If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(USA Today)   Farking Supreme Court shiatheads to rule on whether FCC can require networks to be their biatches, censor swearing on TV. Bunch of nubianrdly coonts. Boobies   (usatoday.com) divider line 134
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

5003 clicks; posted to Main » on 04 Nov 2008 at 3:03 PM (5 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



134 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2008-11-04 01:53:42 PM
Penis?
 
2008-11-04 01:57:26 PM
SH*T, P*SS, F*CK, C*NT, C*CKSUCKER, MOTHERF*CKER, and TITS!
 
2008-11-04 01:57:32 PM
let's not forget "wankstain".
 
2008-11-04 01:58:51 PM
motherfrocking corksoakers.
 
2008-11-04 02:02:36 PM
fark the FCC. It should have absolutely no jurisdiction or power outside of doing what it was originally intended to, parcel out and fairly distribute the public airwaves. It shouldn't be more than a farking technical regulation agency, not some motherfarking censorship bureau.
 
2008-11-04 02:03:30 PM
King Something: SH*T, P*SS, F*CK, C*NT, C*CKSUCKER, MOTHERF*CKER, and TITS!

Tits shouldn't even be on the list. It sounds more like a snack. Tater-tits.
 
2008-11-04 02:05:35 PM
Bloody William: fark the FCC. It should have absolutely no jurisdiction or power outside of doing what it was originally intended to, parcel out and fairly distribute the public airwaves. It shouldn't be more than a farking technical regulation agency, not some motherfarking censorship bureau.

First amendment surrenders?
 
2008-11-04 02:10:47 PM
www.billionswithzeroknowledge.com

fargin iceholes!
 
2008-11-04 02:12:19 PM
corsec67: Bloody William: fark the FCC. It should have absolutely no jurisdiction or power outside of doing what it was originally intended to, parcel out and fairly distribute the public airwaves. It shouldn't be more than a farking technical regulation agency, not some motherfarking censorship bureau.

First amendment surrenders?


The justification for the FCC's content enforcement (and the Fairness Doctrine) is that the airwaves are public property, and a finite space. Without regulation of them, you would have any asshole setting up any transmitter, and scrambling both his and several others' transmissions. And when the airwaves are ostensibly publicly owned, they should then be regulated to contain content acceptable to the majority. This is why there's no FCC for newspapers or the Internet, and why the FCC's jurisdiction doesn't extend to cable or satellite television. They are unlimited media, compared to the limited spectrums of over-the-air television and radio.

However, the FCC has become a bunch of total coonts in the last few decades, so fark them.
 
2008-11-04 02:14:18 PM
burndtdan: fargin iceholes!

Was waiting for Moronie. Didn't have to wait for long. Yay!

/farking submitter
 
2008-11-04 02:16:24 PM
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, excepting references to sexual or excretory functions; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

I think the founding fathers were quite clear there.
 
2008-11-04 02:19:47 PM
Bloody William: The justification for the FCC's content enforcement (and the Fairness Doctrine) is that the airwaves are public property, and a finite space. Without regulation of them, you would have any asshole setting up any transmitter, and scrambling both his and several others' transmissions. And when the airwaves are ostensibly publicly owned, they should then be regulated to contain content acceptable to the majority. This is why there's no FCC for newspapers or the Internet, and why the FCC's jurisdiction doesn't extend to cable or satellite television. They are unlimited media, compared to the limited spectrums of over-the-air television and radio.

However, the FCC has become a bunch of total coonts in the last few decades, so fark them.


The FCC should regulate who can use the airwaves, not what they can say on those air waves. As you say, allowing anybody to set up a transmitter would become a horrible mess quickly. But, the license to use the airwaves shouldn't be dependent on what content is transmitted.

You talk about public spaces: could a local government prevent people from saying "shiat" or "fark" in a public place?
 
2008-11-04 02:36:05 PM
I wonder if the SCOTUS will cite this?
 
2008-11-04 02:45:57 PM
Chief Justice John Roberts later added that such words are often used for emphasis simply because they are dirty words.

"That's what gives (the word) its force," Roberts said.


No, you fukctard, what "gives the word its force" is your reaction to it. It's a dichotomy in this country that we hold ourselves, as Americans, to be rough and ready, ass-kicking tough guys. We have inherited this, justifiably or not, from the generations who came before us who carved the Union out of the wilderness. How is it that we can sit here and call for our enemies to be ripped limb from limb, but grow faint when someone utters a particular sound? Sack up, nancies.

And don't tell me about your kids, unless you keep them tied up in a closet at home (NTTAWWT) they've heard every imaginable word spoken in every imaginable context already.

Curse words are an imagined slight. They only have the power that you give them. It is akin to my touching you with one finger and you believing that I'd broken a bone.
 
