| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"J Young" |
| Date: |
12 Dec 2006 12:51:56 AM |
| Object: |
FCC Defends Cussing Crackdown |
What's astonishing is that the FCC would need to defend itself in the
battle to preserve common decency on the airwaves.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6397889.html?display=Breaking+News
Saying broadcasters have "only limited First Amendment protection,"
that the V-chip is "ineffective," and that they gave the industry
notice it was changing policy on swear words, the FCC Wednesday both
defended its profanity findings against cussing in Fox's Billboard
Music Awards and defended the underpinnings of its entire indecency
enforcement regime.
That defense came in its filing to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals
of a brief responding to a broadcaster challenge of four profanity
rulings issued last March.
Saying that the Pacifica case--the so-called Seven dirty words Supreme
Court decision--upholding its indecency enforcement powers was "good
law," the FCC disputed Fox's contention that its definition of
indecency is unconstitutionally vague.
The FCC said that the Pacifica decision "endorsed the same definition,"
and said that Fox's broadcast of the words "*****" and "*****" lie far
from any zone of uncertainty that might exist at the margins of the
indecency standard's application."
The FCC says that Fox did not contest that the language was shocking,
or "particularly in context" for a prime time awards show, or justified
on artistic grounds, or say they comported with community standards,
but instead argued that the policy change was unexplained, arbitrary
and capricious. In addition, it says, NBC--which weighed in as
well--"appears to argue that the "f word" is never indecent when used
as an "intensifier."
.
|
|
| User: "Parsifal" |
|
| Title: Re: FCC Defends Cussing Crackdown |
12 Dec 2006 04:30:10 AM |
|
|
J Young a =E9crit :
What's astonishing is that the FCC would need to defend itself in the
battle to preserve common decency on the airwaves.
If you knew what the word decency means, you'd immediately commit
suicide.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Syd M." |
|
| Title: Re: FCC Defends Cussing Crackdown |
12 Dec 2006 01:38:26 AM |
|
|
J Young wrote:
What's astonishing is that the FCC would need to defend itself in the
battle to preserve common decency on the airwaves.
Oh, like you have any idea what "decency" actially means, Jerk Young.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6397889.html?display=Breaking+News
"CBN", eh? Sorry, not credible.
PDW
.
|
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: FCC Defends Cussing Crackdown |
12 Dec 2006 06:25:10 AM |
|
|
Syd M. <pdwright42@yahoo.com> wrote in alt.atheism
J Young wrote:
What's astonishing is that the FCC would need to defend itself in the
battle to preserve common decency on the airwaves.
Oh, like you have any idea what "decency" actially means, Jerk Young.
I saw one of the most ridiculous examples of censorship last night
while watching TV. It was during a horror movie that had blood and
guts throughout. During one scene, the person being beaten to a
bloody pulp by a crazed killer gave the killer the "finger" several
times. The censors actually fuzzed out the "finger" but all the blood
and gore were still there. WTF?
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Paul Mitchum" |
|
| Title: Re: FCC Defends Cussing Crackdown |
12 Dec 2006 02:20:52 PM |
|
|
Elroy Willis <elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote:
Syd M. <pdwright42@yahoo.com> wrote in alt.atheism
J Young wrote:
What's astonishing is that the FCC would need to defend itself in the
battle to preserve common decency on the airwaves.
Oh, like you have any idea what "decency" actially means, Jerk Young.
I saw one of the most ridiculous examples of censorship last night
while watching TV. It was during a horror movie that had blood and
guts throughout. During one scene, the person being beaten to a
bloody pulp by a crazed killer gave the killer the "finger" several
times. The censors actually fuzzed out the "finger" but all the blood
and gore were still there. WTF?
Reminds me of an old song by Ten Hands:
Well, I watched a show just the other night
and I must say something was not right.
How come people on television's weird in the head?
They won't show sex but they show a lot of killing
I guess it would be better to show blood spilling
than to let little Jr. see two naked people in bed.
And I was confused.. (I didn't know what to do)
So I got up and turned it off
and that left me a-lone with my thoughts
and a great big pain right in the middle of my head.
And I was confused.. (I didn't know what to do)
--
I have been thinking that I would make a proposition to my Republican
friends... that if they will stop telling lies about the Democrats, we
will stop telling the truth about them. -- Adlai E. Stevenson
.
|
|
|
| User: "Clave" |
|
| Title: Re: FCC Defends Cussing Crackdown |
12 Dec 2006 09:57:40 PM |
|
|
"Paul Mitchum" <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1hq8ews.1rm0igruof09nN%usenet@mile23.c0m...
Elroy Willis <elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote:
Syd M. <pdwright42@yahoo.com> wrote in alt.atheism
J Young wrote:
What's astonishing is that the FCC would need to defend itself in the
battle to preserve common decency on the airwaves.
Oh, like you have any idea what "decency" actially means, Jerk Young.
I saw one of the most ridiculous examples of censorship last night
while watching TV. It was during a horror movie that had blood and
guts throughout. During one scene, the person being beaten to a
bloody pulp by a crazed killer gave the killer the "finger" several
times. The censors actually fuzzed out the "finger" but all the blood
and gore were still there. WTF?
Reminds me of an old song by Ten Hands:
Well, I watched a show just the other night
and I must say something was not right.
How come people on television's weird in the head?
They won't show sex but they show a lot of killing
I guess it would be better to show blood spilling
than to let little Jr. see two naked people in bed.
"I love words. I thank you for hearing my words. I want to tell you
something about words that I uh, I think is important. I love..as I say,
they're my work, they're my play, they're my passion. Words are all we have
really.
We have thoughts, but thoughts are fluid. You know, [humming]. And, then we
assign a word to a thought, [clicks tongue]. And we're stuck with that word
for that thought. So be careful with words. I like to think, yeah, the same
words that hurt can heal. It's a matter of how you pick them.
There are some people that aren't into all the words. There are some people
who would have you not use certain words. Yeah, there are 400,000 words in
the English language, and there are seven of them that you can't say on
television. What a ratio that is. 399,993 to seven. They must really be bad.
They'd have to be outrageous, to be separated from a group that large. All
of you over here, you seven. Bad words. That's what they told us they were,
remember? 'That's a bad word.' 'Awwww.' There are no bad words. Bad
thoughts. Bad Intentions.
And words, you know the seven don't you? *****, *****, *****, *****, *****,
*****, and Tits, huh? Those are the heavy seven. Those are the ones
that will infect your soul, curve your spine and keep the country from
winning the war.
*****, *****, *****, *****, *****, *****, and Tits, wow. Tits
doesn't even belong on the list, you know. It's such a friendly sounding
word. It sounds like a nickname. 'Hey, Tits, come here. Tits, meet Toots,
Toots, Tits, Tits, Toots.' It sounds like a snack doesn't it? Yes, I know,
it is, right. But I don't mean the sexist snack, I mean, New Nabisco Tits.
The new Cheese Tits, and Corn Tits and Pizza Tits, Sesame Tits Onion Tits,
Tater Tits, Yeah. Betcha can't eat just one. That's true I usually switch
off . But I mean that word does not belong on the list.
Actually, none of the words belong on the list, but you can understand why
some of them are there. I am not completely insensitive to people's
feelings. You know, I can dig why some of those words got on the list...like
***** and *****. Those are...those are heavy-weight words.
There's a lot going on there, man. Besides the literal translation and the
emotional feeling. They're just busy words. There's a lot of syllables to
contend with. And those K's. Those are aggressive sounds, they jump out at
you. CocksuckerMotherfuckerCocksucker. It's like an assault, on you. So I
can dig that.
And we mentioned ***** earlier, of course. Two of the other 4-letter
Anglo-Saxon words are ***** and *****, which go together of course. But forget
about that. A little accidental humor there. ***** and *****. The reason *****
and ***** are on the list is that a long time ago certain ladies said 'Those
are the two I am not going to say. I don't mind ***** and *****, but P and C
are out. P and C are out.' Which led to such stupid sentences as 'OK, you
fuckers, I am going to tinkle now.'
And of course the word *****. The word *****, I don't really...well, this is
some more accidental humor, but I don't really want to get into that now.
Because I think it takes too long. But I do mean that. I mean, I think the
word ***** is an important word. It's the beginning of life, and, yet it's a
word we use to hurt one other, quite often. And uh, people much wiser than I
have said, I'd rather have my son watch a film with two people making love
than two people trying to kill one other. And I of course agree. I wish I
know who said it first, and I agree with that. But I would like to take it a
step further. I would like to substitute the word *****, for the word kill in
all those movie cliches we grew up with. 'Okay Sheriff, we're gonna ***** ya
now. But we're gonna ***** ya slow.' So maybe next year I'll have a whole
fuckin' rap on that word. I hope so.
Uh, there are two-way words, but those are the seven you can never say on
television. Under any circumstances you just can not say them ever, ever
ever, not even clinically. You can not weave them in the panel with Doc and
Ed and Johnny, I mean it's just impossible, forget those seven, they're out.
But, there are some two-way words. There are double-meaning words. Remember
the ones your giggled at in sixth grade? 'And the ***** crowed three
times.''Hey, the ***** the ***** crowed three times. It's in the bible.' There
are some Two-way words, like it's okay for Curt Gowdy [mis-spelled in
original transcription. -ed.] to say 'Roberto Clemente has two balls on
him.' But he can't say, 'I think he hurt his balls on that play Tony, don't
you? He's holding them. He must have hurt them by God.' And the other
two-way word that goes with that one is *****. It's okay if it happens to
your finger. Yes, you can ***** your finger, but don't finger your *****.
No, no."
-- Carlin
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: FCC Defends Cussing Crackdown |
13 Dec 2006 11:04:53 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 19:57:40 -0800, "Clave"
<ClaviusNoSpamDammit@cablespeed.com> wrote:
"I love words. I thank you for hearing my words. I want to tell you
something about words that I uh, I think is important. I love..as I say,
they're my work, they're my play, they're my passion. Words are all we have
really.
.. . .
-- Carlin
I loved his talk of ending the war in Vietnam as well.
"'Pull out? Doesn't sound manly to me, Bob! I say we stay in and
finish the job. --- That is after all what we're doing to this
country."
-----
"Anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the
power to make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
.
|
|
|
| User: "ScottyFLL" |
|
| Title: Re: FCC Defends Cussing Crackdown |
13 Dec 2006 03:01:58 PM |
|
|
wrote:
I loved his talk of ending the war in Vietnam as well.
"'Pull out? Doesn't sound manly to me, Bob! I say we stay in and
finish the job.
Off with his head! (as it were)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bernard Hubbard" |
|
| Title: Re: FCC Defends Cussing Crackdown |
15 Dec 2006 01:04:25 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 13 Dec 2006 09:04:53 -0800, wrote:
On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 19:57:40 -0800, "Clave"
<ClaviusNoSpamDammit@cablespeed.com> wrote:
"I love words. I thank you for hearing my words. I want to tell you
something about words that I uh, I think is important. I love..as I say,
they're my work, they're my play, they're my passion. Words are all we have
really.
. . .
-- Carlin
I loved his talk of ending the war in Vietnam as well.
"'Pull out? Doesn't sound manly to me, Bob! I say we stay in and
finish the job. ---
If the fathers of all the bigots had pulled out we would not have any
'phobes to worry about.
-----
"Anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the
power to make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
--
"Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity is not thus
handicapped."~Elbert Hubbard to quote a relative of mine.
Bernard Hubbard
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Syd M." |
|
| Title: Re: FCC Defends Cussing Crackdown |
12 Dec 2006 02:43:15 PM |
|
|
Elroy Willis wrote:
Syd M. <pdwright42@yahoo.com> wrote in alt.atheism
J Young wrote:
What's astonishing is that the FCC would need to defend itself in the
battle to preserve common decency on the airwaves.
Oh, like you have any idea what "decency" actially means, Jerk Young.
I saw one of the most ridiculous examples of censorship last night
while watching TV. It was during a horror movie that had blood and
guts throughout. During one scene, the person being beaten to a
bloody pulp by a crazed killer gave the killer the "finger" several
times. The censors actually fuzzed out the "finger" but all the blood
and gore were still there. WTF?
So, a middle finger is worse then blood and gore..?
Man.. That is just messed up.
But then, did ya expect consistancy from censorers..?
PDW
.
|
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: FCC Defends Cussing Crackdown |
14 Dec 2006 07:47:00 AM |
|
|
Syd M. <pdwright42@yahoo.com> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis wrote:
I saw one of the most ridiculous examples of censorship last night
while watching TV. It was during a horror movie that had blood and
guts throughout. During one scene, the person being beaten to a
bloody pulp by a crazed killer gave the killer the "finger" several
times. The censors actually fuzzed out the "finger" but all the blood
and gore were still there. WTF?
So, a middle finger is worse then blood and gore..?
Man.. That is just messed up.
Probably looks too much like a hard penis or something.
But then, did ya expect consistancy from censorers..?
Yeah, is that wrong? :)
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Syd" |
|
| Title: Re: FCC Defends Cussing Crackdown |
14 Dec 2006 08:41:53 AM |
|
|
Elroy Willis wrote:
Syd M. <pdwright42@yahoo.com> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis wrote:
I saw one of the most ridiculous examples of censorship last night
while watching TV. It was during a horror movie that had blood and
guts throughout. During one scene, the person being beaten to a
bloody pulp by a crazed killer gave the killer the "finger" several
times. The censors actually fuzzed out the "finger" but all the blood
and gore were still there. WTF?
So, a middle finger is worse then blood and gore..?
Man.. That is just messed up.
Probably looks too much like a hard penis or something.
LOL!
But that sounds as sensible a guess as any other..
But then, did ya expect consistancy from censorers..?
Yeah, is that wrong? :)
Consistancy from censors..? What, are you a commie..? (;->)
PDW
.
|
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: FCC Defends Cussing Crackdown |
14 Dec 2006 08:57:52 AM |
|
|
Syd <pdwright42@yahoo.com> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis wrote:
Syd M. <pdwright42@yahoo.com> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis wrote:
I saw one of the most ridiculous examples of censorship last night
while watching TV. It was during a horror movie that had blood and
guts throughout. During one scene, the person being beaten to a
bloody pulp by a crazed killer gave the killer the "finger" several
times. The censors actually fuzzed out the "finger" but all the blood
and gore were still there. WTF?
So, a middle finger is worse then blood and gore..?
Man.. That is just messed up.
Probably looks too much like a hard penis or something.
LOL!
But that sounds as sensible a guess as any other..
What else could it be?
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Syd" |
|
| Title: Re: FCC Defends Cussing Crackdown |
14 Dec 2006 02:55:52 PM |
|
|
Elroy Willis wrote:
Syd <pdwright42@yahoo.com> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis wrote:
Syd M. <pdwright42@yahoo.com> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis wrote:
I saw one of the most ridiculous examples of censorship last night
while watching TV. It was during a horror movie that had blood and
guts throughout. During one scene, the person being beaten to a
bloody pulp by a crazed killer gave the killer the "finger" several
times. The censors actually fuzzed out the "finger" but all the blood
and gore were still there. WTF?
So, a middle finger is worse then blood and gore..?
Man.. That is just messed up.
Probably looks too much like a hard penis or something.
LOL!
But that sounds as sensible a guess as any other..
What else could it be?
Got me there..
What else.. Hmmm.
PDW, can't think of anything..
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Husky" |
|
| Title: Re: FCC Defends Cussing Crackdown |
14 Dec 2006 08:51:50 AM |
|
|
Syd wrote:
Elroy Willis wrote:
Syd M. <pdwright42@yahoo.com> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis wrote:
I saw one of the most ridiculous examples of censorship last night
while watching TV. It was during a horror movie that had blood and
guts throughout. During one scene, the person being beaten to a
bloody pulp by a crazed killer gave the killer the "finger" several
times. The censors actually fuzzed out the "finger" but all the blood
and gore were still there. WTF?
So, a middle finger is worse then blood and gore..?
Man.. That is just messed up.
Probably looks too much like a hard penis or something.
LOL!
But that sounds as sensible a guess as any other..
But then, did ya expect consistancy from censorers..?
Yeah, is that wrong? :)
Consistancy from censors..? What, are you a commie..? (;->)
PDW
Censors should be banned! I just can't figure out what to call the
guys who are to censor that practice. ;-0
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: FCC Defends Cussing Crackdown |
12 Dec 2006 11:21:10 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 12:25:10 GMT, Elroy Willis
<elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote:
Syd M. <pdwright42@yahoo.com> wrote in alt.atheism
J Young wrote:
What's astonishing is that the FCC would need to defend itself in the
battle to preserve common decency on the airwaves.
Oh, like you have any idea what "decency" actially means, Jerk Young.
I saw one of the most ridiculous examples of censorship last night
while watching TV. It was during a horror movie that had blood and
guts throughout. During one scene, the person being beaten to a
bloody pulp by a crazed killer gave the killer the "finger" several
times. The censors actually fuzzed out the "finger" but all the blood
and gore were still there. WTF?
Bloody murder is a Christian sacrament - the finger is a Christian
abomination. Pretty sick religion, isn't it?
--
rukbat at optonline dot net
"Speculating on the possible reaction to evidence is no excuse for
failing to produce the evidence."
- Wayne M. Delia+
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: FCC Defends Cussing Crackdown |
14 Dec 2006 07:57:47 AM |
|
|
Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis <elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote:
I saw one of the most ridiculous examples of censorship last night
while watching TV. It was during a horror movie that had blood and
guts throughout. During one scene, the person being beaten to a
bloody pulp by a crazed killer gave the killer the "finger" several
times. The censors actually fuzzed out the "finger" but all the blood
and gore were still there. WTF?
Bloody murder is a Christian sacrament - the finger is a Christian
abomination. Pretty sick religion, isn't it?
It must be the implied "***** you" that makes it wrong, or maybe it's
the phallic shape. I remember as a kid learning that there were two
ways to make the "finger." One was the right way, with the
surrounding two fingers curled up alongside the main finger, and the
other was the wrong way, with the surrounding fingers curled down
in the ball of the hand, covered by the thumb.
Is that the same way you learned it?
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: FCC Defends Cussing Crackdown |
14 Dec 2006 01:36:31 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 13:57:47 GMT, Elroy Willis
<elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote:
Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis <elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote:
I saw one of the most ridiculous examples of censorship last night
while watching TV. It was during a horror movie that had blood and
guts throughout. During one scene, the person being beaten to a
bloody pulp by a crazed killer gave the killer the "finger" several
times. The censors actually fuzzed out the "finger" but all the blood
and gore were still there. WTF?
Bloody murder is a Christian sacrament - the finger is a Christian
abomination. Pretty sick religion, isn't it?
It must be the implied "***** you" that makes it wrong, or maybe it's
the phallic shape. I remember as a kid learning that there were two
ways to make the "finger." One was the right way, with the
surrounding two fingers curled up alongside the main finger, and the
other was the wrong way, with the surrounding fingers curled down
in the ball of the hand, covered by the thumb.
Is that the same way you learned it?
I just learned about the middle finger - we didn't care where the
other ones were.
--
rukbat at optonline dot net
"Christians tell us that they love their enemies, and yet all I ask
is - not that they love their friends even, but they treat those
who differ from them , with simple fairness. We do not wish to be
forgiven but we wish Christians to so act that we will not have
to forgive them."
- Robert Ingersoll
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Husky" |
|
| Title: Re: FCC Defends Cussing Crackdown |
14 Dec 2006 08:48:02 AM |
|
|
Al Klein wrote:
On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 12:25:10 GMT, Elroy Willis
<elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote:
Syd M. <pdwright42@yahoo.com> wrote in alt.atheism
J Young wrote:
What's astonishing is that the FCC would need to defend itself in the
battle to preserve common decency on the airwaves.
Oh, like you have any idea what "decency" actially means, Jerk Young.
I saw one of the most ridiculous examples of censorship last night
while watching TV. It was during a horror movie that had blood and
guts throughout. During one scene, the person being beaten to a
bloody pulp by a crazed killer gave the killer the "finger" several
times. The censors actually fuzzed out the "finger" but all the blood
and gore were still there. WTF?
Bloody murder is a Christian sacrament - the finger is a Christian
abomination. Pretty sick religion, isn't it?
All religions are pretty sick. It's all are a bunch of Hocus Pocus to
control people here on Terra Firma. Why TF do you need a middle man to
relate to God if you're a believer?
--
rukbat at optonline dot net
"Speculating on the possible reaction to evidence is no excuse for
failing to produce the evidence."
- Wayne M. Delia+
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: FCC Defends Cussing Crackdown |
14 Dec 2006 09:07:16 AM |
|
|
Husky <Cynsguy@gmail.com> wrote in alt.atheism
Why TF do you need a middle man to relate to God if you're a believer?
Because priests are needed to mumble some Latin mumbo jumbo over
some wine and bread in order to change it into actual Jesus blood and
flesh for the faithful to slurp up and chomp on, like vampires and
cannibals. Same thing for holy water used during baptisms.
If believers could do that all by themselves, then no need for a
church or any priests.
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: FCC Defends Cussing Crackdown |
14 Dec 2006 01:34:54 PM |
|
|
On 14 Dec 2006 06:48:02 -0800, "Husky" <Cynsguy@gmail.com> wrote:
All religions are pretty sick. It's all are a bunch of Hocus Pocus to
control people here on Terra Firma. Why TF do you need a middle man to
relate to God if you're a believer?
Of the Abrahamic religions, only Christians do. Jews and Moslems
don't.
--
rukbat at optonline dot net
If you are open to the point of gullibility and have not an
ounce of skeptical sense in you, then you cannot distinguish
the useful ideas from the worthless ones
- Carl Sagan, 1987.
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "ScottyFLL" |
|
| Title: Re: FCC Defends Cussing Crackdown |
12 Dec 2006 10:57:50 AM |
|
|
J Young wrote:
What's astonishing is that the FCC would need to defend itself in the
battle to preserve common decency on the airwaves.
***** 'em.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Andrew F. Heil" |
|
| Title: Re: FCC Defends Cussing Crackdown |
12 Dec 2006 03:18:52 PM |
|
|
J Young wrote:
What's astonishing is that the FCC would need to defend itself in the
battle to preserve common decency on the airwaves.
What's not astonishing is that the best fiction viewing is found on
cable television these days.
Undoubtedly it drives the uptight control-freaks half-bonkers that they
can't do anything about that content.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: FCC Defends Cussing Crackdown |
12 Dec 2006 08:52:58 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 11 Dec 2006 22:51:56 -0800, J Young wrote:
What's astonishing is that the FCC would need to defend itself in the
battle to preserve common decency on the airwaves.
Because we have that pesky 1st Amendment...
--
Mark K. Bilbo
------------------------------------------------------------
"The problem with defending the purity of the English language
is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse *****. We don't
just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other
languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their
pockets for new vocabulary." -James D. Nicoll
.
|
|
|
| User: "J Young" |
|
| Title: Re: FCC Defends Cussing Crackdown |
12 Dec 2006 08:57:10 AM |
|
|
Mark K. Bilbo wrote:
On Mon, 11 Dec 2006 22:51:56 -0800, J Young wrote:
What's astonishing is that the FCC would need to defend itself in the
battle to preserve common decency on the airwaves.
Because we have that pesky 1st Amendment...
It's possible to express all of ones thoughts and opinions without
resorting to vulgarities and obscenities. The 1st amendment has nothing
to do with it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Chief Instigator" |
|
| Title: Re: FCC Defends Cussing Crackdown |
12 Dec 2006 09:41:02 AM |
|
|
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> writes:
Mark K. Bilbo wrote:
On Mon, 11 Dec 2006 22:51:56 -0800, J Young wrote:
What's astonishing is that the FCC would need to defend itself in the
battle to preserve common decency on the airwaves.
Because we have that pesky 1st Amendment...
It's possible to express all of ones thoughts and opinions without
resorting to vulgarities and obscenities. The 1st amendment has nothing
to do with it.
Keep believing that, IBend...they'll come for you, sooner or later.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2006-07 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Omaha 4, Houston 3 (SO) (December 9)
NEXT GAME: Wednesday, December 13 vs. Manitoba, 7:05
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Joseph Welch" |
|
| Title: Re: FCC Defends Cussing Crackdown |
12 Dec 2006 03:23:44 PM |
|
|
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1165935430.627890.168410@j72g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
It's possible to express all of ones thoughts and opinions without
resorting to vulgarities and obscenities.
Of course it's possible. It is not, however, mandatory.
--
____________________
George W. Bush has made the terrorists stronger, their influence wider,
their numbers larger, and their motivation to attack the U.S. and other
western interests greater. He has repeatedly abused his authority and
violated his Oath of Office by turning his back on the United States
Constitution; thereby surrendering to the terrorists by undermining American
freedoms,values, and the very foundations of our system of government.
Supporting Bush is treason.
_____________________
JW
***************
"You've done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have
you left no sense of decency?"
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/welch-mccarthy.html
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
.
|
|
|
| User: "Paul Mitchum" |
|
| Title: Re: FCC Defends Cussing Crackdown |
12 Dec 2006 03:49:53 PM |
|
|
Joseph Welch <seattledemocracy@hotmail.com> wrote:
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1165935430.627890.168410@j72g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
It's possible to express all of ones thoughts and opinions without
resorting to vulgarities and obscenities.
Of course it's possible.
You know ***** well that it's not.
It is not, however, mandatory.
Some of these shitstains would like it to be, though.
--
I have been thinking that I would make a proposition to my Republican
friends... that if they will stop telling lies about the Democrats, we
will stop telling the truth about them. -- Adlai E. Stevenson
.
|
|
|
| User: "Joseph Welch" |
|
| Title: Re: FCC Defends Cussing Crackdown |
12 Dec 2006 04:00:46 PM |
|
|
"Paul Mitchum" <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1hq8iyk.1417kii18w47cbN%usenet@mile23.c0m...
It is not, however, mandatory.
Some of these shitstains would like it to be, though.
Fuckin'-A.
But seriously folks.
I've run into a surprising number of wingers who eschew potty-mouth, but
engage in some extreme behavior on the personal end. There's no shortage of
right-wingers who attend places like the Wet Spot for example (I don't - but
I've talked to them what do).
One woman who claimed to be a Wet Spot regular called herself "Fluffy" and
was a self-proclaimed born again Christian. She'd get all ***** if you
said "God" or "Jesus" as an exclamation or swore. On the weekends she spent
her time dressing up in leather and spanking bad boys a cat-o-nine-tails.
It's as if they think that adopting a strict verbal code excuses them for
all the other nasty ***** that they do.
--
____________________
George W. Bush has made the terrorists stronger, their influence wider,
their numbers larger, and their motivation to attack the U.S. and other
western interests greater. He has repeatedly abused his authority and
violated his Oath of Office by turning his back on the United States
Constitution; thereby surrendering to the terrorists by undermining American
freedoms,values, and the very foundations of our system of government.
Supporting Bush is treason.
_____________________
JW
***************
"You've done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have
you left no sense of decency?"
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/welch-mccarthy.html
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
.
|
|
|
| User: "Clave" |
|
| Title: Re: FCC Defends Cussing Crackdown |
12 Dec 2006 10:50:51 PM |
|
|
"Joseph Welch" <seattledemocracy@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1165960930_3855@sp6iad.superfeed.net...
"Paul Mitchum" <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1hq8iyk.1417kii18w47cbN%usenet@mile23.c0m...
It is not, however, mandatory.
Some of these shitstains would like it to be, though.
Fuckin'-A.
But seriously folks.
I've run into a surprising number of wingers who eschew potty-mouth, but
engage in some extreme behavior on the personal end. There's no shortage
of right-wingers who attend places like the Wet Spot for example (I
don't - but I've talked to them what do).
One woman who claimed to be a Wet Spot regular called herself "Fluffy" and
was a self-proclaimed born again Christian. She'd get all ***** if
you said "God" or "Jesus" as an exclamation or swore. On the weekends she
spent her time dressing up in leather and spanking bad boys a
cat-o-nine-tails.
It's as if they think that adopting a strict verbal code excuses them for
all the other nasty ***** that they do.
Here on Usenet it's usually nothing more than an excuse for the pious,
self-righteous types to ignore the substance of what someone else is saying.
Jim
.
|
|
|
| User: "Nicola" |
|
| Title: Re: FCC Defends Cussing Crackdown |
13 Dec 2006 01:22:05 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 20:50:51 -0800, "Clave"
<ClaviusNoSpamDammit@cablespeed.com> wrote:
"Joseph Welch" <seattledemocracy@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1165960930_3855@sp6iad.superfeed.net...
"Paul Mitchum" <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1hq8iyk.1417kii18w47cbN%usenet@mile23.c0m...
It is not, however, mandatory.
Some of these shitstains would like it to be, though.
Fuckin'-A.
But seriously folks.
I've run into a surprising number of wingers who eschew potty-mouth, but
engage in some extreme behavior on the personal end. There's no shortage
of right-wingers who attend places like the Wet Spot for example (I
don't - but I've talked to them what do).
One woman who claimed to be a Wet Spot regular called herself "Fluffy" and
was a self-proclaimed born again Christian. She'd get all ***** if
you said "God" or "Jesus" as an exclamation or swore. On the weekends she
spent her time dressing up in leather and spanking bad boys a
cat-o-nine-tails.
It's as if they think that adopting a strict verbal code excuses them for
all the other nasty ***** that they do.
Here on Usenet it's usually nothing more than an excuse for the pious,
self-righteous types to ignore the substance of what someone else is saying.
That's so true - and it always annoys me. Surely swearing demonstrates
a wider vocabulary and a more comprehensive grasp of the English
language?
Nicola
--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
