House Speaker Pelosi is hinting at reinstating the Fairness Doctrine, and many of her liberal colleagues in Congress are doing the same in both chambers. Alleging the press isnt balanced, they say government should be making sure all viewpoints meaning the lefts are fairly represented. I agree the press isnt balanced, but Mrs. Pelosi has it backward; liberalism dominates the press, including the three major networks and most major newspapers.

Though originally the Fairness Doctrine did not require opposing time be equal, it came to be the standard. The concern at the time was the prevention of a single viewpoint from dominating the news and biasing the people.

By the 1980s, there were many radio and TV stations available. And many believed the Fairness Doctrine was unconstitutional in any event. So in 1987, Ronald Reagans Federal Communications Commission repealed the Fairness Doctrine, opening every press outlet to freely decide what content to carry. The Democrat-controlled Congress at the time passed legislation to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine, but President Reagan vetoed the bill.

This led to the birth of talk radio.

The doctrines reinstatement would kill conservative talk radio. Radio stations that carry Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Glenn Beck would have to create liberal shows of equal length. And when those shows fail to make money and the stations take a loss, their only option in cancelling those shows would be to cancel the conservative shows as well.

Free speech would lose. Americans would lose.

Religious freedom is also under assault. Center stage is Californias same-sex marriage policy imposed by an activist judiciary. Already activist groups are talking about going after the tax-exempt status of churches that refuse to perform same-sex marriages. Others discuss how they can sue business vendors who refuse to provide services to same-sex marriage ceremonies or receptions. Still others are talking about making charities run by churches that oppose same-sex marriage ineligible to continue as non-profit organizations.

This line of thinking and liberal assault also is found in what Senator Barack Obama promises to do with faith-based initiatives. He says he would institute new regulations under which an organization cannot base hiring decisions on the applicants beliefs and still be eligible for aid. In other words, a Baptist homeless shelter could not refuse to hire an atheist for not believing Baptist or any religious articles of faith.

All these actions cut to the core of the First Amendment. In the 1970s, pop psychologists used the term micro-debilitating aggressions. It referred to the compounding of negative threats until the result was much worse than each threat taken on its own. The left is doing the same with its attack on our free speech and religious liberty. Continued...