Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Freaking Orwellian


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Freaking Orwellian Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 6:42:45 AM   
GoddessManko


Posts: 2257
Joined: 3/6/2013
From: Dante's Inferno
Status: offline 		Both me AND my conservative friends agree. You want Orwellian? Look at Congress. Tell me how on earth it makes sense for someone to serve as many as 20 terms? I thought this was a democracy, not a monarchy? And this is the most ineffective of our entire history to boot! But you know the serenity prayer? Think it applies here. No point kicking up dirt over something that is likely not to change. We'll see November 4th what the voter turnout is like. :/

_____________________________

Happy consent is the name of the game. You are my perfect Mistress. - my collared.

http://submissivemale.blogspot.com/

The Bird of Hermes is my name, eating my wings to make me tame.

(in reply to lovmuffin)
Profile   Post #: 21
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 6:46:35 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
No, we dont have a federal law dictating what we can see.  And sight is different than speech.
But other than that, I think you are pretty well out of the discourse.

So freedom of the press doesn't count ?


There are also actions that falls under free speech.

http://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/get-involved/constitution-activities/first-amendment/free-speech.aspx


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to lovmuffin)
Profile   Post #: 22
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 6:48:19 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessManko
Both me AND my conservative friends agree. You want Orwellian? Look at Congress. Tell me how on earth it makes sense for someone to serve as many as 20 terms? I thought this was a democracy, not a monarchy? And this is the most ineffective of our entire history to boot! But you know the serenity prayer? Think it applies here. No point kicking up dirt over something that is likely not to change. We'll see November 4th what the voter turnout is like. :/


We agree on the need for term limits, but, the voters continue to vote for the same people, so it's the public doing the deed. Some might consider that the voters are "speaking" their mind.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to GoddessManko)
Profile   Post #: 23
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 6:53:18 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		I dont understand your babble here, what the fuck has that got to do with what I said, are you saying something entirely new, or why quote me, cuz it has fuck all to do with anything.


Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Now, what is abridgement of the press?

Fuckin SCOTUS has many rulings regarding that.

The FCC was created in 1934.........their policies are in question on this issue why? some nutsacker nothing from WSJ howls at the moon, and throws out a sinister conspiratorial fear bone to the ever paranoid nutsackers, saying this is what they are really trying to do, not what they are doing, dont believe that shit just because you see it with your own eyes....
http://www.fcc.gov/what-we-do

They are doing a study.

Put that in your newspaper, if you have need of news.


_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to lovmuffin)
Profile   Post #: 24
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 7:23:00 AM   
Yachtie


Posts: 3593
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
And sight is different than speech.



A picture is worth a thousand words. I guess newspapers don't show pictures and television does not involve speech.



Government should intrude with both feet in monopolistic marketplaces. And so this inquiry pressures dipshits in that it makes them feel guilty? Doubt you can make a nutsacker feel guilty, they possess no morals.

I don't understand your babble there. Must be some nutsackering involved somewhere. Coherency is not your strong suit.





_____________________________

“We all know it’s going to end badly, but in the meantime we can make some money.” - Jim Cramer, CNBC

“Those who ‘abjure’ violence can only do so because others are committing violence on their behalf.” - George Orwell

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 25
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 7:31:07 AM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline 		I suspect the nutsacking nutsackers are just twisting the nuts into a sack to avoid discussing the actual topic, Yachtie. They are nutsackers like that.

I quit letting it clutter my screen.



_____________________________

If you lose one sense, your other senses are enhanced.
That's why people with no sense of humor have such an inflated sense of self-importance.


(in reply to Yachtie)
Profile   Post #: 26
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 7:36:46 AM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessManko
Both me AND my conservative friends agree. You want Orwellian? Look at Congress. Tell me how on earth it makes sense for someone to serve as many as 20 terms? I thought this was a democracy, not a monarchy? And this is the most ineffective of our entire history to boot! But you know the serenity prayer? Think it applies here. No point kicking up dirt over something that is likely not to change. We'll see November 4th what the voter turnout is like. :/


We agree on the need for term limits, but, the voters continue to vote for the same people, so it's the public doing the deed. Some might consider that the voters are "speaking" their mind.





We have term limits.....they`re called elections.....

_____________________________

"As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals"

President Obama

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 27
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 7:37:50 AM   
souler


Posts: 4
Joined: 12/21/2012
Status: offline 		Normally I don't jump into the forums here but a couple of things:
1. Instituting the Fairness Doctrine would be amazing. Why? Not just conservative and Liberal talking, but other ideologies that are there can be represented. For instance, the NSA/PRISM scandal would actually have to show both sides and avoid sugar coating it for either side.
2. If you don't think the government doesn't control free speech as of right now with these mega information/communication companies, think again. On one hand, those companies lobby for some of the most extremely hurtful things for citizens, (SOPA, PIPA, hyper extensions to Copyright). On the other hand, if they ever wanted to say F YOU GOVERMENT, they can't because they would abdicate their power, and now the government could harm them.
3. The FCC's powers, for the most part, are very limited. They can't even attempt to label ISPs as common carriers because of people freaking out about too much government. Meanwhile ISPs like Comcast will now be able to extort content and even censor those that don't do what they ask of. If you want to strip a power from them, strip censorship. However, if you want true power back to citizens, you probably want the FCC to gain more power.

(in reply to Yachtie)
Profile   Post #: 28
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 7:41:07 AM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

I suspect the nutsacking nutsackers are just twisting the nuts into a sack to avoid discussing the actual topic, Yachtie. They are nutsackers like that.

I quit letting it clutter my screen.





Bwah!



Isn`t up to you to provide a subject that inspires debate and discussion....?


"you people will discuss the OP they way I want or I`ll report you to the thought police"......

_____________________________

"As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals"

President Obama

(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 29
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 7:43:52 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessManko
Both me AND my conservative friends agree. You want Orwellian? Look at Congress. Tell me how on earth it makes sense for someone to serve as many as 20 terms? I thought this was a democracy, not a monarchy? And this is the most ineffective of our entire history to boot! But you know the serenity prayer? Think it applies here. No point kicking up dirt over something that is likely not to change. We'll see November 4th what the voter turnout is like. :/

We agree on the need for term limits, but, the voters continue to vote for the same people, so it's the public doing the deed. Some might consider that the voters are "speaking" their mind.

We have term limits.....they`re called elections.....


The limit of the length of a term and the limit on the number of terms one can serve are much different. I'm sure you knew that and just decided to attempt to derail.

Fail.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to Owner59)
Profile   Post #: 30
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 7:51:31 AM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: souler

Normally I don't jump into the forums here but a couple of things:
1. Instituting the Fairness Doctrine would be amazing. Why? Not just conservative and Liberal talking, but other ideologies that are there can be represented. For instance, the NSA/PRISM scandal would actually have to show both sides and avoid sugar coating it for either side.



Welcome to the conversation.

You say instituting the Fairness Doctrine would be "amazing." That suggests to me that you think it is some bold new initiative, rather than a failed practice that stifled speech for decades.

_____________________________

If you lose one sense, your other senses are enhanced.
That's why people with no sense of humor have such an inflated sense of self-importance.


(in reply to souler)
Profile   Post #: 31
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 7:52:50 AM   
GoddessManko


Posts: 2257
Joined: 3/6/2013
From: Dante's Inferno
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessManko
Both me AND my conservative friends agree. You want Orwellian? Look at Congress. Tell me how on earth it makes sense for someone to serve as many as 20 terms? I thought this was a democracy, not a monarchy? And this is the most ineffective of our entire history to boot! But you know the serenity prayer? Think it applies here. No point kicking up dirt over something that is likely not to change. We'll see November 4th what the voter turnout is like. :/


We agree on the need for term limits, but, the voters continue to vote for the same people, so it's the public doing the deed. Some might consider that the voters are "speaking" their mind.





We have term limits.....they`re called elections.....


That's fine, but when you have Congressional leaders in Washington for DECADES, don't you think these people have NO fear at all of job security? Why do you think we have been seeing the crazy antics we have in Washington? At least a president does have term limits. However Congress has been giving themselves raises every single year (and heaven forbid they legislate term limits on THEMSELVES...and this is BOTH parties) until this president while wages have stagnated for most Americans over the past 30 years. However I digress.
Isn't that a bigger issue than partisanship? Which they pander to in order to use divisive tactics among voters while NOTHING is really getting done except slashing scientific and technology program funding which would help us in the long term across the board.
And Republicans themselves are not even getting any real representation from their party when the minority teabaggers have pretty much hijacked all of their decision making.
the whole thing is a sordid mess.

_____________________________

Happy consent is the name of the game. You are my perfect Mistress. - my collared.

http://submissivemale.blogspot.com/

The Bird of Hermes is my name, eating my wings to make me tame.

(in reply to Owner59)
Profile   Post #: 32
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 8:12:15 AM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline 		I like my congress person,if I and my mates want to extend her stay....we`re should be allowed to...it is a democracy after all...


Limiting money would be the way to even the playing fields......


Or publically financed elections......where there`s no quid pro quo.


Welcom GodessMako.....we always welcome serious posters.



_____________________________

"As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals"

President Obama

(in reply to GoddessManko)
Profile   Post #: 33
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 8:13:30 AM   
Yachtie


Posts: 3593
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessManko


quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

We have term limits.....they`re called elections.....


That's fine, but when you have Congressional leaders in Washington for DECADES,
the whole thing is a sordid mess.



I have to agree with Owner here. Those decades long leaders were so because of voters, not their own volition. Any problem with such incumbent longevity is voter attributable. Doesn't speak well of the electoarte, does it.

_____________________________

“We all know it’s going to end badly, but in the meantime we can make some money.” - Jim Cramer, CNBC

“Those who ‘abjure’ violence can only do so because others are committing violence on their behalf.” - George Orwell

(in reply to GoddessManko)
Profile   Post #: 34
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 8:22:27 AM   
souler


Posts: 4
Joined: 12/21/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic


quote:

ORIGINAL: souler

Normally I don't jump into the forums here but a couple of things:
1. Instituting the Fairness Doctrine would be amazing. Why? Not just conservative and Liberal talking, but other ideologies that are there can be represented. For instance, the NSA/PRISM scandal would actually have to show both sides and avoid sugar coating it for either side.



Welcome to the conversation.

You say instituting the Fairness Doctrine would be "amazing." That suggests to me that you think it is some bold new initiative, rather than a failed practice that stifled speech for decades.

But that's just it. In this day and age, for the internet, it's not only hard to stifle speech, it's almost impossible (except for certain times). While I don't think it would fix everything that's wrong, it would at least be able to give viewers other thoughts.

(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 35
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 8:25:44 AM   
Yachtie


Posts: 3593
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessManko
However Congress has been giving themselves raises every single year (and heaven forbid they legislate term limits on THEMSELVES...and this is BOTH parties) until this president while wages have stagnated for most Americans over the past 30 years. However I digress.
Isn't that a bigger issue than partisanship? Which they pander to in order to use divisive tactics among voters while NOTHING is really getting done except slashing scientific and technology program funding which would help us in the long term across the board.
And Republicans themselves are not even getting any real representation from their party when the minority teabaggers have pretty much hijacked all of their decision making.
the whole thing is a sordid mess.



You do broadly thrash about. All that can be reduced to one statement which was made a long time ago.

"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic. " - Franklin

Whether it be the individual for himself or groups for their own purposes, once one can use Congress Critters largess for such, well, that's when you, as a voter, have been bought and paid for.



_____________________________

“We all know it’s going to end badly, but in the meantime we can make some money.” - Jim Cramer, CNBC

“Those who ‘abjure’ violence can only do so because others are committing violence on their behalf.” - George Orwell

(in reply to GoddessManko)
Profile   Post #: 36
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 8:33:21 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: souler
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic
quote:

ORIGINAL: souler
Normally I don't jump into the forums here but a couple of things:
1. Instituting the Fairness Doctrine would be amazing. Why? Not just conservative and Liberal talking, but other ideologies that are there can be represented. For instance, the NSA/PRISM scandal would actually have to show both sides and avoid sugar coating it for either side.

Welcome to the conversation.
You say instituting the Fairness Doctrine would be "amazing." That suggests to me that you think it is some bold new initiative, rather than a failed practice that stifled speech for decades.

But that's just it. In this day and age, for the internet, it's not only hard to stifle speech, it's almost impossible (except for certain times). While I don't think it would fix everything that's wrong, it would at least be able to give viewers other thoughts.


Yes, those Chinese enjoy full viewing privileges to the internet...


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to souler)
Profile   Post #: 37
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 8:46:45 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		I doubt the Chinese have the same first amendement language in their constitution that we do.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 38
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 8:50:40 AM   
souler


Posts: 4
Joined: 12/21/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: souler
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic
quote:

ORIGINAL: souler
Normally I don't jump into the forums here but a couple of things:
1. Instituting the Fairness Doctrine would be amazing. Why? Not just conservative and Liberal talking, but other ideologies that are there can be represented. For instance, the NSA/PRISM scandal would actually have to show both sides and avoid sugar coating it for either side.

Welcome to the conversation.
You say instituting the Fairness Doctrine would be "amazing." That suggests to me that you think it is some bold new initiative, rather than a failed practice that stifled speech for decades.

But that's just it. In this day and age, for the internet, it's not only hard to stifle speech, it's almost impossible (except for certain times). While I don't think it would fix everything that's wrong, it would at least be able to give viewers other thoughts.


Yes, those Chinese enjoy full viewing privileges to the internet...


Compared to other years, they sorta do. Yes the firewall is significant but it doesn't mean that others aren't finding ways to get around it (like Tor). That's why I said it's almost hard. You can do things like redirecting, throttling, etc. but as long as people build proxy sites, develop ways to around it, etc. you're going to always have a hard time censoring speech.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 39
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 8:50:54 AM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie


quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessManko


quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

We have term limits.....they`re called elections.....


That's fine, but when you have Congressional leaders in Washington for DECADES,
the whole thing is a sordid mess.



I have to agree with Owner here. Those decades long leaders were so because of voters, not their own volition. Any problem with such incumbent longevity is voter attributable. Doesn't speak well of the electoarte, does it.



Well,as of today....the gop congress, nationally, has single digit ratings......but in their individual districts ,gop members have 80-90 % positive ratings....It`s democracy with all it`s warts.

Senators shake out a little less divided but that`s because it`s a state-wide sample and not just from Butt-fuck Co.....where shit gets concentrated.You can`t gerrymander a whole state.

National elections dissolve the partisan concentrations even more...

But as of today,you can have admitted to buying whores for years and still get elected....if your voters want that.

IMHO,the Founders wanted it like this...And did NOT want top down control of who stays in elected office.

Of course there were exceptions to this w/ certain positions being life-time appointments....thus limiting that person`s vulnerability to political manipulation.

But those folks are initially appointed by who we elect thus maintaining our status as a republic .

Speaking of Orwellian....

Why does rightist media make everything the President does out to be a tyrannical crisis/emergency? Like with the EOs or the ACA?

That was one aspect of 1984 that`s bothersome today.....this "emergency/screaming-meme" mode that`s always being pushed.

IMHO...that`s what`s driving all the assassination talk and violent overthrow narratives, coming from consumers of rightist media.....

It`s because the right has reported the weirdest most mentally retarded fairy-tales as real news.....that grown men are taking the Orwellian "the enemy`s at the gates" propaganda/fear-mongering, as reality.



< Message edited by Owner59 -- 2/22/2014 8:55:42 AM >

_____________________________

"As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals"

President Obama

(in reply to Yachtie)
Profile   Post #: 40
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Freaking Orwellian Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094