White House: What is this Fairness Doctrine of which you speak?
posted at 2:47 pm on February 18, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
I guess the question of Obama administration policy on the Fairness Doctrine depends on which aide one asks. After getting vacillation from press secretary Robert Gibbs and top adviser David Axelrod, a more junior member of the Obama team insisted that Obama still opposes a return of the Fairness Doctrine:
President Obama opposes any move to bring back the so-called Fairness Doctrine, a spokesman told FOXNews.com Wednesday.
The statement is the first definitive stance the administration has taken since an aide told an industry publication last summer that Obama opposes the doctrine — a long-abolished policy that would require broadcasters to provide opposing viewpoints on controversial issues.
“As the president stated during the campaign, he does not believe the Fairness Doctrine should be reinstated,” White House spokesman Ben LaBolt said.
I’d like to hear a little more about Obama’s opposition to reimposition of FD on talk radio. Would he block such a move by Congress with a veto? Or would he replace an FCC commissioner who attempted to reimpose it?
That’s not an academic question. We have had several members of Congress talk approvingly of reimposing equal-time requirements on talk radio, including Senators Tom Harkin, Debbie Stabenow, and Representatives Maurice Hinchey and Dennis Kucinich, among others. Just in the last two weeks, we have seen a veritable avalanche of support from Capitol Hill for the Fairness Doctrine or its equivalent.
The latter is probably the real risk. Obama opposes the Fairness Doctrine, because as he said last summer, it distracts from ownership diversification and other issues like net neutrality that would presumably deliver the same result, only in another guise. I’d like to hear that the White House will actively oppose any attempts to regulate political content on broadcast airwaves. That kind of a statement would make it much harder for a later climbdown from Team Obama.
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: 1 2 Next »
They will just call it something else.
forest on February 18, 2009 at 2:49 PM
This is the point.
He can oppose it all he wants. Makes no difference. FCC implements it – I don’t believe it needs to be voted on by congress or signed.
If he appoints an FCC guy who supports it, clearly he supports it too.
lorien1973 on February 18, 2009 at 2:49 PM
Obama has his team put out mixed signals so that everyone hears what they want. he is still campaigning.
Grafted on February 18, 2009 at 2:49 PM
He also supports working with Republicans to forge bipartisan legislation.
I think it’s Alinsky-like but I’ll take the “no”.
Skywise on February 18, 2009 at 2:50 PM
Trust no one.
Firebird on February 18, 2009 at 2:50 PM
*Offer valid thru 2/28/09.
JiangxiDad on February 18, 2009 at 2:51 PM
Does it really matter what he says? Liars beget more lies.
He just said that this stimulus bill is completely devoid of pork and earmarks. Its all semantics with them, this bill didn’t need to have “earmarks” tucked away in it because the whole thing is based on earmark spending.
It doesn’t matter what they say because they are not held to account for their lies.
stewardoftruth on February 18, 2009 at 2:52 PM
Considering the simmering revolt brewing in this country, he would be even more stupid than I thought to push this now.
Vashta.Nerada on February 18, 2009 at 2:52 PM
Yeah, he opposes “fairness” but is in favor of “local content” and community board input. The boards will only exist to harass the one station in the region that carries Rush.
Iblis on February 18, 2009 at 2:53 PM
bingo. The Hope for Airwave Equality Doctrine perhaps ?
stewardoftruth on February 18, 2009 at 2:53 PM
By the time the FCC or Congress go for localization rules to stifle talk radio, Obama will have so much experience climbing down and reversing past statements that any statement he makes regarding this topic will be second fiddle.
WashJeff on February 18, 2009 at 2:53 PM
Ministry of News and Information
Oink on February 18, 2009 at 2:54 PM
They are not going to reimpose the FD. They are going to try to back door it. Licenses will come up for renewal every two years and there will be a requirement for “local” programing. That will break up the big conservative syndications like Bennett, Rush, Laura, Hannity, etc.
So, BO can honestly say he opposes the FD, then turn around and impose a local programming requirement that does basically the same thing.
tommylotto on February 18, 2009 at 2:54 PM
Vashta, the thing is, they think they can stem the revolt if they silence the ones they believe whip us into a frenzy.
myrenovations on February 18, 2009 at 2:54 PM
Obama lied, talk radio died.
ladyingray on February 18, 2009 at 2:54 PM
Rush just talked about this. He said he sent the WSJ an op- ed on the Fairness Doctrine this morning. He wonders if someone at the Journal leaked it to the White House (since it’s oh so coincidental that in the middle of stimuluspalooza they’re issuing statements) who decided to take a preemptive strike before Rush’s piece appears, or better yet, gives the Journal a reason not to run it now.
Rush went on to say that they’ll just call it something else, use ‘local rules’, and so forth to accomplish their goals.
Buy Danish on February 18, 2009 at 2:55 PM
He can’t publicly come out for the unfairness doctrine. He can, however, make it Nana Pelosi’s baby. And she’ll gladly take it on… she has nothing to lose with her San Fransicko constituency.
And I’ll just bet my stinky senators collins and snowe will trip over themselves to make sure they’re the deciding votes for this trash.
ErinF on February 18, 2009 at 2:55 PM
Ok seriously. Let’s just say that the FD is implemented. Will we still be able to get Rush, Sean, Levin, Beck, etc. on satellite?
Oink on February 18, 2009 at 2:56 PM
Not in favor of reinstating the fairness doctrine, but so long as the FCC continues to licence the airwaves for the benefit of the public, would a modicum of local content be so horrible?
If AM/FM were a completely free market that would be one thing, but since they’re not, the number of stations that have 0 per cent local content (inc. FM DJs or AM local news) bothers me.
YYZ on February 18, 2009 at 2:56 PM
Remember the Law of Obama and Expiration Dates: Everything he says comes with one.
wtis02575 on February 18, 2009 at 2:56 PM
Rush announced that he will have an Op Ed tomorrow regarding this very thing. He sent it off this morning. Somebody Leaked.
PappaMac on February 18, 2009 at 2:56 PM
Exactly what Rush said.
carbon_footprint on February 18, 2009 at 2:57 PM
Yes. What was the name of Hitler’s propaganda machine? I forget…
ErinF on February 18, 2009 at 2:58 PM
Sounds like you found a market niche. Go for it.
WashJeff on February 18, 2009 at 2:58 PM
I thought there was a revolt against Obama during the campaign, or at least I thought everyone else found him as revolting as I did. I learned otherwise. Now I wonder whether any of what is said in here makes it out.
If I asked my liberal family what was new with Obama, they’d probably say there was nothing really new, or that he’s busily fixing things. In regard to the Fairness Doctrine, I’d say they’d first hear about it in maybe 2010-2011.
Don’t make the same mistake twice. Republicans overestimated the electorate; Obama didn’t.
JiangxiDad on February 18, 2009 at 2:59 PM
Have any of you noticed that Obama is getting grey, right before our eyes.
PappaMac on February 18, 2009 at 2:59 PM
The answer is simple, it won’t look like the fairness doctrine of old. It will take the form of rules that censor content and allow equalt time. ACORN is already gearing up.
I think equal time on the Katy Couric Show would be nice.
tarpon on February 18, 2009 at 2:59 PM
Not for free…
ladyingray on February 18, 2009 at 3:01 PM
He’s completely against the Fairness Doctrine. In completely unrelated news, today he announced plans for a Doctrine of Fairness.
Jim Treacher on February 18, 2009 at 3:01 PM
Lies or expiration date or inartful comment. Rhetorical flourish. Whatever floats yer boat.
tru2tx on February 18, 2009 at 3:02 PM
Who cares what the idiot messiah says? He’s a complete and total liar and cannot be trusted, at all.
I don’t see why anyone even bothers asking the moron anything.
progressoverpeace on February 18, 2009 at 3:03 PM
I remember Obama dying his hair gray (or ceasing to dye his hair black – either way) in the middle of his campaign when he was “taking fire” for being too young.
He was all of a sudden wise and experienced.
Grafted on February 18, 2009 at 3:04 PM
Oh, I knew that. Thank you though. :)
Oink on February 18, 2009 at 3:05 PM
What ever Mr. Teleprompter says……….
………… expect the opposite.
Seven Percent Solution on February 18, 2009 at 3:05 PM
So, what this really means,and don’t forget
who also is in the WH,Clinton operatives,
is that ‘Fairness Doctrine’is on the table,
then the internet!
The MSM is playing the ‘Triangulation’ game,
behind the scenes,Obama is for it,but the
MSM are playing the deception/perception angle!
canopfor on February 18, 2009 at 3:05 PM
YYZ on February 18, 2009 at 2:56 PM
Both the talk stations I listen to carry quite a bit of local content, one carries Rush the other has Hewitt, Prager and Medved. The one carrying Rush the afternoon evening slot is all local. The other uses the noon hour for local.
goat on February 18, 2009 at 3:06 PM
Funny how this is coming up when XM/Sirius is circling the drain.
cthulhu on February 18, 2009 at 3:06 PM
Obama is crafty enough to not cram socialism down our throats all at once.
The censorship Doctrine is coming.
Montana on February 18, 2009 at 3:07 PM
Bottom line is listeners vote with their dollars on which radio programs live or die. If the Congress ignores the will of the people here and considers this “vote” irrelevant, leading them to enforce some 50/50 “fairness”, why didn’t Republicans get 50% of their desires included in the Porkulus Bill? So what if the people voted the Dems into the majority. Fair is fair.
Yes, I know. I’ll have another hit.
Patrick S on February 18, 2009 at 3:07 PM
You know what bothers me? I only get two hours of Mark Levin because my local talk station uses the third hour to broadcast a local shmuck who yammers on about local issues five nights a week. Localism sucks.
myrenovations on February 18, 2009 at 3:07 PM
If they were to impose this and it was your station. Couldnt you have Rush give one side and maybe get the meth addict under the overpass to give the opposing view. Is there any standards on who you hire?
Greed on February 18, 2009 at 3:08 PM
This is my understanding of the matter too. So, when the FCC votes 3-2 to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine, Obama will say that it’s not the FCC he knew. At the same time, he’ll say that he doesn’t want to politicize the FCC because he was “unfairly” accused of politicizing the census. Then, he’ll say that it’s really a matter for Congress to remedy. All the while, as talk radio screams, Obama will declare to the public, “Who me? What did I do? The GOP has to stop taking its marching orders from Rush Limbaugh.”
Conservative talk radio will be caught in a catch-22 until they can prevail in court. Ideally, conservative talk radio could get a stay of the FCC order until there’s a judicial resolution of the matter. I’d think that the trial court would err on the side of the status quo.
We’ll see.
BuckeyeSam on February 18, 2009 at 3:09 PM
Question for all:
NBC= National Broadcasting Company
ABC= American “” “” Company
CBS= Columbian yea yea yea, I know.
Notice they are all broadcasting companies – just like radio with pictures.
If fairness doctrine is enabled, can we sue to have Michelle, Ann or Rush have PRIME TIME television show to counter the View, The Today Show, or (fill in LONG list here)?
kurtzz3 on February 18, 2009 at 3:09 PM
How about just having one show, that’s on all day long, with Hannity and Olbermann as co-hosts. We could go split screen and split audio (left and right, no pun intended).
You could even do shift work in this model….after Hannity/Olbermann, we could sit with say…Rush and Maddow, then on to O’Reilly and Matthews. The options are virtually limitless.
I’ve even got a name for the show:
Pointless – CounterPointless
BobMbx on February 18, 2009 at 3:09 PM
I think we’re going about this the wrong way.
