Nothing fair about Fairness Doctrine
+6
Theophilus
CarolinaHound
Terry05_99
HotParadox
thomasjay
Grim17
10 posters
Page 1 of 1
Nothing fair about Fairness Doctrine
by Grim17 Sun Feb 15, 2009 10:19 pm
Nothing fair about Fairness Doctrine
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Nolan Finley
Americans are about to learn that when it comes to protecting their civil liberties, they can't relax no matter which party is in power in Washington.
After spending eight years wailing about President George W. Bush's relentless disregard for the Bill of Rights, Democrats are preparing to launch an assault on the most precious individual freedom of all -- free speech.
They are trying to shut down conservative talk radio, the primary source of criticism of their programs and policies.
Michigan Sen. Debbie Stabenow was reportedly leading the effort, though she now says "that's not my issue." Good thing, since it would have been an obvious conflict of interest. Her husband, Tom Athans, is a co-founder of Air America, the left-wing network that's never caught fire with radio listeners.
Some Democrats want hearings on legislation to revive the ironically named Fairness Doctrine, which requires broadcast stations to provide a balance of opinions in their programming.
While that may sound reasonable on the surface, the reality is that there's little commercial market for liberal talk on radio.
The impact of the Fairness Doctrine would be to drive the Rush Limbaughs, Sean Hannitys, Bill O'Reillys and Frank Beckmanns off the air. Few stations can afford to devote hours to unprofitable liberal programming just to keep the conservative shows on the air.
What's curious about this is that Democrats are just coming off their second straight election of trouncing conservative Republicans, despite being crucified daily by Limbaugh and his ilk.
The attacks on Democrats from conservative talk show hosts barely moved the scales when balanced against the overwhelming media bias toward Barack Obama's candidacy.
Obama beat his Republican opponent, Sen. John McCain, 3-1 in major newspaper endorsements. Time and Newsweek battled tooth and nail to one up each other in deifying the Democratic nominee.
National Public Radio, subsidized by taxpayers, should have been on the Obama campaign payroll. A teeny bopper at a Jonas Brothers concert couldn't have squealed more than MSNBC's Chris Matthews did at the mention of Obama's name.
Against this fierce determination by the rest of the media to get Obama elected, the right-wing blabbers didn't stand a chance.
You'd think the Democrats would savor their victory and ignore their critics.
That they can't suggests an insecurity about the ability of their ideas and policies to hold the hearts and minds of the electorate.
Stifling dissent is a favored weapon of those who are convinced they know what's best for the people and are willing to trample the people's rights to give it to them.
The Fairness Doctrine is right out of the playbooks of Hugo Chavez, Vladimir Putin and others who so value popularity they'll protect it by any means necessary.
This is censorship, poorly masked. And whether you cheer Limbaugh or detest him, if you don't stand up for his right to speak against the tide, you'll ultimately lose your right to do the same.
Link
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Nolan Finley
Americans are about to learn that when it comes to protecting their civil liberties, they can't relax no matter which party is in power in Washington.
After spending eight years wailing about President George W. Bush's relentless disregard for the Bill of Rights, Democrats are preparing to launch an assault on the most precious individual freedom of all -- free speech.
They are trying to shut down conservative talk radio, the primary source of criticism of their programs and policies.
Michigan Sen. Debbie Stabenow was reportedly leading the effort, though she now says "that's not my issue." Good thing, since it would have been an obvious conflict of interest. Her husband, Tom Athans, is a co-founder of Air America, the left-wing network that's never caught fire with radio listeners.
Some Democrats want hearings on legislation to revive the ironically named Fairness Doctrine, which requires broadcast stations to provide a balance of opinions in their programming.
While that may sound reasonable on the surface, the reality is that there's little commercial market for liberal talk on radio.
The impact of the Fairness Doctrine would be to drive the Rush Limbaughs, Sean Hannitys, Bill O'Reillys and Frank Beckmanns off the air. Few stations can afford to devote hours to unprofitable liberal programming just to keep the conservative shows on the air.
What's curious about this is that Democrats are just coming off their second straight election of trouncing conservative Republicans, despite being crucified daily by Limbaugh and his ilk.
The attacks on Democrats from conservative talk show hosts barely moved the scales when balanced against the overwhelming media bias toward Barack Obama's candidacy.
