In response to:

Hollywood Won 2012?

Networker Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 7:11 AM
Welcome to free speech. If you don't like it, don't watch it. But what you can't do is tell others what they can and can't watch based off your opinion of what's appropriate or not.
JacqueDarcy Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 8:45 PM
Brent is exercising his right of free speech, too. And most of all his writing was telling and true. So please, next time you think "gotcha!" think again. I mean, no one is forcing you to troll on a conservative website - that's your choice - so your subjecting yourself to much anger and resentment.
McD2004 Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 11:15 AM
Because of free speech (which still exists as of now) I CAN tell anyone I want what's appropriate to watch or not. They can choose to listen to me or not. Part of the reason we're losing our free speech is because we're too narrow in thinking that there are "some things" that should not be said. I will say what I want and offer my opinions of what right for as long as I am breathing. If you don't like it, don't listen.
Networker Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 11:34 AM
You can absolutely tell people what you think is appropriate to watch or not, but you can't trample on someone else's rights by forcing them not to watch something just because you do not think it's appropriate. But all day long you can state what you think is correct/appropriate/safe/etc to watch.
BlackSheepPatriot Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 12:16 PM
"... you can't trample on someone else's rights by forcing them not to watch something just because you do not think it's appropriate."

I agree with that statement. However, let's add another dimension to this argument: what about forcing people to hear or watch what they do not want to because it goes against their beliefs? Students in public schools are a captive audience.
Networker Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 12:46 PM
Agreed that there may be certain things that students shouldn't be forced to listen to. The next question is what is objectionable or not, and who decides? Following, if after it has been decided and agreed upon the the majority, if certain parents are still not happy, they should have avenues that allow them to move their students into private or home schooling, as long as those adhere to the same basic universal education standards.
BlackSheepPatriot Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 1:08 PM
Ah, but we are back again to the argument of moral principles and the much bigger picture of the Founders and which principles they ascribed to when the Constitution was written, which is and should be the law of the land in the United States. :)
Garfent Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 9:40 AM
Damn right you can.
Seen any porn on Network TV lately?
Networker Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 10:08 AM
True indecency laws have been upheld. I think those violate free speech though.
BlackSheepPatriot Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 10:30 AM
Networker, would I be correct in assessing that you are a Libertarian?
Networker Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 10:46 AM
Independent who typically votes Democrat.
BlackSheepPatriot Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 10:58 AM
Then I would argue the point that there is no such things as "free speech" or much less "freedom" without people who can morally rule themselves. WIthout morals, we concede our freedoms and liberties as we lose the ability to govern ourselves. I would even beg to differ on your definition of "free speech". You definition, to me, leans more towards anarchy, which in turn, leads to a dictatorship.
Networker Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 11:21 AM
BlackSheepPatriot Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 8:38 AM
Free speech; huh? Well, okay, since you are a proponent of free speech; "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten son that whosever shall believeth in Him shall not perish but have everlasting life." ~ John 3:16

Oh and by the way, Merrry Christmas, and Jesus saves!
Lynn422 Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 8:53 AM
Thank you for actually saying "Merry Christmas"....I'm so tired of the "holiday trees" and "Sparkle time" or whatever cr*p they are calling it. We've become AFRAID to worship and celebrate Christian values
Networker Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 9:32 AM
I think you should be able to say all those things as well. No one should be afraid to celebrate christmas and their christian values.
soliton2 Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 8:14 AM
>>But what you can't do is tell others what they can and can't watch based off your opinion of what's appropriate or not.

No, but you can complain about it, which is what Bozell Is doing. If you don't like that, don't read it.
BlackSheepPatriot Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 8:39 AM
Yep, Bozzell is exercising his free speech. If you don't like it, just read another column.
Flubadub Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 7:30 AM
NOT. Welcome to gov't mandated and selected speech, not free speech. The UN is working on making "wrong comments" about anything islamic, as selected by the UN or Imams to be the law of the world. The punishments will be mandated by the UN. Free speech is on world voting stage and the USA cannot ever win that vote. Say goodbye to free speech and your small arms (guns), and say hello to a world tax to fund more UN rules.
Lynn422 Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 8:51 AM
You are very correct sir...all you need to do is read the UK papers to see how people are JAILED for making the wrong comment about the 'special' diverse peoples that live there whether it be homosexuals, or Muslims. We are on our way to extinction
Networker Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 9:29 AM
how does anything that happens in the UK pertain to our laws? last time I checked we seperated from them in the revolutionary war.
BlackSheepPatriot Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 10:29 AM
Separated, yes. However, the influence it still there. In your opinion, is Obama not trying to implement European style socialism?
E1776 Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 10:53 AM
And Ruth Bader Ginsburg said that the Supreme Court should follow international law as precedent rather than the Constitution and U.S. law.
Networker Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 11:21 AM
I believe there are aspects of European society that he is trying to implement. Not that it bothers me. The nordic countries that have super high taxes have great societies. Some of the most prosperous incomes per capita in the world, some of the best education rates in the world, great healthcare, etc.. Not that I want to become Europe as I live life here and have done quite well, but I'm not afraid if we borrow some of their good ideas. I do not want their taxes though.
BlackSheepPatriot Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 12:09 PM
The Nordic countries, or should I say Finland, has a multi-modal economy. The have the service industry but there are also industrialized. This means they have the ability to export products and support their GDP. They have also privatized their industries and cut taxes as early as the '90s. What is currently being proposed in the United States and it effects are not working. I, personally, would not like a Socialist government. The overeach of power is too great. We have no need of more masters.
Networker Wrote: Nov 09, 2012 1:52 PM
I wouldn't want a socialist government either and I agree we need to bring exports up. The type of exports we'll have in the future will require high-tech skills, advanced education, and advanced manufacturing capabilities, not the t-shirts and sneaker goods we outsourced to China and Vietnam. Services exports too. Services of the future will require advanced education, and combined with broadband capabilities, will allow us to continue exporting those (think of a lawyer advising a company in Chile over video conferencing). The exports of the future require a more advanced society and the investments needed in human capital - education, healthcare, etc that will make society better off can and should come from government.
The television industry loves to claim that all of the sex, violence and foul-mouthed language it displays has zero harmful effects on children. On the other hand, they would never dream of telling their advertisers that their paid messages on TV have no effect. So does the entertainment industry have an impact or doesn't it?

The answer is that Tinseltown certainly has an effect, and when that effect is felt in the political arena, the hell with pretending they don't. They openly celebrate.

After the 2012 election, the surprising (if narrow) victories for liberals drew a thumbs-up commentary from former...