Keep the Democrats out of my wallet and the Republicans out of my entertainment. Please.

heck yeah.

That guy (Stevens) is most definitely *not* a Swanky Conservative.

I consider myself conservative and I disagree with Senator Stevens. I can see the point when it comes to the free and public airwaves; I concede that realm to the people to the right of me in a gesture of goodwill.

People are different, and to each their own. More power to them.

A privately owned service that I pay for? That's mine. Leave it alone. You want one you can police? Start it yourself, police it yourself, and let it survive in the open market.

""I think we have the same power to deal with cable as over-the-air" broadcasters."
No Senator Stevens, you do not. Over the air is regulated under the theory of it being public airways due to limited spectrum. That is not the case with cable, especially subscription services. If you are bored Senator Stevens, there are both Social Security and our tax system which need fixing.

Can I get an Amen to that, Stephen!!!

While we're at it, can you keep the Republicans out of my wallet, and the Democrats out of my entertainment too?

"No one wants censorship"

Ummm...exactly what DO you call it when the government is telling a private system not to show things that the government doesn't like???

Ted Stevens is merely a GOP proof that there is nothing more worthless than a U.S. Senator who has been in office more than two terms.

I agree with you Stephen. I want them ALL out of my wallet and I can pick my own entertainment.

Ted's just getting old. He's been in the senate since @'72. I saw him in person last summer and was shocked at how frail and ancient he looked.

I also know someone who was an aide to him back in the 80's and he thought that Ted was one of the smartest guys in the senate.

The other Ted in the Senate scares me far far more.

A better solution that would meet the ends that Stevens is claiming to want is al la carte availablity of cable channels.

A buck for Weather Channel, a buck for Cartoon Network, 50 cents for MSNBC.

That way, the people who want Cartoon Disney for their kids can avoid E! and MTV2 and the DINKs can get whatever prurient channels they want.

Everyone's happy.

Except, of course, for the Senators who want to regulate speech.

I have no problem w/cable movies w/certain language usage being on later than at 5 PM on a Sunday.

I turn off the channel if I know it's coming, but unless I remember every line of every movie which comes out, it gets hard.

And maybe we should start expecting higher language accountability from our children as well.

This lowest-common denominator stuff is sad.

If you are offended turn off the TV or radio! Dont buy tickes to offensive movies. Exercise your freedom.

I have no problem w/cable movies w/certain language usage being on later than at 5 PM on a Sunday.

I do.

Ultimately, it comes down to if other people have the right to decide when programs with certain content will be on.

I say they might when the program is broadcast on public airwaves, but absolutely do not when the program is being carried on a private service.

If you don't like it, change the channel, cancel your subscription, or learn to use the parental lockout feature- but don't try to get the government to act as a surrogate parent for everyone.

Change the word 'Conservative' to 'Dalmatian' and the post title here makes just as much sense.

Stevens' actions here don't make him a conservative.

They make him a conservative with a horribly bad idea.

We don't care if you declare for the GOP or not. As loing as you don't vote for lefties, call yourself whatever you want.

There's room in the Republican party for a lot of different points of view. Debate and discussion are the rule.

It's the Democrats that invented PC, defined words they didn't like as hate crimes, etc.

Well, considering the lifeless, banal crap coming out of Hollywood these days (i.e., do we really need another remake of a 70s TV show?) along with the left-leaning activism, can we keep the Democrats out of our entertainment, too? I can see boobies anytime I want on the internet, I don't need it to distract me from the complete lack of plot or compelling characters in today's "entertainment".

(i.e., do we really need another remake of a 70s TV show?)

Go watch an episode of the new Battlestar Galactica and you tell me.

It's like the FCC and it's ilk have decided to be the "parents" of the entire US, both on TV and radio. Recently I complained to the FCC because my favorite local radio station has taken to removing work like "ass" from various songs. I was more offended by the idea of removing the words than by the words. I am responsible for myself and my family. If I don't like what I am hearing or watching, I turn it off or change the channel. I do it frequently. Why more people can't, as opposed to complain that it is out there is peyond me.

Becky, your argument was already made obselete by last year's Super Bowl wasn't it?
"Don't want to see an aging, sagging breast on prime time TV? well just turn it off! Oops, too late, huh?"
Now, I'm not *for* sanitizing all shows to a G rating by any means. But all the whining that if you can't say shitfucker on Saturday morning cartoons, it means that the religious freak terrorists have won and We Are All Going to be Forced to Kneel to an Angry Christian Prude God Any Minute Now strikes me as hyberbolic overreaction.
How about this? If you want to see explicit sexual themes, watch them on streaming video over the internet! If you want to hear songs with the word "ass" in it, go buy the CD!
Simply put, being a parent does not give you omnipotent control over everything that happens within earshot and visual field of a child, and you guys are being ridiculous to pretend it does.
So if my kids and I are out watching a baseball game, and some drunk guy gets up and starts cussing out my kids, are you going to tell me, "why don't you just stay home?", or are you going to support the removal of such a jerk?

I'm not trying to argue For the Children (tm) or anything...but in a society populated with people from age 2 to 92, why does the default *have* to be for the Beavis and Butthead level of maturity?

With all due respect, I think everyone has missed the most obvious detail in the piece:

"Cable is a much greater violator in the indecency area," the Alaska Republican told the National Association of Broadcasters, which represents most local television and radio affiliates. "I think we have the same power to deal with cable as over-the-air" broadcasters.

I'm not sure how socially conservative Stevens is, so I'm not sure if he's pandering to evangelicals or not. He clearly IS pandering to those already regulated by the FCC who seek to hamstring their competition by having them subjected to the same regulatory regime.

He should get a few more donations from the NAB for this. Of course, if the FCC were to extend its yoke over cable and satellite, Stevens would reap donations from them, too.

To paraphrase James Carville: "It's the rent seeking, stupid."

"The other Ted in the Senate scares me far far more.

I disagree... I know where that Ted stands, but this wolf in sheep's clothing routine from the GOP has got - to - stop. It's becoming apparent the GOP has enjoyed its majority status in congress for far too long and needs to be turned over to the Democrats until they remember why we voted them there in the first place.

The FCC regulates broadcast TV and Radio because the airwaves are considered to be owned by the public and operated in the public trust - empowered and defined in the Communications Act of 1934 as ammended by the Telecommunications Act of 1996. I think we all agree there.

Cable and subscription services fail to meet that criteria. With regards to both, I'm entering into a private contract with a provider to provide me with services I requested. I'm free to quit them at any time and go with another cable or digital satellite subscription service. Same with XM and Sirius. In each case, special facilities are required (such as a wire to your house), and/or special decoding hardware is required for me to receive the broadcast. Additionally, in the case of satellite providers of TV and Radio, that spectrum is not operated "in the public trust," but was awarded to the providers to utilize - at top dollar - after being auctioned by the FCC. Further, the data stream is encrypted and not readily accessible by anyone with a TV or Radio receiver.

What really pisses me off here is the arrogance of this asshat:

Stevens said he disagreed "violently" with assertions by the cable industry that Congress does not have the authority to impose limits on its content.

Why? Exactly where is congress empowered to regulate this? These services aren't operated in the public trust... (which was a load of crap in the first place to stick their nose somewhere it didn't belong.)

You could almost stretch the interstate commerce clause to encompass satillite radio, but that level of interference into the content of private party transactions is generally limited to hazerdous materials, destructive devices, and firearms. Besides, what if I get my cable service from a provider owned and operated inside the state I reside? That's not interstate commerce.

The GOP has no business sticking the federal government's nose here and if the party had any balls, they'd slap Stevens' pee-pee while loudly saying "bad idea," and quickly distance themselves.

And if you're one of these people who seem to think this is a good idea, then cancel your cable service. No one forcing you to sign up for cable or DirecTV. If I want to pay money to listen to Howard Stern on Sirius, or Opie and Anthony on XM - what the hell business is it of yours? Don't like it, don't sign up for it, but get the hell out of my way already. You "family values" zealots are just as bad as the politically correct thought police on the far left.

I realize I'm getting fired up in Steve's sandbox here, but I refuse to have my television service reduced to constant re-runs of Touched by an Angel followed by the Golden Girls.

Doug, at least you're not having to watched Touced by the Golden Girls!

I'm a life-long Alaskan, and I've met Senator Stevens (I interned for Frank and campaigned for Lisa Murkowski) several times. The guy is bored. He was once caught on C-span picking his nose, staring at the booger for almost an hour before finally eating it.

booger eating is an affront to our children! it must be regulated!

All this hub-bub about indecency should focus on expectations. If I'm listening to Howard Stern, I know what I'm going to get. If I'm watching the Superbowl, I should be able to watch it with my daughter. This witch hunt for indecency should be about making sure the f-word is where we expect it, nothing more.

None of this is really about the First Ammendment, its just about people knowing what they are getting into. I'm not trying to limit your free speech, I just don't want my kids hearing it till they're old enough to really understand what it means. Say it on Stern, say it at night, just let me know its coming and I'll take care of my kids.

Doug, at least you're not having to watched Touced by the Golden Girls!

I really think that's going to give me a nightmare...

Bah! Who needs personal responsibility? Isn't that what right wing politicians and evangelists are for? They just want to protect you from... hmmm... words? Um... body parts? Accidental procreation? Dangerous ideas? What exactly was it that I couldn't decide to expose myself to?