Licensing for the 2nd Amendment is bad, but for the 1st?

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Woobie

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 19, 2014
    7,197
    63
    Losantville
    Really? If Fox went down along with a couple of other conservative outlets, what would we have left? To have our very own Pravda doesn't require we only have one news outlet, just that all the news outlets take direction from the party.

    Just pulled up front page at RCP

    The publishers of the Saturday content are: NYT, CNN, USA today, Salon, Federalist, The Guardian, NYT, PJ Media, American Prospect, RCP, NYT, WSJ, American Greatness, Politico, The Hill, New Yorker,
    Washington Examiner,
    New Yorker, NY Post, Slate, American Greatness, The Atlantic, IBD, Al-Monitor, NYT, Rush, CNN, WaPo

    About 65%/35% Pull out Fox and its affiliates (as James and Lachlan arguably may wish to do) and how many of what's left have a major media presence. Look through the daily archives at RCP (I think you can go back at least a week) and watch the media move in lockstep with the progressive talking points/anti-Trump theme of the moment. The situation is even worse in broadcast media, and don't even try to convince me that print media can pick up the slack. That would require our bourgeoning little resistance members to actually read something. For them if it isn't on video/social media it didn't happen

    We are closer to Pravda than you might wish to think

    You didn't address the '10x nuclear arsenal' lie. Is that 'fake news' or not?

    And, from: https://www.fcc.gov/media/radio/broadcast-radio-license-renewal


    Wow, read much? For at least the third time in this thread let me say this: the media is not intellectually honest, nor is it impartial. The 10x nuclear lie doesn't need to be addressed. It's a distortion of real news, chosen and reported with bias. That confirms what I have said this whole time. It isn't "fake news" though. You'll have to check the Onion for that.

    That is quite a straw man you have there, with FOX dropping out and all.

    A profitable multi-billion dollar company closing its doors is not how you'll get government control of media. That will come from somebody acting on what Trump has said, then someone else taking it a step further, and then more restrictions, more censorship, and before long you have government run healthcare, umm, media. Look at their playbook. This is how it is always done, not by talking a billionaire into shooting his cash cow.

    And when did I bring up print media? I did refute a claim that by revoking a broadcast stations license for content reasons there was no 1A infringement because that entity still retained the ability to say what the wanted in print. You just added another argument to that refutation. Thank you, although I'm sure that wasn't your intent.
     
    Last edited:

    Liberty1916

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 13, 2017
    269
    18
    Home
    Wow, read much? For at least the third time in this thread let me say this: the media is not intellectually honest, nor is it impartial. The 10x nuclear lie doesn't need to be addressed. It's a distortion of real news, chosen and reported with bias. That confirms what I have said this whole time. It isn't "fake news" though. You'll have to check the Onion for that.


    "Fake news" is an easy way to sum that up. I get that you don't like the term because you don't like Trump but it's a tag meant to convey exactly what you're saying. And again, a tag that the left originally tried to use against conservative news and it got shoved back in their faces.

    How many times have we heard "Russia hacking the election" as if they were manipulating voting machine counts. The media knows exactly what picture they want painted with stuff like that. It's fake news.
     

    Woobie

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 19, 2014
    7,197
    63
    Losantville
    "Fake news" is an easy way to sum that up. I get that you don't like the term because you don't like Trump but it's a tag meant to convey exactly what you're saying. And again, a tag that the left originally tried to use against conservative news and it got shoved back in their faces.

    How many times have we heard "Russia hacking the election" as if they were manipulating voting machine counts. The media knows exactly what picture they want painted with stuff like that. It's fake news.

    Read back. We've already talked the "Woobie doesn't like Trump" piece. I do not dislike him. I'm not enamored with him, but he's ok. On balance, I probably have a positive view of him as Presidemt. I don't like the "fake news" meme, partly because of what that has come to mean, and partly because it isn't a very accurate depiction. "Dishonest media" is only four more syllables and is a far more accurate description.
     

    Liberty1916

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 13, 2017
    269
    18
    Home
    Read back. We've already talked the "Woobie doesn't like Trump" piece. I do not dislike him. I'm not enamored with him, but he's ok. On balance, I probably have a positive view of him as Presidemt. I don't like the "fake news" meme, partly because of what that has come to mean, and partly because it isn't a very accurate depiction. "Dishonest media" is only four more syllables and is a far more accurate description.


    I get your point, I really do, but I like the whole idea of "fake news" getting shoved back in the left's face, so I don't have a problem with it. And by the way, Trump has probably used the term dishonest media far more than fake news, which he usually reserves for CNN in particular. Loosen up, it's not that big of a deal. Just say "fake news" a few times, and you'll get used to it. :D
     

    BugI02

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 4, 2013
    32,136
    149
    Columbus, OH
    Wow, read much? For at least the third time in this thread let me say this: the media is not intellectually honest, nor is it impartial. The 10x nuclear lie doesn't need to be addressed. It's a distortion of real news, chosen and reported with bias. That confirms what I have said this whole time. It isn't "fake news" though. You'll have to check the Onion for that.

    That is quite a straw man you have there, with FOX dropping out and all.

    A profitable multi-billion dollar company closing its doors is not how you'll get government control of media. That will come from somebody acting on what Trump has said, then someone else taking it a step further, and then more restrictions, more censorship, and before long you have government run healthcare, umm, media. Look at their playbook. This is how it is always done, not by talking a billionaire into shooting his cash cow.

    And when did I bring up print media? I did refute a claim that by revoking a broadcast stations license for content reasons there was no 1A infringement because that entity still retained the ability to say what the wanted in print. You just added another argument to that refutation. Thank you, although I'm sure that wasn't your intent.


    Wow, I've read it all. My mistake is to keep expecting it to make sense

    A substantial portion of broadcast and print media can collude to try and undo the will of the people and its no big deal. Trump can say one of the more egregious sources of 99.9% fake news should have its license challenged and possibly revoked and - full on existential threat to the first amendment

    Vis a vis the 10x nuclear arsenal lie, it's not entirely made up of whole cloth (there was a meeting, Trump attended and nuclear force strength was discussed) so its not fake news to make up the rest and attribute it to annonymous sources (which of course cannot be verified). So as long as there is a stray fact or two included, it isn't fake news. The term fake news can only be applied to things which are 100% fabricated

    And Trump lies = bad Media lies = freedom

    Got it!
     

    2A_Tom

    Crotchety old member!
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Sep 27, 2010
    26,046
    113
    NWI
    I do not dislike him. I'm not enamored with him, but he's ok. On balance, I probably have a positive view of him as Presidemt.

    This is the point I do not get. You do not show it.
     

    2A_Tom

    Crotchety old member!
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Sep 27, 2010
    26,046
    113
    NWI
    I havn't seen the trend broken by ANY approval.

    DDDRees volume was greater, but the song is the same.
     

    Woobie

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 19, 2014
    7,197
    63
    Losantville
    This is the point I do not get. You do not show it.

    Because the subject matter in this thread is negative. Start a thread about something he did great, and if you're right, I'll join in the praise. Do you always only say glowing things about the people you like no matter how wrong they are, or are you honest? Only a friend will tell you if you have a booger hanging out of your nose.
     

    Woobie

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 19, 2014
    7,197
    63
    Losantville
    Criticizing him incessantly showns no respect.

    Respect is earned, not given. You certainly wouldn't have felt disrespectful by criticizing Obama. He earned a fair amount of criticism, and precious little respect from me. I give Trump less of the former and more of the latter. But I tend to dish each out based on merit, not on what party the subject belongs to, or whether I need to feel good about the person I voted for.
     

    Kutnupe14

    Troll Emeritus
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    40,294
    149
    Respect is earned, not given. You certainly wouldn't have felt disrespectful by criticizing Obama. He earned a fair amount of criticism, and precious little respect from me. I give Trump less of the former and more of the latter. But I tend to dish each out based on merit, not on what party the subject belongs to, or whether I need to feel good about the person I voted for.

    Deja Vu. The circle is now complete, lol
     

    Tombs

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    12,089
    113
    Martinsville
    Not that it matters to many ('cept me and a few others) but I find a president uttering the words below, as extremely troubling. A siting president directly talking about restricting the freedom of the press, openly suggesting that speech can be, and should be, revoked. Absolutely crazy.



    -President Donald J. Trump (United States of America?)



    Well some others find it troubling, as well.

    -Sen. Ben Sass Nebraska (R)




    So, INGO, what says you? Do you find a president saying such things concerning, even dangerous, or are some attacks on rights more acceptable to others? Should, at President Donald J. Trump's suggestion, we take a look at the licensing of our (free?) press?
    Here's what some other thought about the issue:

    -John Adams

    -Thomas Jefferson

    -JamesMadison




    Bonus quote: Do these words seem familiar?

    -Vladimir Lenin

    Kut (asks, when does this become a problem?... it's a problem if someone even whispers something about restricting the Second Amendment, but this?)

    Disclaimer: I'm not going to start threads based on every bad action by the president, but this subject definitely deserved it's own thread, as it's an explicit attack on an institution that is a cornerstone to our democracy.


    A press license has nothing to do with freedom of speech. It's a license for access to places the general public can't go.

    Why do reporters deserve more rights than I do? The entire concept of press licenses is absurd to begin with.

    But if we are going to license people to sit in on briefings and inform the public, I don't believe it's unreasonable to require them to tone down opinion piece journalism and report things straight. If they're supposed to be more credible than tabloids, they should have to make an effort to remain objective.

    Under our current climate, I'd revoke the press pass of every mainstream outfit and hand out press passes to youtube journalists who have contributed to the journalistic profession in a meaningful way.
     
    Top Bottom