I was recently questioned about the legitimacy of my denunciation of the Democrats desire to bring back the so-called 'Fairness doctrine...'
You mention the fairness doctrine, but don't even have a quote about liberals trying to resurrect this law.
I honestly didn't think it necessary since it's been in the news, but in light of my last post, I've also come to realize that Democrats and their sheeple are very adept at ignoring what is right in front of them... and blaring over the airwaves. Even Liberal airwaves.
This then is from 'the Prowler' today, over at The American Spectator:
"'Don't let Limbaugh smear true patriotism,' that's the theme," says a DNC staffer. "We're not going to let Limbaugh determine what soldiers can talk and what soldiers can not."
Bad grammar and ill-informed opinions aside, the DNC hopes to raise millions of dollars of[sic] Limbaugh. "If we can't silence him, we should at least make some money to make his life more miserable in a Democratic-controlled Washington in 2008," says a Senate Democrat leadership aide.
Others on the Democrat side are pushing ahead with other plans. Rep. Henry Waxman has asked his investigative staff to begin compiling reports on Limbaugh, and fellow radio hosts Sean Hannity and Mark Levin based on transcripts from their shows, and to call in Federal Communications Commission chairman Kevin Martin to discuss the so-called "Fairness Doctrine."
"Limbaugh isn't the only one who needs to be made uncomfortable about what he says on the radio," says a House leadership source. "We don't have as big a megaphone as these guys, but this[sic] all political, and we'll do what we can to gain the advantage. If we can take them off their game for a while, it will help our folks out there on the campaign trail."
Yet another Democrat in a position of power who doesn't know what the Constitution has to say about free speech and to whom it applies. To spell it out, the First Amendment protects the speech of citizens from the government. Waxman has put government paid employees on the trail of private citizens at taxpayers expense. What.. Who do you think pays these staffers? We do. What Waxman, and the Democrats are doing is in violation of the Constitution. But, of course, they don't care...
...we'll do what we can to gain the advantage.
Even if it means raping the Constitution to do it.
But this is to be expected. They can't compete in the arena of ideas because their Ideology-- Liberalism --falls flat on its face every time it's trotted out as a champion of the common man (so was Communism, as I recall), a panacea of righteous rule for the masses. And that's what these men and women, and their gaggles of sheeple want... they want to rule every aspect of your life...
Liberals want to control everybody's lives so that they live as liberals want them to live. They don't want them to smoke; they don't want them to drive certain cars; they don't want them to eat certain foods; they don't want them to live certain places. It's about total control with the government having the last word on what anybody can eat, drink, say, or do. Liberals also hold most people in contempt... They have done everything they can to keep as many people from reaching individual prosperity as possible. They want people dependent so they'll continue to vote for Democrats.
--The hated and much-maligned Rush Limbaugh
On top of all this, Democrats intend to perpetuate the Lie they've told about Limbaugh to rake in cash. How despicable is that!? To take a lie, an obvious lie, and use it to fill their coffers. How dishonest is it to tell a lie about what someone has said, and then USE that lie as justification for squashing free speech? That's what they intend. To squash free speech. And not just Limbaugh's, or Hannity's, or Levin's... No! It goes much further than that. None of these Talk-Show Hosts, could exist if it weren't for the millions of people who listen to them, and call in. It's called 'Talk Radio' for a reason. It is inarguably the Conservative voice of Free Speech in America. Every time Liberals have tried to break into this field they have all either failed outright or exist as anemic ghosts. Quite simply, the Liberal Philosophy cannot compete in a free-market arena of Free and Open (as in unhindered by Government) Speech. Because Liberalism, like a sieve, simply cannot carry water.
I take solace in the knowledge that Truth Always Wins. Always. Things may not go our way in the next presidential election, but the truth of who and what Democrats/Liberals ARE, will come out. And they will fall mightily for it. It may well be too then to turn things around, but Truth WILL be served its celebratory flute of Dom Perignon.
12 Comments:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You know that in the Bush administration Michael Powell, head of the FCC, has relaxed rules regarding media ownership in ways that benefited primarily conservatives? Clear channel radio is now allowed to own more stations in more markets. Rupert Murdoch has increased his media empire in ways that previously would not have been allowed. This increased corporate ownership is a far greater threat to free speech than you fairness doctrine bogeyman. Each political party works to more efficiently spread their ideology. That's called competitive capitalism.
