1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Apply for your adapter coupons even if you have satellite/cable

Discussion in 'Local Reception' started by samhevener, Jan 22, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. tcusta00

    tcusta00 Active Member

    7,911
    1
    Dec 31, 2007
    Semantics. The coupons can be exchanged for a box.

    It is what it is - they created a coupon program. I agree 100% about the horrible sense of entitlement people have in this country (witness: THIS THREAD) but you're turning this into a debate about changing our tax structure, even reverting back to Constitutionalism, which I don't necessarily disagree with, but that's not what we're all here for. But since we're obviously not letting this go, when was the last time you saw a Constitution Party, or any indy candidate for that matter, taken seriously on the national stage? Ross Perot? Hardly. Ron Paul is running repub because that's what most of these guys do to be "seen." We have a few of them in our local state legislature who are registered repubs. After super tuesday and the rest of the primaries when one of the main stream guys gets enough delegates for the nomination, Paul will be nominated as the Constitution Party's candidate at their convention end of April and he'll soon be forgotten, like the rest of the independent presidential candidates of history.

    Anyhow, I have a feeling these political/campaign posts will be modified or deleted.
     
  2. pratttech

    pratttech Legend

    169
    0
    Jan 13, 2008
    I really hope we don't get deleted. So long as we keep things civil would we? Imho such discussion is a very important part of Democracy and much more so in an election year. This discussion may belong in The OT, but it does seem somehow relevant to this rebate coupon discussion too or I would not have brought it up. In case we do thanks for your response and discussion so far.


    Hardly semantics. A coupon is not a converter box even if it subsidizes one. This is a bit off my point. Assuming your argument and I replace coupon with converter box-- Get your digital OTA analog converter box even if you have satellite/cable? Still doesn't make much sense and posits the same problem I described...

    Who are they? Maybe more semantics from your POV, but I still believe "we the people" must be reclaimed before we are permanently "we the corporations and PACs." Why of all the first world Democracies is the US the only one not giving candidates equal campaign coverage? (And don't consider this a Ron Paul issue-- he is actually out-raising McCain and Huckabee-- fear for Mitt!) Why are all our candidates for the past how many years only the overly wealthy who can afford to be seen? Where are we heading? Ever read cyberpunk? ;)

    Ron Paul is a long-time Republican and the only traditional one. He has run and been elected as a Republican for many years. In addition:
    He has never voted to raise taxes.
    He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
    He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
    He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
    He has never taken a government-paid junket.
    He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.
    He voted against the Patriot Act.
    He voted against regulating the Internet.
    He voted against the Iraq war.
    He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.
    He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.

    Ron Paul is what a true representative of the people should be and has somehow remained uncorrupted by Washington. No wonder the status quo doesn't want his word to get out. As for super Tuesday-- we'll have to see...

    With independents (or third-party candidates as you allude) in History they are up against a very entrenched system, but consider Teddy Roosevelt and the Bull Moose for the possibilities.
     
  3. tcusta00

    tcusta00 Active Member

    7,911
    1
    Dec 31, 2007
    But he's not electable (imho) in the november general. His ideas are too "radical"... if you consider radical sticking to our founding document by eliminating the excesses of social programs and taxes.

    And then there's the downright crazy things (that you're about to defend I'm sure) like "the central bank (fed) is trying to control the world" and "the government orchestrated 9/11 to force more controls on us." That kind of conspiracy theory is what's making him look like a quack to guys like me. Not looking good in Florida for him right now - 3%.

    Anyway, look at what GWB tried to do to save social security and he got shot down. Try to get a guy in the WH who's even more conservative than that! RP wants to eliminate social security, medicare/aid, and move straight to a consumption tax! He'll be a lame duck on day one. The democrats in Congress won't let him get a darn thing done! And hoping that repubs will get the house/senate back in 08 - pfttt. 10? maybe. 12, more likely, and boom, term's up, he hasn't gotten a thing done, except troops pulled out of Iraq and he's out. Repubs are fed up and won't give him the nom again for a second term.

    I still don't know what you mean by the media not "giving" him the attention that the other candidates get. This is a popularity contest! The guys with the money, connections and personality get the face time. He's not exactly the best looking, most articulate, likable fellow in the field. Not that that should be why they should get face time or votes, but again, it is what it is, and it ain't changing over night. I think he's doing a good job of opening people's minds and someday we may get back to basics in this country because of guys like him and his supporters. His is a campaign being run by his supporters, not by his his personal bankroll like mitt, or old-washington money and connections like John Mc. You could say the same about media facetime with Huck too! He's gotten snubbed as well.

    Anyway, now that we're waaaayyy off topic, this ought to be moved to the OT.

    I had two posts removed last week for saying something like "the converter box coupon program is just like other socialized programs that need fixing like social security and medicare" - which is why I said this would be removed. I don't know what the board policies are, but this string of posts has been more political than the comment I made last week! And one of the posts was in an OT forum!
     
  4. pratttech

    pratttech Legend

    169
    0
    Jan 13, 2008
    I'm not about to defend something that is not true! :lol:

    His ideas are radical to our entrenched entitlement establishment, but folks like to blow his ideas way out of all proportion as you now have done to discredit him. Before you jump to defend your post, I'd only ask that you do so with Ron Paul's own words not those of anyone purporting to speak for him.

    To others all I can say is that people should visit his campaign and read or listen to him for themselves. More than any other candidate he has years of his writings available for folks to make their own opinions on. He doesn't change his tune with the popular wind and that in itself makes him popular with many. You may not agree with his every opinion, but a President with integrity? Now that's a novel idea. :p

    GW - WoMD
    Bill - I did not have sexual relations with that woman...
    GSr - Read my lips. No new taxes.
    RR - I don't recall (contragate)
     
  5. tcusta00

    tcusta00 Active Member

    7,911
    1
    Dec 31, 2007
    So no pres is without scandal. And I'm sure RP will have his shortcomings. GW/GSr - those aren't integrity issues as far as I'm concerned. The former was a miscalculation but we destroyed a regime pent on genocide so people just need to let that go. The latter - Economic circumstances change. Hyperinflation takes its toll!

    I just personally don't think Paul's electable. Otherwise I might consider him, because I certainly don't agree with 100% of what "my" candidate believes in. Of course my original candidate was Fred, now Huck, soon to be Mc, as they drop out. I will support Paul sooner than look in the direction of Mitt though. Maybe Paul is banking on support by attrition of his competition!;)
     
  6. pratttech

    pratttech Legend

    169
    0
    Jan 13, 2008
    Well we'll agree to disagree on the integrity issue. Nothing wrong with destroying genocidal regimes, but let's be a little honest with ourselves. Iraq was at least a bit about GW's family vendetta and supposed oil stability for the US economic interests (kind of blew up on us didn't it ;)). WoMD were the excuse. There were a lot more genocidal regimes out there we could have gone after if we were truly in it for the humanitarian aspect, lol. As for Bush Sr.-- economic circumstances do change, but this was a campaign promise and that stings his integrity more heavily in my mind-- lying to get votes (of course that's never happened before :p). Maybe he shouldn't have promised what he couldn't assure? As for Ron gathering support through attrition, this picture is telling... :sure:
     
  7. audiomaster

    audiomaster DBSTalk Club Member

    382
    8
    Jun 24, 2004
    Does anyone know what the output of these boxes will be? Will it be like a modulator where you can pick the channel you want to set the TV to? In other words is it an RF signal via F connector? Or is it a video +stereo audio composite signal? I would think it would need to be both as the really old sets don't have line in jacks. Will they have S-video? Will they have remote controls? Seems that would be required also. With two boxes you could tune two channels and do PIP on one analog set! OK, I know thats a stretch! :new_Eyecr
     
  8. pratttech

    pratttech Legend

    169
    0
    Jan 13, 2008
    http://content.ce.org/dtv/converterQSG.pdf
     
  9. samhevener

    samhevener Godfather

    302
    0
    Feb 23, 2006
    My whole point in starting this thread is that all the nonsense with coupons and adapters is necessary because the TV broadcasters got greedy. The original switchover was to have happened when 85% of Americans owned DTVs. A great plan but the broadcasters couldn't wait. The excuse we have been given for the speedup is that the first responders need the frequencies. Nonsense, its the greedy TV broadcasters who don't want the expense of operating 2 TV transmitters. There are going to be some serious problems this fall and winter with the coupon program. [QUOT.



    It is what it is - they created a coupon program. I agree 100% about the horrible sense of entitlement people have in this country (witness: THIS THREAD) but you're turning this into a debate about changing our tax structure, even reverting back to Constitutionalism, which I don't necessarily disagree with, but that's not what we're all here for. But since we're obviously not letting this go, when was the last time you saw a Constitution Party, or any indy candidate for that matter, taken seriously on the national stage? Ross Perot? Hardly. Ron Paul is running repub because that's what most of these guys do to be "seen." We have a few of them in our local state legislature who are registered repubs. After super tuesday and the rest of the primaries when one of the main stream guys gets enough delegates for the nomination, Paul will be nominated as the Constitution Party's candidate at their convention end of April and he'll soon be forgotten, like the rest of the independent presidential candidates of history.

    Anyhow, I have a feeling these political/campaign posts will be modified or deleted.[/QUOTE]
     
  10. tcusta00

    tcusta00 Active Member

    7,911
    1
    Dec 31, 2007
    That's funny, because here's what I saw:

    I don't see the word "broadcaster" or "greed" anywhere in your OP. In fact, you didn't mention it in you next five responses over the ensuing week. It didn't come up until almost a week later when pratttech and I started to disagree with your ethics.
     
  11. pratttech

    pratttech Legend

    169
    0
    Jan 13, 2008
    One man's greed is another's business sense. Operating two infrastructures is arguably much more expensive than one and certainly cuts into the broadcaster's bottom line. Seems that they would have a vested interest in getting the transition completed as quickly as possible. Sort of like Warner Brothers being greedy deciding to only offer their movies in one format now, or that greedy D* going after all those ingenious folks who figured out a way to pirate their signal years back? Greed, lol-- the root of capitalism (and what mainstream stimulus packages bank on-- just give them more money to spend). Greed=business.
     
  12. tcusta00

    tcusta00 Active Member

    7,911
    1
    Dec 31, 2007
    Reminds me of one of the greatest movie quotes of all time:

     
  13. tcusta00

    tcusta00 Active Member

    7,911
    1
    Dec 31, 2007
  14. pratttech

    pratttech Legend

    169
    0
    Jan 13, 2008
    Yup-- starting to solidify some on both sides-- some more big news from Edwards. So far "He will not “endorse anyone at the moment,” aides told FOX News." You know both Hillary and Obama want that endoresment. :p
     
  15. tcusta00

    tcusta00 Active Member

    7,911
    1
    Dec 31, 2007
    Rumor yesterday was that he was dropping out in exchange for an endorsement of and AG position in Obama's white house.
     
  16. TBoneit

    TBoneit Hall Of Fame

    2,294
    7
    Jul 27, 2006
    [/QUOTE]

    Your govenrment got greedy by wanting those valuable airwaves back to auction off. Do you really think the broadcasters wanted to have to spend all that money to go HD? Nope.
     
  17. tcusta00

    tcusta00 Active Member

    7,911
    1
    Dec 31, 2007
    I was under the impression they were giving the analogs to first responders. After further research though I see you're right...

    http://www.dtvanswers.com/dtv_why.html

    "...the analog turn-off will also free up parts of the airwaves to provide wireless spectrum for future innovative services by entrepreneurs."

    Not exactly shocking though. :nono2:
     
  18. pratttech

    pratttech Legend

    169
    0
    Jan 13, 2008
    FCC Auctions are nothing new...

    Since 1994, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has conducted auctions of licenses for electromagnetic spectrum. These auctions are open to any eligible company or individual that submits an application and upfront payment, and is found to be a qualified bidder by the Commission.

    FCC auctions are conducted electronically and are accessible over the Internet. Thus, qualified bidders can place bids from the comfort of their home or office. Further, anyone with access to a computer with a web browser can follow the progress of an auction and view the results of each round.

    In 1993 Congress passed the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act, which gave the Commission authority to use competitive bidding to choose from among two or more mutually exclusive applications for an initial license. Prior to this historic legislation, the Commission mainly relied upon comparative hearings and lotteries to select a single licensee from a pool of mutually exclusive applicants for a license. The Commission has found that spectrum auctions more effectively assign licenses than either comparative hearings or lotteries. The auction approach is intended to award the licenses to those who will use them most effectively. Additionally, by using auctions, the Commission has reduced the average time from initial application to license grant to less than one year, and the public is now receiving the direct financial benefit from the award of licenses.

    In the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, Congress extended and expanded the FCC's auction authority. The Act requires the FCC to use auctions to resolve mutually exclusive applications for initial licenses unless certain exemptions apply, including exemptions for public safety radio services, digital television licenses to replace analog licenses, and non-commercial educational and public broadcast stations.
     
  19. Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,579
    376
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    Yep... the TV broadcasters really didn't want to do this transition... that's why it keeps getting delayed from when it was supposed to happen. Many stations are being dragged kicking and screaming.

    The TV stations really don't get anything out of this deal... they have to spend more money on new equipment, but don't make any more money for their advertisements or anything... so the TV stations would have preferred to wait as long as they could, which some are still doing.
     
  20. tcusta00

    tcusta00 Active Member

    7,911
    1
    Dec 31, 2007
    Glad I have D* is all I can say. My shed will need a 50' run of cable come spring next year or I'll need a coupon. When I'm working out there it's nice to have a game on.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page