How much "Transforming" is enough? President obama ran his campaign on the idea that we as a nation need to change. According to his wife that change is not just political, '...we're going to have to change our conversation, we're going to have to change our traditions, our history..." And just how do you suppose they plan to enact this change? Well, lets look at this one step at a time.
Apparently, since it would be next to impossible to silence millions of Americans who are speaking out against this administration, they (the gov't) are going to go after the media outlets that don't share the same beliefs as the administration. Enter Mark Loyd, the Diversity Czar (or as the White House calls him, a "special advisor") of the FCC. Under the guise of Diversity, Mr. Lyod seeks to undermine the 1st amendment. Not through the re-institution of the Fairness Doctrine but through legislation and regulation of Broadcast companies. He proposes that new licensing regulations be set in place that call for the placing of exurbant taxes, and what amounts to, extortion. He feels that since conservative radio suffers from a lack of so-called diversity, they should be forced to pay a license renewal fee that equals 100% of their yearly operating budget. That money will be used to fund groups such as NPR that offer a more diverse programming. If Conservative companies don't want to pay that fee, that is fine, they will just lose their license, and that license will be sold to a minority group.
Along with licensing "fees", he also wants the FCC to regulate political advertising and COMMENTARY, the number of commercials stations run, and require ratings info to be posted on programs before they air. He is quoted as saying, "In our report, we call for ownership of rules the we think will create greater local diversity of programming, news, and commentary. And we call for more localism by putting more teeth into licensing rules. But we do not call for a return of the Fairness Doctrine." What they are calling for is complete governmental control of media, which is the exact opposite of what our founders intended and what our Constitution demands.
In his book Prologue to a Farce. Communications and Democracy in America. he states, "It should be clear by now that my focus here is not Freedom of Speech or the Press. This freedom is all too often an exaggeration. At the very least, blind reference to freedom of speech or the press serves as a distraction from the critical examination of other communication policies."
I ask you, if the obama administration is as interested in fairness and equality as they say they are, what were they thinking when they appointed this Marxist? I don't know about you, but I have had just about enough of their so-called change.
Actually, If the FCC can cut back on the tiresome repetitive commercials and the "seems to go on forever" political campaigning, my old head would love it! A far as fairness goes, I could be wrong, but I don't recall the word "fair" appearing in the Constitution, the bill of rights or the Declaration of Independence.
Get the book that exposes the secret blueprint for ending free speech. "Shut Up America" The End of Free Speech.
Written in 2006 by Brad O'Leary.
:(Fair would be that someone on this forum could keep their opinons to them selfs and not comment on every issue on the forum. I my self work and do not have time to set on this forum for 24 hours a day. I have friends and things to do. I guess other people only have the forum to keep them self busy. As you know opinons are A##h##les everyone has one. Thanks Jo I will get the book. ;D
Jane
Diane, those commericals are how radio stations make their money, but I know what you're saying, I HATE commercials, but such is life. As far as campaigning goes, I don't mind if a station endorses one canidate or another, and seeing as how I listen to more talk radio than anything else, I don't see a need for the FCC to regulate it.
Jane, that would be the oppisite of fair. This is a public forum, everyone has the right to express their opinion. Regardless of how many agree with it or not.
Thanks Billy. I don't mind the commercials in small doses, but over and over and over ...How long to they think it takes a person to get the message. Jane, ya just let the cat out of the bag. However you want it. Help yourself. You don't want to read me, then move on. :angel:
I don't know, I kinda like the repetative Victoria Secerts commericals.
Yes, I guess you would. ;)
And I fondly remember the "Hanes" commercials with Michael Jordan. :)
What I really hate are stations that do not moderate the volumn between program and commercials. You set the volumn so that the program can be heard then the commercial blasts you out of the chair. I would think that this is enough of a problem that a tv could be designed to moderate the volumn to a set level. :P :P
I think the government should be staying out of the radio with certain exceptions. There shouldn't be vulgar programming and there shouldn't be people inciting violence. Other than that, people have the right to say what they want.
That's how I really feel too. But I still believe in breaking in for emergencies.
Quote from: sixdogsmom on August 29, 2009, 02:52:32 PM
What I really hate are stations that do not moderate the volumn between program and commercials. You set the volumn so that the program can be heard then the commercial blasts you out of the chair. I would think that this is enough of a problem that a tv could be designed to moderate the volumn to a set level. :P :P
Well being that most people get up during the commercials and leave the room you can expect them to increase the volume on it.
AND TVs are made with that very feature to lower the volume of commercials.
SRK,
Then haul your happy butt to Longton and add that feature to my TV--Please---and while you're at it can you make the Victoria Secret commercials just a tad larger ? :)
Quote from: jarhead on August 29, 2009, 07:59:29 PM
SRK,
Then haul your happy butt to Longton and add that feature to my TV--Please---and while you're at it can you make the Victoria Secret commercials just a tad larger ? :)
LOL its simple, go buy one with a vchip. It also is supposed to filter out bad words too.
Enough is enough, alright!
With a democratic held Congress and leftist president, many rational and patriotic Americans are undecided between suicide and becoming a liberal. Such people should consider the inconsistency and irrational thinking needed to embrace the
liberal agenda:
* Execution of a convicted killer is cruel, unusual & barbaric; whereas a woman's right to abort the life of an innocent childis inalienable.
* Starving an innocent victim like Terri Schaivo to death is acceptable; using lethal injection to end the life of a brutal killer is not.
* Burning Old Glory is acceptable free speech, whereas conservatives like Rush Limbaugh routinely engage in unacceptable "hate speech."
* Skyrocketing gasoline prices devastate working American families, but protecting wild
animals and obscure organisms is a greater priority.
* Large profits are obscenely un-American, except when enjoyed by George Soros, Oprah Winfrey, Hollywood stars,the Clintons, the Kennedys, and other liberals.
* Conservatives working to preserve American culture are bigoted hate mongers, but the
"cultural heritage" of new immigrants must be protected and celebrated at all costs.
* Discrimination based on race or gender is wrong. Except when it is waged against Caucasian men, in which case it is mandated by law & called Affirmative Action.
* Invading a foreign nation is wrong, except when illegal aliens from Mexico invade America.
* Those who believe English should be the official American language are "racist," whereas Hispanics who prefer Spanish to English are perfectly justified because "diversity is our greatest strength."
* The earning power of American citizens is in sharp decline;still, the U.S. should grant amnesty to millions of illegal aliens who will work for lower wages and without benefits.
* Blocking the sale of port security to UAE was necessary to protect homeland security, but securing the border with Mexico would "scapegoat" Hispanics.
* Illegal aliens should be licensed to drive– to avoid breaking the law by driving illegally.
* Freedom of speech must never be repressed, except when "hurtful" to any constituency of the Democrat party, in which case it becomes hate speech.
* Tax cuts are wrong when money is returned to people who actually paid taxes, but perfectly fine when sent to those who paid none.
* All symbols of Christianity must be quashed so as to offend no one, whereas all things Islamic must be heavily promoted in the name of religious awareness, diversity, & tolerance.
* Businesses are oppressive, fascist institutions and must not be allowed to become too large. On the other hand, government when run by Democrats, creates wealth & happiness and should be expanded as much as possible.
* Military force must never be used, except when needed to advance interests not vital to the United States, or to obscure a Democrat president's sexual misconduct in the Oval Office.
Think about it– Are you mindless enough to be a liberal? Or..............!
Warph, two points I'd like to make here...
1 - Thanks for getting back to the topic.
2 - An excellent post.
I have no cats in a bag and I would like to over look all of Dianes comments and opinions but when they are on every thread on the the forum very hard to do. :angel:
Quote from: Jane on August 30, 2009, 06:19:49 AM
I have no cats in a bag and I would like to over look all of Dianes comments and opinions but when they are on every thread on the the forum very hard to do. :angel:
She's not the only one, a lot of people who post regularly on the politics section, usually put something in just about every thread. And though I disagree with just about everything she says I'm not going to tell her to limit her postings. If you don't like what she posts, then don't read it. Unless you agree with our Diversity Czar in that we need to "...regulate political commentary."
Well, HELLO RUDENESS!
So now you are say that being truthfull about the way I feel is rude. I am telling you I would to love to over look her comments and opinions but once again how can you to that when she is on every thread. Please how can you know everything about everything even if you are a Teacher!!!!!! The rest of you let her know how feel but I can"t. What happen to FREEDOM OF SPEECH.??????
Ma'am, don't you understand that liberals and socialists think themselves to know a lot of stuff?
Quote from: redcliffsw on August 30, 2009, 12:09:22 PM
Ma'am, don't you understand that liberals and socialists think themselves to know a lot of stuff?
Red that is just too funny coming from you.
David
Jane, apparently your freedom of speech has bumped heads with mine. If there is a limit to the number of posts an "outsider " can make, I didn't know it and I apologize. Apparently you know, so please enlighten me. A far as a rule that we can only check out the forum from our HOME computer, I didn't know that either, please tell me where that is posted so I can check it out. My fire house has lots of computers and it is quite common for people on duty, who have finished their house assignments, to check out forums, play games, and talk to friends. I didn't know I had to clear it with a few of you. I don't know what I ever did to make you hate me so much. And yes, you did let a cat out of a bag. Because the exact same words were used, I know who you were talking to recently. I have cut back on my posting, to the sadness of some, and went back and deleted 'most everything I wrote for nearly a year. There are at least 10 threads I never comment on, and there are some that I simply add a thank you, or a smiley or a word of encouragement. I don't know why everything I say rubs you the wrong way, but at least you are talking to me today and not whining to someone else behind my back. I will not apologize for the education that my parents worked hard to pay for, the very educational traveling I've done, or the intelligence God gave me. If that intimidates you, or whatever it is that bothers you, that's your problem. What does being a teacher have to do with your obvious anger? I do know a lot, so what. That sure doesn't make me perfect. I'm not intentionally "flaunting" anything. If you are trying to chase me completely off here, too bad, I'm not going unless I'm banned.
Sometimes I don't think you even realize you are being rude, but if rude is the only way you can be truthful then I guess I'll have to put up with it, as I suspect there is more hissing ( sorry Cat) to come. Up until I finally had enough, I tried to be honest ( big mistake) and respectful to everyone and just have conversation or debate. Some of you still don't know how to debate issues without anger and name calling and several have learned and do very well at it now. A few still deliberately ask leading questions or mix issues to try to back someone else into a "have you stopped beating your wife" corner. That just isn't my style. I suspect we could be good friends if we ever met, and yes, I have plenty of them and plenty of "other things to do." For people who are retired or older or disabled, this forum could be big part of their lives, why would anyone want to spoil that for them? As far as your wanting to "look over" my comments and opinions, pardon me if I am very skeptical about that. Questions do come up on here that I do know the answer to.... from now on I'll keep silent and hope that the people who didn't get answered by someone else will forgive me. Even if most of MY questions to a few of you go unanswered. I'm asked a leading question and I answer it, but if I ask the same question of them....silence. Is that the right thing to do? Phooey,and on Sunday no less.
I did not proof read this, so pick away all you want.
Red, that comment is so typical, but should be beneath you. That would be like someone saying that extremists are all possessed by the devil. Gotta love those labels..... Poppy cock
As far as I know FREEDOM OF SPEECH is alive and well,but rude is still rude.
OH...MY...GOD...I swear, if you "children" don't stop your nitpicking I'm going to pull this car over!!!
Jane, if you don't like Dianes comments, then don't read them. Period.
Greatguns, no one appointed you "manner police".
Red, everybody thinks themselves to know alot of stuff. I for one have a plethora of useless information jammed packed right next to my vast knowledge of the universe and everything in it.
Diane, don't be such a victim. Regardless of what others say, you have just as much right to post as anyone else. Just because some folks don't want to play by your rules that doesn't mean you have to stomp your feet and start crying.
So, everybody (and that includes myself) grow up will ya? Personal opinions are one thing, personal attacks are another. Either use facts, or at least percieved facts, to present and counter arguments, or shut the he$$ up! Leave the personal attacks out of it. Afterall, using facts is the best way to confuse liberals. >:( :P ;D
OMG ! ! !
I'm agreeing with Billy! ! !
;D ;D ;D ;D
Well said. As usual, no beating around the bush! :o
ROTFLMBO!!
Billy, sometimes you amaze me with your three S's-------------------Sensitivity, Selflessness, and Sound Advice!
Diane, you and I don't tangle because we usually agree on most things and the ones I don't, I shut up. Please continue to post no matter what anyone else says. If someone here is unhappy with your opinions, they should know not to read them. As far as your comment on those who are retired, yes, I am and I have things I could or have to do with my day, but reading this forum and drinking my morning coffee are the first and foremost things I do every day. I am pretty sure it makes my day a lot better.
And to the rest of you, everyone has a right to say what they think, what they feel, what they know, or think they know. So do you!!! BUT--------finger pointing and back stabbing and name calling tend to show me that you are not as smart or as nice as I thought you were. It only diminishes the value of the posts that you put here and I tend not to read them.
So There!
Larryj
I am not having a pity party nor am I crying. Have any of you received a PM basically telling you to shut up? I DON"T have the same rights as you and I'm not supposed to post freely, so what am I supposed to do? I have cut back and back and back. I wouldn't have posted this but my name came up...again as a criticism. I'm not sure I have any cheeks left to turn. I try to debate ISSUES. I have never called anybody stupid, because you aren't. I'm sorry I finally popped my cork, but when I'm pushed I finally say"enough already." So now I'll finally be judged by different rules than the rest? I can't even stand up for myself? After a very obvious frontal attack? Only ONE political thread was ever started by me....and nobody was interested. Oh well, carry on.
Diane, it's time for the mule to kick in. Had I received a PM telling me not to post, you better believe that I would double the number of postings. Just to irritate that forward person who had that kind of nerve. Post away friend, and know that many many folks enjoy having an intelligent discussion to participate in, whether they post or not. I have been assured that this forum is not just for conservative, far right folks, and I shall continue to operate that way. Let the mule kick in and become flat stubborn. I am always happy to see postings from my friends. :-* :-*
8)
I'm not in here very much anymore.. I come in to check the data... answer my pm's.. take care of personal items in here for members ..occasionally post a minor thing and then I leave.
So, my apologies for not keeping an eye on posts etc..
Billy.. ..excellent job moderating..
In any forum.. it is always something that has to be dealt with.
You did a fantastic job..much better than I could have done. If I had said what you said.. I would have had everyone mad at me.. but you hit the nail smack on the head in all areas...and everyone still likes you! ((SHOCKER)) ;D ;D
Everything and I mean everything you said is 1,000 % right on target..
And I am glad you included yourself in there and also in doing that you included me.. ( which is on target too) :police:
We are all human with different buttons that when pushed ....explode.
Mine have been pushed several times in here and fortunately I have some close friends in here who I trust, that allow me to unload both barrels until I calm down. ( It's not a pretty sight ;D ;D ) But it does help alot..
But Yes.. I agree with Billy... that if anyone doesn't like to read certain people's posts.. then overlook them and read the others... That's what I do. Because people don''t change their spots.. It is the nature of the beast.. We all can try to change our habits a little and do things differently ..but eventually we all creep back to """being who we are"""..
Which is good... But there is always going to be personality clashes with someone somewhere. We all just have to learn to deal with it!
Had an old neighbor of mine a long time ago when I lived in Cedar Vale. and when I would get all upset about something and talk to him he would say to me, "Honey? If it doesn't directly involve you...Ignore it. Turn away from it and quit bringing it to your own plate! ..*Why feed yourself tuna everyday if you don't like the taste of it?*
Amazing sometimes when things like that crop up to the surface and you remember........and how wonderful that the advice actually works..
Billy.....................job well done.
Thank you~!!!!
PS~~~~~
Before I posted this I read the latest one from you 6dogs.............
Let me say this..
Posts that chime in to "stir the fire"... are not any help at all either...............
It might make you feel all good and stout to spout off about what you would do here and what you would do there.. but sometimes its better to let the fights die down and help get things back on course ..rather than throw a cup of gas on the fire.
That's OK, I have a big fire extinguisher.
;D ;D ;D ;D
Billy, are you sure?
Quote from: BillyakaVarmit on August 31, 2009, 04:38:14 AM
So, everybody (and that includes myself) grow up will ya? Personal opinions are one thing, personal attacks are another. Either use facts, or at least percieved facts, to present and counter arguments, or shut the he$$ up! Leave the personal attacks out of it. Afterall, using facts is the best way to confuse liberals. >:( :P ;D
I can't believe it ! ! ! The POT finally calling the KETTLE BLACK or JUMPING FROM THE FRYING PAN INTO THE FIRE ;D :angel:
nonetheless, good, sound advice.
Anyhow, now that thats over with...
Now I am sure that you all have heard the statement made that "Obama won the election, if you don't like it then vote him out in 4 years". And the people who say that are correct, that is the way that the Constitution provides for the people to change our leaders. However, I would like to propose a few questions...With their contempt of the Constitution so obviously blatant, where do you think they will stop or pull up short in their violation of it? Also, why does Obama get a pass when he lies? Also, should people who are admittedly communists be permitted to occupy seats of power within our gov't?
Quote from: Varmit on September 01, 2009, 07:02:31 PM
Anyhow, now that thats over with...
Now I am sure that you all have heard the statement made that "Obama won the election, if you don't like it then vote him out in 4 years". And the people who say that are correct, that is the way that the Constitution provides for the people to change our leaders. However, I would like to propose a few questions...With their contempt of the Constitution so obviously blatant, where do you think they will stop or pull up short in their violation of it? Also, why does Obama get a pass when he lies? Also, should people who are admittedly communists be permitted to occupy seats of power within our gov't?
1. Nothing the administration has done thus far has violated the constitution. If you think they have, state clearly what they have done, and what article was violated.
2. Nobody gets a pass for lying.
3. Yes, if they are put there through legal means. The constitution allows freedom of thought and beliefs systems. You can't bar people from public office because of what they think or believe.
4. My youngest brother is really into computer games, and upon reading some of these threads he says "mmmm their tears are salty, qq more"
Violations of the Constitution by the Obama adminstration..
1. The targeting of individual citizens with legislation i.e. when they went after AIG executive bonuses, violates due process clause. As well as Section 9 of Article 1
2. Taking over private businesses. Violates the 10th admendment.
Thats just a few off the top of my head.
Obama HAS gotten a pass for lying. The media and the Left, not to mention congress, has not called him out on several issues. Balant lies he has told - not knowing Jermiah Wrights stance and views on America, said he didn't really know Bill Aryers, said the stimulus would create jobs, said he would govern from the middle, violates his oath of office by appointing Czars who are answerable only to him and whose core values and principles are in direct violation of the constitution.
Read the Preamble. It clearly states that one of the reasons for the Constitution is to "...secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity..." How can a communist, who believes that the power of government lies with the state and not the people uphold the constitution?
Quote from: Varmit on September 01, 2009, 09:41:14 PM
Violations of the Constitution by the Obama adminstration..
1. The targeting of individual citizens with legislation i.e. when they went after AIG executive bonuses, violates due process clause. As well as Section 9 of Article 1
2. Taking over private businesses. Violates the 10th admendment.
Thats just a few off the top of my head.
Obama HAS gotten a pass for lying. The media and the Left, not to mention congress, has not called him out on several issues. Balant lies he has told - not knowing Jermiah Wrights stance and views on America, said he didn't really know Bill Aryers, said the stimulus would create jobs, said he would govern from the middle, violates his oath of office by appointing Czars who are answerable only to him and whose core values and principles are in direct violation of the constitution.
Read the Preamble. It clearly states that one of the reasons for the Constitution is to "...secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity..." How can a communist, who believes that the power of government lies with the state and not the people uphold the constitution?
Billy, just lol, this is too funny.
1. When referencing the constitution, you first list the article, then the section. Article 1 section 9 limits the powers of congress. Obama is not a member of congress.
2. Obama didn't take over private businesses. Bush bought shares of companies with government funds.
3. Define "pass for lying" You seem to think that because he tried to enact a policy, and the policy failed, that he's a liar? Wait a second there, you've never tried something and been unsuccessful at it? Obama has lied about certain things, but who's given him a pass? nobody that i'm aware of.
4. As far as Czars, they aren't really a whole lot different from any other government appointee. The executive branch hires employees at their convenience, it's been that way since Washington. Just because some wacko decides to call them czars instead of secreteries or ministers doesn't make a difference.
5. You really need to do some research on what exactly communism is if you want to use the word properly. Communism is an economic theory, not a form of government. Furthermore, the theory was developed to protect the poorer classes from the richer classes, which our system also does to a certain extent. The US has had a socialist party for over 100 years, and they were at the forefront of the universal suffrage movement. Their stated goal is
"The eventual goal of the movement was to give control of the means of production to the working class, and, in particular, to transfer ownership of major industries to their respective employees, relinquishing "capital to those who create it." Democratic socialists wish to achieve their goals by winning elections"
They even had 2 members of congress. Whats unconstitutional about that? please tell me
6. I like lists, keep using them
7. I'm tired of you pulling "facts" out of your rear that you can't support.
Anmar, you are right, as far as referencing the constitution, I got it backwards. However, before a bill becomes law it has to cross the presidents desk, and he has to sign off on it. So, if a bill is unconstitutional, and he signs off on it, he is just as guilty of a violation as congress.
I suppose it was Bush that took over GM then handed it over to the UAW? Because as I recall that happened this year.
As to obama getting a pass for lying, I don't see the press all over him like they were Bush about WMD's.
As for Czars, the only person they are answerable to is the president. We, the people, have no say on who gets appointed to these positions, they don't fall under our Checks and balances system and should be done away with.
As to the proper use of the word communism - The term "Communism", usually spelled with the capital letter C, is however often used to refer to a form of government in which the state operates under a one-party system and declares allegiance to Marxism-Leninism or a derivative thereof, even if the party does not actually claim that the society has already reached communism. Joseph Stalin established the character of Communism as the totalitarian ideology it is most commonly known as and referred to today.
As to the Socialist party being unconstitutional, they would first have to gain control of private business, which the constitution doesn't give them the power to do, and then relinquish control of that business to the employees. Wether they do it through a violent revolution or a peaceful one doesn't matter, it still violates the constitution.