Author Topic:  (Read 2177 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline DiogenesLamp

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5,686
« Reply #150 on: October 12, 2017, 02:45:59 PM »
The real question is, is there any Constitutional permission for the federal government to restrict broadcasting, or can anyone just put up a giant jammer?


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_Act_of_1934


While i'm at it,  the "equal time"  rule was created by the "Radio Act of 1927".


Quote
The equal-time rule was created because the FCC was concerned that broadcast stations could easily manipulate the outcome of elections by presenting just one point of view, and excluding other candidates.


Manipulate the outcome of elections?   Nooooooooo!!!!!!   You don't say!   



Offline DiogenesLamp

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5,686
« Reply #151 on: October 12, 2017, 02:49:20 PM »
Ah, that great Conservative principle...Affirmative Action!

 22222frying pan :chairbang:   *****rollingeyes*****


Keep up.  The point in presenting that idea was to demonstrate that the task of balancing the leftest propaganda could be accomplished without government censorship.   (Which was the detail being discussed at the time.) 


If it could be accomplished in this manner,   perhaps it could be accomplished in another manner of which you can speak?   

How about it?  Rather than taking pot shots,  can you come up with another idea for correcting the problem without government censorship?   

(And remember,  doing nothing is not fixing the problem.)   



Offline Ancient

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 57
« Reply #152 on: October 12, 2017, 02:51:24 PM »

Offline Ancient

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 57
« Reply #153 on: October 12, 2017, 03:00:42 PM »

Offline DiogenesLamp

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5,686
« Reply #154 on: October 12, 2017, 03:02:13 PM »

Online kevindavis

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 9,052
« Reply #155 on: October 12, 2017, 03:05:13 PM »

So basically you want a Fascist government of Homosexuals and Abortion providers ran from New York and San Fransisco. 



See,  two can play this game.


I want a small limited Government that is neutral.
To Clear things up...

Mueller has been one of the most respected individuals on the planet over the last 20 years.

Mueller is a Republican

Mueller was appointed by Republicans

Mueller doesn't determine if someone is guilty, The Judge and Jury do!

Get it!!!!

“You can go to live in France, but you can't become a Frenchman. You can go to live in Germany, but you can't become a German... But anyone, from any corner of the world, can come to live in the United States and become an American.”

- Ronald Reagan

Offline DiogenesLamp

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5,686
« Reply #156 on: October 12, 2017, 03:10:24 PM »


There is the principal of how things should be and the laws as they are.  Allowing one side to use the law to persecute but not the other is a recipient for more bad laws.  The best way to remove a bad law is to enforce it.  If the left wants to regulate speech, they need to feel the pain of that type of regulation.  Only then will they squeal and come to the table to change it.


This is a point I often make.   There is an old joke about a little girl that keeps hitting her brother. 


"Mom!  Becky is hitting me again!"   

"Well sweety,  she doesn't know it hurts."   

The boy just nodded and walked back into the other room.  A moment later mom heard a "Thwack!"  followed by a little girl bawling.   

The boy came back into the room and said  "Well,  she does now!"   



Let the ogre of government ravish the liberals for awhile,   and they will soon rethink their position that we should have such a strong overbearing government. 


So long as conservatives are the only ones to feel the pain of an overbearing government,  Liberals will feel no incentive to reign in government power.   

The solution here would seem to be to turn loose it's force on them,  and let them suffer for awhile,   and then they may come to the table with the position that "Perhaps we should restrain it more." 



Offline DiogenesLamp

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5,686
« Reply #157 on: October 12, 2017, 03:15:20 PM »

Offline DiogenesLamp

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5,686
« Reply #158 on: October 12, 2017, 03:18:27 PM »

I want a small limited Government that is neutral.


So do I,  so why should we play this game of accusing each other of supporting Fascism or Censorship?   


The networks were created through the Government issuing the licenses to use the public airwaves.   It has allowed them the ability to build a monopoly on effective speech in this nation. 


The government contributed to the cause of the problem,   and so what can we now do to correct the problem?   


I'm open to any reasonable suggestion.   

Online aligncare

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 20,498
« Reply #159 on: October 12, 2017, 03:49:20 PM »

Online Sanguine

  • Member
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 20,306
« Reply #160 on: October 12, 2017, 04:24:51 PM »
@Sanguine
I figured you must be since you bash any ideas to try and counter it.

Except of course the one about spending a billion dollars to create a new network.

Nope, you have me confused with someone else. 

I simply accept the fact that 1) giving the government the power to control the media is a stupid and existentially destructive idea, is 2)anti-Constitutional and 3) won't work the way you propose it would work. 

Other than that, I'm fine with it. 
There are no safe spaces in real life.   - LMAO

Walk in Wisdom
See then that you walk circumspectly, not as fools but as wise, redeeming the time, because the days are evil.

But the noble make noble plans, and by noble deeds they stand.

Offline Chosen Daughter

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4,626
  • "God is our refuge and Strength"
« Reply #161 on: October 13, 2017, 01:25:34 AM »

That's what I would expect as well,   but just for the purpose of discussing the idea,  we can pretend for a bit that it wouldn't.   




We actually have mostly had token conservatives.   Bill O'reilly is a Libertarian at best.   Sean Hannity I suppose would be an actual conservative,   but Shep Smith is a homosexual liberal,  and most of the staff runs the gamut between Libertarians and Liberal with few if any fiscal/social conservatives in the mix. 


A lot of the guests on various shows which they claim are "conservatives"   are usually not actually conservative.   

Meghan McCain?   No.   Dick Morris?   No.  Charles Krauthammer?   No.   And so on.

You are correct.  FOX is not Conservative and no news gets it right all the time.  Just look at FOX they gave us Trump.

Online Frank Cannon

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 17,573
  • Frank Cannon: "I need a drink."
    • Bum Wine
« Reply #162 on: October 13, 2017, 01:32:05 AM »
You are correct.  FOX is not Conservative and no news gets it right all the time.  Just look at FOX they gave us Trump.

On it's best day on it's best hour FOX News gets around 3-4 million viewers. There were around 130 million votes cast in the last election.

Assuming a percentage of FOX viewers don't vote or can't vote, just how in the hell did FOX give us Trump when maybe 1% of voters watch FOX?
Two Liters Is A Soft Drink, Not An Engine Size.

Offline Chosen Daughter

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4,626
  • "God is our refuge and Strength"
« Reply #163 on: October 13, 2017, 01:52:22 AM »
On it's best day on it's best hour FOX News gets around 3-4 million viewers. There were around 130 million votes cast in the last election.

Assuming a percentage of FOX viewers don't vote or can't vote, just how in the hell did FOX give us Trump when maybe 1% of voters watch FOX?

Frank FOX has the highest viewership rating of any cable news stations.  If you think that they didn't have a impact on the election you are crazy.  There are no other Republican/Conservative cable news stations except FOX that I know of.  Plenty of liberal ones.  CNN, NBC, ABC...........

Oh an I also hold Breitbart and Anne Coulter and much of the Evangelical community responsible for the buffoon.


Offline IsailedawayfromFR

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 6,527
  • Sept 11 2001 or March 6 1836
« Reply #164 on: October 13, 2017, 11:47:50 AM »

So do I,  so why should we play this game of accusing each other of supporting Fascism or Censorship?   


The networks were created through the Government issuing the licenses to use the public airwaves.   It has allowed them the ability to build a monopoly on effective speech in this nation. 


The government contributed to the cause of the problem,   and so what can we now do to correct the problem?   


I'm open to any reasonable suggestion.
It is my opinion that most of the problems that occur in this country is the absence of remembering our Christian roots when this government was devised.

By God's own word, it is not a level playing field.  True, He gave us the freedom of choice, but that does not equate to what is right or wrong, and right by His judgment always outweighs wrong.

On most fronts, patriotism caused our government to be swayed to enforce judgments that behaved according to what was right with God (although I note an exception was slavery in its early years).  Much of our patriotic foundation has been steadily eroded as we stray further from our Christian heritage. The entire Democrat party is a perfect example of the foundering of patriotism if one looks at their platform of social liberalism that fragments a family and enforcement of diversity and onerous taxes over freedoms .

The ideal world is to control by doing what is good for the country ie, Christian-based, but we are so far down alternatives roads, it would be a very hard sell.
Yearning to stay free takes place in many ways at many different times, whether by withstanding planes or bayonets


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf