Skip to comments.
Judge who backed telemarketers is deluged (Judge Lee R. West's telephone has not stopped ringing)
NJ.com ^
Posted on 09/25/2003 1:26:51 PM PDT by Sub-Driver
Edited on 07/06/2004 6:39:11 PM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
OKLAHOMA CITY (AP)
(Excerpt) Read more at nj.com ...
TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events; Political Humor/Cartoons
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-51 next last
To: Billthedrill
I think it is immature and irresponsible to be flooding the number 405-609-5000 with telephone calls. I, for one would never call 405-609-5000 to vent my spleen. In fact, I'm not even going to tell you what the number 405-609-5000 is, that way you can't call 405-609-5000 and mis-use that information.Thank heaven that some of us are still responsible mature adults. I'd hate to think that 405-609-5000 would get flooded with aluminum siding/credit cards/cell phone sales pitches. I know I hate those the most....
21
posted on
09/25/2003 1:54:27 PM PDT
by
xJones
To: Sub-Driver
:) I posted his number on FR yesterday, and the thread was pulled. At least the word got out anyway.
22
posted on
09/25/2003 1:57:43 PM PDT
by
Recovering_Democrat
(I'm so glad to no longer be associated with the Party of Dependence on Government!)
To: bicycle thug
???
He ruled that a Federal agency was over stepping its bounds. The judge did not rule on the merits of the DNC List. He only held that the FTC was not authorized by Congress to setup the DNC List. Congress is on their way to expressly authorizing to power...in this case the system worked.
You should be glad that at least this judge is scrutinizing the actions of an executive agency.
To: Sub-Driver
That judge better get himself into a Witness Protection Program ASAP.
He has 50 million Americans mad at him.
24
posted on
09/25/2003 2:00:26 PM PDT
by
Palladin
(Proud to be a FReeper!)
To: 13foxtrot
...And I knew this process would very likely play out this way. Suffice it to say my post you responded to was grounded more in frustration at intrusion at the insect politics level from telemarketers then my love of bureaucratic authority.
25
posted on
09/25/2003 2:05:55 PM PDT
by
bicycle thug
(Fortia facere et pati Americanum est.)
To: Billthedrill
His Honor's Chambers Telephone: 1-405-609-5140
26
posted on
09/25/2003 2:06:53 PM PDT
by
SwinneySwitch
(The barbarians are inside the gates!)
To: Palladin
"He has 50 million Americans mad at him."
That's 50 million phone numbers, probably more like 100 million angry Americans!
27
posted on
09/25/2003 2:09:45 PM PDT
by
SwinneySwitch
(The barbarians are inside the gates!)
To: Sub-Driver
Telemarketers say the list would devastate their industry and lead to the loss of thousands of jobs. Boohoohoo. Telemarketers are outsourced. Thousands of barely-able-to-speak-English-and-too-stupid-to-code-java Indians will lost their jobs.
28
posted on
09/25/2003 2:10:07 PM PDT
by
Alouette
(The bombing begins in five minutes.)
To: Sub-Driver
Rick Ratliff, president of U.S. Security, Inc., one of the plaintiffs in a lawsuit challenging the list, said his company laid off half of its 600 employees because of restrictions on telemarketing."U.S. Security does not sell anything over the phone," he said. "We simply ask for the opportunity to tell someone about the lifesaving benefits of our security and fire systems in a face-to-face meeting."
Advertising creates jobs, too. And without intruding into someone's home
uninvited.
29
posted on
09/25/2003 2:11:49 PM PDT
by
auboy
(Many words rhyme with French. For some reason, stench always tops my list.)
To: 13foxtrot
The judge is an idiot for enjoining the government from going forward on the DNC pending a trial on the merits. Only an idiot would think that the will of 50 million families would be ignored by Congress for even 24 hours.
A sensible judge would have expressed his thoughts in open court, would have given Congress until midnight September 30th to remedy the defect in the law and not brought this bundle of rage down upon himself and his clerks.
30
posted on
09/25/2003 2:13:48 PM PDT
by
Procyon
To: Sub-Driver
NAYS: 8
Bishop (UT),
Meek (FL),
Strickland,
Cannon,
Paul,
Terry,
Flake,
Ryan (OH)
Perhaps, these members of congress are dining alone tonight and would like a telemarketer for companionship?
31
posted on
09/25/2003 2:19:31 PM PDT
by
Procyon
To: 13foxtrot
Rather interesting to see the folks at FR be so pissed about the concept of limiting an agency's power. Sure looks like an emotional, 'means justifies the ends' response.
32
posted on
09/25/2003 2:20:54 PM PDT
by
Ready4Freddy
(Veni Vidi Velcro)
To: Procyon
"
A sensible judge would have expressed his thoughts in open court, would have given Congress until midnight September 30th to remedy the defect in the law and not brought this bundle of rage down upon himself and his clerks."
No one who's actually read the opinion was left w/ any doubt as to the basis of his ruling. From the looks of it that must include no more than 4 ppl on FR.
Your idea that the judge should have stayed the injunction '..because Congress was probably going to act soon...' is actually kinda funny.
33
posted on
09/25/2003 2:26:51 PM PDT
by
Ready4Freddy
(Veni Vidi Velcro)
To: SwinneySwitch
Good... we can start calling that one early in the morning!
34
posted on
09/25/2003 2:29:39 PM PDT
by
Pan_Yans Wife
("Life isn't fair. It's fairer than death, is all.")
To: Ready4Freddy
It is trespassing.
What are your views on that?
35
posted on
09/25/2003 2:43:08 PM PDT
by
MonroeDNA
(No longshoremen were injured to produce this tagline.)
To: jjm2111; Sub-Driver
We should find out who the misguided 8 were, so they can start getting bombarded with phone calls.
To: Ready4Freddy
In this situation, the agency has been given no power except to act on behalf of individual citizens who have requested it to do so. I don't find this to be a scary abuse of government power.
To: MonroeDNA
Limiting an agency's power is trespassing?
Please expound......
38
posted on
09/25/2003 2:57:44 PM PDT
by
Ready4Freddy
(Veni Vidi Velcro)
To: GovernmentShrinker
Not scary because you agree w/ the outcome?
39
posted on
09/25/2003 2:58:36 PM PDT
by
Ready4Freddy
(Veni Vidi Velcro)
To: Ready4Freddy
Not scary because the agency is not acting on its own initiative -- only on behalf of each individual citizen, on direct orders from that citizen.
We need to keep our eye on the ball here. Federal and state governments have all sorts of agencies grossly abusing citizens against their will, and we would do well to focus our energies on those. Calling the "do not call" program an over-reaching by a government agency is a huge stretch. The telemarketers are taking a bite out of citizens' time, without those citizens' consent, and many citizens have found it necessary to incur further time and expense on installing technological obstacles to cut down on the telemarketer's intrusions. Any citizen who actually likes, or doesn't mind receiving these infernal calls, is free to continue receiving them -- the FCC won't put your number on the do-not-call list without your request.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-51 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson