Fairness Doctrine Watch: The Dem campaign continues Update: Rep. Pence leads challenge to beat back threat…bill added
You know, it’s really funny. Last week, when I noted that the left-wing Center for American Progress report on talk radio was a clever part of the Dem campaign to resurrect the Fairness Doctrine, the nutroots scoffed. Fairness Doctrine? Who said anything about the Fairness Doctrine?
Who did?
Dennis Kucinich did.
Dianne Feinstein did.
Now, John Kerry has.
Drudge posted Kerry’s remarks on YouTube. The video notes say Kerry made the remarks to WNYC talk host Brian Lehrer (no date). The transcript:
“I think the Fairness Doctrine ought to be there and I also think equal time doctrine ought to come back. I mean these are the people who wiped out one of the most profound changes in the balance of the media is when the conservatives got rid of the equal time requirements. And the result is that, you know, they’ve been able to squeeze down and squeeze out opinion of opposing views and I think it’s been an important transition in the imbalance of our public…”
And The Hill reports:
House Republican lawmakers are preparing to fight anticipated Democratic efforts to regulate talk radio by reviving rules requiring stations to balance conservative hosts such as Rush Limbaugh with liberals such as Al Franken.
Conservatives fear that forcing stations to make equal time for liberal talk radio would cut into profits so drastically that radio executives would opt to scale back on conservative radio programming to avoid escalating costs and interference from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).
They say radio stations would take a financial hit if forced to air balanced programming because liberal talk radio has not proved itself to be as profitable as conservative radio. Air America, the liberal counterpunch to conservative talk radio, filed for bankruptcy in October.
But Democratic leaders say that government has a compelling interest to ensure that listeners are properly informed.
“It’s time to reinstitute the Fairness Doctrine,” said Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.). “I have this old-fashioned attitude that when Americans hear both sides of the story, they’re in a better position to make a decision.”
Alan Sears puts it simply: ‘Fairness Doctrine’ Is A Code Name For “Censorship”
When the Left fails in the marketplace, it turns to government.
It will take everything the GOP minority has to beat this back.
Rep. Mike Pence is ready. He’s introduced legislation today to combat the “Fairness” brigade. Here’s the press release:
In remarks to be presented on the floor of the U.S. House today, U.S. Congressman Mike Pence, a former radio talk show host, will discuss a bill he plans to introduce that would prevent reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine:
“The American people love a fair fight, especially where the issues of the day are debated. In a free market, fairness should be determined based upon equal opportunity, not equal results. As some voices are calling for Congress to enforce their idea of ‘fairness’ upon the American people, it would be good for us to proceed with caution whenever some would achieve their ‘fairness’ by limiting the freedom of others.
“Beginning in 1949, the Federal Communications Commission and its precursor developed and enforced the so-called Fairness Doctrine. The Fairness Doctrine required broadcasters to present controversial issues in a fair and balanced manner. However, because of the lack of clarity in the Commission’s ruling, broadcasters opted to offer non-controversial programming in lieu of hours of paperwork or countless legal fees.
“Thankfully, the FCC began to overturn its own ruling on the Fairness Doctrine in 1985. And, following that change in policy by the FCC and President Reagan’s veto of attempts to reinstate it, the results have been dramatic. The lifting of the Fairness Doctrine has opened the public airwaves to free and vigorous discussion of controversial issues by individuals of all political stripes.
“Since the demise of the Fairness Doctrine, talk radio has emerged as a dynamic forum for public debate and an asset to the nation.
“Unfortunately, in the name of fairness, there has been much talk in recent days about the need to level the playing field of radio broadcasting by restoring the Fairness Doctrine.
“A liberal think tank recently condemned what they called the ‘massive imbalance’ on the radio airwaves.
“Some elected officials have said that Congress should ‘deal with that problem’ and others are ‘looking at’ bringing back this outright regulation of the American political debate.
“Bringing back the Fairness Doctrine would amount to government control over political views expressed on the public airwaves. It is a dangerous proposal to suggest the government should be in the business of rationing free speech.
“Congress must take action to ensure that this archaic remnant of a bygone era of American radio does not return. There is nothing fair about the Fairness Doctrine.
“During my years in radio and television, I developed a great respect for a free and independent press. Since being in Congress, I have been the recipient of praise and criticism from broadcast media, but it has not changed my fundamental belief that a free and independent press must be vigorously defended by those who love liberty. It is with this in mind that I will introduce the Broadcaster Freedom Act.
“The Broadcaster Freedom Act will prohibit the Federal Communications Commission from prescribing rules, regulations, or policies that will reinstate the requirement that broadcasters present opposing viewpoints in controversial issues of public importance. The Broadcaster Freedom Act will prevent the FCC or any future President from reinstating the Fairness Doctrine. This legislation ensures true freedom and fairness will remain on our radio airwaves, and I would encourage my colleagues to cosponsor and support this bill.
“John F. Kennedy stated, ‘We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people.’”
Pence is holding a phone conference at 10:30am. Will report back shortly.
10:45am. I’m on the call now. Rep. Pence will be waging battle on two fronts. In addition to the Broadcaster Freedom Act, he has an amendment with GOP Reps. Hensarling and Flake that will be brought to the Financial Services Appropriations bill this week. The amendment, if allowed, would prevent funds from being used to enforce the Fairness Doctrine–and would put every member of Congress on record. The vote is expected before the end of the week.
Pence is currently seeking original co-sponsors for the Broadcaster Freedom Act. He noted that the fight will be a difficult one given the “fairness” mantle worn by the Left: “This is going to be a tall hill to climb.” Pence deemed the threat “a very serious threat–an existential threat to the conservative movement as it is currently defined.” He reiterated: “There’s nothing fair about the Fairness Doctrine.”
Here’s Pence’s bill. It’s short and to the point:
***
Rich Lowry’s column on the push is here. Rush Limbaugh responds here.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- The Return of the Fairness Doctrine : The American Pundit
- Hot Air » Blog Archive » The Unfairness Doctrine
- politicalpartypoop.com » Blog Archive » Fairness Doctrine Watch
- Pence's Bill now Available : The American Pundit
- Free In Idaho! » Blog Archive » Fairness and Power
- Lamentabili Sane » Blog Archive » Liberals vs. Free Press
- Bluey Blog | Robert B. Bluey » ‘There’s Nothing Fair About the Fairness Doctrine’
- Right Voices » Blog Archive » Becareful What You Wish For With The Unfairness Doctrine
- PAXALLES
- Pemptively Forging Amnesty Documents « Utah Rattler
- Babalu Blog
- Searchlight Crusade
- Bill's Bites
- Fairness siegte gegen Doktrin » Gegenstimme
- Searchlight Crusade
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Fairness Doctrine, John Kerry
Sister Toldjah
» The anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall – and how the far left still hasn’t given upAmSpecBlog
» Carly Fiorina's Twitter OpponentPundit & Pundette
» Intelligence agencies knew Hasan was a traitorLegal Insurrection
» Will The Truth Be Hasan's Last Victim?The Powers That Be
» US Intel Knew Hasan Was Trying to Contact Al QaedaNewsBusters.org
» NYT's Krugman Quotes Song Proving ObamaCare Opponents' Point
God forbid this moves forward, couldn’t one make a similar argument that opinion presented within the context of TV news would also require equal time? While I am by no means suggesting this go forward, considering the liberal slant to most of the MSM, it would be ironic if the Dems’ efforts to curtail conservative radio resulted in the curtailing of liberal ‘news’.
Maybe that is the perfect threatened poison pill to make this go away . . .
Hmmmm…censorship of Conservative radio prior to an election? Hardly surprising.
Life in this country is becoming a non-stop bad dream.
If the “justification” for imposing the Fairness Doctrine over radio is premised upon the federal ownership of the airwaves, why does this same rationale not apply to television networks, who also rely on the public airwaves? And, as to cable news, which carries advertising messages, surely this too would be considered “interstate or foreign commerce” within the meaning of Article I, Section 8, clause 3 of the Constitution, which Congress also has the power to regulate. So, if Congress really wants to revive the Fairness Doctrine, let’s make sure it applies to ALL of the media.
to wolverine20 — can you imagine a conservative senator drawing up a bill for a right-wing ‘fairness doctrine for the print & cable TV media’? HAHAHAHA
The buttholes @ the NYTimes, MSNBC, NEWSWEEK, TIME, CNN, WASH.POST, etc., wouldn’t know what to do….but I’ll bet they’d love to have the ratings that Rush, Hannity, O’Reilly, & FOX News enjoy.
Kerry’s transcript:
“I think the fairness doctrine ought to be there and I also think equal time doctrine ought to come back. I mean these are the people who wiped out one of the most profound changes in the balance of the media is when the Conservatives got rid of the equal time requirements. And the result is that they’ve been able to squeeze down and squeeze out. opinion of opposing view and I think its been an important transition in the imbalance of our public…”
Michelle-
You are right on the money with this one. It just troubles me that the ACLU will be on the same side of the fight. Yuck!
Someone should educate Senator Kerry that the only thing that “squeezed out” opinion of opposing views is the marketplace.
If there was a market for liberal talk radio – it would be on the air and doing well.
I compare this with all the stem-cell zealots. If there was a market for embryonic research – there would be private companies rushing to conduct it without a need for Government assistance.
Once again, the liberal mantra is – If we can’t get enough support for it – let’s legislate it.
What is stopping Kerry, Feinstein and the rest from getting their views out now? Fear stops them. None are willing to appear with Laura Ingraham, Hannity, O’Reilly, Rush, etc because they know that they can not win an honest debate based on facts. Memo to the liberals: Stopping an opposing viewpoint does not make you right.
In a worst case senario (passes senate and house) can we trust Bushco to veto?
The Democrats had “Air America” and it failed, the American people rejected them, so now they want to forcefully shove their ideology in people’s throat.
It does confirm what we always think of these Rats: they are communists in capitalistic clothes.
Is Durbin really that stupid? If he is, how does he keep getting elected?
It’s a simple fact – if I want liberal news, I listen to any of the networks, read any newspaper. When I want the other side I listen to talk radio. They have all the other media outlets now they want talk radio too.
Wonder if this will apply to NPR?
The Senate would filibuster it, and the President would veto it if they didn’t. It has ZERO chance of coming back.
Let’s see, destroy our national soveriegnty with amnesty, take away free speech, take away the right to keep and bear arms.
Can we start questioning thier patriotism ~now~?
I am so tired of these Liberals. Little children who don’t get their way make life miserable for all others. Now I can see why they sympathise with radical Muslims. All whining babies who don’t get their way.
It just doesn’t. Throughout the forty years this thing was in effect the TV news was just as leftist as it is now, and there was no attempt to use the so-called unFairness Doctrine to balance it.
Sure it does. In a couple years with a Dhimmicratic president and the likes of Trent Lott in the Senate, they can bring it back and probably make it worse.
My intended point was to suggest that a killer amendment, making it applicable to all forms of media, can be tried. That includes the print media (the
holy of holies, er, the vanguard of the proletariat?), which uses the arteries (i.e., roads) of interstate commerce to distribute their content. Congress prohibits child pornography based on its content, but does so through the interstate commerce clause. While print media content control would be unjustifiable by historical practice, and that pesky First Amendment, an argument could be made with a straight face that the media (ALL of the media) is subject to regulation by Congress. The Fairness Doctrine is a regulation that doesn’t theoretically exercise content control. Hence, propose a killer amendment that strikes at the heart of liberal media by applying the Fairness Doctrine to all forms of media.Honestly I think the whole thing is dumb, however wouldn’t the Dems be shooting themselves in the foot here?
I mean sure, they would get back talk radio time, but assuming they follow the letter of the doctrine, wouldn’t the repubs stand to make considerable gains in TV and print?
This is silly because it already is apparent that liberals don’t embrace talk radio as a medium. All these companies will be forced to hire liberal talk radio personalities only to discover that nobody is listening.
The Democrats have been quite bold in trying to silence conservative speech. This is just one of three methods they are trying. The others are the grassroots lobbying bill and the “hate speech” laws.
Whatever happened to the First Amendment? Why isn’t the ACLU all over this? (rhetorical question)
The Democrats and RINOs want to silence YOU. They want to silence dissent since it only serves to aggravate their pursuit of total power.
Ahh, things just keep getting better. Amnesty and the Fairness Doctrine are back from the dead and shambling around the halls of Congress…
In addition, add Hillary Clinton and Barbara Boxer to that list of those who want to censor conservative talk radio. Why? Because they can’t get over the fact that the liberal media get soundly trounced by conservative hosts on a daily basis.
Don’t think for one second this Unfairness Doctrine would apply to liberal media outlets.
Conservatives would have to give up the air time, and liberals would demand equal time, but does anyone honestly think a liberal station will ever put a real, bona fide conservative on their airwaves?
It’s not designed that way.
This is designed to shut up conservatives because we’re the biggest market in talk radio. Which means our ideas, our views, our opinions and – most importantly – our criticisms of liberals are being heard by lots of people.
And that drives the liberals crazy.
So if they can’t win in the marketplace of ideas, they resort to silencing the opposition.
And – if reinstated – don’t think the Unfairness Doctrine will be limited to radio for long.
Look for it to affect other “conservative” media forms (FoxNews, blogs, etc.) and television programming deemed “conservative” (i.e., stations like EWTN).
Don’t think for one second the liberals are ever really going to embrace the ideals of “tolerance” and “diversity”; they’re always thinking of some way to shout down the competition and silence dissenting voices.
As an aside, did anyone note Elizabeth Edward’s chastizing Ann Coulter to stop her “personal attacks”?
Who wants to bet that this was a planned, timed interaction designed to show people why we need the Unfairness Doctrine? That it was meant to show, without it, those mean conservatives will do nothing but run around and insult people?
As Mark Levin points out, Trent Lott also has a history of supporting the ‘Fairness Doctrine.’
This is big government attempting to stifle the voices that are for small government. In other words government fighting the efforts of it’s citizens to maintain their freedoms.
Fairness = stifling dissent of big government ?
Fairness = government controlled media ?
This is fairness according to Hugo Chavez and other socialist dictators.
Sgt. Tim. Trent Lott also has a history of sticking his size 13 foot in his fat piehole.
Don’t worry, comrades. The Ministry of Truth will form a Central Planning Committee for the People’s Media. After the purges, all will be well.
Trent Lott has not only threatened tlk radio, he has voted for the fairness doctrine. This bumbling Gollum is getting annoying ever since he lost his pretty Senate position,
I’m a registered MA voter and have been proud to support Kerry and Uncle Teddy in the past. (I know this puts me in a slim minority on this site.) However the former’s support for the Fairness Doctrine and the latter’s support of the current immigration legislation (amnesty doesn’t bother me as much as bureaucratic messes meant to please everyone while pleasing no one) is greatly disappointing.
I agree with you conservatives out there. Liberal ideas should be strong enough to survive on their own without government intrusion. I have faith in liberal ideas (I am prepared to be mocked for this).
Conservative talk radio is preaching to the choir anyways. Dems need to find something else to be worried about (ie IRAQ).
Before anyone “mocks” you, Rusty, allow me to welcome your viewpoint to the site.
If I lived in MA, I’d probably have grown up a liberal too. Hell, I almost did growing up in the Chicago suburbs!
I think you’ll be pleasantly surprised at the quality of the comments on this site. Most people are respectful of others viewpoints – even if they do have some fun with them. But we discourage nastiness and personal attacks.
(Now, who out there is going to make a liar out me?)
Ha. I welcome being mocked. I wouldn’t expect anything less from this site. It’s all in good fun, right?
My husband and I are sitting here trying to remember why the Fariness Doctrine died an unremarked death the last time it appeared. Near as we can recall it was because they could legislate the Doctrine, but they couldn’t legislate listener preferences and the media started losing money because much of it was just plain boring. They still can’t legislate listener preferences and the most interesting will still prevail I suspect. However there may have been other reasons?? Any one else present back then who recalls?
An alternate proposal.
If they insist on being fair, why not make it really fair, and have it apply to network television news?
Any time T.V. news quotes a body count with improper context, conservatives get equal air time. Any liberal comment at all gets equal air time during an equal time-slot for equal viewership.
Of course this is bad legislation, but hypothetically it could work to conservatives’ “advantage.”
“A liberal think tank recently condemned what they called the ‘massive imbalance’ on the radio airwaves.”
It takes a ‘think tank’ for them to figure that out?
Then it might take an army for them to figure out the left rules every other media type available to mankind. An army of think tank nit-wits.
It troubles me that they would want such overall media dominance… yet it does prove they can’t win the American people on their own agenda and ideas. If you don’t like it, we’ll force you to see it our way. Sounds familiar, huh.
He was and still is ALWAYS annoying. Conservatives sufferred along with and endured Lott’s pathetic kissing up to the Dems when he was minority leader BEFORE the 94 Republican takeover of Congress.
It’s just that NOW with internet news and blogs he can be directly targeted for his stupidity and collusion with the Dems.
He can no longer hide from (while he can still try to ignore) criticism, which is why he’d like to censor HIS critics with a revival of the unFairness Doctrine.
Now we just have to get Rusty to think that way with guns, economics and health care, and things will be much better!
Sorry Rusty, I’m trying to keep an open mind, and I’m not trying to be a total, but Teddy Kennedy? YEEEEECH! How on God’s green Earth can you vote for and support that murderous slimeball?
heh, my #36 should say ‘not to be a total jerk’, but you can have fun and fill in the blank if you want.
Rusty:
While I can’t guarantee no mocking from anyone else, I can tell you that comments as level-headed, fair, and reasonable as yours will never be mocked by this conservative.
You are right on. Sadly, it seems your representatives don’t feel this way. Their resurrection of the Unfairness Doctrine shows they believe that liberal ideas cannot stand on their own and that they have no faith in liberal ideas.
If they did, they’d feel the same way you do.
What happens if the “Fairness Doctrine” passes and radio stations are forced to cut conservative programs and those programs simply change their medium to streaming on the internet? Would that also be covered by the doctrine or would the liberals have to come up with some more creative legislation to get a 50/50 cut of the internet as well? They should spend more time on trying to figure out why no one is listening to them instead of trying to figure out how to force people to listen to them.
If the fairness doctrine is revived (as I’m sure it will be) I intend to call my legislators and pound like I have on immigration. This slap in the face of the Constitution is just another indication of the disconnect between the people and the Beltway.
I vote we build 2 fences: one at the border with Mexico, and one around D.C.
No likely to happen…
The orginal Doctrine was instituted when there were only a few radio stations in the entire country and no television. Today, there are countless sources for news and commentary from all ideological points of view. There’s no constitutional basis for it. There’s only liberal whining that they now have competition in the arena of ideas and they don’t like it. They’re being exposed for what they are.
It would never pass the Congress, much less the President, much less the Supreme Court.
Rusty, you sound more like a moderate Democrat rather than a liberal. Either way, thought provoking and respectful commentary is always welcome by this conservative.
Welcome aboard
This is beyond infuriating, and anyone who thinks applying this to print and television media would hurt liberals is, I believe, mistaken.
Remember, the application of this, ultimately is going to involve someone (or a committee of someones) arbitrating “fairness”, and all you have to do is look at the New York Times Public Editors to see how well that will work out.
The Democrats will simply install someone who operates from the perspective that the only bias in existence is a conservative one. The media will be divided into centrist content (which by its very definition doesn’t need to be balanced) which will include the major newspapers and the television news broadcasts on CBS, ABC, NBC, PBS, CNN and MSNBC, and evil conservative content (talk radio and Fox News).
Our jaws will be dropping over the bias, and the Fairness Doctrine arbiters will yawn, seeing absolutely no merit in the complaints.
I’d love to be able to say that this can’t happen, but we can’t bank on that. The Democrats are working overtime to lay the groundwork for it, and while they’re fooling the gullible with their pretense of fairness, the articulate critics who can expose the scam of it will not be able to easily get their voices heard.
Obviously we can’t depend on most of the Republicans in Congress to protect our interests, either. Indeed, so many of them will be falling all over each other to jump in board, not only to protect their own skullduggery and incompetence but also because, well, it’s good to be the king(s).
They’re baaaaack!
Someone should warn Sen. Kerry to be careful of what he wishes for. Bringing back the equal time rule might force our almighty TV news bureaus to air conservative opinions, even tell the truth, God forbid!
News is a commercial business operation and always has been. Any illusion that there is some kind of objectivity is purely contrived so as to have the viewers believe there isn’t an agenda. Content in whatever form is a vehicle to attract viewers, while the viewers are fodder for the advertisers.
The success of conservative talk-radio is a ringing endorsement of the free market system. Success is born out by the numbers. Where people have a choice, which is beyond what the main stream media once offered between ABC, CBS and NBC–a cooperative monopoly– we now have cable stations offering people a choice of multiple media outlets. However, the liberals who cry about fairness in everything except when they’re not in a position of authority are now moaning about not having their voices heard. Air America was a dismal failure because they produced and delivered a crap product. I’ve heard their talking heads’ shows and they’re gawd awful! No humor. No information. Just a lot of bitchin and blaming and not much else.
This just exposes what they are, Communist want a be’s.-
What I have failed to see yet is anybody mentioning the “fairness” in TV, print media, and let’s not forget the 9-1 ratio at which the media gives political contributions to democrats.
Are the Fienstien’s, Durbin’s, Hitlery, and Kerry going to mention ANY of that?
HYPOCRITE ALERT!!!
Oh I agree there is a lot of unfairness in broadcasting. Conseervatives got the radio and the liberals go the tv and print media. Liberals tend to deal in visual mediums since so much of what they say and do must be seen to be believed.
Conservatives manage to paint the picture, if you will, with words that excite the imagination and spark critical thinking.
Liberals tell you what to think and what your opinion is.
So to truly make it fair you require radio to devote so much time to dead air, err liberal radio shows and we demand that at least one newspaper with a national subscriber base be turned over to conservatives along with one network.
Sounds FAIR to me.
I’ve just sent a letter to my senator, Diane Feinstein of all people, urging her to not reinstate the “Fairness Doctrine” and instead to support Rep. Pence’s bill. Here’s hoping I’m not alone.
Because the State of Illinois is populated by morons.
And because of Chicago…
Pander to the Windy City, and you win elections.
It’s really time to remove the FCC and these communication control laws….NOW please…..
Censorship? Cool! As soon as the GOP is through giving away our country, I say they help the left as much as posssible on this. It’s for our own good, right…?
It’s not Illinois in total; it’s Chicago. I grew up in Chicago and love Chicago, but it’s Midwest Moonbat Central.
For the supporters of the “Fairness Doctrine”, a balanced point of view occurs when they sit on both sides of the scale.
Tomorrow June 28th, in Manhattan The 25th Annual International Radio Broadcasting Awards at the Tribeca Rooftop. Lifetime Achievement Award for their Contributions to the Broadcasting Industry, there are Seven Nominated, one of the Nominees is Don Imus for his Forty Plus Years in Radio. Anyone who knows the real story about what happened to Don Imus, google: Hillary’s Hit Man and Imus, Media Matters, George Soros, The Fairness Doctrine ect.. first they went after the Moderate Democrats and now they are going down their list. I am an Imus Fan, whether this targeted hit had happened to him or not, I would want him to WIN but you know if he does Win, It will be sticking it in the Eye of the Clintonistas. I have written a short blog with a link to the above subject.
Where was the Fairness Doctrine when they created National Public Raido
I have not heard one single conservative view ever aired on the station in all the many years I have scanned Through it. Thats been a long time.
“I have this old-fashioned attitude that when Americans hear both sides of the story, they’re in a better position to make a decision.”
Yes, right. Tell this to CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, PBS, all local affiliates across the nation, and print media. Let’s have it across the board if they want it, and see how these biased, left-wing organizations like it then.
The Pravda Doctrine
It makes me sick that we are even wasting cycles on this debate. gregorystephens said it best in his post # 39
“They should spend more time on trying to figure out why no one is listening to them instead of trying to figure out how to force people to listen to them.”
I don’t know…Milwaukee could give Chicago a run for its money.
Any of you who think that somehow, magically, the UnFairness Doctrine would be enforced on liberal programming are dead wrong.
Liberal stations will put on a “conservative” (someone they choose), who will basically pander to the left while they insist conservative stations put on “real”, hard-core liberals.
Don’t ever – for a second – think this Doctrine is going to in any way, shape, or form, apply equally to liberals and conservatives.
This is what will happen:
A station will have a successful conservative host. The UnFairness Doctrine will force said station to give airtime to a liberal host. The station won’t be able to afford it because, as we’ve seen, liberal talk radio fails miserably.
Because they can’t keep a liberal host on the air, and because the UnFairness Doctrine dictates they must do so, the station pulls the conservative host too because they can’t make ends meet.
It’s killing two birds with one stone: destroying capitalism and the free market (which liberals despise) and silencing conservatives.
And that’s what will happen with the UnFairness Doctrine. Nothing else.
So prepare for battle.
All this stuff -the fairness doctorine, immigration amnesty against the will of the people, brokered behind closed doors with attempts to push it through on procedural nightmares against the will of the people – is great great great fodder for Republican candidates in ‘08 if they only have the courage and communication skills. There was a time when politicians feared that kind of eventuality, but it’s apparent that the Dems are drunk with power and paranoid of opposing views which might imperil their current power base, an often clumsy combination which often leads to downfall.
“Not only did the Democrats attempt to raise taxes while maintaining a three-day workweek at the taxpayer’s expense, but they also tried to force dangerous immigration policy – immigration policy that would have left our country dangerously open to enemy attack, and tried to do so against the will of the American people who were 80 percent against it – but they also tried to take over the airwaves the way Hitler and Stalin did – the way the government in Venezuala recently did – by using Government to shut off opposing political viewpoints. This they did under the name of Fairness, my friends, and this, my friends, is the very core nature of the Democratic party as it stands today in America: corrupt, selfish and dangerously irresponsible. NOW is the time to take this country back!”
You know, this could all just turn out to be the yummy filling inside an otherwise lame tasting cupcake. All we now is to get a new host of candidates to replace the dealmakers in there now; cabdidates who have the fire in the belly and the personal charm to deliver the above hypothetical message at point-blank range not once, but at every opportunity, without fear or apology.
After all, taken practically, it’s nothing less than the truth.
The court of public opinion is available to all on the airways, on the WWW, newspapers, telephones, blogs, even “over the back fence”! Liberals, socialists, communists, as well as conservatives are free to present their views.
Having been defeated with logic, social-democrats are now trying to trample on our First Amendment rights. We fought a Revolution to rid ourselves of the King!
At least we have the ballot box—or do we?
There is a balance already. During all the conservative talk radio programs they have these things called news-breaks when the liberals espouse their opinion on what’s happening in the world.