh supporters, after all this is Pennsylvania. But, with the exception of a couple of hold outs, even those who would normally go with Pittsburgh were rooting for Green Bay. Or should I say they were rooting against Roethlisberger.

Some women switched their allegiance at the party when they heard the story of Roethlisberger. For those who of you who still don’t know the entire story was accused in March of last year of holding a woman against her will in a bathroom and raping her. The woman later decided not to press chareges, but never recanted her story.

It seems the quarterback will never be forgiven by many and that may be his punishment - to be ostracized by NFL fans outside of Pittsburgh.

In my continuing effort to remind people we are still at war in Afghanistan, even though our original mission there no longer exists, I make a plea to the budget hawks.

If you are serious about cutting the budget defecit, the$120 Billion we are expected to pay this year in that war is a good place to start.

Of course, that is not the greatest cost. Almost 1500 American men and women have died fighting that war - the longest in our history. It is time to get out.

Bill Maher is funniest when he doesn't mean to be.

Last night on MSNBC he blasted Bill O'Reilly as unpatriotic for asking the President tough questions and cutting him off for time in a pre-Super Bowl interview.

Really? Bill Maher? the same guy who blasted George Bush for eight years. Please!

Laws across the country are not tough enough against those who derive pleasure from the abuse of animals,

Please visit the ASPCA for more

What a beautiful thing to see the early stages of Democracy in yet another country.

What started in Philadelphia in 1776 has spread around the world and continues to spread.

I shot commentary the commentary for tonight was President Obama's speech - and before many of the days events - but it still stands...

We must side with the people - it is the very AMERICAN thing to do.

Valentine’s Day. It seems like a good idea in theory – a day in the middle of winter warmed by a simple testimony of love. But it has become this expensive pressure filled day that you dare not forget.

And god forbid you are a woman who’s not seeing someone when the day rolls around because your work site will look like a flower farm with roses sprouting up from every desk but yours – the one barren patch of ground in the flower field.

I’m married so there is even more pressure to do something – anything – to prove you are still in love.

And by the way, if you are married and your wife says "let’s not even do Valentine’s Day this year," alarms should go off. It’s a trap; don’t fall for it. You still have to get something or you will wonder for a full year what’s wrong.

And here is my special problem, once I gave my wife some presents for her birthday and she seemed disappointed. After some questioning she finally told me that there are only three things she wants from me as a gift – Jewl – e – ry!

Before that moment I had a problem with the notion that one pretty rock is more valuable than the other pretty rock. Why? Because someone says so. It just seemed like a waste of money

Yes I may be cheap; but that doesn’t take away from the fact that Valentine’s Day is an unnecessarily expensive day of pressure and or loneliness that we could easily eliminate from the calendar and no one would miss it.

Oh, I did buy flowers and some jewl-e-ry for my wife. I may take a bold stand here, but not at home. I may be cheap but I’m not crazy

Happy Valentine's Day!

Three U.S. senators who denounced the Egyptian government for shutting down Internet services are the same Senators who are pushing a cyber-security bill that would give the American President authority to take over computer networks and systems.

So,U.S. senators who want to give the president power to shut down the Internet denounced Egypt’s president for essentially doing the same thing.

"The steps the Mubarak government took last week to shut down Internet communications in Egypt were, and are, totally wrong," said Senators Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, Susan Collins of Maine, and Tom Carper of Delaware in a joint statement on Feb. 1. "His actions were clearly designed to limit internal criticisms of his government," the senators said.

The senators plan to reintroduce last spring’s “Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act,” a cyber-security bill that would hand control of non-governmental computer systems over to the president during a “national cyber-emergency.”

If the president declares a cyber-emergency, the Department of Homeland Security could “issue mandatory emergency measures necessary to preserve the reliable operation of covered critical infrastructure,” according to the bill’s summary prepared by the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, which Lieberman chairs.

Under the bill, Homeland Security would maintain the list of critical infrastructure. Computer systems, such as servers, Website and networking routers, would be included on the list if the disruption of the system could cause "severe economic consequences," is a “component of the national information infrastructure" and the national information infrastructure depends on its “reliable operation,” according to the bill.

While the term “kill switch” does not exist in the legislation, the description of what the president can do includes ordering critical computers, networks and Websites to be disconnected from the Internet, according to the public version of the bill. Previous drafts proposed in 2009 were more explicit, giving the executive branch the power to “order the disconnection” of certain networks or Websites, according to the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

One section of the bill reads as if the government could force the carriers to disclose certain types of non-communications data as part of the emergency measures.

Regardless of whether the Department of Homeland Security was better equipped to handle cyber-security than companies like AT&T, Verizon, Microsoft and Google, which already spend billions of dollars securing their systems each year, industry watchers were more concerned the draft bill banned judicial review.

The president currently has broader powers under the Communications Act of 1934 than sought by the Internet emergency bill, according to the senators. That Act authorizes the president to take over or shut down wire and radio communications in the event of or the threat of war. The senators called the law a “crude sledgehammer” and a “recipe for encroachments on privacy and civil liberties.”

The proposed bill would ensure such broad authority is not used, because the measures apply only to the “most critical infrastructure,” they said. Even though the president could act independently of the courts, the president would be required to notify Congress of the act, and would not be able to continue the measure beyond 120 days without Congressional approval, the senators said.

However, the latest draft of the bill doesn’t repeal the section of the 1934 law giving the president such broad powers. In fact, the way the legislation is worded, this bill would give the chief executive additional authority.

However, in light of the controversy, the senators pledged to “ensure” that any future legislation contains “explicit language prohibiting the President from doing what President Mubarak did.”

CBS chief foreign correspondent Lara Logan "suffered a brutal and sustained sexual assault and beating" while covering Egypt president Hosni Mubarak's resignation on Friday in Tahrir Square, and is in a U.S. hospital recovering.

CBS released this statement on Tuesday regarding the attack:

On Friday February 11, the day Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak stepped down, CBS correspondent Lara Logan was covering the jubilation in Tahrir Square for a 60 MINUTES story when she and her team and their security were surrounded by a dangerous element amidst the celebration. It was a mob of more than 200 people whipped into frenzy.

There will be no further comment from CBS News and Correspondent Logan and her family respectfully request privacy at this time.

What I want to know is why there have been no arrests in this mass sexual assault? There is not even th hint of an investigation. Why isn't the State Department or the President demanding justice for Lara Logan.

They can start by questioning the men in this photo taken right before Logan was attacked.

***I wrote this last night at about 9PM and for some reason it did not post. I apologize for that.

Also, I am doing a second commentary on Lara Logan tonight. This story absolutely sickens me.

This will be my second commentary in two nights on the Lara Logan attack.

The attack on the CBS correspondent on the streets of Cairo is heartbreaking and sickening. I know everyone joins in praying and hoping for her to be healed both physically and emotionally so she can put this horror behind her. According to a statement from CBS, Logan, their chief foreign correspondent, was the victim of a “brutal and sustained sexual assault and beating” by “a mob of more than 200 men whipped into a frenzy” last Friday, the day Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak stepped down.

Of all the thoughts and emotions that swarmed me as I read about what had to be a terrifying ordeal for the 39-year-old woman, my first reaction was why are there no reports of an investigation or any arrests? She was reportedly saved by 20 Egyptian soldiers. Did they not think to take any of the men into custody?

There is a picture of Lara Logan in the crowd just before the attack, and you can see several men surrounding her. The investigation can start by rounding them up and questioning them about the attack.

President Obama reportedly called Logan this morning to wish her well. She is out of the hospital and resting at her suburban Washington home with her husband, her one-year-old son and other family members. I hope the president is also calling Egypt and demanding justice for Lara Logan. Secretary of State Hillary Clinto today said she would contact Eygptian authorities.

I have set up a Facebook page, “Justice for Lara Logan” to pressure our president and state department to insist that the new Egyptian authority take action. It would be a horrible message to the world if a highly publicized mass sexual assault is allowed to happen with no investigation.

My initial angry reaction and call to action was quickly followed by lament about the state of television journalism. I hope the Lara Logan story serves as an ugly wake-up call to both network news bosses and local news managers.

Increasingly, TV reporters are pressured to put themselves in the thick of dangerous situations because it’s “good TV.” The result is television news morphing into a reality show with anchors and reporters as the central characters; they reluctantly but necessarily become the story. The result — “good TV” — overshadows “good journalism.”

Recently CNN’s Anderson Cooper was punched while wading through the protests on the streets of Egypt. Immediately his producer tweeted the incident to the world and CNN promoted it all day. The message was clear: When TV news people put themselves in danger, it helps the ratings and their careers.

But the Lara Logan incident is so horrifying, the networks must at least review their policies on the way they cover potentially violent news events. If they don’t, then they must be held responsible for future incidents.

You would think that they would know better by now. In 2003 NBC anchor and reporter David Bloom died from a blood clot that formed while riding in a tank in the assault on Baghdad during the Iraq war. Three years later, ABC anchor Bob Woodruff suffered a brain injury when a roadside bomb went off while he was taping a report in Iraq.

It is a dangerous world, and it is important that it’s covered by brave and talented journalists, but no reasonable person would say that our thirst for information is worth what happened to David Bloom, Bob Woodruff or Lara Logan.

And local news in New York and across the country should also take notice. Is it really necessary to put a reporter out live in a high-crime area hours after the news event happened just to have a “live presence”? Watch the local stations over the next month and you will see it several times. Young men and women holding cameras and microphones forced to stand isolated and unprotected in the dark to report on a crime that happened hours ago. All for “good TV.”

As Lara Logan recovers, let this event finally shock us into saying enough — don’t force anyone else to put themselves in danger for us. Because if we say enough maybe finally the news executives, both at the network and here in NY, will get the message.

How about Wisconsin?

As part of Gov. Scott Walker’s current budget repair bill to close a $137 million deficit in the current fiscal year’s budget and a projected $3.6 billion deficit in the next two-year budget, he has proposed:

1) Government-sector unions to agree to reforms that would limit collective bargaining for most government-sector employees to wages only, with wages capped to inflation.

2) Union members would also have to vote every year to keep their union.

3) The state would no longer collect union dues.

4) The bill would require union members to contribute 5.8 percent of their salary toward their pensions and 12.6 percent to the cost of their health insurance premiums. (The comparable nationwide employee healthcare contribution is 20 percent) to the BLS.

The state Senate is expected to pass the bill, which will then move to the Republican-controlled Assembly. Thousands of protesters have flocked to the State Capitol this week in response, arguing that limiting union bargaining rights strips members of representation. Wisconsin Education Association Council President Mary Bell last night called for all citizens of the state to join the protests in Madison Thursday and Friday. “We are here tonight in the spirit of Martin Luther King calling on our union members and all Wisconsinites to look tonight into their hearts and to listen to their conscience to decide what kind of Wisconsin we want to call our home,” she said to the crowd of protesters. “What happens to the rights of some today endangers the rights of others to come.”

But this isn’t about collective bargaining, or anything else, it’s about balancing a budget and preventing layoffs. While it may be bold politically, it is a modest proposal to ask state workers to pay 5 percent of their pension contribution and 12 percent — half the national average — of their healthcare premiums.

The governor’s proposal will save the state $300 million over the biennium, preventing around 5,500 layoffs of state workers and a similar amount of local government employees and teachers.

Wisconsin is one of many states where Republican governors are taking on “third rail” type issues. A victory or defeat in Wisconsin will ripple through other states and Washington, D.C.
Governors like Scott Walker, John Kasich, and Chris Christie are taking on entitlements that threaten the long-term fiscal health of their states while President Obama is punting on federal entitlements.

Republican governors are showing you can balance difficult budgets without raising taxes.
Democrat governors in Illinois, Minnesota and Connecticut have proposed or enacted massive tax hikes. Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn increased the state income tax by 67 percent.
Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton has proposed raising taxes by more than $3 billion. It is the largest tax increase ever proposed by a Minnesota governor and would result in Minnesota having the highest state income tax rate in the nation. Connecticut Gov. Dan Malloy proposed $3.4 billion in new tax revenue over the next 2 years.

Watch what is happening in Wisconsin - if it works - it will spread across the country.

Sorry that I have been MIA for a couple of nights.

But I am back and ready to make up for lost blogs. Let's start with the latest commentary Libya - As bag guys on the world stage go, Moammar Gadhafi, the brutal, bizarre leader of Libya, is tough to beat. For four days he's been slaughtering his own people in the streets of Tripoli. Long before that atrocity, he was slaughtering Americans.

Gadhafi's agents blew up Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988, killing 270, among them American students flying home for the holidays. Two years earlier, Libyan terrorists bombed a Berlin discotheque, killing two U.S. servicemen and wounding hundreds of people. The U.S. responded with bombs of its own, barely missing a fleeing Gadhafi.

So why has President Obama remained silent until today. Why are we never ready for these uprisings with a plan of action? Why do we seem to have to make it up as we go? It was an approach we lucked out with in Egypt.

We need to impose sanctions immediately and a limited military solution must be on the table.

Non-violent transition to democracy isn't going to work with Gadhafi or the mullahs in Tehran. But if their people see them as the villains and democratic ideals as the answer, that can only help the United States. We need to stand firmly with Democracy and the people.

Congress 26 weeks on recess or vacation? That is what the current congress set up for themselves. This all started with Newt Gingrish who had a philosophy of spending as much time in your state or district as in Washington. But to take off a week for President's Day when the budget hangs in the balance? C'mon, get back to work.

President's Day We need to go back and make February 22 Washington's Birthday and February 12 Lincoln's Birthday. President's Day just so we can have a 3 Day weekend is lame. Plus, it was never officially switched to President's Day.

Can't Washington and Lincoln. two ggiants in American history, just have their own day?

Governor Scott Walker in Wisconsin is taking on the state's publis unions. So is Chris Christie in New Jersey. It's happening in Ohio and Indiana - everywhere there is a Republican Governor. And here is the real reason - the labor unions - and especially the public labor unions are the power source of the Democratic Party. Take out the Unions and you cripple the Democrats.

What began two weeks ago as Republicans in one relatively small U.S. state trying to balance the budget by rewriting local labor relations rules has turned into a major national confrontation between Republicans and business interests on one side, and the Democrats backed by union groups on the other.

In Ohio, a bill that would terminate collective bargaining rights for state workers likely will be softened by amendments before it comes to a vote next week, an Ohio Senate Democrat said on Friday. "I believe it will definitely be less draconian, it will definitely be softer," said Joe Schiavoni.

And in Indiana, Democratic lawmakers have also left the state to deny Republicans a quorum, refusing to vote on Republican-backed bills that restrict worker rights.

Thousands huddled beneath umbrellas in the rain in New Jersey's state capital of Trenton on Friday to hear AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka point out the significance of the standoff. "What happens in Wisconsin affects every man, woman and child in America. Nothing less than the fate of our middle class is at stake," Trumka told the demonstrators.

In Iowa, a bill curbing collective bargaining rights for public workers passed a House committee early Friday morning, after an all-night attempt by Democrats to block the vote.

This is now a national fight with long term political implications. But make no mistake about it - this is about money and politics. Wisconsin is just the start - this will be a long ugly fight right into the 2012 Presidential elections.

I hate to say I told you so...actually I love to say I told you so. Anne Hathaway and James Franco were horrible hosts for The Academy Awards. the ratings were well off from last year.

The 83rd Academy Awards were watched by 33.5 million last night, down nearly 8 million viewers from last year’s 41.5 million.

And what about young viewers, the ones the two were supposed to draw? The show drew a 10.6 in the 18-49 demo, down from last year’s preliminary 12.5 in the demo.

But more important - they were just bad. She was okay. He seemed sedated.

Can we go back to comedians now?