Abraxas
Global Moderator
Hero Member
   
Karma: +213/-207
Posts: 4,100
"You do not speak for the rest"
|
 |
« on: March 12, 2008, 07:23:39 AM » |
|
Well, I could count on one hand how many times this has happened, and it's NEVER cause Bush is right... but because the Democrats are just flat out wrong... Bush: ‘Fairness Doctrine’ unfairIn Nashville today, during a speech to the National Religious Broadcasters Convention, President Bush said there’s nothing fair about the so-called “Fairness Doctrine” that once required broadcasters to offer air time for competing ideologies. The FCC got rid of it about 20 years ago. Now, some Democrats in Congress - long the target of popular conservative radio talk-show hosts - think it’s time to bring it back. Perish the thought, Bush told the religious broadcasters in the following passage that ends with a veto promise. His speech can be found at this link... What the hell? Usually I just pitty Democrats - but now I feel this feeling welling up inside - one might call it "loathing". Seriously. How do you mandate objectible media? Why should it be regulated? WTF!?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Either you repeat the same conventional doctrines everybody is saying, or else you say something true, and it will sound like its from Neptune. - Noam Chomsky
... you can almost see the high water mark - that place where the wave finally broke and rolled back. - Hunter S. Thompson
|
|
|
|
Perrin
|
 |
« Reply #1 on: March 12, 2008, 07:41:35 AM » |
|
The irony about this Doctrine was that it was introduced 20 years ago by the Reagan Administration. It was dropped after a realization came that more and more pundits were conservative. It is a pointless doctrine to begin with in my opinion, and I do disagree with it, I am just surprised that some dems are picking up an old Reagan torch.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
A fanatic is one who can’t change his mind and won’t change the subject.
In America, anyone can be president. That\\\'s one of the risks you take.
|
|
|
|
Perrin
|
 |
« Reply #2 on: March 12, 2008, 08:24:00 AM » |
|
One additional odd point, this does point against the idea of a liberal media. If the Dems are trying to place a fairness doctrine now, then one has to ask why?
Why would the Dems want equal air time and the Reps go against it when at one point in history the reverse was true (when there was a clear bias)?
Just a question to ask one's self.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
A fanatic is one who can’t change his mind and won’t change the subject.
In America, anyone can be president. That\\\'s one of the risks you take.
|
|
|
OswaldTheOsprey
High Society
Hero Member
   
Karma: +100/-123
Posts: 9,152
|
 |
« Reply #3 on: March 12, 2008, 10:08:28 AM » |
|
One additional odd point, this does point against the idea of a liberal media. If the Dems are trying to place a fairness doctrine now, then one has to ask why?
Why would the Dems want equal air time and the Reps go against it when at one point in history the reverse was true (when there was a clear bias)?
Just a question to ask one's self.
It could possibly be because both parties are hypocrites and frauds and look for any edge, constitutional or not. The party of Mark Foley versus the party of Eliot Spitzer. OswaldTheOsprey
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Urbi et Orbi
|
|
|
|
Reaganite
|
 |
« Reply #4 on: March 12, 2008, 11:33:52 AM » |
|
The free market should dictate who gets airtime on private channels.
If people wanted liberal talk radio it would exists and be thriving but its not.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
You get what you pay for America... Welcome to the Obamanation.....
|
|
|
Abraxas
Global Moderator
Hero Member
   
Karma: +213/-207
Posts: 4,100
"You do not speak for the rest"
|
 |
« Reply #5 on: March 12, 2008, 07:20:46 PM » |
|
The free market should dictate who gets airtime on private channels. Damnit! Now I'm even agreeing with Reaganite! You Democrats have really done it now... If people wanted liberal talk radio it would exists and be thriving but its not. Liberals have the internet...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Either you repeat the same conventional doctrines everybody is saying, or else you say something true, and it will sound like its from Neptune. - Noam Chomsky
... you can almost see the high water mark - that place where the wave finally broke and rolled back. - Hunter S. Thompson
|
|
|
Buzz
Full Member
 
Karma: +30/-35
Posts: 157
|
 |
« Reply #6 on: March 12, 2008, 11:07:19 PM » |
|
Oh please... Don't any of you really know anything about the Fairness Doctrine? And don't you all(except for Reaganite) know better than to believe anything Bush says without checking it out first? First... Reagan did not start the doctrine. It was started back in 1949. The Reagan Administration was just instrumental in getting rid of the fairness doctrine. Second... The fairness doctrine was found by the Supreme Court to be constitutional back in 69. And that ruling has never been overturned. Third... The fairness doctrine covers public airwaves and not private channels. And forth... The fairness doctrine is not intended to silence anyone. That is a lie. Its purpose is to make sure people are exposed to both sides of a argument. There are some very good reasons to reinstate the doctrine as well some legitimate reasons not to. So before you all go off and condemn Democrats because of this, stop and think about it for a bit. What would be so horrible if Rush Limbaugh had to let liberals on his show to actually debate him? Has anyone ever noticed that you never see him able to debate anybody on a level playing field? Its because he has told so many lies and spread so much misinformation that he doesn't know fact from fiction. I watched the one time Rush tried it... he got his ass handed to him on a silver plater. And if the millions of people who believe everything he says were exposed to some truth many would realize how wrong he is all the time. That would hopefully force him to get some real live research staff and learn some facts or lose his listeners. There are a lot of pundits out there who are just as bad as Rush and I believe they are one of the main reasons why so many people in this country are so misinformed. Sure... I wish we didn't need the government to get involved and I believe in free speech but I think that there are lots of political pundits on the public air waves that are doing more harm to this country than good.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
tadpol
|
 |
« Reply #7 on: March 13, 2008, 12:43:11 AM » |
|
The fairness doctrine would not put a liberal within spiting distance of Mr Limbaugh, and would not encourage his show to be any more factual. It would make the stations airing his show produce a show where any person or group Rush mentions could call him a liar. This does not strike me as a good thing.
Also I'd like to understand why the fcc cares.
We allow people speaking to out shout each other competing for our attention. Is the difference between em and audio speech historic or philosophical? If it's a rational distinction I'd be interested in hearing it explained.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Jsharp29
Jr. Member

Karma: +9/-8
Posts: 78
|
 |
« Reply #8 on: March 13, 2008, 04:23:50 PM » |
|
What would be so horrible if Rush Limbaugh had to let liberals on his show to actually debate him?
Liberals can just start their own program....which they have. All you want to do shut the Right up, which isn't free speech good sir........
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Abraxas
Global Moderator
Hero Member
   
Karma: +213/-207
Posts: 4,100
"You do not speak for the rest"
|
 |
« Reply #9 on: March 13, 2008, 06:28:43 PM » |
|
The left has already tried to make a radio program.
It's not the right's fault that they suck.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Either you repeat the same conventional doctrines everybody is saying, or else you say something true, and it will sound like its from Neptune. - Noam Chomsky
... you can almost see the high water mark - that place where the wave finally broke and rolled back. - Hunter S. Thompson
|
|
|
Buzz
Full Member
 
Karma: +30/-35
Posts: 157
|
 |
« Reply #10 on: March 14, 2008, 02:15:49 AM » |
|
The fairness doctrine would not put a liberal within spiting distance of Mr Limbaugh, and would not encourage his show to be any more factual. It would make the stations airing his show produce a show where any person or group Rush mentions could call him a liar. This does not strike me as a good thing. Yeah... you may be right. I don't know for sure how the fairness doctrine would be enforced if reinstated. And I doubt if you really know for sure either. I think the best way would be if the both sides were to actually let the other side on their shows for a fair debate. But to be honest that wouldn't go over to well with many on the right. People like Limbaugh would be shown to be the dumb asses that they really are. And he would do everything in his power to prevent that from happening. As a matter of fact Rush would probably quit before he would face a liberal in a fair debate. So Broadcasters might want to go with what you suggest. But that would mean the broadcaster's would actually have to drop right wing shows to put the left shows on. That would in fact silence some hosts, limit free speech and cause a loss of profits. That would be unconstitutional. I think the only fair way to bring back the fairness doctrine would be to force everyone to have fair debates instead of just forcing equal time for leftist hosts. Also I'd like to understand why the fcc cares. What makes you think they care? Since when has any agency under the leadership of Bush actually cared about anything except big business? If this doctrine is brought back before Bush leaves office it will be done by Congress and not the FCC.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: March 14, 2008, 02:35:50 AM by Buzz »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Buzz
Full Member
 
Karma: +30/-35
Posts: 157
|
 |
« Reply #11 on: March 14, 2008, 02:33:08 AM » |
|
What would be so horrible if Rush Limbaugh had to let liberals on his show to actually debate him?
All you want to do shut the Right up, which isn't free speech good sir........ Is that all you have to contribute to this discussion? Just one right wing talking point? I have been listening to Rush Limbaugh off and on for over 20 years. Now If i wanted to shut him up why would I listen to him for so long. Its because I like hearing from both sides of an argument. And Rush is more entertaining than most even if he is an idiot. Its his lies and misinformation that he and others on the right continually regurgitate that the left wants to expose. Most of America's radio stations are controlled by the right. And most of these radio stations don't give the left much air time if any. So is this really free speech when only one side gets to speak?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Buzz
Full Member
 
Karma: +30/-35
Posts: 157
|
 |
« Reply #12 on: March 14, 2008, 02:34:02 AM » |
|
The left has already tried to make a radio program.
It's not the right's fault that they suck.
Is this based on personal experience? Have you actually ever even listened to any leftist radio programs? Your the one who started this thread. Why don't you quit just bashing the left and actually debate the issue?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
neue regel
|
 |
« Reply #13 on: March 14, 2008, 04:19:57 AM » |
|
The left has already tried to make a radio program.
It's not the right's fault that they suck.
Is this based on personal experience?
Have you actually ever even listened to any leftist radio programs?
Your the one who started this thread. Why don't you quit just bashing the left and actually debate the issue? I have. I've listened in spurts several times to Randi Rhodes (not the guitar player.) Talk about depressing. I had to keep myself from sharp objects for about 5 hours after listening to that vitriol. Pure hate is an ugly thing and I'd rather not waste my time. I guess they are still on the air.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
OswaldTheOsprey
High Society
Hero Member
   
Karma: +100/-123
Posts: 9,152
|
 |
« Reply #14 on: March 14, 2008, 04:58:05 AM » |
|
The problem I have is that what passes for discourse on TV and radio is starkly limited by the establishment. Limbaugh, Olbermann, O'Reilly, Franken, etc. are simply hacks, in most cases partisan hacks. True non-conformists, either of the left or right, are shut out. Where are people like Alexander Cockburn, Joe Sobran, Steve Sailer, Jeffrey St. Clair and others like them? Perhaps the establishment doesn't want their messages out, eh?
OswaldTheOsprey
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Urbi et Orbi
|
|
|
|