Instead of fighting the FD, I think instead we (Conservatives) should espouse that the FD will not be contained and cannot possibly be applied *only* to talk radio. The TV airwaves are *no different* than the broadcasted radio waves, there is a mixture of both satellite and terrestrial. All bandwidth is sold off by the government in the same fashion, so consequently, all bandwidth would fall under the same jurisdiction of the FCC and should fall under the same broadcast rules.
If the liberal hacks had to swallow the FD being applied to television and cable networks in addition to the radio waves, perhaps they would finally stfu about this crap (anti-First Amendment). I’m sure any good legal team could present that case in the SCotUS that the law had to be applied evenly…
Liberal newspapers are going under
Liberal radio is going under (see Nova-M and Air America)
Liberal TV can’t compete with Fox as is…
The liberal media would have no safe haven from which to spew their partisan drivel except the internet, where the free market is alive and well. Hundreds of “reporters” and broadcasting celebrities would be out of jobs and the world would perhaps then return to a semblance of normalcy.
Geministorm on February 18, 2009 at 3:10 PM
Good.
YYZ on February 18, 2009 at 3:11 PM
What ever Mr.Teleprompter says… … …
… … … expect the opposite.
Seven Percent Solution on Feb 18,2009 at 3:05PM.
Seven Percent Solution:BINGO!
Hopey/Changey’s grand Perception/Deception strategy!:)
canopfor on February 18, 2009 at 3:11 PM
Was the Fairness Doctrine ever instated?????? What am I missing here?
bloggless on February 18, 2009 at 3:11 PM
Democrats: Be careful what you wish for
Democrats had better stop and think for a second.
Your party is on the brink of a very slippery slope. Make no mistake, your leaders want to dismantle the Constitution, the very cornerstone of our Republic.
Do you really want to do this?
Your party is rapidly getting to a point of no return on the road to tyranny. Ultimately this tyranny will be overthrown and your party destroyed. Your party will have the same fate and the Nazis, Communists, and any other group that wanted absolute power.
Chainsaw56 on February 18, 2009 at 3:12 PM
For forty years, until Reagan.
progressoverpeace on February 18, 2009 at 3:12 PM
Remember the Howard Stern Show? If you don’t want to be bothered by the FCC and it’s rulemaking, go where the FCC has no authority. Satellite, baby.
BobMbx on February 18, 2009 at 3:12 PM
PappaMac on February 18, 2009 at 2:59 PM
Havn’t noticed the gray, but have begun to see a strained smile and stress lines around the eyes and mouth. Suppose it would happen to anyone facing this country’s problems. I’m sure we all out here don’t help. But, he could fix that by listening to us now and then and acting on it.
jeanie on February 18, 2009 at 3:12 PM
Obama listening to advice from Sarah Palin, good for him.
Jim62sch on February 18, 2009 at 3:15 PM
Uh huh. Oblahblah also opposes “Nationalization” but is in favor of a “Swedish System” for banks.
All I know is that the Swedish System better mean that I get a massage in place of a free toaster when opening a checking account and I damn well better not have to talk to the Muppet Swedish Chef when I call for account inquiries.
Damiano on February 18, 2009 at 3:16 PM
Localism is libspeak for fairness doctrine.
canditaylor68 on February 18, 2009 at 3:17 PM
The Fariness D or some variation would be an annoyance, but we can get around it. In fact, depending on how it comes down, we can contribute to sinking it as happened before. Boycott it on all fronts especially do not buy or subscribe to any products or services that sponsor it. There are enough conservative/GOP out there to put a serious dent in the economics of this boon doggle. Sure, it might take down a friend or two, sad, but the price of freedom of speech and worth it. We are not helpless here–we the people and all that….
jeanie on February 18, 2009 at 3:18 PM
Sorry, not buying it. They’ll just call it something else and he’ll let his persons of hench in Congress pass it, then just claim he’s going along with the will of the people.
In the end it’ll wind up being called the Democrat Death Warrant Act of 2009.
JammieWearingFool on February 18, 2009 at 3:19 PM
liar…uhbuma
winston on February 18, 2009 at 3:19 PM
Who me bring back the fairness doctrine? Not me but you have to watch the guys over at the FCC.There independent and don,t realy (Wink Wink)work for me.
thmcbb on February 18, 2009 at 3:20 PM
I love the Mr. Teleprompter tag. However, the equipment in question is more of a giant monitor linked to Axelrod’s blackberry. : ))
Perhaps, the President can respond to such questions by saying,
I would like you to refer to the notes I’ve been fed from my podium (and Chief of Staff). : ))
WASHINGTON PROWLER
In All Fairness
By The Prowler on 2.16.09 @ 6:09AM
SCREENING OBAMA
One wouldn’t know it from reading the Washington Post or New York Times, but some inside the White House don’t think that President Barack Obama hit a home run with his first national press conference last week.
“It looked scripted beyond the scripted part, the speech,” says one former communications adviser, who has been feeding notes and suggestions to the White House team and worked with them on the inauguration. “Every president has gone into one of these things knowing that there were some pre-arranged questions or journalists to be called on, but this one was pretty ham-handed.”
To that end, he says, the White House is looking to install a small video or computer screen into the podium used by the president for press conferences and events in the White House. “It would make it easier for the comms guys to pass along information without being obvious about it,” says the adviser.
The screen would indicate whom to call on, seat placement for journalists, pass along notes or points to hit, and so forth, says the adviser.
Using a screen is nothing new for Obama; almost nothing he said in supposedly unscripted townhall events during the presidential campaign was unscripted, down to many of the questions and the answers to those questions. Teleprompter screens at the events scrolled not only his opening remarks, but also statistics and information he could use to answer questions.
“It would be the same idea with the podium,” says the adviser.
Obama had a teleprompter set up for his remarks last week, before taking questions, but the White House couldn’t use the teleprompter for anything but the remarks, because the journalists were so close to the screens. Further complicating matters, teleprompter copy can’t be easily updated in real time, in a setting like a White House press conference.
Angry Dumbo on February 18, 2009 at 3:21 PM
I am sure he welcomes this distraction from the new number one threat to our country.
The economy.
getalife on February 18, 2009 at 3:22 PM
If only there was some document where the people could put limitation on the freedoms that Congress is able to take away.
pedestrian on February 18, 2009 at 3:23 PM
Hah hah Hah HAHAHAHHA!
You’re talking about Liberals here. They don’t even believe that the MSM is leftist. Heh.
Liberals, when faced with facts, reason and logic, never see truth. They see what they want to “feel”.
Montana on February 18, 2009 at 3:24 PM
Of course not, silly..how would that help Michelles kids?
Itchee Dryback on February 18, 2009 at 3:24 PM
Unsure which I think is the #1 threat to our nation? Controlling the news strikes me as worse that the sinking economy. The obama admin already tries to do that. They are a dangerous bunch!
jeanie on February 18, 2009 at 3:28 PM
Fairness Doctrine sounds so rigid, so harsh.
How about Fairness and Flowers. Much more appealing.
Yeah, right.
pjean on February 18, 2009 at 3:29 PM
Democrats: Be careful what you wish for
Democrats had better stop and think for a second.
Your party is on the brink of a very slippery slope. Make no mistake, your leaders want to dismantle the Constitution, the very cornerstone of our Republic.
Do you really want to do this?
Your party is rapidly getting to a point of no return on the road to tyranny. Ultimately this tyranny will be overthrown and your party destroyed. Your party will have the same fate
andas the Nazis, Communists, and any other group that wanted absolute power.There, fixed the typo
Chainsaw56 on February 18, 2009 at 3:31 PM
Download it. It’s free. Like speech. For now.
Jim Treacher on February 18, 2009 at 3:31 PM
The rebuttal to Mr. Limbaugh’s monologue will now be given by progressive spokesman Transy Smallpecker.
whitetop on February 18, 2009 at 3:32 PM
We found out today that Obama is taking over running the mortgage industry. Such a clever man, next will be the banks, then autos and media, to the extent the slobbering love affair doesn’t already violate any fairness in presentation.
This debate is about “fairness” in media like the “card check” scheme is like “emloyee freedom”.
Harry Schell on February 18, 2009 at 3:34 PM
You’ve got a point here. Get all the top conservative talk show hosts to sue for “equal time on TV” in exchange for equal time for liberals on radio. Get Rush Limbaugh on with Olbermann, Hannity on with Stephanopoulos, Laura Ingraham on “The View”, Michelle Malkin or Star Parker on with Oprah, etc., and let the sheeple in TeeVeeLand hear what the Other Side thinks.
The libs might think twice about forcing conservatives on TV, and let the free market decide what political opinions people want to hear.
Steve Z on February 18, 2009 at 3:35 PM
I love the Mr. Teleprompter tag.
Angry Dumbo on Feb 18,2008 at 3:21PM.
Angry Dumbo: Remember when the MSM had a fit over President
Bush!
They accused him of wearing a communication
package,or buldge,on his lower back,under his
suit,being fed information at press conferen
ces!
And Team Obama is open about it,yet,not a peep
from the biased MSM!
canopfor on February 18, 2009 at 3:35 PM
If you changed the name of various fascist/communist/nazi programs and put a nice spin on them… you’d probably get a solid majority of the unwashed to support you.
There is also the fear of “appearing” to support “hate” if you oppose the FD.
I saw a cartoon years ago in which a vote was called on the “Anti-motherhood and Anti-apple pie Bill”… no hands went up… the bottom panel had the bill name changed to the “Anti-motherhood and Anti-apple pie CIVIL RIGHTS Bill” and every hand shot up.
mankai on February 18, 2009 at 3:35 PM
One of Alinksy’s rules for tools:
Just like the shot across the bow talk from the conservative radio hosts. They’re gauging the reaction from their targets and the public. From the media, too. Keeping my eyes and ears on the SC justices or any future Obagonga appointee talk. Not gonna pretend these radicals don’t have power.
RepubChica on February 18, 2009 at 3:37 PM
Vashta.Nerada on February 18, 2009 at 2:52 PM
I am interested in whether anyone believes that the ‘simmering discontent’ I see evidenced here and on other conservative sites will erupt into anything. And, if so in what form? Used to see some extreme examples from time to time here, but paid them no serious mind. I still tend to see it as venting and all talk, but am interested in how others may see it.
jeanie on February 18, 2009 at 3:38 PM
Herr Obamafuhrer’s henchman may not exactly call it the FD, but they will try and stifle dissent just the same.
After all, these are totalitarians we are dealing with here, and freedom of speech, or freedom in general, is the absolute last thing on their minds.
-Dave
Dave R. on February 18, 2009 at 3:40 PM
There is a REASON Barak Obama is called “The One.”
I don’t pay a lick of attention to anything anyone in the Obama administration says. And neither does he.
Clinton used to have his people run “trial ballons.” It was like listening to Soviet propaganda: you had to take it all with a huge grain of salt, but you could at least try to reverse-engineer and figure out what they were really trying to pull over on you.
Not so with Obama’s cabinet. These guys are running completely open loop. He doesn’t bother giving them directions, and he couldn’t care less what they say.
logis on February 18, 2009 at 3:40 PM
Negative. It only applies to the public airwaves that is specifically AM radio. Coincidence that, huh?
anuts on February 18, 2009 at 3:42 PM
If that doesn’t work for people they can always get him here for the full three hours.
JammieWearingFool on February 18, 2009 at 3:42 PM
Smart White House. Issue denials that the President wants it; while allowing crazy Democrats on Capitol Hill and in the commentariat to keep talking about it and keep conservatives distracted and afraid.
rockmom on February 18, 2009 at 3:44 PM
I wonder if Obama will do us the favor of instituting the fairness doctrine?
You can’t tell me his minions have not kept close track of the core right base and have a very articulate understanding of the consequences involved the any with jacking around any of their big causes.
Speakup on February 18, 2009 at 3:50 PM
PAWN = Public Air Waves Neutrality
redrock on February 18, 2009 at 3:50 PM
Obama lies to his own people?/sarc
*eats*
bluelightbrigade on February 18, 2009 at 3:50 PM
What about the Libertarians & the Communists do they get equal time? Be careful what you wish for DemonRats.
redridinghood on February 18, 2009 at 3:52 PM
Daa, posting from work.
involved
the anywith jacking around any of their big causes.Speakup on February 18, 2009 at 3:54 PM
They take your banks. They take your voice. They take your guns.
Who ever thought it would all be comin’ down this fast, this soon?
So, the question remains – what are we going to do about all this? Wait for the Watchmen? hello? Liberty is calling….what shall our answer be?
OwlorNothing on February 18, 2009 at 3:56 PM
Open Dialogue Doctrine…or ODD
Dialogue, Open Doctrine, & Opinion…DoDo
right2bright on February 18, 2009 at 3:56 PM
They will just call it something else.
forest on February 18, 2009 at 2:49 PM
Too funny. All of us of a like mind.
anniekc on February 18, 2009 at 4:00 PM
How about: Would he support Pence’s act(it was Pence, right?) to block the FD?
batter on February 18, 2009 at 4:03 PM
“They will just call it something else.”
Precisely.
spobjasap on February 18, 2009 at 4:18 PM
Me, too, Ed, and they’re little-brainer follow-up questions, particularly the first one. I’m surprised it wasn’t asked. Let’s see if there’s a WH reporter who has one or two gray cells, tomorrow.
Dusty on February 18, 2009 at 4:19 PM
I sure do remember talk of GW’s “bulge.” Still Obama getting fed answers in real time doesn’t seem to be helping him much. On the topic of the fairness doctrine or some kind of local content rule, I know it is coming, but I can’t help but think that it will backfire. If I spend 3, 6 or 9 hours a day puttering around the house listening to Rush, Sean or Mark Levin vent on liberal politicians, it is 3, 6, or 9 hours I am not spending volunteering for the conservative causes I support. This whole Fairness Doctrine could just be a huge windfall to the conservative movement. A rallying point if you will.
Perhaps organize a rally where we send our radios to our local congress critters in Washington who so clearly want to control what we listen to?
Angry Dumbo on February 18, 2009 at 4:20 PM
Axelrod already hinted at the truth by dumping responsibility off on the FCC. FCC commissioners are appointed to do what their appointer tells them. The Dem’s do not understand that the Fairness Doctrine or Localism or the Fairness and Fairie Fart doctrine is the final straw for many people. Organized dissent being stifled by either party is waving a red flag at the bull.
Elemental on February 18, 2009 at 4:20 PM
While this is obviously a solution, it does not address the enormous concern that the government would be censoring content on a commercial, privately-owned radio station. The analogy would be to say that government censorship of newspapers is okay because we can always read what we want on the internet.
Government censorship of any media is un-American!
DrStock on February 18, 2009 at 4:31 PM
When interpelating the statements of The One on this (or any subject) it is important to keep in mind that the General Operational Principle applicable to all His Pronouncements is: it is all B as in B, S as in S.
Bruno Strozek on February 18, 2009 at 4:32 PM
You always hear people complaining the world’s going to Hell in a handbasket. But it seems like in the last six months, somebody greased the skids.
There’re pretty much two options:
1) You can play the bailout lottery and try to guess which companies will be propped up, and which ones will be taxed out of existence to pay for it; then re-shuffle your money in the hopes that you’ll survive the next round, and the next… or
2) You can buy the only two remaining sure-fire safe investments: guns and canned food.
logis on February 18, 2009 at 4:32 PM
Dude, this liar Obama will just call it something else.
marklmail on February 18, 2009 at 4:33 PM
The beauty of this statement is the lumping of Stabenow and Harkin with carnival clowns Kucinich and Mo Hinchey. This is where both belong – in the lowest echelon of congressional court jesters.
Jaibones on February 18, 2009 at 4:35 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »