no anti-bush ad in the superbowl

[tyboogie]

http://www.moveon.org/cbs/ad/

without getting into teh politics of whether or not bush is good or bad, i do think its an interesting situation where cbs is refusing to air the ad. these conglomerate media companies are getting scary.

[mtw]

CBS has stated that they don't want to air political ads. An ad by PETA was also denied.

[cotron]

They don't want to show political ads, but they're airing one from Bush himself... right...

I think it's "they don't want to show political ads that they don't agree with."

I really don't know how much I'd have agreed with either ad, but the fact that a public forum like that is instantly turned down due to the potential controversy involved is disheartening.

[DanSTC]

Hey, I'm all for shooting down PETA's usual deceptive shock tactics, but this ad really needs to be seen. Bad move on CBS's part.

[stalecracker]

WOW!!! That was REALLY informative and full of information. I agree, why ban it. It was not misleading OR manipulative at all.

[Sinix]

Originally posted by stalecracker
WOW!!! That was REALLY informative and full of information. I agree, why ban it. It was not misleading OR manipulative at all.

Lol. :chug:

[Skank]

Originally posted by stalecracker
WOW!!! That was REALLY informative and full of information. I agree, why ban it. It was not misleading OR manipulative at all.

lol
yay for sarcasim!

i agree...CBS can play whatever they want...
pro bush or not...its their choice..since when do they HAVE to take money for an ad they dont want to run.
im sure this ad will get its air time on the other networks...
i dont wanna see that crap during the super bowl ANYway.
im not pro bush by any means, but like i said..their choice.,..oh fucking well.
it always makes me laugh when people get upset when they find out about this kinda stuff...like politics is in any way honest and forthcoming..PLEASE!
person runs for office, person gets lots of money from a large company, thats the way it works, for ANYone running for office, i dont care what party youre part of....get over it, it happens.

[seb]

they should air this instead of those ads.
http://bushflash.com/thanks.html

personally, i think the great unwashed masses take what is said on television to be the truth; sadly a majority of americans cant think for themselves, except for the bastions of intelligence along the coasts, and elsewhere.

[stalecracker]

HELL YEAH!!!
They SHOULD air the EDITED DOWN FOOTAGE of what was, more likely than not, a FIREFIGHT in a WAR ZONE. As for the soldier? That's the way a Soldier/Warrior has and always will think.

That's what they DO...

KILL PEOPLE.

It reminds me of the classic Vetnam footage of the Vietnamese Officer tagging the "Innocent Civilian" in the head and casually walking away. No one EVER mentioned "In the day" that the man executed was VIETCONG and had successfully attacked and killed some of the Officers troops. Why? Because it's not news. Creating stories about soldiers killing innocent people is sells WAY more footage and gets you noticed...


just ask Sen. John Kerry.

[N D Hill]

I say we all take up arms and "mess with texas"

[stalecracker]

*sigh*

[seb]

so essentially your argument is "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth." what happens when you run out of eyes and teeth? people usually want to do stupid things for a reason... like ending their own lives. their lives must really suck if they are willing to under go the ultimate sacrifice for what they believe in. and its a matter of perspective whether that person is a patriot, a martyr, a terrorist or a murderer. i think the most commendable thing is the strength of their conviction.

texas frightens me as do most of the southern states. if texas is really is like king of the hill, then i'm never going to step foot there.

but seriously now, forcing people to think is good. even if the conclusions that they come to are totally different than youre own. i think that really should what our republic is about. really to vote at all requires alot of work and research. its like buying a car. talk like this is good for our country.

[Lono]

LOOK what you did Ty!!


-Lono

:p

[Skank]

Originally posted by stalecracker
HELL YEAH!!!
They SHOULD air the EDITED DOWN FOOTAGE of what was, more likely than not, a FIREFIGHT in a WAR ZONE. As for the soldier? That's the way a Soldier/Warrior has and always will think.

That's what they DO...

KILL PEOPLE.

It reminds me of the classic Vetnam footage of the Vietnamese Officer tagging the "Innocent Civilian" in the head and casually walking away. No one EVER mentioned "In the day" that the man executed was VIETCONG and had successfully attacked and killed some of the Officers troops. Why? Because it's not news. Creating stories about soldiers killing innocent people is sells WAY more footage and gets you noticed...


just ask Sen. John Kerry.

i guess you could call this "an eye for an eye", but really, showing footage of soldiers killing people to prove how wrong something is, is like showing footage of an artist drawing or painting: its what they DO! thats the whole point of the military is to wage war, or defend against it, everyone knows this. that footage of them shooting the guys in the truck is like an on the job video, just bacause the guys theyre shooting at arent shooting back doesnt mean jack shit, we dont know the situation, its a gawdamn war, horrible stuff happens, people die....sure it sucks, no one wants it, but using it to prove wether or not somone is a good leader is just ludicrous.

im sure theres much more actual evidence against Mr. strategery you could use instead of footage of soldiers doing their JOBS.

[dfacto]

Personally I like Seb's post with the link to Bushflash.com.

I actually admire the US more after watching it. I knew we had screwed Iraq, but I never knew we did it that bad. Hell, we are badass, and we got the cojones to wheel and deal like nobody's business! THATs what true politics is about. Bush understands that. (or he's just real slow in the head):rolleyes:

Face it, politics is dirty business. If you didn't know that then you need a reality check, and if you don't like it then shut your mouth because thats what keeps your country running. Doesn't matter if you live in the US or in Madagascar, politics is not about being nice and moral, its about cheating, stealing, lying, and double dealing your way to the top. Do you think that the Democrats are better than the Republicans? Well, they're the same except for policy differences. They're still cheating assholes. Look at Clinton, and his Monica thing (I did not have sexual...oh wait, shit ;) ) or Kosovo. Fact is, Clinton was just as bad as Bush (somewhat), he was just discreet (something Bush should learn before he makes the US even more unpopular).

As for using footage of soldiers doing their jobs to discredit the leader, that is stupid. Soldiers do what they are trained to do, and thats kill. End of story. What did you think they did in a war...have tea and cakes and pleasant conversation?

on the original post: CBS is a private corporation, they can do whatever they want as long as it is legal, and not airing an ad is very legal. No surprise that they don't want to air anything against Bush though, anyone who messes with him seems to get bombed.:evilbat:

[stalecracker]

its a matter of perspective whether that person is a patriot, a martyr, a terrorist or a murderer.


WOW...
What an amazingly ignorant statement.
So, by THAT very definition... A child rapist would be different from a subtle pedophile who builds trust then gains intimacy?!? PLEASE- there are VAST idealogical, ethical and moral differences between a Patriot (which really doesn't fit into this category... but whatever) a Martyr, a Terrorist and a Murderer. If you truly cannot grasp that or, better yet, see that then you truly are void of conscience.

texas frightens me as do most of the southern states. if texas is really is like king of the hill, then i'm never going to step foot there.

HAHAHAHAH... Perhaps the best reason I now have for living here and further iron-clad proof that you float vapidly in a sea of Liberal dogma.


OH yeah...

GOD bless Texas... YEEEEEEEHAW *spit*

[Skank]

Originally posted by dfacto
Personally I like Seb's post with the link to Bushflash.com.

I actually admire the US more after watching it. I knew we had screwed Iraq, but I never knew we did it that bad. Hell, we are badass, and we got the cojones to wheel and deal like nobody's business! THATs what true politics is about. Bush understands that. (or he's just real slow in the head):rolleyes:

Face it, politics is dirty business. If you didn't know that then you need a reality check, and if you don't like it then shut your mouth because thats what keeps your country running. Doesn't matter if you live in the US or in Madagascar, politics is not about being nice and moral, its about cheating, stealing, lying, and double dealing your way to the top. Do you think that the Democrats are better than the Republicans? Well, they're the same except for policy differences. They're still cheating assholes. Look at Clinton, and his Monica thing (I did not have sexual...oh wait, shit ;) ) or Kosovo. Fact is, Clinton was just as bad as Bush (somewhat), he was just discreet (something Bush should learn before he makes the US even more unpopular).

As for using footage of soldiers doing their jobs to discredit the leader, that is stupid. Soldiers do what they are trained to do, and thats kill. End of story. What did you think they did in a war...have tea and cakes and pleasant conversation?

on the original post: CBS is a private corporation, they can do whatever they want as long as it is legal, and not airing an ad is very legal. No surprise that they don't want to air anything against Bush though, anyone who messes with him seems to get bombed.:evilbat:

:D
i like you
well said

[Grooveholmes]

All in all and regardless of what you people have said. CBS not airing the ad just boils down to blatant censorship. And skank.. I guess you'll be happier watching beer commercials and Jeep ads? Time for you to wake up man. Seriously.

[Skank]

Originally posted by Grooveholmes
All in all and regardless of what you people have said. CBS not airing the ad just boils down to blatant censorship. And skank.. I guess you'll be happier watching beer commercials and Jeep ads? Time for you to wake up man. Seriously.

the super bowl is all about goofy ads, i know people who watch it just for that. it has nothing to do with "waking up", its entertainment. entertainment and politics shouldnt mix in my opinion (which is just that, you are of course, entitled to yours) . i dont think they should be airing ANY political ads during the super bowl, thats the most expensive time slot for TV ads, and they spend too much freakin money on their trumpet blowing as it is. censorship or not, its still the choice of CBS to air what ads they want to, who are we to tell them what to air and what not to air. its their choice to make.

[mtw]

Originally posted by Grooveholmes
All in all and regardless of what you people have said. CBS not airing the ad just boils down to blatant censorship.
No it doesn't. It would be the first political ad shown during a superbowl. Like Skank said, CBS wants to keep the Superbowl hours as entertainment.

[mtw]

Originally posted by cotron
They don't want to show political ads, but they're airing one from Bush himself... right...
Bush himself? The Drug Agency is the one who submitted the ad, and it's about helping kids on drugs.

[seb]

i think it would be refreshing when politcal issues become more important than a game of football.

[Skank]

Originally posted by seb
i think it would be refreshing when politcal issues become more important than a game of football.

i can agree with that, but i think theres a time and place for everything..and this isnt it.

[Grooveholmes]

Originally posted by Skank


i can agree with that, but i think theres a time and place for everything..and this isnt it.

You, little boy; aren't the one to decide what the time and place is for it. And this complacent attitude of yours that would rather watch a bunch of jocks butt heads is part of the problem. People Just Like YOU are the problem. Who cares, take 30 seconds to ruminate on an alternate viewpoint. The game last 5 fucking hours, what's 30 seconds. What better way is there to reach hundreds of millions of people at once. You definately wont hear that point of view coming from any of the big 5 corporations that currently control the media in this country as it is.

And.. MTW, the drug agency is very much an arm of the White House. So yes, like it or not.. It was a very political ad.

Not only that.. but the mere fact that CBS WON"T show the ad is a political statement as well.


Sooooo, you guys lose. You support bush? You Lose.
You think he has your best interest in mind?
You Lose.
Take a look at his track record in office, Has he done one thing to show that he has our best interest in mind?
We all Lose.l

[mtw]

Originally posted by Grooveholmes

You, little boy; aren't the one to decide what the time and place is for it. And this complacent attitude of yours that would rather watch a bunch of jocks butt heads is part of the problem. People Just Like YOU are the problem. Who cares, take 30 seconds to ruminate on an alternate viewpoint. The game last 5 fucking hours, what's 30 seconds. What better way is there to reach hundreds of millions of people at once.
Oh no, people are having fun.

And.. MTW, the drug agency is very much an arm of the White House. So yes, like it or not.. It was a very political ad.
The Drug Agency would be around and making those ads even if Bush wasn't there.

Not only that.. but the mere fact that CBS WON"T show the ad is a political statement as well.
No it's not.


Sooooo, you guys lose. You support bush? You Lose.
You think he has your best interest in mind?
You Lose.
Take a look at his track record in office, Has he done one thing to show that he has our best interest in mind?
We all Lose.l
That's a pretty cocky attitude you have. All I'm talking about is why CBS won't air the ad. I'm not saying anything about Bush.

[Grooveholmes]

The Drug Agency would be around and making those ads even if Bush wasn't there.

No, look at the statement those ads made. They were in direct correlation with previous remarks shrub had said in numerous speeches.

[cotron]

:hearts: :inlove: :hearts: :inlove: :foundlove :inlove: :hearts:

come on guys, keep it positive... let's not start calling names and that sort of thing.

[Skank]

Originally posted by Grooveholmes
Sooooo, you guys lose. You support bush? You Lose.
You think he has your best interest in mind?
You Lose.
Take a look at his track record in office, Has he done one thing to show that he has our best interest in mind?
We all Lose.l

hmm, i cant remember ever saying i supported bush..EVER.
i dont in fact. i didnt vote for his dumb ass (or gores for that matter)
what i AM saying is MY personal opinion. im not telling you what to think, im not forcing my views on you, im mearly stating MY opinion (as are you, as is everyone) and you calling me an ignorant child (basically) isnt really helping any issues get resolved.
just because i may not have agreed with you or seb, doesnt mean i agree with CBS, bush, or ANY politician for that matter.
i find that a bit arrogent. the fact is, CBS can play whatever the hell they want to. does the fact that i think this make me complacent? no, im just stating my opinion.
the mere notion that ANY politition running in this upcomming election isnt biased, or have some big finacial backers is just silly. they are going to lie, cheat, and steal their way into office, the same as they always have. this is one of the many times its going to happen this year, so getting upset about it and yelling at me for bing "the" problem isnt going to fix it.

vote his ass out of office (which im going to be doing.) so we can have another president to complain about. heh, i dont think my problem is complacency, i think its just the fact that im a cinical bastard who has no faith in a corpulent system of greed and corruption...i hate polititions...end of story

im sorry if my opnion doesnt agree with yours....ill try harder next time. ;)



:chug:

[Grooveholmes]

Yeah I understand.

Its also my understanding that the airwaves (including television) are supposed to belong to the people. But they don't anymore. You have your GE's and yout Clearchannels that control any communication that gets through.
So, somehow Nike (a bunch of slavers) are allowed to say anything they want. But an organization like Move On (which is comprised of citizens) cant.
Its BIG BUSINESS at its finest. One corporations money is better than the next. And got forbid the people have a say.

[Skank]

Originally posted by Grooveholmes
Yeah I understand.

Its also my understanding that the airwaves (including television) are supposed to belong to the people. But they don't anymore. You have your GE's and yout Clearchannels that control any communication that gets through.
So, somehow Nike (a bunch of slavers) are allowed to say anything they want. But an organization like Move On (which is comprised of citizens) cant.
Its BIG BUSINESS at its finest. One corporations money is better than the next. And got forbid the people have a say.

i can honestly say i fully agree with that statement :)
money.
thats what its about.
(i probly should have stated this earlier lol)
me saying CBS can show whatever they want is brought on by the fact that its gotten to the point where these big companies can do whatever they want to, how they want to, and WHEN they want to....hence my loss of faith and overall "fuck you" to the government.
the only thing we truly count for now is which asshat gets into office next.

heh, i havent talked about politics in so long, it gets my blood boiling so i try not to, but im glad we're having this discussion.

cheers man

[dfacto]

Its also my understanding that the airwaves (including television) are supposed to belong to the people. But they don't anymore. You have your GE's and yout Clearchannels that control any communication that gets through.

LMAO!

WOW, Groove, I think you've stumbled on something there? What next, discovering oxygen, or figuring out that 2+2 makes 4 (or 5 if you read 1984 too much).

1)No, TV is business and does not belong to the people. The channels that do fail because they show crap, and nobody cares.

2)F*** the superbowl ad! Seriously, do you think that ad is even telling the whole truth? Its as duplicitous as Bush's reasons for war. If you want the truth told to you you are grossly mistaken if you think its going to get served to you on a platter during the Superbowl halftime. So sit back, enjoy, the game, the funny commercials, and get your news elsewhere. Hard to do these days since there is so much BS floating around. (I'm looking at YOU CNN)

3)There should be NO political commercials during the Superbowl.

