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 8:57:04 AM   
Owner59


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

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

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.



So where were talking about limiting the lengths of terms?

What other voices do you hear?

_____________________________

"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 #: 41
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 9:03:21 AM   
Yachtie


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

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

I doubt the Chinese have the same first amendement language in their constitution that we do.



I don't think that is what Desi was getting at, but also reading what Souler wrote, neither was he.

_____________________________

“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 #: 42
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 9:08:41 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		Well, whatever he was getting at, the chinese have nothing to do with us. or our internet. 

_____________________________

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


(in reply to Yachtie)
Profile   Post #: 43
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 10:00:54 AM   
DesideriScuri


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

ORIGINAL: Owner59
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
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.

So where were talking about limiting the lengths of terms?
What other voices do you hear?


Elections are held at the end of a term, no?


_____________________________

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 #: 44
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 11:13:56 AM   
Yachtie


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

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Well, whatever he was getting at, the chinese have nothing to do with us. or our internet. 



Au contraire. The chinese exploit our internet weaknesses at every opportunity.

_____________________________

“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 #: 45
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 11:20:21 AM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

FR
The airwaves belong to the public. The FCC is tasked, by law, with monitoring those stations that broadcast over those airwaves to ensure they serve the public interest. a duty that has been almost completely ignored for decades. It's about time the FCC started doing its job and I could care less how some twit spins it for Murdoch.

According to the commissioner who outed the program the opposition has com from across the
political spectrum. To put this in other terms if the Bush administration was demanding that newsrooms
explain why they ran stories and how they decided what stories were important would you be so supportive.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 46
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 1:15:12 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
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.

Then vote yours out. 2 of my 3 are doing a good job and I want to keep them. Kirk is gone in 2016.

(in reply to Yachtie)
Profile   Post #: 47
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 1:18:19 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

FR
The airwaves belong to the public. The FCC is tasked, by law, with monitoring those stations that broadcast over those airwaves to ensure they serve the public interest. a duty that has been almost completely ignored for decades. It's about time the FCC started doing its job and I could care less how some twit spins it for Murdoch.

According to the commissioner who outed the program the opposition has com from across the
political spectrum. To put this in other terms if the Bush administration was demanding that newsrooms
explain why they ran stories and how they decided what stories were important would you be so supportive.

If all they were doing was a study? I wouldn't care. If they started injecting ideology into licensing decisions, yes. So until you can show some evidence that your paranoid hysteria is based in reality...

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 48
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 2:02:01 PM   
Owner59


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

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

FR
The airwaves belong to the public. The FCC is tasked, by law, with monitoring those stations that broadcast over those airwaves to ensure they serve the public interest. a duty that has been almost completely ignored for decades. It's about time the FCC started doing its job and I could care less how some twit spins it for Murdoch.

According to the commissioner who outed the program the opposition has com from across the
political spectrum. To put this in other terms if the Bush administration was demanding that newsrooms
explain why they ran stories and how they decided what stories were important would you be so supportive.




The shrub admin and faux-news were coordinating news stories together........


Fuck any notion they were anything but propagandists.

_____________________________

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

President Obama

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 49
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 3:38:56 PM   
TheHeretic


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

ORIGINAL: DomKen
If all they were doing was a study? I wouldn't care. If they started injecting ideology into licensing decisions, yes. So until you can show some evidence that your paranoid hysteria is based in reality...



No. Let's start with going back to the question you tried to lie and handwave away earlier in the thread. Under what authority does the FCC ask newspapers one damn question about anything?

I'm happy to paste the whole damn study outline into the thread so you can see that newspapers are right behind broadcast TV in who they were planning to ask about who decided what on content and sorts of news covered. (The formatting will be fucked, but I'm sure you could puzzle it out.)

Or are you saying you simply don't care about trampling the prohibitions of the 1st Amendment through intimidation, as long as a Democrat does it?



_____________________________

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 DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 50
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 3:52:41 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
If all they were doing was a study? I wouldn't care. If they started injecting ideology into licensing decisions, yes. So until you can show some evidence that your paranoid hysteria is based in reality...



No. Let's start with going back to the question you tried to lie and handwave away earlier in the thread. Under what authority does the FCC ask newspapers one damn question about anything?

I'm happy to paste the whole damn study outline into the thread so you can see that newspapers are right behind broadcast TV in who they were planning to ask about who decided what on content and sorts of news covered. (The formatting will be fucked, but I'm sure you could puzzle it out.)

Or are you saying you simply don't care about trampling the prohibitions of the 1st Amendment through intimidation, as long as a Democrat does it?





Let me try to explain it in simple terms.

The FCC or Federal Communications Commission has no authority over printed media. Their authority is limited to media that is transmitted via wireless medium such as amateur radio, commercial radio, television, cell phone service, two way business radio systems etc.

In other words, the FCC has no authority to ask a printed media publisher jack shit about anything, and thanks to the Supreme Court, they cant even ask about anything said publisher puts on the internet.

And to be honest, I dont feel that the FCC should have the authority to limit content on broadcasted content. There authority should be limited to the assigning of frequencies used by broadcasters and the amount of transmitter power. Everything else is in violation of the first amendment.

In other words, the FCC should go and collectively fuck themselves with barbed wire dildos covered in ghost chili sauce.

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 51
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 4:07:47 PM   
TheHeretic


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

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

In other words, the FCC should go and collectively fuck themselves with barbed wire dildos covered in ghost chili sauce.



Dammit, Jlf! We are only supposed to agree on the joking around and zombie prep threads. This is P&R! What are you thinking???

One creepy aspect to the study were the 8 CINs - the Critical Information Needs, where the government is picking subjects the media "ought" to be covering, while leaving others out entirely.

_____________________________

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 jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 52
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 4:16:05 PM   
kdsub


Posts: 12180
Joined: 8/16/2007
Status: offline 		I think it is a good idea... Our media...over the air ways and print... are not providing Americans with unbiased reporting of events and that is if they even report events that are important to us.

I am tried of half truth sensationalism designed to increase ratings rather then objectively reporting the news.I have to listen to the BBC for truth in reporting. Our media has been taken over and controlled by partisans who report news with a manipulative political bent.

I find Americans are mostly ignorant of world events, through no fault of their own, because of the political affiliations and the competition for viewership in our media outlets.

Now I agree that fact finding will do little... I just wish the FCC had real power to assure truth in reporting and kick the Fox's and MSNBC's off the air if they don't JUST report the DAMN news.

Butch

< Message edited by kdsub -- 2/22/2014 4:17:46 PM >

_____________________________

Mark Twain:

I don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way of spelling words. We might as well make all clothes alike and cook all dishes alike. Sameness is tiresome; variety is pleasing

(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 53
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 4:21:11 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

In other words, the FCC should go and collectively fuck themselves with barbed wire dildos covered in ghost chili sauce.



Dammit, Jlf! We are only supposed to agree on the joking around and zombie prep threads. This is P&R! What are you thinking???

One creepy aspect to the study were the 8 CINs - the Critical Information Needs, where the government is picking subjects the media "ought" to be covering, while leaving others out entirely.



See this.

I am having some major issues with what the elected and appointed fucktards of both parties in what the government should monitor.

For example I can remember when land owners could purchase limited amounts of explosives for use on their property, not anymore. I either have to hire a fucking contractor to remove two rather large rocks that are blocking the road to one of my pasture areas. They really aint that big, bout the size of a old VW beetle.

Anyway, the contractor will break em up and haul the pieces to the place I want them for $4500 bucks. A couple of sticks of dynamite and a bob cat would cost me about $600... or I can apply for a permit from the ATF... which will take a few months to go through and by that time it will be a little late to have the pasture planted in drought resistant rye, which is already gonna cost me $1500.

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 54
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 4:23:59 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
If all they were doing was a study? I wouldn't care. If they started injecting ideology into licensing decisions, yes. So until you can show some evidence that your paranoid hysteria is based in reality...



No. Let's start with going back to the question you tried to lie and handwave away earlier in the thread. Under what authority does the FCC ask newspapers one damn question about anything?

I'm happy to paste the whole damn study outline into the thread so you can see that newspapers are right behind broadcast TV in who they were planning to ask about who decided what on content and sorts of news covered. (The formatting will be fucked, but I'm sure you could puzzle it out.)

Or are you saying you simply don't care about trampling the prohibitions of the 1st Amendment through intimidation, as long as a Democrat does it?



I say don't give power to any official that you wouldn't be comfortable with Nixon having .

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 55
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 4:27:41 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

In other words, the FCC should go and collectively fuck themselves with barbed wire dildos covered in ghost chili sauce.



Dammit, Jlf! We are only supposed to agree on the joking around and zombie prep threads. This is P&R! What are you thinking???

One creepy aspect to the study were the 8 CINs - the Critical Information Needs, where the government is picking subjects the media "ought" to be covering, while leaving others out entirely.



See this.

I am having some major issues with what the elected and appointed fucktards of both parties in what the government should monitor.

For example I can remember when land owners could purchase limited amounts of explosives for use on their property, not anymore. I either have to hire a fucking contractor to remove two rather large rocks that are blocking the road to one of my pasture areas. They really aint that big, bout the size of a old VW beetle.

Anyway, the contractor will break em up and haul the pieces to the place I want them for $4500 bucks. A couple of sticks of dynamite and a bob cat would cost me about $600... or I can apply for a permit from the ATF... which will take a few months to go through and by that time it will be a little late to have the pasture planted in drought resistant rye, which is already gonna cost me $1500.

Yep your government making life easier and safer.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 56
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 4:32:08 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
If all they were doing was a study? I wouldn't care. If they started injecting ideology into licensing decisions, yes. So until you can show some evidence that your paranoid hysteria is based in reality...



No. Let's start with going back to the question you tried to lie and handwave away earlier in the thread. Under what authority does the FCC ask newspapers one damn question about anything?

I'm happy to paste the whole damn study outline into the thread so you can see that newspapers are right behind broadcast TV in who they were planning to ask about who decided what on content and sorts of news covered. (The formatting will be fucked, but I'm sure you could puzzle it out.)

Or are you saying you simply don't care about trampling the prohibitions of the 1st Amendment through intimidation, as long as a Democrat does it?

They can ask all the questions they want. The FCC has no regulatory power over newspapers.

Go freak out over some research being done some where else.

(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 57
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 4:41:38 PM   
cloudboy


Posts: 7306
Joined: 12/14/2005
Status: offline 		To address your OP and Subject Heading: Nothing Orwellian there at all. It is a study. Participation is voluntary. The author himself is biased and conclusory.

Many Americans, including myself, would like news organizations to stop dealing in false, misleading, and biased reporting. Bad journalism is bad for everyone.

If a network or business wants high ratings without having to observe any journalistic standards -- they can reap those rewards though their entertainment divisions.

The medical establishment cannot hawk quackery.

Food Suppliers cannot misrepresent their products and must meet FDA standards.

Auto makers have to meet standards for vehicles allowed on US roads.

Financial Organizations cannot deliberately mislead investors.

Free for all, unregulated markets are for 3rd world countries, not the USA. News Organizations should be held to higher journalistic standards.

< Message edited by cloudboy -- 2/22/2014 4:49:16 PM >

(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 58
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 4:50:17 PM   
cloudboy


Posts: 7306
Joined: 12/14/2005
Status: offline
At some point he may get his bat on the ball.

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 59
RE: Freaking Orwellian - 2/22/2014 6:05:49 PM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline 		It`s a situation similar to today`s eschatologists aka 'end timers'....the nutters who not only believe in the biblical prophecy of an apocalypse but who are so consumed and obsessed that they see 'Revelations' in every single event and happening....

dick`s consuming obsession is 1984 and see`s Orwellian monsters everywhere......even if he has to make them up. Fear of and fear mongering are membership requirements to the cult of gop.


It`s mostly a phony act to cover his need for authoritarianism.......aka republicanism.

_____________________________

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

President Obama

(in reply to cloudboy)
Profile   Post #: 60
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