| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"Snowflake" |
| Date: |
28 Feb 2004 02:24:37 PM |
| Object: |
Janet, Howard and San Francisco don't speak for me!!! |
http://www.columbustownhall.com/townhall/index.php?s=&act=ST&f=8&t=222
Janet, Howard and San Francisco don't speak for me!!!
I may be mistaken but I thought in America elected legislators made
the law, and the judges enforced the law. The rule of law is what
holds us together as a Great Nation. No single unelected person has
the right or power to make the rules that everyone else must follow;
this is a Democracy not a Dictatorship. In their full court press to
recapture the Whitehouse and forward their leftwing agenda obnoxious,
pushy and offensive Liberals seem to have forgotten these principals.
FCC laws for decency have been on the book for years and are well
known by every performer in the entertainment industry. Apparently the
unbelievably egotistical and arrogant Janet Jackson decided that she
was above the law, and forced all of America to accept her new and
obscene interpretation of the law, regardless of their views. Because
of her arrogance, conversations about breast shield and nipple
piercing can be found on almost any playground. I am sorry, but I
don't want Janet Jackson or her brother determining what acceptable
family entertainment is for the rest of us.
Howard Stern had the nerve to blame "Right-Wing Fascists" for the
PRIVATE decision of Clear Channel's CEO dropping him from a few major
markets. Ironically, at the same time Mel Gibson couldn't find funding
or distribution for one of the biggest blockbusters in history for his
conservative movie and the NY Times published a threatening article
questioning Mel Gibson's ability to ever work in Hollywood again.
Howard has been defecating on the airwaves for over 20 years, and it
took a sexually explicit conversation with Paris Hilton's co-star
during which the "N" word was used to get his Boss to enforce the laws
that have been of the books for Generations. Once again, I don't want
arrogant, egotistical, developmentally arrested and obscene leftist
"entertainers" like Howard Stern determining for the rest of America
what is appropriate to broadcast over the PUBLIC airways. I didn't
vote for him to determine what is appropriate for my children to view
or hear.
Lastly is San Francisco. If ever there was a place totally unsuited
to determine the course of this Great Nation it is San Francisco.
Their "progressive" agenda and policies almost bankrupt their once
Great State of California. Now, San Francinians have determined that
the definition of marriage that has stood for thousands of years, is
globally accepted and the laws based upon it must be changed and are
not to be obeyed. A single left-wing Mayor and his sympathetic
activist Judges simply shoved their extremist views down the throats
of all Americans and arrogantly expect then to swallow. Ironically,
just a few months ago these very same groups were outraged by a judge
in Alabama interpreting the 1st Amendment in a manner that was
tolerant of a respectful display of the Ten Commandments in a public
building. Being outraged at a Ten Commandments display, while being
supportive of displays like the "***** Christ," unilaterally redefining
marriage and issuing Gay Marriage licensed in clear violation of
California law shows just how distorted and out of the mainstream
their value system truly is. Once again, I didn't vote for the Mayor
of San Francisco, or any of those activist leftist judges. I
certainly don't want a vocal minority like the Gay lobby dictating to
America what the definition of marriage should be, any more than they
would want me dictating the laws to them. The law, not a single person
or group, determines that.
If San Francisco can do this, then Judge Roy Moore should be allowed
to determine the interpretation of the 1st Amendment for all of
America, and while we are at it, let's have him give a final and
forever binding ruling on Roe v Wade. After that we should have Judge
Thomas review the Civil Rights Amendment, and what ever he decides
become the law of the land. Clearly this isn't a road the short
sighted and hypocritical Liberals want to follow, especially with the
recent congressional redistricting and state delegate changes that
greatly favor the Republicans in the House and Senate this next
election. Also, forcing radical change on the American, especially
during a time of war, will most likely result in a backlash. America
is at war, fighting evil terrorists with Americans losing their lives
almost daily. Do liberals really want to hold Howard Stern, Janet
Jackson and San Francisco out as symbols of their out-of-touch agenda?
Call me impractical and living in denial, but I bet War, National
Security and the economy are far more important right now in the minds
of the average voter then redefining marriage and allowing our public
airways to continue as toilets for obnoxious, obscene and offensive
shock jocks and developmentally arrested exhibitionist Mtv Video Stars
to defecate in. California is not only financially bankrupt, it is
morally, culturally, and ideologically bankrupt as well. Liberals'
priorities are simply out of touch with the rest of America, and
Americans' should vote to quarantine the bankruptcy on the left coast,
and not let the leftist contagion spread to the rest of the Nation.
.
|
|
| User: "Roedy Green" |
|
| Title: Re: Janet, Howard and San Francisco don't speak for me!!! |
28 Feb 2004 07:57:58 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 28 Feb 2004 20:24:37 GMT, Snowflake <bumpy1@mindspring.com>
wrote or quoted :
Janet, Howard and San Francisco don't speak for me!!!
Cry of the dinosaurs on the great issues of the day: Janet's tit and
Howard Stern.
Have you no sense of proportion? Why are such trivia so important to
you, but the fate of the planet means nothing.
Snow-Flake -- says it all.
--
Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
Coaching, problem solving, economical contract programming.
See http://mindprod.com/jgloss/jgloss.html for The Java Glossary.
.
|
|
|
| User: "=Ö§âmâ ßíñ Trâvís=" |
|
| Title: Re: Janet, Howard and San Francisco don't speak for me!!! |
28 Feb 2004 11:33:19 PM |
|
|
"Roedy Green" <look-at-the-website@mindprod.com> wrote in message
news:7mh240hsq6rgkfe2n9u3n907k7r92cd29e@4ax.com...
On Sat, 28 Feb 2004 20:24:37 GMT, Snowflake <bumpy1@mindspring.com>
wrote or quoted :
Janet, Howard and San Francisco don't speak for me!!!
Cry of the dinosaurs on the great issues of the day: Janet's tit and
Howard Stern.
Have you no sense of proportion? Why are such trivia so important to
you, but the fate of the planet means nothing.
Snow-Flake -- says it all.
--
Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
Coaching, problem solving, economical contract programming.
See http://mindprod.com/jgloss/jgloss.html for The Java Glossary.
Don't distract me with Dean, Janet and oware, I'm busy hating Georgie Mush.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gus" |
|
| Title: Re: Janet, Howard and San Francisco don't speak for me!!! |
01 Mar 2004 02:37:14 AM |
|
|
Roedy Green wrote:
On Sat, 28 Feb 2004 20:24:37 GMT, Snowflake <bumpy1@mindspring.com>
wrote or quoted :
Janet, Howard and San Francisco don't speak for me!!!
Cry of the dinosaurs on the great issues of the day: Janet's tit and
Howard Stern.
Have you no sense of proportion? Why are such trivia so important to
you, but the fate of the planet means nothing.
That's what rightwingnuts do. They have no working brain cells, so they
screech about what ever rightwingnut puppetmasters like Rush & Rove tell
them to screech about with no sense of proportion or meaning.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "d2e2" |
|
| Title: Re: Janet, Howard and San Francisco don't speak for me!!! |
28 Feb 2004 07:18:54 PM |
|
|
Snowflake wrote:
http://www.columbustownhall.com/townhall/index.php?s=&act=ST&f=8&t=222
Janet, Howard and San Francisco don't speak for me!!!
I may be mistaken but I thought in America elected legislators made
the law, and the judges enforced the law. The rule of law is what
holds us together as a Great Nation.
hypocrite: one who feigns to be other and better than he is; a false
pretender to virtue or piety; one who simulates virtue or
piety.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
