politics...do we dare???

[wrestlemark]

i'm big on politics its in all of our lives elected or not tell me what you think about it...... examples social security , iran & north korea, your boss making you act or do some thing, lets see how it goes i'm looking forward to it :rant:

[WildIrish]

I lived in Iran for three years. It was towards the end of the Shah's reign, and we were one of the last out before the fall of his rule. Incredible cultural experience, but terrifying at the end.

[lakritze]

Find out who supports large corporations over individual liberties,declares war to occupy another country,wants to narrow the wall that divides church and state and regulate what goes on in our bedrooms. Steer clear from these bastards.

[WildIrish]

Those with strong enough convictions vote every day...with their wallets. You don't like a radio show, turn it off...boycott it's sponsors. If you don't like the political views a candidate supports, find the businesses that support them and boycott their products and services. When the companies get hit in the pocketbook, they react.

[Irish]

I'll be 61yrs old,in a couple of weeks!I'm finally realizing that it's not good for
me to enter any discussions,about politics or anything that has differing
opinions.I've realized that you're not going to change anyones opinion &
they are not going to change yours.Unfortunately,I'm not mature enough,that
these things don't bother me.My emotions don't turn off with my computer,so
I've decided to stay out of them.I can't understand why people don't see things my way & I'm sure that they can't understand why I don't see things as they do.As they say in AA-Live & let live. Irish
P.S.Back to lurking! :rant:

[tgisober]

Irish....ditto!

[gekkogecko]

Why start this thread? Politics runs through every post of every thread, whether or not people want them to anyway. What's the need?

[osuche]

Great! Let's hit all the hot spots on one thread! :D :p :D

[maddy]

I'll bite... I choose social security....

I'm not a fan of the present system, I acknowledge that it was a great system for a long time, but with the way our retirement systems have evolved over the years (I'm fully 401K with company contribution, and not a lick of a pension), I think I should be given the equal liberty to do with my retirement funds that the government holds as I have with those that my employer and I are setting aside. I'm all for the concept of "individual" accounts with "individual" control. I believe there needs to be some continuing support for my parents who were not of the 401K mindset and are planning to retire on a pension (which isn't much in their case), a small amount they finally did put away, and SS. But, I would like to have more control over my fate, if I'm mandated to pay in a certain amount each year, I'd like to control how its invested, and it's my loss if I pick a poorly performing mutual fund... or my gain if I pick a good one.

[Lilith]

My state permits this system as part of their retirement planning options. The jury is still out on whether it was the best option for Mr. Lil and I. I'm not sure I like the idea of gambling with both his retirement and SSI.

[FallenAngel5]

I have to agree with WI on this one... money does talk, and where you don't spend it talks even louder. Though to touch on another point he made - which may be off topic here - but I don't understand why people who don't like to watch a certain show on TV or listen to a radio show don't just turn it off or change the station. It's as simple as that. I don't like Fox News, nor do I like the Jerry Springer show. So I don't watch them. But I know that other people like to watch them, so I'm not gonna go bitch about how they ought to be taken off the air.
:rant:

Post about actual topic to come. :)

[Mark Vieth]

Well politics here in australia are very much like school yard tactics. Everyone is trying to oust everyone else. They seem to pat each other on the back but the other hand holds a knife. I really don't understand why this thread has been started. I know that we all have our own views on this. And as such should be left alone.

[LixyChick]

I have to agree with WI on this one... money does talk, and where you don't spend it talks even louder. Though to touch on another point he made - which may be off topic here - but I don't understand why people who don't like to watch a certain show on TV or listen to a radio show don't just turn it off or change the station. It's as simple as that. I don't like Fox News, nor do I like the Jerry Springer show. So I don't watch them. But I know that other people like to watch them, so I'm not gonna go bitch about how they ought to be taken off the air.
:rant:

Post about actual topic to come. :)
The mindset on this topic, from the powers that be (former head of the FCC-Michael Powell), is that unchaperoned children should not be infiltrated with indecency in prime time media of any kind. He's gone so far as to say (example) that if a conversion van is riding down a road and has a pornographic video playing on it's onboard VCR or DVD player...the owner can be sited for indecency. That is one extreme case in point. Other concerns are for "latch-key" kids and their time spent at home, alone during prime time hours, and the things they can hear and see on the TV and radio. We can't police the parenting of everyone in the country...so we'll censor the media and stomp on the "Freedom of Speech" amendment, till it's mangled to smitherines! We don't trust that parents can decide what their own children can and can't see and hear. And, how can we weasle into the internet and pay radio (sattelite)?

What the FCC fails to demonstrate is the long term negative resulting effect of said children after viewing what it (the FCC) deems as indecent...even though it cannot name what it deems as indecent. They literally say..."We'll know it when we hear it or see it". and have NEVER listed indecent words or actions, but arbitrarily fined a few media personalities and/or their companies for what they claim was an abundance of claims against them. In reality, when the source of these claims was challenged, a list of a handful of people (nationwide) had sent dozens, if not hundreds, of complaints. That one person makes hundreds of complaints is seen by the FCC as hundreds of complaints...period! The guidelines are not spelled out, and on any given day one person's "indecent" remark may not be indecent if spoken by another person...an icon of society (if you will). For example: the words vagina or masturbation can be used by Oprah Winfrey...but not by Howard Stern (a syndicated talk show host).

Of course George Carlin has spelled out "the seven dirty words" one cannot say in mainstream media...and these words have always been used as a guideline for self imposed censorship. But, in live broadcasts, sometimes these words slip by. NOT anymore, says the FCC! Live media is now expected to have a delay (usually 5-7 seconds...and then it wouldn't be live, would it?) and if a word or action slips by...MAJOR FINE! This can happen on a news report...where a passer by can flash her breasts or a guy can shout "Fuck" or something like that...and WHAMMO...you're busted! But again, if you are Oprah Winfrey...it's ok, and she doesn't even broadcast live!

And the absolute worst part? No one is challenging the FCC's arbitrary rulings. They could take them to court and make them spell out the guidelines...but for some strange reason, that is totally beyond me, no one has yet to do so!!!???

[Belial]

And the absolute worst part? No one is challenging the FCC's arbitrary rulings. They could take them to court and make them spell out the guidelines...but for some strange reason, that is totally beyond me, no one has yet to do so!!!???

My guess is that no-one wants to take on the role of Great Media Satan and be deemed responsible for all of society's ills.

"Those are the words that'll curve your spine....and stop the country from winning the war..."


(I think I might not have got the whole quote but you get the point) :D

[Oldfart]

Perhaps we should ask the Mods for a Political Forum, though you'd have to promise

that the blood, guts, anger, mayhem and violence would not spill across into the other

Fora.

[Sharni]

I dont believe we require a forum just for politics......the general chat area should be sufficient

[WildIrish]

I think everyone engaging in political talk should do so naked.


I'm wildirish, and I approve of this message.

[tgisober]

Sharni,what should I wear to work today??

[wrestlemark]

I think everyone engaging in political talk should do so naked.


I'm wildirish, and I approve of this message.



we as humans are passionate some are offended some go with it some don't bother with it i really enjoy hearing what people like dislike sexually & non this site makes me want to know more about everyone like a family or a group at work. thank you for your input i'd try to answer everyones point but that would be pushing my opinion ..... i will coment on 2 of them , i have an fcc radio license it states that it may be revoked at any time because of profanity .they were just making an example of stern right or wrong howard made out ,satellite radio will be the biggest thing in the very near future and he might have started the whole thing himself seeing how far he could go before being slapped .the fcc is trying to keep up with our ever changing world don't know if it can.



the 401k & social security thing ...well i lost half of a 17 year profit sharing plan to a crook banker who took over the company i worked for he made lots of money backfor the co. changing profit sharing to 401k and investing in risky investments, i only got the other half when i was let go due to "down sizing "(and having a big mouth ) because it was my money but i had no control over it until i broke my ties with the company and it was turned over to me .it is legal and i hope they (congress) do it correctly so we all can have a fund (social security ) to draw from as our parents are when we retire . Again thanks and sorry to anyone i pissed off by starting this thread .......oh by the way did you read the fine print "all who posted owe us a erotic story and a sexy picture" ....aaaaaahhhh transition :rant: :hair: :x: love you all!!!!

[Irish]

I,personally,am glad that you had this thread.Most of the newer members,
don't even know me.A few of the older members,probably,expect me to respond to political threads.I have been trying to decide how to tell people
that I'm not going to respond to hardly anything controversal anymore.It's
just not worth,what it does to me,mentally. Irish

[Sharni]

Sharni,what should I wear to work today??
*L*...you cant dress yourself?

Clothes would be a good idea

[WildIrish]

Clothes would be a good idea


Thanks for ruining it for the rest of us! :mad:

[LixyChick]

My guess is that no-one wants to take on the role of Great Media Satan and be deemed responsible for all of society's ills.

"Those are the words that'll curve your spine....and stop the country from winning the war..."


(I think I might not have got the whole quote but you get the point) :D
Glad to see a response to my post...TY hun!

Here's whats happening as ***I see it***...

Someone (who shall remain nameless, because his/her name sparks controversy and it's been pointed out IN VOLUMES that controversy isn't the reason for this site) has cornered the market on making this country a moral country because he/she thinks it is going straight to hell in a handbasket, despite all his/her past discretions (judge not lest ye be...yada yada). For some reason this issue of morality has been their SMOKE SCREEN to show that (1) Yes, the government and it's appointed officials are indeed doing some positive things to better this country in the shadow of war...and (2) Yes, the government has a mighty enough power to herd enough sheep into believing that stomping on the first ammendment will be for the good of everyone, not just those that blindly trust it now...

*That is, till that stomping affects a group or majority directly...and then, and only then, will they see through the smoke...which hasn't happened thus far...it's only been individualized...but it's coming!*

Belial? You say that you think no one has wanted to take on the role of "The Great Media Satan" and be deemed responsible for all of society's ills...correct? Not true my son! Listen and I shall tell you of "the one" who has been at the helm of that media ship for over 25 years! He didn't ask for this role...he was shoved into it!

His name is Howard Stern...a syndicated (countrywide, till he was fired from some stations owned by Clear Channel Entertainment...which he's broadcasted on for over 15 years) talk show host who some have likened to Lenny Bruce (though, Howard hates that similitude). His name is well known amoung his followers AND amoung those who hate him (but seem to listen to him everyday so they can write the FCC about the contents of his show or just bitch about him in general...which, BTW...gives him more listeners and shoots his ratings sky high...so he loves the haters too!). He is referred to as a "shock jock" and has knighted himself "King of all Media"...which he intends to prove when he leaves "the people's" airwaves and begins his show on sattelite radio in January of 2006. He has had 2 best selling books, he has had a top grossing movie, he has produced shows for cable TV ("Son of a Beach"), he has had, and still has, a number one TV show that broadcasts his radio show on "E" TV, he has had the number one morning show in most of his markets for 20+ years (despite what Imus claims...lol...another Howard wannbe), he is working on an upcoming cartoon of his life growing up, and he is now going to produce 3 radio shows for Sirius sattelite radio this coming January (his show and 2 other shows to be named). The only media medium he hasn't delved into as yet is the written media. He does not own a newspaper...and as far as I know he doesn't really want to. So maybe his self imposed claim to fame isn't complete...but the world hasn't ended yet!

My point? In all the years that Howard has been broadcasting...there is ALWAYS controversy! He has been fighting the FCC...single handedly...for umpteen years. And everyone of his "fellow" broadcasters have taken his lead and let their hair down with each controversial move Howard has broken through! Howard was one of, if not...THE, first to syndicate his radio talk show. He has been fined (his company...Infinity Broadcasting) in excess of a million dollars (really so much more)...and thus, after so many years of carrying his show, and in full knowledge of it's content over the years, Clear Channel Entertainment (owned by people strongly affiliated with the he/she I first mentioned) fired The Howard Stern Radio Talk show, withholding pay despite a concise contract, and taking his shows off numerous stations nationwide without a warning or a chance for Howard to fight or appeal the decision.

The only reason stated? The content of his show is indecent! It has ALWAYS been the same type of show...year in and year out. If you heard the name Howard Stern, you'd think one of two things (in a nutshell)..."I hate his guts...he's a pig" or "He's hilarious and I love his honesty". He's had followers from his one tiny show years ago to current day. And...he's had haters that long as well! He's always said...to those who call into the show and those who criticize in other media..."If you don't like my show...don't tune in"!!! As sighted in a line from his movie "Private Parts", poll taker talking to producer: "I asked his followers why they tune in to his show for the 4+ hours he is on air. Most common answer, I want to hear what he will say next. I asked his haters why they tune in for an hour or more. Most common answer, I want to hear what he will say next". Many other radio talk show jocks have immitated him...and fully denied it when challenged. Some have tried to one-up him to be MORE shocking...and have dug their own grave as far as a radio career. He's been able to tip-toe around the nay sayers and those who have made it their life's mission to get him off the air. He (rightfully) stands behind the first ammendment...and has been able to thwart the slings and arrows throughout the years. Till now!

His show is now under the FCC microscope with an even more intense lens. They have started with him because of his fame and intend[ed] to make an example out of him. His "fellow" talk show jocks are shaking in their socks to see what'll happen to Howard. The FCC has made it a priority to prove that they have the power to bring down the giant in the media industry. He is now threatened with "personal" half million dollar fines for EACH indiscretion per show they deem indecent...even from the ones they feel are so from his past shows when played for "Best Of" (shows that have already been aired in the past and went out "as is" and Clear Channel never said a peep) when he is on vacation. He has censored himself to the highest power lately...because he wants to finish out his contract and leave the commercial airwaves with the knowledge that he didn't crumble under the thumb of the FCC. He's offered to show up everyday and do his show as usual and the button pushers who have him on a 7 second delay can push the button to their hearts desire. But truthfully, his content has mellowed since they have threatened personal fines. It could bankrupt him in one show! He's even offered to show up to fulfill his contract of "being on air" and just play music...but it's sickened him to think it might lead to this extreme. NO other radio talk show host (or any other media personality for that matter) will come to him and say, "No matter that we are adversaries, I cannot let you go down as we watch the first ammendment crumble before our eyes". Howard is the only one who has ever spoken up against the FCC and it's deliberate false sense of hierarchy...to the point of openly challenging them to a day in court to define indecency in a clear cut, written guideline for EVERYONE to follow...not just those they feel apalled by.

To date...he will never has his day in court. The FCC has even gone so far as...recently requesting to hold their meetings in secrecy, which is against a law that the name now escapes me (help me here...jseal!). They want privacy to deal behind closed doors and decide the fate of the media spectrum. Usually, the open records of the FCC are available to any and all who request them. Michael Powell (head of the FCC) has given notice to tender his resignation. I am terrified of who will take his (backstabbing, flip-flopping) place.

The good news? Being his usual, insightful self...and before the FCC could fine him into quitting his current show...Howard Stern is moving to sattelite (non-commercial) pay radio. The FCC has NO jurisdiction over them...and Howard has, once again, pioneered a way around the ruling thumb of "Big Brother"!

Cudos Howard! That'll show the bastards! Whether you like him or not...you can't deny his right to free speech! If you don't like him...don't listen to him!

[fzzy]

Very well thought out and presented comments Lixy ... but I would just say that in your own way you've given the very reason why most people are not able to simply not tune in to something they don't like (especially if they feel VERY strongly about it). You've documented the power of one individual who is truly committed to his cause and how he can impact an entire industry ... and in some ways, an entire nation ... that, I think is why most feel they must have their say when they feel they are at the opposite end of the spectrum ... that old saying (and I think this applies for both sides of the coin in how they think) ... All it takes for "evil" to win is for a few good men to do nothing.

[Mark Vieth]

Lixy well said. Now as we do get the letterman show here late in oz, I did watch the ones when Howard was on. Now from a stand off point of view Howard is harmless. I have watched his movie "Private Parts" and found it very funny. Now we have a similar watch dog here in oz but not as tight as the FCC.

Howard did say on letterman that the only reason why Michael Powell got the job was because of his father. Now as you so clearly stated about the first ammendmant (which here in oz we also have) freedom of speech no matter how controversial, is still free.

Howard has the right idea. It just sucks that he has to go satellite to keep his boat afloat. Here's a question to think about. If he is so controversial then why haven't the FBI been after him? It seems to me the FCC are on his back coz they got nothing better else to do.

They even chased Eminem coz of some of his lyrics. He's only a rapper and they decide to slap him with a lawsuit as well. It's bueracracy gone wrong.

I think that someone needs to give the FCC an enema. (Well Howard's been doing that for years already)

What I think is even more disconcerning is that Colin and Michael Powell are like carbon copies of each other. From what I have seen here via the news, Colin was trying to convince the UN to go to war against Hussain. Now his son is going to war against Howard Stern. WTF?????
The left hand doesn't know what the right hand is screwing up!

[fzzy]

Just to make sure all understand, freedom of speech is not something that is guaranteed, it has it's limits ... the famous one being that you are not free to yell fire in a public place ... or much like the thought that we have freedom of action here, just so long as you don't harm someone else in your actions .... freedom of speech is only guaranteed so long as you don't harm someone else in the process, then it becomes either a matter of the "state" litigating or an individual litigating. (since we are an international site, I'm not sure that all would have that understanding when they hear the phrase). :)

[Belial]

To clarify further, we in Australia do not have free speech as guaranteed by the first amendment to the US Constitution.

And...why the fuck did it take an amendment for free speech to be guaranteed (such that it is) by the US constitution :confused:

[Belial]

Hey Lixy,

You know, when I posted my comment, Howard Stern was precisely the man I was thinking of. I caught the Letterman show when he made his announcement to move to sattelite. In terms of his artistic and professional freedom, obviously this is a great move. But is this going to maintain or increase his impact on American society or will it marginalise him? After all, it is hard to be the Great Media Satan when you are not a participant in it.

Oh yeah, and did you recognize my quote? :p

[Mark Vieth]

Sorry Bel you are right about us not having a first ammendmant for free speech. I was only trying to make a link as to our country that we can say what ever we want and nobody slaps us on the hand.