2008-11-04 02:48:54 PM
corsec67: Bloody William: The justification for the FCC's content enforcement (and the Fairness Doctrine) is that the airwaves are public property, and a finite space. Without regulation of them, you would have any asshole setting up any transmitter, and scrambling both his and several others' transmissions. And when the airwaves are ostensibly publicly owned, they should then be regulated to contain content acceptable to the majority. This is why there's no FCC for newspapers or the Internet, and why the FCC's jurisdiction doesn't extend to cable or satellite television. They are unlimited media, compared to the limited spectrums of over-the-air television and radio.

However, the FCC has become a bunch of total coonts in the last few decades, so fark them.

The FCC should regulate who can use the airwaves, not what they can say on those air waves. As you say, allowing anybody to set up a transmitter would become a horrible mess quickly. But, the license to use the airwaves shouldn't be dependent on what content is transmitted.

You talk about public spaces: could a local government prevent people from saying "shiat" or "fark" in a public place?


Um... actually, yes. The line between obscenity and free speech was drawn with a rather thick brush years ago. Miller vs. California is one of the more recent (well, over three decades) rulings that determine (and reaffirm) that obscenity is not protected under the First Amendment.

I don't necessarily agree with that concept, but that's how the law has been established over the last two centuries.
 
2008-11-04 02:49:56 PM
www.herloyalsons.com
 
2008-11-04 02:50:13 PM
timujin: Chief Justice John Roberts later added that such words are often used for emphasis simply because they are dirty words.

"That's what gives (the word) its force," Roberts said.

No, you fukctard, what "gives the word its force" is your reaction to it. It's a dichotomy in this country that we hold ourselves, as Americans, to be rough and ready, ass-kicking tough guys. We have inherited this, justifiably or not, from the generations who came before us who carved the Union out of the wilderness. How is it that we can sit here and call for our enemies to be ripped limb from limb, but grow faint when someone utters a particular sound? Sack up, nancies.

And don't tell me about your kids, unless you keep them tied up in a closet at home (NTTAWWT) they've heard every imaginable word spoken in every imaginable context already.

Curse words are an imagined slight. They only have the power that you give them. It is akin to my touching you with one finger and you believing that I'd broken a bone.


Personally I agree with you and I think that the majority of "obscenity" is bullshiat that, if they were so "offended," they would have done far better to simply ignore it and not give it such power.

Unfortunately, from a legal perspective, that's not the case. Unless we get a chain of some revolutionary precedents set about the subject... it is what it is.
 
2008-11-04 03:07:56 PM
I just came in here to say TWAT-WAFFLE!!!
 
2008-11-04 03:08:04 PM
That's going to make a fine t-shirt.
 
2008-11-04 03:08:13 PM
There are only so many trees on this planet that can be used to print newspapers so bandwidth is limited there too. :)
 
2008-11-04 03:08:18 PM
media.monstersandcritics.com

/Approves (of the headline that is)

//Hotlinked

///Slashies!
 
2008-11-04 03:08:21 PM
mofroe: King Something: SH*T, P*SS, F*CK, C*NT, C*CKSUCKER, MOTHERF*CKER, and TITS!

Tits shouldn't even be on the list. It sounds more like a snack. Tater-tits.


Actually, they are all towns in Pennsylvania.
 
2008-11-04 03:08:29 PM
Imagine if the Fairness Doctrine were applied to network television?


HAHAHA!!!


The networks would be forced to have an equal number of conservative biased sitcoms! Hollywood would leave the country!
 
2008-11-04 03:09:02 PM
Hello!!! Suck this and MF and kiss my big black stuff and suck it and stick it down ya' mouth and suck it and suck it!!!

www.maxim.co.uk
 
2008-11-04 03:10:10 PM
i220.photobucket.com

This is what happens when you find a stranger in the alps!
 
2008-11-04 03:10:52 PM
Isn't this why they forced manufacturers to put V-Chips in the TV's?

Now that they're there, there's nothing to worry about right?

RIGHT?!??!?
 
2008-11-04 03:11:32 PM
NYZooMan: Imagine if the Fairness Doctrine were applied to network television?


HAHAHA!!!


The networks would be forced to have an equal number of conservative biased sitcoms! Hollywood would leave the country!


You are going to disappear after tonight, right?

/Sorry to those who block him.
/PhilHerup, McCainDemocrat / Poon et al are at least intelligent once in a while.
 
2008-11-04 03:11:48 PM
I was watching a live call-in broadcast of C-Span this morning and a caller said he just wanted to call to say "Farkin' A!" and he did. The nonplussed commentator/host just said, "And your parents are so proud."
 
2008-11-04 03:12:16 PM
canadoh.blogsport.de
 
2008-11-04 03:13:09 PM
corsec67: You talk about public spaces: could a local government prevent people from saying "shiat" or "fark" in a public place?

Yes, usually it's covered under 'disturbing the peace'

/still wrong
 
2008-11-04 03:13:40 PM
mofroe: King Something: SH*T, P*SS, F*CK, C*NT, C*CKSUCKER, MOTHERF*CKER, and TITS!

Tits shouldn't even be on the list. It sounds more like a snack. Tater-tits.


New Nabisco Tits!

\George Carlin... rest in peace.
 
2008-11-04 03:13:40 PM
There's enough shiat on network TV already.
 
2008-11-04 03:13:46 PM
nubianrdly?

/they're nubians?
 
2008-11-04 03:14:59 PM
What part of "shall make no law" is so damn hard to understand?
 
2008-11-04 03:15:06 PM
exparrot: Isn't this why they forced manufacturers to put V-Chips in the TV's?

Now that they're there, there's nothing to worry about right?

RIGHT?!??!?


THIS

Now that we all have V-chips, and the power is in the hands of the consumer, they should free the airwaves.
 
2008-11-04 03:15:06 PM
mofroe: King Something: SH*T, P*SS, F*CK, C*NT, C*CKSUCKER, MOTHERF*CKER, and TITS!

Tits shouldn't even be on the list. It sounds more like a snack. Tater-tits.


"Tit for tit!"
"...That's not how that saying goes."
 
2008-11-04 03:15:30 PM
coont pickle!

Penn and Teller had a good episode of Bullshiat! about profanity. I think you can youtube it, so it's worth lookin up!
 
2008-11-04 03:15:41 PM
The Thnikkaman: This is what happens when you find a stranger in the alps!

still my favorite tv redub of all time.
 
2008-11-04 03:15:43 PM
"Yippe Ki Yay, Mr. Falcon."
 
2008-11-04 03:16:51 PM
APPROVES (new window)
 
2008-11-04 03:16:57 PM
Shut your farking face, uncle farker!
You´re a corksucking, arse-liking, uncle farker!
You´re an uncle farker, yes it´s true
Nobody farks uncles just like you!

Shut your farking face, uncle farker!
You´re the one that farks your uncle, uncle farker!
You don´t even sleep or mow the lawn,
You just fark your uncle all day long!

(what´s going on in here?)

Shut you´re farking face, uncle farker!
You´re a boner bitting bastard, uncle farker!
You´re an uncle farker, i must say,
You farked your uncle yesterday!

Uncle farker, that´s U-N-C-L-E, fark you!
Uncle farker!

suck my balls.
 
2008-11-04 03:19:25 PM
Pertifly: mofroe: King Something: SH*T, P*SS, F*CK, C*NT, C*CKSUCKER, MOTHERF*CKER, and TITS!

Tits shouldn't even be on the list. It sounds more like a snack. Tater-tits.

"Tit for tit!"
"...That's not how that saying goes."


There once was a woman who was quite begat.
She had three babies named Nat, Pat, and Tat. S
he said it was fun in the breeding....
But hell in the feeding...
When she found there was no tit for Tat.

Tit for tat, Mr. Hero, tit for tat.
 
2008-11-04 03:19:50 PM
I'm an old fart. I have long since got over the need to establish my independence by pushing every opinion to the extreme just to get a reaction.

If you can't say something without using foul language then I don't want to hear it. If you can't make a TV show without 87 guys shooting at each other every 5 minutes then I don't want to watch it.

/Lawn, etc.
 
2008-11-04 03:20:03 PM
gorgor: APPROVES (new window)

Do you just get paid to post images to threads?

/Not that I mind
//this one was particularly funny
 
2008-11-04 03:23:31 PM
i257.photobucket.com
 
2008-11-04 03:25:29 PM
WORLD FARKING CHAMPIONS

Sorry...I can't hear any of you over how awesome the Philadelphia Phillies are....


\It's Topical....
 
2008-11-04 03:25:32 PM
I like how sh*t has become occasionally acceptable on TV, perhaps in-no-small-part thanks to South Park.
 
2008-11-04 03:27:40 PM
Bondidude: Do you just get paid to post images to threads?

/Not that I mind
//this one was particularly funny


Some things are worth doing free :)
 
2008-11-04 03:29:26 PM
mofroe: King Something: SH*T, P*SS, F*CK, C*NT, C*CKSUCKER, MOTHERF*CKER, and TITS!

Tits shouldn't even be on the list. It sounds more like a snack. Tater-tits.


OM NOM NOM NOM
 
2008-11-04 03:30:08 PM
dofus: If you can't say something without using foul language then I don't want to hear it. If you can't make a TV show without 87 guys shooting at each other every 5 minutes then I don't want to watch it.

That would be the biggest downside.

I don't really care if a few "foul" words are used on TV now and then. Used appropriately they can add meaning and character.

However I fully expect that the committees that come up with most of the TV shows will go for that coveted 14-yo male demographic and make every character speak like Quentin Tarantino suffering from Tourette syndrome.
 
Displayed 50 of 134 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report