The W
Views: 97644796
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
24.7.07 1515
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - GOP's Selective Faith in People Register and log in to post!
(354 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (8 total)
spf
Scrapple
Level: 132

Posts: 3135/5401
EXP: 26879237
For next: 252767

Since: 2.1.02
From: The Las Vegas of Canada

Since last post: 13 days
Last activity: 1 day
AIM:  
#1 Posted on 2.3.05 1238.23
Reposted on: 2.3.12 1238.51
Well, the GOP trusts us to be better able to spend the money that goes to the government in taxes, and to be better able to invest our money than the government to protect our retirement. I'm glad they have faith in the American people to look out for their own well-being and not need the protective hand of government. Why, just look at this story about the GOP wanting to have the FCC regulate basic cable decency. (suntimes.com)

    Originally posted by Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK)
    Most viewers don't differentiate between traditional TV and cable so they don't know when they might be exposed to objectionable programming


So we trust Americans to invest a trillion dollars in private accounts and not screw that up, but figuring out how to use the parental lock on their tv, how to tell the difference between MTV and CBS, or how to not order cable if they don't want their kids to see "Room Raiders"...now that's asking too much of the public?

(edited by spf on 2.3.05 1238)
Promote this thread!
drjayphd
Scrapple
Moderator
Level: 115

Posts: 2373/3937
EXP: 16526932
For next: 284483

Since: 22.4.02
From: Long Island

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 1 day
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#2 Posted on 2.3.05 1301.57
Reposted on: 2.3.12 1304.49
Eh, more hypocrisy in politics. There's a total shocker. Wake me when they can draw a line and be consistent (as in pro-life, but anti-capital punishment).
redsoxnation
Scrapple
Level: 151

Posts: 4538/7534
EXP: 43294671
For next: 1905

Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 388 days
Last activity: 388 days
#3 Posted on 2.3.05 1330.42
Reposted on: 2.3.12 1330.45
I'm really starting to miss the days when one of the tenets of the Grand Old Party was LESS government bureaucracy. Should the FCC(middle C stands for Communist, not Communication) be strengthened, that means either more federal money to pay for extra bureaucrats, extra money charged for cable, or, the most likely occurrance, both. More bureaucracy being created, the Department of Education still in existance, whatever became of our Glorious Revolution in 1994?
King Of Crap
Goetta
Level: 38

Posts: 289/309
EXP: 341948
For next: 28502

Since: 17.9.03
From: Holley, New York

Since last post: 3386 days
Last activity: 3317 days
AIM:  
#4 Posted on 2.3.05 1738.05
Reposted on: 2.3.12 1738.08
It was pretty funny seeing the guy who sponsored the bill pn FOXNews trying to justify the action.
AWArulz
Knackwurst
Level: 107

Posts: 1058/3336
EXP: 13011348
For next: 80005

Since: 28.1.02
From: Louisville, KY

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 1 day
AIM:  
Y!:
#5 Posted on 2.3.05 1751.40
Reposted on: 2.3.12 1751.43
    Originally posted by drjayphd
    Eh, more hypocrisy in politics. There's a total shocker. Wake me when they can draw a line and be consistent (as in pro-life, but anti-capital punishment).


#1, as soon as a baby kills someone while in the womb, I am all about executing him or her. Until then, the two subjects have nothing to do with one another. Unless all death is equal to you. I consider the life of a baby (no matter how old) much more important than a murderer or rapist who has dedicated his or her life to the destruction of society.

I do agree that there's no good reason to "rate" or censor basic cable. If you don't want it, slap up an antenna.
Corajudo
Frankfurter
Level: 58

Posts: 364/810
EXP: 1507615
For next: 69940

Since: 7.11.02
From: Dallas, TX

Since last post: 15 days
Last activity: 2 days
#6 Posted on 2.3.05 2219.28
Reposted on: 2.3.12 2220.46
#1, as soon as a baby kills someone while in the womb, I am all about executing him or her. Until then, the two subjects have nothing to do with one another. Unless all death is equal to you. I consider the life of a baby (no matter how old) much more important than a murderer or rapist who has dedicated his or her life to the destruction of society.

I would argue that all life is equal. And, no man has the right right to take the gift of life from anyone; be they innocent baby, unfaithful spouse, someone in the wrong place at the wrong time, or even someone who has committed the most heinous of crimes. If someone is committed to the destruction of society, remove them from society but let them live. Just because someone else has no respect for life does not mean their life loses its value. IMHO, life is the relevant issue, not death.
AWArulz
Knackwurst
Level: 107

Posts: 1059/3336
EXP: 13011348
For next: 80005

Since: 28.1.02
From: Louisville, KY

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 1 day
AIM:  
Y!:
#7 Posted on 3.3.05 0512.47
Reposted on: 3.3.12 0512.52
    Originally posted by Corajudo
    #1, as soon as a baby kills someone while in the womb, I am all about executing him or her. Until then, the two subjects have nothing to do with one another. Unless all death is equal to you. I consider the life of a baby (no matter how old) much more important than a murderer or rapist who has dedicated his or her life to the destruction of society.

    I would argue that all life is equal. And, no man has the right right to take the gift of life from anyone; be they innocent baby, unfaithful spouse, someone in the wrong place at the wrong time, or even someone who has committed the most heinous of crimes. If someone is committed to the destruction of society, remove them from society but let them live. Just because someone else has no respect for life does not mean their life loses its value. IMHO, life is the relevant issue, not death.



And I can respect that opinion. I don't agree with it, but respect it. I'm of the opinion that governments are established for the express purpose of establishing society and one of those functions is removing those who break societal rules. I think that a serious infringment of those rules (and, in our society we have defined those serious infringments as murder and a few other serious crimes) can warrent execution. I see a serious difference between accidental death, a personal murder by a person and an execution by a goverment. The first is an accident, the second is wrong and the third is right.

I understand that some folks do not agree that the goverment has that right. It's a difference we'll have to agree to disagree on.
Teppan-Yaki
Pepperoni
Level: 66

Posts: 928/1083
EXP: 2366618
For next: 95246

Since: 28.6.02

Since last post: 846 days
Last activity: 816 days
#8 Posted on 6.3.05 1901.43
Reposted on: 6.3.12 1901.49
FWIW, Powell has already said that he's against trying to extend the current indecency regulations to cable/satellite TV.

When Mike Powell knows it's going to be an uphill battle, good luck to the GOP.
ALL ORIGINAL POSTS IN THIS THREAD ARE NOW AVAILABLE
Thread ahead: Anyone want to help me out on my essay?
Next thread: McCain: Do as I say, not as a do
Previous thread: Does this go here?
(354 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - GOP's Selective Faith in PeopleRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.399 seconds.