[Skank]

Originally posted by dfacto


LMAO!

WOW, Groove, I think you've stumbled on something there? What next, discovering oxygen, or figuring out that 2+2 makes 4 (or 5 if you read 1984 too much).

1)No, TV is business and does not belong to the people. The channels that do fail because they show crap, and nobody cares.

2)F*** the superbowl ad! Seriously, do you think that ad is even telling the whole truth? Its as duplicitous as Bush's reasons for war. If you want the truth told to you you are grossly mistaken if you think its going to get served to you on a platter during the Superbowl halftime. So sit back, enjoy, the game, the funny commercials, and get your news elsewhere. Hard to do these days since there is so much BS floating around. (I'm looking at YOU CNN)

3)There should be NO political commercials during the Superbowl.

this is why i dont watch the news..hehe
#1 it makes me angry

#2 its depressing (too many people gettin killed over stupid shit)

#3 you get about 30% fact and about 90% BS ( ya, you do the math)

#4 it makes me angry

#5 id rather be drawing :D

[seb]

1)No, TV is business and does not belong to the people.

however the airwaves that bring television to people that do not have cable belongs to the people. this also includes the part of the spectrum used for wireless communication, etc. television at one point was mandated by the government to have public service announcements and other useful things in exchange for their free use of the the airwaves.

The channels that do fail because they show crap, and nobody cares

the bbc can be argued as belong to the people. they fund it through their tv licenses. cbc is also another example.

[Grooveholmes]

Think what you want Dfacto, and I'll do the same. Can you even see the super bowl in germany?

Trust me, I have no plans to watch the superbowl or the commercials. In fact I intend to go out of my way to avoid it all together. I'm merely arguing for the right to air that commercial.
Like I said before, Big Business doesn't like the people to have a say in anything. And this is just another example of that.

Soo, just like dfacto said... Sit back! Relax! Don't mind the man behind the curtain, he doesnt concern you.

[seb]

WOW...
What an amazingly ignorant statement.
So, by THAT very definition... A child rapist would be different from a subtle pedophile who builds trust then gains intimacy?!? PLEASE- there are VAST idealogical, ethical and moral differences between a Patriot (which really doesn't fit into this category... but whatever) a Martyr, a Terrorist and a Murderer. If you truly cannot grasp that or, better yet, see that then you truly are void of conscience.

hmmm full of barbs and thorns, just like rush limbaugh used to make them.

patriot - One who loves, supports, and defends one's country
martyr - One who makes great sacrifices or suffers much in order to further a belief, cause, or principle.
Terrorist - One that engages in acts or an act of terrorism (terrorism - The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.)
murderer - One who engages in murder. (murder - The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.)
all definitions from dictionary.com

Now that we have the book stuff out of the way, now we can get down to business. Those titles were picked with specific intention of creating contrast. The big problem with conservative thinking is that they don't actually give a response, but throw a red herring out there. but back to the issues at hand.

You talk about "VAST idealogical, ethical and moral differences." Ideology (def - The body of ideas reflecting the social needs and aspirations of an individual, group, class, or culture.) the reflection of what the people of a nation want and where they want to go. Don't you think this is affected by other things? Perhaps culture, economic status and other things play into this? It would potentially ignorant to believe so. The next on your list is ethics. Ethics and morals are essentially the rules by which we live our lives, a set of principles of right conduct. This too is a cultural and situational thing. It brings to mind the old conunudrum of the starving man who steals a loaf of bread to feed his starving family. Ethics are idealistic and differ from society to society.

This leads us back to the four words - patriot, martyr, terrorist, murderer. if this was an SAT question, the pairing would be patriot:murderer :: martyr:terrorist. Although my analogy is far from being completely accurate, lets talk it out. Lets define soldiers as patriots. They work, live, die, kill to defend our country. I appreciate that if their cause is justified. A good example would be an attack on our soil by another country. An example of this would be the Japanese attack at Pearl Harbor. The main purpose of an army is to kill, n'cest pas? Of course in order to do so equires a lot of planning and logistics, thus isn't it premeditated? Then this bring us back to the question of whether it was justified and also there are the inevitable blurring of lines between civilians and the enemy. But lets think from the opposing point of view for a second. Lets say tomorrow Canada and all the countries of the EU declare the United States of developing weapons of mass destruction, crimes against humanity and having an illegitament ruler. They invade and we are occuppied. Lets say you had a gun and a few texan friends that felt the same way. So you would go out with your buddies in your pickup truck and take a few shots at the occupiers. Lets say one day all your buddies get killed in a raid. From your point of view, the occupiers are murders, arent they? Lets have a flashback to vietnam; ever here of Mai Lai and Liet Calahan?

I'll let you think through martyr vs terrorist. Either you would have opened your mind a bit or stand steadfast in your convictions. Either way, more talk probably isn't going to help much. Essentially this boils down to you imposing your assumptions and beliefs on to other people. This does not mean that I believe that things like murder, rape and stealing are ok, however it means that it depends on the situation and the culture.

Personally calling me a liberal is the cliche "conservative" way of insulting me. Its somewhat funny now. I'd like to think that I have my opinions and you have yours and I will respect what you think as long as you have a good and logical reason for thinking that way. Hell, I'll even defend your right to say it. Does that necessarily sound bad? If you even want, I can say that your post was both "fair and balanced." Have fun in your state. I will make sure not to visit. Just remember not to pee on any electric fences. I hear it smarts and we both wouldnt want that.

[DanSTC]

Originally posted by seb

Personally calling me a liberal is the cliche "conservative" way of insulting me. Its somewhat funny now. I'd like to think that I have my opinions and you have yours and I will respect what you think as long as you have a good and logical reason for thinking that way. Hell, I'll even defend your right to say it. Does that necessarily sound bad? If you even want, I can say that your post was both "fair and balanced." Have fun in your state. I will make sure not to visit. Just remember not to pee on any electric fences. I hear it smarts and we both wouldnt want that.

As if the definitions of "patriot" and "terrorist" being eroded by misinformation weren't bad enough, I especially enjoy when I have to explain to a Fox News generation "conservative" of why the position I've taken is actually conservative, not liberal. :rolleyes:
(Bush's fiscally liberal activities has pissed off quite lot of conservatives, for that matter. Which is what I'd thought the censored superbowl ad was supposed to be about.)

I myself don't really subscribe to a political ideology, so I find it rather insulting when so-called "conservative" pinheads insult my intelligence by mistakenly stereotyping me as "lib'ral." (It's fotten even worse these days thanks to assholes like Anne Coulter branding all liberals as "traitors" and all manner of other misleading bullshit.) In reality, I'm more a force of nature who sways wherever I feel is necessary based on what I currently know, though I treat this with a healthy dose of ingrained skepticism and reasoning. Thus I will often support conservative and liberal ideals wherever I deem appropriate, since I really see no division between the two aside from the differing utility they can have for a given situation.

[dfacto]

Think what you want Dfacto, and I'll do the same. Can you even see the super bowl in germany?

Nope, ignorance is bliss eh?

Like I said before, Big Business doesn't like the people to have a say in anything. And this is just another example of that.

Well, yeah...I mean if people got their say then there would be no commercials, and then broadcasting companies would fail. Its like the USSR. The government tried to control the economy and it failed miserably, over and over. That's why Russia is a poor superpower, instead of a rich one, like it should technically be. While people controlling TV stations wouldn't have such a large impact, it would still lead to unsuccesful TV stations such as PBS, and the majority would fail.

Well OK, you couldn't get rid of commercials. Even PBS has them, except they come in 30 minute pledge drive doses that make you want to charge them money for wasting your time.

Soo, just like dfacto said... Sit back! Relax! Don't mind the man behind the curtain, he doesnt concern you.

