PTC Wants You to Thank AGs That Supported California

October 19, 2010 -

The Parents Television Council (PTC) is urging its ranks to thank attorneys-general from the states that supported the California side in the Schwarzenegger vs. EMA case now before the Supreme Court.

The PTC’s website features the mailing and email addresses for AGs from Connecticut, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Texas and Virgina in order to make the process easier.

But what if you don’t live in one of the aforementioned states? The PTC then would urge you to “please write to thank California Governor Arnold Schwartzeneggar and California State Senator Leland Yee for creating and supporting this law.” Lee especially might appreciate such correspondence, as he, “in particular has come under attack from the videogame industry.”

Perhaps, you, dear readers, might utilize the list as a primer for which attorneys-general not to vote for, should they be up for reelection this year, or running for other office (like Connecticut’s own Dick Blumenthal, who is gunning for a Senate seat).

It’s probably not advisable to look to the Governator for letter-writing tips however, even though he wields a mean letter-opener.

Comments

Re: PTC Wants You to Thank AGs That Supported California

Yee has been under attack?  Since when?  I like the guy, even though I don't agree with him.  At least he's civil with us, unlike he-who-shall-not-be-named.  Hell, I wish there were more politicians who behaved as if the people opposed them were still human beings.

Re: PTC Wants You to Thank AGs That Supported California

Well, I now know who to send my letter to, thank you.

Re: PTC Wants You to Thank AGs That Supported California

I'm not sure that the PTC quite understands the concept of "attacking".  Yee and these buffoons are the ones trying to censor the game industry.  The response to this would be known as defending.

-Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person's fear of their own freedom-

Re: PTC Wants You to Thank AGs That Supported California

 This proves how ridiculous the PTC is:

http://www.parentstv.org/PTC/publications/bw/2010/0924worst.asp

Re: PTC Wants You to Thank AGs That Supported California

Wow.   Their logic is kinda scary... 'the american people own the airwaves, so do what we say!'

Re: PTC Wants You to Thank AGs That Supported California

A more accruate statement "We the PTC own the networks, so we will bully them into doing what we want.

Re: PTC Wants You to Thank AGs That Supported California

I will not thank anyone that wants to take away my rights!

http://www.magicinkgaming.com/

Re: PTC Wants You to Thank AGs That Supported California

Considering that Minnesota and it's taxpayers got burned with the legal fees from one of the past game-legislation efforts, I took the email provided and voiced my disappointment that the AG failed to learn anything from that incident. I most likely will not be voting for Lori Swanson any time soon.

 

Re: PTC Wants Idiots to Thank AGs That Supported California

I'll "thank" them when California inveitably loses their case before SCOTUS. Thank those motards for wasting taxpayer money on a show of support for anti-American ideals, for supporting a state that wasted its taxpayer money on a doomed appeal that could have better served for more useful purposes.

Thanked? No, the ten AG's that supported California deserve condemnation than gratitude that they didn't earn or deserve.

Geaux Saints, Geaux Tigers, Geaux Hornets, Jack Thompson can geaux chase a chupacabra. Hell will stay frozen over for quite a while since the Saints won the Super Bowl.

Geaux Saints, Geaux Tigers, Geaux Pelicans. Solidarity for the Saints = No retreat, no surrender. 2013 = Saints' revenge on the NFL. Even through the darkest days, this fire burns always.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Andrew EisenNow, having said that, what sites are you reading that are claiming that if "you self-identify as a Gamer, you're immediately the problem" or that gamers are "obligated to stop harassment"? Or was that hyperbole too?09/21/2014 - 1:03am
Andrew EisenFirst of all, ONE person in the Shout box suggested an obligation to call harassers out on their harassing but only after YOU brought it up. Plus, Techno said "when you see it happening." If you don't see it, you're not under any obligation.09/21/2014 - 1:02am
Sleaker@Craig R. - at this point I don't even know what the hashtags are suppsed to be in support of. what does GamerGate actually signify.09/21/2014 - 12:21am
Sleaker@AE - Hyperbole for the first 2, but it seems like some of the comments in the shout are attempting to place blame on fellow gamers because they aren't actively telling people to stop harassing even though they don't necessarily know anyone that has.09/21/2014 - 12:16am
Andrew EisenSleaker - Who the heck are you reading that is claiming "all gamers are bad," we "need to pass laws or judgement on all gamers," that if "you self-identify as a Gamer, you're immediately the problem," or that gamers are "obligated to stop harassment"?09/20/2014 - 9:44pm
erthwjimhe swatted more than just krebs, I think he swatted 30 people http://krebsonsecurity.com/2014/05/teen-arrested-for-30-swattings-bomb-threats/09/20/2014 - 9:31pm
Craig R.Btw, the guy who swatted security expert Brian Krebs? He got picked up recently. It can be done.09/20/2014 - 8:55pm
Craig R.Such things are not done in a vacuum... hence why the 4chan and other logs show what fools you've all been, tricked into doing the trolls' work09/20/2014 - 8:49pm
Sleaker@Technogeek - How do you call someone out that anonymously calls in a SWAT team, or sends threats to people?09/20/2014 - 7:04pm
Technogeek"It also doesn't mean you're obligated to stop harassment from all gamers that are doing so." I'd say you're certainly obligated to call them out when you see it happening.09/20/2014 - 5:17pm
SleakerNow if you disagree with anything in my last 2 posts then we obviously have a difference in world view, and wont come to any sort of agreement. I'm fine with that, maybe some people aren't?09/20/2014 - 5:09pm
SleakerIt also doesn't mean that just because a news outlet says that Gamers are the problem and you self-identify as a Gamer, you're immediately the problem. It also doesn't mean you're obligated to stop harassment from all gamers that are doing so.09/20/2014 - 4:59pm
SleakerJust to re-iterate: People getting harassed is wrong. Just because someone is harassed by so called 'gamers' doesn't mean that all gamers are bad. nor does it mean that you need to pass laws or judgement on all gamers.09/20/2014 - 4:56pm
SleakerAnd furthermore just because someone doesn't 'crusade against the evil' that doesn't make them the problem. You can have discussion with those around you. There's a thing called sphere of influence.09/20/2014 - 4:54pm
Sleaker@Conster - one person getting harassed is a 'problem' only so far as the harassee's are doing it. Just because a select few people choose to act like this doesn't make it widespread. Nor does it immediately make everyone responsible to put an end to it.09/20/2014 - 4:54pm
james_fudgeno worries09/20/2014 - 4:15pm
TechnogeekI misread james' comment as "we can't have a debate without threatening" there at first. Actually wound up posting a shout about death threats and "kill yourself" not technically being the same thing before I realized.09/20/2014 - 3:59pm
james_fudgeDon't hit me *cowers behind Andrew*09/20/2014 - 3:20pm
ConsterYou take that back right now, james, or else. *shakes fist menacingly*09/20/2014 - 3:00pm
james_fudgeOur community is awesome. We can have a debate without threatening to kill each other.09/20/2014 - 2:50pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician