FCC commissioner wants to scrap Constitution

[Quantum Windbag]

I hate to agree, QW is usually pretty quality but unless you have a direct quote saying "I want to scrap (or similar) the constitution" it's putting words in someone’s mouth.

I do agree that it's sad times when people in power want to attack media (fox news in this case) but of course never mention CNN/MSNBC, NPR and so on. This country is falling apart and I'm starting to believe it might lead to civil war.

We have 2 sides in essence, one that would be happy with a King as long as that King thinks like them and then people that support the constitution and a freer society. It's really that divided, and it's sad. This is not a liberal/conservative argument either as both sides are hypocrites when it comes to the constitution. Liberals seem to be worse only because I believe they as a whole are far less educated in politics as proven by many studies. However with the birth of the Neocons, Republicans near match Liberals with support for a warfare/welfare state.

The Bush Neocons are almost the same people that would call themselves Progressive liberals. A true liberal and a true conservative are relatively the same thing as they would have to follow the rules of the constitution. This fake Pro light rail/HC/war/spend Liberal and fake conservative BS has managed to blur the lines. Today your average BS liberal VS your average BS conservative only differ on pathetic issues like Gay marriage and abortion.

The only evidence that you will take is a direct quote of someone saying they want to scrap the Constitution before you will believe that is what they want to do? That might very well be the attitude that allowed Chavez to gain so much power in Venezuela, since he never actually said that was his goal no one saw it coming until he had already done it.

I did not say that he intends to scrap the Constitution because he said he wants to, he probably thinks he is actually supporting it. The problem here is not his intent, but the result of the actions he is proposing. If the government starts dictating who is a "real" reporter, and who is an opinion reporter, we will eventually reach the point where the only news sources we have are from the government. That, believe it or not, will scrap the Constitution.

You can phrase the discussion however you want, but unless we concentrate on individual freedom we will eventually end up with a tyrannical government, even if we elect it.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Or the govt making laws abridging free speech ie banning opinions, thoughts, ideologies. Damn scary, I don't care what your political views.

But is it okay for media groups who own several stations in several markets to broadcast the same political perspective 24/7? Is that really free speech in a free market place. Isn't that excluding any other political perspective? I don't want the governement outlawing anyone's speech. If they decide to regulate broadcast political content I'd like to be able to hear more than two sides(Rep/Dem) as well. The world is not black and white. There are more than two ideas, ideals and solutions to our problems.

But, up 'til now, you didn't mind living with this?

Dan Rather, Katie Couric, Tom Brokaw, Peter Jennings, Edward R. Murrow, Ted Koppel, Andy Rooney, Leslie Stahl, George Stephanopoulos, Mike Wallace, Barbara Walters, Ed Bradley, Campbell Brown, Jack Cafferty, Walter Cronkite, Jim Lehrer, Roger Grimsby, Soledad O’Brien, Keith Olbermann, Cokie Roberts, Diane Sawyer, Bob Schieffer, Paula Zahn, Sam Donaldson, Brian Williams, Judy Woodruff, David Shuster, Bernard Shaw, Jessica Savitch, Harry Reasoner, Sally Quinn, Gwen Ifill, Douglas Kiker, Charles Kuralt, Roger Mudd, Robert MacNeil, Charles Osgood, Douglas Edwards, John Chancellor, Charles Gibson, Christiane Amanpour, Anderson Cooper, Ann Curry, Marvin Kalb, Bryant Gimbel, Andrea Mitchell, Jeanne Moos, Bill Schneider, Daniel Schoor, Richard Threlkeld, Jake Tapper, Ann Compton, Lester Holt, Michael Beschloss, Norah O’Donnell, Chris Matthews, Joy Behar, Jon Stewart, Ric Sanchez, Rachel Maddow, Bill Moyers, Fareed Zakaria, Oprah Winfrey, Arianna Huffington, Paul Krugman, Ed Schultz, Paul Begala, James Carville, Linda Douglas, Howie Kurtz, Phil Donohue, Tavis Smiley, Mark Shields, Bill Press, Larry O’Donnell, Joe Conason, Margaret Carlson, Bob Beckel, Larry King, Alan Colmes, etc.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

If a naked breast can be banned by the FCC and fines allocated for using the F word, why shouldn't lies, half-truths, libel and other forms of defamation be regulated by the FCC?

Funny thing, SCOTUS is saying they cannot do any of that, so your position is premised on a falsehood. Maybe you should pay more attention to current events before you start discussing them.

FCC Overruled in Janet Jackson Super Bowl Nudity Fine (Photo, Video) at The Insider

 

[Nosmo King]

The 24 hour news cycle created the opinion show. Some folks confuse Fox News with journalism. It ain't "news", it's opinion.

Now, I don't think any channel that spouts opinion should be sanctioned. But the point remains: there has been a decline in "real journalism".

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Or the govt making laws abridging free speech ie banning opinions, thoughts, ideologies. Damn scary, I don't care what your political views.

But is it okay for media groups who own several stations in several markets to broadcast the same political perspective 24/7? Is that really free speech in a free market place. Isn't that excluding any other political perspective? I don't want the governement outlawing anyone's speech. If they decide to regulate broadcast political content I'd like to be able to hear more than two sides(Rep/Dem) as well. The world is not black and white. There are more than two ideas, ideals and solutions to our problems.

Works for me, I never watch them anyway.

By the way, in the days before radio and TV most markets only had one or tow newspapers to get their vies from, yet they survived. With the internet and cable broadcast TV is dead anyway, and we really do not need the FCC. They are just trying to find a justification for their existence.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The 24 hour news cycle created the opinion show. Some folks confuse Fox News with journalism. It ain't "news", it's opinion.

Now, I don't think any channel that spouts opinion should be sanctioned. But the point remains: there has been a decline in "real journalism".

No, there has been a decline in real journalism in the traditional sources. There are still plenty of journalists out there, and they are making their voices heard. Supporting your view of "real" journalism is the equivalent of demanding people keep using radios to listen to music. The world is changing, and I intend to stay up with it, and not look backwards.

 

[Wry Catcher]

If a naked breast can be banned by the FCC and fines allocated for using the F word, why shouldn't lies, half-truths, libel and other forms of defamation be regulated by the FCC?

Great...

now, would you agree that little ol' me would be the very best arbiter of " lies, half-truths, libel and other forms of defamation."

Just sign right here, on the dotted line..........

I will. Once you inform me of who decided naked breasts and half a dozen or so words are obscene.

PS, would you really want that job?

 

[PoliticalChic]

The 24 hour news cycle created the opinion show. Some folks confuse Fox News with journalism. It ain't "news", it's opinion.

Now, I don't think any channel that spouts opinion should be sanctioned. But the point remains: there has been a decline in "real journalism".

Yeah, "real journalism"....that's what vetted Senator Obama, huh?

See the stats:
CABLE NEWS RACE
THURS., FEB 10, 2011

FOXNEWS O'REILLY 3,325,000
FOXNEWS BAIER 2,335,000
FOXNEWS HANNITY 2,293,000
FOXNEWS BECK 2,243,000
FOXNEWS SHEP 1,936,000
FOXNEWS GRETA 1,744,000
CNN BLITZER 1,036,000
CNN MORGAN 941,000
MSNBC HARDBLL 844,000
MSNBC O'DONNELL 843,000
CNN COOPER 826,000
MSNBC MADDOW 765,000
CNN PARKERSPITZER 724,000
MSNBC SHULTZ 575,000


You better hurry, so many people to convince.

 

[PoliticalChic]

If a naked breast can be banned by the FCC and fines allocated for using the F word, why shouldn't lies, half-truths, libel and other forms of defamation be regulated by the FCC?

Great...

now, would you agree that little ol' me would be the very best arbiter of " lies, half-truths, libel and other forms of defamation."

Just sign right here, on the dotted line..........

I will. Once you inform me of who decided naked breasts and half a dozen or so words are obscene.

PS, would you really want that job?

Now, Wry, you know you can trust me implicitly (eyelids flutter)...

I'll get right to it, as soon as I finish Glenn Beck's new book....

 

[Nosmo King]

The 24 hour news cycle created the opinion show. Some folks confuse Fox News with journalism. It ain't "news", it's opinion.

Now, I don't think any channel that spouts opinion should be sanctioned. But the point remains: there has been a decline in "real journalism".

Yeah, "real journalism"....that's what vetted Senator Obama, huh?

See the stats:
CABLE NEWS RACE
THURS., FEB 10, 2011

FOXNEWS O'REILLY 3,325,000
FOXNEWS BAIER 2,335,000
FOXNEWS HANNITY 2,293,000
FOXNEWS BECK 2,243,000
FOXNEWS SHEP 1,936,000
FOXNEWS GRETA 1,744,000
CNN BLITZER 1,036,000
CNN MORGAN 941,000
MSNBC HARDBLL 844,000
MSNBC O'DONNELL 843,000
CNN COOPER 826,000
MSNBC MADDOW 765,000
CNN PARKERSPITZER 724,000
MSNBC SHULTZ 575,000


You better hurry, so many people to convince.

Are these numbers supposed to justify Fox as legitimate journalism? Lend them credibility based on Neilson Ratings? please.

If being popular was all it takes to make one credible, Lady Gaga is obviously more credible and a greater talent than Vivaldi. iTunes tells us so.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Great...

now, would you agree that little ol' me would be the very best arbiter of " lies, half-truths, libel and other forms of defamation."

Just sign right here, on the dotted line..........

I will. Once you inform me of who decided naked breasts and half a dozen or so words are obscene.

PS, would you really want that job?

Now, Wry, you know you can trust me implicitly (eyelids flutter)...

I'll get right to it, as soon as I finish Glenn Beck's new book....

LOL, in some cases verification is not necessary.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The 24 hour news cycle created the opinion show. Some folks confuse Fox News with journalism. It ain't "news", it's opinion.

Now, I don't think any channel that spouts opinion should be sanctioned. But the point remains: there has been a decline in "real journalism".

Yeah, "real journalism"....that's what vetted Senator Obama, huh?

See the stats:
CABLE NEWS RACE
THURS., FEB 10, 2011

FOXNEWS O'REILLY 3,325,000
FOXNEWS BAIER 2,335,000
FOXNEWS HANNITY 2,293,000
FOXNEWS BECK 2,243,000
FOXNEWS SHEP 1,936,000
FOXNEWS GRETA 1,744,000
CNN BLITZER 1,036,000
CNN MORGAN 941,000
MSNBC HARDBLL 844,000
MSNBC O'DONNELL 843,000
CNN COOPER 826,000
MSNBC MADDOW 765,000
CNN PARKERSPITZER 724,000
MSNBC SHULTZ 575,000


You better hurry, so many people to convince.

Are these numbers supposed to justify Fox as legitimate journalism? Lend them credibility based on Neilson Ratings? please.

If being popular was all it takes to make one credible, Lady Gaga is obviously more credible and a greater talent than Vivaldi. iTunes tells us so.

Nah....just a couple a' million idiots.

But, while I have your attention, please accept my deep and abiding appreciation for the
enlightenment elites like you have provided to us, the little people....

Without you educating me, I might have fallen under the sway of the dreaded "Fox News"...

a regular John Dewey!


But, you know the old saying: Self-righteousness…catnip for liberals.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Or the govt making laws abridging free speech ie banning opinions, thoughts, ideologies. Damn scary, I don't care what your political views.

But is it okay for media groups who own several stations in several markets to broadcast the same political perspective 24/7? Is that really free speech in a free market place. Isn't that excluding any other political perspective? I don't want the governement outlawing anyone's speech. If they decide to regulate broadcast political content I'd like to be able to hear more than two sides(Rep/Dem) as well. The world is not black and white. There are more than two ideas, ideals and solutions to our problems.

There are all kinds of ideas out there. Just look for them. I have no problem with CNN, ABC, CBS, MSNBC, FOX, espousing their views. They each have devolved into sub-mediocre coverage of news. They're definitely not journalists. I turned them off 10 years ago and now read magazines, books, internet to get my news.

 

[peach174]

How about the power of the people? Everyone has the right to turn off the TV or not read the bolgs that they don't want to.
The problem here is very serious because it's a Dept. not the congress trying to make law.
And it says congress shall make no law regarding freedom of speech or press.
It's unconstitutional for any Department to make any laws.
Our constitution says only congress shall make laws. Article I -Section 1 All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a congress (Senate & House) not Departments.

 

[PoliticalChic]

How about the power of the people? Everyone has the right to turn off the TV or not read the bolgs that they don't want to.
The problem here is very serious because it's a Dept. not the congress trying to make law.
And it says congress shall make no law regarding freedom of speech or press.
It's unconstitutional for any Department to make any laws.
Our constitution says only congress shall make laws. Article I -Section 1 All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a congress (Senate & House) not Departments.

What an excellent, and perceptive point!

The hallmark of progressive government is the investment of unelected technocrats and experts and bureaucrats with power!

It is discused by James Buckley in "Freedom at Risk." From Buckley:

1. Consider, by example, Title 42 of the US Code: Laws dealing with public health and welfare. United States Code: Title 42,TITLE 42—THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE | LII / Legal Information Institute Today, this federal law is 1700 pages more than it was prior to the New Deal. The reason is the creation of more and more bureaus and agencies endowed with ever broader responsibilities and discretion in defining the rules that govern our activities and our lives. And these rules have the full force of law! Congress has increased the number of rules whose infractions are criminalized, waiving the common law requirement that one knows he is breaking the law. Today, one can be jailed for violating a regulation that one had no reason to know even existed!

a. While the officials in these agencies are generally good people, they become focused on their particular portfolio of duties, that, often, they cannot see the consequences on other parts of society. Put this together with human nature, and one can see bullying, and misuse of power, especially when these individuals are immune to penalty, and supported by free and extensive legal representation: they have sovereign immunity in their positions.

b. While not unconstitutional, regulation may be considered extra-constitutional. There may be some point where it is considered to be an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority to an agency or bureau. Under Obamacare, or Dodd-Frank Reform we see legislation where regulators have not yet determined what the regulation should be…how can Congress allow a law without knowing what the impact will be?