I wish we could do to some lawmakers what they did in California with Davis. Then we could start over! That's why I believe in "Term Limits."
Posted on 05/19/2004 4:17:16 AM PDT by SheLion
The Greatest Evil
Congress needs to butt out of our business.
May 17, 2004, 7:30 a.m.
By Shawn Macomber
The gears of the nanny state ground forward last week as the Senate Commerce Committee held hearings to determine whether movies that portray smoking should receive an "R" rating. As usual, the government was all stick and very little carrot.
"We're calling for personal restraint. We're calling for personal responsibility," Sen. John Ensign (R., Nev.), said, quite reasonably, followed all too quickly by Sen. Ron Wyden (D., Ore.), who was less magnanimous. "If something isn't done by the industry, something will be done by Congress," Wyden threatened. "Personal responsibility" apparently now means living up to the arbitrary whims and mores determined by the federal government. So long as those whims are bipartisan, of course.
This in the midst of an election campaign that, so we are told, is one of the most significant in our country's recent history: The economy is collapsing, terrorists are at our doorstep, global environmental ruin is imminent, and baby boomers are more likely to retire to cardboard boxes than to Florida. I've seen John Kerry's commercials, and it's not pretty. Yet our government has determined that Now is the time to end the scourge of smoke on the silver screen.
So what is a movie rating exactly? The original ratings system was created as a response to a 1968 ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court that upheld the rights of states and cities to keep certain books and films available to adults out of the purview of children. In other words, ratings are meant to protect children from something they otherwise would not have contact with in the public square.
The "R" rating, as it stands today, warns parents that a film contains nudity, sexual situations, hard language, or illegal-drug use. These are reasonable cultural demarcation lines because each of these acts in a public setting before a child would be illegal. A couple having sex on an elementary-school playground would be arrested, for example. Shooting heroin in front of your neighbor's kid while repeatedly shouting the "F" word could get you in trouble as well.
Smoking is an altogether separate matter. Cigarettes are not an illegal product, and their use by adults is accepted in public. Parents, friends, older siblings, bad-boy (and -girl) musicians can all smoke in front of them, without consequence. A parent, teacher, or older sibling can all light up in their presence without facing a citation or a ride downtown. More importantly, the oh-so-cool 18-year-old leather-jacket rebel at the mall could smoke with coolly detached nihilism and mall security would be forced to stand by helplessly. The draw will still be there.
Further, in threatening to regulate an industry which to a large extent already regulates itself, Congress is accomplishing nothing. Children are not being protected from anything in that darkened theater that they will not be privy to on any sunlit street in America. Do we really want to equate smoking with abject violence or crack cocaine? Will that send a message about what "personal responsibility" means in a free society for the next generation?
Worse, regulation would set a terrible precedent. Government regulation always has unintended consequences, a point that was not lost on Motion Picture Association of America head Jack Valenti, who told lawmakers that if the rating system were to stand at the whim of special-interest groups, it would not end with a ban on smoking. Overeating is, long term, as deadly as smoking. Will depicting Happy Meals require an "R" rating next? Environmental and animal-rights groups, Valenti pointed out, would love to have their agendas affect ratings as well.
"I want to make sure this rating system does not get cluttered up with a bunch of other people who have equally passionate views that want to be included," Valenti said Tuesday. "I've lived this for 38 years and I understand it very well."
An "R" rating also needs to be taken seriously by the film industry because it makes a large cut into a film's potential audience. To foist such a limiting factor onto a project unnecessarily is a form of politically correct economic warfare.
In the end, it is absolutely true that smoking is dangerous. But so too is rock-climbing or skydiving or not hassling Islamic militants on FBI watch-lists at flight schools. Educating children on the risks of smoking will cut down on under-age smoking, but it will never eliminate it. To believe that sheltering children from something in movie theaters that is perfectly legal at home will suddenly end the teen-smoking problem is merely pie-in-the-sky fantasy. For the government to believe it is their business to make artistic decisions for filmmakers is arrogant. If smoking is not insidious enough to be outlawed completely, then let's allow parents, not Congress, to worry about raising our children.
— Shawn Macomber is a staff writer at The American Spectator.
I wish we could do to some lawmakers what they did in California with Davis. Then we could start over! That's why I believe in "Term Limits."
My worthless/dangerous not-representative took time out from all this excitement to commemorate Asian Pacific American Heritage Month.
Woo-hoo.
except for the political elite, and their loyal serfs, that is.
Darn. It's a "photoon" I did back in Clinton days. Maybe someone here can grab it and repost. I can't, my paid parking spot for photos disappeared one day. I was treated rudely by that company and will not give them any further business.
Fantastic animation!!!
I feel so ... Empowered!!!!
HaHaaaaaaaa! There are SEVERAL faces I'd love to see in place of Davis. hehe! I bet YOU have a few yourself. LOL!
I LOVE the way his EYES BUG OUT right at the end!!!
You said it SheLion. We need to clean out the whole mess of these pompous as*&%# who think they are the Kings and Queens of the world. They make me sick!
PING, PING, PIINNGGGGG!
That's one reason I advocate TERM LIMITS! 8 years is MORE then enough for most of these idiots. The longer they sit in their seat, the more power, control and restriontions they think they can dump on us.
I, for one, am damn tired of it. And it's not just the smoking issue, either!
Then when you go to your Rep for help, they have all the lies and spin in the world to try to "appease me." It's useless.
That's true
Oh yeah,,,,,,,,,,,I get the same form letter every time. People better wake up. These people are more of a "danger" to us than real representatives. If they go to WDC with the right intentions, it soon gives over to the lure of power. That's sad. I can probably count on one hand the Senators and Reps that are there doing a good job........or maybe I can't. *~*
It is a method whereby the movie industry is able to peddle porn legally. It has nothing to do with warning parents, but everything to do with making their filth acceptable.
The old frog in the boiling pot method, works every time.
There are some good ones! But some of the "old farts" (excuse the word, I hate it, but what else can you call them without being downright vulgar), like Kennedy and Hitlery that are good at "arm twisting." And I believe they coerce the others. Either that, or there is a lot of palm greasing going on under the table.
Another thing, the longer they remain in their seat, the more vocal they become. And the more power they seem to believe they have. They use their seat to lay down rules for the rest of us just because "they" do not like it personally. This is WRONG!
It's almost impossible to remove them. It takes a lot of work, time and signatures. Like the two we have in Maine. No one opposes them from our side. I truly wish someone would, because these two would never get another vote out of me. But I am FORCED into voting for them time and time again because I would rather cut off my right arm then vote for a RAT.
Oh yeah,,,,,,,,,,,I get the same form letter every time. People better wake up. These people are more of a "danger" to us than real representatives. If they go to WDC with the right intentions, it soon gives over to the lure of power. That's sad. I can probably count on one hand the Senators and Reps that are there doing a good job........or maybe I can't. *~*
Here is one example. Every time I send email to this Rep, this is what I get back, time and time again. NO answers! NO help. NO suggestions. Just this damn form letter. What a putz he is. He's a COWARD hiding behind his FANCY email!
CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1717 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515-1901
(202)225-6116
Thank you for contacting me by electronic mail. I appreciate hearing from you.
This e-mail was sent to you as an automatic reply to let you know that I have received your message. Due to the amount of mail that I receive, I regret that I am only able to respond to mail from the state of Maine. In order to respond properly to questions and requests for information from Maine residents, I hope that you have included your name and complete address in your e-mail. If you are from Maine and believe you have forgotten to include this information, please resend your message with this information enclosed. I look forward to responding to the concerns of my constituents.
I also regret that I am unable to process attachments to e-mail messages due to security concerns. If you have sent an attachment, please resend your message with the attachment in the body of the message.
I encourage you to send messages to me via web form by visiting my homepage (http://tomallen.house.gov). If you need immediate attention, have a problem with a federal or state agency, or would like to set up an appointment, please call my Portland office at (207) 774-5019.
Again, thank you for writing.
Sincerely,
Tom Allen
Member of Congress
I also heard that congress wants to readdress the drunk driving problem. I know MADD wants .05 by 05. I wonder if they will get it.
Porn is a HUGE money maker today. But do you see any of these a-holes trying to stop THIS? Oh no! They just want to take SMOKING out of FILMS for the KIDS you know!
Well, I bet a lot of kiddies are viewing porn today. But boy, make sure they don't see SMOKING!
These anti's are ALL sick, IMHO.
I'm not trying to be rude, but do you really expect anything else out of any of them?????
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.