Friday, February 13, 2009

Still Crying Wolf? Democrats Reviving Fairness Doctrine

Last November Patrick Ruffini wrote a provocative post entitled, "Crying Wolf on the Fairness Doctrine." Ruffini warned that conservatives were missing the big picture and wasting time and effort focusing on the left's interest in restoring regulation of political speech on the airwaves:

Sorry to burst anyone's bubble, but liberals are unlikely to upset the apple cart with alternative media ... The reimposition of the Fairness Doctrine went nowhere when Rush was on the rise in 1993, and it will go nowhere next year or the year, especially with conservative talk radio no longer the center of the universe.

So, why does it bother me that some people focus on the issue?

First off, even with the proliferation of media, there is only so much bandwidth in the media ecosystem for conservative opposition messages. Do you really want to waste it on a nothing-burger like the Fairness Doctrine? There are enough legitimate threats - endless bailouts, runaway deficit spending, nationalized health care, card check - that I don't think we can afford to throw away our limited political capital on a non-issue.
Well, considering the Democratic-left is on the verge of passing its $787 billion economic stimulus package (the House voted on straight party lines to approve the measure, which now goes to the Senate for a final vote), it's worth remember that so far this year talk radio - and Rush Limbaugh in particular - has already been extremely effective in leading conservative oppostion to the Obama administration's shift to state socialism. We're already seeing radical leftists attacking the GOP as "Talibanized Republicans," and that kind of language is certainly a precursor to legislative efforts to defeat the right's "insurgency" against Democratic fiscal profligacy and moral bankruptcy. Indeed, as CNN reports, plans to shut down right-wing criticism of the Democratic regime are building steam:

More and more Democrats in Congress are calling for action that Republicans warn could muzzle right-wing talk radio.

Representative Maurice Hinchey, a Democrat from New York is the latest to say he wants to bring back the "Fairness Doctrine," a federal regulation scrapped in 1987 that would require broadcasters to present opposing views on public issues.

"I think the Fairness Doctrine should be reinstated," Hinchey told CNNRadio. Hinchey says he could make it part of a bill he plans to introduce later this year overhauling radio and t-v ownership laws.

Listen: Hinchey says he wants to make talk-radio more fair.

Democratic Senators Debbie Stabenow of Michigan and Tom Harkin of Iowa added their voices recently to those calling for a return of the regulation.
I know personally that leftists are mental incompetents who are eternal impotent from competing in the marketplace of ideas. Instead, they resort to fearmongering, intimidation, and threats of legal action to silence Americans of good moral standing from lifting the veil of Democratic totalitarianism. "Gird your loins, people."

6 comments:

Average American said...

I am 100% FOR the Fairness Doctrine being revived, as long as television and papers are also covered. Let Rush have a little competition, I'm sure he can handle it. In return, we get 1/2 the airtime on NBC, ABC, CBS, MSNBC, CNN, and a shitload of leftard tabloids. I'll take that deal anyday!

Donald Douglas said...

AA: It's not so much being for it or against it. The larger issue is Democratic totalitarianism. The right is ready to compete. The left not so much...

Ted said...

Sen. Gregg withdrew because (1) Obama’s chutzpah crossed the line and (2) Obama CANNOT put away his “birth certificate” issue.

1. Here’s the chutzpah: The Republicans didn’t get their act together enough to challenge Obama for not being constitutionally qualified to be President as an Article 2 “natural born citizen” so Obama’s White House steals the census from the Commerce Department against the specific instructions of the constitution itself — “actual enumeration” under Article 1.

2. Here’s the “birth certificate” issue: Since Obama’s earnest drive to convince the nation to weaken its economic strength through redistribution as well as weaken its national defense, COUPLED WITH HIS UNPRECEDENTED WHITE HOUSE TAKEOVER OF DECENNIAL CENSUS TAKING FROM THE COMMERCE DEPARTMENT, has confirmed the very threats to our Republic’s survival that the Constitution was designed to avert, it no longer is sustainable for the United States Supreme Court to refrain from exercising WHAT IS ITS ABSOLUTE CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY TO DEFEND THE NATION FROM UNLAWFUL USURPATION. The questions of Obama’s Kenyan birth and his father’s Kenyan/British citizenship (admitted on his own website) have been conflated by his sustained unwillingnes to supply his long form birth certificate now under seal, and compounded by his internet posting of a discredited ‘after-the-fact’ short form ‘certificate’. In the absence of these issues being acknowledged and addressed, IT IS MANIFEST THAT OBAMA REMAINS INELIGIBLE TO BE PRESIDENT UNDER ARTICLE 2 OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION. Being a 14th Amendment ‘citizen’ is not sufficient. A ‘President’ MUST BE an Article 2 ‘natural born citizen’ AS DEFINED BY THE FRAMERS’ INTENT.

Steve J. said...

It's about time serial liars like Limbaugh and Hannity are held accountable.

Average American said...

Ya, right Steve. Go drink another gallon of that koolaid you, dumb f###!

Anonymous said...

I love how this nation is full of people who believe the first thing they hear on the news or read in the paper without taking any sort of steps to look deeper into the issue. If you actually would listen to Rush and then do some research you would find that what he is saying holds merit. The televised media left SOO many things unreported it made me sick. This election was not over who was or was not the best candidate to them. It was 100% about getting the first black president elected to prove we are not a racist nation. That whole idea is a crock of shit. How many hate crimes do you see now days? Home many hangings lynchings job losses? Do some fucking research you mindless peons. You are the reason's we are in this mess. Plain and simple. How is anything he has proposed to do going to help us? Spending money that we do not have??? How many of you have credit cards? What happens when you spend money on your cards that you can not cover with your monthly income? You end up paying ALOT more in interest. We just got slammed with an 800+ billion credit card bill that we can not even come close to paying back in the next 50 years. All for a 14 dollar a week tax break. Now we have to deal with a lot more Gov regulating ever aspect of our lives. This bill is for everyone on well fare and the illegals to ensure the democrats hold office for a long time to come. You are now working to put food not only on your own tables but on the tables of everyone who is unwilling to work for a living. Read the stimulus bill. Actually read it. In fact I think it should be a requirement for everyone who voted for the man to read. You have no clue who you voted for or what he stands for. If you read it and pay attention you will understand that is NOT what you thought you were voting for. The whole campaign was a sham. Good luck to all we are going to need it...