Thursday, February 12, 2009
|
|
It's Not Just the Fairness Doctrine
|
|
Posted by:
Ericka Andersen at
10:14 PM
|
The Fairness Doctrine, otherwise known as the un-Fairness Doctrine, never seems to go away. The ridiculous notion that radio stations be required to have equal balance of liberal and conservative shows instead of relying on audience and marketing demands is the gist of this legislation.
Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN), a former talk show host, has campaigned aggressively against reviving the Doctrine but the issue surfaced today when Michigan Sen. Debbie Stabenow said it was "time to be bringing accountability to the airwaves." When liberal radio host Bill Press asked he she would push the issue, she agreed to do so. It turns out, Stabenow is married to a radio talk show executive as well.
During Eric Holder's Attorney General confirmation last month, it came up as well. When asked if it should be reinstated, Holder said he "wouldn't want to commit myself to something" on the issue. Michael G. Franc writes: "Holder’s evasive responses represent the first hint that the new Administration may re-open what has been 'settled doctrine' within the Department of Justice and in the courts for over two decades."
Obama has said he won't support the revival of the Fairness Doctrine but Reason points out a host of other ways he can influence the airwaves with regulations. Most notably, he can use "localism," an FCC rule invested in "competition and diversity" for service to benefit the local community. Obama recently nominated Julius Genachowski to replace FCC Chairman Kevin Martin and will "need only three votes from the five-member FCC to define localism his way," according to Human Events.
"I can't think of anything worse than to have government in a position to dictate the content of information going over public radio," said Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe in an interview with Fox News today. "The whole idea is that it has to be market driven. We have a lot of progressive or liberal radio shows but nobody listens to them and every time one tries to get on, they are not successful."
Obama knows taking on the Doctrine causes deafening uproar from conservatives so concerned citizens ought to be paying attention to the other ways in which talk radio may be manipulated.
|
|
It is now unstoppable. If Obama wants to remain in power then he dares not allow facts to come to light.
Most people are as abominably ignorant of economics as they are of quantum mechanics. However, they can be swayed (at times) by reasoning that connects ideas to their own experience.
The slow rejection of Global Warming hysteria is one such example, but could this happen if no popular media were allowed to speak about it? The answer that Obama & Co are banking on is "No".
All tyrants must control the media. The networks are all philosophically accepting of fascism even though the network anchors and reporters would be appalled at that suggestion. Their ignorance of the origins of their ideas is as great as their love of populist tyrants like Obama.
The only outlets for "unpatriotic" ideas (that smear will appear shortly just as it appeared in 1934) are AM radio and the internet. They both will be silenced within the year but not through the Fairness Doctrine. They will be silenced by new campaign finance laws that will count all public expressions of political ideas to be campaign contributions that organizations will have to report as income.
Since the organizations don't have the money to cover the taxes on the contributions of individual "contributors" the contributors themselves will be taxed.
You will be able to say whatever you want just as long as you pay the jizya to the state.
If there is anything that you want to say, better say if fast and hope that the Campaign Contribution Tax isn't retroactive. |
|
|
i used mtv as convienant example idiot. to roosevelt continued hoovers fuc$ed up econimic plan and added the new deal . reagan did manage too slow the growth but he in no way ended it !unfortunatley he was unable to kill it our country would be better off had he been able to. my problem with the republican party is this most of them were democrat progressive lite. no one could tell the difference policy wise between them mcain lacked the huevos to set himself truly apart from obama and gave us this final disaster so just go ahead become a democrat continue to play the class card and watch the rest of the jobs move to china or elsewhere . bottom line buisness is for making profits for the risk takers as much profit as they possibly can they are not to provide bullshi& social justice duties it's not their job to provide health care ,pensions anything beyond an agreed upon wage and working conditions with all the crap the goverment forces on us you should be dam@ed glad there are any jobs left . |
|
|
you constantly rant against corporations ,they gave much more money to the dems than they gave to the republicans. why? because the democrats love regulating and goverment regulation is what keeps large corporations in power . smaller companies can not comply with increasing regulation therefore they are bought out or go under .the corporations whine all the way to the bank ,they move a lot of jobs overseas and have little competion at home thus increasing profits in spite or because of increased regulation . unbridled captilism would cure this by increasing competion . what we have now is not socialism but a move toward facism where goverment and bigbuisness become partners and control competion and keep the serfs in line through increased social spending . thank you FDR it took 70 years but your new deal has finally fuc&ed us all. |
|
|
I can't possibly be serious about anything after you have informed us about your personal knowledge of Rush Limbaugh's buttocks!MLOL!How is the view from there!You will be from now on known as the Brown Salamander!LOL This will be my last posting on this thread,it's getting pretty deep.If you don't like the game then don't try to play,you have no skills. |
|
|
rush ,o'reilly, hannity ,olberman ,madow ect... are all hypocrytes ,everyone in the world is hypocritical at one time or another in thier lives . if you want the public airways to be" fair" then only have music and straight news with a deadpan delivery and no intonation indicating any sort of preference . the truth is it's pretty fair right now and trhe public has decided what they want to listen to . the only way to ensure this is competition . air america tried it and they started out very well funded and failed. they did not or were incapable of capturing any sort of significant audience.perhaps one day one of them will rise like rush did ,from a small station that manages to atract enough of an audience to move up to national syndication . so far their message does not resonate with the demographic group that listens to talk radio . i think mtv was the leftys version of talk rafdio in this election cycle should we force them to have an equal number of conservitive rappers or whatever on mtv? i think if we did you see mtv take a significant finacial hit . |
|
|
You have now submitted the funniest and most ridiculous piece of fiction here on TH.Now what is all this about you being a cyst on Rush Limbaugh's buttocks? |
|
|
Slimy your one sentence dedicated to O'Reilly feigning outrage is as transparent as the obvious obsession you and your fellow libs have for Rush.You just labored through four posts describing his marriages,his drug problem,who tells him what to say and yes you even claim to know his sexual preferences(of course you do that with everyone,you really should have that problem checked out)and you finally admit that you listen to him. You have mentioned Rush in many of your posts and you can triple that number when you went under your other name. Now I know why your kind sees no need for water-boarding,you give up information so willingly!I couldn't tell you if Chris Matthews,Keith Olbermann or al Franken is married,gay or does drugs,point is I don't care.If they come on I tune out but that doesn't seem true on the left.That ain't no asbestos bologna sandwich!(A little inside joke between me and my boy slimy) Like they say on the hardwood:Come back when you have a game boy!: This is way toooo easy. |
|
|
of course rush does what the people who write his check want, so do you and so does everyone else that has a job .i own my own buisness and i do what my customers want or i don't get paid . rush has a large audiencethat listens to what he opines about and this gives him and others like him , oprah for example , a lot of bargaining power . that audience is worth a lot of money to asdvertisers , but if their numbers drop significantly so does the amount of money advertisers are willing to pay . you say because the left has one the last couple of election cycles that this is proof that the public would like lefty radio . if so how come fox kicks msnbc as$ in the ratings? oreilly stomps madow and olberman night in night out. maybe some day there will be a lefty limbaugh that's at least entertaining but trying to legilate something that is run by market forces is assine . |
|
|
If you want to get everyone's attention in a restaurant don't yell fire,whisper Rush Limbaugh!Every voice will silence, necks will crane,eyes will widen,all senses come to full alert just to hear the conversation.Whenever I talk politics with a liberal Rush's name is immediately brought to the forefront,I say Pelosi they say rush,I say Reid they say Rush,I say Obama ,you guessed,Rush.I say he Is not an elected official but they still cry Rush.Just like the libs here on Town Hall they tell me they never tune in to Rush and then they proceed to tell me everything he said that day.If rush was live opposite Obama during the state of the Union,I submit he would have more libs listening to him than Obama did! So what drives these libs to Rush like moths to the flame.Is it his in your face fact based honesty they can't get from their side? Is it the fact that this self educated man is smarter than all their highly educated Ivy League graduates,after all is there any doubt what the outcome of a head to head debate between Obama,Reid,Geither etc and Rush would be?What power he possesses that the mere mentioning of his name unhinges the libs so much that the hideous contortions on their faces make Helen Thomas look like Jessica Simpson.Whatever it is,he is in their heads,he controls their physce,he troubles them and confounds them ,he ruins their day and that ain't bad! |
|
No delusions here ,Demographics ,as i stated play a large role as well. thats why you don't see children oriented adds on during desperate housewives . yeah they have a huge following but they are the wrong demographic for children advertising Trojan is better suited for desperate housewives you also don't see trojan advertising during the kiddie shows on saturday morning, i ocasionally listen to sirius left when i'm travelling ,there is a good reason Rush kicks their as$. they suck and they are boring .
P.S. rush still calls them feminazis and refers to nazi pelosi on pretty regular basis . |
|
|
Advertisers go with the largest audeince for their product .They look at the demographics and size of audience and spend their advertising dollars accordingly. biggest bang for the buck is what you look for . Like them or not rush ,hannity and other conservitives earn their spots by atracting larger audiences thus allowing stations to charge more for advertising during those time slots . the fairness doctrine would be a serious finacial blow to those am stations if they were forced to air programming based on so called fairness . political discourse being available in so many different medias shows the faiorness doctrine to be nothing less than a mcarthy style witch hunt and anything but fair. |
|
"Slimey got pushed from job after 6 years
What took them so long! It must have been your magnetic personality.Maybe you will have better luck next time,just don't talk to any of your coworkers!LOL"
Thanks for the laugh!
|
|
Now that your Idol has his bill passed you will not have to worry about layoffs,because he is going to SAVE or create 3or4 million jobs.Well it is a change from creating 4 million jobs but lets not quibble over a few million.So now we can expect nothing but happiness and contentment now that your boy has saved the day.Lets chat about this in 6months to see how its working out for you.Until then enjoy the sudden success and prosperity that Obama has bestowed upon us.
Love and peace. |
|
|
What took them so long! It must have been your magnetic personality.Maybe you will have better luck next time,just don't talk to any of your coworkers!LOL |
|
Slimy says...
"The problem is advertising dollars, not what the Public wants. THat's the problem we the Public DON'T have control, we have a few corporations that put up the capital and impose their message on us like a bunch of little robots being programmed.
Riddle me this einstein, do companies pay for advertising due to the number of listeners, or do listeners listen to talk radio because of the advertisers?
Spoken like a true leftwing, anti-free market, intolerante nut job...you are actually making Scarlett look like a left wing genius... |
|
"somehow I think that the administration and Congress would have been occupying jail cells. Or perhaps they would have been facing firing squads for treason. Either idea sounds pretty good."
So you think we - or somebody - should violently overthrow the elected national government? |
|
you don't really believe that most of us here at TH bother to read all of your wasted, noncompelling spews, do you.. Sorry Darlin... by the second one or so, I became immune to your filibustering.. |
|
|
Isn't is curious that this bunch is so frightened of the electorate? Within weeks of inauguration, Ovomit is telling people to whom they should listen, his minions are yapping about censorship, one flunky has already introduced legislation to attack gun ownership, and the organized crime family in Congress has purposefully deconstructed a electronic version of the massive spending orgy so that the public cannot read the bill. What are these crooks planning that is so bad that they can not allow free speech, sharing information and ideas, gun ownership, or scrutiny of governmental activity? Can anyone imagine that this country has degenerated to the point where we face a very real threat of dictatorship? I wonder what the founding fathers would have done had this administration been riding roughshod over the country during their times; somehow I think that the administration and Congress would have been occupying jail cells. Or perhaps they would have been facing firing squads for treason. Either idea sounds pretty good. |
|
|
I know asbestos is bad sal,especially when it is used in a lie but thanks for the warning Sal.That's why I didn't have any of that asbestos&balogna sandwich you were dishing out.BTW did that happen when you were working for the big co for thirty years or while you were in the military with your"brothers" or when you were in the Coast guard.You must be about 120years old! LOL |
|
|
It all depends on who defines the word "fair". Remember, the Great Philanderer even said it all depends on what "is" is. |
|
|
Since when is there Fairness in a Dictatorship? |
|
"And Now that the Democrats are firmly in Control of Congress and the White House, they have promised to make it a reality again soon!"
No they haven't. Forget about this and go see if there are any Communists hiding under your bed.
|
|
The sad thing is that this listed liberal radio as "progressive"!! A liberal hates to be called a liberal. Some stats on radio listenership.
These numbers are represented from 2007 data compiled by CAP.
They were broken out in a US Map but I put them here.
2,570: Hours of conservative talk broadcast by those radio stations each day.
254: Hours of progressive talk broadcast by those stations each day.
92: Percentage of those stations (236 out of 257) that broadcast no progressive programming.
91: Percentage of total weekday talk programming that is conservative.
100: Percentage of news/talk radio in Dallas, Houston, and Philadelphia that is conservative.
69: Percent of news/talk radio in L.A. and San Francisco that is conservative.
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2007/07/numbers_radi o.html
|
|
The Fairness Doctrine is rearing its ugly head again. And Now that the Democrats are firmly in Control of Congress and the White House, they have promised to make it a reality again soon!
Americans must speak out and let Congress know we DO NOT want to have the airwaves monitored and censored for political content!
Click the following link and join the campaign by signing the petition and then sending a FAX to your members of congress and say NO FAIRNESS DOCTRINE!
http://www.conservativeoutpost.com/campaign/stop_fairness_d octrine |
|
The Fairness Doctrine is rearing its ugly head again. And Now that the Democrats are firmly in Control of Congress and the White House, they have promised to make it a reality again soon!
Americans must speak out and let Congress know we DO NOT want to have the airwaves monitored and censored for political content!
Click the following link and join the campaign by signing the petition and then sending a FAX to your members of congress and say NO |
|
You sound very jealous. Too bad. Like I said, if you people don't care about the fairness doctrine, why the hell are you bitching and moaning about the level of conservatives versus libs? It's hypocritical at best.
"You might want to notice that his audience isn't growing, and the Fairness Doctrine hasn't played a part in that at all. The internet has."
Well, again, Rush and his colleagues have great followings. The point is not that the audience is shrinking.
It IS that he has 20 million listeners and you people don't even garner a fraction of that.
Repeat after me: It cannot be legislated, no matter how bad they want it. |
|
"The Fairness Doctrine, otherwise known as the un-Fairness Doctrine, never seems to go away."
That's correct. The reason is that the right wing so enjoys getting themselves whipped into a lather that they continue bringing it up. The minor fact that hardly any liberals are in favor of bringing back the Fairness Doctrine isn't going to stop them. The only place you hear anything about the Fairness Doctrine is at hysterical right-wing web sites. |
|
political discussion, telling people what they can and cannot say, punishing people who do not follow the government's dictates on what should be allowed to be said over the airwaves. Does it get any more unAmerican than that? |
|
The notion of "fairness" is an insane concept. The only logical end to fairness is complete and total destruction of anything that is based upon it.
If A can do this, then B is allowed that. If A and B cand do such and such, the D,E, F should be allowed to do this that and the other. And it just keeps going -- the last one always justifies the next one.
And of course the "Fairness Doctrine" is a scam. But if we were to take it at face value or providing equal time for opposing view points, where would that end? If we need more Liberal viewpoints on the radio to balance Conservatives, what about Libertarians shouldn't they have more time? And what about those not affiliated with a particular political leaning or ideology, shouldn't they be heard? And if most, if not all are in English, should those who speak Spanish be left-out?
It would just keep going and going...until it became a complete and total mess. Just like everything does when you invoke the notion of "fairness" into it. |
|
Raelei writes "In spite of the fact that the Republican has an army of radio and television personalities working on their behalf"
Surveys have confirmed that some 90% of the news media is left wing Democrats and the same is true for University professors and Hollywood. Even in places (such as unions and many main stream churchs)) where the membership is near 50/50 politically, the leadership is often 100% liberal.
So, "me thinks you dust objects too much" or whatever that line is. |
|
obacrap will jump on the bandwagon to impose government on talk radio, as soon as he sees the opening, as will crooked holder, for now, the "associates" do the leg work, put out the feelers and forward the position, this is how the game is played.
bill press prides himself in being an obnoxious sob, which he can also add degenerate, convenient multi millionaire. press is all about spewing bs and making money, he has no soul.
Because many of the "conservatives" and "moderates" acted like sheep and bought into the lie of getting rid of Republicans, the "change" went from bad to worse. Also because of the ahole cheating acorn which the corrupted media coveniently ignores and the red welfare states, where the leaches roam.
The Republicans have so much on their plate, the people who truly love this country, believe in it's principles of true democracy, are the only hope. Is a lot to ask of the people, specially in such tough times but if they don't stand up these leaches, (led by the power and money manipulators, like clinton and the fakeacrats), who will settle for any form of government that will appease their pervetions, will destroy America.
We are being destroyed everyday and we don't even see it, we are being loothe to comfort, led by smooth lying talking mastered by bs/bj clinton and being duplicated by obacrap, "what a nice guy."
Wake up America !
|
|
and money grab.
Liberalism is dead in America. These are not liberals, these are power and money hungry individuals who manipulate the easily and willing self serving sheep, radical hating leftist and fakeacrats.
No true Liberal would want the government interfering in any way in anything, specially with the airwaves. LIBERAL comes from LIBERTY, even more than Libertarian but, these individuals, are degerates of conscious with no integrity. They are intellectual liars whose only alliance is to the destruction of the US and perversion. In essence everything about these leftsit radicals, fakeacrats are perverted beings, who have sold their souls.
Wacked out maxine millionaire communist waters, hiding behind her skin pigmentation (a racist herself) tells the oil companies "we will nationalize the oil," which is basically what they have done in controlling where the oil is. wacked out waters who could not win a dog catcher position in a fair contest, spews out her socialist, communist beliefs (while she is a millionaire) and yet it goes unquestioned. f u schutmer and now bj/bs clinton, spew out government control of the radio airwaves because his perverted side cannot compete in the competitive realm so as usual the liars and manipulators have to use government, the corrupted media and the sheep to seize more power under the cover of another lie. clinton with his manipulative expertise, programs the sheep with his lying statement "big money behind right wing talk radio," just like his "right wing conspirancy" and "he did not have relations" with that woman, all BS. As he seeks more power and more money and back on the public stage. clinton conveniently ignores "the free market," as he plays to his sheep, who conveniently go along to get their check and find some meaning behind their lazy lives at the expense of the producers.
|
|
Liberals don't care as much as you think they do about the Fairness Doctrine. In spite of the fact that the Republican has an army of radio and television personalities working on their behalf, the GOP still suffered a massive loss in the 2006 and 2008 elections. What this says is that even though Limbaugh may saturate the airwaves, his message isn't a winning one.
The difference from the 90's when the Fairness Doctrine SHOULD have been re-instated, and now, is the internet. We've seen over the past 8 years a huge change in how Americans can arm themselves with knowledge based on substance and fact. I do read DailyKos, but I verify and contrast their news with other sources that I know are less inclined towards ideology. Same here - I see your stories, follow the links and verify them with sources that are less ideologically inclined.
The point is, a growing number of Americans - who are now in the majority, I might add - are getting their information in a variety of ways, and that happens to stop someone like Rush Limbaugh cold. You might want to notice that his audience isn't growing, and the Fairness Doctrine hasn't played a part in that at all. The internet has. |
|
|
We will allow, I mean force, AM radio to have equal time. If the same occurs on network and cable tv, magazines, the newspapers, the Colleges and Universites etc. |
|
You are correct. The new line of attack is "localism" which is another red herring. Most stations that carry the syndicated stuff also have local shows. They certainly carry local news, weather, and traffic to serve to "locals".
Just another shrewd attempt to silence people the left disagree with.... |
|
There is nothing fair about it. It is named because it is a lie, sold under a label so that the public who studies very little will be lead to believe it is "fair" it should be called for what it is.
"Government Control of what you hear". ILBTARDS cannot create and deliver a show that maintains advertiser and compels listeners to return. Period. SO now government, will under the guise of a LIE, force LIBTARDS on the air to spew their nonsense.
White Salamander, you really need to get educated before you open your mouth. Little of what you write has any value. |
|
Lilly, it is a shame that Rachel Maddow doesn't use her doctorate, but is so consumed by liberal talking points.
She does not beat O'Reilly (well, on some rare nights in one narrow demographic) and has about a third of the viewership that O'Reilly gets. |
|
|
|
Localism is probably a bigger threat because it will pass under the radar and would shut down big syndication operations - such as Limbaugh. So would reducing the license period to 2 years and allowing community groups the sole right to approve or oppose the licensee - another Obama proposal. Obama will do what he has to to pay off his MSM supporters and save them from near term bankruptcy. But Limbaugh is well positioned to make a complete transition to the internet if he is banned from AM broadcast. He is probably better positioned than anyone for this.
So the Libs will need to regulate the content going over the internet. There are many legal excuses that can be used to do this, and you can be sure of one thing. The Libs will be extremely creative about doing it in a way that passes Supreme Court muster. |
|
USED to have Beck, USED to have Tucker....USED to have is the operative term there einstein. (Carlson is not even that conservative)...Dobbs I would say is more Libertarian than conservative. But there we are again, who will referee what is what?
So you return to the argument that the "public" owns the airwaves argument"...well the public seems to like the current programming and the "public" votes by way of their support and listenership, thus advertisement dollars thus the financial viability and independence of such programming. The "public" is not the one clammoring for a change, only the politicians that want to deter and censor uncomfortable or unflattering free speach.
You are passing Scarlett and Munck as the most ignorant smart person that posts here. |
|
Wouldn't it be something if our first black president is the one credited with abridging the First Amendment?
I'm with vonryansexpress, let them try. This will be a Democrat PR disaster. I can see the court challenges being filed as we speak.
|
|
I think it is great that Olberdorf, Maddow and Matthews have a place to spew their views. They could be on 24/7 and I wouldn't care whatsoever. I just don't watch,(apparently from the ratings I'm not alone), but I would defend their right to have a show if the stations and the advertisors sponsor it.
My objection, however, is FORCING it on us. That's why it's erroneously named the fairness doctrine. |
|
Right on. There are hardly any conservative TV shows except on Fox. Can't stand to watch the majority of TV shows because they are so far left slanted. Shows like the View (group of frustrated old hags), the alphabet channels (particularly in the morning), MSNBC, most of CNN's fare and on and on. In my opinion even FOX's O'Reilly is so full of himself I can't watch for long and then there is Colmes, Rivera and "many" of FOX's far left contributors, especially on O'Reilly.
Limbaugh is a breath of fresh air and that is why he has so many loyal fans. Most rental cars I get into are tuned to Rush (if not I leave them there). |
|
|
Sal this could be your big break.Think of all the anecdotes you could say on the air like you do here on TH.The story of how you worked for a large co for 30yrs and got screwed or the one about being a member of the military and the Coast guard or how some family member died of some asbestos poisoning or latex exposure you could have the other two trolls from TH as guests and you could discuss in length all the different names you employ.Outstanding.LOL |
|
When people shoot down that moron Slime-O-Whiner like the scud missle he is.
You know that scud that gets launched with little idea where it will ever land. |
|
Re "Why would anybody listen to a gay liberal hack": are you possibly talking about Rachel Maddow, since she is both gay and liberal? Just wondering, because a few people seem to be listening to her for an hour every night, prime-time. Google "Maddow ratings" and see what comes up. Maddow has beaten (in the ratings) not only her liberal mentor Keith Olbermann, but conservative Bill O'Reilly and neutral Larry King. She doubled MSNBC's ratings the first month she was on. She is enormously popular. You should get out more.
PS I'm not she qualifies for the title "hack" since she has some pretty solid expertise to back up her comments---did you know she's got a PhD in Political Science from Oxford (that's a university in England, William). "Rachel [the Hack" is actually Dr Maddow. |
|
If you are so concerned about having competing viewpoints on the radio (and I agree that there should be), then why don't you gather the start-up capital and launch your own liberal talk network? You could call it Airhead America and staff it with such luminaries as Al Franken, Randi Rhodes, Janeane Garofalo and other examples of liberal intellectual prowess. Then you could file for bankruptcy because nobody wants to listen to your nonsense.
The differing points of view are out there for anyone to listen to if they want. The problem for liberals is that nobody wants their point of view. If they did then Airhead America would have succeeded. |
|
Re "Are you saying that under the Fairness Doctrine, [liberal media would would have to add conservative voices]": Lou Dobbs, Jack Cafferty, and Glenn Beck have been regulars on CNN and MSNBC; Beck's move to FOX is recent. William Kristof was a regular columnist in the New York Times, now replaced by David Brooks; George Will and Charles Krauthammer regularly appear in the mainstream media, both on TV and in print. And, were you not aware, Olberman and Maddow ARE the counterbalance to conservative voices already speaking---MSNBC is counterprogramming FOX. Or do you think that Hannity should be the only voice we hear on prime-time TV?
Let me point out something else. When Rachel Maddow was on Air America, conservatives laughed and laughed at how no-good she was. Now she has her own prime-time hour-long TV show and her ratings have been 'way up there since the first week she was on TV---she's a star. Some Americans love Rush Limbaugh, but some love Rachel Maddow. Our media should make room for all, which is what the Fairness Doctrine is all about. If you have an orange and I give you an apple, you don't have "no fruit", you have "two pieces of fruit". If you have Limbaugh and I give you Maddow, I haven't taped Limbaugh's mouth shut---you now have TWO voices, offering the public TWO points of view, and that is only FAIR, which is why it's called the FAIRness Doctrine. |
|
1. Another example of how the Dems/Libs will overreach as soon as they get power. This will boomerang on them.
2. Even if they do it - we have to realize that they actually have many more opinion outlets than the right (just talk radio) - once this pandora's box opens, we get to use it too - MSM Tv for example - or what about Universities - they get federal money - they'll need some regulation for balance too! |
|
|
Where is this transparency thing everyone eludes to? It's only going to worse and worse. Remember, just blame Bush! This should work for 2 or 3 years at least. |
|
|
I would take Rush's opinion over olbermanless, Maddow, mathews, NPR, Bennet or any other lib. Lib radio will just bankrupt the stations causing more downturn in the economy. You liberals always believe your rights are being trampled on, but your never willing to sacrafice for the rights. When the libs can sell their propaganda and increase profit in the talk radio buisness they will have the right to be there. And BTW, Why would 98% of the country listen to a gay liberal hack on the radio. |
|
|
First of all anyone can listen to any radio or TV station they wish. Most of MSM is very liberal and that is what they preach. NPR and PBS which are paid for with taxpayers dollars are liberal. Apparently this group of socialists is ready to have government run media so that we the public will only hear or see what they want. Guaranteed that it will not be equal time. The Libs will control. Hold on we are about to lose more and more of our freedoms and more and more of out paycheck with this group. |
|
A slippery slope you advocate. SO are you saying that CNN, MSNBC,ABC,CBS,NBC will have to also offer opposing view points on their broadcasts? SO MSNBC will have to offer balance to Matthews and Olberman? Be careful what you wish for. 90% of the media leans left so if you want to apply your doctrine evenly and fairly, the conservatives should have venues in the MSM that they don't presently have.
Also, who is going to "referee" what content is left, right, center, etc???
|
|
You're an idiot. Sorry, but, how many times has a liberal radio show made it...Al Franken and his nasty non-sensical self didn't make it.
Allan Colmes. The Obama station IN DC!! Yet conservative talk shows are making it all over the place. Nobody has said a liberal doesn't get a "FAIR" Chance. They just suck at the message.
Once again the village wants everyone to have the same successful outcome, and they are going to try and legislate it. WTF is that matter with you people? You cannot legislate success, smarts, or wealth. |
|
Wow, didn't know that! Your thought process is totally wrong on this. One of the things that Nixon was rightly maligned about is his use of the Fairness Doctrine. I don't want anybody to tell me what I should or should not be listening or watching!
That is not Freedom it is Stalinism! Remember Rush saved the AM dial from extinction. (And I thought Libs were against things going extinct!) This is silly anyway, if the Fairness Doctrine is re-instated, the media will move else where. Question: Do you want the Gov't telling you what Internet site you can go to? They will certainly head that way!
You can go about this two ways... 1 you can let corporations tell you what to listen and watch, voting with your dollars. or 2 you can let the Government tell you what to listen and watch AT THE POINT OF A GUN!
|
|
Oh yeah, some of those gloating, drunk on their power Dems continue to blather about squashing our First amendment Rights by bringing back the archaic Orwellian "Fairness Doctrine", or possibly some sneaky back door version of it.. Notice to two of the lib Attack Dogs..
Don't go there Harkins.. who plead guilty to mail fraud, and was one of those "Stolen Valor" military hero phonies..
Shut up, Debbie Stabenow.. this Hypocrite happens to be married to Tom Athans.. co-founder of a lib talk radio network misnamed Democracy Radio, and is the Executive Vice-President of Air America failed talk radio..
Come on you smug, cocky little political Thugs.. make our day.. |
|
begin to organize your trusted circle of influence, friends, family, associates, neighbors
HOLD meetings to draft and sign petitions:
IF necessary organize to Add an amendment to the constitution to preserve our rights to free speech.
WE THE PEOPLE speak to eachother through talk show hosts: It is our only venue and it is our right>
SORS and the libs control every other media resource including the internet.
SITES are shutting out free speech under the threats of SOROS and his Comrades around the world and in the USA |
|
1. NO VIOLATION OF OUR FREE SPEECH RIGHTS
2. IMPEACH OBAMA for violation of his oath of office |
|
AND petition to Impeach Obama for violating his oath of office !
FIRE UP THE PHONES, emails, letters
to their DC offices and HOME state offices
their party headquarters:
VOLUNE: |
|
the STIMULUS is a STEALTH bill which contains an 800 page pro-Socialist written section where it
says
that the PUBLICS pratitioners are to give treatment ONLY that WHICH
is
COST EFFECTIVE to GOVERNMENT and that GOV says is appropriate NOT
what is BENEFITIAL to make PUBLIC healthy and NOT what will keep the
PUBLIC alive and NOT what will protect the PUBLIC.
iT also states that any illness lets say osteoporosis for example, if
you are x percent chances of survival---they will let you DIE. Same
thing with any illness.
Also, the Bill states that the PUBLIC must meet GOVERNMENT
requirements to receive care and it leaves it up to GOVERNMENT to
decide what those REQUIREMENTS ARE. (politically and RELIGIOUS and otherwise.
You couple this nasty stimulus TOGETHER with the Sharia law and you have a BLANK CHECK for the MUSLIMS SHARIA LAW to REFUSE TO GRANT anyone medical aid if they are NON-MUSLIM. they will simply let everyone die.
|
|
The United Nations already voted to accept that SHARIA LAW and 24 hours later 30 christians were kicked out of land, property, home and possesions and money why??? Because they are NON-muslims and as a result of USA refusing to tie our exit to political progress Pakistan is NOW SHARIA LAW country and NON-muslims are classified as “servants’ whom are to be destitute.
You can bet that if American's allow themselves to be bamboozled by this so-called fairness doctrine which is sharia law---you can bet they aren't going to wait 24-48 hours before showing up at your house door or bank to kick everyone out of house home land property and money.
So, we must face the fact they ‘really” do hate US and it’s no longer safe to travel.
WE THE PEOPLE need to make it LEGALLY and LEGISLATIVELY clear to WASH DC that they are to protect our flag, our allegience, and our seal iron-clad and that WE THE PEOPLE will indeed have LONG, LONG memories should even “one” legislator attempt to “shirk” their responsibility to protect our freedoms.
|
|
Regarding the Fairness Doctrine, I have a contrarians view. Let the Democrats attempt to destroy talk radio using as a rational, that the right to having the medallion requires a tit for tat use the public airways.
Apart from the phosphorus burn of the fight and the hearings and the outcry that would attend the attempt, will be the inability/failure to implement the Fairness Doctrine, even if the Democrats succeed legislatively.
Stations could refuse to implement, take the cases to court, years would pass and the Supreme Court would find the legislation unconstitutional on any of many potential arguments against it.
Times have changed. The Fairness Doctrine of Lyndon Johnson's time would not pass Constitutional muster in today’s America.
The fight would be an inferno, and the implementation could be disregarded and litigated. The entire exercise would be pyrrhic for the proponents.
Might actually be good to smoke out the leftist totalitarians and make them appear for what they are.
|
|
SHARIA LAW is a marxist, communist/socialist/facist movement people, you cannot “secularize” it to make it generic and think it’s “OKAY”.
Anyone with some reasonable amount of intelligience already knows that Socialism/communism/facism/marxism is “not and okay” thing.
In addition, should the USA allow themselves to be bamboozled into accepting SHARIA LAW –it means forced female gen. mutilation will be the “norm” for the USA why??? because it’s SHARIA LAW and they condone it.
Talk about a holocaust of a different variety of people. it is why they run around shouting "praises to hitler" and for those whom don't think so--you need to be reading your computer because US naivety will cost everyone their homes,land, money and possessions. These people are a Hitler policy group operating by attempting to cloak themselves under the mantle of religion while they unequivocably attempt to target and holocaust not only jews this time; but everyone whom is non-muslim.
This law was deliberatly mislabeled "fairness doctrine" to hide the fact that this is a---Hitler policy law group which grants the Muslims unequivacable rights to forcibly---evict, extort, pillage, plunder and kill Non-muslims and all without prosecuting the Muslims for their crimes to Non-muslims because the Quoran says that Muslims are EXEMPT from prosecution for any/all crimes against Non-muslims and that any countries law, treaties, charters, and constitution are unenforcable against SHARIA LAW.
|
|
To the best of my knowledge there was never a legal challenge to the fairness doctrine that included the ACLU.
The only real challenge was made in Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. FCC in 1969. A private attorney represent Red Lion. The ACLU was not involved.
The ruling by the Supreme Court was 8-0 against the plaintiff. The Supreme Court ruled that broadcasters have no rights whatsoever regarding the content of broadcasts because of the scarcity of a resource (the relectromagnetic spectrum) that the government allowed some to use and denied to others.
Justice White stated that it was "idle to posit an unabridgeable First Amendment right to broadcast comparable to the right of every individual to speak, write, or publish."
In an interview Nadene Strossen of the ACLU said in 1994
Strossen: We have historically supported the Fairness Doctrine, although I've dissented from that position, as have other prominent people within the ACLU. Our basis for supporting it was so narrow and so historically contingent that I really have my doubts as to whether even the Fairness Doctrine itself would be reaffirmed if the ACLU National Board took another look at it. It was based on the notions of spectrum scarcity and of government having conveyed a public trust, if you will, to the broadcasters. Both facts have changed substantially. We have never taken that position with respect to any other media and certainly have never taken it with respect to print media.
So the ACLU might come to the defense of talk radio but in the present climate I doubt it. |
|
The other day we read how these people are attempting to justify their warped racist sharia law by actually stating that Americans whom protest against abortion are to be classified as “christian terrorists”.
the unmitigated gall and warped sense of mentality that is subscribed to this line of thinking is unfathomable.
Since when does anyone with half a brain have a hard time comprehending that “seeking to save the more Frail and helpless lives from being destroyed” hardly classifies anyone as “terrorist” whether christian or non-christian.
The “same way” these people ramble endlessly about "respect yet, these people attempt to consider it okay for the KORAN to claim that muslims are “superior” (yep it uses the word superior about it) race to non-muslims whom are “servants (yep it uses word servant about it) and that since non-muslims are classfied as “servants’ therefore they are to have NO home, No land, NO freedom, NO money, NO possesions and the non-muslims life can be killed with NO prosecution to the Muslim for having committed the killing of the non-muslim.
Also, they think it’s OKAY for the Koran to say that at a time “deemed appropriate” to the muslim the muslims are commanded to Jihad to forceably and financially take away NON-muslims, homes, land, possessions and money–even though the NON-muslims have worked hard for every penny and that NON-muslims are to be stripped of all possessions for the simple fact they are NON-Muslims. This is their spread the wealth campaign.
how many people don’t know that the term spread the wealth was used thru-out history by communist/marxist/socialist/facists.
Then these people go around claiming because “some” people are smart enough to see thru these sharia law henious bantor and call it the racist bantor that sharia law “really” are—the sharia law people attempt to claim anyone whom doesn’t agree with them is “racist’ or disrespectful
|
|
thinks he is Lincoln, part deux.
Retraces Lincoln's train route and swears in with Abe's bible.
Anyone for a night out at Ford's Theater?????? |
|
what he is not. That is the Saul Alinsky teaching and Obama is his disciple.
Obama is a leftist Marxist radical but he will charm people into thinking he is somewhere in the center or center left. He would like us to think that he is of the same honorable tradition as Lincoln. Lincoln defended and preserved the Constitution but Obama will seek to subvert it in order to pursue his political goals. |
|
"Since the fairness doctrine seems like a squashing of free speech - will the ACLU defend Rush Limbaugh?"
They've done it before, specifically in 2004 when they filed a "friend-of-court" motion on behalf of Limbaugh arguing state officials were wrong in seizing his medical records for their drug probe and in 2007 when he was attacked by government officials over his 'phony soldiers' comment. |
|
|
He never lied before did he? Please dems go for it,I beg you and try the card check while you are at it! The dems are sloppy drunk with power with no moral compass to guide them.Let them consume each other and take the rinos with them. This isn't going to take as long as I thought it would. |
|
|
Since the fairness doctrine seems like a squashing of free speech - will the ACLU defend Rush Limbaugh? |
|
Defined as a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc.,
Sound familiar? |
|
The "Fairness Doctrine" and "Card Check".
In my 54 years, I have NEVER heard of 2 more un-American policies than these.
Those 2 programs get implemented, we will have hit rock-bottom as a country. |
|
|
|