Freedom of speech means not having to listen to Howard Stern

townhall.com ^ | 3/17/04 | Kathleen Parker

[kattracks]

As a big fan of the First Amendment, I'm as reluctant as anyone to urge curbs on speech. But as an even greater fan of civilization, I'm having a hard time mustering sympathy for shock jock Howard Stern, whose show has been suspended from several stations for obscenity infractions.

Or to find common cause with comedian George Carlin, the "go-to guy" these days when talk-show hosts need someone to express righteous indignation about potential speech infringements.

People like Stern and Carlin have built careers out of making obscenity "funny," that is, if you're emotionally trapped in a 7-year-old boy's psyche. No offense to boys, but anyone who has served a tour of duty as a Cub Scout leader knows that those endowed with the XY chromosome find great hilarity in body functions and are prone to uncontrollable giggles upon hearing vocabulary referent to human anatomy.

Carlin is most famous for a comedy routine some 30 years ago in which he regaled audiences with the seven dirty words we're not allowed to broadcast. His point then, as now, was that censorship of certain words is a function of "religious superstition."

[CalKat]

I'm sure if he had a problem with my post, he is perfectly capable of addressing me himself. It seems from reading the TITLE of the article, and the posts on the thread, the article was referring "Having to listen to Howard Stern" and most of posters seem to have the reading comprehension that allows them to understand this.

Why are you asking such stupid questions, especially of a post that was not addressed to you or concern you? Or was my post so egregious that you had to step in to save the forum and poor, defenseless Curly Dave? You would probably be happier if you just quit searching my posts and stalking me about the place.

[novacation]

The free market is deciding. That is why he got canned on those stations.He serves no useful purpose.Pure garbage

[JTG]

I bet you do. That way Bush can win another term with no problems. Would you have liked it if Clinton decided to suspend the 1996 election? I don't think so.

Elections are an integral part of [b]democracy[/b]. We need elections.

[JTG]

Blah, I screwed up my HTML again. I meant to put democracy in bold, like right here.

[WhiteGuy]

For the record, I adressed YOU as Batman............ :)

Anyway,

And ignore whatever censorship, (carefull here, do we really wish to advocate censorship?)

obscenity laws, (The Stern show has been broadcasting within the FCC laws, hand hasn't been fined since 1995)

and community decency standards (Name a community that has taken action against a station airing the Stern show)


Is there anything wrong with plastering a story and pic of a GIANT penis, it's "partner" across the front page of the New York Times? (Your sentece structure seems a bit off....., but to answer your question, NO!)

There's not a thing is wrong with it, But be serious, it wouldn't happen because the Times' audience would not accept it or expect it when it happened. The NYT would loose a fortune with this content.

Everyone knows that THSS is an adult oriented show and can choose to tune in or not. Their audience expects frank discussions of sex, political opinion and fart jokes.

(There are plenty of "publications" that DO publish the pictures you mentioned, and are tolerated, just stroll past your local newstand)

To put things into perspective, I think we can both look objectively at the actions of the congress and the FCC and realize that raising the fines, applying those fines to everyone in the "on air organization" and targeting a specific broadcast media has little to do with community standards of decency.

It has everything to do with Howard's outspoken disagreement with our current president, and the fact that Stern has a very large and very loyal audience.

As always, These are my opinions.

And I always liked Batman...............

[Dan from Michigan]

What is good about regulation from a bunch of unelected bureaucrats that do not have to answer to the people.

THAT's evil. Much like the tyrants in black robes.

[Peach]

Some of us have agreed to watch trolls. Get over it.

[WhiteGuy]

Stern broke his contract, he should be yanked. It's really simple.

How?

"IMHO, let people put whatever they want on the air, just advertise first what it is and the market will sort it out."

We agree 100%

I'll be responsible for what my kids see and don't see that's MY job. (Let's be honest, I remember being a 13 year old boy, I tried to access every adult thing I could. It was me against my parents. the battle ended in a tie.)

[wku man]

Hehehehe...I got a kick out of your home page. I like the part about Libertarians being the last to come to your aid and the first to kick you in the crotch. While I still espouse many small "l" libertarian beliefs, I found the LP itself to be way too populated with goofs and imbiciles. Now, I'm a proud conservative independant. Be good, bro.

Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!

[Trillian]

I'll admit, I used to listen to him long ago. I used to think he was funny. Now he's just unfunny and sad..
My husband on the other hand, has always thought he was an idiot. Especially over when Stern called Air Florida
Airlines and asked what the fare was for a one-way ticket from National Airport to the 14th Street Bridge.

[Lurking Libertarian]

Stern is a potty-mouthed, 50 year old juvenile delinquent. Carlin however has occasionally showed genius ("Baseball vs. Football").

Agree.

[WhiteGuy]

When you can no longer effectively argue your point, call your opponent names.


Thank you for not including me in your "group".

If your primary goal is to encourage others to re-elect our current president, the best thing you can do is shut your mouth. Your anti-constitutional views will alienate more undecided voters than it will attract.

[Qwinn]

JTG:

"He helped Christie Todd Whitman out in NJ."

And you're using this as a defense of Stern - to say that he's Republican? LOL.

Christie Whitman is utterly despicable. She's a RINO of the worst variety. I say this as a citizen of the State of New Jersey for almost 30 years. She was as bad as Florio and almost as bad as McGreevey. She did more damage to the Republican Party in NJ than any 10 Democrats combined ever could.

To call Christie Whitman a Republican is like calling Clinton our first black president. Just cause someone said they were doesn't make it true.

HiramAbiff:

The FCC has every right to shut down Stern for obscenity. It has no right to shut him down for his political opinions. Political and religious speech are what the 1st Amendment was meant to protect - NOT pornography.

My guess is that you would be happy if the government were to go out tomorrow and shut down Michael Moore, Al Franken, Janine Garofolo, etc. etc. No longer permit them to state their views publically. Do you -really- believe that that would further the conservative cause? You are awfully naive if so.

Yes, I know they're either brain-addled or communists. Yes, I know their intentions are purely anti-American. But they cannot be silenced for their political views, lest we become that which we despise.

Your problem is you don't trust limited representative government, which is what America stands for. If you did, you'd realize that they can get all the airplay in the world, but they'll never con enough people to bring us down - AS LONG AS BOTH SIDES HAVE THE RIGHT TO STATE THEIR CASE. Our side will win on an even playing field, because as you said, we are right, they are wrong, and Americans are smart enough to tell the difference if they are allowed to judge.

What we need to work at is to stop the Left from muzzling conservative political speech on campus, religious expression, etc. The worst way to accomplish that is to have people like you "on our side" saying it's okay to censor political speech.

Qwinn

[JTG]

You totally missed the point I think.

Howard Stern worked for Al D'Amato too, over the years. Rick Lazio was pretty conservative, and Howard endorsed him too. Christie Todd Whitman was not the point of my argument.

I was simply saying that Howard has not always been a Democrat. I don't even think he's one now. He intended to run in 1994 for the governorship of NY as a Libertarian, but dropped out when he found he had to file financial disclosure forms. He later ENDORSED Pataki. My point is not that these Republicans are not that conservative. My point is that Howard Stern is a precious resource, and that you should not dismiss him as irrelevant. Okay?

[Qwinn]

No, I think I got your point.

"My point is that Howard Stern is a precious resource,"

I am almost too stunned by this statement to even respond. I haven't heard a worse application of the word "precious" since Gollum.

"and that you should not dismiss him as irrelevant."

Oh, he's not irrelevant... he has more responsibility for the degradation and purileness of American popular culture than any other single human being alive that I can think of. The guy is a purile, adolescent pervert, and I say this from all my old-fogeyness and backwood-hickedness of a 34 year old who has lived within 10 miles of Princeton, NJ most of my life.

Back when I was 13 or 14, I used to listen to Howard, I even liked him. He wasn't nearly as bad back then. In the last decade, however, he has descended to the scum that scum wouldn't scrape off the bottom of it's shoes. Seriously, if you're going to pick someone to defend from a Libertarian perspective, it should not be this guy. You just wind up totally discrediting yourself.

Qwinn

[justanotherday]

If you believe in Good vs. Evil, there is no better illustration than Rush Limbaugh and Howard Stern. I'm surprised that Stern hasn't turned against Bush sooner.

[JTG]

Okay, I'm not going to argue with you about this, because I have a horse in this race.

I listen to Howard Stern almost every single weekday morning. I've read his books and I've called into his show. So, I would almost certainly feel differently about Howard Stern than you.

[wku man]

"Why should anyone have the right to force their own sexual repression on me?"

Don't take this the wrong way, because you seem like a nice guy, and sincere in your beliefs. But I'm not sure how to answer your question, because frankly it is so asinine. Since when do you have the "right" to hear smut on the public airwaves?

On the contrary, we as a society have the responsibility to ensure that the moral standards and values we were founded upon are passed on from generation, in perpetuity. These moral standards made us great, but our (Baby Boomers, GenX, Generation.com) failure to uphold those standards is doing drastic harm to our nation. It cannot be ignored that with the ever increasing smuttiness of the public airwaves, both TV and radio, we have seen increased drug use among young people, increased teen pregnancy, increased teen crime, dropping out, the disintegration of the family, lower test scores among kids, you name it.

Coincidence? Absolutely not, IMHO. In fact, I think its cause and effect. As we drop our standards lower and lower, as evidenced in part by the rot vomited forth by the likes of Bubba and Stern, our society continues to crumble, maybe to the point of no return.

Have I heard any of the rap/hip-hop garbage that kids are listening to today? Unfortunately yes (there are a number of young dumba**es at work that listen to that drivel). Should the FCC clean up "urban" stations as well as Stern? You betcha. Will they do it? Not likely, because the NAACP, Jesse Jackass, Al The Racist Sharpton, the Congressional Black Caucus, the New Black Panther Party, and any other black rabble rouser group out there will squeal like stuck pigs, and deafen the nation with cries of "racism". But does that mean we shouldn't fine the crap out of Bubba? Hell no. Stick his bloated carcass to the wall, and hope maybe one day someone with a spine at the FCC will decide that something has to be done about "urban" programming.

I don't see the connection between the Jefferson quote that the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of tyrants and patriots, and your assumed right to hear smut on the radio. Please spell this out for me...remember, I'm the product of the Kentucky government schools, and therefore not exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer.

As for the "very small percentage of children hearing something of a sexual nature", I have two thoughts. First, what information do you have to back up your assertion that its only a "very small percentage", and secondly, why would you, I, or anyone else want our kids exposed to any material of a sexual nature over a medium we can easily control? That's like saying, "oh don't worry...it's only a little poison we're feeding them...besides they'll probably build up a tolerance to it, anyway". That's just crazy.

Our generation (I'm assuming you're an Xer, like me...if you're not, I apologize) has been raised to believe that we have a "right" to do anything we want, and if we're told we don't have that "right", we should cry and throw temper tantrums until we get it. You don't have a "right" to hear sexual or toilet programming on the public airwaves...be glad that in this day and age you have the Internet, cable TV and satellite radio as an outlet for your prurient interests. Just because the FCC has let it slip this long without doing anything about it, and you've gotten used to being able to hear smut on the public airwaves, doesn't mean it has somehow become a "right". OTOH, you have a responsibility, along with the rest of us, to ensure those moral values and standards that were passed on to us by previous generations are maintained, whether you like it or not. Its time for GenX and Generation.com to grow up, realize we're adults now, and that we have grown up responsibilities...like managing the republic and making sure it survives for subsequent generations to enjoy and prosper.

Finally, I've often thought that I should come up with a Liberal Ten Commandments list. I never did write down all 10, but Commandment One is "thou shalt not come between me and a good time". Don't fall prey to that mentality, as so many others in our generation have. Take care, dude.

Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!

[HiramAbiff]

"Clinton decided to suspend the 1996 election? I don't think so. "

You're right - because Clinton was an Evil thug. Bush is Good and Moral and chosen by God. Plus we are at WAR.

[HiramAbiff]

"If your primary goal is to encourage others to re-elect our current president, the best thing you can do is shut your mouth."

Maybe you're are right. Apparently you and most of the other sheeple aren't ready to hear this stuff. But know this: it is going on right now.

I suggest you increase your emotional tolerance. A good way would be to start with Plato's Republic and move onto the Machevelli's Prince and then try and absorb the fact that the laws of history, humanity and government haven't changed in the last 2500 years.

Cheers! God Bless President Bush.