Turning down the volume on TV commercials

Discussion in 'Congress' started by Kevin_Kennedy, Dec 16, 2009.

  1. Anguille
    Offline

    Anguille Bane of the Urbane

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    17,910
    Thanks Received:
    2,120
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +2,136
    I took my cue to exaggerate from you, Paulie.

    :eusa_whistle:
     
  2. manifold
    Offline

    manifold Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Messages:
    55,777
    Thanks Received:
    8,223
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    your dreams
    Ratings:
    +33,519
    I thought we were keeping the discussion within the constraints of pragmatic reality.

    My bad! :thup:
     
  3. Kevin_Kennedy
    Offline

    Kevin_Kennedy Defend Liberty

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2008
    Messages:
    18,020
    Thanks Received:
    1,612
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Location:
    Ohio
    Ratings:
    +2,172
    If that were the case I'd have no reason to post anything, because the pragmatic reality is that the government is going to grow and do whatever it wants whenever it wants.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. Paulie
    Offline

    Paulie Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Messages:
    35,521
    Thanks Received:
    5,323
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +21,770
    Based on that post from me that you quoted, what was an exaggeration?

    The average commercial from a major company lasts about 60 seconds, and many last even less than that.

    It's YOU guys who are exaggerating, trying to claim that there's more than an occasional commercial with that much extra volume. The majority of commercials are not that loud, Ang.

    I could almost see your point if they were, but they simply aren't.
     
  5. tigerbob
    Offline

    tigerbob Increasingly jaded.

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2007
    Messages:
    6,225
    Thanks Received:
    968
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Location:
    Michigan
    Ratings:
    +970
    Fuck the constitution.
     
  6. manifold
    Offline

    manifold Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Messages:
    55,777
    Thanks Received:
    8,223
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    your dreams
    Ratings:
    +33,519
    Touché! :lol:
     
  7. RadiomanATL
    Offline

    RadiomanATL Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2009
    Messages:
    24,943
    Thanks Received:
    3,818
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Not here
    Ratings:
    +3,833
    Thats 'cuz its pretty much an unenforceable "law". Totally subjective, and hence unenforceable.
     
  8. RadiomanATL
    Offline

    RadiomanATL Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2009
    Messages:
    24,943
    Thanks Received:
    3,818
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Not here
    Ratings:
    +3,833
    They are complying with the law is what I have been saying. And what I have posted examples of at least twice.
     
  9. Ravi
    Offline

    Ravi Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2008
    Messages:
    86,980
    Thanks Received:
    13,387
    Trophy Points:
    2,205
    Location:
    Hating Hatters
    Ratings:
    +37,734
    Yes, they are complying with the law as it is currently written. Which is why the law is being changed...because it was poorly written to begin with.
     
  10. RadiomanATL
    Offline

    RadiomanATL Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2009
    Messages:
    24,943
    Thanks Received:
    3,818
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Not here
    Ratings:
    +3,833
    You forgot to add: And it's being written in such a way as to be effectively unenforceable, like the UK version.

    Like I said, this is nothing but a feelgood, ineffective, look-at-me-and-reelect-me piece of junk legislation.
     

Share This Page