[LixyChick]

I know what you mean fzzy...and I guess I might have simplified my thoughts about the people who feel VERY strongly about Howard Stern's "immorality" on the airwaves. It's just that...the "fight" is soooooo different now. Howard has been on the air for many years and he's known what can and can't be aired. He gets live phone calls and can never predict what a caller will say, so he has almost always been on a delay or had a "bleep" button to make a comment "air presentable". If there was ever a problem with his show Clear Channel would have said so. They never did and, in fact, backed him on many issues they felt sure were air worthy and they wouldn't tolerate anyone trying to take away his freedom of speech. Till one day the govenment shifted and those who headed up Clear Channel found themselves in closer proximity to the powers that lead us. In an effort to sway a nation...the powers that be said, why not take on the morality issue and kick it up a notch? Who better to cast the attention to...than Howard Stern? In retaliation, his views about the last BIG election started the snowball down the hill!

Geezzzzz...you'd think I was the Howard Stern poster child...but it's much more passionate than simple. The FCC was almost a non-organization before Michael Powell came to it. Prior to his heading up the FCC, Michael Powell had made some speeches that would have totally backed Howard on the free speech issue. Once he was empowered as the leader of the FCC, and maybe because of his father's role in our government (most assuredly), and without question because Howard Stern had such an able voice in the markets he was aired in...Michael Powell changed his views on free speech and to this day hasn't made it clear what it is he thinks is indecent. Because he headed the FCC...whatever he deemed indecent at the time, was indecent...if spoken by Howard Stern. That's the gist of it...pure and simple!

The major problem now is...Howard will be gone. And those left behind, who didn't feel like it was their fight too, will find out that they should have NEVER let it get this far. The FCC won't have Howard to hold up as a sacrifice...so they'll have to focus on those who are left behind to figure out what the FCC is thinking. And those who sat on their hands all this while, will feel the snowball effect of the wrath that Howard has escaped.

It's funny...but I think about those poor, misguided handful of people who made it a daily mission to pen hundreds of letters to the FCC (that the FCC took as hundreds of complaints individually), and what will they do with all their free time now? LOL! Hopefully, they'll use that spare time to actually do something productive to aide their fellow man! I say this because I still don't know the long term, detrimental effect that the words of Howard Stern have had on the children of this nation!

BTW...have you seen an afternoon soap opera lately? They'd better watch their p's and q's...or I've a feeling they'll be on the chopping block soon!

Mark...Howard's contract with commercial radio is over in December of this year. It always has been. He usually renews for 5 years. This time he wasn't. He was going to retire from broadcasting and focus on producing, and other endeavors, after he went off the air. He never intended to sign a new contract to do more radio on the commercial airwaves. With the inception of extraterrestrial radio...and given that the FCC has provoked him further than they ever have...he's thumbed his nose and flipped them the bird...and signed a 5 year, multi-million dollar contract with Sirius to produce 3 shows on 3 of their newest stations (his show and 2 more of his choice), with the understanding that he has to accumulate at least 1 million new subscribers before the contract can go into effect. Upon his announcement on his current radio show, that he was moving to sattelite, stock in Sirius hit the roof! XM radio (the competiton that tried to woo Howard as well) had been #1 in sattelite prior to this announcement. To date, as far as I know, MORE than a million new Sirius customers have signed on. This was, in part if not all, because of Howard's move. Howard isn't as "harmless" as you'd might think. He's considered politics in the past...but never wanted to divulge his income (lol!)...and so never made the move. His voice has a lot of the power of a politician without having to change his convictions in order to fit in with the political rhetoric. BTW...this isn't the "Roaring 20's" and the F.B.I. may have Howard on a list of some sort...but he's done NOTHING to warrant the organization to focus on him. Howard IS NOT anti-American or a terrorist! Despite the fact that he'd rather our current president wasn't re-elected...he doesn't wish him any harm! He just doesn't like some of his policies and he says so...which he has every right to do! I don't agree with a lot of what Howard says at times...but I'd defend his right to say them anytime! In the FCC's eyes...it's mission is done. And so Michael Powell will now resign...though I don't know the reason he has given for this manuever. But, the FCC hasn't won anything in getting Howard off the air. He wasn't going to re-up his contract anyway. Now...because of the FCC (and the money offered by Sirius...it's a lot of money after all!)...he is going to a venue where they can NEVER touch him! I hope they are proud of their efforts!

It took an ammendment for free speech to be guaranteed, Belial...because our constitution was intended to be spelled out by the people, for the people...in order for EVERYONE to be able to receive the exact kind of treatment as the next person. No one person was exempt because of race, creed, color or political affiliation. Because we were founded as a nation for all to join if they chose to...we are a melting pot of many nations...all with different policies and politics. If only the FCC would spell out it's rules as well as our constitution does. And yes, it's been tilted and twisted and tweeked through the years to ammend and update it...but freedom of speech has always meant what it was spelled out to mean!

Fzzy is right...there are exceptions...like the "fire" in a theatre rule. Things like that are just common sense, actually. But you'd be surprised how many idiots would yell that for no good reason if it weren't ruled out...lmfao! Speaking of common sense...Howard is a father of 3 daughters and has never let them listen to his show (though he knows he can't do anything about it if he isn't around to stop them). They are smart, well adjusted young women! He knows the 7 words that can't be aired...and has never aired them without it being accidental (callers squeaking them in when it wasn't expected...before the delay button inception). He cleans up fast and either hangs up on an uncontrollable caller or cleans up his/her words so the conversation can be aired. Some of the content of the show is audio sexual...but if you tune in you'll know that and if you don't like it...TUNE OUT! Sex is all around us...not just on the Howard Stern show! And we know EXACTLY what we are getting when we tune in. He's never deviated from his format in all the years he's been around!

And Belial...I think he'll make good on his claim to fame as "The King of ALL Media! He's used to pioneering his craft...and I see no reason why he won't again. Sattelite radio is in it's infancy...and quite literally...the sky is the limit!
And to my chagrin...no, I don't know the quote. Sorry...mind is drawing a blank. Please enlighten me!

*hugs to you all*

[Lilith]

It took an ammendment for free speech to be guaranteed, Belial...because our constitution was intended to be spelled out by the people, for the people...in order for EVERYONE to be able to receive the exact kind of treatment as the next person. No one person was exempt because of race, creed, color or political affiliation. Because we were founded as a nation for all to join if they chose to...we are a melting pot of many nations...all with different policies and politics. If only the FCC would spell out it's rules as well as our constitution does. And yes, it's been tilted and twisted and tweeked through the years to ammend and update it...but freedom of speech has always meant what it was spelled out to mean!


*hugs to you all*

Actually it took an ammendment because our Constitution was NOT written to be all inclusive but there were a number of representatives who had only agreed to sign if a Bill of Rights would be later added and they continued to push. http://www.billofrights.com/

[LixyChick]

Actually it took an ammendment because our Constitution was NOT written to be all inclusive but there were a number of representatives who had only agreed to sign if a Bill of Rights would be later added and they continued to push. http://www.billofrights.com/
Thanks Lil! That's surely what I meant!

[Lilith]

Thank all that is good, for the revolution and evolution ;)

[LixyChick]

... or much like the thought that we have freedom of action here, just so long as you don't harm someone else in your actions .... freedom of speech is only guaranteed so long as you don't harm someone else in the process, then it becomes either a matter of the "state" litigating or an individual litigating. (since we are an international site, I'm not sure that all would have that understanding when they hear the phrase). :)
See fzzy? This is precisely my point! Where is the proof of harm? What are the EXACT guidelines? Who do they, and don't they, apply to and in what context? Where is Howard's day in court? They won't even let him ask them to prove their point in litigation. At their whim (for lack of a better word) they have said...and I quote Michael Powell..."We'll know it when we hear it". Which, to me, means...if we don't like the context of what you are saying, we will fine you up the wazzoo. And...it could have been ok yesterday, but it might not sit right with us today...so you'd better put your psychic thinking cap on and say nothing that we MIGHT feel is indecent today! How can the FCC say that what one person says is indecent...and when spoken by another it isn't? Either it is or it isn't! A word is a word is a word! Masturbation can mean nothing more than masturbation! And it shouldn't be left to a small group of people to get their panties in a bunch over something one person says just because they don't like his show content! It's not like Howard has just recently gotten sexual in content...he's been the same personality all along. They should be made to spell it out and adhere to it for everyone. But...they won't give him a day in court! Ergo my reason for previously stating that the FCC imposes arbitrary fines without having to answer to anyone! No one non-elected organization should have half the power that the FCC is now demonstrating. It's ludicrous and goes against all that this country was built on!

[Belial]

My quote, Lixy, is from George Carlin's "Seven Dirty Words" sketch :)

[LixyChick]

My quote, Lixy, is from George Carlin's "Seven Dirty Words" sketch :)
Damn Belial...do you know how long it's been since I actually heard that? Let's just say it hasn't been in the last ten years (way longer than that)!

LOL!

[fzzy]

OK ... first of all ... from my own personal "nails on the chalkboard" thing.... amendment only has one "m" in the beginning ...... OK sorry, just had to get that off my chest :)

Want to make it plain that I have not stated an opinion on this matter, just clarified how the 1st amendment has been interpreted by the courts. I personally have only spent a few minutes here or there viewing Howard Stern in any forum he presents himself in because I find the man's public personae to be crass and pre-pubescent (ok here's the problem with correcting spelling, when you then spell words that you're not sure how to spell) :sun:
On the other hand, I've never written a letter to anyone about it either. I'm in the numbers of those who basically ignore him and will be perfectly happy when he moves to his new venue. I also don't necessarily believe that the "attack" will turn to others ... it may or may not, that can only be known at a later date.

From my perspective, I think that there is a difference in presentation of certain words ... just as we've commented before about discussion of certain topics here on Pixies not being ok, but are ok on other sites ... the last one I remember of concern was a discussion about breastfeeding that a short term member wanted to do a poll on .... he mentioned it was perfectly fine on a parenthood board but was banned here .... content of the program can be important IMHO when making such decisions.

[Lilith]

1) I missed amendment twice on the same Social Studies content exam cause it should have two MMMMMMs damn it (so says me...fuck Webster) :p

2) Breastfeeding itself was not the issue...it had something to do with minors. It was about the content not the topic.

[fzzy]

thanks for clarifying that Lil .... I knew that it had to do with minors .... but others may not know that ... as always, you're the best! (and we can submit the "corrected" spelling to Websters ... let them know they've made a grave error!!!)

[Lilith]

Seriously...I got like 48 out of 50 points because the woman took off both times....grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!

[LixyChick]

OK ... first of all ... from my own personal "nails on the chalkboard" thing.... amendment only has one "m" in the beginning ...... OK sorry, just had to get that off my chest :)

Want to make it plain that I have not stated an opinion on this matter, just clarified how the 1st amendment has been interpreted by the courts. I personally have only spent a few minutes here or there viewing Howard Stern in any forum he presents himself in because I find the man's public personae to be crass and pre-pubescent (ok here's the problem with correcting spelling, when you then spell words that you're not sure how to spell) :sun:
On the other hand, I've never written a letter to anyone about it either. I'm in the numbers of those who basically ignore him and will be perfectly happy when he moves to his new venue. I also don't necessarily believe that the "attack" will turn to others ... it may or may not, that can only be known at a later date.

From my perspective, I think that there is a difference in presentation of certain words ... just as we've commented before about discussion of certain topics here on Pixies not being ok, but are ok on other sites ... the last one I remember of concern was a discussion about breastfeeding that a short term member wanted to do a poll on .... he mentioned it was perfectly fine on a parenthood board but was banned here .... content of the program can be important IMHO when making such decisions.
I hear ya...about the spelling thing fzzy! When I type on this thing and reread my words...most of them don't look correct...lol! It's annoying and I know it and I'm sorry! I know I'll never make the "amendment" mistake again though...so TY!

As to the Stern show content and presentation...I totally understand what you are saying about how one person can say something in one context and another can say the same thing in a totally different way, but did you understand me when I explained that Howard's content has ALWAYS been the same?

I'm not trying to make a case and sway opinions for Howard Stern here. He is just a perfect example of the climate of what the FCC and the governing powers are up to these days. There have been other radio jocks who have actually been ousted from their jobs recently, for being even more shocking than Howard. So...he is not the only focus of the FCC, but he is a major one!

I'll say it again...Clear Channel carried Howard's show for many years and defended his right to keep his content on many occasions. Suddenly, one day they fired the show from all of their stations with no warning and only stated that his content was the reason. He is not being paid in fulfilling his contract...even though it is an iron clad one and, yes, he is taking Clear Channel to task in litigation for it. Then the FCC aquired Michael Powell as it's head. This is a man who, on several occasions, has spoken out in favor of freedom of speech in a way that would have left Howard unscathed...till he was appointed to the FCC. Then he flip-flopped his reasonings and began fining Infinity Broadcasting for the complaints it received for the Stern show. He stated that hundreds of complaints were received, but failed to mention (till the records were checked) that these hundreds of complaints came from a handful of people...literally! The fines were high at first, but Infinity paid them none the less. Then the threat of fining individuals for each and every indescretion was tabled and discussed. This included past shows that had already aired "as is". So each show had to be re-edited for airing for the "Best Of" shows when the cast of the Stern show is on vacation. But, because the FCC hasn't clearly and concisely defined indecency, but "will know it when they hear it"...the old shows can be fined over and over and over again for words that aired the last times it was aired but wasn't sited. So, if a show is used three times (for example) and the content has been censored each time...the very next time it is aired, it can be fined again for something new that the FCC suddenly feels is indecent.

In all honesty...all Howard wants is a day in court with the FCC in order for them to define indecency. This won't help him now. But those left behind on commercial radio will need this definition in order to play by the FCC's rules and it would behoove the braodcaster's in all media venues to make certain it comes to fruition...and stop this downward spiral before it gets even more out of hand!

If it's left up to the FCC, as it is now, they have petitioned to have their meetings and results kept behind closed doors...which is against some law (that I can never remember the name of)...and quite frankly, a really bizarre request for an organization that is suppose to be in the forefront of helping people keep this country "moral"!!!!!!


Oops...running late...gotta go!

[SEVERUSMAX]

Find out who supports large corporations over individual liberties,declares war to occupy another country,wants to narrow the wall that divides church and state and regulate what goes on in our bedrooms. Steer clear from these bastards.

I'd agree with much of that, just not all. Individual liberty is good, but so is economic freedom. I want to keep government off my back, out of my pocket, and out of my bedroom, unless of course, by government, you mean some cute intern. :devilish:

[wrestlemark]

Damn Belial...do you know how long it's been since I actually heard that? Let's just say it hasn't been in the last ten years (way longer than that)!

LOL!



tater :boobs: and cheese :boobs: and nacho :boobs: bet you can't eat just one!!!


i love the discussions keep em coming :line: hey guys bring in the stuff ....wanna move over a little ....... :line:

[wyndhy]

If it's left up to the FCC, as it is now, they have petitioned to have their meetings and results kept behind closed doors...which is against some law (that I can never remember the name of)...!

i think what you mean are the open meeting laws but i believe they apply only to agencies. in pa we have the sunshine act... also applies to agencies....could be federal as well but i'm not certain.
*thinking she didn't know much about it after all * lol

[WildIrish]

I think we should settle this with a winner takes all game of Anal Ring Toss. :D

[LixyChick]

i think what you mean are the open meeting laws but i believe they apply only to agencies. in pa we have the sunshine act... also applies to agencies....could be federal as well but i'm not certain.
*thinking she didn't know much about it after all * lol
That's it wyndhy! The Sunshine Act...(if I had more time I would look it up, but for now...that's the one I was thinking of!) TY so much!

There is a bill before Congress, as we speak, that will be voted on real soon (the fastest I've ever heard a bill getting to voting stage), possibly this week, that will allow for individual fines for each individual "indecent" behavior or remark by a broadcaster. This means that 1/2 million dollar fines will be imposed per incident coming from the pocket of the person who is held responsible. It's almost a sure thing to pass! Howard will shut up and just play music for the rest of his contract if this happens. Indecency STILL hasn't been defined...and at their descretion (the FCC)...on any given day, for any reason that they feel like, for anything that doesn't sit right with them no matter how miniscule or ridiculous...they will be able to impose this fine over and over and over again with no explaination...just that "we knew it when we heard/saw it!

We can all thank Janet Jackson for her help in this one...though she goes unscathed because she has never had a fine imposed on her for her "wardrobe malfunction"!

Do you understand what this does to the first amendment? It would be comparable to overturning Roe vs. Wade in terms of impact on our nation!!!!!! We're headed backward instead of forward people!

[LixyChick]

LMAO@WI!

[jseal]

LixyChick,

There are those who would, and have, suggested that it is the irresponsible behavior of people like Ms. Jackson that precipitated these unfortunate developments. Note also that it requires an act of Congress (ref. your post above) to empower the FCC to assess these draconian fines. Congress represents the general populace, as reflected in votes.

[Belial]

tater :boobs: and cheese :boobs: and nacho :boobs: bet you can't eat just one!!!


Roberto Clemente has two balls on him! :D

[LixyChick]

LixyChick,

There are those who would, and have, suggested that it is the irresponsible behavior of people like Ms. Jackson that precipitated these unfortunate developments. Note also that it requires an act of Congress (ref. your post above) to empower the FCC to assess these draconian fines. Congress represents the general populace, as reflected in votes.
Yeah jseal...she was the catalyst!

The bill I spoke of has already been passed in the House sub-committee and is being considered in the House now. When they pass it (which they more than likely will) it'll go to the Senate for conference and then a vote and then on to the President...all of which should happen within the next few weeks. Congress has nothing more to do in this recent session (poor people, AIDES, prescription medicine, etc., etc.) it seems...cause this bill took off like wildfire. In about 4 months (at the very least) this bill will be law! As far as I know there are only a handful who will vote NO.

This isn't the first time the bill has been presented to Congress, but the last time it was shot down in conference for an addendum that has now disappeared. Huh? Yeah...there was some wording that got it a no vote...and now the wording is gone! Dunno what it said (specifically), but it's been reworded and it's "passable" now.

BTW...my representative[s] is/are all of the same persuasion (R) as the majority of the country...but even Democrats find this bill amusing and worthy!!!???

This country sure done gone crazy!

[Lilith]

My governor is pushing to have the authority to purge voters from the voting rolls. :D Just the news I woke up to.

[jseal]

LixyChick,

The bill passed by 389 votes to 38 on Wednesday. Not too many legislators on either side of the aisle willing to go to bat for the First Amendment. Although the bill cannot become law until the Senate approves similar legislation, it is already considering such a bill.

This measure would require the FCC to act on complaints within six months and would allow them to consider violations when renewing licenses. It boosts the maximum penalty for firms and individual entertainers to $500,000.

I can only hope that those who rail against self restraint, or as they call it “self-censorship”, are pleased and satisfied with Ms. Jackson’s exercise of her “freedom of speech”.

:(

[wyndhy]

i've (obviously) been reading this thread and i feel the need to add something.

i believe in freedom of speech, wholeheartedly, but you can not now nor will you ever be able to convince me that when our founding fathers ensured our rights to free speech they envisioned that a most important debate to be held some 200-odd years hence would be focused upon whether or whether not someone can say ass-fuck on the public radio waves. they meant the right ot disagree with your govn't, the right to proclaim your faith for all to hear.

i also firmly stand by the notion that a nation can not have total equality and total freedom…they do not meet in the middle. someone will always be “more free”. do i not have the freedom to not be accosted with things i do not wish to see or hear but are beyond my control? does another person not have the freedom to say things i do not wish to hear? who’s freedoms are more important…who is more equal?

[jseal]

...purge voters from the voting rolls...

Lilith,

Bummer! What are the criteria?

[Lilith]

Unsure yet of how he plans to sell it...I am in one of 10 states that denies felons the right to vote and one of only a few that denies them that right forever. We had voting issues over this during the last election. But the article does not refer to that.

Here is the article http://www.tallahassee.com/mld/tallahassee/10919322.htm

[denny]

When are Floridians gonna wake up and toss Jeb out? :rant:

[Lilith]

Well he can't run again so my guess is when his term is up :p

[jseal]

Lilith,

Florida seems to have some vivid local politicos. After reading that edition of the Tallahassee Democrat, I'm pleased to learn that Maryland is not alone in having colorful elected officials! :)

[Irish]

Unsure yet of how he plans to sell it...I am in one of 10 states that denies felons the right to vote and one of only a few that denies them that right forever. We had voting issues over this during the last election. But the article does not refer to that.

Here is the article http://www.tallahassee.com/mld/tallahassee/10919322.htm

New Hampshire,must be one of the states that allows it!I am a convicted felon.Many years ago,in Rockingham County Superior Court,I was convicted
of Aggravated Assault(sp?)(a felony)I have since gotten a complete record
annullment.There is a court fee($300)& many high state officials,have to OK it,before the Superior Court Judge,approves it.I carry a photostatic copy in my wallet,just in case.No-one ever said anything about voting & I am registered as an Independent,on the Town voting list. Irish

[Lilith]

In my state it is estimated around 8% can not vote.

[Belial]

i believe in freedom of speech, wholeheartedly, but you can not now nor will you ever be able to convince me that when our founding fathers ensured our rights to free speech they envisioned that a most important debate to be held some 200-odd years hence would be focused upon whether or whether not someone can say ass-fuck on the public radio waves. they meant the right ot disagree with your govn't, the right to proclaim your faith for all to hear.



Sure, but what if my faith is in the divinity in the Almighty Lord Assfuck? ;)

Only kidding :p

[wyndhy]

then you will need to ammend that to say "the almighty deity of unlawful rectal carnal knowledge" :p :D

[Lilith]

wasn't that a Van Halen album ?:spin: :dizzy:

[Aqua]

No, that is what I am changing my name to. ;)

[LixyChick]

i've (obviously) been reading this thread and i feel the need to add something.

i believe in freedom of speech, wholeheartedly, but you can not now nor will you ever be able to convince me that when our founding fathers ensured our rights to free speech they envisioned that a most important debate to be held some 200-odd years hence would be focused upon whether or whether not someone can say ass-fuck on the public radio waves. they meant the right ot disagree with your govn't, the right to proclaim your faith for all to hear.

i also firmly stand by the notion that a nation can not have total equality and total freedom…they do not meet in the middle. someone will always be “more free”. do i not have the freedom to not be accosted with things i do not wish to see or hear but are beyond my control? does another person not have the freedom to say things i do not wish to hear? who’s freedoms are more important…who is more equal?

I wholeheartedly agree with you wyndhy...about our forefather's having NO intention to assure us the right to speak in a vulgar or indecent (which, btw...can be argued for interpretation of what one person finds vulgar and indecent and another doesn't...but I digress) manner in a public venue, 200+ years after the inception...I swear I agree with you! I can visualize them flipping in their graves as a matter of fact!

This bill isn't about Howard wanting to say "fuck, ass, suck, dick, shit, tit, clit" (or whatever those 7 words are) on his show and the FCC putting their foot down, once and for all, and making him stop! It's NOT about that at all...it's soooooooooooooooooooooooooooo much more! I fear I can barely explain in a semi-midsized post just exactly what the FCC is taking away from [us]...not just Howard and his "fellow" broadcasters...but us as a nation!

I'm gonna try though...you know I am...lol!

Without a formal guideline of EXACTLY what can and can't be said on the airwaves, through the years Howard (and many, many other broadcasters of all venues) have "self-censored" their shows to be air worthy. This means that Howard has NEVER uttered the entire word "fuck", but has said it as "the F word" or "friggin" or "ffffffffffffffffffffff"...and so the same goes with all the other words that [we] would be shocked to hear on the airwaves. His show's content has not changed in all the years he's been on air!! I cannot state that fact enough...his persona and show content has always been what it is to this day!

That said (again and again...I know...You don't have to say it so loud! I'm a pain in the ass sometime...lol!), let me just tell you about the Howard Stern show...and YOUR right NOT to listen if you don't like it's content...which is well in your control...JUST TURN THE DIAL OR TURN OFF THE RADIO!

I'm only speaking of Howard's show here because that is what [I] listen to...but many other shows have been/are/will be effected by this law!

Howard's show is filled with sex, politics, sex, local and national news, sex, pretty girls getting naked for money, sex, fart jokes GALORE, sex, queefs (pussy farts), sex, retarded people, sex, midgets, sex, dwarfs, sex, drunks, sex, drug jokes, sex, bizarre contests, sex, real intelligence contests, sex, money prizes, sex, big time show biz people, sex, Congressman, sex, Senators, sex, Governors, sex...oh, I could go on and on...and that's just in one jam-packed 4-5 hour show, per day, per week, day in and day out for over 20 years! He has been the top morning show in nearly (if not all) of his markets in syndication (nationwide) in the "male, 18-35 age group" every stinkin single one of the years he's been broadcasting with his current regular show staff (ie: Robin (Ophelia...lmao!) Quivers, Fred (Eric) Norris, Gary (Bababooey) DelAbate, Scott (Scotttttttttttttttttttttttttt!) Salem...and now, replacing Jackie (The Jokeman) Martling is Arty Lange (one of the most spontaneous comedians...and drunken ones too...that I have ever heard!

Howard has surrounded himself with oddities...which he handles with TLC in his own way, over the years. Many have taken offense to his calling a black man "King of all Blacks"...but those who know Howard, know he is not a racist and we wait to hear where this title will take the "King". It usually takes him to the height of his own personal "15 minutes of fame" and the realization that Howard loves [most] all people if you are real and not an asshole...as most people would assume if they met you in person. He listens to plights and helps those he can. He weeds out the grubbers and truely takes interest in a sad situation. He's actually talked a man down from throwing himself off a bridge (even though it's been said that it was staged...it's been proved to be true). He's exposed, and then had them show their true selves for what they are in front of America on the air, the more seedy side of the human race in...KKK leaders, crooked politicians, lying newspaper journalists, phony, bilking psychics...etc., etc.

The show has had sponsors (Steven Singer Jewelers...off the top of my head) for over 20 years. This tells me that someone beside me knows the impact he has on this country.

Now...don't get me wrong here! There are things I HATE about the man. I have to take my headphones off at times during the show and go ugggggh! But all in all, I find Howard to be one of the most honest and open and fast thinking/forward thinking people I have NEVER met. And as is with almost anything/anybody...you either love him or you hate him. There is no middle ground with him and his show. All I need to convey here is that he's never overstepped the line in content. Meaning...he's "cleaned up the language" of as many indecent things he could think to stop before it went to air. If, on any given day, in any given moment, it is suggested that something is not air worthy, he has "cleaned it up" to the satisfaction of the producers and censors and the FCC. When it is stated CLEARLY that suddenly something isn't air worthy...with a LOT of bitching for what one finds indecent and another doesn't...he'll STILL clean it up to make his show a go! Every single day that passes...no, make that hour...his show is chopped and chopped to bleeps personified!

I don't care if you like the man or his show. I mean...I REALLY DON'T CARE! I'm NOT trying to "sell" him to this forum! I'm trying to let you all know that his show, in all the years I have been listening (going on 15 now) has always been about what it is about today. Except today...we get less and less and less and less of a show that WE KNOW WHAT WE ARE TUNING IN TO WHEN WE TURN HIM ON...AND IF I DON'T LIKE IT...I TURN HIM OFF!

You cannot tell me that it doesn't scare you that a Federal agency of non-elected officials (yeah...I know...our elected officials appointed them to their jobs...but I say those elected were not elected by everyone!) has the authority to fine an individual $500,000.00 per incident for an "indecent" remark that on another day before was not deemed indecent and on another day in the future could be...but we don't know because it's an "I'll know it when I hear it" situation...left to the discretion of a handful of puritan thinkers who want to clean up the morals of this entire country???????

Who's to say what is indecent? Is this site indecent? Some think it is...and we, as members of this family, would be up the asses of those who tried to shut us down...wouldn't we? Why in the world aren't we as outraged at what this new law might do as we would be if someone tried to say that they arbitrarily decided that this site should no longer exist because of it's content? They think it's indecent and they are in charge of our morals now...and they are shutting us down! Wouldn't that piss you off to the highest power? Just who the fuck do they think they are to correct my morals to be in line with theirs? I am a human being with a mind and a soul and a will of my own...and I will decide what is indecent and decent for ME and MINE...not them!

Sorry wyndhy...but your statement "I believe in freedom of speech, wholeheartedly" doesn't hold true to me when you can differentiate on the basis of assumed (and false) insinuation that Howard IS what his critics claim he is all about! It's not the case at all. And if content is his Achilles heel...it should have been that all along...not just now in this new administration!

Oh...and one more MAJOR example of just what the FCC is up to...

DISCLAIMER: Don't read on if you are easily offended...























Knowing that in all the years Howard has been on air and knowing the content of his show...one has to know that he is a man, and men are tickled to death with fart noises. Am I right? Yep...I know I am! LOL! Well, get this...

Howard has had guys (and a few girls who queef) on his show, year in and year out, who can fart on demand for as long as 2-3 hours (some maybe more). Recently, he's been notified that the FCC will fine the show if a fart noise "lasts too long or is too wet". CAN YOU FUCKIN BELIEVE THAT? It's as true as true can be, people! This is what it's all coming to! I mean...farts, for crying out loud! We can't even laugh at a long, wet fart anymore!
















Just wanted to show you how miniscule they'll go to show their power. I swear...it isn't as simple as a fart noise!

*hugs to you all for reading my ramblings!*

[LixyChick]

*BUMP*

Didn't want this thread to get lost yet!

[wyndhy]

wasn't that a Van Halen album ?:spin: :dizzy:


yep… stole it, twisted it, and made it mine…er… i made it aqua’s :D


and lixy…. a few points ;)


first. i don’t think there’s any way that they can introduce a set of strict “guidelines” because, frankly imo, they’re right: vulgar or indecent is something that they will know when they see or hear it, or anyone else will interpret in their own way. it must be kept changeable because languages and popular opinion are always changing. there are words decent or even non-existent today that will not be so tomorrow. t’s the nature of the beast. there are also times when the content is the issue and not the words, as fzzy pionted out before. to define the word cunt is much different than calling someone a cunt. but this, i think, is something i need not explain further. you can all understand what i mean.

and as for the control i spoke of … are you saying that there will never be a time that i am at the beach or stuck in traffic on a 100 degree day with no a/c and someone close by is blaring something offensive or vulgar from their radio speakers? c’mon…that’s impossible. that’s what i meant by beyond my control. (perhaps it is not howard, etc….whoever, who should be fined but the people too stupid, ignorant or obnoxious to keep it on the qt. :D :grin: ) anyway, back to being serious...i think that's the reason govn’t feels it incumbent upon them to police the radio waves, over which they have licensing control, for “immoral” content.

and i really don’t like making this about howard (incidentally i am an oddity i guess because i don’t love him and i don’t hate him) but nevertheless, here goes…his content may not have changed but his reach and influence have. popular opinion has changed as well. hence, the sudden crackdown. they are not arbitrarily shutting down anything. he could stay where he is and play by their rules or he can find another way. he has chosen to find another way. which, btw, i want to point out that if anyone wants to get satellite radio just so they can listen to howard be prepared to pay an extra two dollars cause he ain’t part of their package deal. he does it for the money, as do they all, not some sort of crusade against “the man”. his motives are not selflessand i don’t have a problrm with that. i do have a problem with him/others like him making themselves into martyrs for “the cause” when all they want is to get rich :rolleyes2

would i be upset if someone took away my outlet to discuss sex in a private forum? sure would! but signing up as a member of a forum clearly labeled as “sex site” is much different then if i were to suddenly begin a vulgar discussion of said sex site at the playground, mickeyD's or on the abc channel (again these are things/places under local, private and federal control). and if it did happen? so be it. freedom of speech does not give me the right to belong to a forum such as this. i don’t think that will ever happen, though. they are not trying to muffle everything “vulgar”, only the venues that are, and have always been, under the licensing jurisdiction of the federal govn’t (sorry but i can’t stress that enough). if i wanted to become a part of something that is under the control or jurisdiction of someone else then i need to be prepared to follow their rules or go elsewhere. it’s just that simple.

“And yes, it's been tilted and twisted and tweeked through the years to ammend and update it...but freedom of speech has always meant what it was spelled out to mean!”

i respectfully disagree. it does not mean today what it was intended to mean 200+years ago. it has been twisted and tweaked, yes, but not buy the govn’t…it has been twisted by people who want to say anything they can just for its’ shock value and then hide behind their “right to free speech”. contrary to your belief, i can separate the two because i believe in the freedom of speech as our founding fathers intended. i do not believe it gives anyone the right to say anything they want to anyone within earshot. and i was not refferring to howard only in that post. i am just plain sick and tired of hearing about how so-and-so said/did such-and-such on the radio, broadcast tv, the entrance to the mall, whatever, got themselves in dutch, and then whined “but it’s my right to say/do ‘______’, the constitution guarantees it”. THAT is just plain bullshit and that was my point earlier… they should not hide behind their “rights” because everyone else has those same rights. why are one person’s rights more important than another person’s?

“You cannot tell me that it doesn't scare you that a Federal agency of non-elected officials (yeah...I know...our elected officials appointed them to their jobs...but I say those elected were not elected by everyone!) has the authority to fine an individual $500,000.00 per incident for an "indecent" remark that on another day before was not deemed indecent …”

you're right, they were not elected by everyone, they were elected by the majority, and no their fines do not scare me. as i said, these venues are within the licensing powers of the govnt’ and it is the govn’t’s right and obligation to police them as they see fit. if they started throwing people in jail or… :eek: … executing them THEN i’d be scared. and i’m not saying i agree with some, most or all of what they have deemed vulgar. but that is another discussion and not what my earlier post was about at all. i, too, have issues with the government involving themselves in/forcing their way into my personal life. but…they are not shutting him or anyone down…they are forcing them to find a place to air their shows where the govn’t does not have control. i ask you…where is the harm in that? i would feel the same way… “this is my house and you will obey my rules or be punished and if you can not obey my rules you will go elsewhere”

[Irish]

Wyndhy---I agree with MOST of what you say,but you are not the ONLY oddity,I don't love him or hate him either! Irish
P.S.When you're a biker & an Irishman,you get used to being called an oddity!

[LixyChick]

wyndhy, I've read all you had to say and I actually didn't expect anything less or different than what was your well thought out reply. TY for taking the time!

As I said before...I'm not here to help change the mind of everyone in this forum. I'm just stating what I see, as I see it.

IMHO...popular opinion hasn't changed all that much. It's just that now...with a new holier than thou/more moral than you can shake a stick at administration...you and I are being told how to conduct our lives by people I would never invite into my life if I had the "choice". That's my biggest problem with all that is afoot. I have NO CHOICE but to let what is happening happen. And by the time all is said and done...mark my words, here and now...somehow, someway, the actions that are starting to snowball from this bill becoming law will effect you and/or yours in some way that is negative to you...and you (whoever is reading this) will look back and say, "Lixy was right...this sucks...and I can't believe it got so out of control!"

I've never said there will never be a time when you overhear something disconcerting on someone else's radio (or whatever) and wished you didn't have to listen. What I did say is...if you tune into Howard's show and can't stand him...you have every power within yourself to turn him off! I'm not into "policing" the world to my specifications...and I am not here to recruit Howard Stern lovers. I believe in diversity and to each his own and the biggy of all biggies...WE ARE ALL RESPONSIBLE FOR OUR OWN ACTIONS by us, for us, and towards the people we love and to mankind in general. If I needed the government to step in and teach me how to live a moral and decent life...I'd move to Iraq or some other country who's government is compelled to control them and tell them how to live! When I don't like something that affects me personally, I try to change it in my own comfort zone...I don't try to change the entire country to suit my feelings about it! I don't need "saving". I don't need anyone elses ideals of right or wrong inflicted on me. I'm NOT a bad person and I can't stand someone saying I am because I listen to what I listen to or look at what I look at.

If someone doesn't explain to me (soon) what the long term effects of overhearing an "indecent" word or action on a media venue is doing to the children or adults of this world...I think I'm gonna explode! For a handful of nutcakes...it may have an effect. But there will always be a handful of nutcakes out there. In the long run...the rest of us just go about our lives and either forget or it doesn't affect us in the least. WHERE'S THE MOTHER FUCKIN HARM?

And...WHAT'S NEXT? After all is hunky dory on the airwaves...are they looking to book banning/burning again? Hey! You don't know...there is NO WAY you can know! It could happen just as surely as I am typing this!

If someone is provoked and backed into a corner...the natural instinct is to fight. If someone is offered an incredible amount of money for doing something he's been doing all along...but with less restraints and callings to task...there is no way I could call them selfish. I'd actually call them smart for taking advantage of an upgraded situation. Who wouldn't want more money? Not one single person out there wouldn't want more money for the same kind of job with better working conditions! The offer was given...not demanded! Howard had no intention of continuing his broadcating career...but I'd call him a stupid asshole had he turned down the deal he was offered. Howard's told everyone how much to expect to spend to convert to sattelite (his shows)...and his pay has been divulged. He doesn't lie to his audience. Never has. So it was no secret!

It is 2005...and the times they have been a changin since the Constitution was first conceived. If interpretation has changed along with it...that only seems natural to me. Just as natural as taking antiquated laws off the books that only concerned the days they were written for (sorry...drawing a blank for an example at the moment...lol!). I want to grow and PROGRESS...not stop and then REGRESS...as I feel is happening by letting the government leap into our lives deeper and deeper by the minute.

If we can't stand up and proclaim out "right to free speech" in a circumstance that will effect so many more than just ourselves...we have no such thing as free speech! As I see it....Howard is doing the most selfless thing ever for a cause that will not even concern him in a few short months. He could sit back and shut up and abide the nitpicky rules and regulations and never again say another word about them. Instead, he's trying to educate those who will listen and let them know that no matter what they think of him...this is just another instance where the government is overstepping it's bounds and taking on more than should ever be allowed.

If the FCC had jurisdiction to do what they intend to do...they wouldn't need an act of Congress to say ok. They'd just do it. They don't have the power yet...but are seeking the power through this bill. If it were right and acceptable...why doesn't Howard have a day in court to confront his accusers? Why won't Michael Powell or any other FCC member talk to Howard or Infinity Broadcasting about the ins and outs...or show him "the rules", as you stated wyndhy. Why are their rights and regulations more important than keeping this all in the open and above board? Couldn't it be that the FCC might be trying to do a good thing in the wrong way?

I think the FCC and our federal government has overstepped their limits and I don't think many can see the forest for the trees! I feel so alone! I don't care what anyone says...I hate regression!!!!

[maddy]

right, wrong, or indifferent much of our government is based upon majority whether it be a 2/3 majority or a simple majority (50% +1) and the persons sitting in the house and the senate are elected by the majority. If our government were established to only operate on absolutes nothing would get accomplished including elections. As this thread has illustrated thus far 100% of the people will not agree 100% of the time. Unfortunately it isn't fun being in the minority, but when you believe strongly enough in your cause and are part of that minority, all you can do is try to actively educate those in the majority that feel differently to sway them to see that your way is the better way. This can be done in many ways, including speaking out to your elected officials. Never underestimate the power of one voice.

The only thought I have as I read through this and how one thing can mean something different over time is the country song (don't know the name or the singer but some of the lyrics) ... when a hoe was a hoe, when a screw was a screw, when crack's what you do when you crack a joke, when you said I'm down with that, it meant you had the flu... I think this song easily sums up that while Howard has always been about the same thing, that doesn't mean that words he spoke 10 years ago don't have a differing slang meaning today.

[jseal]

LixyChick,

I’d like to qualify a number of points you raised.

“Popular opinion has not changed all that much.” The Republican Party won a majority of the votes cast for Congress for the first time since 1946 in 1994. It has since increased its majority in the House, taken the majority role in the Senate, and elected and re-elected a Republican President. During this period the Republican Party has added to the number of states run by Republicans. In a representative democracy, the elected officials approximate the opinions of the electorate. I would suggest that popular opinion has demonstrably shifted to the right over the last decade.

“If we can't stand up and proclaim out “right to free speech" in a circumstance that will effect so many more than just ourselves...we have no such thing as free speech!” No American has an absolute right to free speech. Alternatively, everyone has an absolute right to free speech, if by ‘free speech’ you include the freedom to stand up in a crowded theatre and scream “Fire!” – but then you are indeed responsible for your actions. Such an action could land you in prison for a considerable time if you are held responsible for anyone who may be injured or die in a resultant panic.

“And...WHAT'S NEXT? After all is hunky dory on the airwaves...are they looking to book banning/burning again?” Equating or closely associating regulating the radio spectrum and book burning requires a leap of faith that I, at my advanced age, am unable to successfully complete. You may or may not be aware that neither Mr. Stern nor Infinity Broadcasting own the radio frequencies used to broadcast his show. Infinity Broadcasting applies to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for a license to use a piece of the radio spectrum. The radio spectrum in the United States is owned by the government of the United States, as is true for each sovereign nation. The U.S. Congress has delegated the responsibility of regulating this interstate commerce by several acts of congress to the FCC. The FCC’s authority is limited by the bills passed by Congress and signed into law by the President. The Department of Labor (DOL) and the Department of Commerce regulate many aspects of our work lives. They can, and do, bring the coercive power of the state to bear upon people and businesses who fail to conform to currently accepted standards. The same is true for the FCC in its regulation of the radio spectrum. The Department of Transportation (DOT) regulates many aspects of commercial transportation. Examples are how many hours a trucker can drive without a break, and how many hours a pilot must rest between extended flights. Environmental regulations which cost many millions of dollars every year to accommodate were proposed, and following review, are enforced by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). I happen to approve of these regulations, but I know people who do not. The Bureau of Mines regulates mining in the U.S., etc. Bureaucrats are not elected, but they get their authority from those who were. That is how U.S. governments work.

“If the FCC had jurisdiction to do what they intend to do...they wouldn't need an act of Congress to say ok.” All regulatory agencies require Acts of Congress to enforce their regulations. An aggrieved individual or business may bring suit against these bodies in Federal court at any time, and this happens frequently. If the judge rules against the agency, the agency may either change the regulation to bring it into compliance with existing law, appeal the decision to a higher court, or petition Congress to amend the law to authorize the regulation and the enforcement.

My grandfather used to say “One man’s meat is another man’s poison.” While you and I may be more or less uncomfortable about the FCC’s new enforcement powers, I point to the first paragraph above to remind you that the people who elected the people who are passing the laws don’t agree with us. They think it is a good idea, not a bad idea to limit the range and styles of expression which may be broadcast. Mr. Stern has made an eminently sensible decision to relocate his show to a venue beyond the grasp of the FCC. More power to him!

[LixyChick]

LixyChick,

I’d like to qualify a number of points you raised.

“Popular opinion has not changed all that much.” The Republican Party won a majority of the votes cast for Congress for the first time since 1946 in 1994. It has since increased its majority in the House, taken the majority role in the Senate, and elected and re-elected a Republican President. During this period the Republican Party has added to the number of states run by Republicans. In a representative democracy, the elected officials approximate the opinions of the electorate. I would suggest that popular opinion has demonstrably shifted to the right over the last decade.

“If we can't stand up and proclaim out “right to free speech" in a circumstance that will effect so many more than just ourselves...we have no such thing as free speech!” No American has an absolute right to free speech. Alternatively, everyone has an absolute right to free speech, if by ‘free speech’ you include the freedom to stand up in a crowded theatre and scream “Fire!” – but then you are indeed responsible for your actions. Such an action could land you in prison for a considerable time if you are held responsible for anyone who may be injured or die in a resultant panic.

“And...WHAT'S NEXT? After all is hunky dory on the airwaves...are they looking to book banning/burning again?” Equating or closely associating regulating the radio spectrum and book burning requires a leap of faith that I, at my advanced age, am unable to successfully complete. You may or may not be aware that neither Mr. Stern nor Infinity Broadcasting own the radio frequencies used to broadcast his show. Infinity Broadcasting applies to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for a license to use a piece of the radio spectrum. The radio spectrum in the United States is owned by the government of the United States, as is true for each sovereign nation. The U.S. Congress has delegated the responsibility of regulating this interstate commerce by several acts of congress to the FCC. The FCC’s authority is limited by the bills passed by Congress and signed into law by the President. The Department of Labor (DOL) and the Department of Commerce regulate many aspects of our work lives. They can, and do, bring the coercive power of the state to bear upon people and businesses who fail to conform to currently accepted standards. The same is true for the FCC in its regulation of the radio spectrum. The Department of Transportation (DOT) regulates many aspects of commercial transportation. Examples are how many hours a trucker can drive without a break, and how many hours a pilot must rest between extended flights. Environmental regulations which cost many millions of dollars every year to accommodate were proposed, and following review, are enforced by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). I happen to approve of these regulations, but I know people who do not. The Bureau of Mines regulates mining in the U.S., etc. Bureaucrats are not elected, but they get their authority from those who were. That is how U.S. governments work.

“If the FCC had jurisdiction to do what they intend to do...they wouldn't need an act of Congress to say ok.” All regulatory agencies require Acts of Congress to enforce their regulations. An aggrieved individual or business may bring suit against these bodies in Federal court at any time, and this happens frequently. If the judge rules against the agency, the agency may either change the regulation to bring it into compliance with existing law, appeal the decision to a higher court, or petition Congress to amend the law to authorize the regulation and the enforcement.

My grandfather used to say “One man’s meat is another man’s poison.” While you and I may be more or less uncomfortable about the FCC’s new enforcement powers, I point to the first paragraph above to remind you that the people who elected the people who are passing the laws don’t agree with us. They think it is a good idea, not a bad idea to limit the range and styles of expression which may be broadcast. Mr. Stern has made an eminently sensible decision to relocate his show to a venue beyond the grasp of the FCC. More power to him!
"The radio spectrum is owned by the government of the United States"

Isn't that us? We...the people? Myself...along with many others out there are part of that [WE] the people, but I don't feel very included lately!

That brings me to...Popular opinion changing. As you pointed out, things have shifted in the administration and so when I said I didn't think opinion has changed all that much, I should have added that I just think "their" opinion (those who believe they need to correct my moral fortitude) has gotten a bigger soapbox than they used to have in the past.

"An aggrieved individual or business may bring suit against these bodies in Federal court at any time, and this happens frequently."

Howard has had lawyers trying to get him his day in court for a very long time...to no avail.

With each passing day...and before a defining ruling...the FCC hovers over the airwaves and picks and chooses what "they feel"...not what is assuredly a law...but what "they feel" is an indecent remark or sound by the content in which it is being used. This is to say that if "they feel" it is indecent then it is...no warning, no reprimand....just a giant fine with no recourse for the company or person the fine is imposed on but to pay it. Yesterday it might have been an ok thing...but you'd better be sure today and try and get into the heads of the FCC members and how they are "feeling" today...or you'll get another fine for something that aired the day before. It's gotten so ridiculous that, I swear, they will fine for fart sounds now!

Shouldn't they be required to say what can and can't be said or done...instead of going on a whim for the day? What if Michael Powell had a really shitty fight with his wife recently and isn't getting any? Of course he's gonna take it out on the guy on the radio bragging about all he got this past weekend! Instead...as it is now...he can say to himself, "Ya know, he thinks he's big shit for getting all that nookie. I'm gonna fine him up the wazzoo today"! BAM!

Howard can't read minds! He doesn't even believe in psychics! How can he be expected to know what will get fined if he's been doing the same thing for years...and now, suddenly, out of the blue, it's no longer acceptable...and tomorrow it's something else all together? It's an arguable point that Howard has been arguing for well over a year now!

And one more time...Howard NEVER had any intention of continuing his show after his contract was up. The offer came to him...he didn't seek another venue. The money was incredible and the venue was better for him, and therefore his listeners, and so he took it. That it spites the FCC is just the cherry on the icing of the cake of Howard Stern! If the FCC hadn't fucked with him so much...and actually listened to his entire show instead of just picking out all the "bad" parts and making it all about that (which it isn't...it actually isn't all sex and smut, believe it or not)...they would have heard him say that he would be done broadcasting in December of 05. I don't think even Congress can inact a bill to "get him" on pay radio! How will we (the world) survive now that Howard will be free?

It's rigoddamnediculous!

[jseal]

...How will we (the world) survive now that Howard will be free?

LixyChick,

I don't know. Stay tuned, if you'll pardon the expression. :)

[Irish]

What you said about M. Powell,havig a fight with his wife applies to everything.When I went to Superior Court,for my record annulment,the State
Prosecutor,gave his OK,the head of the Probation Dept.,gave his OK.Just as
the judge,was going to look at my,previous,record,he got a phone-call from
his wife.The court Baliff got him for the call.My lawyer said,that he hoped that
his wife was in a good mood."Your future depends on it!"
The judge came back with a big smile on his face.He didn't even look at my
files(record)He slapped his gavel down and said-"State versus -----"-Anullment Granted! Irish
Morale---Always look at the glass, as 1/2 full,instead of 1/2 empty.You never
know what will happen.

[wyndhy]

I'm NOT a bad person and I can't stand someone saying I am because I listen to what I listen to or look at what I look at.

OH, NO! NO, NO, NO! of course you’re not!!!!!!…i didn’t mean to imply that at all! :( oh, man! i want to fix this but how!?….i don’t know how, really, except to say (and hope you believe!) that i do not think you’re a bad person, not even a little!!! you are passionate, true, but that’s a good thing(!), and resolute but kind and sincere and… well… you are who you are and i like you like that. lots. k?

and realizing that massive mix-up, i went back and really looked hard at my post, with as much detachment as i could manage, and i saw some more areas that may explain the frustration i’m sensing from you. (if i knew what you look like when you feel like throttling someone, i’d know what to picture in my mind’s eye ;) :D) so i’m going to try and clear a few things up, just so you know that in no way was i trying to make this personal.

He doesn't lie to his audience. Never has. So it (how much to expect to spend to convert to sattelite) was no secret!

i truly did not mean to imply it was a secret. and reading back i saw now that it sounded a bit that way. i do not believe howard is a liar. in fact, from what i have come to know of him through his show in the years i have listened (i am not a faithful listener by any means but i do listen) he has the power of conviction, and integrity in his beliefs. those are things i can greatly repect and admire in another human beiing. i do beleive he is enjoying his taste of martyrdom though, but that does not a liar make :)

and some of the phrases i used quotes for? just to clarify… i chose to use quotes in those instances to convey that word/phrase in all it’s implications and applications, they weren’t used in a sarcastic manner, which iknow using quotes can mean. my apologies.

and one more…when i asked you “where’s the harm in that?”, i can see that pissed you off a bit;) WHERE’S THE FUCKING HARM?...again, reading back, i sounded sarcastic and again that was not my intention. i wasmerely pointing out that he has only to move to satellite to continue his show and how that is a kind of non-issue for me. he definitely, without a doubt, has every right to rail against this bill and try like hell to change things he thinks need changing, as does anyone who wishes to. and i sincerely wish them luck…it takes a special courage to fight the system instead of lapsing into complacency.



If the FCC had jurisdiction to do what they intend to do...they wouldn't need an act of Congress to say ok. They'd just do it. They don't have the power yet...but are seeking the power through this bill.

but after reading this, and thinking back on a few others things you’ve said regarding this bill, i am beginning to worry that i am not even thinking of the same bill you are. i was under the impression that the fcc did already have this power to fine at their discretion. i thought the bill raised the fines and daily cap (clarification: the senate’s has a cap, the houses’ does not) and allows them to fine an individual as well as or in place of the company who holds the entertainers’ contract and the fcc license and has aired the material deemed indecent (although this is actually contradicted in a few articles i’ve found, some imply that they [fcc] already have this power) and a few other things. do you have a link to more specific info you could share?…i could not find one that actually lists the bills’ provisions. damned if i didn’t try though. i even looked on dot gov sights. the bastages are hiding it from me! :D the best one i found was: http://www.cnn.com/2005/ALLPOLITICS/02/16/congress.indecency.ap/

aside from that... i am afraid we must agree to disagree. ;) but this debate got me thinking, which is always a good thing (eh, eh, eh…no comments from the :corn: gallery please! tsk! tsk! :p and ty, lixy! here’s to more in the future :wine: ) if this all happened 5 years ago (aka before kids lol) i think i might have been standing right there with ya lix. kids have made me look at my world in a way that…i don’t know….i just haven’t got the words to explain it…maybe they have made me a nutcase but i’m a nutcase all stuffed with love and protectiveness for them. it’s not better or worse, just different.

and just one more thing…

I feel so alone! I don't care what anyone says…
you aren’t alone. i was just discussing this with a friend at a birthday party a few weeks ago and… if it helps to hear this… she feels just as frustrated and stifled by it as you do.

[wyndhy]

jseal, a very informative post. thank you for teaching me something new today. :)

[LixyChick]

Oh wyndhy...wait! I think we've both misunderstood each other in a few instances.

I wasn't saying that YOU were calling me a "bad person". What I meant there was that I don't like censorship "for the good of the people" when I don't think that what I am looking at/listening to is indecent. I just think indecency is in the eye and ear of the beholder and that parenting should be left up to parents...not a government agency!

That's not to say that there shouldn't be ANY rules and guidelines...but at least list the rules and guidelines and stop (already) with the "we'll know it when we see and hear it" kind of arbitrary rulings!

And trust that [we] can't police every word/deed that is spoken/done and that without a study on the effects of these words and deeds...where is the harm? Parents do a great job with the V-chip and such...and it has to be trusted that they don't allow their children to listen to Howard (for example)! If they accidently hear him...where's the harm? Half the children that might hear him...wouldn't even know what he was talking about or doing...ya know? It's the deviated minds of adults that get offended for themselves...and hide behind the child for reasoning!

I was NEVER offended by anything you posted hun! I am probably radiating frustration that you mistook for anger...and I apologize for that. I'm frustrated that I am not getting my point across in a manner that I can when I speak. I'll admit...typing my thoughts loses something in the translation. I've known that for a long time! LOL!

So...Peace, my sister from a different mister! I am learning things in this thread as well...and there is no need to picture me wanting to throttle someone! I haven't throttled anyone in years! LMFAO!

(((((wyndhy)))))

[LixyChick]

Oh...and as to a link to the wording of the new bill? I'm sorry...I don't have that info right now...but will get it ASAP. The last time I heard anything about it was last Thursday or Friday when a Congressman called in to Howards show and Howard asked the exact process of the bill, where it was in the House now, and it's wording. The Congressman (didn't catch his name...but it would be on HowardStern.com) wasn't even sure of the exact wording at that point, but is going to get back to Howard with that info ASAP. Now (yesterday anyway)...Howard's show is in re-run. I don't know if he was taken off the air live...or he had a day off????

I'm sorta up in the air about it too! Sorry!

[Belial]

Howard's show is in re-run. I don't know if he was taken off the air live...or he had a day off????


Howard is off the air. Howard has always been off the air. Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia.

[wyndhy]

I haven't throttled anyone in years! LMFAO!


*giggles* oh, well..that's alright then.
















you sure? it might be fun ;)