Liberal Forum

Cannonpointer » 20 Jan 2017 12:28 pm » wrote:My motive for the thread has been further explained - stop your **** whining.

The issue ultimately is one of philosophy - much of law, since you seem unaware, is in the courts' interpretations of the legislature's intent. And their interpretations seem to be guided, at least in part, by public opinion - hence the failure of the SCOTUS in the 1800s to ban slavery, hence the scotus upholding the voting rights act - etc., ad nauseum.

This board is for the discussion of politics, not law - so your girlish outrage that I sneaked in a political component is a product of your vadge, not my imputed dishonesty.

We have before us a crystalizing issue - and you're trying to avoid taking a firm stand because you know that it leads to agreement with board liberals. You're trying to wheedle your answer into strict conformity with a pretended intention, BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANT TO SPEAK YOUR MIND.

You know that in fact, you believe news stations should be **** well accountable to an objective code of conduct in the public interest. And you're trying to pretend not to be afraid to answer to the underlying issue, while at all costs avoiding answering to the underlying issue.

You aren't my victim - you're the victim of your own inability to ever admit error, and your deep desire to straddle every **** fence you find.

Me, I say my positions straight - I don't try to hide behind legalistic ****, confining my response to a strict interpretation of intent, EVEN AFTER that intent has been deepened.

Answer to the underlying issue. SHOULD THIS NATION HOLD NEWS STATION TO ANY OBJECTIVE STANDARD OUTSIDE OF MAKING MONEY FOR THEIR SHARE HOLDERS?

YES/NO