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: calgal who wrote (513551)	12/20/2003 1:54:36 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

If anyone is to thank for the '90s, it is Ronald Reagan, for creating a low tax, low regulation, environment, and, therefore, solid ground........

To: calgal who wrote (513551)	12/20/2003 1:55:04 PM
From: calgal	Respond to of 769670

Fast-flying F-words Brent Bozell (archive) December 20, 2003 \| Print \| Send URL:http://www.townhall.com/columnists/brentbozell/bb20031220.shtml The latest rage in reality programming is the rich-fish-out-of-bottled-water plot. MTV's "Rich Girls" follows two spoiled 18-year-old super-rich kids, Ally Hilfiger (daughter of fashion mogul Tommy Hilfiger) and aspiring singer Jaime Gleicher, as they flutter about shopping malls and fuss about their teen-age angst. Noisier buzz has greeted "The Simple Life," a typically smarmy Fox reality show featuring waifish blonde hotel heiress Paris Hilton and Nicole Richie, the adopted daughter of singing star Lionel Richie. They took these two pampered princesses and plopped them smack-dab in the middle of rural America -- Altus, Ark., to be precise. Watch the culture clashes unfold! Both of these grasping girls brought scandalous behavioral records for Fox publicists to exploit. Paris had an amateur sex video that was being highlighted on celebrity showcases like "Entertainment Tonight" when people still had no idea who on Earth she was. Nicole has a rap sheet for heroin possession (and began taping fresh out of rehab). In almost any zip code, these two would be branded as losers. In Hollywood, they're stars. The show is vile, an assault on decency and on the senses. These two idiots -- that is how they wish to be seen, no? -- laugh as the pie they were taught how to make is devoured by the family dog. They host a kissing booth and are soon taking money from boys who want to kiss their bare behinds. Last week, they laughed as they stole from the credit card of their boss, as if they needed cash. Part of their calculated, crass, talent-free march to fame came during their turn as presenters on Fox's "Billboard Music Awards" on Dec. 10. Paris warned Nicole: "This is a live show. Watch the bad language." (See the bad joke coming?) Paris added it was great to be there, to which Nicole responded, "Yeah, instead of standing in mud and cow s--t." Fox bleeped that out. But then Nicole added, "Why do they even call it ‘The Simple Life'? Have you ever tried to get cow s--t out of a Prada purse? It's not so f---ing simple." Fox chose not to bleep those sentences out for the Eastern half of the United States, no matter how many millions of children were hit with it. In the wake of public outrage, Fox offered perfunctory apologies, but this act is wearing thin. Tape-delay technology to stop these outbursts has existed since the golden days of radio. It is obvious that Fox wants this indecent language on the air as a way of shocking audiences and scoring cheap ratings points. This is the third time in a year that Fox has included the F-word in a network broadcast. In fact, it was the 2002 Fox broadcast of the exact same program that contained Cher's use of the F-word. It is outrageous that Fox is content for children to be victims of this new, repetitive low in network programming. How can they get away with this assault on decency standards for the public airwaves? See the ridiculous ruling in November from the ill-named "Enforcement Bureau" at the Federal Communications Commission. In response to a complaint that NBC refused to bleep rock star Bono using the exclamation "really, really f---ing brilliant" during the Golden Globe Awards, the FCC "enforcers" ruled that the F-word is not indecent for primetime broadcast television -- if it is used as an adjective. If it's a noun, that's still wrong, the FCC assured us. I cannot imagine a ruling that could make a bigger mockery of an organization charged with enforcing some shred of decency on the airwaves. While the Fox swearing outburst was great publicity for Murdoch-land, including the front page of The Washington Post, I'm sure it came as an unhappy surprise to Michael Powell, the chairman of the FCC. He wrote this writer in November to share his concern that "As a husband and father of two boys, I am personally disturbed by the continued proliferation of profanity, violence and sex in our daily lives." But he explained that the evasive Golden Globes ruling "should in no way be read to condone or endorse profanity. Television licensees are forewarned not to read government acquiescence into our decision." The Fox pattern shows how broadcasters aren't exactly quaking in their boots over Powell's threat. For her part, Nicole Richie denies pulling this stunt as a Fox-promoting strategy. She told USA Today she "tweaked" her scripted lines to place herself in a more positive light. "Otherwise, we would have sounded so ditzy and stupid." Ditzy and stupid (and slutty and amoral and profane) are all a part of the act. Thank you, FCC, for making it all possible. I hope Congress considers your actions when next you come to the taxpayer trough asking for your $278 million annual subsidy. Brent Bozell is President of Media Research Center, a Townhall.com member group. ©2003 Creators Syndicate, Inc.

