Dems to Outlaw Free Speech on the Radio
- 10-22-2008, 02:58 PM
Dems to Outlaw Free Speech on the Radio
DEMS GET SET TO MUZZLE THE RIGHT - New York Post
Fairness Doctrine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I haven't heard anything about this on television stations, but it is all over conservative talk radio. Essentially, the concept is that all private radio stations must ensure that all political viewpoints receive equal airplay or face the wrath of the FCC.
Believe it or not this is very popular among democrats and has been to the supreme court and not been struck down. Supposedly the democratic congress has not enacted this bill yet out of fear of Bush's veto, but if Obama got elected they expect him not to veto. Also with the inclusion of two-three more "liberal" justices, this may stick.
There's also speculation that this would extend to private websites on the internet.
This is a grievous attack on free speech and scares the daylights out of me. Regulating ideas is one more step toward a totalitarian regime and in theory it should be fought tooth and nail by the ACLU. Fat chance.
- 10-22-2008, 04:36 PM
btw did you hear about obama purchasing ad space on video games...just another way to sway the vote, the vote of young, ignorant, uneducated, or a compilation of the three! he's votes are limited to how many people can fit on his ginormus bangwagon!
10-22-2008, 04:36 PM
10-22-2008, 04:39 PM
I like how the dems love to portray the Republican party as the police-state party.
Definitely the other way around, as we will see in the coming years.
10-22-2008, 04:43 PM
You'd think an organization like the ACLU would have the integrity to fight this. This is a BLATANT attempt to infringe on civil liberties. Just goes to show you who's side the ACLU is on.
This should be THE issue in this race. This shows the true colors of the democratic party and what their ultimate goals are.
10-23-2008, 12:14 PM
The GOP continues to use this as a scare tactic, and it never gets old (to their base) it seems...
It will never pass. You have kooks on both sides of the aisle that love the spotlight and say anything they can to obtain said spotlight. So it doesn't surprise me that one Democrat's words are suddenly being taken seriously near the election.
Obama himself is opposed to the measure - and I laugh at those like Nancy Pelosi who have offered veiled support to reinstate it. Liberals aren't 60 year olds listening to their radios. Rush vicodin Limbaugh, and the rest of the puppets preach to the choir. If conservatives rule the radio, so be it. Who cares?
Besides, it would never, ever survive a SCOTUS challenge.
10-23-2008, 12:42 PM
10-23-2008, 01:11 PM
Good work. Minimize the threat. Make it sound like Republicans are kooks for bringing up this issue, even though this is a purely Democratic issue.
10-23-2008, 01:43 PM
while I would never agree with this (fairness doctrine) hearing a republican complainnig about constitutional interpretation is always laughable to me, specifically when one looks at the 2nd amend.
10-23-2008, 02:06 PM
10-23-2008, 02:08 PM
10-23-2008, 02:12 PM
10-23-2008, 03:02 PM
Hopefully this will never be passed.
I don't think anyone should ever be coerced to tell both sides of any story.
Especially if they are in a position to influence others.
10-23-2008, 03:07 PM
10-23-2008, 03:10 PM
10-23-2008, 03:29 PM
10-23-2008, 03:33 PM
10-23-2008, 03:35 PM
10-23-2008, 03:40 PM
10-23-2008, 03:48 PM
Encourage Diversity in Media Ownership: Barack Obama believes that the nationís rules ensuring diversity of media ownership are critical to the public interest. Unfortunately, over the past several years, the Federal Communications Commission has promoted the concept of consolidation over diversity. As president, Obama will encourage diversity in the ownership of broadcast media, promote the development of new media outlets for expression of diverse viewpoints, and clarify the public interest obligations of broadcasters who occupy the nationís spectrum.
10-23-2008, 04:13 PM
The Fairness Doctrine was done away with BY the FCC after Justices Bork & Scalia ruled (Appeals Court for DC) that the FCC was not required to implement the fairness doctrine, citing 1st-Amendment considerations that (from my preliminary study) turned the meaning and purpose of the FD inside-out.
Not coincidentally, the actions that brought down the FD arose in the aftermath of the Iran-Contra scandal & IIRC pre-dated the rise of "conservative" talk-radio. Personally, I think there are questions there that need answering; if I can't find answers, I'll see what facts I can find, and then see if I can build an argument.
Or, perhaps I'll find out what I want to know. In that case, I'll act on what I know.
10-23-2008, 04:15 PM
10-23-2008, 04:28 PM
10-23-2008, 05:09 PM
10-23-2008, 08:14 PM
10-24-2008, 09:23 AM
10-24-2008, 09:26 AM
10-24-2008, 09:36 AM
What's really interesting about the FD is that it won't apply to NPR....a radio station funded by the government. Only private stations that have to pay their bills.
Also, Al Sharpton, a noted liberal democrat, has a program that is defined by the FCC as "entertainment", not "political talk". So under the FD you have Rush in your line up followed by Sharpton, then you would still need a "liberal" to balance things.
Too bad the FD didn't apply to Radio Free Europe. We could've had pro-freedom messages for one hour, followed pro-communist messages for the next hour. Obviously, people are entitled to all viewpoints.
Similar Forum Threads
- By Liftergym33 in forum LG SciencesReplies: 406Last Post: 11-27-2009, 05:43 AM
- By anabolicrhino in forum General ChatReplies: 12Last Post: 08-16-2007, 01:56 AM
- By CNorris in forum PoliticsReplies: 9Last Post: 08-06-2007, 01:26 AM
- By INFOHAZARD in forum PoliticsReplies: 24Last Post: 02-17-2005, 02:21 PM