Posted on 08/03/2002 12:05:41 PM PDT by SamBees
Rush always says "words mean things". We know that very well in this electronic forum. Words can inspire others to act in a physical response to the emotions brought about by reading the thoughts of another person.
So, Rush is right, words are powerful, and it is because they have power that Hillary once said that something was going to have to be done about the excessive freedom the net offers those who are engauged in anti-government free speech.
In the political realm, free speech is most vital, so said our founding fathers. We must be able to talk about our elected officials even if they don't like it, and you know that they do not want us spreading around information about them, their votes, or their adulterous lifestyles, in the case of Comrade Clinton.
Since 9/11/02, government has been having a party. Never before in the history of America has government be given such a free reign over the country. The Patriot Act, and other similar pieces of legislation have allowed government officials to spy on US citizens. It is very likely that every word you say on the telephone, and ever word you type in an email, or anywhere else is being processed by some alphabet agency that is looking for certain phrases, or key words.
We are living in a time where we've placed incredible trust in our federal government. We are told that thought they've been given all kinds of new power, we can trust them not to abuse it. But, that is today, or right now, maybe they've already begun to misuse that power, we have no idea.
Your words mean things, rmemeber? You have power because you can say what you think. That kind of power is a threat. You could easily inpire others to turn against a government program, or official. You, a single person in a country of many millions, could bring down a president. Ask Matt Drudge about how its done. The clinton admin. wanted to open up the Internet, formerly a communications medium used for research between Universities, scientists, and government agencies. It was this very medium combined with Free Speech, and one Mr. Matt Drudge that began the process that led to the eventual impeachment of bill clinton.
As we drift away from liberty-no one really talks about increasing our freedoms, nor is there serious conversation about limiting the power of government to those contraints listed in our wonderful Constitution, won't we someday accept the following words, "For the good of the country....Free Speech can no longer be as free"?
We've empowered government in ways government only dreamed of in decades past. Government officials can and probably already do monitor your every word in any electronic medium in which you speak. Maybe it won't be this administration, and maybe we are not far enough down the brainwash road to accept the above statement, but the day is coming when, "For the good of the country", your speech will be limited by government.
Many of you here are not at all surprised by this suggestion. You see where we are headed as a country. You know that liberty is an anathema to government, and the government has gained the upper hand over "We the People". Yes, we live in the era of not big government, but Monsterous Government power. Words are powerful. Government wants all power.
It won’t be long, historically speaking, before spectrum auctions may become technologically obsolete, economically inefficient, and legally unconstitutional.
And it may not be long before a new form of frequency allocation may emerge where spectrum use does not require any license; when information traverses the ether as flexibly as an airplane in the sky instead of being straight-jacketed into a single frequency and routed like a train on a track; and where congestion is avoided not by the exclusivity of ownership but by access charges that vary with congestion, with the information itself often paying for access with tokens it carries along.
Sounds like TV is sitting on 402 MHz of unused bandwidth, trying to keep wireless out of it more or less like the dog in the manger.
I think the FCC is seriously out of whack. When you seriously reflect on what broadcast does to our culture . . . we-the-people can make good use of two-way wireless, but have no need of 402 MHz of additional read-only claptrap.
With voice recognition, anytime you use a phone, your location can be determined.
All cell phones will be required to contain GPS chips within 2 years.
Government is clamping down.
Really? Try applying for a license in Los Angeles.
Not under current FCC regulations. And when I suggested lower maximum powers in major markets, you called it micro-managing.
Doublethink.
What about your desired "homesteading" regulations?
A spoonful of ignorance.
Give me an example, in even the most general terms, of how such a "homestead" would be filed, who it would be filed with and what it might say.
I doubt you're up to the task but in case you attempt it, please don't forget that a claim for property needs to clearly describe exactly what is being claimed.
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.