The FCC and Cable Channels
 

How many really truly think the FCC should be the governing body over Cable Channels?

Cable is not regulated by the FCC because it is not "broadcast" over public air ways and is a pay service.

You have to pay to get it thus you must want it. One idea I recently saw floated in an article was a "family oriented" tier but the difficulty in that is who defines what is "family oriented" and what isn't.

I know personally I do not want this regulation; I pay for this service to the point that I want it. I don't personally pay for movie channels but I get the others like Comedy Central and such. If I wanted the porn part of it I would pay for it and expect the FCC and congress to leave me be (on my couch with some cheetoos and some questionable orange stains).

Why is it that parents simply refuse to police the things their kids watch? Parental controls are on just about everything your kid might watch. There are warning labels on EVERYTHING nearly...

It seems that we in America have more than our fair share of village idiots.

but, but wha wha wha what about the children.


Some right wingers are upset that as part of their overall cable package, they are "paying" for channels they don't approve of. One solution that the cable industry is fighting is "A la carte" cable channels.

And yes people (left, right and center) are stupid. How many VCRs have you seen with a blinking 12:00, or better yet, how many people know how to set a remote timer on a VCR? You expect someone who doesn't know how to do that, figure out channel locking. Right.

Hopefully Congress and the FCC won't have their way or we'll all be watching Barney in 10 years. Oh wait, he's gay, we can't have that.

Re: The FCC and Cable Channels
 

.

Re: The FCC and Cable Channels
 

We, as a society, have accepted the role that we are not in control of our lives and therefore not responsible for our actions and the consequences.

To your question though, politicians, seeing that we are so unable to police ourselves, take that as a mandate to do it for us and so in this case regulate everything they can.

Me personally, hate being protected from myself and find it silly.

I would go to dish, just to get rid of COX, but until they get rid of that "$4.99 per month for each additional set" crap, they ain't seeing my money....

But why is it that the 'conservatives' want to abridge our 'liberties' by limiting what we can chose to see? Oh wait 'liberties' = 'liberal'. But wait, I thought the liberals wanted government to controle our lives. Oh crap, none of this makes sense. What do you say we let adults make adult choices and live with the results like adults. Does that make me one of those wacky libertarians?

I covered this on my [gasp] Republican/conservative website 5 weeks ago:


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I just read on Drudge that Sen. Ted Stevens (R. Alaska) wants decency standards to extend to pay TV and radio (cable/satellite). This is the kind of crap that pisses me off. It's also the kind of crap that makes people think we're a bunch of controlling weirdos as well. It's none of my business if Joe six pack wants to buy a Playboy at the corner store and by the same token it's none of my business if he wants to watch similar shows (which he pays for on private broadcasts) in his home. Censor the public airwaves; fine....in fact I'm a big supporter of that. Just don't tell me what I can buy. Why do we as a party get caught up in this stuff? Do you guys really think this is what government is for?

Stick to the basic tenets of our party and we'll be just fine for decades to come. Start messing with people’s personal freedoms and you're going to lose people like me. Morals are to be taught in the private sector and at home, not by government. Think of the door we're opening if we concede government has a role in personal behavior! Do we want that????

Our recent success has put us in a position where we must self-police. While we may think we know how people should live their lives, we also know damn well that it goes against all our convictions to mandate it via legislation! Wake up guys.

It's the classic........"just because you can doesn't mean you should".

Parenting: One of the most important jobs in the world and one which requires no training or capabilities other than copulation. And we don't require training for that either...

This is one of the problems I have with 'conservatives' - their lust to regulate everyone else down to their level. I can't stand reality TV or wrestling. My solution? I don't watch it! A perfect solution, and it didn't cost millions in lobbying costs or V-chips or any of that crap.

My parents didn't want us watching TV; when we did, it was a special family thing, like watching the Disney movie on Sunday nights we if had behaved. If we were caught watching TV any other time - or any other transgression - dad had a behavioral correction device, about 40" long, 1 1/2" wide, hand made from the epidermis of a deceased bovine. Worked wonders then, and would work wonders today on some of these kids, if you could use it without getting CPS involved. There's a rant I'll save for another day.

The 'for the children' argument is bunk. If your kids can't watch the pr0n channel at your house, I gar-ron-tee they're watching it at one of their friend's house.

Technically, it doesn't even require that; I guess you missed the turkey baster thread.

Yep, sure did miss that. And yes, I know I oversimplified. Guess I just wanted to point out that my opinion is that it is the parents job to parent not the governments, schools, churches, etal. They exist to fill other needs, not the training of our own offspring, no matter how we did it.

And it wasn't too many years ago that most teenage girls got pregnant by "just holding hands."

I have DISH and they do charge an addtional $5 per month for another receiver but this is for being able to watch different programming in different rooms. The downstairs box is wired for two tvs with a rf controller so it can be used through walls etc to control the box.

I'm confused, I'm an old school type of Republican (I think, but I'm not sure anymore). I want the Guvmnt out of my wallet, bedroom and my body. "They" need to sticking to building roads and wastewater treatment plants.

Hugh, I'm with you. This kind of thing makes me mad.

Hold the phone fellow Republicans, this is one guy from Alaska, not part of the Republican platform! We have our zealots, but don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. It's just that when one of ours jumps the fence it gets huge coverage.

Lendaddy,

No, in fact, the Christian Right is now the foundation of Republican power. If you don't think that, you aren't paying attention.

Hey Lendaddy,

What about Sensenbrenner's (R) thought that indecency should be criminalized? The "I know when I see it" isn't a good enough standard when it comes to throwing people in jail. Not to mention a violation of the First Amendment.

What can I say.......I simply disagree. And FWIW I can flat ass guarantee that I've been paying attention:) Perhaps you can name for me a couple of laws or bills or proposals or.....whatever that show the right is trying to legislate religion?

Neil, it ain't gonna happen man. I know it, you know it, Sensenbrenner knows it. I completely agree that this stuff is BS, but I take solice in knowing it's just talk...much akin to kissing babies.

Don't twist what I said - No one is overtly legislating religion.

You can't tell me that the Christian Right doesn't have a tremendous influence on the general adgenda of the Republican party. You can't tell me that Republicans in the senate (and coward Democrats that feel they must play along) really cared about that end of life case in Florida. No, they cared about votes at stake from the 'social conservative' electorate. The same man who as Governer of Texas signed into law legislature requiring end of life support in some cases rushed to DC jump into this.