---
Try to say something nice about every person you put down. Isn't that one of the tenets of your faith? Love thine enemies. Rush Limbaugh believes passionately in the conservative ideology. George Bush appears to be firm in his faith. Can you reply in kind about Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton and Ted Kennedy?
Luke 19:27?
"But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me."
Where are you going with this?
Now, not so much, with cable outlets, and the 'Net, and everything else.
On the other hand: The broadcadt frequencies, as public broadcast bands, asre still "the commons" under law. As such, I think "imposing" some attempt at "fairness" is in the national interest.
But I think it's like imposing safety features on buggy whip kmakers in the national interest. Eh, the time has passed when national interest is at state.
Right. Hey, BenT...I've got some ocean-front property here in the Ozarks I'll offer to sell to you.
Reasonably!
Most conservatives I know believe that liberals are by no means "progressive" and are working to bring down the most responsible progressive government on earth.
But...I'm a liar....right? After all...I did just offer to sell you some ocean-front property in the Ozarks.
LOL!
Two words..."Air America"!
LOL!
Why isn't any Liberal talk show hosts on that list of radio programs they plan to monitor? If this is about fairness, where is the fairness in one sided investigations?
Yes. It's called the free market system and the United States was founded partially on those principles. Over regulation inhibits the right of business owners to compete in a free market economy. Any over-regulation. Any business owner.
The Liberals have the exact same opportunity to monopolize the airways as the Conservatives. They just can't compete on an equal playing field, and they are furious about it, so they do what every good Liberal does. They attempt to regulate Conservatives off the airwaves.
But I digress to the earlier point. How does the relaxation of rules of ownership unfairly benefit only Conservatives? Could it be that the Liberals just aren't as business savvy as Conservatives? I don't think so, really. But one wonders why George Soros, (and other high dollar Libs) who has easily enough funds to create his own radio empire, doesn't do so.
I'm thinking that the market won't support Liberal talk radio, and again, that makes the Libs furious. That aint Rush, Sean, or Mark's fault. I think the Libs need to look within to discover who their enemy really is.
They wouldn't like who they'd find staring back at them... Their selves and their own twisted ideology.
James Dobson has said that the religious right won't support Rudy Guilliani if he wins the Republican primary. Rudy's the only Conservative candidate though that seems to have a chance of winning the general election. Where do you land EL? Is your religion more important to you than your politics, or do you want presidential power more?
"Politics is about compromise, everyone being able to live together."
Considering the Left's intense hatred of George W. Bush and their concerted efforts to drag him down into ignominity, I'd say you don't have a very good grasp of what "Politics is about..." Politics, throughout history, has been a game wherein each participant struggles, and maneuvers, and jockeys for position within the halls of Olympus [metaphorically speaking]. Compromise occurs only when it is in the best interests of the politicians. That is hardly the rosy picture you paint.
As to the current spate of Republicans, I'm voting for Huckabee in the Primary. Mike more closely reflects my values as a Christian, and if it weren't for Ron Paul's stance on Iraq, I'd be taking a very hard look at him as well.
Come the general election, I will, as will every other voting American, be voting AGAINST the other candidate. That's cynical, I know, but it is nonetheless true. General elections have long since ceased to be about voting FOR a preferred candidate. Adding a viable third party candidate, however, COULD give the voters a genuine option to vote FOR someone, rather than against. But Dobson's talk of a third-party candidate is a bit premature. The first primary hasn't even arrived.
And yes, my faith is more important than politics, but that doesn't negate my responsibility as a voting citizen. And from where I stand, if my guy doesn't win the nomination, I'll vote for the most viable alternative to Hillary Clinton, who is likely to be the Left's nominee.
Another eight years of HillBilly in the White House is the worst thing I can imagine, politically, for this nation. That is an eventuality from which this nation may never recover. He hiring of Sandy Berger only underscores the unfitness of Hill and Bill to occupy again the White House. In point of fact... I'd almost prefer another four years of Carter, than a Clinton.
LOL!
And what does the philosophy of humanity do?
It COFUSES right and wrong...it PERVERTS good by mixing it with evil.
With each post, BenT, you show your fundamental misunderstanding of Christianity.
Christianity unites...in one accord.
Leftist "Christianity"...Leftist Atheism...atheism itself...DIVIDES...and...PERVERTS!