To: calgal who wrote (513551)	12/20/2003 1:55:17 PM
From: calgal	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

Nothing succeeds...like success URL:Neil Cavuto (archive) December 20, 2003 \| Print \| Send townhall.com The French want to strike a deal with us. The Germans are saying nice things about us. And the Russians just might entertain a partnership with us. But wait a minute, I thought all these guys hated us? I think they still do, but something changed. Saddam Hussein has been captured. And now the countries who wouldn't do squat to remove him are tripping over themselves to strike a deal with the country that did. Nothing succeeds, it seems, like success. After all, when things were looking very rocky in Iraq, these countries couldn't pull out the diplomatic I-told-you-so's fast enough. Way back then, actually just last week, they were dumping on us . . . now they're praising us, praising the capture of a very bad man who did very bad things. The only thing very bad going on here is the smarmy, wormy, phony behavior of our so-called pals. I just hope we're looking at all of this with eyes wide open. I mean, let's be real here. Nabbing Saddam was no easy feat. But it's a remarkable one. It takes away the most pointed of all the criticisms of this war . . . that we let the big guy get away. Well now the big guy's being detained and de-liced, and the bugs we call our friends are desperately trying to scramble back into the picture because they now see the bigger picture: a liberated Iraq, a freer Iraq, an independent Iraq and a no-Saddam-coming-back-ever Iraq. I also think they fear a suddenly talking Saddam, someone who might prove eager to cop a deal to dodge a bullet. To me, at least, the French particularly seem a little too solicitous, a little too congratulatory and a little too slovenly. Perhaps they fear the former Iraqi dictator will spill more than the beans on weapons of mass destruction. Perhaps they sense Saddam will spell out how he got those weapons, or the materials, supplies and maybe even the advice for those weapons. I always thought when we were debating this war, the French doth protested too much. The cynic in me suspects it wasn't all over the horrid reality of war but what that war might uncover. The bigger issue for the global community is recognizing the wisdom of the war itself. It's beginning to strike more and more people, even critics of this war, that we were right to topple this government, that nabbing Saddam in a ditch all but ditched any argument against our being there in the first place. Americans didn't say that. The delirious and happy faces of scores of flag-waving and celebrating Iraqis said that, showed that and reveled in that. The world is now seeing what most Iraqis have been appreciating . . . namely, a life without Saddam, without the threat of his coming back or the evil he might bring back. The U.S.-led coalition made that possible. Iraqis know that, and now the rest of the world finally is beginning to appreciate that. It's as if the diplomatic train has left the station and clueless critics of this country are only now beginning to realize, "Hey, that's my train!" We'd have never seen the French talking about forgiving Iraqi debt had they not realized that they look increasingly out-of-touch and out-of-step. They know full well that the tide against evil led by the United States threatens to leave them behind. They know that one of the world's most ruthless dictators has been brought down by a force greater than they can comprehend and more meaningful than they ever fathomed. There's something to be said about seeing the good fight and not taking the call, then seeing the good results and not taking the cue. The French, Germans and Russians are all seeing the good results and taking the cue. They might still suspect more problems for coalition forces in Iraq; perhaps some are even hoping for more problems. But they know that to be part of this world of good, they must do a lot more to fight the world of bad. They wouldn't do it with soldiers. It seems only appropriate in their wormy, obsequious and back-stabbing way that they will do it in the only manner to which they can relate . . . with money. And all this time we thought Saddam was the only guy . . . in a rat hole. ©2003 Creators Syndicate, Inc.