Obama beat his Republican opponent, Sen. John McCain, 3-1 in major newspaper endorsements. Time and Newsweek battled tooth and nail to one up each other in deifying the Democratic nominee.
National Public Radio, subsidized by taxpayers, should have been on the Obama campaign payroll. A teeny bopper at a Jonas Brothers concert couldn't have squealed more than MSNBC's Chris Matthews did at the mention of Obama's name.
Against this fierce determination by the rest of the media to get Obama elected, the right-wing blabbers didn't stand a chance.
You'd think the Democrats would savor their victory and ignore their critics.
That they can't suggests an insecurity about the ability of their ideas and policies to hold the hearts and minds of the electorate.
Stifling dissent is a favored weapon of those who are convinced they know what's best for the people and are willing to trample the people's rights to give it to them.
The Fairness Doctrine is right out of the playbooks of Hugo Chavez, Vladimir Putin and others who so value popularity they'll protect it by any means necessary.
This is censorship, poorly masked. And whether you cheer Limbaugh or detest him, if you don't stand up for his right to speak against the tide, you'll ultimately lose your right to do the same.
Link
Grim17-
Number of posts : 430
Age : 59
Location : Phoenix, Arizona
Registration date : 2009-01-17
Re: Nothing fair about Fairness Doctrine
by thomasjay Mon Feb 16, 2009 11:54 am
I don't think most people remember the Fairness doctrine, because it had so little real impact on public discourse. All I remember of it was Emily Litella type characters commenting on usually obscure local issues at the end of the evening news broadcasts. I don't recall it forcing broadcasters to balance show hosts politically. It would have even less impact now with cable and sattelite. Anyone thinking it would get 2nd cousin Rush off the airwaves is dreaming. And I still can't believe Darryn Kagan went out with the fatass.
thomasjay- Number of posts : 176
Registration date : 2009-01-22
Re: Nothing fair about Fairness Doctrine
by HotParadox Mon Feb 16, 2009 12:04 pm
HahaOHhahathomasjay wrote:I don't think most people remember the Fairness doctrine, because it had so little real impact on public discourse. All I remember of it was Emily Litella type characters commenting on usually obscure local issues at the end of the evening news broadcasts. I don't recall it forcing broadcasters to balance show hosts politically. It would have even less impact now with cable and sattelite. Anyone thinking it would get 2nd cousin Rush off the airwaves is dreaming. And I still can't believe Darryn Kagan went out with the fatass.
HotParadox-
Number of posts : 4051
Location : Boston
Registration date : 2009-01-13
Re: Nothing fair about Fairness Doctrine
by Guest Mon Feb 16, 2009 2:22 pm
From what I've read, even if they reinstate the Fairness Doctrine, stations will not be required to balance out their programming. The FCC can choose whether or not to enforce it, and from my reading they rarely chose to when it was enacted.
Guest- Guest
Re: Nothing fair about Fairness Doctrine
by Terry05_99 Mon Feb 16, 2009 7:04 pm
lisan23 wrote:From what I've read, even if they reinstate the Fairness Doctrine, stations will not be required to balance out their programming. The FCC can choose whether or not to enforce it, and from my reading they rarely chose to when it was enacted.
Why do you think it is needed if it was "rarely" enacted? Why a push now?
Terry05_99-
Number of posts : 177
Age : 68
Location : Canton Michigan
Job/hobbies : Harley Davidsons, flying, hunting
Humor : Thats not funny
Registration date : 2009-01-13
Re: Nothing fair about Fairness Doctrine
by Guest Mon Feb 16, 2009 7:26 pm
Terry05_99 wrote:lisan23 wrote:From what I've read, even if they reinstate the Fairness Doctrine, stations will not be required to balance out their programming. The FCC can choose whether or not to enforce it, and from my reading they rarely chose to when it was enacted.
Why do you think it is needed if it was "rarely" enacted? Why a push now?
Because almost no one likes Rush Limbaugh, not even most Republicans. Ok... not really. I think it's an attempt by Congress to make liberal shows more available and popular and to compete with the Republican corner market. Also, probably an attempt to reduce the number of Republican radio shows. BUT Congress can reach only so far, it can't force the FCC to enact them since the Supreme Court already ruled that the FCC doesn't have to.