Well, yeah actually. Fact is there will always be "the man behind the curtain", no matter how hard you struggle, so you might as well save your breath. Even if you managed to get rid of "him", "he" will eventually be replaced, and it will start again. What you want is not to make "him" go away, but to make "him" concur with your political views. Tisk Tisk, tolerance at its finest. (sorry, had to find a way to take a jab at ya', nothing personal):D

[N D Hill]

I believe without a doubt that the American media is bias towards whatever makes people watch. Why is it that Ben and "J-Lo" occupy so much serious news time while much more important things that actually matter are happening? We hear nothing of the tribal warfare that's tearing apart Burma or the Terrorism in Sri-Lanka that has real potential of turning that nation into a theocracy. Likewise, in the media we hear only the oppinions of those people who have money and the favor of those already in power. You could have the most qualified person you could imagine running for president, but not hear a thing about him if he doesn't have a cent to spend on a proper campaign. And if his ideals contradict those of General Electric or Time Warner, or anyone who proffits from the system he's trying to change, you can bet that he doesn't have much of chance of getting that campaign money.

Those with radical ideas and the drive to actually see them through are always seemingly blacklisted by the media. Anyone with serious concerns about environmental impact regulations, heavier taxation of corporations and more equal medical coverage for those who can't pay for it is pretty much ignored. Ralph Nader comes to mind simply as he was the most recent. He wasn't even allowed to debate while Bush and Gore, who agreed on everything, gave us the most boring and monotonous moments of our young lives.

In anycase, I couldn't care less about the superbowl ad. CBS can air whatever beer commercial it wants. Personally, I think people deserve a break from politics and thinking durring the superbowl.

[Skank]

Originally posted by Exo
Ralph Nader comes to mind simply as he was the most recent. He wasn't even allowed to debate while Bush and Gore, who agreed on everything, gave us the most boring and monotonous moments of our young lives.

lol
so true..
it was the "dumb and dumber" election...
good gawd, i remember looking at those 2 and just thinking "damn, we're fucked the next 4 years"...

and i also agree that what we hear on the TV "news" is so filtered and biased that theres really no point in watching it, unless of course you LIKE getting angry at a talking box.
i could go on and on about this crap, but theres really no point...

[Grooveholmes]

Dfacto... That's quite the defeatist attitude that you've got there man. How did you get that way? With the attitude the you've got you have already lost and will continue to lose.. again and again. :o

Umm, Btw.. who says PBS is not a success? I actually enjoy quite a bit of thier programming.

[seb]

what's with all the PBS bashing and ignoring the BBC and CBC? I guess maybe they don't have enough reality programming for your tastes. Public television is good because it allows for things to be heard and said that will not air on commerical television. While we are at it, NPR probably pwns commercial radio especially KCRW here in Los Angeles.

[dfacto]

There are some things you can't really struggle against Groove. The "man behind the curtain", for example, who shall be referred to as special interest groups forthwith, is never going to go away. Human nature dictates that everyone struggles for their own benefit, and as soon as somebody has more power than anyone else, which invariably happens, they begin to push for their benefit with their newfound influence. Its CBS on the corporate scale, and its your neighborhood bully on the local "nobody" scale. You can't successfully fight the special interest groups unless they goof and do something illegal, or piss too many people off. And as I said, if one special interest group falls, there are five others waiting in the shadows to be the next top dog.

Why defeatist? Its the truth, can't you see it, its right there in front of your nose. You can live in your bright and sunny dreamworld where anything is possible Groove, but reality happens to be much gloomier.

[Skank]

Originally posted by seb
what's with all the PBS bashing and ignoring the BBC and CBC? I guess maybe they don't have enough reality programming for your tastes. Public television is good because it allows for things to be heard and said that will not air on commerical television. While we are at it, NPR probably pwns commercial radio especially KCRW here in Los Angeles.

lol
reality TV..gawd that shit pissed me off...

sorry....lol
thats a whole different conversation.
i agree with seb on this...TV=teh sux

[Grooveholmes]

Damn Dfacto, how many times do I have to repeat the same thing?

When the majority of the people have givin up before they have even started just like you have then of course nothing is going to change and it will continue to get worse. And worse..

A sunny dreamworld has nothing to do with it, and I live far from it. Open your eyes. Until you are willing to fight for what's yours you deserve nothing.

[dfacto]

When the majority of the people have givin up before they have even started just like you have then of course nothing is going to change and it will continue to get worse. And worse..

In no way did I say that you should lose all drive to better your world. I was very explicitly stating that you cannot solve the special interest group situation. If you topple one, the next one climbs over the corpse and takes position. You may have a temporary respite, but its just that...temporary. I am not saying that you shouldn't fight the group when it does something illegal. In fact I said that that is one of the only ways to really topple the group. But you should know that when you bring it down, there will be a new one in its place in no time. You can't win, only force a time-out.

And I haven't quit before I have started. I simply maintain a cynical view because it helps me cope with the world much more easily than others. When you expect bad things you are always pleasantly surprised. That combined with a rather unhealthy dose of apathy keep me smiling and laughing at even really bad news items. Everything's funny when you are an apathetic asshole :D

But if my rights were being infringed upon, I would fight for them, but I would maintain a realistic view of the chances that I have, and I would also look to keep myself out of the fray as long as the costs of getting involved outweighed the gains.

[Grooveholmes]

Sorry to beat a dead horse and bump this topic again but thats exactly what the bush regime is up to:

GOP committee says MoveOn.org's spots are illegally financed (http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/03/07/moveon.ads/index.html)

"WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Republican National Committee is warning television stations across the country not to run ads from the MoveOn.org Voter Fund that criticize President Bush, charging that the left-leaning political group is paying for them with money raised in violation of the new campaign-finance law."

[Pencil Soldier]

vote his ass out of office (which im going to be doing.)

Im really disturbed about that. You would vote for the other person simply so Bush wouldn't be in office? Thats pretty, sad, sick, and biased. Personally, Kerry makes me want to puke.

Actuly, when watching all the democratic debates i wanted to puke. I cant help but quote Catcher in Rye and say that they are all a bunch of phonies. :cool:

[Wastrel]

Originally posted by Grooveholmes
Yeah I understand.

Its also my understanding that the airwaves (including television) are supposed to belong to the people. But they don't anymore. You have your GE's and yout Clearchannels that control any communication that gets through.
So, somehow Nike (a bunch of slavers) are allowed to say anything they want. But an organization like Move On (which is comprised of citizens) cant.
Its BIG BUSINESS at its finest. One corporations money is better than the next. And got forbid the people have a say. i was under the impression that the individuals who ran the networks were also people. but maybe all people except them own airwaves. or maybe we are all granted an equal portion of airwaves upon birth. feel free do deny them the use of your airwaves. the network not running any ad they choose will never be censorship, any more than me not arguing your point of view is. anti-bush agendas to not have a right to force thier business on the stockholders of the station.

[Grooveholmes]

Was that english?

1. corporations are not people.
2. not running an ad isnt censorship? By all means; tell me what the definition of censorship is, please.

[gallon]

"Until you are willing to fight for what's yours you deserve nothing."
"Grooveholmes"

Well said!

[Wastrel]

Originally posted by Grooveholmes
Was that english?

1. corporations are not people.
2. not running an ad isnt censorship? By all means; tell me what the definition of censorship is, please. if you want to look at the literal definition, then yes it is censorship. just like if mcdonalds refused a request for burgerking to put big burgerking posters in all mcdonalds establishments that would be consorship. if you want to consider the legal standpoints and documented rights having to deal with censorship (which are the only standpoints that have anything to do with the debate), you might be surprised to discover that there is nothing wrong with this practice by private corporations. the government is not allowed to censor, which has been dragged into a total grey area by politicians. for instance, you cant yell "fire" in a movie theatre, and recently you cant broadcast what someone else considers vulgar or profane. as for corporations not being people, that is only the legal standpoint. they certainly dont make policy without human involvement, or exist without human interaction. my standpoint on the matter is that they should not have to use their equipment or resources or money (these originate from people by the way, and are not conjured from nothing by a corporation) to say what you want to say or promote your agendas. but they should not be able to prevent you from purchasing your own broadcasting equipment and broadcasting your agenda your own self.