I hear ya...about the spelling thing fzzy! When I type on this thing and reread my words...most of them don't look correct...lol! It's annoying and I know it and I'm sorry! I know I'll never make the "amendment" mistake again though...so TY!

As to the Stern show content and presentation...I totally understand what you are saying about how one person can say something in one context and another can say the same thing in a totally different way, but did you understand me when I explained that Howard's content has ALWAYS been the same?

I'm not trying to make a case and sway opinions for Howard Stern here. He is just a perfect example of the climate of what the FCC and the governing powers are up to these days. There have been other radio jocks who have actually been ousted from their jobs recently, for being even more shocking than Howard. So...he is not the only focus of the FCC, but he is a major one!

I'll say it again...Clear Channel carried Howard's show for many years and defended his right to keep his content on many occasions. Suddenly, one day they fired the show from all of their stations with no warning and only stated that his content was the reason. He is not being paid in fulfilling his contract...even though it is an iron clad one and, yes, he is taking Clear Channel to task in litigation for it. Then the FCC aquired Michael Powell as it's head. This is a man who, on several occasions, has spoken out in favor of freedom of speech in a way that would have left Howard unscathed...till he was appointed to the FCC. Then he flip-flopped his reasonings and began fining Infinity Broadcasting for the complaints it received for the Stern show. He stated that hundreds of complaints were received, but failed to mention (till the records were checked) that these hundreds of complaints came from a handful of people...literally! The fines were high at first, but Infinity paid them none the less. Then the threat of fining individuals for each and every indescretion was tabled and discussed. This included past shows that had already aired "as is". So each show had to be re-edited for airing for the "Best Of" shows when the cast of the Stern show is on vacation. But, because the FCC hasn't clearly and concisely defined indecency, but "will know it when they hear it"...the old shows can be fined over and over and over again for words that aired the last times it was aired but wasn't sited. So, if a show is used three times (for example) and the content has been censored each time...the very next time it is aired, it can be fined again for something new that the FCC suddenly feels is indecent.

In all honesty...all Howard wants is a day in court with the FCC in order for them to define indecency. This won't help him now. But those left behind on commercial radio will need this definition in order to play by the FCC's rules and it would behoove the braodcaster's in all media venues to make certain it comes to fruition...and stop this downward spiral before it gets even more out of hand!

If it's left up to the FCC, as it is now, they have petitioned to have their meetings and results kept behind closed doors...which is against some law (that I can never remember the name of)...and quite frankly, a really bizarre request for an organization that is suppose to be in the forefront of helping people keep this country "moral"!!!!!!


Oops...running late...gotta go!

I'd agree with much of that, just not all. Individual liberty is good, but so is economic freedom. I want to keep government off my back, out of my pocket, and out of my bedroom, unless of course, by government, you mean some cute intern. :devilish:

tater :boobs: and cheese :boobs: and nacho :boobs: bet you can't eat just one!!!


i love the discussions keep em coming :line: hey guys bring in the stuff ....wanna move over a little ....... :line:

i think what you mean are the open meeting laws but i believe they apply only to agencies. in pa we have the sunshine act... also applies to agencies....could be federal as well but i'm not certain.
*thinking she didn't know much about it after all * lol

I think we should settle this with a winner takes all game of Anal Ring Toss. :D

That's it wyndhy! The Sunshine Act...(if I had more time I would look it up, but for now...that's the one I was thinking of!) TY so much!

There is a bill before Congress, as we speak, that will be voted on real soon (the fastest I've ever heard a bill getting to voting stage), possibly this week, that will allow for individual fines for each individual "indecent" behavior or remark by a broadcaster. This means that 1/2 million dollar fines will be imposed per incident coming from the pocket of the person who is held responsible. It's almost a sure thing to pass! Howard will shut up and just play music for the rest of his contract if this happens. Indecency STILL hasn't been defined...and at their descretion (the FCC)...on any given day, for any reason that they feel like, for anything that doesn't sit right with them no matter how miniscule or ridiculous...they will be able to impose this fine over and over and over again with no explaination...just that "we knew it when we heard/saw it!

We can all thank Janet Jackson for her help in this one...though she goes unscathed because she has never had a fine imposed on her for her "wardrobe malfunction"!

Do you understand what this does to the first amendment? It would be comparable to overturning Roe vs. Wade in terms of impact on our nation!!!!!! We're headed backward instead of forward people!

LMAO@WI!

LixyChick,

There are those who would, and have, suggested that it is the irresponsible behavior of people like Ms. Jackson that precipitated these unfortunate developments. Note also that it requires an act of Congress (ref. your post above) to empower the FCC to assess these draconian fines. Congress represents the general populace, as reflected in votes.

Roberto Clemente has two balls on him! :D

Yeah jseal...she was the catalyst!

The bill I spoke of has already been passed in the House sub-committee and is being considered in the House now. When they pass it (which they more than likely will) it'll go to the Senate for conference and then a vote and then on to the President...all of which should happen within the next few weeks. Congress has nothing more to do in this recent session (poor people, AIDES, prescription medicine, etc., etc.) it seems...cause this bill took off like wildfire. In about 4 months (at the very least) this bill will be law! As far as I know there are only a handful who will vote NO.

This isn't the first time the bill has been presented to Congress, but the last time it was shot down in conference for an addendum that has now disappeared. Huh? Yeah...there was some wording that got it a no vote...and now the wording is gone! Dunno what it said (specifically), but it's been reworded and it's "passable" now.

BTW...my representative[s] is/are all of the same persuasion (R) as the majority of the country...but even Democrats find this bill amusing and worthy!!!???

This country sure done gone crazy!

My governor is pushing to have the authority to purge voters from the voting rolls. :D Just the news I woke up to.

LixyChick,

The bill passed by 389 votes to 38 on Wednesday. Not too many legislators on either side of the aisle willing to go to bat for the First Amendment. Although the bill cannot become law until the Senate approves similar legislation, it is already considering such a bill.

This measure would require the FCC to act on complaints within six months and would allow them to consider violations when renewing licenses. It boosts the maximum penalty for firms and individual entertainers to $500,000.

I can only hope that those who rail against self restraint, or as they call it “self-censorship”, are pleased and satisfied with Ms. Jackson’s exercise of her “freedom of speech”.

:(

i've (obviously) been reading this thread and i feel the need to add something.

i believe in freedom of speech, wholeheartedly, but you can not now nor will you ever be able to convince me that when our founding fathers ensured our rights to free speech they envisioned that a most important debate to be held some 200-odd years hence would be focused upon whether or whether not someone can say ass-fuck on the public radio waves. they meant the right ot disagree with your govn't, the right to proclaim your faith for all to hear.

i also firmly stand by the notion that a nation can not have total equality and total freedom…they do not meet in the middle. someone will always be “more free”. do i not have the freedom to not be accosted with things i do not wish to see or hear but are beyond my control? does another person not have the freedom to say things i do not wish to hear? who’s freedoms are more important…who is more equal?

Lilith,

Bummer! What are the criteria?

Unsure yet of how he plans to sell it...I am in one of 10 states that denies felons the right to vote and one of only a few that denies them that right forever. We had voting issues over this during the last election. But the article does not refer to that.

Here is the article http://www.tallahassee.com/mld/tallahassee/10919322.htm

When are Floridians gonna wake up and toss Jeb out? :rant:

Well he can't run again so my guess is when his term is up :p

Lilith,

Florida seems to have some vivid local politicos. After reading that edition of the Tallahassee Democrat, I'm pleased to learn that Maryland is not alone in having colorful elected officials! :)

New Hampshire,must be one of the states that allows it!I am a convicted felon.Many years ago,in Rockingham County Superior Court,I was convicted
of Aggravated Assault(sp?)(a felony)I have since gotten a complete record
annullment.There is a court fee($300)& many high state officials,have to OK it,before the Superior Court Judge,approves it.I carry a photostatic copy in my wallet,just in case.No-one ever said anything about voting & I am registered as an Independent,on the Town voting list. Irish

In my state it is estimated around 8% can not vote.

Sure, but what if my faith is in the divinity in the Almighty Lord Assfuck? ;)

Only kidding :p

then you will need to ammend that to say "the almighty deity of unlawful rectal carnal knowledge" :p :D

wasn't that a Van Halen album ?:spin: :dizzy:

No, that is what I am changing my name to. ;)

I wholeheartedly agree with you wyndhy...about our forefather's having NO intention to assure us the right to speak in a vulgar or indecent (which, btw...can be argued for interpretation of what one person finds vulgar and indecent and another doesn't...but I digress) manner in a public venue, 200+ years after the inception...I swear I agree with you! I can visualize them flipping in their graves as a matter of fact!

This bill isn't about Howard wanting to say "fuck, ass, suck, dick, shit, tit, clit" (or whatever those 7 words are) on his show and the FCC putting their foot down, once and for all, and making him stop! It's NOT about that at all...it's soooooooooooooooooooooooooooo much more! I fear I can barely explain in a semi-midsized post just exactly what the FCC is taking away from [us]...not just Howard and his "fellow" broadcasters...but us as a nation!

I'm gonna try though...you know I am...lol!

Without a formal guideline of EXACTLY what can and can't be said on the airwaves, through the years Howard (and many, many other broadcasters of all venues) have "self-censored" their shows to be air worthy. This means that Howard has NEVER uttered the entire word "fuck", but has said it as "the F word" or "friggin" or "ffffffffffffffffffffff"...and so the same goes with all the other words that [we] would be shocked to hear on the airwaves. His show's content has not changed in all the years he's been on air!! I cannot state that fact enough...his persona and show content has always been what it is to this day!

That said (again and again...I know...You don't have to say it so loud! I'm a pain in the ass sometime...lol!), let me just tell you about the Howard Stern show...and YOUR right NOT to listen if you don't like it's content...which is well in your control...JUST TURN THE DIAL OR TURN OFF THE RADIO!

I'm only speaking of Howard's show here because that is what [I] listen to...but many other shows have been/are/will be effected by this law!

Howard's show is filled with sex, politics, sex, local and national news, sex, pretty girls getting naked for money, sex, fart jokes GALORE, sex, queefs (pussy farts), sex, retarded people, sex, midgets, sex, dwarfs, sex, drunks, sex, drug jokes, sex, bizarre contests, sex, real intelligence contests, sex, money prizes, sex, big time show biz people, sex, Congressman, sex, Senators, sex, Governors, sex...oh, I could go on and on...and that's just in one jam-packed 4-5 hour show, per day, per week, day in and day out for over 20 years! He has been the top morning show in nearly (if not all) of his markets in syndication (nationwide) in the "male, 18-35 age group" every stinkin single one of the years he's been broadcasting with his current regular show staff (ie: Robin (Ophelia...lmao!) Quivers, Fred (Eric) Norris, Gary (Bababooey) DelAbate, Scott (Scotttttttttttttttttttttttttt!) Salem...and now, replacing Jackie (The Jokeman) Martling is Arty Lange (one of the most spontaneous comedians...and drunken ones too...that I have ever heard!

Howard has surrounded himself with oddities...which he handles with TLC in his own way, over the years. Many have taken offense to his calling a black man "King of all Blacks"...but those who know Howard, know he is not a racist and we wait to hear where this title will take the "King". It usually takes him to the height of his own personal "15 minutes of fame" and the realization that Howard loves [most] all people if you are real and not an asshole...as most people would assume if they met you in person. He listens to plights and helps those he can. He weeds out the grubbers and truely takes interest in a sad situation. He's actually talked a man down from throwing himself off a bridge (even though it's been said that it was staged...it's been proved to be true). He's exposed, and then had them show their true selves for what they are in front of America on the air, the more seedy side of the human race in...KKK leaders, crooked politicians, lying newspaper journalists, phony, bilking psychics...etc., etc.

The show has had sponsors (Steven Singer Jewelers...off the top of my head) for over 20 years. This tells me that someone beside me knows the impact he has on this country.

Now...don't get me wrong here! There are things I HATE about the man. I have to take my headphones off at times during the show and go ugggggh! But all in all, I find Howard to be one of the most honest and open and fast thinking/forward thinking people I have NEVER met. And as is with almost anything/anybody...you either love him or you hate him. There is no middle ground with him and his show. All I need to convey here is that he's never overstepped the line in content. Meaning...he's "cleaned up the language" of as many indecent things he could think to stop before it went to air. If, on any given day, in any given moment, it is suggested that something is not air worthy, he has "cleaned it up" to the satisfaction of the producers and censors and the FCC. When it is stated CLEARLY that suddenly something isn't air worthy...with a LOT of bitching for what one finds indecent and another doesn't...he'll STILL clean it up to make his show a go! Every single day that passes...no, make that hour...his show is chopped and chopped to bleeps personified!

I don't care if you like the man or his show. I mean...I REALLY DON'T CARE! I'm NOT trying to "sell" him to this forum! I'm trying to let you all know that his show, in all the years I have been listening (going on 15 now) has always been about what it is about today. Except today...we get less and less and less and less of a show that WE KNOW WHAT WE ARE TUNING IN TO WHEN WE TURN HIM ON...AND IF I DON'T LIKE IT...I TURN HIM OFF!

You cannot tell me that it doesn't scare you that a Federal agency of non-elected officials (yeah...I know...our elected officials appointed them to their jobs...but I say those elected were not elected by everyone!) has the authority to fine an individual $500,000.00 per incident for an "indecent" remark that on another day before was not deemed indecent and on another day in the future could be...but we don't know because it's an "I'll know it when I hear it" situation...left to the discretion of a handful of puritan thinkers who want to clean up the morals of this entire country???????

Who's to say what is indecent? Is this site indecent? Some think it is...and we, as members of this family, would be up the asses of those who tried to shut us down...wouldn't we? Why in the world aren't we as outraged at what this new law might do as we would be if someone tried to say that they arbitrarily decided that this site should no longer exist because of it's content? They think it's indecent and they are in charge of our morals now...and they are shutting us down! Wouldn't that piss you off to the highest power? Just who the fuck do they think they are to correct my morals to be in line with theirs? I am a human being with a mind and a soul and a will of my own...and I will decide what is indecent and decent for ME and MINE...not them!

Sorry wyndhy...but your statement "I believe in freedom of speech, wholeheartedly" doesn't hold true to me when you can differentiate on the basis of assumed (and false) insinuation that Howard IS what his critics claim he is all about! It's not the case at all. And if content is his Achilles heel...it should have been that all along...not just now in this new administration!

Oh...and one more MAJOR example of just what the FCC is up to...

DISCLAIMER: Don't read on if you are easily offended...























Knowing that in all the years Howard has been on air and knowing the content of his show...one has to know that he is a man, and men are tickled to death with fart noises. Am I right? Yep...I know I am! LOL! Well, get this...

Howard has had guys (and a few girls who queef) on his show, year in and year out, who can fart on demand for as long as 2-3 hours (some maybe more). Recently, he's been notified that the FCC will fine the show if a fart noise "lasts too long or is too wet". CAN YOU FUCKIN BELIEVE THAT? It's as true as true can be, people! This is what it's all coming to! I mean...farts, for crying out loud! We can't even laugh at a long, wet fart anymore!
















Just wanted to show you how miniscule they'll go to show their power. I swear...it isn't as simple as a fart noise!

*hugs to you all for reading my ramblings!*

*BUMP*

Didn't want this thread to get lost yet!

yep… stole it, twisted it, and made it mine…er… i made it aqua’s :D


and lixy…. a few points ;)


first. i don’t think there’s any way that they can introduce a set of strict “guidelines” because, frankly imo, they’re right: vulgar or indecent is something that they will know when they see or hear it, or anyone else will interpret in their own way. it must be kept changeable because languages and popular opinion are always changing. there are words decent or even non-existent today that will not be so tomorrow. t’s the nature of the beast. there are also times when the content is the issue and not the words, as fzzy pionted out before. to define the word cunt is much different than calling someone a cunt. but this, i think, is something i need not explain further. you can all understand what i mean.

and as for the control i spoke of … are you saying that there will never be a time that i am at the beach or stuck in traffic on a 100 degree day with no a/c and someone close by is blaring something offensive or vulgar from their radio speakers? c’mon…that’s impossible. that’s what i meant by beyond my control. (perhaps it is not howard, etc….whoever, who should be fined but the people too stupid, ignorant or obnoxious to keep it on the qt. :D :grin: ) anyway, back to being serious...i think that's the reason govn’t feels it incumbent upon them to police the radio waves, over which they have licensing control, for “immoral” content.

and i really don’t like making this about howard (incidentally i am an oddity i guess because i don’t love him and i don’t hate him) but nevertheless, here goes…his content may not have changed but his reach and influence have. popular opinion has changed as well. hence, the sudden crackdown. they are not arbitrarily shutting down anything. he could stay where he is and play by their rules or he can find another way. he has chosen to find another way. which, btw, i want to point out that if anyone wants to get satellite radio just so they can listen to howard be prepared to pay an extra two dollars cause he ain’t part of their package deal. he does it for the money, as do they all, not some sort of crusade against “the man”. his motives are not selflessand i don’t have a problrm with that. i do have a problem with him/others like him making themselves into martyrs for “the cause” when all they want is to get rich :rolleyes2

would i be upset if someone took away my outlet to discuss sex in a private forum? sure would! but signing up as a member of a forum clearly labeled as “sex site” is much different then if i were to suddenly begin a vulgar discussion of said sex site at the playground, mickeyD's or on the abc channel (again these are things/places under local, private and federal control). and if it did happen? so be it. freedom of speech does not give me the right to belong to a forum such as this. i don’t think that will ever happen, though. they are not trying to muffle everything “vulgar”, only the venues that are, and have always been, under the licensing jurisdiction of the federal govn’t (sorry but i can’t stress that enough). if i wanted to become a part of something that is under the control or jurisdiction of someone else then i need to be prepared to follow their rules or go elsewhere. it’s just that simple.



i respectfully disagree. it does not mean today what it was intended to mean 200+years ago. it has been twisted and tweaked, yes, but not buy the govn’t…it has been twisted by people who want to say anything they can just for its’ shock value and then hide behind their “right to free speech”. contrary to your belief, i can separate the two because i believe in the freedom of speech as our founding fathers intended. i do not believe it gives anyone the right to say anything they want to anyone within earshot. and i was not refferring to howard only in that post. i am just plain sick and tired of hearing about how so-and-so said/did such-and-such on the radio, broadcast tv, the entrance to the mall, whatever, got themselves in dutch, and then whined “but it’s my right to say/do ‘______’, the constitution guarantees it”. THAT is just plain bullshit and that was my point earlier… they should not hide behind their “rights” because everyone else has those same rights. why are one person’s rights more important than another person’s?



