Supposedly it is voice actors. "Working voice actors," with "busy lives." But we definitely heard a guy with a non-Plains State regional accent. That's no working voice actor!

Anyway, these "actors" are reading, verbatim, unexpurgated, the entirety of HR-3962 and "The Senate Bill," which means the Chairman's Mark of the Finance Committee bill. You will be totally informed about all the death panels, once you have heard various calm-sounding people reading tables of contents and listing subsections and explaining what terms mean "for the purposes of this bill." Our favorite is Kristi Steele's sexy take on Title III Subtitle B Pt 1 of the Senate bill, "Extension of Long-Term Care Hospital Provision."

And now we know as much about Health Care Reform as we do about the dangerous side-effects of Yaz.

[Via John Dickerson]

• South Park: In its famous "Cartoon Wars" episode, Cartman decides he hates Family Guy, hilarity ensues.

• Deborah Solomon: The NYT's stern question lady had a decidedly pissy interview with Seth Macfarlane last month. Sample Solomon questions: "Personally, I find the show's rape jokes especially unfunny...Why is that funny?...I would say Groening is a better colorist...Are you contemptuous of families?...Are you straight?" God, shut up, Deborah Solomon.
• Richard Lawson: Famous cultural critic who did not care for the show. He called it "crude, sloppy, shamelessly Simpsons-derivative non sequitur humor," which is relatively non-debatable, as insults go.
• Microsoft: Microsoft and their supercool ad agency Crispin Porter Bogusky were all signed up as sponsors for an upcoming prime time Family Guy special, but then somebody at Microsoft accidentally watched Family Guy, and, whoa! Microsoft can tolerate jokes about nerds, Apple, the blind, barely legal hoes, and Rwanda, but this show's "riffs on deaf people, the Holocaust, feminine hygiene and incest" were too much, according to Variety.

Remaining Family Guy Fans:

• Seth MacFarlane: That guy is so rich now. Filthy, unclean rich.
• News Corp. Executives: Family Guy makes money.
• Millions of 18-34 year old males: Their taste is America's taste!

It's unclear what exactly went down, but investigators know this: Gately and his husband Andy Cowley were in Spain, where they have a vacation home. The gents went out on Friday night, tossed a few back and then returned to their apartment.

At some point in the night, according to investigators, Gately choked on his own vomit and died. A gruesome way to go, yes, and not one we enjoy passing on. So, sorry.

It's all very sad and unexpected, but, considering Gately's gay ways, a perfect opportunity for papers, like the Daily Mail, to turn his last hours into a tawdry scandal.

Consider the paper's headline: "Boyzone star Stephen Gately and partner asked Bulgarian back back to £1m apartment."

We're not entirely sure what this mystery man's nationality has to do with the scandal, nor do investigators think he had anything to do with Gately's untimely death, but it makes for great tabloid fodder, no? We wonder whether Gately's sexuality has anything to do with this admittedly pointless article. Or perhaps it's just for shits and giggles.

• 'Bombshell Bussing Incident': We quite like the use of the word "Bussing" as a synonym for "kissing," don't you? Make a note, language hounds. In this case, it seems that Dave Letterman drove Stephanie Birkitt home a couple months ago—to the home she shared with blackmailer Joe Halderman—and Halderman caught them smooching! Right there at the end of the driveway! Then, of course, Halderman flew into a jealous rage and decided to extort Letterman. Case closed, etc.
• But Halderman Seemed Like Such a Good Guy!: Joe Halderman was a hard living producer who like action but his colleagues never thought he would do something like this. Read the entire standard-issue disbelief reaction story in the Times.
• Know Who Does Not Care About This Scandal, Besides Smart People? Advertisers: Because of intricate complicated ad and entertainment industry things like Q Rating and reputation management and the fact that Letterman never really put himself forward as a holier-than-thou guy, his show's sponsors don't much care about this scandal. They do care about ratings. Which are good!

We all remember the Texas-born Swayze from his roles in Dirty Dancing and Ghost, but the actor's real break came from the television adaptation of North and South, a Civil War drama. The actor went on to star in a number of hits, like Point Break.

While we all have fond memories of Swayze's silver screen hits, we are most impressed by his courageous cancer battle. Though he knew his days were numbered, Swayae signed on to star in A&E's The Beast. And, honestly, whatever you'll say about the show, his gumption was commendable. We've previously honored Mr. Swayze with a video tribute, but here;s our absolutely favorite performance from Dirty Dancing, the sleeper hit that helped make him a star.

RIP, Patrick. You touched many lives and, as cynical and mean as we may be, will always be adored

Patrick Goldstein of the LA Times offers three reasons why remakes are all the rage. First, despite some duds, many remakes do make scads of money, as exhibited by Star Trek. Second, the audience likes them. Finally, after years of rejecting the remake, directors are now keen on the idea.

There was once a time when filmmakers used their craft to elevate their ingenuity, vision and originality. Sadly, those traits are few and far between these days and, rather than stretch their own lazy imagination, filmmakers claim they're "reinventing" previous big screen forays. Bullshit.

While people like Rob Zombie may want to call themselves "auteurs," no self-respecting artist would take someone else's work, shoot it from a different angle — or, heaven forbid, in 3D — and display it as an example of their bottomless creative well. But, like any business, Hollywood's ruled by a little thing called supply-and-demand and can't be held entirely accountable for this developing trend.

The public's only endorsing this sort of behavior: by going to remakes, we are tacitly telling Hollywood, "Hey, it's okay: we crave nothing new. We can't stretch our tiny minds to understand — or even demand — an entirely innovative film going experience." No, we're all telling upcoming filmmakers that we'll happily consume any well-trod, familiar story.

We can blame Hollywood all we like, but it's really the public who's encouraging laziness on the part of our entertainers. It's we who are helping erode the foundations of America's collective imagination, thus giving rise to remakes like Fame, The Taking of Pelham 1,2,3 and, why?!, Footloose. This isn't nostalgia. This is a sad indictment of our insatiable love for all things safe, secure and ultimately conventional. And it's for that reason that we don't deserve entertainment at all. Not until we can prove we need more than flashing lights and shiny objects to get us off.

The company and, more to the point, its insurance company are shelling out the money to settle a lawsuit from investors who claimed the company knew its programmers had hidden the sex scene in the game and decided to ship it anyway. Not a terrible idea; development is expensive, timetables are tight, and in any case the hidden scenes could only be unlocked with special software. But the company underestimated how strong America's Puritan impulses remain. Now it's spending 36 times what CBS was (unsuccessfully) fined for the crime of exposing America to Janet Jackson's nipple. It's just that inappropriate to take a break from your life of crime, for sex.

Feeling bad for the museum, the Hollywood Foreign Press Time Warner Cable (who's teamed up with Ovation TV) have looked within their entertainment-loving hearts and are each donating give the museum $75,000 to keep the 40-year old program alive. And, as if that's not enough, Time Warner and Ovation are spending $1.5 million to market the program to the masses.

For its part, the Hollywood Foreign Press was "persuaded" by an open letter penned by Martin Scorsese.

So, rest easy, for the program's safe — well, for now: museum officials say they have enough money to last through the 2010 fiscal year. After that? Who knows...

Image via pedrosimoes7's flickr.

Wood sat down recently with renowned E! gossip queen Marc Malkin to discuss her role as Louisiana's renowned vampire queen, Sophia.

The 21-year old couldn't really say much, lest series creator Alan Ball smite her, but she did offer titillating hints that her character will bed another female and, possibly, a man.

She's not necessarily a lesbian.... Her human partner is a girl, but I'm pretty sure she goes both ways. I think vampires are like that in general.

Just as note: Wood once dated Marilyn Manson and made out with Mickey Rourke. And that's all we'll say....

The happy happening will go down at the massive, 800,000 square foot Anaheim Convention Center and will feature all things Disney, including much lauding of Tim Burton's highly anticipated — we can't wait! - Alice and Wonderland. While that's all well and good, Disney president and chief executive Robert Iger hopes the event will help persuade "very ardent" fans to flock to the company's wide-ranging products:

We live in a world where digital communication enables people to express their opinions about things to a much broader set of people. We call it the combustion of digital world of mouth... Their ability to communicate with others is unlike anything we've seen at any time before.

Translation: "We want to make sure the little buggers don't use twitter against us, as they have others." Yes, the D23 Expo may sound simply like a company-specific Comic-Con, but it's far more than that: it's so much more than that. Disney crazed masses can also join "a high-end, elite-level access" fan club.

So, what does membership cost you? $75-a-year. Now, tell us: who on this green planet of ours, in this recession of ours, would shell out that kind of money simply to get into a glorified trade show that doesn't feature comics?

[Image via Getty]

Don't worry, we won't ruin anything about tonight's episode, but we will wonder, aloud, why last week's episode came complete with a "mature audiences" warning, while tonight's did not. Could it be that last week's episode featured some man-on-man action?

Yes, the aforementioned action was a bit racy — hand down boxers! — but c'mon! AMC has been quite cutting edge in its original programming and we commend Mad Men's delicacy in dealing with a closeted character living in the Sixties, but this has us shaking our virtual heads a bit. There are so many other things that could have been warned against, like the rape, racism, possibly even the pot smoking.

Even if we were to give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that AMC put the warning up after receiving hell for the show's first two scandalous seasons, why didn't they warn against some of the "adult" topics in tonight's episode, including some slightly naughty language, an advertisement that read "Rape on 34th St." and little Peggy Olson getting randy with things "other" than sex?

Thus, we're a bit astonished - dare we say "mad?" - about the singular notification.

[Image via]