Good morning, MacDiva Esq. My, but you are up early in Portland, the probable home of the 2006 LP national convention. It's nice to see such verbal diarrhea from you so early, and in such copious amounts. And, you're a lawyer? Gosh! I bow, deeply.
Actually, I read very little Rand and a whole lot of history. Perhaps you should do the same for a background on the FCC and how it allows the conditions for our current media situation, with corporations from ClearChannel to NPR devouring small stations with complicit government help.
Maybe it would allow you to see that it took decades for the poor to get telephones and televisions, but now mere years for the poor to get internet. There is a positive evolution there that defies your bitter rhetoric.
Your complaints are what? That the internet isn't perfect, and that not everybody has internet access? Gosh, but those are really pathetic, petty complaints. The regulated broadcast media was perfect until spoiled by deregulation? That's when the variety of perspectives closed up?
Maybe what we need, to make sure that everyone has internet access, is a law. That's what lawyers always argue for as the solution to any problem, right? No, two laws:
1. Amendment to the US Constitution: All citizens have a right to free internet access. There will be no denial of this vital resource based on economic or other status.
2. All citizens shall be forced to learn to read and to type. It shall be a crime to be unable to use this precious resource through lame excuses such as illiteracy, or even- get this- disinterest.
My, but this is the most fun I've had in the last 23 minutes!
It just dawned on me that there has been something troublesome to me about MD's constant anti-Rand harangues.
I admit that there was a time when I was intoxicated by Rand's militant style of laissez faire politics. I never fully bought in, because there was one aspect of Rand's approach that I reject. It was overwhelmingly adopted by her cultist followers, the Objectivists: never fail to pronounce moral judgment.
That's what bothered me about MD's attacks. They always use this formula. She never fails to pronounce moral judgment. It is alway accompanied by bitterness, anger, negativity, and name-calling. I had no use for it in those people I had significant agreement with. I have even less use for it in those I disagree sharply with.
Believe it or not, I very much enjoy the arguments from the other side, coming from Natalie Davis, Hal, Boom, Shark, bhw, BAB, and even bob2112 (when he avoids the Nazi thing). I get tremendous value from dealing with what I consider intellectual peers.
78 -
Eric Olsen
Oct 19, 2004 at 8:52 am
hey bob2112, I absolutely was not ignoring you or in any way passing judgment: there are only somany hours in the day and only so much time to make comments. I see my overarching role regarding comments as filling in the spaces and acting as a lubricant. I always try to gree new members in particular. When a thread is going quite smoothly on its own with various sides being represented quite well without my help, I generally concentrate on other things. That's all there is to it.
Mike, I see your point about the FCC and regulation and your comparison to the Internet. There's no denying that an average American can have a voice on the Internet, while having zero chance of having a voice in traditional print or broadcast media.
That has to do with the *relatively* low cost to enter the Internet "market": a home PC, an Internet connection, and an overlown ego and you're on your way to Internet publishing!
But what MD says about the barrier to entry is still true: there are millions of Americans who still can't afford the access at home. Even if they can access it at, say, the local library, it's not quite the same as having the access anytime you want it and having the freedom to do what you want with the PC.
Still, access is *relatively* cheap, but that has a lot to do with the technology, which continues to go down in price. The Internet existed before the home PC, but without the home PC, the Internet would still be the exclusive domain of universities and government agencies and other institutions that could afford the hardware and software.
So, to make a long story longer, even if you got rid of the FCC and completely deregulated broadcast media ownership, we'd still end up with monopolies of ownership because of the cost barrier. It's just to frickin' expensive for an average American to own a single tv station that reaches more than his neighbors, nevermind an actual network of them.
One of the best things that happened to the Internet, if you ask me, is that people learned it's NOT that easy to make money on it, certainly not big money like with broadcast media. That's partially because of user behavior -- we just don't click those damn ads! -- but also because there's no centralized gather place: there are too many options out there for users [which is good for users but bad for advertisers]. Where is the "prime time" slot to book your ads? And users aren't too fond of subscriptions, either. We want it all for free. So the situation keeps feeding itself: more user options, fewer identifiable "sure things" for advertisers. And users will keep heading for the free content, for the most part.
