Free Markets, Free People

They Just Won’t Leave it Alone


Apparently, we need a muzzle for this

Apparently, we need a muzzle for this

he Democrats in Congress keep talking about it, and talking about it:  The Fairness Doctrine.  The newest musings about it come from Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY).

More and more Democrats in Congress are calling for action that Republicans warn could muzzle right-wing talk radio.

Representative Maurice Hinchey, a Democrat from New York is the latest to say he wants to bring back the “Fairness Doctrine,” a federal regulation scrapped in 1987 that would require broadcasters to present opposing views on public issues.

“I think the Fairness Doctrine should be reinstated,” Hinchey told CNNRadio. Hinchey says he could make it part of a bill he plans to introduce later this year overhauling radio and t-v ownership laws.

When Bruce addressed this recently, commenter PogueMahone responded:

Well then you are kooks.  This is no fairness doctrine.  Despite the wishes of some, there will be no “fairness doctrine” bill passed.


Huh.  maybe.  But for people who aren’t going to pass it back into law, they sure talk about it a lot.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

19 Responses to They Just Won’t Leave it Alone

  • would it mean the msm would have to cover the skeptics view of global warming/climate change?

  • Head fake perhaps (pogue withstanding)…

    But if it is, my goodness, what is the left trying to hide?

    Good old fashion fascism?

  • I’ll save Pogue some time here:  They’re not going to pass a “fairness doctrine” bill formally. They’ll just backdoor it.

    That about cover it Pogue?

    …..hey, maybe they did it through the stimulous bill already? Nobody read it, and that’s how they slipped backdoor healthcare nationalization through.

    • Not quite, but thanks for the effort shark.  You, like other frequent commenters here including looker, still having at least a few fingers grasping onto sanity, realize that there will be no new “fairness doctrine” bill passed.  The others losing their grasp on sanity are probably the same people wanting to horde their precious metals, hook up with the “axe maestro”, and head for the hills ’cause the world is ending.

      But that doesn’t mean that there aren’t at least some Democrats and other lefties that want a fairness doctrine.  They may want it, but that doesn’t mean it’s going to happen.  Do you guys understand this concept?

      Let me try and help those who feel that their definitely going to lose their daily dose of dittohead now that the Dems are in charge.
      You see, politicians are full of bullsh!t.  I would have thought most of you were old enough to realize that now.  And though politicians talk the talk, they don’t always walk the walk.  Even if politicians are genuinely interested whatever issue they rave about, it certainly doesn’t mean that their colleagues will go along.
      Remember Tancredo and his crusade against illegals?  Remeber how the Left makes it out that the Republicans want to round up all the brown people and send them below the border?  You see, it’s kind of like that.  Just because Tancredo and some other Republicans and some on the Right want to round up all the illegals and ship them home, it doesn’t mean that it’s going to happen.  Just because there are those that want a fairness doctrine, it doesn’t mean that its going to happen.  Why?  Well that’s easy.  Just like how the Republicans know that it would be political suicide to round up all the illegals, the Dems also realize that any kind of fairness doctrine would be used to hammer them out of office.

      And besides, it wouldn’t make any sense to do it.  They’ve got a friendly media already.  And as most of you mistakenly assume that the media got Obama elected (oh no, it couldn’t be that the republicans were constantly screwing up over the last eight years that got a dem elected… NO, it was the media.  Kooks), and if that were true, then why would they mess with a media that got them elected.

      Seriously, take off your tin hat and think about it for a second.


  • As was noted in the other thread, no bill is required.  The Fairness Doctrine was always an FCC rule.  All they need are enough Democratic appointments.

    The Democrats don’t need 60 votes to get it past the Senate.  The Republicans need 60 votes to stop it.

  • Great post! I really enjoy reading your blog. Keep up the good work.
    I recently started a new blog that will be highlighting the dangerous advances of the secular progressive movement (pro-gay “rights”, pro-abortion, anti-religious freedoms, etc).
    We’re looking to build a solid group of conservatives who’ll frequent our site regularly and contribute to some good discussions. The site gets updated daily with breaking news, so you’ll want to check back often, or you can just sign up for our <a href=>News Feed</a>.
    If you’ll add us to your blogroll we’ll gladly add you to ours. Our blog is called <a href=>Religion and Morality</a>.

  • Phone call with a friend last night, and he put it so succinctly that I nearly missed it.

    He is saying to all who will listen (according to his father-in-law, a deadhead Dem if there ever was one), that one word demonstrates perfectly that the modern Democrat Party has become, in power or out of power, in control of the White House or not:


    That’s the best one I have heard in some time. And it is so apropos.

  • You troglodytic dense righties just won’t shut up about this, will you?  I mean is this the only way you have of inflating your shriveled manhoods?
    Everyone KNOWS that the Democrats aren’t going to impose the Fairness Doctrine.  Sure more of them keep talking about it and all, but that’s just EVDIENCE…what we all know, without any need of evidence is that the Democrats aren’t going to do this.  How do we know, because of the new and brilliant voting class, those of us who vote for Obama KNOWING what he will or won’t do, INSPITE of what he says.  It’s easy you see, if they do it, we vote for that, if they don’t do, well we knew they were merely SAYING that they were going to, but we all knew they wouldn’t…
    See how easy this is, I’m never disappointed, and that entire argument and evidence thing is just Sooooo 1980’s.  This new system that you shriveled losers can’t grasp frees up ever so much more time to be snarky…And that’s really a good thing.  Snark is much better than argument, or evidence, or results….Snark shows how smart we are as compared to you losers, especially that Mardsen loser dood…
    Really, welcome to the 21st Century, where anything is OK, as long as Obama does or does NOT do it…and I must tell you I hated that Slimeball doood, OH having to listen to him in my previous place of employment just drove me crazeeee, now I’m safe from him, having a new place to work, and so too, you can be safe from him!  I can only hope and for pray that.  Not that it will happen of course, because the POTUS said he’s not for it, UNLESS it happens and then well…I’ll be happy and you’ll all still be losers and no matter what happened I’ll come in here and gloat…about something, and insult Mardsen.

  • “I mean is this the only way you have of inflating your shriveled manhoods?”

    No, but that’s for another blog.

  • Clearly “Faux News” and the WSJ editorial staff has agents provocateur out in the field forcing all these Dem politicians drum-up support for the FD so they can have an “enemy.”  That’s how the Right operates! < /leftistsnark >

  • Did troglodytes have penises?

  • When next we see the Fairness Doctrine, it won’t be called that.  Just as liberals are rebranding themselves as “progressives” they’ll rebrand FD.  I’m guessing something like “Responsible Speech,” with ample comparisons to yelling “Fire!” in a crowded theatre.

    Of course they’re going to make a play for this!  In the same meeting where Obama shut down debate with “I won” he told the Republicans to stop taking their marching orders from Rush Limbaugh.  Obama is a statist, and the inmates have taken over the asylum in Congress.  It’s a matter of when, not if.

    I’m just curious to see what the response will be on the left.  I think a handful of people will be outraged, but the vast majority will respond to FD Redux just like NOW reacted to Clinton’s shenanigans.

  • Yea, it’s already been rebranded as “localism,” i.e. an local unelected cadre of jackboot lefto-fascists will threaten to have the license of any station pulled that plays Rush or other non-left commentators and not local leftist mouth-frothers.

    All very “(un)democratic” and freedom-hating.

  • Nope, nothing to see here, they’re just blowin’ smoke up our butts…

    WALLACE: Will you rule out reimposing the Fairness Doctrine?
    AXELROD: I’m going to leave that issue to Julius Genachowski, our new head of the FCC, to, and the president, to discuss. So I don’t have an answer for you now.
    Lester Kinsolving, the conservative radio host, has twice asked Robert Gibbs about it in the briefing room, and each time, the press secretary didn’t reveal the administration’s position.
    Last week, I reached out to press office staffers in order to find out if the administration’s position is the same as in June, and have not yet received a response.
    If Obama’s position on the Fairness Doctrine is the same as during the campaign — and I have no reason to believe it isn’t — stating such clearly would quickly silence a lot of conservative critics who assume the Democratic president is going to try and reinstate the defunct policy. Otherwise, the Fairness Doctrine chatter on the airwaves isn’t likely to die down.

  • Pogue still harping on his familiar refrain: “Trust us. We may be statists, and love the State, and want to increase its power all we can, and reduce your liberty as much as possible–but a threat to freedom? Not us!”

    At what point, I wonder, would he allow those of us in the pro-freedom camp to start worrying about our liberty? 

  • Jonah Goldberg should put out a new, updated edition of LIBERAL FASCISM to deal with Obamanation. He could call it the “Yes, We Can!” edition and the publisher should adverstise it thusly: “Now–more than ever.”