OT: Telemarketers 1, America 0

[Steven]

Wow, I don't think I've ever seen Congress act this quickly or decisively!

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/09/ ... index.html


Steven

[anniemcu]

Hip-Hip-Hooray for Congress!!!

[Nanohedron]

Chalk up a point on the side of preventing the abuse of capitalism.

[Ridseard]

I think those researchers weren't familiar with the sh*t habits of southerners. I would conjecture that they tend to stay in the path of a storm because either they're too lazy to move their ass or else they're too stubborn (or ignorant) to admit to themselves that they are vulnerable. But that surely ain't what they're going to tell no researcher.

In case anybody was offended by those remarks, they were intended to be tongue-in-cheek. I have lived 45 years in the southeast and 20 years in other parts of the country, and I have not noticed any more fatalism in the south than anywhere else.

[BrassBlower]

I think those researchers weren't familiar with the sh*t habits of southerners. I would conjecture that they tend to stay in the path of a storm because either they're too lazy to move their ass or else they're too stubborn (or ignorant) to admit to themselves that they are vulnerable. But that surely ain't what they're going to tell no researcher.

In case anybody was offended by those remarks, they were intended to be tongue-in-cheek. I have lived 45 years in the southeast and 20 years in other parts of the country, and I have not noticed any more fatalism in the south than anywhere else.

Of course, I was not offended, but that ain't what I'm gonna tell no researcher!

[jim stone]

Hi, didn't make any of the assumptions attributed to me,
I'm afraid. Certainly didn't think I was repsonding
to southerners! I'm a southerner--at least I
worked my entire career in Louisiana.

The story was an aside, meant
as a whimsical illustration of the point that people
who think that matters really aren't in their
hands tend to suffer the consequences.

According to the papers today, the FCC is appealing.
The court has maintained that the legal authority
of the FCC to set up the list is unclear. The court
wants the FCC's authority clarified. The FCC thinks
its authority is already clear; hence the appeal.
Meanwhile bills are being introduced
in Congress from both parties clarifying the
authority of the FCC to set up the list--
the FCC's authority depends on federal
legislation. So we should have the list
before long, one way or another.
There is no indication that anybody
in this process is caving- in to
Big Money. Best

[IDAwHOa]

It is Telemarketers 2, America 1

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/politics ... rtner=UNTD

Seems some other judge thinks that a telemarketers "right to free speach" is more important than my RIGHT to privacy. One think I did learn was that charitables and political were not subject to the list. That may have been the thing that through the wrench in the works.

Just need a version that stops those other two things. I hate them too. If I want to donate money to you I will call you.

[Jack]

Quote @ madguy

And all people who work as telemarketers should find real jobs, even if it's just flipping burgers, instead of terrorizing unsuspecting people at home.

I don't think doing your job and feeding your family can be equivocated to terrorism. I also don't think it's as simple as 'find real jobs' especially in areas such as this one where the only major employer for miles and miles is a call center.

[Chuck_Clark]

It is Telemarketers 2, America 1

Seems some other judge thinks that a telemarketers "right to free speach" is more important than my RIGHT to privacy. One think I did learn was that charitables and political were not subject to the list. That may have been the thing that through the wrench in the works.

Just need a version that stops those other two things. I hate them too. If I want to donate money to you I will call you.

Ah, hell! Just one more proof that America has great judges - the best that money can buy.

Since when does freee speech include the ability to break into my home to exercise it? I never thought I'd appreciate our partisan Congress over the judiciary - just proves you should never say never.

Cranberry -

I hate to seem insensitive, but I spent years dealing with Southern Illinois coal miners who spend their lives on welfare because there are "no jobs". Horsepuckey! What they mean is that there are no mining jobs, or perhaps no jobs in their little hick town or county. If there are no jobs in a person's area of residential choice, that does NOT mean there no jobs anywhere. It means that the worker isn't willing to go where the jobs are.

[Jack]

Quote @ Chuck_Clark

I hate to seem insensitive, but I spent years dealing with Southern Illinois coal miners who spend their lives on welfare because there are "no jobs". Horsepuckey! What they mean is that there are no mining jobs, or perhaps no jobs in their little hick town or county. If there are no jobs in a person's area of residential choice, that does NOT mean there no jobs anywhere. It means that the worker isn't willing to go where the jobs are.

I see exactly what you're saying, but that's not the case everywhere, it's certainly not the case here. There are literally no jobs. None in fast food, none in what have you. The biggest employer is the call center. Almost everybody works there or has worked there. If it get shut down, it will be a really terrible thing to a lot of local families, to put it lightly. I agree that people should leave the area instead of stay here, and they are. Our population is declining at like seven million percent. Just the older people are remaining and everybody else is fleeing.

[Rando7]

If there are no jobs in a person's area of residential choice, that does NOT mean there no jobs anywhere. It means that the worker isn't willing to go where the jobs are.

Chuck! You and I agree on something!

[Chuck_Clark]

If there are no jobs in a person's area of residential choice, that does NOT mean there no jobs anywhere. It means that the worker isn't willing to go where the jobs are.

Chuck! You and I agree on something!

EEK! I'll try to be more careful.

[chas]

It is Telemarketers 2, America 1

Seems some other judge thinks that a telemarketers "right to free speach" is more important than my RIGHT to privacy. One think I did learn was that charitables and political were not subject to the list. That may have been the thing that through the wrench in the works.

Just need a version that stops those other two things. I hate them too. If I want to donate money to you I will call you.

I'm not so sure -- there's plenty of precedent for treating political speech and commercial speech differently. For example, one can say anything one wants, no matter how ridiculous or slanderous, in the context of a political campaign. My favorite example of that is Geoffrey Fieger, who became famous as Jack Kevorkian's lawyer and ran for governor of Michigan against John Engler. Among the things Fieger said about Engler:

"I don't see how they (Engler's triplets) could possibly be his -- unless they have corkscrew tails."

"(Engler) is almost certainly sub-human, probably the result of miscegenation between human beings and barnyard animals."

This is all protected political speech. Businesses simply can't do this -- can you imagine the wars of words between Nabisco and Keebler?

[glauber]

Using free speech to justify telemarketers calls is ridiculous. Hopefully this one will be appealed.

Anyway, privacy manager rocks! I just had it installed (SBC/Ameritech/TheDevil is offering a 90 day free trial) and the phone didn't ring at all last night. I though the darn thing was broken!

[IDAwHOa]

I'm not so sure -- there's plenty of precedent for treating political speech and commercial speech differently.

Chas, then you will need to contact the federal judiciary and let them know that, because they certainly don't seem to think so.

More and more I am beginning to believe that more personal opinion goes into judgements than law does.