Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Thomas A Watson who wrote (411118)	6/2/2003 9:17:09 PM
From: Cogito	Respond to of 769670

>>The reason the FCC should do what they did is because they are supposed to do what is right or best. It's very simple. I have no reason to challenge what the FCC did.<< Thomas - What is the FCC's job? To make sure Rupert Murdoch is happy? Are they supposed to do what is right or best for Viacom? If they are supposed to be doing what is right or best, then how is it OK that they should take a lot of free trips with the leaders of the industry they are charged with regulating? Do the words "conflict of interest" mean anything to you? Since you haven't looked into the situation, your assumption that what they are doing must be the right thing is rather naiive. How is it OK that they should have more than 70 meetings with the people who stand most to benefit from this decision, and 2 meetings with the public, neither of which the FCC Chairman even attended? If the Democrats were in power and this were happening, I'll bet you'd be smelling something fishy. By the way, the FCC regs that were in place up until today had been relaxed quite a bit just a couple of years ago, so it's really not as if the rules were 40 years old. When you say things like that you demonstrate very clearly that you are not well informed about the situation. - Allen