you're right, they were not elected by everyone, they were elected by the majority, and no their fines do not scare me. as i said, these venues are within the licensing powers of the govnt’ and it is the govn’t’s right and obligation to police them as they see fit. if they started throwing people in jail or… :eek: … executing them THEN i’d be scared. and i’m not saying i agree with some, most or all of what they have deemed vulgar. but that is another discussion and not what my earlier post was about at all. i, too, have issues with the government involving themselves in/forcing their way into my personal life. but…they are not shutting him or anyone down…they are forcing them to find a place to air their shows where the govn’t does not have control. i ask you…where is the harm in that? i would feel the same way… “this is my house and you will obey my rules or be punished and if you can not obey my rules you will go elsewhere”

Wyndhy---I agree with MOST of what you say,but you are not the ONLY oddity,I don't love him or hate him either! Irish
P.S.When you're a biker & an Irishman,you get used to being called an oddity!

wyndhy, I've read all you had to say and I actually didn't expect anything less or different than what was your well thought out reply. TY for taking the time!

As I said before...I'm not here to help change the mind of everyone in this forum. I'm just stating what I see, as I see it.

IMHO...popular opinion hasn't changed all that much. It's just that now...with a new holier than thou/more moral than you can shake a stick at administration...you and I are being told how to conduct our lives by people I would never invite into my life if I had the "choice". That's my biggest problem with all that is afoot. I have NO CHOICE but to let what is happening happen. And by the time all is said and done...mark my words, here and now...somehow, someway, the actions that are starting to snowball from this bill becoming law will effect you and/or yours in some way that is negative to you...and you (whoever is reading this) will look back and say, "Lixy was right...this sucks...and I can't believe it got so out of control!"

I've never said there will never be a time when you overhear something disconcerting on someone else's radio (or whatever) and wished you didn't have to listen. What I did say is...if you tune into Howard's show and can't stand him...you have every power within yourself to turn him off! I'm not into "policing" the world to my specifications...and I am not here to recruit Howard Stern lovers. I believe in diversity and to each his own and the biggy of all biggies...WE ARE ALL RESPONSIBLE FOR OUR OWN ACTIONS by us, for us, and towards the people we love and to mankind in general. If I needed the government to step in and teach me how to live a moral and decent life...I'd move to Iraq or some other country who's government is compelled to control them and tell them how to live! When I don't like something that affects me personally, I try to change it in my own comfort zone...I don't try to change the entire country to suit my feelings about it! I don't need "saving". I don't need anyone elses ideals of right or wrong inflicted on me. I'm NOT a bad person and I can't stand someone saying I am because I listen to what I listen to or look at what I look at.

If someone doesn't explain to me (soon) what the long term effects of overhearing an "indecent" word or action on a media venue is doing to the children or adults of this world...I think I'm gonna explode! For a handful of nutcakes...it may have an effect. But there will always be a handful of nutcakes out there. In the long run...the rest of us just go about our lives and either forget or it doesn't affect us in the least. WHERE'S THE MOTHER FUCKIN HARM?

And...WHAT'S NEXT? After all is hunky dory on the airwaves...are they looking to book banning/burning again? Hey! You don't know...there is NO WAY you can know! It could happen just as surely as I am typing this!

If someone is provoked and backed into a corner...the natural instinct is to fight. If someone is offered an incredible amount of money for doing something he's been doing all along...but with less restraints and callings to task...there is no way I could call them selfish. I'd actually call them smart for taking advantage of an upgraded situation. Who wouldn't want more money? Not one single person out there wouldn't want more money for the same kind of job with better working conditions! The offer was given...not demanded! Howard had no intention of continuing his broadcating career...but I'd call him a stupid asshole had he turned down the deal he was offered. Howard's told everyone how much to expect to spend to convert to sattelite (his shows)...and his pay has been divulged. He doesn't lie to his audience. Never has. So it was no secret!

It is 2005...and the times they have been a changin since the Constitution was first conceived. If interpretation has changed along with it...that only seems natural to me. Just as natural as taking antiquated laws off the books that only concerned the days they were written for (sorry...drawing a blank for an example at the moment...lol!). I want to grow and PROGRESS...not stop and then REGRESS...as I feel is happening by letting the government leap into our lives deeper and deeper by the minute.

If we can't stand up and proclaim out "right to free speech" in a circumstance that will effect so many more than just ourselves...we have no such thing as free speech! As I see it....Howard is doing the most selfless thing ever for a cause that will not even concern him in a few short months. He could sit back and shut up and abide the nitpicky rules and regulations and never again say another word about them. Instead, he's trying to educate those who will listen and let them know that no matter what they think of him...this is just another instance where the government is overstepping it's bounds and taking on more than should ever be allowed.

If the FCC had jurisdiction to do what they intend to do...they wouldn't need an act of Congress to say ok. They'd just do it. They don't have the power yet...but are seeking the power through this bill. If it were right and acceptable...why doesn't Howard have a day in court to confront his accusers? Why won't Michael Powell or any other FCC member talk to Howard or Infinity Broadcasting about the ins and outs...or show him "the rules", as you stated wyndhy. Why are their rights and regulations more important than keeping this all in the open and above board? Couldn't it be that the FCC might be trying to do a good thing in the wrong way?

I think the FCC and our federal government has overstepped their limits and I don't think many can see the forest for the trees! I feel so alone! I don't care what anyone says...I hate regression!!!!

right, wrong, or indifferent much of our government is based upon majority whether it be a 2/3 majority or a simple majority (50% +1) and the persons sitting in the house and the senate are elected by the majority. If our government were established to only operate on absolutes nothing would get accomplished including elections. As this thread has illustrated thus far 100% of the people will not agree 100% of the time. Unfortunately it isn't fun being in the minority, but when you believe strongly enough in your cause and are part of that minority, all you can do is try to actively educate those in the majority that feel differently to sway them to see that your way is the better way. This can be done in many ways, including speaking out to your elected officials. Never underestimate the power of one voice.

The only thought I have as I read through this and how one thing can mean something different over time is the country song (don't know the name or the singer but some of the lyrics) ... when a hoe was a hoe, when a screw was a screw, when crack's what you do when you crack a joke, when you said I'm down with that, it meant you had the flu... I think this song easily sums up that while Howard has always been about the same thing, that doesn't mean that words he spoke 10 years ago don't have a differing slang meaning today.

LixyChick,

I’d like to qualify a number of points you raised.

“Popular opinion has not changed all that much.” The Republican Party won a majority of the votes cast for Congress for the first time since 1946 in 1994. It has since increased its majority in the House, taken the majority role in the Senate, and elected and re-elected a Republican President. During this period the Republican Party has added to the number of states run by Republicans. In a representative democracy, the elected officials approximate the opinions of the electorate. I would suggest that popular opinion has demonstrably shifted to the right over the last decade.

“If we can't stand up and proclaim out “right to free speech" in a circumstance that will effect so many more than just ourselves...we have no such thing as free speech!” No American has an absolute right to free speech. Alternatively, everyone has an absolute right to free speech, if by ‘free speech’ you include the freedom to stand up in a crowded theatre and scream “Fire!” – but then you are indeed responsible for your actions. Such an action could land you in prison for a considerable time if you are held responsible for anyone who may be injured or die in a resultant panic.

“And...WHAT'S NEXT? After all is hunky dory on the airwaves...are they looking to book banning/burning again?” Equating or closely associating regulating the radio spectrum and book burning requires a leap of faith that I, at my advanced age, am unable to successfully complete. You may or may not be aware that neither Mr. Stern nor Infinity Broadcasting own the radio frequencies used to broadcast his show. Infinity Broadcasting applies to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for a license to use a piece of the radio spectrum. The radio spectrum in the United States is owned by the government of the United States, as is true for each sovereign nation. The U.S. Congress has delegated the responsibility of regulating this interstate commerce by several acts of congress to the FCC. The FCC’s authority is limited by the bills passed by Congress and signed into law by the President. The Department of Labor (DOL) and the Department of Commerce regulate many aspects of our work lives. They can, and do, bring the coercive power of the state to bear upon people and businesses who fail to conform to currently accepted standards. The same is true for the FCC in its regulation of the radio spectrum. The Department of Transportation (DOT) regulates many aspects of commercial transportation. Examples are how many hours a trucker can drive without a break, and how many hours a pilot must rest between extended flights. Environmental regulations which cost many millions of dollars every year to accommodate were proposed, and following review, are enforced by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). I happen to approve of these regulations, but I know people who do not. The Bureau of Mines regulates mining in the U.S., etc. Bureaucrats are not elected, but they get their authority from those who were. That is how U.S. governments work.

“If the FCC had jurisdiction to do what they intend to do...they wouldn't need an act of Congress to say ok.” All regulatory agencies require Acts of Congress to enforce their regulations. An aggrieved individual or business may bring suit against these bodies in Federal court at any time, and this happens frequently. If the judge rules against the agency, the agency may either change the regulation to bring it into compliance with existing law, appeal the decision to a higher court, or petition Congress to amend the law to authorize the regulation and the enforcement.

My grandfather used to say “One man’s meat is another man’s poison.” While you and I may be more or less uncomfortable about the FCC’s new enforcement powers, I point to the first paragraph above to remind you that the people who elected the people who are passing the laws don’t agree with us. They think it is a good idea, not a bad idea to limit the range and styles of expression which may be broadcast. Mr. Stern has made an eminently sensible decision to relocate his show to a venue beyond the grasp of the FCC. More power to him!

"The radio spectrum is owned by the government of the United States"

Isn't that us? We...the people? Myself...along with many others out there are part of that [WE] the people, but I don't feel very included lately!

That brings me to...Popular opinion changing. As you pointed out, things have shifted in the administration and so when I said I didn't think opinion has changed all that much, I should have added that I just think "their" opinion (those who believe they need to correct my moral fortitude) has gotten a bigger soapbox than they used to have in the past.

"An aggrieved individual or business may bring suit against these bodies in Federal court at any time, and this happens frequently."

Howard has had lawyers trying to get him his day in court for a very long time...to no avail.

With each passing day...and before a defining ruling...the FCC hovers over the airwaves and picks and chooses what "they feel"...not what is assuredly a law...but what "they feel" is an indecent remark or sound by the content in which it is being used. This is to say that if "they feel" it is indecent then it is...no warning, no reprimand....just a giant fine with no recourse for the company or person the fine is imposed on but to pay it. Yesterday it might have been an ok thing...but you'd better be sure today and try and get into the heads of the FCC members and how they are "feeling" today...or you'll get another fine for something that aired the day before. It's gotten so ridiculous that, I swear, they will fine for fart sounds now!

Shouldn't they be required to say what can and can't be said or done...instead of going on a whim for the day? What if Michael Powell had a really shitty fight with his wife recently and isn't getting any? Of course he's gonna take it out on the guy on the radio bragging about all he got this past weekend! Instead...as it is now...he can say to himself, "Ya know, he thinks he's big shit for getting all that nookie. I'm gonna fine him up the wazzoo today"! BAM!

Howard can't read minds! He doesn't even believe in psychics! How can he be expected to know what will get fined if he's been doing the same thing for years...and now, suddenly, out of the blue, it's no longer acceptable...and tomorrow it's something else all together? It's an arguable point that Howard has been arguing for well over a year now!

And one more time...Howard NEVER had any intention of continuing his show after his contract was up. The offer came to him...he didn't seek another venue. The money was incredible and the venue was better for him, and therefore his listeners, and so he took it. That it spites the FCC is just the cherry on the icing of the cake of Howard Stern! If the FCC hadn't fucked with him so much...and actually listened to his entire show instead of just picking out all the "bad" parts and making it all about that (which it isn't...it actually isn't all sex and smut, believe it or not)...they would have heard him say that he would be done broadcasting in December of 05. I don't think even Congress can inact a bill to "get him" on pay radio! How will we (the world) survive now that Howard will be free?

It's rigoddamnediculous!

LixyChick,

I don't know. Stay tuned, if you'll pardon the expression. :)

What you said about M. Powell,havig a fight with his wife applies to everything.When I went to Superior Court,for my record annulment,the State
Prosecutor,gave his OK,the head of the Probation Dept.,gave his OK.Just as
the judge,was going to look at my,previous,record,he got a phone-call from
his wife.The court Baliff got him for the call.My lawyer said,that he hoped that
his wife was in a good mood."Your future depends on it!"
The judge came back with a big smile on his face.He didn't even look at my
files(record)He slapped his gavel down and said-"State versus -----"-Anullment Granted! Irish
Morale---Always look at the glass, as 1/2 full,instead of 1/2 empty.You never
know what will happen.

OH, NO! NO, NO, NO! of course you’re not!!!!!!…i didn’t mean to imply that at all! :( oh, man! i want to fix this but how!?….i don’t know how, really, except to say (and hope you believe!) that i do not think you’re a bad person, not even a little!!! you are passionate, true, but that’s a good thing(!), and resolute but kind and sincere and… well… you are who you are and i like you like that. lots. k?

and realizing that massive mix-up, i went back and really looked hard at my post, with as much detachment as i could manage, and i saw some more areas that may explain the frustration i’m sensing from you. (if i knew what you look like when you feel like throttling someone, i’d know what to picture in my mind’s eye ;) :D) so i’m going to try and clear a few things up, just so you know that in no way was i trying to make this personal.



i truly did not mean to imply it was a secret. and reading back i saw now that it sounded a bit that way. i do not believe howard is a liar. in fact, from what i have come to know of him through his show in the years i have listened (i am not a faithful listener by any means but i do listen) he has the power of conviction, and integrity in his beliefs. those are things i can greatly repect and admire in another human beiing. i do beleive he is enjoying his taste of martyrdom though, but that does not a liar make :)

and some of the phrases i used quotes for? just to clarify… i chose to use quotes in those instances to convey that word/phrase in all it’s implications and applications, they weren’t used in a sarcastic manner, which iknow using quotes can mean. my apologies.

and one more…when i asked you “where’s the harm in that?”, i can see that pissed you off a bit;) ...again, reading back, i sounded sarcastic and again that was not my intention. i wasmerely pointing out that he has only to move to satellite to continue his show and how that is a kind of non-issue for me. he definitely, without a doubt, has every right to rail against this bill and try like hell to change things he thinks need changing, as does anyone who wishes to. and i sincerely wish them luck…it takes a special courage to fight the system instead of lapsing into complacency.





but after reading this, and thinking back on a few others things you’ve said regarding this bill, i am beginning to worry that i am not even thinking of the same bill you are. i was under the impression that the fcc did already have this power to fine at their discretion. i thought the bill raised the fines and daily cap (clarification: the senate’s has a cap, the houses’ does not) and allows them to fine an individual as well as or in place of the company who holds the entertainers’ contract and the fcc license and has aired the material deemed indecent (although this is actually contradicted in a few articles i’ve found, some imply that they [fcc] already have this power) and a few other things. do you have a link to more specific info you could share?…i could not find one that actually lists the bills’ provisions. damned if i didn’t try though. i even looked on dot gov sights. the bastages are hiding it from me! :D the best one i found was: http://www.cnn.com/2005/ALLPOLITICS...s.indecency.ap/

aside from that... i am afraid we must agree to disagree. ;) but this debate got me thinking, which is always a good thing (eh, eh, eh…no comments from the :corn: gallery please! tsk! tsk! :p and ty, lixy! here’s to more in the future :wine: ) if this all happened 5 years ago (aka before kids lol) i think i might have been standing right there with ya lix. kids have made me look at my world in a way that…i don’t know….i just haven’t got the words to explain it…maybe they have made me a nutcase but i’m a nutcase all stuffed with love and protectiveness for them. it’s not better or worse, just different.

and just one more thing…


you aren’t alone. i was just discussing this with a friend at a birthday party a few weeks ago and… if it helps to hear this… she feels just as frustrated and stifled by it as you do.

jseal, a very informative post. thank you for teaching me something new today. :)

Oh wyndhy...wait! I think we've both misunderstood each other in a few instances.

I wasn't saying that YOU were calling me a "bad person". What I meant there was that I don't like censorship "for the good of the people" when I don't think that what I am looking at/listening to is indecent. I just think indecency is in the eye and ear of the beholder and that parenting should be left up to parents...not a government agency!

That's not to say that there shouldn't be ANY rules and guidelines...but at least list the rules and guidelines and stop (already) with the "we'll know it when we see and hear it" kind of arbitrary rulings!

And trust that [we] can't police every word/deed that is spoken/done and that without a study on the effects of these words and deeds...where is the harm? Parents do a great job with the V-chip and such...and it has to be trusted that they don't allow their children to listen to Howard (for example)! If they accidently hear him...where's the harm? Half the children that might hear him...wouldn't even know what he was talking about or doing...ya know? It's the deviated minds of adults that get offended for themselves...and hide behind the child for reasoning!

I was NEVER offended by anything you posted hun! I am probably radiating frustration that you mistook for anger...and I apologize for that. I'm frustrated that I am not getting my point across in a manner that I can when I speak. I'll admit...typing my thoughts loses something in the translation. I've known that for a long time! LOL!

So...Peace, my sister from a different mister! I am learning things in this thread as well...and there is no need to picture me wanting to throttle someone! I haven't throttled anyone in years! LMFAO!

(((((wyndhy)))))

Oh...and as to a link to the wording of the new bill? I'm sorry...I don't have that info right now...but will get it ASAP. The last time I heard anything about it was last Thursday or Friday when a Congressman called in to Howards show and Howard asked the exact process of the bill, where it was in the House now, and it's wording. The Congressman (didn't catch his name...but it would be on HowardStern.com) wasn't even sure of the exact wording at that point, but is going to get back to Howard with that info ASAP. Now (yesterday anyway)...Howard's show is in re-run. I don't know if he was taken off the air live...or he had a day off????

I'm sorta up in the air about it too! Sorry!

Howard is off the air. Howard has always been off the air. Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia.

*giggles* oh, well..that's alright then.
















you sure? it might be fun ;)