#15 – I’m talking about a steady drumbeat from the drug addled hippies on forward. But, once in a while things really are broken. The problem with Newt’s crowd is that they didn’t follow through and also had to try and push everything past a Democratic President.

Never fear though – all that is good will end soon with the election of O’Vomit.

Maybe it’s because it’s a parody of our viewpoint to call fairness censorship.

We don’t want censorship, we want ALL KINDS of political opinions on the radio waves… not just 100% conservative, 100% of the time like in many US markets right now.

But that’s the problem. There ISN’T an open market of ideas when conservative media monopolies are allowed to shut out political opinions they don’t like, with the collusion of a conservative government.

… and to do it with publicity owned airwaves.

All the doctrine did is require broadcast stations to provide equal time to groups or individuals who took exception to something the station broadcast. That isn’t censorship, its courtesy. Talk radio was young then, and it was much more civilized (although not completely) because you always faced the possibility you would be challenged.

Since all the right wing hosts these days tend to just parrot the Republican talking points and the Drudge report, literally everything they say would be subject to challenge. Yes they have a reason to be worried, because they might actually have to WORK for their salaries if there were a fairness doctrine.

On a side note, did you ever noticed that the conservatives like to lump all liberals into the same bag? “Air America Sucks”. Yet you never hear them say “Clear Channel is great.” If you are going to attack liberal radio, at least name a host so you at least create the illusion that you actually have listened to one. This may come as a shock to you, but there are successful liberal hosts who don’t work for Air America.

And they would be subject to the fairness doctrine also, but none of the ones I’ve heard have a problem with that.

Chris

What’s fair about that? What’s open about that?”

What is fair about it is called the Open Market Place of Ideas where people buy and support ideas and arguments that they happen to find themselves in agreement with…and their BS detectors haven’t exploded into a million pieces after being exposed to it!

If you’re selling a POS product that NOBODY wants to buy, it will die a well-deserved death. Liberals are crying that people are mean because they won’t buy corrupt, self-serving, communistic, socialist garbage bullshit…what a shock!

The libidiot sheeple solution? FORCE THEM TO BUY IT! Oops, sorry, its America and you can’t force us. NAH NAH NAH!

People who see things anywhere close to this view are pure, “useful idiots.” I’m a conservative and I couldn’t go to Hell even if I tried, its already overflowing with tool liberal sheeple.

Bring on the so-called “Fairness Doctrine” and then see what immediately happens to the ultra-liberal Main Stream Media which includes the networks, CNN, etc. Suddenly, conservatives will have more national outlets than ever before even if it is forced upon the MSM by Supreme Court ruling to enforce the “Fairness Doctrine.”

Soon enough, libidiots everywhere will realize that they have opened a Conservative Pandora’s Box and will be beaten to death with their own arm.

It is absurd to equate Net Neutrality — a principle that promotes and protects free speech on the Internet — with any effort to regulate speech.
Sen. Kerry FCC Commissioner McDowell’s World

In reality, the FCC’s decision is not about regulation; it’s about law and order. If someone is caught red-handed committing a crime, their punishment is not regulation. It’s justice. Comcast was caught illegally blocking free speech and the free market on the Internet and now they are being punished for their crime. Punished not with a fine, but with a reasonable request. The FCC simply told Comcast to stop.

I saw the video and I think the FCC chairman was actually talking about net neutrality and was giving a very poor analogy regarding ISP’s and the fainess doctrine, he was trying to connect dots that just were not there.

Even so, do we really need a fairness doctrine for anything? I just turn it off or change the channel unlike those poor slobs in N. Korea that HAVE TO leave the ‘radio’ on in their homes.

90% of talk radio stations are conservative and many communities have no “lib” station at all.

What’s fair about that? What’s open about that?

The conservatives love being the only one with a microphone in vast swaths of America, so they can lied their heads off, unchallenged.

No, you’re confusing liberals with the conservatives’ “Contract with America” that was promised to fix a country that had totally gone off the rails in every regard.

Holy smokes, they made it worse. Those days seem pretty great now.

Since when do “bloggers” at the Heritage foundation have any sort of status to be instructing the FCC?