Author Topic: Thank Goodness For Conservatives and The FCC (Read 825 times)

SteveBailey · « **Reply #15 on:** January 28, 2008, 06:28:50 PM »

Terrible bait.... stinky troll from a leftist loon.

rpm · « **Reply #16 on:** January 28, 2008, 06:44:07 PM »

Troll? You don't find this absurd? You don't think the FCC made a bonehead move?

DiabloTX · « **Reply #17 on:** January 28, 2008, 06:44:41 PM »

I'm in agreement with RPM on this one. Much ado about nothing.

Chairboy · « **Reply #18 on:** January 28, 2008, 07:02:39 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by SteveBailey
Terrible bait.... stinky troll from a leftist loon.

You agree with the FCC on this? Well, it's obvious that SOMEONE holds the same view as the people who complained, maybe we're lucky enough to have one of those in-house to explain why this fine is justified. SteveBailey, you have the floor.

Arlo · « **Reply #19 on:** January 28, 2008, 07:05:22 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by SteveBailey
Terrible bait.... stinky troll from a leftist loon.

Hi there, "Special Ed."

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #20 on:** January 28, 2008, 09:05:35 PM »

Quote

from FCC.gov
Consistent with a federal indecency statute and federal court decisions interpreting the statute, the Commission adopted a rule that broadcasts -- both on television and radio -- that fit within the indecency definition and that are aired between 6:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. are prohibited and subject to indecency enforcement action.

The FCC has defined broadcast indecency as “language or material that, in context, depicts or describes, in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community standards for the broadcast medium, sexual or excretory organs or activities.”

Rules is rules... I don't like the speed limit, but if I get caught speeding I have to pay the fine.

DiabloTX · « **Reply #21 on:** January 28, 2008, 09:16:19 PM »

Buttocks are neither sexual or excretory (eww) organs or glands. They're merely muscles.

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #22 on:** January 28, 2008, 09:19:43 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by DiabloTX
Buttocks are neither sexual or excretory (eww) organs or glands. They're merely muscles.

Well then they have the basis for an appeal.

DiabloTX · « **Reply #23 on:** January 28, 2008, 09:31:18 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Well then they have the basis for an appeal.

They also have an appealling basis.

rpm · « **Reply #24 on:** January 28, 2008, 10:04:26 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Rules is rules... I don't like the speed limit, but if I get caught speeding I have to pay the fine.

No, you don't (at least in Texas). Speed limits are prima facie (i.e., that the speed at which you are traveling is "unreasonable and imprudent under the circumstances then existing"). "Prima facie" means "sufficient to establish a fact or case unless disproved" or "at first sight; before closer inspection." In other words, if, upon "closer inspection" there is sufficient evidence that the speed at which you are traveling is NOT "unreasonable and imprudent under the circumstances then existing," YOU ARE NOT SPEEDING UNDER TEXAS LAW!!!

I hold the same arguement with this ruling. Under the existing conditions the nudity was neither vulgar nor pornographic.

john9001 · « **Reply #25 on:** January 28, 2008, 10:44:01 PM »

this not a conservative or liberal issue, it is that small minority of prohibitionists that want to ban everything, ban nudity, ban t-back bathing suits, ban topless beaches, ban alcohol, ban guns, ban bad words, ban cultural insensitivity.

these people know what is best for you, such as setting arbitrary speed limits, making you wear seat belts and helmets. they also want warning labels on everything, "this coffee is hot", "this knife is sharp", "falling off this ladder can cause injury or death".

SD67 · « **Reply #26 on:** January 28, 2008, 10:53:13 PM »

The thing with warning labels is that they are there because somebody has actually done it!:huh
My all time favourite was the one I found attached to an electric (mains voltage, on the cord by the plug) hair dryer that said : WARNING!! Do NOT use in shower or bath! May cause serious injury or DEATH!

mg1942 · « **Reply #27 on:** January 28, 2008, 11:05:23 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by john9001
they also want warning labels on everything, "this coffee is hot", "this knife is sharp", "falling off this ladder can cause injury or death".

That's because many people got away with millions on lawsuits by suing companies for not labeling "this coffee is hot".

DREDIOCK · « **Reply #28 on:** January 28, 2008, 11:15:04 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Rules is rules... I don't like the speed limit, but if I get caught speeding I have to pay the fine.

And maybe they need to change the rules to keep up with the times.

They raised the 55 limit when that no longer made any sense.

Key part of that phrase "as measured by contemporary community standards"

Based on most peoples views these days the ruling does not follow modern contemporary anything

This is 2008 Not 1608 or even 1960's or 70's
(anyone remember the I dream of Jenie and Cher Navel ban?)

I say be gone with it. the sooner we get rid of such nonsensical rules. the sooner this country stops being pseudo puritans. and the soonner none of this is a forbidden fruit and thus stops being a big deal to anyone. and the sooner everyone will start living more phsycologically healthier lives.

SteveBailey · « **Reply #29 on:** January 29, 2008, 01:00:56 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Chairboy
You agree with the FCC on this? Well, it's obvious that SOMEONE holds the same view as the people who complained, maybe we're lucky enough to have one of those in-house to explain why this fine is justified. SteveBailey, you have the floor.

The title is stink bait... a leftist looney tune starting this thread with that title.... trying to blame conservatives for things the dems want to do... restrict our freedoms.... blah blah blah... the title is a weak troll from a nutbag.