02 Nov 06
3 edits
It has been my observation that political advertisements do little other than harrass the voters. Think of it, when is the last time you were swayed by a political advertisement? When is the last time you knew of someone who was swayed by a political advertisement? When was the last time you felt informed via a political advertisement? It is to the point that I no longer want to answer my phone, go to my mailbox, or answer my door.
Now before everyone screams about restricting free speech let me say that I am not in favor of restricing free speech, rather, I am in favor of restricting the venues for such free speech. After all, it has been my observation that politicians try to say as little as possible anyway. What you wind up getting is one phrase sound bites that is nothing more than rhetoric and drival. I don't think free speech can be defended when it borders harrassment and I think this is the main issue.
Think of the benefits. Think of the money we would save as a country. Politicians would then be relieved of much of the duty of trying to raise funds as they are now if they knew that their campaigning would be limited to certain venues that both sides have equal time and access to no matter how much money they raised.
02 Nov 06
1 edit
Originally posted by sjegYou are free to blame who you wish, however, the bigger question is, do you agree that they should be restricted?
Ban most if not all ads, I'd say.... they're a bloody intrusion, and worse every year!
You know what I blame???
-capitalism! 😛
02 Nov 06
Originally posted by sasquatch672"Now before everyone screams about restricting free speech let me say that I am not in favor of restricing free speech, rather, I am in favor of restricting the venues for such free speech." - from original post, obviously not talking about the repression of free speech.
You're talking about the repression of free speech. If the last six years should have taught you anything, it is that a free and independent press, and unhindered speech, is critical to the well-being of our society. What's left of it anyway.
I seriously disagree with the idea though that free speech is critical to the well being of our society. Free speech has created a completely polarized political system, as well as a sensationalized view of what our leaders do. Free speech has given us everything but the truth about what is going on in our world and what is going on in our own country.
Free speech has forced moderate politicians out of office in favor of those politicians who send out thousands of ads that just sling mud.
The idea of free speech is being abused by nearly every single person in this nation. We need to find a way to moderate speech without destroying the principles behind "free speech." That is the difficult part.
02 Nov 06
Originally posted by sasquatch672People have a right to free speech, but responsibilities go with that right. Is it right to tell people they will die unless they vote for a political party or buy their product? Too much freedom all round brings anarchy.
You're talking about the repression of free speech. If the last six years should have taught you anything, it is that a free and independent press, and unhindered speech, is critical to the well-being of our society. What's left of it anyway.
02 Nov 06
Originally posted by sasquatch672So it's ok for people to lie to get the masses on their side...
Not surprisingly, I disagree with both of you. No - you can't yell fire in a crowded theater. But when you start telling pople what they can and can't say - well, that's what Islamic countries do. I'm offended by just about everything that's come out of Bush Administration officials' mouths for the past six years, but I wouldn't restrict a word of it ...[text shortened]... racy is a roiling, turbulent, rough thing, but it's the only alternative to being ruled.
02 Nov 06
Originally posted by whodeyWhat better way to be exposed to their ideas as well as their stupidity.
It has been my observation that political advertisements do little other than harrass the voters. Think of it, when is the last time you were swayed by a political advertisement? When is the last time you knew of someone who was swayed by a political advertisement? When was the last time you felt informed via a political advertisement? It is to the point ...[text shortened]... tain venues that both sides have equal time and access to no matter how much money they raised.
02 Nov 06
Originally posted by whodeyYou can't ban political ads based on the first amendment, which you did state. You can't sensor political speech, no matter how much you hate it. However, the time, place, and manner can be regulated. That's why you only see them around election day.
It has been my observation that political advertisements do little other than harrass the voters. Think of it, when is the last time you were swayed by a political advertisement? When is the last time you knew of someone who was swayed by a political advertisement? When was the last time you felt informed via a political advertisement? It is to the point ...[text shortened]... tain venues that both sides have equal time and access to no matter how much money they raised.
You can always turn the TV or radio off. As for the mail, well...
02 Nov 06
Originally posted by kirksey957Yes, that is very much the truth. The other day I got an obviously loaded political ad in my newspaper which was badmouthing the local Democrat candidate, sent by the Republican candidate. It sealed my vote for the Democrat.
What better way to be exposed to their ideas as well as their stupidity.
Just like the Bush vs Kerry election, I am having to choose where my vote goes not because I like my chosen candidate, but because I intensely dislike his opponent. It is sad, and it is a product of our warped and skewed version of free speech.
02 Nov 06
1 edit
Originally posted by kirksey957This is a debate forum not a name calling forum the last time I checked. If you have something to say spit it out man!!!!!!!
What better way to be exposed to their ideas as well as their stupidity.
I have not known you to be disrespectful up until this point and it saddens me.
02 Nov 06
2 edits
Originally posted by sasquatch672Let me ask something here. What if in these political ads the politicians hooked up with a corporation such as the corporation that sells Coke products? Lets say the candidate gets paid by the corporation to help raise funds so long as he or she is drinking a Coke in the political advertisement. Would you still feel the same? In fact, that is all political advertisements are. Lobbiests are giving these people money to go out and sell themselves so that they can become elected and so that there election will either benefit them monitarily or politically.
Not surprisingly, I disagree with both of you. No - you can't yell fire in a crowded theater. But when you start telling pople what they can and can't say - well, that's what Islamic countries do. I'm offended by just about everything that's come out of Bush Administration officials' mouths for the past six years, but I wouldn't restrict a word of it ...[text shortened]... racy is a roiling, turbulent, rough thing, but it's the only alternative to being ruled.
What about the "Do not call" list that was just introduced? It seems to me that if you can limit soliciters from calling your home to sell you MCI for your phone service you should be able to do the same for someone trying to sell you their vote. What if you put a no soliciting sign on your door? It seems to me that solicitors would be tresspassing if they came to your door anyway. I am not so much in favor of censoring public political advertisements as I am ones that harrass me in the privacy of my own home. Sure you can say, "Well don't turn on your TV. Well don't answer your door. Well don't answer the phone." Clearly there must be a better way.