Confidence: Warranted?
By Mitch Berg
Noodles at Freedom Dogs notes FCC Chairman Kevin Martin’s pinky-swear that the Commission has no plans to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine:
Every once in awhile something that makes sense and shows some level of rational thinking comes out of Washington. This is one of those times
.
WASHINGTON (AP) – The Federal Communications Commission has no intention of reinstating the Fairness Doctrine imposing a requirement of balanced coverage of issues on public airwaves, FCC Chairman Kevin Martin said.
Martin, in a letter written this week to Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., and made public Thursday, said the agency found no compelling reason to revisit its 1987 decision that enforcing the federal rule was not in the public interest.
Of course there’s no compelling reason – now.
But if we have a Democrat president and a Democrat Congress?
Compulsion will likely follow, in the form of a slew of Democrat nominees.
Chairman Martin’s word is only as good as his appointment, and as good as the strength of the Free Speech advocates on the Commission.
Any bets, if Hillary! takes over?
Of course we all know why this came up in the first place, it is clear that Democrats want to silence any opposing views to their own.
Several Democratic lawmakers suggested that Congress take another look at the doctrine after conservative radio talk show hosts aggressively attacked an immigration reform bill when it was on the Senate floor, contributing to its defeat.
Even with all of their clamoring one only need to take a look at the wide variety of information sources available today to know that the Fairness Doctrine has no place in the current marketplace of ideas and news.
If it were about practicality, reason, or fact, there’d never be a question.
But it’s about quashing dissent.
July 30th, 2007 at 6:34 am
Assuming, for the sake of argument, that none of the Democrats are interested in further stifling of dissent — despite their protestations to the contrary — getting rid of the ability of the FCC to reinstate the “Fairness” Doctrine is still the right thing; some future bunch of Democrats (or Republicans) might think differently.
That said, while I understand showing the flag now, I think that’s all the activity on the Hill is, on this; the House and Senate are firmly in the hands of Pelosi and Reid, after all, and the best possible result, at this point, is them allowing Pence’s bill blocking of the FD (pronounced “fudd”) to come to the floor for a losing vote, (they’re not going to let it come to the floor if it would pass) and even that’s vanishingly unlikely.
Is this the right battle to pick at this time? Probably. Putting people on notice that there’ll be a huge amount of fuss if the present free market situation is messed with is about all that can be done, and the Pence bill is, as far as I can tell, a perfectly legitimate mechanism to get that loud, noisy, and entirely fair discussion going, and keep it going.
July 30th, 2007 at 9:30 am
The motivation is expressed daily by the moonbat blaaaghs that censor their comments.
Moonbats cannot and will not deal with anyone dropping a big Truth turd into their koolaid.
July 30th, 2007 at 10:09 am
That ain’t truth you’re crapping, swift one. You are what you eat. In your case: shit-in, shit-out.
July 30th, 2007 at 11:01 am
AC your vehemence makes one thing Swiftee is close to the truth if not touching the sorespot.
July 30th, 2007 at 11:10 am
It’s called “standard English,” billhedrick. Look into it. Angryclown isn’t fluent in gibberish.
July 30th, 2007 at 12:16 pm
There’s that awesome, towering intellect on display, yet again.
July 30th, 2007 at 1:08 pm
Uh, don’t sell yourself short, AC… you’re a tremendous slouch.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22you%27re+a+tremendous+slouch.%22
July 30th, 2007 at 1:35 pm
Now, AC – since the establishment Clown media isn’t covered by the “Fairness” doctrine at all, you probably have no stake in this…
…but for someone who squealed with all the other Ashkkkroft Libertarians when the Administration took its’ non-existant whacks at civil liberties, I’d think you’d be right there with us, protesting the Dems’ moves to reinstate the Doctrine.
Or is the lefty version of the First Amendment like their version of the Second – it only applies to some people?
July 30th, 2007 at 2:00 pm
“Or is the lefty version of the First Amendment like their version of the Second – it only applies to some people?”
Well Duh.
July 30th, 2007 at 2:22 pm
Let’s see, Angryclown slagged not-so-swiftee and criticized billhedrick for an unintelligible post. Not sure how you extrapolated Angryclown’s views on the defunct fairness doctrine from those comments. (Here’s an opinion on a moot law, if that helps: Fugitive Slave Act? Totally against it.)
Angryclown will let you know if he ever wishes to become SITD’s Alan Colmes-style house liberal – condemned to gamely set up the pins for the wingnut masses to bowl down your self-defined issues of the day. Till then, maybe you can lure PB back?
July 30th, 2007 at 3:05 pm
You already do!
lol
July 30th, 2007 at 3:09 pm
self-defined issues of the day
You say that like it’s a bad thing.
This is, like, my blog. Not a chat forum!
July 31st, 2007 at 12:38 pm
Personally, I think RickDFL is more like Alan Colmes than AC. AC is the lefty equivalent of Michael the Savage Weiner. I don’t listen to lefty foghorns, so I have no idea who their equivalent of Mikey is.