LONDON -- Feel free to repeat what you will about President Bush's intelligence, make up your own jokes about his odds of spelling Mensa, much less testing his way into it, see how many variations you can come up with of "he's one sandwich short of a picnic" or "he's one banana short of a bunch."
Just don't try to do it in a British television commercial.
The British government has banned a promotional spot that shows a cartoon Bush trying to play a video by placing it in a bread toaster. That's way too mean, according to British law, this portrayal of the distinguished president of the United States as, well, one slice short of a loaf.
The show in question is called 2DTV, a rough equivalent of the American cartoon show South Park but with a decidedly more political slant. The law being used is part of a cache of government regulations in Britain that place restrictions on the media that would be unheard of in the United States.
As in the United States, the British government, through its Independent Television Commission, forbids advertisements that are untruthful. Also banned are commercials that are likely to "stir the masses," frighten children or portray people in a negative light.
The advertisement questioning Bush's intelligence was not banned on grounds of truthfulness. It was banned because it ridiculed him. Never mind that he has done the same to himself on Saturday Night Live and at a number of news conferences he has held, poking fun at his struggles with English. (He was "ambilavent" about the Saturday Night appearance, he explained on the show, because some of the material was "offensible." He told a news conference in Prague, Czech Republic, last month, "Nobody has ever accused me of being a poet before, but thank you," after a reporter complimented him for his use of "lofty" words.)
No matter. For the advertisement to air, according to British law, Bush would have to give his permission.
The producer of 2DTV never sought it.
"It's an idiotic request," says the producer, Giles Pilbrow. "We'd write a letter to Bush, but I doubt he could read it."
The show has not been banned and is free to make fun of Bush -- or whatever politician it wants. And it does. In 2DTV, Bush can understand things only when they are explained to him by his sidekick, a sock puppet named Professor Liebstrom.
Britain is quite liberal when it comes to television shows. Broadcast networks show full nudity after 9 p.m., talk-show hosts cuss like angry dockworkers after a few belts in a pub, and attempts at sexual innuendo here often forgo the "innuendo" part.
"The reasoning goes that programming gets wider latitude because it's felt that people who are watching programming have a pretty good idea of what they're going to be watching," says Uisdean Maclean, director of the Broadcast Advertising Clearance Center, which appealed to the government to allow the ad. "That's not true with advertisements. One doesn't want an adult advertisement showing up on a children's show."
The center is paid for by broadcast stations and tells them when a commercial may be violating government regulations. In this case, Maclean says, the center screened the commercial, saw a potential problem and asked the government's Independent Television Commission, the British equivalent of the Federal Communications Commission, whether it broke the rules.
"We pushed the ITC to be more relaxed because it seemed innocent enough," Maclean says. "They came back and said in no uncertain terms that it could not be run."
The television commission has been embarrassed by the decision, and its spokesman, who was not allowed to be named -- a common restriction on the news media here -- would say only that it reiterated its rules to the broadcast group.
"The rules are pretty clear about ridiculing people," says the spokesman. "It's not allowed without their permission."
Colin Sparks, a professor specializing in media studies at Westminster University in London, says the Bush ad ban may be funny, but it is emblematic of troublesome restrictions on the British media.
Reporters here cannot give sources any great assurances that they will remain anonymous, and libel laws place the weight of proof on the news media rather than on those who bring suit. Political advertising is banned on television and radio. And the truth of what is broadcast or published is not necessarily a defense.
For years, it was an open secret in London that newspaper publisher Robert Maxwell was involved in questionable business practices, Sparks says, but no newspaper would report that because of his willingness to sue. Only after Maxwell's death was it reported that he pillaged his employees' pension funds for millions of dollars.
"The restrictions are among the most negative features of British life," Sparks says. "It leads to the concealment of wrongdoing by government and powerful individuals. The sooner we get a meaningful freedom of information act and the sooner we get real press freedoms the better off we'll be. And that includes freedoms in advertising."
None of that comes in time for 2DTV's ads, even those featuring people whom the British government may soon help bomb -- or already have.
Under the advertising guidelines, 2DTV's producer says he was told, he could not run advertisements that show him ridiculing Saddam Hussein or Osama bin Laden. That is, unless he got on the phone with the Iraqi dictator or the Saudi terrorist and explained that he wanted to run an ad that wiggles a finger into their ribs.
"I doubt we could get bin Laden's permission," Pilbrow says. "He's a bit tricky to track down at the moment."