Constitution Daily: 'Looking Back: George Carlin & The U.S. Supreme Court'

Source:National Constitution Center- The great comedian George Carlin.

"On July 3, 1978, the Supreme Court issued its historic verdict in the George Carlin “seven dirty words” case, a decision that still holds sway over the use of indecent and obscene language on television, and in a new era of mass communications.

George_Carlin

Carlin himself wasn’t involved directly in the case, which was called Federal Communications Commission V. Pacifica Foundation. He had already won a legal verdict in an unrelated case several years prior to the FCC decision when a judge threw out his arrest in for performing the comedy routine at a Milwaukee summer festival.

It was a New York radio station owned by the Pacifica Foundation that was in hot water with the FCC for playing a recording of Carlin’s “Filthy Words" monologue on October 30, 1973, at 2 p.m. in the afternoon. The broadcast was heard by John H. Douglas, who said he heard the words while driving with his young son in a car. Douglas then complained to the FCC, although the case wasn’t decided until almost five years later. FCC ended in a 5-4 split among the Justices, with Justice John Paul Stevens writing the majority decision.

Prior to the case, the FCC had warned Pacifica that the language in Carlin’s routine was indecent and prohibited by FCC statutes. The FCC didn’t fine Pacifica, but instead issued an order that threatened to take into account any complaints when Pacifica next sought to renew its broadcast license.

The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit reversed the decision in 1977 by a 2-1 margin, with each judge writing separate opinions. Judge Tamm said that the FCC’s order represented censorship.Chief Judge Bazelon said the FCC’s order “must be narrowly construed to cover only language that is obscene or otherwise unprotected by the First Amendment.”

But Judge Leventhal argued the FCC correctly concluded that the content was indecent because it was broadcast during the daytime and the FCC had a legitimate interest in protecting children from hearing such indecent content.

Despite the humor in Carlin’s monologue, the Court was faced with a very serious question: Did the First Amendment deny the federal government any power to restrict the public broadcast of indecent language under any circumstances?

Justice Stevens agreed with Judge Leventhal from the District of Columbia appeals court.

“We have long recognized that each medium of expression presents special First Amendment problems,” Justice Stevens said. He stated that because “the broadcast media have established a uniquely pervasive presence in the lives of all Americans” and “broadcasting is uniquely accessible to children,” the FCC had the right to impose an order on the radio station warning it about the consequences of the broadcast.

The FCC had the right to treat indecent speech as a nuisance, in this one instance, because the Court said that limited civil sanctions could constitutionally be invoked against a broadcast of words dealing with sex and execration.

Stevens then referenced a Court decision from 1926 and a quote from Justice George Sutherland: "Nuisance may be merely a right thing in the wrong place, - like a pig in the parlor instead of the barnyard."

The decision officially gave the FCC the ability to impose penalties on broadcasters who presented obscene, indecent, or profane language outside of certain time periods or in certain cases. It also limited the First Amendment rights of broadcasters.

Justice William Brennan wrote the dissent. “I find the Court's misapplication of fundamental First Amendment principles so patent, and its attempt to impose its notions of propriety on the whole of the American people so misguided, that I am unable to remain silent.”

“The Court's decision may be seen for what, in the broader perspective, it really is: another of the dominant culture's inevitable efforts to force those groups who do not share its mores to conform to its way of thinking, acting, and speaking,” he added.

In 2012, the Court had a chance to revisit the Pacifica decision when it considered three incidents where the FCC wanted to punish Fox and ABC for what it deemed as offensive content. Justice Anthony Kennedy’s majority decision ruled against the FCC, but for procedural reasons. Kennedy saw no need to revisit the Pacifica decision.

But Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, while concurring with Kennedy’s overall opinion, stated her objections to the FCC case ruling. “In my view, the Court’s decision in FCC v. Pacifica Foundation was wrong when it issued. Time, technological advances, and the Commission’s untenable rulings in the cases now before the Court show why Pacifica bears reconsideration,” she said.

As for Carlin, he said in his 2009 autobiography, “FCC vs Pacifica has become a standard case to teach in communications classes and many law schools. I take perverse pride in that. I’m actually a footnote to the judicial history of America.”

Scott Bomboy is editor in chief of the National Constitution Center." 

Source:Constitution Daily 

"George Carlin on his reaction to the Supreme Court case about his Seven dirty words" 

Source:Foundation Interviews- Comedian George Carlin, talking about his seven dirty words.

"George Carlin on his reaction to the Supreme Court case about his Seven dirty words."

From Foundation Interviews

The blog writes a lot about political correctness and fascism, because we write a lot about comedy and write comedy ourselves and without free speech which is what political correctness and fascism tries to restrict (obviously, duh, you don't say!) there would't be any comedy and even political satire. Which is why I'm always amused if not confused when so-called left-wing comedians and other entertainers make calls for political correctness because they think some material is offensive.

Because without free speech there wouldn't be any comedy. I mean, if political correctness ran this country instead of the First Amendment, comedians wouldn't be able to crack jokes about anybody. Especially the people who deserve to be made fun of. Like our politicians, just to use as an example. Entertainers attacking free speech is very ironic. Because speech is what fuels comedy, as well as self-awareness and what's going on around you in life. Even comedians have stood up for political correctness against free speech, like Michael Moore and others. Even John Oliver, Stephanie Miller, John Fugelsang, would be other examples.

A comedian attacking free speech, is like a race car driver saying oil and gas are bad for the environment and therefor should be outlawed. Oil and gas literally fuel that race car driver's career. Without it, he might be flipping burgers or selling lemonade. Or a pro football player saying football is too violent and therefor tackling should be outlawed. Who would go watch professional flag football? As the great comedian Mel Brooks has said political correctness is destroying comedy because comedians are worried about offending oversensitive tight asses, who think they're the only perfect human beings on the face of the Earth who don't deserve to be made fun of. Brooks has said political correctness is destroying comedy. The second part is my line.

George Carlin is not the first victim of political correctness when it comes to comedy. You could argue at least that Lenny Bruce back in the 1950s and 60s has that uthonorable title. But George and Lenny, are from the same generation. Lenny would literally go on stage using cuss words as part of his act and I'm not talking about hell or damn, but he would talk about sex and talk about how people would have sex with each other and put it bluntly. And then would literally be arrested on stage for using foul language. George has  a similar but different story.

George would go on stage and literally use words like shit, fuck, mother fucker, mother fucking fucking, and others and these were part of the so-called seven dirty words that comedians weren't supposed to use in Phyllis Schlafly's 1950s America, where you weren't even allowed to say God, Jesus, and hell, at least not on TV.

Liberal democracy which has a practically guaranteed right for free speech in America under are First Amendment. The only exceptions having to do with falsely libeling, inciting violence, or harassment, like leaving obscene message on someone's voice mail, to use as an example. This is not the place for oversensitive tight asses who look at the mirror and only see perfection. Or have a glass jaw for an ego and can't take the smallest bit of criticism without breaking out in tears and flooding their homes from all of their perspiration. I don't know, maybe Canada is a country for people like that.

If you don't like offensive material, then don't watch it or listen to it! Only watch PBS and C-SPAN if you can't handle criticism about yourself and groups you believe have constitutional protection not to be criticized that no one else has. With liberal democracy comes a lot of individual freedom, but with that comes responsibility and the fact that you're not the only one who lives here and you have the same freedom and responsibility that everyone else has. And might from time to time hear and see things that you disapprove of. But so will everyone else. 

You can also see this post at The New Democrat, on Blogger.

You can also see this post at The New Democrat, on WordPress.

You can also see this post at The Daily Press, on Blogger. 

You can also see this post at FRS FreeState, on Blogger.

You can also see this post at The Daily Press, on WordPress.

Young Americans For Liberty: George Carlin- On Individualism

Source:The Daily Review- The great comedian and political satirist George Carlin.

"George Carlin describes his process of organizing his life experiences into his comedy routines.

ABOUT THE PALEY CENTER:
In an era of rapid change in media and technology, the not-for-profit Paley Center for Media explores the evolving ways in which we create, consume, and connect through media. With locations in New York and Los Angeles, and the foremost public archive of television and radio programming, the Paley Center produces and curates programs, forums, and educational activities that engage the general public, industry professionals, and the creative community in an ongoing conversation about the impact of media on our lives. The Paley Center for Media is a hub of innovation and connection for entrepreneurs, investors, and consumers with its finger on the pulse of the next big thing in media go to Paley Center to learn more."

Source:Paley Center For Media- Comedian George Carlin, in 2008.

From The Paley Center For Media

George Carlin, I believe was the most individualists of individualists. Perhaps not the father of individualism, but perhaps the president of it. A man who didn't play team sports, because always wanted to be himself. Imagine if we had a culture of individualists instead of a culture of faddists. Who believe there worthless or something if they don't have the latest i-phone or i-pad, or whatever the current thing is that people have to have, or you might see them inline to jump off a bridge. Because their current device is a week old instead of just buying it brand new today. George Carlin and myself, aren't against technology. I don't think he's as popular as he's today without it and I'm not doing what I'm doing without it. But he was against cloning and faddism.

People are exactly that. We all at start out in life as ourselves and what we do with that is up to us. A faddist and unfortunately I know plenty of them goes with the current trend. Whatever is considered cool or awesome. They vote for politicians, because that person is cool, or shares the same phone and watches the same programs as they do. Individualists vote for people based on who they think would be the best person for the office that they're voting on. Individuals make individual decisions. What's best for them and what they believe and what they want to do. They don't camp out at stores so they're one of the five people to have the latest whatever as soon as it goes on sale. They buy a new phone or whatever the thing is when they need one. And buy what is best for them.

If you noticed George Carlin was an individualist comedian as well. He was well-read and well-informed on the news and talked and made fun of things and people based on what he thought was important and what interest him. Not about whatever the popular subject was at the time. And was so good at what he did that he brought people to him and actually got him to think. He might be the only comedian who could get Millennial's who are interested in current affairs to put their i-phone down for more than five-minutes. Scratch that, maybe he could only do it for a minute, but in today's society that would still be impressive. Because Carlin could get people to think about things they've never thought about before and think about things they have thought about, but look at them differently. Like when it comes to politicians and blaming the voters who voted for them. And is someone who can't be replaced and is still missed. 

You can also see this post at Real Life Journal, on Blogger.

You can also see this post at FreeState Now, on Blogger.

Meg Rifter: George Carlin- 'Maybe it's Not The Politicians Who Suck?'

Source:Meg Rifter- George Carlin, on American politicians and the voters who elect them.

"George Carlin's bit on voting and politicians."

From Meg Rifter

I partially agree with George Carlin on this. Our politicians actually do suck in way too many cases. I think that is obvious when you have a Congress that can’t get its basic responsibilities taken care of like gee I don’t know, funding the government that they are part of, or paying the bills that has been run up on the debt, which is what a debt ceiling extension actually is. Not an agreement to borrow more money, just to pay the interest on the current debt. 

Just the way our politicians treat each other would be an example of political sucking (to mix a political metaphor) is another example of how members of Congress in both parties treat each other. Like the majority not allowing the minority opportunities to offer amendments and other examples like that. But just in case people who aren’t insomniacs actually read this, I don’t want to put everyone else to sleep with what is called in Washington Congressional speak: language that only the House and Senate uses.

I completely disagree with George Carlin on his notion that non-voters have every right to complain. Sure, according to the First Amendment they do, which is all that they need. But for people to be taken seriously, they have to sound credible. And if you’re not doing everything you can to improve government and the least you can do is to bother voting, you can’t credibly complain about politicians who are on office now, because you were too busy complaining, or sitting on your ass at home, or at a coffee-house, perhaps watching celebrity TV all day, getting drunk, masturbating, whatever it might be and not voting. 

Had Democrats bothered to turn out in 2010 and 2014 anywhere near the numbers they did in 2008 and 2012: what Tea Party revolution? Republicans rely on low voter turnout to get elected and reelected. There are still more Democrats than Republicans in America. What Republican gerrymandering if Democrats held onto all of those legislatures and governorships in 2010?

I realize I’m coming at this from a Democratic vantage point, but here’s a newsflash: I’m a Democrat and I’m not saying this to put Republicans down, but Democratic voters don’t have much to complain about when they don’t vote for Democrats. Especially when their reasoning is that they don’t like Center-Left establishment Democrats and that the candidate, or incumbent is not in love with government and doesn’t have a new tax or government program to take care of everyone’s problems for them. Or is not as Far-Left as the Green, or Democratic Socialist candidate. 

Democrats, won back Congress in huge numbers in 2006, because Republicans didn’t bother voting. This works both ways. If you don’t do the very least that you can do to improve government and get the best possible people to represent you, which is bothering to vote and the person you most not rather see wins that office, whose fault is that? All the opposition did was show up and win and beat a party that didn’t bother to vote.

If you don’t like the current field of candidates, run yourself, or encourage someone who you think would be a good candidate to run and then work for that person. Assuming that you caught them when they were drunk, or high, or had a gun pointed at their head (that wasn’t filled with water) and agreed to run for that office. 

But a big reason why we have politicians who suck is because we have voters who suck themselves and maybe we should require all voters to pass a sobriety test, or eye examination before voting. But other reasons why we have politicians who suck is because we have voters in name only. People who are registered to vote, but who don’t bother voting at all. And as a result we get politicians, because of a low voter turnout who would’ve lost badly had we just had a decent voter turnout for that election. Who represent a small faction of the country and wouldn’t have won any other way. 

You can also see this post at The Daily Times, on Blogger.

Counter Argument: George Carlin- Politically Correct Language

Source:Counter Arguments- Comedian George Carlin, taking apart political correctness and what he called soft language.

"A personal point of view regarding a debatable topic. Individual: George Carlin

Topic: Political Correctness Opinion: Political correctness cripples discourse, creates ugly language, and is generally stupid."

From Counter Arguments

"In the age when torture has become "enhanced interrogation techniques"; when the rich are "job creators"; when murdered children are "collateral damage"; it is good to remember these brilliant words from the late, great, George Carlin."

Source:Aaron Pryor- Part of George Carlin's 1990 HBO special.

It is also good to remember that the phrase "Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder" has now been officially changed in American English to "PTSD", a totally lifeless non-threatening acronym, totally devoid of even pity and with an almost whiny feel to it.

From HBO

I probably agree with everything that George Carlin said in this video. Other than the word liberal. Replace liberal with illiberal and Liberals with Illiberal’s and we agree on everything here.

Without Liberals, George Carlin isn’t able to make this video, because Liberals gave us our First Amendment Freedom of Speech rights. It is illiberal fascists on the Far-Left, who have the balls to call themselves Liberals, even though they have more in common with Karl Marx and Fidel Castro, than they do with Jack Kennedy, Tom Jefferson and even Wendell Willkie. Who actually were Liberals, because they believed in liberal values and not illiberal values.

Illiberal fascists are the people who run the U.S. Political Correctness Department on the Left in America. While Liberals, Conservatives, Libertarians and even some Progressives, disobey all of their laws.

It’s not that labels and the truth that are the problem in America. Without them how would know what is real and what is make-believe. How would we know how to refer to each other. I guess we would have to wait for the PCD, or Political Correctness Department to tell us that. Perhaps Ben Affleck will play the Chief of that department in his next movie. Maybe Michael Moore will be his deputy after he’s done with his next film about how so-called White people want create a new American Civil War and kick out all the non-Europeans in the country. And even Europeans who aren’t of British descent and Protestant.

Without the truth and accurate ways to referring to each other, we might as well all go blind and death. Because none of us will know what the hell is going on. The truth is never the problem, it is what leads to the truth that can be. People can only improve once they know what is wrong.

If a Muslim believes that women should be his servant and that the man is always in charge and that women shouldn’t be allowed to work and the whole deal, similar to how many Christian-Conservatives feel today and not just one Muslim, but that is mainstream thought in that culture and a non-Muslim and lets say a non-Muslim of European heritage points that out, how is the person who is accurately critiquing Muslims who believe these things a bigot? All this person is doing is pointing out some negative truths about some Muslims.

If someone is fat and crazy, are you supposed to pretend they got a body of Hercules and are the sanest person around? And perhaps the worst thing about illiberal political correctness is how phony it is. (I’m being really kind) Because it is disguised as tolerance, even though it is the opposite towards people who disagree with them.

Once you hide the truth for fear it might offend people, you become a fascist. And once a society does that, they just threw the First Amendment in the garbage. And as a result the society will regress and become a regressive society and not even a progressive society that political correctness fans claim they want. Because the society will stop progressing, because people won’t know the truth about themselves and how to improve.

“Joey, isn’t a bad student compared with the rest of the class, or is dumb. He just learns slower. And because of that we shouldn’t get him any help, or hold him back, because we don’t want to hurt his feelings.” And that is just one example of political correctness where students are promoted even if they don’t make the grades, because for fear of hurting their self-esteem. And is something that a progressive society and free society can’t afford if they want to continue to make progress.

You can also see this post at The New Democrat, on WordPress.

You can also see this post on The Daily Times, on Blogger.

Yoo Jay: George Carlin- 'The Art and Freedom to Offend people'

Source:Yoo Jay- RIP, George Carlin. 

"Ricky Gervais, Patrice O'neal, Jim Jefferies, Bill Hicks, Louis CK, George Carlin, Jimmy Carr, Richard Pryor and Lenny Bruce. I don't know what the Artist: Underdogz thing is."  

From Yoo Jay 

If I’m going to listen to so-called political comedians, I’m going to first listen to people who know what they’re talking about. I’m not going to go to a mechanic to get my knee examined, or hire that person to do my taxes. Just like I’m not going to listen to a comedian who simply doesn’t know what they’re talking about and perhaps just looks at politics from a stereotypical point of view as far as how they look at politics, politicians, Democrats, Republicans, etc. 

Once I’ve determined that the comedian is knowledgable about politics, or whatever the issue is, they got to be funny. And use their own humor and not use material that a hundred other comedians and other people have already used.

To me at least comedy is only funny when it is accurate, or at least not exaggerated. So to make fat jokes about plus-sized curvy women who are actually in great shape, especially when they come from a rail-thin women who gets blown to the ground every time there’s a breeze in the air, is not funny and also doesn’t even make sense. Now a fat joke about a woman, or man who goes to sleep at the all you can eat meat lovers buffet every night so they don’t miss anything, would be funny. But it would also be true. 

Jokes to me at least have to make sense and they make sense when they’re believable and correct. Like making fun of hypocrites (to use as example) like the guy who preaches about the dangers of adultery and homosexuality when he’s cheating on his third wife and having an affair with a man. You could say this person knows these dangers from personal experience.

I also tend to only listen to comedians who are consistent and non-partisan. Meaning they’re not looking to just bash Republicans, or Democrats, but people who they see as either funny, or bad politicians, or a combination of both. 

I’ll also listen to comedians who lean in one direction, or the other, but smart and honest enough to know that their side isn’t perfect either. And will go after their side from time to time when they feel they deserve it. Dennis Miller on the Right, Bill Maher, fairly Far-Left, Lewis Black on the Left, P.J. O’Rourke on the Right, whose not a fan of Democrats, or Republicans and the same thing with Chris Buckley, the son of William F. Buckley.

George Carlin, is one of my favorite comedians and I don’t agree with all of his satire. But he was about as non-partisan as it came with his comedy even though his personal politics leaned very left at least on economic policy. But he didn’t make fun of Democrats, or Republicans, but he made fun of politicians who happened to be Democrats and Republicans. And he made fun of voters who voted for politicians. 

I guess Carlin's idea of a politician was someone who would practically do anything to get reelected, or move on to the next level in government. Someone like that will get taken seriously by both sides of the isle and will also attract followers. Because a, they know what they’re talking about, but just as important they’re honest enough to talk about it. As opposed to the partisan comedian who bashes the other side as hard as they defend their own.

Political comedy and comedy in general needs to be funny first and of course. But it’s not going to be funny if it's not accurate, or at least not exaggerated. And when you’re hitting one side, keep in mind someone is hitting your side and perhaps doing a damn good job at it. And you would better off if you can take a joke. Instead of acting you’re all perfect while the other side if loaded and overflowing with morons that need to be deported, because you’re out of room for morons. 

Comedy also has to be consistent and this gets to political correctness: if redneck jokes are acceptable, so are ghetto jokes. If right-wing Christian jokes are acceptable, then so are right-wing Muslim jokes. And that is just a couple of examples. That great comedians make fun of people that deserve to be made fun of. Instead of picking out one side and hammering them, while they’re trying to defend everyone else. 

You can also see this post at The Daily Journal, on Blogger.