Guest- Guest
Re: Nothing fair about Fairness Doctrine
by CarolinaHound Mon Feb 16, 2009 8:48 pm
Why don't more liberals listen to liberal shows when people do try to run them?
CarolinaHound-
Number of posts : 4843
Age : 54
Location : Fayetteville NC
Job/hobbies : Being loveable me.
Humor : yes
Registration date : 2009-01-13 -
Re: Nothing fair about Fairness Doctrine
by Guest Mon Feb 16, 2009 8:51 pm
I watch Keith Olbermann, but no liberal radio shows are even aired in my area. Even if there were some, it would be unlikely I'd be able to hear them unless I streamed them from a webpage.
Guest- Guest
Re: Nothing fair about Fairness Doctrine
by CarolinaHound Mon Feb 16, 2009 10:10 pm
I don't listen to talk radio myself. The only time I listen to a radio at all is in the car and I have to listen to rock when I drive. I was just curious. What ever happened to air america or whatever it was? Frankin's station.
CarolinaHound-
Number of posts : 4843
Age : 54
Location : Fayetteville NC
Job/hobbies : Being loveable me.
Humor : yes
Registration date : 2009-01-13 -
Re: Nothing fair about Fairness Doctrine
by Guest Mon Feb 16, 2009 10:51 pm
Googled and found this: http://airamerica.com/. It's still up and running.
When I'm in the car I like to listen to NPR, but my kid hates it. We usually end up listening to Disney music.
When I'm in the car I like to listen to NPR, but my kid hates it. We usually end up listening to Disney music.
Guest- Guest
Re: Nothing fair about Fairness Doctrine
by CarolinaHound Mon Feb 16, 2009 11:03 pm
lisan23 wrote:Googled and found this: http://airamerica.com/. It's still up and running.
When I'm in the car I like to listen to NPR, but my kid hates it. We usually end up listening to Disney music.
Yep that's talk radio. Interesting, like watching ice melt.
CarolinaHound-
Number of posts : 4843
Age : 54
Location : Fayetteville NC
Job/hobbies : Being loveable me.
Humor : yes
Registration date : 2009-01-13 -
Re: Nothing fair about Fairness Doctrine
by Theophilus Tue Feb 17, 2009 2:17 am
I like to see a mix of view points. Air America would get boring because it was the same talking points every show. You could listen to one show, and that was all you needed to hear. The other shows may as well been a repeat. I think a good formula for success would to for stations to bring on the best talent with different view points. Instead of having just one side. That would bring in a lot of listeners. Something like that would bring in more money from sponsors. Many years ago when we did have the fairness doctrine it was about the public airwaves. This was before the internet, and cable. So to be quite honest, a fairness doctrine today doesn't make sense. Also it really would not change much. All it would do is make people upset. Sponsors I doubt would support a program that was forced on a station. I am against the fairness doctrine.
People can always contact a station manager, and tell them what kind of programming they would like to hear. I know I have called them before in support of programming I liked, and let them know that.
People can always contact a station manager, and tell them what kind of programming they would like to hear. I know I have called them before in support of programming I liked, and let them know that.
Theophilus-
Number of posts : 914
Location : Beautiful Northern California.
Humor : I miss the humor in what people say at times.
Registration date : 2009-01-15
Re: Nothing fair about Fairness Doctrine
by Independent Harry Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:27 pm
CarolinaHound wrote:Why don't more liberals listen to liberal shows when people do try to run them?
Because they have better things to do than sit around and figure out new ways to hate stuff...
Independent Harry- Number of posts : 44
Registration date : 2009-01-20
Re: Nothing fair about Fairness Doctrine
by Terry05_99 Tue Feb 17, 2009 5:39 pm
lisan23 wrote:Terry05_99 wrote:lisan23 wrote:From what I've read, even if they reinstate the Fairness Doctrine, stations will not be required to balance out their programming. The FCC can choose whether or not to enforce it, and from my reading they rarely chose to when it was enacted.
Why do you think it is needed if it was "rarely" enacted? Why a push now?
Because almost no one likes Rush Limbaugh, not even most Republicans. Ok... not really. I think it's an attempt by Congress to make liberal shows more available and popular and to compete with the Republican corner market. Also, probably an attempt to reduce the number of Republican radio shows. BUT Congress can reach only so far, it can't force the FCC to enact them since the Supreme Court already ruled that the FCC doesn't have to.
If people do not like Rush he would not be on the air. Market share determines that. So the government now controlled by the democrates want to tell people what they can listen to?
Terry05_99-
Number of posts : 177
Age : 68
Location : Canton Michigan
Job/hobbies : Harley Davidsons, flying, hunting
Humor : Thats not funny
Registration date : 2009-01-13
Re: Nothing fair about Fairness Doctrine
by Guest Tue Feb 17, 2009 5:48 pm
Terry05_99 wrote:lisan23 wrote:Terry05_99 wrote:lisan23 wrote:From what I've read, even if they reinstate the Fairness Doctrine, stations will not be required to balance out their programming. The FCC can choose whether or not to enforce it, and from my reading they rarely chose to when it was enacted.
Why do you think it is needed if it was "rarely" enacted? Why a push now?
Because almost no one likes Rush Limbaugh, not even most Republicans. Ok... not really. I think it's an attempt by Congress to make liberal shows more available and popular and to compete with the Republican corner market. Also, probably an attempt to reduce the number of Republican radio shows. BUT Congress can reach only so far, it can't force the FCC to enact them since the Supreme Court already ruled that the FCC doesn't have to.
If people do not like Rush he would not be on the air. Market share determines that. So the government now controlled by the democrates want to tell people what they can listen to?
Not at all. In all honesty it sounds like you need to research what the fairness doctrine is. It's not controlling what people listen to, it's supposed to attempt to make stations more balanced. But like I said, the FCC doesn't have to enforce it even if it is re-enacted.
Rush is popular because stupidity in this country is popular. (Britney Spears, Paris Hilton, and the list goes on of celebrities who truly don't have any talent.) It's unfortunate, but true.
And it's democrats.
Guest- Guest
Re: Nothing fair about Fairness Doctrine
by CarolinaHound Tue Feb 17, 2009 6:00 pm
Independent Harry wrote:CarolinaHound wrote:Why don't more liberals listen to liberal shows when people do try to run them?
Because they have better things to do than sit around and figure out new ways to hate stuff...
Then why bother bringing the doctrine back?
CarolinaHound-
Number of posts : 4843
Age : 54
Location : Fayetteville NC
Job/hobbies : Being loveable me.
Humor : yes
Registration date : 2009-01-13 -
Re: Nothing fair about Fairness Doctrine
by Terry05_99 Tue Feb 17, 2009 8:17 pm
lisan23 wrote:Terry05_99 wrote:lisan23 wrote:Terry05_99 wrote:lisan23 wrote:From what I've read, even if they reinstate the Fairness Doctrine, stations will not be required to balance out their programming. The FCC can choose whether or not to enforce it, and from my reading they rarely chose to when it was enacted.
Why do you think it is needed if it was "rarely" enacted? Why a push now?
Because almost no one likes Rush Limbaugh, not even most Republicans. Ok... not really. I think it's an attempt by Congress to make liberal shows more available and popular and to compete with the Republican corner market. Also, probably an attempt to reduce the number of Republican radio shows. BUT Congress can reach only so far, it can't force the FCC to enact them since the Supreme Court already ruled that the FCC doesn't have to.
If people do not like Rush he would not be on the air. Market share determines that. So the government now controlled by the democrates want to tell people what they can listen to?
Not at all. In all honesty it sounds like you need to research what the fairness doctrine is. It's not controlling what people listen to, it's supposed to attempt to make stations more balanced. But like I said, the FCC doesn't have to enforce it even if it is re-enacted.
Rush is popular because stupidity in this country is popular. (Britney Spears, Paris Hilton, and the list goes on of celebrities who truly don't have any talent.) It's unfortunate, but true.
And it's democrats.
Did you bother to read the article that we are commenting on? Let me qoute it "The impact of the Fairness Doctrine would be to drive the Rush Limbaughs, Sean Hannitys, Bill O'Reillys and Frank Beckmanns off the air. Few stations can afford to devote hours to unprofitable liberal programming just to keep the conservative shows on the air."
Also, since when is it the governments position to tell businesses to be more balanced? Don't people have the right to turn it off?
What views of Rush do you consider stupid?
Thanks for correcting my spelling
Terry05_99-
Number of posts : 177
Age : 68
Location : Canton Michigan
Job/hobbies : Harley Davidsons, flying, hunting
Humor : Thats not funny
Registration date : 2009-01-13
Re: Nothing fair about Fairness Doctrine
by Guest Tue Feb 17, 2009 8:43 pm
I did read the article, but it's an editorial piece meaning it's not required to give us factual or accurate information, but instead the writers opinion. I personally am much more interested in factual information regarding this act than a biased editorial. I'm likely to get more accurate information from sources outside editorials. (And this remains true for any subject.)
People do have the right to turn it off. To be honest, I don't see any point it in Congress for passing this act, but I'm not going to get my "panties in a wad" over something that even if passed isn't likely to make a difference. You're making an assumption that I am for the Act, I'm not. I think it's a waste of time for Congress to even address it, but then again I'm not a Senator or Representative and I did vote so at this moment in time there's not much I can do about it. No point in complaining about something that will do nothing.
I used the wrong word with Rush, he's not stupid. I'd much rather (and excuse my language) use the term "drama whore". And they're just as popular in our culture as stupid people. (His radio show reminds me of the VH1 reality shows like Flavor of Love.) He's hypocritical, and he fails to realize that politics is all based on opinion. Just because he's a staunch Republican doesn't make him right, but he doesn't get that. It's almost like watching a train wreck with Rush, and that's why he's so popular.
People do have the right to turn it off. To be honest, I don't see any point it in Congress for passing this act, but I'm not going to get my "panties in a wad" over something that even if passed isn't likely to make a difference. You're making an assumption that I am for the Act, I'm not. I think it's a waste of time for Congress to even address it, but then again I'm not a Senator or Representative and I did vote so at this moment in time there's not much I can do about it. No point in complaining about something that will do nothing.
I used the wrong word with Rush, he's not stupid. I'd much rather (and excuse my language) use the term "drama whore". And they're just as popular in our culture as stupid people. (His radio show reminds me of the VH1 reality shows like Flavor of Love.) He's hypocritical, and he fails to realize that politics is all based on opinion. Just because he's a staunch Republican doesn't make him right, but he doesn't get that. It's almost like watching a train wreck with Rush, and that's why he's so popular.
Guest- Guest
SNL:Emily Litella 'Violins on TV'
by HotParadox Wed Feb 18, 2009 12:26 pm
Your request is my command, thomasjay!
HotParadox-
Number of posts : 4051
Location : Boston
Registration date : 2009-01-13
Re: Nothing fair about Fairness Doctrine
by JReed Sun Feb 22, 2009 7:21 pm
lisan23 wrote:From what I've read, even if they reinstate the Fairness Doctrine, stations will not be required to balance out their programming. The FCC can choose whether or not to enforce it, and from my reading they rarely chose to when it was enacted.
Maybe so...but it's just a first step. The Dems won't outlaw conservative talk radio...they'll just make it too expensive to maintain.
It will be the same with guns. The dems won't outlaw guns...they'll just make them so expensive that only the rich can afford to legally own them...which just leaves those who keep them illegally.
JReed-
Number of posts : 112
Location : Milwaukee
Job/hobbies : Ironman
Registration date : 2009-02-22
Re: Nothing fair about Fairness Doctrine
by PaulM Sun Feb 22, 2009 7:26 pm
JReed wrote:lisan23 wrote:From what I've read, even if they reinstate the Fairness Doctrine, stations will not be required to balance out their programming. The FCC can choose whether or not to enforce it, and from my reading they rarely chose to when it was enacted.
Maybe so...but it's just a first step. The Dems won't outlaw conservative talk radio...they'll just make it too expensive to maintain.
It will be the same with guns. The dems won't outlaw guns...they'll just make them so expensive that only the rich can afford to legally own them...which just leaves those who keep them illegally.
Buy your guns now before the price hike or lament later!
Good to see you here! Welcome aboard!
PaulM-
Number of posts : 577
Age : 72
Location : Kentucky
Humor : Yes
Registration date : 2009-01-14
Re: Nothing fair about Fairness Doctrine
by JReed Sun Feb 22, 2009 7:31 pm
Well thank you.
I was wondering where everyone from scam went.
I was wondering where everyone from scam went.
JReed-
Number of posts : 112
Location : Milwaukee
Job/hobbies : Ironman
Registration date : 2009-02-22
Re: Nothing fair about Fairness Doctrine
by JReed Sun Feb 22, 2009 7:35 pm
lisan23 wrote:Terry05_99 wrote:lisan23 wrote:From what I've read, even if they reinstate the Fairness Doctrine, stations will not be required to balance out their programming. The FCC can choose whether or not to enforce it, and from my reading they rarely chose to when it was enacted.
Why do you think it is needed if it was "rarely" enacted? Why a push now?
Because almost no one likes Rush Limbaugh, not even most Republicans. Ok... not really. I think it's an attempt by Congress to make liberal shows more available and popular and to compete with the Republican corner market. Also, probably an attempt to reduce the number of Republican radio shows. BUT Congress can reach only so far, it can't force the FCC to enact them since the Supreme Court already ruled that the FCC doesn't have to.
If you want to hear or see liberal shows why not watch NBC, CBS, CNN, ABS, MSNBC, or check out the other mainstream media outlets.
The reason "liberal" shows fail is because people can't tell the difference between the show and the normal news.
JReed-
Number of posts : 112
Location : Milwaukee
Job/hobbies : Ironman
Registration date : 2009-02-22
Re: Nothing fair about Fairness Doctrine
by Peregrine(Endangered) Sun Feb 22, 2009 7:36 pm
Hey good to see you here!!! Hope you stick around.
Peregrine(Endangered)-
Number of posts : 1132
Age : 82
Location : Delaware
Job/hobbies : Gardening, Birding
Humor : lots
Registration date : 2009-01-13
Re: Nothing fair about Fairness Doctrine
by HotParadox Sun Feb 22, 2009 7:44 pm
Welcome aboard, JR.JReed wrote:
I was wondering where everyone from scam went.
HotParadox-
Number of posts : 4051
Location : Boston
Registration date : 2009-01-13
Re: Nothing fair about Fairness Doctrine
by JReed Mon Feb 23, 2009 2:47 pm
I saw this quote and thought it was pretty funny. It fits this thread pretty well too....
"Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical, liberal minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."
"Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical, liberal minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."
JReed-
Number of posts : 112
Location : Milwaukee
Job/hobbies : Ironman
Registration date : 2009-02-22
Re: Nothing fair about Fairness Doctrine
by Guest Mon Feb 23, 2009 2:58 pm
PaulM wrote:JReed wrote:lisan23 wrote:From what I've read, even if they reinstate the Fairness Doctrine, stations will not be required to balance out their programming. The FCC can choose whether or not to enforce it, and from my reading they rarely chose to when it was enacted.
Maybe so...but it's just a first step. The Dems won't outlaw conservative talk radio...they'll just make it too expensive to maintain.
It will be the same with guns. The dems won't outlaw guns...they'll just make them so expensive that only the rich can afford to legally own them...which just leaves those who keep them illegally.
Buy your guns now before the price hike or lament later!
Good to see you here! Welcome aboard!
Have either of you attempted to purchase a firearm recently? My husband called on a gun (I'll have to ask him which one) and there is an 18-24 week wait. The democrats have done nothing, not a thing, to restrict firearm purchases and yet there's this massive wait to get one. Why? Because people are over-reacting and, I mean this in the nicest way, being stupid.
Guns and abortion are 2 issues I feel are very similar. Republicans constantly tout how they think abortion is wrong and should be illegal, but it's been how many years and nothing has been done?? Same with guns, the democrats tout the issue of making them illegal, more difficult to purchase, etc... but in the end, not a whole lot changes. (And yes, I'm aware of the changes Bill Clinton made in regards to automatic firearms, but Bush didn't do anything to change it. So in the end I take it as just a talking point from both sides.)
Oh, and as for gun rights - I'm completely Republican on that issue.
As for the Fairness Doctrine, it really will just be a failed attempt to try and control radio. And I don't think this is attempt and controlling media is just something Democrats do, I think Republicans do it too. It's kind of like saying Democrats are for big government. In my opinion, BOTH parties are for big government, it just depends on what kind of big government you prefer.
Guest- Guest
Re: Nothing fair about Fairness Doctrine
by Terry05_99 Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:32 pm
lisan23 wrote:PaulM wrote:JReed wrote:lisan23 wrote:From what I've read, even if they reinstate the Fairness Doctrine, stations will not be required to balance out their programming. The FCC can choose whether or not to enforce it, and from my reading they rarely chose to when it was enacted.
Maybe so...but it's just a first step. The Dems won't outlaw conservative talk radio...they'll just make it too expensive to maintain.
It will be the same with guns. The dems won't outlaw guns...they'll just make them so expensive that only the rich can afford to legally own them...which just leaves those who keep them illegally.
Buy your guns now before the price hike or lament later!
Good to see you here! Welcome aboard!
Have either of you attempted to purchase a firearm recently? My husband called on a gun (I'll have to ask him which one) and there is an 18-24 week wait. The democrats have done nothing, not a thing, to restrict firearm purchases and yet there's this massive wait to get one. Why? Because people are over-reacting and, I mean this in the nicest way, being stupid.
Guns and abortion are 2 issues I feel are very similar. Republicans constantly tout how they think abortion is wrong and should be illegal, but it's been how many years and nothing has been done?? Same with guns, the democrats tout the issue of making them illegal, more difficult to purchase, etc... but in the end, not a whole lot changes. (And yes, I'm aware of the changes Bill Clinton made in regards to automatic firearms, but Bush didn't do anything to change it. So in the end I take it as just a talking point from both sides.)
Oh, and as for gun rights - I'm completely Republican on that issue.
As for the Fairness Doctrine, it really will just be a failed attempt to try and control radio. And I don't think this is attempt and controlling media is just something Democrats do, I think Republicans do it too. It's kind of like saying Democrats are for big government. In my opinion, BOTH parties are for big government, it just depends on what kind of big government you prefer.
Are you saying he could even get the gun? Or was it difficult to get a CCW? Where I live in Detroit or at least in the same county (Wayne) it can take three month for a CCW permit.
Terry05_99-
Number of posts : 177
Age : 68
Location : Canton Michigan
Job/hobbies : Harley Davidsons, flying, hunting
Humor : Thats not funny
Registration date : 2009-01-13
Re: Nothing fair about Fairness Doctrine
by Guest Mon Feb 23, 2009 7:46 pm
He can get the gun, he doesn't have to get a CCW in Wyoming, and he's a resident here. All he has to do is fill out the paperwork for a background check. The problem is the rifle he wants is on backorder for that long because everyone THINKS that Obama will make firearms illegal so they are buying them faster than usual.
Guest- Guest
Re: Nothing fair about Fairness Doctrine
by thomasjay Tue Feb 24, 2009 8:51 am
lisan23 wrote:He can get the gun, he doesn't have to get a CCW in Wyoming, and he's a resident here. All he has to do is fill out the paperwork for a background check. The problem is the rifle he wants is on backorder for that long because everyone THINKS that Obama will make firearms illegal so they are buying them faster than usual.
I wonder if the national firearms dealers association had anything to do with people thinking that? I suppose it helps the economy anyway as long as the guns are American made.
And off-topic, who made the font sizes on this thread so humongous?
thomasjay- Number of posts : 176
Registration date : 2009-01-22
Re: Nothing fair about Fairness Doctrine
by Terry05_99 Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:41 pm
lisan23 wrote:He can get the gun, he doesn't have to get a CCW in Wyoming, and he's a resident here. All he has to do is fill out the paperwork for a background check. The problem is the rifle he wants is on backorder for that long because everyone THINKS that Obama will make firearms illegal so they are buying them faster than usual.
Oh ok, well thats not so bad.
Terry05_99-
Number of posts : 177
Age : 68
Location : Canton Michigan
Job/hobbies : Harley Davidsons, flying, hunting
Humor : Thats not funny
Registration date : 2009-01-13
Re: Nothing fair about Fairness Doctrine
by Terry05_99 Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:41 pm
thomasjay wrote:lisan23 wrote:He can get the gun, he doesn't have to get a CCW in Wyoming, and he's a resident here. All he has to do is fill out the paperwork for a background check. The problem is the rifle he wants is on backorder for that long because everyone THINKS that Obama will make firearms illegal so they are buying them faster than usual.
I wonder if the national firearms dealers association had anything to do with people thinking that? I suppose it helps the economy anyway as long as the guns are American made.
And off-topic, who made the font sizes on this thread so humongous?
I don't see the font size larger??? Something may be up on your end
Terry05_99-
Number of posts : 177
Age : 68
Location : Canton Michigan
Job/hobbies : Harley Davidsons, flying, hunting
Humor : Thats not funny
Registration date : 2009-01-13
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum