Congress has voted to immunize telecoms for alleged illegal lawbreaking, terminate lawsuits against them for doing this, and pretty much bless any darn eavesdropping that the Bush administration wants to do on anyone without warrants or following the FISA provisions for warrants. Glenn Greenwald is as annoyed as I am, not so much at the Republicans but at Democrats, Mr. Obama included.

This was sold as — and reported in the press as — a "compromise proposal." But in a compromise, both sides give up something and regret some aspect of the agreement. A number of Democrats regret things in it but I don't see any Republicans unhappy at even a semi-colon in the bill. This kind of thing wouldn't happen if the Democrats had a majority in either the House or the Senate.

I could to some extent buy the argument that the telecoms should not be punished for doing what their government asked them to do. What I don't like is the precedent/principle that there is apparently no such thing as illegal surveillance any longer. I would like to see the following question put to those who supported this bill: "Give me a few hypothetical but possible scenarios for instances of government eavesdropping where you would say, 'Someone ought to go to prison for this.'"

If they can't name a couple then the Fourth Amendment is kinda meaningless, isn't it? And if they can name some, then the question is how we would ever know if they were occurring and how would we prosecute in an environment when the administration (any administration) could just say, "This is necessary for the War on Terror?"

I get deluged with samples of "small press" comics. I came back from Minnesota with a dozen and that wasn't even a comic book convention. They go into a couple of "read when I get the time" boxes here which, I'm ashamed to admit, probably have well over 500 books that may not get read in this or the next decade. If you have something in those boxes, please accept my apologies for not being able to deal better with the pile. It's my loss, I know, because there's obviously some pretty good stuff in there.

One "small press" guy whose work I've read and enjoyed is a fellow named Ryan Claytor, who does mostly autobiographical comics that are skilled and far from self-indulgent. Ryan is about to embark on a cross-country trip to sign and promote his work and if he comes near you, go see him and buy something.

He's also moving from California to Michigan for reasons that I gather are romantic in nature. I figure he'll either get a great relationship out of it or another great autobiographical comic…maybe, if he's lucky, both.

The membership of AFTRA ratified its contract offer by a margin of 62.4%. That's very low — these things usually pass by 90%+ — but it's enough to seal the deal and yank the carpeting out from under the Screen Actors Guild. They have a couple of options now but none of them are all that great.

So here's Mark's prediction. SAG has received essentially the same offer from the studios. What those studios will do now is to stonewall. They might better it in some small way…give them some tiny thing that AFTRA didn't get, on the condition that they put the contract offer to an immediate vote of the SAG membership. But for the most part, the AMPTP will stand its ground, taking the position that the negotiations are over and will not resume under any circumstances. They will note that what they've offered SAG is not unfair…after all, the other actors' union thought it was good enough to take. The suggestion will be made that the SAG leadership is out of control, on some sort of personal vendetta, shutting down the town and ruining its members' lives rather than admit they were making hysterical, unreasonable demands.

And I bet it'll work. To get out of this box it's in, SAG would have to vote down that same offer and authorize a strike…and by a much wider margin than 62.4%. Since the membership is already feeling outmaneuvered and divided, I can't imagine that happening. Most of 'em will probably think it's time to throw in the terrycloth and commence the slow, angry process of repairing the SAG/AFTRA relationship. That won't be easy but if they don't do it, it'll be even worse next time. Much worse.

Last March here, I wrote about a man named Juan Manuel Alvarez who caused the death of eleven people, the injury of a couple hundred more and a whole lot of horror and financial loss. I could not understand why his trial was going to last "through June," meaning about three months. I thought it should take about twenty minutes.

As it turned out, the forecast was right. The trial ended on June 26 when the jury returned a verdict of Guilty on eleven counts of first-degree murder. I'm not sure how his actions fit the definition of first-degree murder I learned in school, which said that the death had to be "willful and premeditated." There's been no suggestion that Alvarez got up that morning and said, "Hey, I think I want to wreck a train so many will die or be maimed." I gather the explanation is that it's also first-degree if a death occurred as a result, even inadvertent, of a violent felony.

The conviction seems severe enough, especially since he is apparently not going to stand trial for the other damage he did. In any case, they're now in the penalty phase of the case, deciding if the Death Penalty is going to be applied here. If the trial itself was worth about twenty minutes, I think this stage oughta take ten.

I have highly-mixed feelings about the Death Penalty…about whether it's moral, whether it's wise, whether it's proper, etc. Oddly enough, a big argument against it — the strong evidence that we've convicted and executed a lot of innocent folks — doesn't apply here. No one is claiming he didn't do it…so we're left with the other questions, which are a lot larger than this one case.

Thus, what it boils down to is whether we believe in the Death Penalty. If we don't, then you toss the guy in prison for the rest of his life…and way down the line, others can debate the unlikely prospect of parole. If we do think the D.P. is applicable for the worst kinds of crime…well, there you go. I mean, if eleven counts of first-degree murder doesn't get you The Chair or a lethal injection or whatever it is they do in this state, what does? A dozen? More? Causing eleven deaths while you also litter?

Like I said: This one should have been over in ten minutes. In this article, the widow of a man killed in the crash told a judge that she didn't want to testify in the trial because, as she put it, "I don't want to relive it." I'm sure there are trials that should last months because there are so many questions, doubts, possibilities, etc. It's in everyone's best interests to make sure we convict the Guilty and clear the Innocent, and I'm not suggesting we should shortcut Justice when the facts are in dispute. But if only so that victims' families and friends don't have to spend months reliving their worst moments, maybe we could speed some of these trials along a bit. Hmm?

Which state in this country is the most overweight? Take a look. I think it's the one with the most Burger Kings, per capita.

Hey, wanna read an online conversation with Stephen Sondheim and the folks behind the recent revival of Sunday in the Park With George? You don't? Then don't click here.

Well, after many years of keeping my contacts, calendar and other vital info on Microsoft Outlook, I'm just about ready to pitch it. There seems to be no decent way to sync its data between my three computers. We (my assistant and I) have tried every sync program and nothing works the way it's supposed to. I've never particularly liked Outlook and have decided to try something else.

Anyone have a suggestion for a Personal Information Manager? I need one that will handle contacts, calendar, notes (preferably in multiple folders) and a "to do" list. I need it to have a simple desktop version (PC) and the ability to sync with a BlackBerry and also with other computers.

I'd give Lotus Organizer a try but they don't seem to offer a demo version. What is anyone else using and liking?

If you missed it the last time — or just plain didn't believe what you saw — you have another shot at Skidoo, my pick for the weirdest movie ever made by a studio and director you've heard of and starring stars who were sometimes in good movies. We started touting this one back in this post and have banged the drum ever since. If you want to see what the fuss is about, you want to tune in (or TiVo) Turner Classic Movies late Friday night (or early Saturday morning) at 2 AM Eastern Time.

Also: Friday morning at 8:45, TCM is airing Penelope, another movie I didn't like but write about often. Here's your chance to miss both of them at the same time.