[Qwinn]

Okay. I reread your post. Here's what you said:

"Gloating over the loss of freedoms and usurption of constitutional rights for your neighbor is a myopic ignorance of your own loss."

Well, the only thing anyone is gloating about that any neighbor has had usurped is the ability to listen to Howard Stern. You refer to this as an usurpation of constitutional rights. If you're claiming that this does not equate listening to Howard Stern to a constitutional right, you're going to have to explain how, cause reading your post a thousand times isn't going to change what it quite clearly says.

Or is the neighbor in question Howard Stern himself? Heh. You think -his- constitutional right is violated? What constitutional right? Was he making a political statement? A religious statement? Any statement meant to clarify, elucidate or otherwise -make a point-? No, he was being a disgusting pig. I -never- bought into the line that the founding fathers -meant- to extend utter freedom towards pornography, that was a little invention that never even -occurred- to anyone until 200 years after the Constitution was written. Now, do I care if erotica is out there? No, not really. In fact, let's put the whole pornography thing aside, and let's assume for the moment that I -do- think it's protected by the constitution.

What you seem to want is for Clearwater's right to NOT air Howard Stern to be infringed. You seem to think that once they hire him to be on the air, he can say whatever he wants and offend as many people as possible, and... they... can... NEVER... fire him.

I would say it's you trying to take away rights. The right of the decision makers at Clearwater to run their business the way they want, and to fire a misbegotten scumbag like Stern if they want.

That's my view.

If Stern wants to spew his filth, he can go do it on a street corner or on an internet website. No one's freedom of speech is infringed by not being a top-billed radio star. Howard Stern has not one more constitutional right to be on the radio than I do. If his rights are now infringed, then so have mine, my entire life. Maybe I should sue Clearwater for not letting me on the air, whatcha think? Heck, I won't even be disgusting when I do it.

Qwinn

[NYCVirago]

If Stern wants to spew his filth, he can go do it on a street corner or on an internet website. No one's freedom of speech is infringed by not being a top-billed radio star. Howard Stern has not one more constitutional right to be on the radio than I do.

Yep. As I wrote on another thread, not only was Dr. Laura's tv show forced off the air due to gay activists, but her radio show is not even broadcast anymore in New York City, the largest media market in the country. Are her free-speech rights being violated?