Because the FCC was chartered to regulate the over the air frequencies no matter who uses them. This why they can regulate over the air television but not cable television.
Chris Mathews drops the F-bomb...
- Thread starter Candy
- Start date
Because the FCC was chartered to regulate the over the air frequencies no matter who uses them. This why they can regulate over the air television but not cable television.
yeah but honestly what difference does it really make. i understand the n-word and faggot to an extent due to the historical nature of the word to demean a culture. but words like fuck, cunt, and so on our just a vulgar way of refering to things. and there is something about free speech or something i should throw in there.
But the fact that they are vulgar is what makes them more potent and shocking. There will always be words that serve that purpose and have that label as it is necessary in a language. They may change over time, but they will always exist.
And I'm not certain if free speech applies unless there was no other way he could state his though without using the words he knows are not allowed.
Because what is being broadcast on American TV is a direct representation of our society.
Which would you rather have the world see? People who are able to form cohesive sentences without continually and pointlessly being vulgar? Or some guy with dreadlocks yelling "poopcock" into the camera over and over?
I'm pretty sure SCOTUS has never ruled that protected speech has to meet that requirement. :thrawn:
Successful ranchers/farmers are probably more savvy in economics than graduate economists or even those that claim they are professional economists.
was he even successful in that? afaik, he only has a doctorate in riding daddy's coat tails
You have got that right. The Rancher-Farmers have had to live in the real economic world unlike the academic or professional economists.
I think he's referring to applying to the job of POTUS.
Hopefully no one here is discounting the value and hard work involved in farming.
He was one of the Skulls at Yale from what I've heard.
they're no doubt more savvy in applied economics as it applies to their industry, but that doesn't necessarily translate well to international trade relations, national budget management and tax policy. i'm not saying that there aren't any well educated ranchers, I'm just saying that on-the-job training in economics isn't a substitute for higher education on the subject. Most ranchers and farmers are more likely to have advaced degrees in agriculture or biology.
If you would actually read the thread instead spamming it. You would know the answer to your question.
