Say Anything Blog

Rush, the Godfather of talk radio, has been predicting for years that the Democrats would try to do this since competing in the marketplace has always proven such a dismal failure for liberals.

Which reminds me… I wonder if the Gloria Wise Boys and Girls Club was ever reimbursed the $875,000 fraudulently “loaned” to Air America.  One more example of sanctimonious liberals who think that whatever they want or need should be theirs for the taking… regardless of who it actually belongs to.

“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

I think there must have been some effort to institute the unFairness Doctrine in 93 and 94. 

I assume that the Republicans in the Senate filibustered it.  Unless the Republican now in the Senate are retarded they’ll do the same.

What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.

Whistler,

I believe Reagan vetoed the bill in 1987, and Bush 41 threatened to do so in 1991.  In 1993, the “Hush Rush” bill was defeated when Limbaugh orchestrated a huge public campaign against it (right before Dan’s Bake Sale in Fort Collins, Colorado.)

“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

Look! You can use typical Conservative tactics to focus on failures rather than successes. Air America does suck, but have you ever hear of NPR or PBS? I guess those establishments don’t count when you’re trying to “spin” something to work in your favor. Go figure.

NPR and PBS are publicly funded, right?  Meaning that they exist because some politician decided that they should exist, not because there’s an actual demand for them.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

More spin. Just because you people don’t listen to or watch them doesn’t mean the remaining thinking populace doesn’t listen to or watch them. Also you neglect the fact that a lot of their money is donated to them via fund drives. These donations are given to them BY the viewers and listeners so SOMEBODY WANTS to listen to and watch these. Again, go figure.

So Dirk, if NPR and PBS are so widely appreciated by the American public I’m sure you’ll be just fine with us removing that completely unnecessary tax funding, right?

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Thanks Dirk, for admitting that NPR and PBS are flaming liberal. 

By the way how’s the new fridge working out for you?

What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.

Does anyone get the idea that Rob is too dense to understand that total power equals total corruption?

Oh yeah, I forgot that Conservatives prefer Anarchy (wow, the definition fits perfectly) over Democracy. Grow up.

Does anyone get the idea that Rob is too dense to understand that total power equals total corruption?

No, that’s the point I’m making.  Socialism is about expanding government power. The closer the government gets to total power the closer we get to totalitarianism.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

I suspect that’s why Rob and the rest of us want to keep government limited as much as possible.

What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.

Sorry for the post above. Wrong thread.

Kids like Bat One throw around the “Liberal” word as though it’s a curse word. Tisk tisk potty mouth. Liberals exist to prevent the world from turning into a festering cesspool of ignorance and true slavery, cotton fields and plantation and all.

Kids like Bat One...???

Dear Mr. Quixote,

If you are truly intent on saving the world from “turning into a festering cesspool of ignorance,” it probably wouldn’t hurt your credibility to demonstrate that you have some modest, passing acquaintance with the truth.  Tough to champion knowledge and candor when you are yourself so demonstrably uninformed.

As much as I appreciate the compliment, however unintended (another mark of your own mental shortcomings), I am quite a bit older, more experienced and far more knowlegable and sagacious than you’ve managed to demonstrate here thus far.

“Liberal” may not be a curse word, but it is certainly the most blatant example of misappropriation of language for political purposes by those on the Left.  Formerly, the word stood for limited government, individual liberty both political and economic, and self-determination.  Its hard to argue, seriously, that today’s liberal Democrats stand for any of those things.

Before you get your boxers clustered, try this:  look up President Kennedy’s 1962 Inaugural Address, read through it carefully, and then tell me which of today’s liberal Democrats could stand up and give that very same speech without being laughed off the stage by Republicans, and booed by fellow Democrats.

“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

Woops! I meant to say The Whistler. My mistake. Easy to do since you all sound alike…

Visiting this forum is like swimming in a river of turds. Who would care which turd smells the worst? You’re in an river of shit!

BTW: It’s pretty cute how you got all defensive there. You must be accused of being a kid all the time. I feel sorry. Awww…

So Dirk, if NPR and PBS are so widely appreciated by the American public I’m sure you’ll be just fine with us removing that completely unnecessary tax funding, right?

Under the Fairness doctrine which will never pass would actually make PBS and NPR more conservative since they are both mouth pieces of the left. I think both should be killed…

Check out:
Goon’s North Dakota Red Neck
Goon’s World

AntiAmerican.  Against Freedom of Speech.

Communism is evil

Under the Fairness doctrine which will never pass would actually make PBS and NPR more conservative since they are both mouth pieces of the left. I think both should be killed…

Very true. But at least the rest of the mouth-pieces for the right (even the dreaded MSM is part of the right wing mouth-piece) would be balanced out. You people cant stand freedom of speech can you?

Did you realize that in Canada there is a law that ensures that there will be at least 60 percent Canadian content broadcast on it’s privately owned television and radio stations? It makes sense since the majority of the people in Canada are CANADIAN.

Now in the United States there is close to P Democrat and P brainwashed Republican. Lets let each P percent speak their mind regardless of how idiotic and brainwashed they might seem. It will help the public become better informed (if not incite more outrae concerning their enemies). Hell, it might even help the Conservative/Anarchist cause to take over the US by giving the right-wing talking boneheads more ammo to work with on their bonehead radio-talkshows. Ever think of that?

I like that you bring up the word “kill”. It shows how immature you are. Go play Grand Theft Auto if you want to kill something and knock off your redneck survivalist nonsense. It doesn’t make you look macho, it makes you look like a moron.

AntiAmerican.  Against Freedom of Speech.

Quite an addition. Thanks for your input.

The point I was trying to get to was the sacrifice of NPR and PBS would be well worth it.

"Dirk Gently” spills, You people cant stand freedom of speech can you?

You’re telling us that “freedom of speech” equals government coercion of speech.

That does not compute nor make sense.

You’re the one who can’t stand freedom of speech. You hear something you don’t like and want the government to squash it.

Uh oh! That was just another one of my “typical Conservative tactics” (AKA telling the truth).

The fairness doctrine is censorship no question about it.  The government has no power to decide who can say waht.

The market is correcting to a 50/50 split.  It’s going slower than I’d like but it’ll happen. 

Letting the market decide is far more fairer and safer method.

By the way, I’ve heard the Nixon administration used the fairness doctrine to go after it’s enemies.  That’s the kind of power we don’t want in the hands of the government.

What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.

The government has no power to decide who can say waht.

They clearly do in this case, because the proper conceptual framework here is freedom to contract (where the government is the contracting party by leasing public airwaves) rather than freedom of speech.

By the way, I’ve heard the Nixon administration used the fairness doctrine to go after it’s enemies.  That’s the kind of power we don’t want in the hands of the government.

The difference in the media landscape between then and now is enormous.  Nixon could use the FD as a hammer then because there wasn’t cable TV & radio or the internet.  Back then, virtually all information was disseminated by means of FD-susceptible media; I’ll bet the percentage of people that get their info from those channels has at least halved since then.

They clearly do in this case, because the proper conceptual framework here is freedom to contract (where the government is the contracting party by leasing public airwaves) rather than freedom of speech.

I don’t think they have the power to limit political speech on the airwaves due to the first amendment. 

They have a compelling need to regulate the airwaves because it’s a limited quantity.  There also are some standards of decency on free air broadcasts that perhaps should be adhered to.

If you give them the right to limit free speech under those conditions than you are giving them the right to limit nearly all public speech.

1.  Cable TV At some time that’s on a satellite, same argument.

2.  Speech in the public square:  Hey who owns the square?  The government.

3.  Magazines:  Postal service.

4.  Newspapers:  Hey as long as it doesn’t involve interstate commerce in some tenuous manner.

5.  The internet?  Are you kidding me, the government is still highly involved in the internet system.

Anyone notice that it’s the left that wants to stifle free speech.  Why, because they can’t win a fair argument.

What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.

From a legal perspective, this is a contractual clause in a lease of government property.  The government isn’t creating speech restrictions on private concerns (such as a newspaper or a cable TV station).

Why are the public airwave spectrum “public” but the satellite spectrum “private”?  Beats me, but there it is.

Given that, I don’t think that a compelling interest standard would be used.  Instead, I think (and this is educated guess terrain) it’d be a reasonable-restriction standard.  So, if the government leases some of its forest land to loggers, they can probably put reasonable restrictions on the use of the land.

FD is lousy policy, IMHO, but I don’t think it’s constitutionally lousy.

Why are the public airwave spectrum “public” but the satellite spectrum “private”?  Beats me, but there it is.

There is no difference there is there?  It’s just that they aren’t after banning Fox News, yet.

The Democrats want to limit talk radio and this is how they are going about it.

FD is lousy policy, IMHO, but I don’t think it’s constitutionally lousy.

I think that it’s lousy constitutionally but after the John McCain “Shut up you little people” Free Speech Reform US Supreme Court decision I have no confidence in the Supreme Court protecting our rights.

What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.

Legally, there is a difference, I think.  We took control of the public airwaves with an act in the early 20th century.  The satellite & cable modes of delivery are not considered part of the airwaves that are owned by the public.

Instead, they’re like any other private space.  That’s why FD simply cannot be extended to expression found on private channels.

(after looking around a bit, I don’t see the distinction between public and private airwaves featured too prominently.  That’s decent evidence that you’re right that, in theory, FD could be extended to cable & satellite media)