Feingold to call for rare presidential censure

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: gr8fuldaniel Unfortunately I dont have cable or Sattellite. I think CSPAN should go public like PBS.

And have the Republicans whine about them being "too liberal" and not fair enough? No thanks.

When you think of what big business has given back to the people (and cable TV is BIIG business) cable is right around the top because they fund C-SPAN.

Head over to www.c-span.org and watch the streaming video.

[Osborn F Enready]

Daniel said: Unfortunately I dont have cable or Sattellite. I think CSPAN should go public like PBS. I can think of no good reason, why what happens in DC should be privledged information.

I say:
Dude, I agree TOTALLY.

Have you written your local PBS, or C-Span about this? I will if you will.

[Osborn F Enready]

Good points too Scrib.

I wish they had longer kept archives and more access though......

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready Good points too Scrib. I wish they had longer kept archives and more access though......

But if the best you have is not perfect but is still miles ahead of anything else out there, you DON'T start tinkering with it. I believe C-SPAN is pretty much unique in the world and is one of the only places where you can hear what comes out of the politician's mouths without the "experts" telling you what you ought to make of it. It's not filtered, it's not editorialized and it ain't busted so don't even THINK of fixing it.

I would support a new and different venue to provide what C-SPAN lacks but I'm very comfortable with what I see now.

[Osborn F Enready]

I totally agree Scrib, and I have become a C-Span fan.

I love listening to the "average" of opinions that come through the call-ins on Washington Journal in the mornings, and their coverage of live action in Washington is unparalelled by anyone.

They have done a great job of keeping commercialism at bay. (the only ones?)

If they take away my C-Span, I know the last vestige of free speech in television is gone, as is the last non-filtered coverage of the true crime we know as government.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready If they take away my C-Span, I know the last vestige of free speech in television is gone, as is the last non-filtered coverage of the true crime we know as government.

I suspect they cover that crime unfettered because they never REFER to is as such. Unlike the FOX slogan, C-SPAN DOES report and let's US decide.

[Milton Bradley]

Well articulated Scribbler, Osborn, perhaps that is what Dan needed all along, a link to what drove me to be a conspiracy theorists. Happy headspins Dan old boy. I believe that C-SPAN really is the best information source on government out there followed closely by PBS. Well worth you time investigating the information on that site.


What is really funny that I have been noticing lately is how on target Lou Dobbs, and Jack Cafferty are in their opining on the problems behind the stories. Unfortunately, they should have been reporting the same thing 20, or 25 years ago when those same facts were being pointed out on the House floor. Too bad they appearently didn't watch C-SPAN back then, or they could have reported the facts in time for he people to actually prevent these proposals from becoming law in the first place. But hey, they did figure out the outsourcing problem, and the free trade agreements. Lets give'em a big hand folks.

[bishop]

dobbs is just putting on an act these days.. i regularly watch him, and the basis of his arguments has weakened considerably as of late.

i used to agree with some of what he said (and definitely appreciated the information), but these days he's just preaching to the choir for the most part.

[gr8fuldaniel]

Quote by: Scribbler Head over to www.c-span.org and watch the streaming video

I tried that for quite a while. It wouldnt work on friday. Maybe because I am on dial-up modem and there was just too much traffic.At first I thought it was because my Real Audio needed to be upgraded. That took a couple of hours for 12 meg download. After all that I couldnt find it scheduled on CSPAN or CSPAN2. So I had to re-sign up for cspan alerts to get the links to watch. That didnt help, it was only for the weekend and no reruns were scheduled..

Anyway, I just now finally found it HERE. By doing a search.
There was no link to it from the CSPAN main page.
Which is plenty odd. Its almost like it never happened. Nothing to see here, move along now.

[gr8fuldaniel]

That video stream worked for 9:46 before it had to rebuffer. For 5 minutes. Now its back on, but it will only last 3 minutes. And then 1 min. and then it just wont start up again.

I know poor people dont really matter to the fat white men who rule over us.


What good can come from the peasants eavesdropping on the aristocracy?

[gr8fuldaniel]

Quote by: Os If they take away my C-Span, I know the last vestige of free speech in television is gone,

Is it really free speech if you have to pay through the nose for it?

[gr8fuldaniel]

Quote by: MB Happy headspins Dan old boy

So you are going to be just plopping insults into the middle of your posts. Like little turds?

[Osborn F Enready]

Gr8ful said: Is it really free speech if you have to pay through the nose for it?

I say:
I hear ya Dan, but the point is that anything that involves labor, involves money.

We need to make the people understand that in a wolrd like we have now, with media as it is, the amount it would take for channels like c-span to exist could be found in MANY constitutional venues.

I would support it, let's start the movement.

[gr8fuldaniel]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready Gr8ful said: Is it really free speech if you have to pay through the nose for it? I say: I hear ya Dan, but the point is that anything that involves labor, involves money. We need to make the people understand that in a wolrd like we have now, with media as it is, the amount it would take for channels like c-span to exist could be found in MANY constitutional venues. I would support it, let's start the movement.

I wonder if cspan has even a limited monopoly/copyright?

I would be willing to watch some commercials that would cover the cost. There wouldnt be too much expense, IMO, because its not like you are paying for huge productions with budgets that include movie stars and athletes salaries and such.

Another angle may be even ..... radio.

We cannot rely on the embedded media to report just the facts.

Corporate agenda and profit get in the way.

Maybe somebody can fire up a non-profit org., but I presume it hasnt been done yet because cspan has cornered the market. They have contracts with cable to fill.

[Osborn F Enready]

I favor instead holding all broadcasting companies to the same regulations through the FCC.

The airwaves are the property of the collective of the United States people. For individuals to broadcast on those airwaves, for a profit, the people have a right to set limitations on those companies to provide non-opinion oriented, FACT based news coverage without bias.

We the people, need to enact a movement to force the FCC to remove the majority of their regulation on entertainment broadcasting, while at the same time imposing new regulation to a minimum commitment of all licensed broadcasting stations to broadcast a minimum of 3 hours of fact based, non-biased, non-partisan news coverage, per day, as well as a possible requirement for larger stations to put forth non-biased investigative journalism per day.

There would still be 24 hour news channels, as well as entertainment channels, but all would be required to perform an EQUAL commitment to the U.S. people for the abilty to profit of the valuable resource that is our airwave communication mediums. (radio, television, satellite) For that ability to create wealth which is astronomical (as testament from advertising time shares) there MUST be a service of commitment to the people to provide HONEST, RELIABLE news that keeps an informed, and intelligent populace.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready We the people, need to enact a movement to force the FCC to remove the majority of their regulation on entertainment broadcasting, while at the same time imposing new regulation to a minimum commitment of all licensed broadcasting stations to broadcast a minimum of 3 hours of fact based, non-biased, non-partisan news coverage, per day, as well as a possible requirement for larger stations to put forth non-biased investigative journalism per day. There would still be 24 hour news channels, as well as entertainment channels, but all would be required to perform an EQUAL commitment to the U.S. people for the abilty to profit of the valuable resource that is our airwave communication mediums. (radio, television, satellite) For that ability to create wealth which is astronomical (as testament from advertising time shares) there MUST be a service of commitment to the people to provide HONEST, RELIABLE news that keeps an informed, and intelligent populace.

That's a great idea but as soon as a public outcry for more fact-based news becomes loud enough the broadcasters will obviously say they ARE providing the facts. They do that already and the sheep will likely swallow it whole. Hell, there are a large number of saps who think Limbaugh and Hannity are providing NEWS, so they will immediately buy the inevitable hype that FOX and MSNBC, etc. will be dishing out wholesale.

It can be done. C-SPAN is the best example of that, but it will not be done willingly, or at least not to the degree that we would like, because as soon as the broadcasters (A misnomer, actually.) are in any way inconvenienced they will resist any further change.

Then there is accuracy. Even IF we get a supposed honest, factual and unbiased source of information, how will we know for SURE it is all that without acting as editors and rechecking every story they produce. I can't speak for anyone else but even though I don't consider myself easily fooled I have to admit I HAVE been.

[Osborn F Enready]

I've been fooled to Scrib.

You are right, it would be tough to monitor. All the more reason for a seperate non-profit media accuracy organization with full transparency for honesty and accuracy in media.

[gr8fuldaniel]

While the Senate tries to resolve whether or not to censure the pinhead in chief............
A citizen actually DOES censure him this morning:

Link Questioner sharply criticizes President Bush at appearance BY RON HUTCHESON AND JIM MORRILL Posted on Thu, Apr. 06, 2006 Knight Ridder Newspapers CHARLOTTE, N.C. - President Bush isn't used to tongue lashings, but he got a scolding Thursday from a North Carolina man who told the president that he should be ashamed of himself. "While I listen to you talk about freedom, I see you assert your right to tap my telephone, to arrest me and hold me without charges, to try to preclude me from breathing clean air and drinking clean water," real estate broker Harry Taylor told Bush at a town hall meeting. "I have never felt more ashamed of nor more frightened by my leadership in Washington." The audience at Central Piedmont Community College booed, but Bush seemed to take the criticism in stride. "I'm not your favorite guy," the president said. "What's your question?" Taylor didn't have one, but he wasn't finished. "I feel like, despite your rhetoric, that compassion and common sense have been left far behind during your administration," he told Bush. "And I would hope, from time to time, that you have the humility and the grace to be ashamed of yourself." More.....

Somebody played this back on the radio this morning. The guy layed into him for about 2 minutes. The crowd started to boo, but bush said "no no, let him finish".

Related: Google Results "Questioner: Bush should be 'ashamed'"

No word on the guys whereabouts :eek:

Edit: Sorry, I attributed the photo to the Knight Ridder story. The pic was actually found here , also worth the read.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: gr8fuldaniel No word on the guys whereabouts :eek:

He's probably at Gitmo in charge of feeding the dogs. They found out he once called his 1989 Chevy a "BOMB" and nabbed him as a terrorist.

Yep, I'll bet that's it.

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: Scribbler He's probably at Gitmo in charge of feeding the dogs. They found out he once called his 1989 Chevy a "BOMB" and nabbed him as a terrorist. Yep, I'll bet that's it

Humor, hehehehe.

Quote by: gr8fuldaniel So you are going to be just plopping insults into the middle of your posts. Like little turds?

That was not intended to be an insult, that was intended to a prediction, perhaps even a warning.


I know when I watch C-SPAN my head spins in one direction, then the other. Trying to make sense, or claim there is rational thought in Washington is like trying to find intelligent life in outer space.