[dinok]

"What could be in an "indecency bill" that would impact Rush?"

The question is not what you and I think is indecency. Its that we give the government the power to decide what it is. To democrats, dogs having sex with my dead grandmother is not half as bad as Rush's monologue every day at noon.

In liberal canada...the bibble is hate speach. Don't you get it? You and I talking here is offensive to the liberals.

[rwfromkansas]

No, you don't get it.

There is something fundamentally different between political speech and lurid programming.

They are not equivalent.

[rwfromkansas]

No, you don't get it.

There is something fundamentally different between political speech and lurid programming.

They are not equivalent.

AND EVEN WHEN DEMOCRATS GET BACK IN CHARGE, THEY WON'T MAKE POLITICAL SPEECH "INDECENT."

They could have done so a long time ago; we have had indecency legislation since even before 1776 and politics has not become an area of indecency to punish conservatives in all that time. It won't happen. The public would not stand for it, even Manhattan liberals and the ACLU would scream free speech if they tried to squelch a conservative voice by claiming politics to be "indecent."

And if they try, we can vote the Dems out.