Stabenow: Hey, let’s hold hearings on bringing back the Fairness Doctrine
posted at 7:33 pm on February 5, 2009 by Allahpundit
Nothing to worry about. Just another figment of your paranoid wingnut imagination, same as it was when Pelosi mentioned it and Durbin mentioned it and Bingaman mentioned it and Schumer mentioned it.
I’m trying to game out the politics but can’t get a good read. On the one hand, it’d thrust people like Limbaugh into the middle of a hot-button policy debate, making their already-big megaphone even bigger. Bad for Democrats. On the other hand, my theory during the recent Rush dust-up has been that Obama and the left want to raise his profile in order to drive the GOP away from the center and back towards the right. Good for Democrats! On the other other hand, would they really benefit by turning him into a free-speech martyr? Having people sympathize with him only hurts the left’s cause of making him look fringey. Bad for Democrats. On the other other other hand, there may be enough popular support for reinstating Fairness that the sympathy factor would be muted. Good for Democrats! Stop me before I “other” again by clicking on the image to listen.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
Already did my part this afternoon. Don’t know the result, but I am sure I am not the only one.
BetseyRoss on February 5, 2009 at 8:30 PM
Your points are all well-taken. But keep one thing clearly in mind: We should all swear to support and defend The Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. That’s what this is all about.
It is proper to fight tyranny, but be careful you don’t make that your cause, and merely end up replacing one tyranny another.
ZenDraken on February 5, 2009 at 8:35 PM
I still love Ann Coulter’s observation that talk radio leans conservative because most people who listen to talk radio are in a car on their way to, or from, some kind of job.
Tuning Spork on February 5, 2009 at 8:36 PM
…and merely end up replacing one tyranny with another.
(gah!)
ZenDraken on February 5, 2009 at 8:37 PM
It’s political speech. ANY move to restrict it is unConstitutional. What don’t Democrats understand about it?
SouthernRoots on February 5, 2009 at 8:37 PM
Debbie Stabenow is hardly a disinterested party as her husband had an interest in liberal talk radio and prostitutes.
Unfortunately for Tom, neither adventure was successfully consummated.
moxie_neanderthal on February 5, 2009 at 8:39 PM
Damn…I leave for one afternoon and miss all of the good threads. One thing on the FD which might or might not have meaning. Sirius/XM Radio (SIRI) was up 20% today on news that EchoStar (SATS) (that’s the Dish Network guys) was buying up a large portion of the SIRI debt, thereby setting up to take it over. The SIRI stock is only selling for $.17 but the debt purchase was for $175,000,000, so this is not a small play. I wonder if this is looking forward to a FD enactment?
genso on February 5, 2009 at 8:41 PM
Let’s try a “Fairness” experiment. Have NPR simulcast Rush from Noon-3:00 EST. Instead of commercial breaks, NPR can use that time for their never ending pledge pitches. After Rush’s 3 hours, they can have the remaining 21 hours to do their typical left wing programming. In a month, let’s look at the ratings for the day and compare to the amount of money pledged.
NCJeff on February 5, 2009 at 8:42 PM
In Michigan,at Lake State University,
they have Lake State Radio,WLSO 90.1FM
And play,a music format!
So,I guess,Debbie wants to screw that up,
and engage in politics on a music station!
http://wlso.lssu.edu/
canopfor on February 5, 2009 at 8:42 PM
If something like this comes to pass, not only do we conservatives need to challenge its legality, but we also need to do our best to use it against the MSM. Every single sitcom with a leftist joke. Every rerun of some hack lefty movie. Every award show. And so on.
18-1 on February 5, 2009 at 8:43 PM
That’s true, and some people like to ejaculate in a stranger’s mouth after paying them $ 150. But what’s your point?
Red State State of Mind on February 5, 2009 at 8:44 PM
Stabenow’s dangerously incompetent.
Attila (Pillage Idiot) on February 5, 2009 at 8:50 PM
I’ll keep saying it,
its not about talk radio,
its about the ‘RIGHT’!
And the ‘RIGHT’s ability to
communicate and deliver the message!
And,’SILENT THE RIGHT’on exposing the
‘CORRUPT LIBERALS’and their ‘DEVIOUS PLANS’!
———————————-
And the Left needs equal time,to lie,distort,
and bamboozle their voting block,even though
they know,their voters won’t be listening!
Its just another MAD LIBERAL POWER MANEUVER
ATTEMPT!
canopfor on February 5, 2009 at 8:52 PM
Control the message. Control the message. Control the message.
Pretty basic stuff. Any radio/TV/media that is not parroting the Party line is deficient, counterproductive, counterrevolutionary, thus must be quashed at all costs.
Take a look at history. Over the past 100 years, control of the airwaves and print media was a significant and vital necessity in order to control a population and promulgate programs that would wither immediately in the cleansing light of day.
Way are the Dems so adamant about the “Fairness Doctrine?”
Is their message deficient? Is their message subject to opprobrium when seen in the full light of day?
If they had a message that sold…really sold, in the marketplace of ideas, without having groups like ACORN and Media Matters, Mediastrike and others, and guys like Soros bankrolling the same, then it would sell, make a profit, be heard across the nation in small and large markets.
They don’t. So, the next best step forward for them is to crush dissent, shutdown contrarian media, and develop a newspeak filled government controlled media…and the Constitution somewhere is having a few more bits torn out and shredded.
All in the name of “fairness.”
coldwarrior on February 5, 2009 at 8:55 PM
You have too much on you hands.
And too many hands.
Ugly on February 5, 2009 at 8:56 PM
“Idle hands…the Devil’s workplace,” according to Sister Mary Catherine back in my younger school days.
coldwarrior on February 5, 2009 at 8:59 PM
We are not shooting enough professors.
- Lenin
We are not silencing enough conservative radio.
- Stabenow
MB4 on February 5, 2009 at 9:00 PM
You’re right Hannity was genuinely po’d. Come to think of it, even soft-spoken Lindsey Graham was po’d today. I think there’s a whole lot of people in public and private who are MAD AS HELL AND WE AREN’T GOING TO TAKE IT ANYMORE.
DrStock on February 5, 2009 at 9:01 PM
Way ahead of you there, pal.
Seriously though, I fully intend to pay all my taxes – as soon as I get the check for my share of the bailout money.
logis on February 5, 2009 at 9:04 PM
Well… some only know one thing
Their hands……strictly in the biblical sense
Beto Ochoa on February 5, 2009 at 9:05 PM
I might add one more issue that would lead to a snap and that’d be amnesty for the 30,000,000 illegals who’re here now.
BowHuntingTexas on February 5, 2009 at 9:06 PM
i am sure someone has said this already, but…
f**king fascists!
homesickamerican on February 5, 2009 at 9:08 PM
But but Crr said there is nothing to it
/sarc
Jamson64 on February 5, 2009 at 9:08 PM
Hey Bimbo, let’s worry about accountability in Washington first. Once you get a handle on that, we can worry about talk radio.
cannonball on February 5, 2009 at 9:09 PM
Let’s hold the hearings. Let’s defeat this crap once and for all. I don’t even think most of the left will go along with it. Only the nuts.
Ampersand on February 5, 2009 at 9:10 PM
When Governor Bimbo can get a handle on Michigan first…
coldwarrior on February 5, 2009 at 9:11 PM
Allah, can you just give me your straight-up, lithium-free, gut-reaction on why FD is mentioned? [Hint: to muzzle talk radio and let the torpedos be damned.]
Mark30339 on February 5, 2009 at 9:14 PM
The SCOTUS would crush this insane idea in the blink of an eye. I pray the libtards try to reinstate the policy.
David in ATL on February 5, 2009 at 9:14 PM
What was that 80′s movie where some guy was driving around broadcasting an underground radio program? It comes to mind for some reason.
I think this will be a big failure for the left and really serve to boost Rush’s rating and power. I’m unusually optimistic about how little of a chance this has. It will serve to label the left as the anti 1st amendment party.
God I hope I’m not being foolish.
Ampersand on February 5, 2009 at 9:21 PM
Pasting “The Fairness Doctrine” all over the Democrats would be icing on the cake right now.
GarandFan on February 5, 2009 at 9:23 PM
The economy is in peril,its a crisis,DOOMSDAY by
all accounts, according to the crafty leftys,
yet,they need the Republican Party’s help,
but,the Left,bash the right,and want Fairness
Doctrine,then shouldn’t Obama be focused on this
‘crisis’ like a laserbeam,instead of ‘RUSH’!
canopfor on February 5, 2009 at 9:27 PM
Here come the ” FREE SPEECH PIONEERS ” to trample the First Amendment and completely try to shut down talk radio. Imagine that right? Liberals suck at talk radio because they aren’t capable of having intelligent TALK. They need television and stupid audiences.
Smart people listen to and make sense of the radio broadcasts. It requires you to think.
tx2654 on February 5, 2009 at 9:28 PM
Another bimbo I never heard of trying to interrupt my radio entertainment? Starting to feel very Cuba-ish around here lately.
FireBlogger on February 5, 2009 at 9:29 PM
So do they wait till week four or five before they try and take our guns?
Bring it.
daesleeper on February 5, 2009 at 9:29 PM
I have been calling and complaining about the Fairness Doctrine for a few weeks. Won’t stop either.
sheebe on February 5, 2009 at 9:30 PM
I’m no constitutional scholar, but doesn’t the “Fairness doctrine” kinda go against the 1st Amendment? I don’t know, just throwing it out there,
madne0 on February 5, 2009 at 9:30 PM
The idiot libs and the Obama administration are going to straight up the bill of rights.
1. Free speech
2 Right to bear arms
If I remember correctly, the road to serfdom is painted with the blood of patriots.
daesleeper on February 5, 2009 at 9:33 PM
Everybody knows that Australia is entirely peopled by criminals.
unclesmrgol on February 5, 2009 at 9:34 PM
The Fairness Doctrine was created after WWII as an overreaction to the monolithic media of the fascist governments. It died a natural death a while ago–why exhume it in the name of “fairness,” when at this historical juncture it more resembles the very thing it was initially a reaction against? Talk about Orwellian double-speak. Let’s see. Pew Trust says 75% of journalists identify as Democrats/liberals–Hollywood is a bastion of liberalism and a never-ending source of leftist propaganda–the public schools are in the strangle-hold of the teacher’s unions, another Dem special interest group–TV with the exception of Fox is liberal–NYT, WaPo, Chicago Trib, LA Times, all the biggest papers are liberal–yeah we need to get rid of that ONE area in which conservatives dominate–it’s only fair don’t you know.
smellthecoffee on February 5, 2009 at 9:40 PM
Pardon me, if someone made the point before my post, but that photo encapsulates putting lipstick on a pig.
Our first two rights in the Bill of Rights are there in primary position for a reason. We, the people, determine our representation, and those representatives are answerable to us, not vice versa. We have freedom of speech to make our voices heard, whether in agreement or disagreement, in order to prevent government from limiting our innate rights and freedoms. Gun ownership protects our rights against a repressive, tyrannical government.
NO law should transgress those rights.
Liberal fascists may dress their intentions with Orwellian phrases such as “fairness doctrine” or “social justice” or “card check,” but Little Debbie and her jackboots had better be prepared for a huge revolution to let her know who really is in charge. We have a government at our sufferance; it is not the determiner of what we think, write, or say until the laws against libel or slander limit them. As a public figure, answerable to your constituency, Little Debbie, you are our employee, not the employer. We have the right to judge whether you are following the Constitution that you swore to uphold.
onlineanalyst on February 5, 2009 at 9:43 PM
I wish I shared your optomism. However, I thing the Jugears in chief will try to pack Scotus with jurists who are left of Lenin.
This does make me think a little of when the Germans bombed Coventry. That cost them the Battle of Britain because the Brit response was to bomb german cities, Berlin I think. The Germans retaliated and that made them lose site of their goal of obtaining air superiority for the invasion. Might have cost them. the war.
So, Senator Fugly may have jumped the gun. Judging from Hannity’s voice, she started a bit of a war.
However I am a little pessimistic because that, by the time this gets to Scotus, the SC building’s address will be 1 Red Square.
bullseye on February 5, 2009 at 9:44 PM
she’s so pretty…
D2Boston on February 5, 2009 at 9:46 PM
I feel bad for her. Husband is a failure at work and at home. She’s aparently not very good at representing her constituents. Now? She’s reduced to the ignominy of exposing all of this – presenting a jugular for evisceration by the talk radio army and conservative blog battalions – to further the nefarious agenda of Citizen Obama.
.
Gifts like Stabenow don’t “just happen” on days like today – where the audience for the c-span coverage of the bazillion bill debates is increasing dramatically – this is no accident. She was told to say these things to distract the discussion.
.
Of course she’s going down. That’s a given. But I … I am suspicious and sad for her. It’s like a form of political prostitution.
BrideOfRove on February 5, 2009 at 9:46 PM
The problem is that Dems think it is
1) The Right to Free butter
2) The Right to Bare Arms
Jamson64 on February 5, 2009 at 9:49 PM
I’m not going to worry about that until Kennedy retires. I think he’s going to be more conservative on these core issues–eminent domain, free speech, etc. I like him better as the swing vote than O’Connor.
If Obama gets reelected, THEN we’ve got a big problem. As for now, if they replace Ginsburg with Cindy Sheehan, what’s the diff?
smellthecoffee on February 5, 2009 at 9:50 PM
If the Constitution guarantees free speech, and
If a Senator takes a vow to uphold the Constitution, yet
introduces legislation to deny free speech, then
Can that Senator be impeached, recalled, tarred and feathered?
BitterClinger on February 5, 2009 at 9:54 PM
No, that was Ray Nagin, Mayor of Nawleans.
onlineanalyst on February 5, 2009 at 9:58 PM
Cold civil war.
Mason on February 5, 2009 at 10:01 PM
If the Constitution guarantees free speech, and
If a Senator takes a vow to uphold the Constitution, yet
introduces legislation to deny free speech, then
Can that Senator be impeached, recalled, tarred and feathered?
BitterClinger on February 5, 2009 at 9:54 PM
rplat on February 5, 2009 at 10:03 PM
Does Stabenow have a conflict of interest here? Googling her husband produced this:
The co-founder and former CEO of the liberal-progressive Democracy Radio and husband of U.S. Senator Debbie Stabenow was caught in February by a Troy police sting aimed at catching prostitutes, according to a police report.
Never mind the sex thing, Dems always get a free pass. But if he is trying to make a go of progressive radio, then promoting the fairness doctrine smacks of a deep conflict of interest.
Fat Cow
karenhasfreedom on February 5, 2009 at 10:05 PM
Hey Debbie, you go ahead and bring back the Fairness Doctrine.
We’ll go ahead and bring back the Guillotine.
Kasper Hauser on February 5, 2009 at 10:15 PM
Thanks for nothing, Michigan voters…again!
SouthernGent on February 5, 2009 at 10:20 PM
Yes we can have a Rep. recalled, or terminated or Impeached. I been writing Lawyers and a few sites. Signature Petition is what they say to start.
sheebe on February 5, 2009 at 10:20 PM
Talk radio should be held accountable to the government? For what? Talk like that should send shivers up your spine. I can just see the new Ministry of Truth (headed by someone who didn’t pay his or her taxes and lied about it).
NNtrancer on February 5, 2009 at 10:33 PM
They’re playing with fire.
TexasJew on February 5, 2009 at 10:36 PM
Wait a second…I thought Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin et al are entertainers, right? No one listens to those clowns. Right?
ddrintn on February 5, 2009 at 10:37 PM
Just like Fortunately, Unfortunately
shazbat on February 5, 2009 at 10:37 PM
It might be worth trying if only for the publicity it would generate. It might even educate a few of the sheeple who don’t know what freedom of speech really means and how some of their Senators are trying to stifle it.
Perhaps ACORN could gather a few signatures for us. /sarc
BitterClinger on February 5, 2009 at 10:38 PM
Sentor you and the rest of the left wing hear this.In this world there are some things you don,t dare do.Spit into the wind,pull on supermans cape and most of all you don,t mess with our const.rights to live in a free country and listen to what the H*LL we as free americans what to.Do you and the rest of people up there think we would just sit back and let you or anyone else up there take away our freedoms with out a fight?Sentor this the United States of America not 1937 Germany and we do not bend or bow to the likes of you or any other sentor or congressman.
thmcbb on February 5, 2009 at 10:46 PM
progressives oppose free speech
eh on February 5, 2009 at 10:52 PM
How’s about we set the string to your tampon on fire and watch your evil witch azz burn from the inside out instead? Lord help me but I am sick of these wankers.
GlocknRoll on February 5, 2009 at 10:57 PM
That is what I am thinking. Would panic them if not anything else. Who knows nothing insults a Liberal.
sheebe on February 5, 2009 at 10:59 PM
someone else may have mentioned this … but on local talk radio today (J. D. Hayworth on KFYI 550 Phoenix) noted that her husband is an Exec VP with Air America.
I did not get to listen to all of the story, but the take is
1) she is just pressing the liberal agenda (we all know).
2) moreover, she is using her position to help hubby rake in lots of cash.
AZ_Redneck on February 5, 2009 at 11:15 PM
get ready to return it …
AZ_Redneck on February 5, 2009 at 11:16 PM
Barry made references about the airwaves and talk twice tonight in his “speech” more like “preach.” He sounded very annoyed and I sat there thinking, he’ll shut down the Conservative radio shows next. He is out of synch with the country and trying to shove too many changes at us all at once. He’s out to ruin us so he can reinvent us in his own plan. We are so screwed.
UnEasyRider on February 5, 2009 at 11:22 PM
Democrats know that they need a compliant media to keep their jobs, but they will destroy a.m. radio if they pass the Hush Rush Bill. Will they readily accept the higher unemployment numbers? I think they would.
Hate blinds people to all unacceptable realities.
DannoJyd on February 5, 2009 at 11:26 PM
You go ahead, lefties. Take away my vote. Take more of my money. Try to shut me up.
Ask yourself before you do… what do I have left?
Maybe y’all should just leave it alone.
Merovign on February 5, 2009 at 11:35 PM
No conflict of interest here; Stabenow’s husband was a sr. exec at AirAmerica and is also a sr. exec/co-founder of TalkUSA. with another leftist radio network (forgot the name). (BTW: He was also caught in a prostitution sting.)
So good to hear Stabenow’s disinterested voice taking care of us.
ElRonaldo on February 5, 2009 at 11:43 PM
She wants accountability in the airwaves? I want accountability in my damn government. All I see is 535 freeloading a**tools in Washington trying to p*ss away as much money as they can because..they can. And now they want to silence the people who criticize them? Screw that.
austinnelly on February 6, 2009 at 12:16 AM
Is this fossil up for re-election in 2010?
Might be time to show her the door.
Iblis on February 6, 2009 at 12:26 AM
I DARE YOU….. TRY IT!!!!
Kini on February 6, 2009 at 12:34 AM
Who is this b*tch?
ex-Democrat on February 6, 2009 at 12:37 AM
Seriously, this is what the 2nd Amendment is for…if we can’t roll out the arms and march on Washington because of this, we don’t deserve freedom.
Go for it lady. I’ll march. Let’s roll.
ex-Democrat on February 6, 2009 at 12:39 AM
After seeing her pic I feel like contacting a prostitute for some reason.
ex-Democrat on February 6, 2009 at 12:44 AM
No, no. The Fairness Doctrine doesn’t PREVENT anyone from saying whatever they want to say; and it doesn’t prevent anyone from hearing whatever they want to hear.
All it does is FORCE people to say things that they don’t want to say, and FORCE people to listen to things that they don’t want to hear.
What could possibly be more fair than that?
logis on February 6, 2009 at 12:59 AM
And every other body part, as well, I think.
njcommuter on February 6, 2009 at 1:44 AM
It seems easy to find manure with which to refresh the tree of liberty, but also hard to wash it off one’s hands.
Kralizec on February 6, 2009 at 2:28 AM
I wrote this to “my” senator tonite (yes I am in Michigan, but I did not vote for this moron).
Ms. Stabenow, I can NOT believe that you have the audacity to think that we need a “fairness” doctrine. In this age of multiple streams of media choices, people can tune in to various places to hear the news.
The liberals have the daily newspapers, and the network news. Where is the balance there? Do you REALLY want a government entity being the police of the “news”? I suggest that you get up to speed and realize Americans don’t need a nanny state.
We are grown ups. We can choose where we listen to our sources to get the news. There is no need for a “fairness” doctrine. Unless of course, you are ready to insist that the networks hire conservatives, that NPR has half of their air time devoted to conservatives, and that the college radio stations devote equal time to conservatives.
You are not at all a disinterested party here. Your husband has a financial interest in having the gorvernment ram programming down our throat. You should be ashamed of yourself for suggesting we need a “fairness” doctrine.
You are just a partisan hack with a financial interest in this outcome. Cesspool of corruption all right. You have been in Washington too long.
karenhasfreedom on February 6, 2009 at 2:31 AM
The words “Fairness” and “Doctrine” are mutually exclusive.
OldEnglish on February 6, 2009 at 2:40 AM
Considering his wife’s manly appearance, I’d bet he doesn’t consummate that much either. Triple loser.
hawkdriver on February 6, 2009 at 2:50 AM
The Dems realize you need to be distracted from reality, uhhhh, how about some perky porn!
Mr. Joe on February 6, 2009 at 2:54 AM
No other topic will bring so many to recognize this is the fight to the death worth having to defend American liberty.
T J Green on February 6, 2009 at 3:29 AM
I’m in and this would be the perfect event to demonstrate to the administration, media and Republican elite, that we unwashed masses are out here, that we’re passionate and that we mean business on key issues.
2 million march on Washington to protect Free Speech. I’ll do the same for the 2nd Amendment.
hawkdriver on February 6, 2009 at 3:56 AM
Well I just hope she remembered to zip up Obama’s trousers.
SKYFOX on February 6, 2009 at 5:45 AM
D. Stab.
202.224.4822
elifino on February 6, 2009 at 5:50 AM
You’re talking about Michigan, not Ohio or Pennsylvania.
Michigan is irreversibly blue save for intentionally imploding everything south of the Mackinac.
Ohio is almost there, but headed fast in that direction.
Pennsylvania seems to be a mixed bag but has ideologically cleansed its steel towns.
sethstorm on February 6, 2009 at 6:00 AM
I wouldn’t count on it. They upheld campaign finance reform, they made the Kelo decision, and far too many issues that should be clear constitutionally get 5-4 rulings. The Supreme Court isn’t what it used to be. Of course, love of the Constitution isn’t what it used to be, either.
DrMagnolias on February 6, 2009 at 6:15 AM
Actually, I say it would be a much greater audience if most conservatives weren’t so hard working!!! Can you imagine that? I am a stay at home mom, so, when we are in the kitchen, my little ones get healthy helpings of Ingraham, Rush, Hannity and Levin.
I am a christian and I am really, really struggling with hate over here. I don’t want to be that way, but, I really despise this BUCK NAKED HYPOCRISY PARADING AROUND IN GROTESQUE GLORY UNDER BANNERS OF FAIRNESS. It makes me want to VOMIT. These are adult men and women who recognize a disparity in an area of media…BECAUSE THEY HAVE FAILED IN IT. (It was good enough for them when they were ON the radio, but when failure comes…) And, rather than take their lumps and either rebrand or give up radio, they have to shut it all down like spoiled children who can’t compete. I cannot stand people like this. I avoid people like this. To think they are running this show is a frightening thing, indeed. This means that folks with NO emotionally clarity and maturity nor HONESTY are making rules and dismantling fundamental freedoms we enjoy as a nation.
If these people like communism so much, just move to China, for goodness’ sake. All the abortion they want there, too. Looking at that woman in the photo makes me sick. Someone help me…it’s too early for this level of loathing.
Mommypundit on February 6, 2009 at 6:34 AM
It used to be that news was separate from opinion, but with the Age of Obama and the melding of news opinion and entertainment there is no way that such a law could exempt so called news shows nowadays, any such exemption would be arbitrary and capricious. Moreover when the original rule was in place there were only three major networks and possibly a leftist public broadcasting network. Presently there are hundreds if not thousands of channels and stations as well as satellite and internet. Last, life is not fair, and as conservatives have to endure unfairness in the vast majority of news being delivered and slanted by unabashed liberals, libs have to endure the pin pricks of conservative talk radio. A true fairness doctrine would mandate affirmative action for conservatives in reporting and anchoring positions. Aren’t libs the ones always bemoaning diversity (or is it uniformity of thought but diversity of outward appearance that is their real dogma?) so they should get behind that right?
eaglewingz08 on February 6, 2009 at 7:00 AM
IS XM radio slipping this idiot a lot of cash?
drjohn on February 6, 2009 at 7:16 AM
I don’t think this would have a chance.
drjohn on February 6, 2009 at 7:16 AM
So long as the Left is chasing after talk radio, it takes resources away from tasks where they would more likely have success. Rush and Hannity make attractive targets and the Left can’t help itself but attack them. They’re like the terrorists in Iraq who can’t help but attack a U.S. convoy, even if it means they’ll get their asses kicked.
Rush and Hannity want the attack on the First Amendment to start. This is what exposes the Left for what it really wants: One-party rule. In a fiercely partisan age, the notion of one-party rule is toxic. Exposing the Dems this way will pay off big in 2010.
The Overreach has begun,…
EMD on February 6, 2009 at 7:27 AM
I’ve met and talked with Debbie Stabenow and she’s a moron. The only reason she was elected to the Senate is because Spencer Abraham was a bigger putz! Why don’t they ever bring up the fact that the reason liberal radio fails is because no one wants to listen to it!
flytier on February 6, 2009 at 7:28 AM
While we’re bringing back another antiquated, idiotic idea, let’s bring back another – burning witches at the stake.
And what else do we burn?
More witches!
NoDonkey on February 6, 2009 at 7:31 AM
Allah,
This group of imbeciles can’t vet someone for tax evasion. Do you really think they have the ability to plot out the story you describe…ie turning Limabaugh into a martyr in order to force the GOP to the right and get the center all to themselves?
I’d be surprised if 1/2 these yokels can find their keys in the morning.
angryed on February 6, 2009 at 7:33 AM
I’ve mentioned this before. The FD wouldn’t be all that bad really. I think that most if not all radio broadcasting will be done through the internet within a decade. So all the FD would do really is speed up that process.
And good luck trying to regulate what gets broadcast over the internet. The Dems could extend the FD online of course, but good luck with that…see internet gambling on how well that kind of regulation works.
Add in satellite radio and who knows what other technology that’s around the corner, and the FD will be meaningless.
angryed on February 6, 2009 at 7:41 AM
The fairness doctrine requires the station to grant equal time to the liberals. Ergo if conservatives get 6 hours a day, the station has to provide 6 hours to the liberals to make it “fair”. Since people turn off the radio when liberals talk, the station can’t sell advertising for those 6 hours. So, the station cuts back the conservative speech to 2 hours. Or, as was done in the past, they change the format altogether.
Thus, conservative talk is eliminated from the airwaves. This is another tactic of communism. It uses conservative free market principles to defeat conservatism.
csdeven on February 6, 2009 at 7:45 AM
I don’t contact politiicans or protest or agitate but the Fairness Doctrine would drive me to it.
RobCon on February 6, 2009 at 7:46 AM
Satellite radio isn’t free and that would limit the exposure to those whom can afford it. Thus those who need it most, are unable to afford it, thus leaving them at the mercy of the liberals and their pap.
csdeven on February 6, 2009 at 7:49 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »