Reply With Quote
Bravo to the government controlling the press.
these guys are scared to death about the fairness doctrine.
the fairness doctrine was only their to protect the people.
all the fairness doctrine does is put a little conscientiousness in the minds of all media.
...and it doesn't censor anyones speech. the fairness doctrine just says you have to give equal time to both sides......
So if you have one 3 hour hannity, you have to have another 3 hour colmes.
Bravo to the government controlling the press.
I guess the terrorist and socialist cards aren't working well enough to maintain the brainwashing their listeners.
End goal is to drive them (prosperous conservative talk radio) out of business.
Cool Hand talks some talk, then supports bull like this. What a doofus.
#'s of listeners are thriving. Do you know how much Rush gets paid a year? Do you know how profitable the industry is? Do you know that liberal talk radio has to be pumped full of $$$ just to stay afloat?
The lib ers are going after conserv. talk radio because it is the last form of media that questions them. Take them away, and you are ing the country over.
Cant argue with any of that.
The ing government should stay the out of any media. The Fairness Doctrine would be (another) slippery slope.
That should be the slogan so far this quarter...Slippery Slope.
I don't see how you could even enforce such a thing. Who determines which hosts are representing one side or the other? Is everything that host says subject to the Fairness Doctrine? What about moderate hosts (pretending for a moment there is such a thing)?
Anyway, I believe inplementation of Fairness Doctrine is as inevitable as the Draft we were going to have if Bush was re-elected in 2004.
Why would anyone support this? I especially don't understand why libs, being the ones that are always throwing the freedom of speech card around, would be supporting this?
damn straight.
I don't know how anyone could be for this its not Rush's/Hannity's fault that the libs can't come up with anyone to rival their media presence.
i can't believe i actually have to agree with those two aholes about something.
Rush is quite the religious leader. I agree with you on the government needing to stay the out of the media though. The first amendment should have no exceptions. No exceptions for flag burning nor censorship nor anything else.
Democratic leadership is just as self-serving as any other ins ution.
Theyre getting their ass-whipped in the radio world. They have tried to compete, but cannot (Air America anyone?). So in their eyes, something needs to be done to counter the Limbaughs of the country and the influence they project (as evidenced by many board Republicans here).
IMO, the Fairness Doctrine represents everything government should not be. So whats next? What other media can be legislated against because it doesnt particularly adhere to "balance"?
What cons utes balance? Porn? Blogs? Internet? Cable television?
Again, a slippery slope. Its a horrible idea and I hope Spurminator is right that this is as likely to pass as the draft when W. was reelected in 2004.
To be fair, though... one flaw with my analogy is that the Draft wasn't being promoted by the Speaker of the House in 2004.
But I still don't see it happening. Decisions like these get parties booted out of power.
they didn't need to. i give alot of credit to rush/hannity for obama's victory. america just told them they suck.
Half hour max b4 sharing opposing points of view. The 3 hour format in widespread use would be illegal.these guys are scared to death about the fairness doctrine.
the fairness doctrine was only their to protect the people.
all the fairness doctrine does is put a little conscientiousness in the minds of all media.
...and it doesn't censor anyones speech. the fairness doctrine just says you have to give equal time to both sides......
So if you have one 3 hour hannity, you have to have another 3 hour colmes.
Liberal radio doesn't sell; formats will have to change.
That's the point.
If this isn't censorship, wtf is it?
The FCC does; part of the executive branch.
You do the math.
Blathering about the "fairness doctrine" is simply more conservative hysteria.
It ain't gonna happen.
It is hard to figure out why some Democrats are intent on shooting themselves in the foot over this. Someone should tell them about the internet.
dumbarse.these guys are scared to death about the fairness doctrine.
the fairness doctrine was only their to protect the people.
all the fairness doctrine does is put a little conscientiousness in the minds of all media.
...and it doesn't censor anyones speech. the fairness doctrine just says you have to give equal time to both sides......
So if you have one 3 hour hannity, you have to have another 3 hour colmes.
The "fairness doctrine" only deals with Radio - and for it to be "fair" - shouldn't it include radio, print, TV and the internet, blogs and hollywood. --
Besides with Satellite radiop - you can have any talking point you want - even the lib s have radio. You can get whatever you want to hear through all the different mediums available..
Conservative hysteria? So when the Dem's come up with the idea, throw it around congress, and actually consider it...............but it's conservative hysteria......
Where the is the rolling eyes smilie? Oh, there it is.....
yeah, I noticed the same thing. didn't expect CH to be pro-Fairness Doctrine.Cool Hand talks some talk, then supports bull like this. What a doofus.
Really, how many Democrats have been arguing for the Fairness Doctrine? I mean, important Democrats that actually have a say, not the wackos. This seems like a right-wing Boogeyman to me.
I could be wrong, but I'd like to see who was calling for passage of the Fairness Doctrine again. (Note: I am against it.)
more like airwaves
Oh, well nevermind then.
I'm sure there's going to be some legislators out of touch with reality that are going to attempt to bring this 'doctrine' up. That said, the whole premise of this thing is entirely uncons utional, so it will be stopped at one point or another.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
