Bleep You

It’s coming up on my one-year anniversary of acquiring a satellite radio unit. Once installed in my vehicle, I’ve rarely looked back on FM and AM, and many others are increasingly feeling the same way. I love satellite radio. The seemingly endless variety of music genres and talk/comedy stations, most without commercials and only limited DJ banter, puts terrestrial radio to shame. With so much bandwidth, XM and Sirius can take chances with new and relatively unheard artists and comedians. Off-center musicians that never saw light on radio can now breathe on this medium. Everything from bluegrass to new age to salsa to punk. Not only that, but the bleeps and pauses that may cover the naughty bits are absent. Satellite radio, like cable stations HBO and Cinemax, are beyond FCC regulations. For now.

But politicians like Senator Ted Stevens (disappointingly from Alaska, one of the most limited-government states in the union) wouldn’t mind extending the heavy hand of the FCC into cable television and satellite radio (Imagine Tony Soprano shouting “gosh darn you!”). And it appears that it doesn't really matter what side of the proverbial aisle they are on. Stevens is Republican, and the retired John Breaux, a Democrat, pushed for an amendment to expand the FCC's authority.

The pro-FCC side has always favored such decency standards for over-the-air broadcast radio. Even if one disagreed with even this amount of regulation, one could possibly see some sense in the other side's argument.

But going after a paid service is downright scary. If this succeeds (which, fortunately, many predict it won't), every single shred of home entertainment will have to be at a child's level. The FCC will have completed its role as Ultra-Nanny. I mean, what's next? Magazines? Someone might bring a Penthouse home, and God forbid if an unsupervised child finds it. Books? Even widely-known mainstream novels like Michael Crichton's Timeline have more than a couple obscenities in it.

Seems like Howard Stern was on to something, after all.

Share this

This whole thing infuriates

This whole thing infuriates me. I have XM radio and the XM Radio service offers a parental control/blocking option which allows the parent to have XM Radio completely block access to any channel upon request. The market has solved the "problem" (not that I ever thought it was a problem) twice over- first by charging for service, and second by offering to turn off channels that one has paid for. This legislation clearly isn't "for the children" but rather blatant government speech control

I certainly like her better

I certainly like her better than Teresa Heinz-Kerry.

Daniel: Y'know, at times

Daniel: Y'know, at times Laura Bush's behavior makes me wonder what it'd have been like if she were president and not Dubya...

I'm on-board with the pumas

I'm on-board with the pumas one.

- Josh

Zell Miller said on the

Zell Miller said on the Daily Show last night that he wants to censor rap music. He compared it to shouting "fire" in a crowded theater. I don't like the messages in a lot of rap music, but that wouldn't give me the right to silence it with the force of law.

I was a little weirded out by the first lady's little comedy routine yesterday. It was surprisingly blue. But it's refreshing to hear someone in that camp loosen up a bit. I just wish the Congress would, too.

Parents are constantly

Parents are constantly trying to get other people to subsidize their childrearing hobby and to inconvenience others so that they can be really lazy as parents. "Lock up your guns because my children might shoot themselves with them!" "Don't cuss on TV because my children might be watching!" "Don't be gay in public because my children might realize that gay people exist!" "Wait behind this bus interminably while I install my child in a seat because she is too stupid to get on a bus by herself!" "Don't release pumas in the neighborhood to control deer because my children might be eaten by one!"

One kind of off topic

One kind of off topic quibble thats been driving me nuts lately. Can we all stop maintaining/promoting the myth that right wing politicians were/are FOR smaller government! In my entire life I have never seen or witnessed the much vaunted much ballyhooed conservative political prediliction for ’smaller government’. Where is it? When did it occur? AFAIK, power has varigated roughly evenly between the 2 paries in my life , and a complete idiot can see there has NEVER been even a slowdown in the encroaching filth called centralised government. I know it will never happen as these things are ingrained in the one dimensional media, but it would be pleasingly accurate to refer to Republicans and Democrats on a scale like the Hertsprung star system, with Rep.s and cronys as Giants and Dem.s and libertards as SuperGiants on the inflationary government scale. garden variety libertarians would be white dwarfs, etc… or maybe someone has a better analog.:lol: