Steve's Bogus Lawsuit News of the Day
*An extreme far-centrist foundation!
Those Darn Frivolous Lawsuits!
"Fair and Balanced" Litigation Abounds With Frivolity
by Steve Young

August 15, 2003 -- LOS ANGELES (apj.us) -- Lawyers!

Damn 'em. Damn 'em all.

Thankfully we have cable news and talk radio to expose these sons of witches and their dastardly deeds.

In fact, I may not have this exactly right but I think I remember FOX News Channel's Bill O'Reilly saying that lawyers representing frivolous lawsuits are costing the courts and US, time and money. And when I heard that I said, "Thank G-d for Bill! You tell 'em! You da man!" Okay?

So imagine my chagrin when I was served papers from Bill O'Reilly and FOX Television for, let me write it directly from the lawsuit:

"...for Mr. Young's repetitious use of the word okay and using said okay with devious intent.

"That Fox News believes Mr. O'Reilly not only owns the rights to the word okay, okay, but that he also owns the manner in which he says it, so that Mr. Young's repetitiveness of writing the word okay and the repulsive nature he adopts to write it, are libelous and hinder Mr. O'Reilly's ability to cash in on his legally binding obnoxious nature."

Here's the part I don't understand: they added that I always seemed to be "inebriated" and "deranged" when I said it. Okay, I mean alright, that I can buy, but they also went on to say that I was... let me read directly from the lawsuit... that I was also, "unattractive," "cheap" and "could stand to lose a few pounds."

Granted, I've got my problems, but must they be so legally... cranky?

I was totally caught off guard by this legal onslaught to my verbiage and poundage because I have never known Bill to be purposely malicious or attempt to hoist his opinion on others, or be the kind of guy who would never call for boycotts against those who would disagree with him.

And now for him to say that he legally owns the word "okay" would be like FOX News saying that they own the words "Fair and Balanced". I'm sure even they understand that if they did have some hold on the phrase, they'd actually have to be fair and balanced, and they've already been on record basically saying they're not.

What I mean is, the FOX News Channel, admittedly, was created to offset the liberal bias of the main stream media. That in itself would mean that they would have to create a... minor stream media with a conservative bias. As much as I appreciate bringing in a conservative voice to compensate for the radical anti-American views of the likes of Katie Couric and the anorexic Al Roker, once you even the playing field, you are no longer being balanced but rather a counterbalance. I'm sure you'd agree that with a conservative tilt you certainly could not be considered objective or fair. It would be like saying Alan Colmes is a balanced and fair match for Sean Hannity.

(Hold on a second. I have to stop laughing.)

So FOX legally laying claim to fair and balanced would be like chocolate calling itself vanilla and trying to claim vanilla as chocolate's property. As convoluted as that is it would be just as convoluted for would be for FOX News to claim "Fair and Balanced" as their property.

Now, I'd have no problem if they wanted to call themselves say, Dogmatic and Asymmetric. Rolls of the tongue, don't it?

Nevertheless, Bill, I beg of you. Let me write okay, okay? Let's keep those liberal ACLU parasites where they belong, feeding at the bottom of some slimey water-filled location or squashed on the road with no skid marks in front of them. Let's not push them in the court taking up time and space on some frivolous lawsuit.

Okay?

Now "what say you?" That's a whole different story.

Steve Young is an award-winning television writer, director/writer of "My Dinner With Ovitz"", and author of "Great Failures of the Extremely Successful" (Tallfellow Press -- check out the web site at http://www.greatfailure.com). He writes a regular column for Jewish World Review".