Rep. Slaughter: Hey, Maybe The FCC Should Clamp Down On Meanies

Personally, I’m offended and feel threatened by her violent name: Rep. Louise Slaughter

She said she does not fear for herself but for her family. She put some of the blame on the FCC saying it does little to tone down inflammatory rhetoric.

She said the FCC should work harder to reprimand TV and radio commentators who may incite violence.

“Frankly what I’d like to see—is–if we could all get together on both sides of the aisle and really talk about what we can do to cool down this country. Part of that has to be what we hear over the air waves,”…Slaughter said.

Obviously, she means Conservative talk radio and Fox News. Nothing like using a tragedy to diminish the 1st Amendment, eh, Louise?

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

6 Responses to “Rep. Slaughter: Hey, Maybe The FCC Should Clamp Down On Meanies”

  1. John Ryan says:

    Obviously. And about your name Teach. Wasn’t Edward Teach a bad person? A pirate ?

  2. Kevin says:

    It’s not the FCC’s responsibility to do that. One thing that is nice about the U.S. is that speech, almost all speech is protected. Unless you make a specific threat to a specific person, you are pretty much free to say what you want. While I don’t think our leaders should be engaging in the kind of taunting discourse that they engage in, it is perfectly within their right, however irresponsible it may be. Just because you and I may speak to each other informally, and with hyperbole, doesn’t mean our leaders should.

    By the way, and this is pathetic, I actually looked up another word to use besides rhetoric and came up with discourse. If I hear someone say rhetoric one more time, I think I am going to lose it. Something else I learned, the opposite of rhetoric is conciseness. Maybe it is not the rhetoric that is the problem, maybe we should be calling for more conciseness.

    This is probably why I am just center of left. I disagree with almost anything that goes overboard. Personally, if it gets the job done in the best way we know how, that is all I care about. I also don’t think that money is always a good reason to vote for or against a bill. But, now I am rambling…

  3. “…what we can do to cool down this country…”

    The last time I remember this hack doing that, she came up with an unconstitutional rule for a shoving a bill the country didn’t want down our throats. Sorry, Representative – no compromise, no quarter from here on out.

    http://libertyatstake.blogspot.com
    “Because the Only Good Progressive is a Failed Progressive”

  4. I actually changed several references of the “R” word in my latest post just for, Kevin.

  5. david7134 says:

    I don’t understand this business about compromise and “toning down” the discussion. What compromise is there when 20% of the country is trying to shove socialism/communism down our throats? At least 70% of the country does not approve of the direction in which our country is going. I see people trying to rob us of what little freedom that we have and doing extra time on eliminating any wealth that is left. I don’t want to compromise. In fact, I don’t want to tone down anything. We need to fight harder.

    The killing of this representative was the only such in many decades. In fact, they actually showed Long as one of those that had been killed. He was killed by his own security!! Yet many are calling for just such security for all these worthless bums. If they feel that they are being threatened, then resign from office or try to enact measures that the majority of the people support. Like more freedom and leave us alone. I can’t tell you how many times I have been threatened and had people try to hurt my family. The police were of no help, so you learn to defend yourself. Our politicians are showing just what kind of men they are by whining about this. And finally, this nut was allowed to be running around because of the liberals who are so sympathetic to the menatally ill. Almost all the homeless that you see begging for money are schizophrenic. They all have a potential for similar violence. They weren’t on the street until the liberals shut down the insane asylms. This nut would have been stopped in the past, but the liberals prevent anyone from doing something now as it would violate his “rights” or would be a privacy issue.

  6. Kevin says:

    Teach, thanks for helping me keep my sanity. As someone that leans to the left, you never know when I will go off my rocker.

    David, your post was a collage of things I have heard several conservative talk show hosts spew. Put together, I don’t even think half of what you said makes sense. I think the point here is to attach to people what is attachable, and leave the rest in the gutter where it belongs.

    Yelling louder and with more anger doesn’t get things done. One person screaming at the top of their lungs doesn’t represent the majority. They are just the guy screaming the loudest. I work with large groups of people, you can get your opinion heard and get “stuff” done, (thanks Shakespeare for inventing the word stuff) without denigrating, falsifying, amplifying, and making everyone that is part of a particular party out to be some evil manipulator of the people.

    Wars require violence, politics require negotiation, and unfortunately probably realistically include money and bribes as well. Let’s not go to war when there are other more amenable options available.

    It’s not fair to say that the words of one person caused this shooting. Likely, he would have probably eventually cracked. I also don’t think the solution is to start locking people up in sanatoriums. Read some of the history about what actually went on there and you may come to agree with me. The system isn’t perfect, but you can still change it when you get enough people and support behind you.

Bad Behavior has blocked 7844 access attempts in the last 7 days.