State of the Union: Zzzzzz

"Politically, both parties on Capitol Hill displayed a lack of enthusiasm. Democrats said Mr. Bush had opposed foreign oil reduction targets in last year's energy bill, and Republicans questioned the practicality of relying on ethanol and other alternatives."

Other than that, it was a smashing success.

Says the Los Angeles Times : "After making no progress winning congressional approval for the 10-year, $74-billion credit, administration officials have quietly revamped the measure in ways that would sharply reduce its costs and thereby offset the price tag for the White House's proposed expansion of health savings accounts."

So far, so good. But :

"Most elements of the administration's latest package are not new. Even sympathetic observers . . . think the plan stands little chance of passage during what promises to be a contentious midterm election year."

And then there's the truth-squadding:

"Legal specialists yesterday questioned the accuracy of President Bush's sweeping contentions about the legality of his domestic spying program, particularly his assertion in his State of the Union speech on Tuesday that 'previous presidents have used the same constitutional authority I have,'" says the Boston Globe .

What's the catch?

"But legal specialists said yesterday that wiretaps ordered by previous presidents were put in place before warrants were required for investigations involving national security."

I've been really troubled by those chilling and horrifying kidnap tapes that every network airs. Now I find MarketWatch's Jon Friedman raising the same issue I've been wondering about:

"The pictures provided such an indelible portrait of one courageous woman's fear that it will be a long time before I can get them out of my mind.

"In other words, I acted exactly the way the terrorists had intended. The clip made me feel weak and helpless. I feel this way every time someone is grabbed by militant enemies of America and dragged in front of TV cameras.

"You do, too, huh?

"Originally, Jill Carroll's captors had demanded that the U.S. free Iraqi women prisoners or they'd kill her. That deadline came and went. If the most recent footage of Carroll could be believed, she was still alive.

"What if . . .

"What would happen if the media took a different approach the next time an American (a journalist or not) is seized by a publicity-hungry terrorist?

"What if the American television networks -- out of a concern for the hostage's welfare -- didn't show the tape and thwarted the goal of the captors?

"Maybe it's time we refused to air a tape and, in effect, quit pandering (if unwittingly) to the terrorists."

I know, it's news, we must cover it, blah blah blah. But what if Friedman is right?

Here, courtesy of the WSJ, is part of the apology that James Frey is adding to his mega-best seller:

"My mistake, and it is one I deeply regret, is writing about the person I created in my mind to help me cope, and not the person who went through the experience."

A minor flaw, really, when you stop and think about it, writing about someone who doesn't exist doing things that never happened.

Finally, the satellite folks who are paying Howard Stern a half-billion bucks have a little problem: "Since Jan. 9, when Stern debuted on Sirius, pirated versions of the shows have been made available for free via several online file-sharing networks just hours after Stern signs off. . . . Now Sirius is, in a word, furious."