Homeland Insecurity Provides Triggers For IED's

In yet another example of feel-good intentions which will only serve to help the bad guys, some geniuses in the federal government, notably the FCC and FEMA, have decided to make it mandatory for certain alerts be sent to your cell phone and for all cell phones to be equipped with the ability to receive these alerts.

This can only serve as a boon to the terrorists since they will no longer have to call their phones being used as triggers. They can simply set the bomb and wait for the alert to come in to do the dirty work.

The alert system will send the emergency messages even if other cell phone voice or text services aren’t working.

Really, does anybody have one lick of common sense in the Imperial Federal Government. Let me guess, nobody in these agencies thought of this, right?

Time to take them on a walk of the Afghan countryside with some EOD folks. I figured it out before I even finished reading the story.

Silver Lining to Obama's Suffocating Nanny State: No More Loud Commericals!

Because nobody should ever have to fumble around for the remote after being rudely awoken by a blaring infomercial.

That's in the Constitution somewhere, I think.

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama has signed legislation to prevent advertisers from abruptly raising the volume of TV commercials louder than regular programming.

The law signed by Obama on Wednesday requires the Federal Communications Commission to adopt industry standards coordinating ad decibel levels to those of the regular program within one year.

The new regulations go into effect a year after that. They apply to all broadcast providers, including cable and satellite.

Lawmakers who sponsored the bill said they were reacting to their constituents’ complaints about abrasively loud television commercials — and their own experiences.

The FCC has been receiving complaints since the 1960s about jarring sound bursts when commercials come on, but had not regulated program or commercial volume.

Hmmm. Any chance the FCC might crack down on the jarring sound bursts MSNBC bombards unsuspecting channel-surfers with night after night?

Just askin'.

Cross-posted.

FCC Visit

I caught this quite by accident and of course I wasn't on a computer that would allow me to get a screen shot, but look who visited us today.

31 fcc.gov Washington, District of... 4:41:16 pm 1 0:00
http://jammiewearingfool.blogspo...orous-dictator-i-dont-stink.html

Now maybe it was just an employee surfing at work, but if it wasn't I wonder why the FCC would be interested in the bathing habits of Hugo Chavez and what Jammie has to say about it?

Sometimes Sitemeter does serve a purpose.

Good News: New and Improved 'Fairness Doctrine' Could Apply to Web Content

Nothing would ignite a fire under the behinds of a million bloggers more than threatening them with the idea of having to provide "balance" on their sites.

Good luck with that.

Mark my words. Any politician dumb enough to vote for something like this should take the time to enjoy their final term in office. I'm almost curious to see them try, as the backlash would be so swift and enormous the notion of resurrecting this long-outdated scheme would never again see the light of day.

There’s a huge concern among conservative talk radio hosts that reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine would all-but destroy the industry due to equal time constraints. But speech limits might not stop at radio. They could even be extended to include the Internet and “government dictating content policy.”

FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell raised that as a possibility after talking with bloggers at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C. McDowell spoke about a recent FCC vote to bar Comcast from engaging in certain Internet practices – expanding the federal agency’s oversight of Internet networks.

The commissioner, a 2006 President Bush appointee, told the Business & Media Institute the Fairness Doctrine could be intertwined with the net neutrality battle. The result might end with the government regulating content on the Web, he warned. McDowell, who was against reprimanding Comcast, said the net neutrality effort could win the support of “a few isolated conservatives” who may not fully realize the long-term effects of government regulation.

“I think the fear is that somehow large corporations will censor their content, their points of view, right,” McDowell said. “I think the bigger concern for them should be if you have government dictating content policy, which by the way would have a big First Amendment problem.”

“Then, whoever is in charge of government is going to determine what is fair, under a so-called ‘Fairness Doctrine,’ which won’t be called that – it’ll be called something else,” McDowell said. “So, will Web sites, will bloggers have to give equal time or equal space on their Web site to opposing views rather than letting the marketplace of ideas determine that?”

The notion is so insane, so anti-freedom that only some pointy-headed libs could be stupid enough to dream it up.

I can see the left trying to stifle dissent by attempting to silence talk radio. After all, they hate free speech. But the idea that blogs would ever have to provide balance? With the sheer volume on both the left and right it would just not be possible. Considering it's the World Wide Web, how would they possibly control content that extends across the globe?

Sneaky Backdoor FCC Rule Could Imperil Talk Radio

I hope the folks out there who enjoy talk radio, and hopefully the hosts themselves are aware of this.

They better be. You know the Democrats want to silence debate and would love nothing more than to reimpose the absurd Fairness Doctrine. Knowing that's pretty difficult, they'll certainly be happy to leave it up to the anti-American, terror-supporting scum like CAIR to do their dirty work.

English First warned fans of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Dr. James Dobson and other syndicated talk shows that a proposed FCC regulation would drive their favorite programs off the air.

On January 24, 2008, the FCC published a "Notice of Proposed Rulemaking" in the Federal Register which, if ultimately adopted, would impose a back-door version of the discredited "Fairness Doctrine" upon America's airwaves.

The FCC's proposed regulations claim that radio station "programming -- particularly network programming - often is not sufficiently culturally diverse" and that the FCC seeks "to ensure that broadcasters serve their communities, especially traditionally underserved audiences," such as non-English speakers, whether or not these people actually exist.

Wonderful.

These advisory boards "should include representatives of all segments of the community," a requirement which would empower self-appointed "community leaders," such as representatives of the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) or the Center for American Islamic Relations (CAIR), to discourage commercial radio stations from airing discussions of controversial matters such as the costs of illegal immigration or the meaning of jihad.

English First has established a web site, http://www.keeprushontheair.com, containing the relevant FCC documents and a citizen's petition to the FCC. The deadline for FCC reply comments is June 11, 2008.

H/T NJDhockeyfan.