Anyway, the Internet is about as democratic as you can get, even though many people still can't partake in it. But it's definitely unprecedented in giving average people the ability to broadcast their ideas across the globe.
Someone sounds bitter, but it sure ain't me. The Liberinfants' formula must have caused colic.
Forty-seven percent of Americans don't have Internet access. For most of them, the reason is the cost. To dismiss that large a proportion of the population tells us the person doing the dismissing holds anyone not economically well-off in contempt. But, we already know that about Liberinfants. They propose a world in which a tiny elite, which they hope would include themselves, would live well why others barely get by or perish from lack of necesseties.
Mike Kole, you know next to nothing about the history of deregulation of media and it shows. The one thing deregulation has accomplished superbly is concentration of media ownership in a few hands. More deregulation will create more concentration. Apparently you are silly enough to believe that Mom and Pop Doe will be the ones to buy newspapers, radio and television stations in the absence of regulation. I am not.
As for not liking being spoonfed by someone who does know what she is talking about, that is definitely your prerogative. Since you cling to ignorance as if it is a comforting teddy bear, your Liberinfant attitude in this regard is not surprising either.
It is somewhat amazing that you can be completely ignorant of the Digital Divide while claiming knowledge of the Internet. It is probably the most significant topic related to the 'Net. Reminds me of your argument with bhw about capitalism. You latched onto a simple-minded position -- capitalism is good -- and would not let it go. You've done the same thing here with pretty much the same result, conclusions that cannot be defended.
81 -
andy marsh
Oct 19, 2004 at 11:09 am
Diva could you give me a definition of the word Liberinfant? I'm just trying to keep up is all!!!
Thanks!
82 -
boomcrashbaby
Oct 19, 2004 at 11:20 am
Even after I posted my last comment, it dawned on me that people who can't afford a PC or the cost of an ISP can walk into a public library for free and use the net and blog for free
But according to the Right, those PC's contain nothing but porn.
Andy, I coined 'Liberinfant' myself. I am not much of a curser or name caller, but I do like to turn a colorful word or phrase that captures the object like a deer in headlights. The self-centered nature of Libertarians reminds me of babies. Another infantile aspect is the way other people don't really exist for them except as abstractions. When Al Barger or a Mike Kole refers to much, maybe most of the population, it is not as people with needs like themselves, but as barriers to them getting their way. So, I bring you 'Liberinfants,' a construction that describes what those folks are really like.
Worse than that, Steve (Boom)! Natalie's blog, which contains absolutely no porn, cannot be accessed from the library or even Kinko's. She writes about gay rights and I suspect that has caused the ban. She once tried to blog from Kinko's, perhaps because her system was unavailable at home. She couldn't. I tried accessing her blog from Kinko's. I couldn't.
84 -
andy marsh
Oct 19, 2004 at 11:43 am
I'll buy into the cost of a pc...but you can actually access the internet for free through Juno. You will get bumped if the to many paying customers come on, but it's still free. And yes this still works. I was out of town 2 weeks ago, staying in a hotel that did not have HS internet (I try to avoid that) and used my old juno software that I have not paid for in a year to download my e-mail. It reminded me of why I hate dial up so much, but if you don't know any better...
85 -
bob2112
Oct 19, 2004 at 1:23 pm
Thank you, Eric. You got a thread dedicated to Al to be a super hot debate!
I hope to God Al wins his race!
Good luck, Al!
Can't play today, gang. Real life is calling. Real bills. Real Absentee voting for Kerry & the other (D)'s I can help out!
I know, I know. What a relief! bob2112 can't spew more of his outlandish theories to disregard, today. Maybe he'll get hit by a car or something! Maybe the accident will burn up his ballot before he gets to the mailbox! Yeah Andy, that's the ticket!
Diva, your 'facts' are crap. I'll show how crappy with a post shortly.
Funny how you can say that you aren't an insulting name-caller while having to explain the insulting name you coined for libertarians.
I know plenty about the history of the broadcast media. First, it was unregulated. Then it was regulated. Now it is still regulated, but what you call de-regulation is actually re-regulation. De-regulation is the absence of regulation. Tough concept to grasp, I know. Anyhow, that's the brief history of broadcast media and regulation. Stuff your head in the sand if you must.
That's piffle, Liberinfant. I was the research assistant for one of my law profs on a book about media deregulation. Still have my notes. Furthermore, I worked for newspapers for years. This is not some new topic I discovered yesterday, but something I've followed over time.
As for your assertion above (Comment 77) Mike Kole, that white participants in Blogcritics are your "intellectual peers," but I am not, I am not surprised by it at all. Show me someone who loves Al Barger and I will show you someone with a race problem. I just hope you are not stupid enough to actually believe what you imply.
90 -
andy marsh
Oct 19, 2004 at 4:53 pm
you can tell colors from those names??? I'm impressed!!!
Bob2, my ballot came in the mail today, along with the real voters' pamphlet from the League of Women Voters and a phony voters' pamphlet disguised to look like the one by the LWV from the Republicans. If I am not too tired after getting up early today, I will sit down and peruse the ballot this evening. I hope to complete the ballot and mail it back by Thursday.
92 -
andy marsh
Oct 19, 2004 at 4:59 pm
more of the vast right wing conspiracy...I sure hope after GWB finishes up his next four years that hillary runs on the dem ticket...think how much fun this place will be then!!
Not at all, Andy. The GOP printed up and mailed partisan voters' pamphlets designed to look like the objective ones from the League of Women Voters here. Now, they getting all shamefaced on TV about being exposed.
94 -
andy marsh
Oct 19, 2004 at 5:45 pm
really...and I'm being serious here...I'd like to see one...I never seem to get any of the propaganda.
Diva, I can see why you no longer work for newspapers. Your factchecking abilities are subpar. You may still have the notes, but they are badly out of date.
LOL! So, someone told you Natalie isn't white and you think that will get you off the hook, Mike Kole. It won't. Your claim that someone of my proven ability is your intellectual inferior is ludicrous. It is the kind of a thing a bigot would say. And, frankly, I am a lot smarter than you will ever be.
Andy, I will see if any of the local media have a picture of the phony voters' pamphlets.
98 -
bob2112
Oct 19, 2004 at 7:38 pm
Ballot mailed. Check.
Not influenced by other state's early voting. Check.
Still believe current version of (R)Party is watered down Fascism. Check.
Walmart is current version of government cheese.(Throw 'em a bone!) Check.
Tax cuts will bankrupt social programs to enslave the poor, more. Check.
Diebold programmed back door in vote count program for over 1000 counties to allow cyber-terrorism, in hopes of postponing election. Check.
Healthy Forest Initiative attempt to tip the balance for Bush, in swing states WA & OR. Check.
Flu Shot crisis, purposeful population control tactic to kill Seniors before 2006 Medicare prescription benefit kicks in. Check.
Medicare prescription benefit, carrot to secure as many (R) Senior Citzen votes as possible. Check.
Alan Keyes can kiss my ass! Check.
Tom Delay pure evil! Check.
Karl Rove, please die! Check.
Colin Powell, quit now, man! Check.
Michael Powell, down with the ship. Check.
John McCain, I understand what you have to do. Those guys are sick bastards, & who knows what they'll do to you if you don't play ball.
John McCain last (R) standing. Check!
"I would be kicking these guys asses myself if they were to be unlucky enough to be face to face with me, as a victim of their long distance atrocities."
Under the old, pre-deregulation rules (needless to say media has been deregulated) there would have been a requirement that Sinclair's Broadcast be presented as political fare (which would have brought the equal time requirement into play) or that it be aired after the election. Free speech is not absolute. The problems with what Sinclair does are twofold: They are the only local option for many of their viewers who do not have cable, and, they don't distinguish between opinion and fact. There will be viewers who believe they are watching a factual presentation.
"Free speech is not absolute". I guess she or another dictator will the arbiter of what shall pass. In this case, the FCC will do nicely.
"The problems with what Sinclair does... They are the only local option for many of their viewers who do not have cable"
Once again, Mac's fact checking is lousy. A two-minute check of Sinclair's website reveals that they are present mainly in markets with plenty of TV viewing options: Baltimore, Buffalo, Birmingham AL, Cincinnati, Columbus OH, Dayton, Kansas City, Las Vegas, Milwaukee, Minneapolis-St. Paul, Pittsburgh, St. Louis, San Antonio, Syracuse...
They are in places I'm not so familiar with, such as in Asheville, NC. Turns out they have an ABC afiliate in Asheville, which isn't much, but then again, they also get Nashville TN tv stations as well as Hickory NC stations. They have cable and are fighting to get the local County Commissioners to create the public access channel, which would allow for diverse viewpoints.
OK, how about Paducah, KY? Turns out Paducah has plenty of TV- all the network affiliates and Comcast cable.
I just can't find a market Sinclair serves where they are a monopoly player, or even where the market they are in isn't served by cable.
Your 'proven ability' seems to be in blowing smoke.
110 -
bob2112
Oct 21, 2004 at 3:29 pm
RJ, maybe I should have clarified what I meant. I would be kicking those guys asses in 1970-whenever as an NVA victim of their long distance atrocities they inflicted on my family. These guys committed their own share atrocities.
I wouldn't want to be in the same room with these guys today. The lies they tell hurt too much.
Once again, Liberinfant Mike Kole misses the point. But, then, he is ignorant of the deregulation of the media that makes the point an issue. As I said before, the problem is twofold: limited access to other voices and the intent of Sinclair to directly influence the election. Before deregulation, neither aspect of the problem would have occurred. There would have been other local options for viewers and the Fairness Doctrine would have required Sinclair be balanced in its airing of political content.
This not quite equivalent to Kole bragging about doing all the research he needed in regard to the Digital Divide in one minute on the Internet elsewhere, but it is further evidence of someone imagining hinself to be much brighter than he is.
Look, Mac. The FCC as it is now is what you call de-regulated, but I do not call it de-regulated. I call it re-regulated.
A de-regulated FCC would create no artificial barriers to entry for any entity wishing to pop a TV station up. The result would be *lots* of TV stations, and would prevent the possibility that a Sinclair could be the sole media outlet.
You argued that Sinclair was the only outlet in some places. I showed it wasn't true.
You would be imminently more credible if you stopped calling names, and debated on the facts. Alas, you sweep facts under the rug, never allowing them to get in the way of your bombast.
The only facts about deregulation on this thread were posted by myself, Steve (Boom), and bhw. Until his last comment, Mike Kole denied that deregulation has occurred.
Furthermore, the man who would be king* of his own Dungeons and Dragons world is totally tripping in regard to the main thing deregulation achieves -- concentration of ownership. Deregulate more and the same entities that own multiple television stations, radio stations and newspapers will own even more. The problems will be exacerbated.
*Yes, Mike Kole believes he would be king. He perceives Al Barger as his subject, a gofer. And entertainment. A kind of 'Mr. Piggy.'
Relax in the safety of your own delusions, Diva. Whenever you're off on a topic, you will do one one the following: play the race card, call names, insult, put words in the mouth of your opposition.
You've done all of these things on this thread. Why not just concede that you're wrong once in a while? It works wonders, especially when you *are* wrong.
…
Article comments
76 - Mike Kole
Good morning, MacDiva Esq. My, but you are up early in Portland, the probable home of the 2006 LP national convention. It's nice to see such verbal diarrhea from you so early, and in such copious amounts. And, you're a lawyer? Gosh! I bow, deeply.
Actually, I read very little Rand and a whole lot of history. Perhaps you should do the same for a background on the FCC and how it allows the conditions for our current media situation, with corporations from ClearChannel to NPR devouring small stations with complicit government help.
Maybe it would allow you to see that it took decades for the poor to get telephones and televisions, but now mere years for the poor to get internet. There is a positive evolution there that defies your bitter rhetoric.
Your complaints are what? That the internet isn't perfect, and that not everybody has internet access? Gosh, but those are really pathetic, petty complaints. The regulated broadcast media was perfect until spoiled by deregulation? That's when the variety of perspectives closed up?
Maybe what we need, to make sure that everyone has internet access, is a law. That's what lawyers always argue for as the solution to any problem, right? No, two laws:
1. Amendment to the US Constitution: All citizens have a right to free internet access. There will be no denial of this vital resource based on economic or other status.
2. All citizens shall be forced to learn to read and to type. It shall be a crime to be unable to use this precious resource through lame excuses such as illiteracy, or even- get this- disinterest.
Obey! Obey!
77 - Mike Kole
My, but this is the most fun I've had in the last 23 minutes!
It just dawned on me that there has been something troublesome to me about MD's constant anti-Rand harangues.
I admit that there was a time when I was intoxicated by Rand's militant style of laissez faire politics. I never fully bought in, because there was one aspect of Rand's approach that I reject. It was overwhelmingly adopted by her cultist followers, the Objectivists: never fail to pronounce moral judgment.
That's what bothered me about MD's attacks. They always use this formula. She never fails to pronounce moral judgment. It is alway accompanied by bitterness, anger, negativity, and name-calling. I had no use for it in those people I had significant agreement with. I have even less use for it in those I disagree sharply with.
Believe it or not, I very much enjoy the arguments from the other side, coming from Natalie Davis, Hal, Boom, Shark, bhw, BAB, and even bob2112 (when he avoids the Nazi thing). I get tremendous value from dealing with what I consider intellectual peers.
78 - Eric Olsen
hey bob2112, I absolutely was not ignoring you or in any way passing judgment: there are only somany hours in the day and only so much time to make comments. I see my overarching role regarding comments as filling in the spaces and acting as a lubricant. I always try to gree new members in particular. When a thread is going quite smoothly on its own with various sides being represented quite well without my help, I generally concentrate on other things. That's all there is to it.
79 - bhw
Mike, I see your point about the FCC and regulation and your comparison to the Internet. There's no denying that an average American can have a voice on the Internet, while having zero chance of having a voice in traditional print or broadcast media.
That has to do with the *relatively* low cost to enter the Internet "market": a home PC, an Internet connection, and an overlown ego and you're on your way to Internet publishing!
But what MD says about the barrier to entry is still true: there are millions of Americans who still can't afford the access at home. Even if they can access it at, say, the local library, it's not quite the same as having the access anytime you want it and having the freedom to do what you want with the PC.
Still, access is *relatively* cheap, but that has a lot to do with the technology, which continues to go down in price. The Internet existed before the home PC, but without the home PC, the Internet would still be the exclusive domain of universities and government agencies and other institutions that could afford the hardware and software.
So, to make a long story longer, even if you got rid of the FCC and completely deregulated broadcast media ownership, we'd still end up with monopolies of ownership because of the cost barrier. It's just to frickin' expensive for an average American to own a single tv station that reaches more than his neighbors, nevermind an actual network of them.
One of the best things that happened to the Internet, if you ask me, is that people learned it's NOT that easy to make money on it, certainly not big money like with broadcast media. That's partially because of user behavior -- we just don't click those damn ads! -- but also because there's no centralized gather place: there are too many options out there for users [which is good for users but bad for advertisers]. Where is the "prime time" slot to book your ads? And users aren't too fond of subscriptions, either. We want it all for free. So the situation keeps feeding itself: more user options, fewer identifiable "sure things" for advertisers. And users will keep heading for the free content, for the most part.
Anyway, the Internet is about as democratic as you can get, even though many people still can't partake in it. But it's definitely unprecedented in giving average people the ability to broadcast their ideas across the globe.
80 - Mac Diva
Someone sounds bitter, but it sure ain't me. The Liberinfants' formula must have caused colic.
Forty-seven percent of Americans don't have Internet access. For most of them, the reason is the cost. To dismiss that large a proportion of the population tells us the person doing the dismissing holds anyone not economically well-off in contempt. But, we already know that about Liberinfants. They propose a world in which a tiny elite, which they hope would include themselves, would live well why others barely get by or perish from lack of necesseties.
Mike Kole, you know next to nothing about the history of deregulation of media and it shows. The one thing deregulation has accomplished superbly is concentration of media ownership in a few hands. More deregulation will create more concentration. Apparently you are silly enough to believe that Mom and Pop Doe will be the ones to buy newspapers, radio and television stations in the absence of regulation. I am not.
As for not liking being spoonfed by someone who does know what she is talking about, that is definitely your prerogative. Since you cling to ignorance as if it is a comforting teddy bear, your Liberinfant attitude in this regard is not surprising either.
It is somewhat amazing that you can be completely ignorant of the Digital Divide while claiming knowledge of the Internet. It is probably the most significant topic related to the 'Net. Reminds me of your argument with bhw about capitalism. You latched onto a simple-minded position -- capitalism is good -- and would not let it go. You've done the same thing here with pretty much the same result, conclusions that cannot be defended.
81 - andy marsh
Diva could you give me a definition of the word Liberinfant? I'm just trying to keep up is all!!!
Thanks!
82 - boomcrashbaby
Even after I posted my last comment, it dawned on me that people who can't afford a PC or the cost of an ISP can walk into a public library for free and use the net and blog for free
But according to the Right, those PC's contain nothing but porn.
83 - Mac Diva
Andy, I coined 'Liberinfant' myself. I am not much of a curser or name caller, but I do like to turn a colorful word or phrase that captures the object like a deer in headlights. The self-centered nature of Libertarians reminds me of babies. Another infantile aspect is the way other people don't really exist for them except as abstractions. When Al Barger or a Mike Kole refers to much, maybe most of the population, it is not as people with needs like themselves, but as barriers to them getting their way. So, I bring you 'Liberinfants,' a construction that describes what those folks are really like.
Worse than that, Steve (Boom)! Natalie's blog, which contains absolutely no porn, cannot be accessed from the library or even Kinko's. She writes about gay rights and I suspect that has caused the ban. She once tried to blog from Kinko's, perhaps because her system was unavailable at home. She couldn't. I tried accessing her blog from Kinko's. I couldn't.
84 - andy marsh
I'll buy into the cost of a pc...but you can actually access the internet for free through Juno. You will get bumped if the to many paying customers come on, but it's still free. And yes this still works. I was out of town 2 weeks ago, staying in a hotel that did not have HS internet (I try to avoid that) and used my old juno software that I have not paid for in a year to download my e-mail. It reminded me of why I hate dial up so much, but if you don't know any better...
85 - bob2112
Thank you, Eric. You got a thread dedicated to Al to be a super hot debate!
I hope to God Al wins his race!
Good luck, Al!
Can't play today, gang. Real life is calling. Real bills. Real Absentee voting for Kerry & the other (D)'s I can help out!
I know, I know. What a relief! bob2112 can't spew more of his outlandish theories to disregard, today. Maybe he'll get hit by a car or something! Maybe the accident will burn up his ballot before he gets to the mailbox! Yeah Andy, that's the ticket!
86 - Mike Kole
Diva, your 'facts' are crap. I'll show how crappy with a post shortly.
Funny how you can say that you aren't an insulting name-caller while having to explain the insulting name you coined for libertarians.
I know plenty about the history of the broadcast media. First, it was unregulated. Then it was regulated. Now it is still regulated, but what you call de-regulation is actually re-regulation. De-regulation is the absence of regulation. Tough concept to grasp, I know. Anyhow, that's the brief history of broadcast media and regulation. Stuff your head in the sand if you must.
87 - Al Barger
Bob2112, thanks for your kind endorsement.
88 - andy marsh
Bob...I have a lighter if you need it!!! I'd hate for you not to be around though, I love all your conspiracy theories!!!
89 - Mac Diva
That's piffle, Liberinfant. I was the research assistant for one of my law profs on a book about media deregulation. Still have my notes. Furthermore, I worked for newspapers for years. This is not some new topic I discovered yesterday, but something I've followed over time.
As for your assertion above (Comment 77) Mike Kole, that white participants in Blogcritics are your "intellectual peers," but I am not, I am not surprised by it at all. Show me someone who loves Al Barger and I will show you someone with a race problem. I just hope you are not stupid enough to actually believe what you imply.
90 - andy marsh
you can tell colors from those names??? I'm impressed!!!
91 - Mac Diva
Bob2, my ballot came in the mail today, along with the real voters' pamphlet from the League of Women Voters and a phony voters' pamphlet disguised to look like the one by the LWV from the Republicans. If I am not too tired after getting up early today, I will sit down and peruse the ballot this evening. I hope to complete the ballot and mail it back by Thursday.
92 - andy marsh
more of the vast right wing conspiracy...I sure hope after GWB finishes up his next four years that hillary runs on the dem ticket...think how much fun this place will be then!!
93 - Mac Diva
Not at all, Andy. The GOP printed up and mailed partisan voters' pamphlets designed to look like the objective ones from the League of Women Voters here. Now, they getting all shamefaced on TV about being exposed.
94 - andy marsh
really...and I'm being serious here...I'd like to see one...I never seem to get any of the propaganda.
95 - Mike Kole
Diva, I can see why you no longer work for newspapers. Your factchecking abilities are subpar. You may still have the notes, but they are badly out of date.
96 - Mike Kole
Diva- this is my 'list of peers' from Comment 77:
Natalie Davis, Hal, Boom, Shark, bhw, BAB, and even bob2112
Every one of these are white people, eh?
Like I said about your factchecking abilities, above.
97 - Mac Diva
LOL! So, someone told you Natalie isn't white and you think that will get you off the hook, Mike Kole. It won't. Your claim that someone of my proven ability is your intellectual inferior is ludicrous. It is the kind of a thing a bigot would say. And, frankly, I am a lot smarter than you will ever be.
Andy, I will see if any of the local media have a picture of the phony voters' pamphlets.
98 - bob2112
Ballot mailed. Check.
Not influenced by other state's early voting. Check.
Still believe current version of (R)Party is watered down Fascism. Check.
FCC deregulation, overt assbackward right-wing benefit. Check.
Walmart is current version of government cheese.(Throw 'em a bone!) Check.
Tax cuts will bankrupt social programs to enslave the poor, more. Check.
Diebold programmed back door in vote count program for over 1000 counties to allow cyber-terrorism, in hopes of postponing election. Check.
Healthy Forest Initiative attempt to tip the balance for Bush, in swing states WA & OR. Check.
Flu Shot crisis, purposeful population control tactic to kill Seniors before 2006 Medicare prescription benefit kicks in. Check.
Medicare prescription benefit, carrot to secure as many (R) Senior Citzen votes as possible. Check.
Alan Keyes can kiss my ass! Check.
Tom Delay pure evil! Check.
Karl Rove, please die! Check.
Colin Powell, quit now, man! Check.
Michael Powell, down with the ship. Check.
John McCain, I understand what you have to do. Those guys are sick bastards, & who knows what they'll do to you if you don't play ball.
John McCain last (R) standing. Check!
99 - Mac Diva
Now, Bob2, I dunno about the flu shot conspiracy. ROFL!
100 - bob2112
I forgot: Saddam, Tariq Aziz, & Noriega are all nodding off on pure Afgani dope, not naming names.
James Baker is 'real' Secretary of State
Dick Cheney still smokes.
Bush is on perfect prescription cocktail
developed by Eli-Lilly.
There is no hope or help on the way if Republicans win. Check, check, check, check, check, check!
101 - andy marsh
you really do crack me up Bob...glad you're around here...one of the few liberals with a real sense of humor...you're a good man charlie brown!!!
102 - RJ
"They are attempting to influence public opinion in a coming election. This should be illegal, I don't know why it is not."
Have you ever heard of free speech?
Have you ever read Newsweek or Time?
103 - RJ
"I would be kicking these guys asses myself if they were to be unlucky enough to be face to face with me, as a victim of their long distance atrocities."
Ooo...I would LOVE to see that...
104 - Mac Diva
Under the old, pre-deregulation rules (needless to say media has been deregulated) there would have been a requirement that Sinclair's Broadcast be presented as political fare (which would have brought the equal time requirement into play) or that it be aired after the election. Free speech is not absolute. The problems with what Sinclair does are twofold: They are the only local option for many of their viewers who do not have cable, and, they don't distinguish between opinion and fact. There will be viewers who believe they are watching a factual presentation.
105 - RJ
"Even when the journalist has the floor, the lawyer is not far away."
(retch...)
106 - RJ
"I am not much of a {...} name caller"
(retch...)
107 - RJ
"Show me someone who loves Al Barger and I will show you someone with a race problem."
Is Justene on vacation? Or just utterly useless vis-a-vis race-baiting?
108 - RJ
"someone of my proven ability"
RETCH!
109 - Mike Kole
Quoth Mac-Who-Cannot-Be-Named:
"Free speech is not absolute". I guess she or another dictator will the arbiter of what shall pass. In this case, the FCC will do nicely.
"The problems with what Sinclair does... They are the only local option for many of their viewers who do not have cable"
Once again, Mac's fact checking is lousy. A two-minute check of Sinclair's website reveals that they are present mainly in markets with plenty of TV viewing options: Baltimore, Buffalo, Birmingham AL, Cincinnati, Columbus OH, Dayton, Kansas City, Las Vegas, Milwaukee, Minneapolis-St. Paul, Pittsburgh, St. Louis, San Antonio, Syracuse...
They are in places I'm not so familiar with, such as in Asheville, NC. Turns out they have an ABC afiliate in Asheville, which isn't much, but then again, they also get Nashville TN tv stations as well as Hickory NC stations. They have cable and are fighting to get the local County Commissioners to create the public access channel, which would allow for diverse viewpoints.
OK, how about Paducah, KY? Turns out Paducah has plenty of TV- all the network affiliates and Comcast cable.
I just can't find a market Sinclair serves where they are a monopoly player, or even where the market they are in isn't served by cable.
Your 'proven ability' seems to be in blowing smoke.
110 - bob2112
RJ, maybe I should have clarified what I meant. I would be kicking those guys asses in 1970-whenever as an NVA victim of their long distance atrocities they inflicted on my family. These guys committed their own share atrocities.
I wouldn't want to be in the same room with these guys today. The lies they tell hurt too much.
111 - Mac Diva
Once again, Liberinfant Mike Kole misses the point. But, then, he is ignorant of the deregulation of the media that makes the point an issue. As I said before, the problem is twofold: limited access to other voices and the intent of Sinclair to directly influence the election. Before deregulation, neither aspect of the problem would have occurred. There would have been other local options for viewers and the Fairness Doctrine would have required Sinclair be balanced in its airing of political content.
This not quite equivalent to Kole bragging about doing all the research he needed in regard to the Digital Divide in one minute on the Internet elsewhere, but it is further evidence of someone imagining hinself to be much brighter than he is.
112 - Mike Kole
Look, Mac. The FCC as it is now is what you call de-regulated, but I do not call it de-regulated. I call it re-regulated.
A de-regulated FCC would create no artificial barriers to entry for any entity wishing to pop a TV station up. The result would be *lots* of TV stations, and would prevent the possibility that a Sinclair could be the sole media outlet.
You argued that Sinclair was the only outlet in some places. I showed it wasn't true.
You would be imminently more credible if you stopped calling names, and debated on the facts. Alas, you sweep facts under the rug, never allowing them to get in the way of your bombast.
Que sera sera.
113 - Andrew Ian Dodge
There are those who will stand up and be counted (like Al) and there are those like MD.
Deeds not words...
114 - Mac Diva
The only facts about deregulation on this thread were posted by myself, Steve (Boom), and bhw. Until his last comment, Mike Kole denied that deregulation has occurred.
Furthermore, the man who would be king* of his own Dungeons and Dragons world is totally tripping in regard to the main thing deregulation achieves -- concentration of ownership. Deregulate more and the same entities that own multiple television stations, radio stations and newspapers will own even more. The problems will be exacerbated.
*Yes, Mike Kole believes he would be king. He perceives Al Barger as his subject, a gofer. And entertainment. A kind of 'Mr. Piggy.'
115 - bob2112
"FCC deregulation, overt assbackward right-wing benefit. Check." post#98
"FCC rules recently allowing companies to legally buy up signals so one voice can monoploize more stations, under the guise of capitalism." post#43
Thanks, Lucy! Arrrgh!
116 - Mac Diva
Sorry I left you off the list, Bob2. You are right.
117 - Mike Kole
Relax in the safety of your own delusions, Diva. Whenever you're off on a topic, you will do one one the following: play the race card, call names, insult, put words in the mouth of your opposition.
You've done all of these things on this thread. Why not just concede that you're wrong once in a while? It works wonders, especially when you *are* wrong.
118 - Mike Kole
Diva, that was really unseemly of you to describe my relationship with Al Barger that way. The civil thing to do would be to apologize.
In all actuality, you have the relationship backward, though. Al is the candidate and I am the party operative. As such, I am his gofer.
119 - bob2112
It's OK, Diva. I can take it. I've been left out in these NW woods for the last 24 of my 35 years!
120 - Al Barger
The dark woman, she is too wise and her soul too strong for us. She knows too much. She must be eliminated.
Mike Kole and RJ, my minions, you must dispatch this Fighter for Justice with extreme prejudice before she exposes our plans for World Domination.
Go, now!
121 - RJ
[unsheathes two-handed battle axe]
"How many hit points does the gully dwarf have left?"