Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Plot to Shush Rush and O’Reilly
Front Page Magazine ^ | 24 January 2006 | Brian C. Anderson

Posted on 01/24/2006 4:34:29 AM PST by unionblue83

The rise of alternative media—political talk radio in the eighties, cable news in the nineties, and the blogosphere in the new millennium—has broken the liberal monopoly over news and opinion outlets. The Left understands acutely the implications of this revolution, blaming much of the Democratic Party’s current electoral trouble on the influence of the new media’s vigorous conservative voices. Instead of fighting back with ideas, however, today’s liberals quietly, relentlessly, and illiberally are working to smother this flourishing universe of political discourse under a tangle of campaign-finance and media regulations. Their campaign represents the most sustained attack on free political speech in the United States since the 1798 Alien and Sedition Acts. Though Republicans have the most to lose in the short run, all Americans who care about our most fundamental rights and the civic health of our democracy need to understand what’s going on—and resist it.

(Excerpt) Read more at frontpagemag.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bloggers; censorship; fairnessdoctrine; firstamendment; freespeech; liberals; mediabias
Long article but any blogger should read this. If the facts of this are true, the First Amendment is in serious trouble.
1 posted on 01/24/2006 4:34:31 AM PST by unionblue83
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: unionblue83

Scary ..!


2 posted on 01/24/2006 4:42:58 AM PST by MEG33 (GOD BLESS OUR ARMED FORCES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: unionblue83; Jim Robinson

Is an interesting and potentially disturbing article


3 posted on 01/24/2006 4:44:01 AM PST by lunarbicep (There is something about a closet that makes a skeleton terribly restless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: unionblue83

"The FEC thus has plunged into what Smith calls a “bizarre” rule-making process that could shackle the political blogosphere. This would be a particular disaster for the Right, which has maintained its early advantage over the Left in the blogosphere, despite the emergence of big liberal sites like Daily Kos. Some 157 of the top 250 political blogs express right-leaning views, a recent liberal survey found. Reaching a growing and influential audience—hundreds of thousands of readers weekly (including most journalists) for the top conservative sites—the blogosphere has enabled the Right to counter the biases of the liberal media mainstream. Without the blogosphere, Howell Raines would still be the New York Times’s editor, Dan Rather would only now be retiring, garlanded with praise—and John Kerry might be president of the U.S., assuming that CBS News had gotten away with its last-minute falsehood about President Bush’s military service that the diligent bloggers at PowerLine, LittleGreenFootballs, and other sites swiftly debunked"


Dear Congress-Critter,

Muzzling the blogosphere is a shooting offense.

Sincerely
A Former US Marine


4 posted on 01/24/2006 4:44:14 AM PST by Fenris6 (3 Purple Hearts in 4 months w/o missing a day of work? He's either John Rambo or a Fraud)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fenris6
Muzzling the blogosphere is a shooting offense.

Exactly what I was thinking. Let's see them enforce any blog laws.

5 posted on 01/24/2006 4:52:49 AM PST by numberonepal (Don't Even Think About Treading On Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Fenris6
Muzzling the blogosphere is a shooting offense.

Here, here!

I think what we're seeing here is the political elite realizing that they can no longer fool most of the people all of the time.

I, for one, welcome their attempt to stiffle free speech. After all, it will be their burdon to explain exactly why this tactic is Constitutional.

6 posted on 01/24/2006 4:54:52 AM PST by Thermalseeker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Budge

Self ping for later read.


7 posted on 01/24/2006 5:01:46 AM PST by Budge (<>< Sit Nomen Domini benedictum. <><)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: unionblue83

WOW, that is truly a scary article. What are we, the Soviet Union?


8 posted on 01/24/2006 5:02:18 AM PST by Falcon28
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: numberonepal

I thought LIBERALS loved the First Amendment. Oh wait, that's only when it suits them!


9 posted on 01/24/2006 5:05:33 AM PST by Jazzman1 (lol)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: unionblue83

bookmark


10 posted on 01/24/2006 5:07:10 AM PST by Talking_Mouse (Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just... Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

*


11 posted on 01/24/2006 5:08:36 AM PST by LivFREEordie (Live free or die . . . Death is not the worst of evils." Gen. John Stark, 1822)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Fenris6
"The FEC thus has plunged into what Smith calls a “bizarre” rule-making process that could shackle the political blogosphere

I think the Libs keep so many of the mindless stories going so as to keep their 'back room' solutions from much of the 'light of day'.

That said. . .we need to be dealing with this. . .and for starters. . .just who the heck are these people at the FEC who are actually crafting such ideas into a Leftist, dream reality. . .

Their actitons alone. ..should be legally challenged.

Truly makes a joke; albeit not a funny one'' ; of those Libs who are currently feigning their contempt for President Bush's violating our Constitution.

12 posted on 01/24/2006 5:08:47 AM PST by cricket
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Here are my thoughts on the subject.

This obviously is a long article but well worth the read if anyone has time to read it.

I might mention that one of our best news and information sources, a newstalk station recently went to a Spanish language format. People listening to that staion are now having to get portable or battery TV's to get their life saving information like severe weather warnings and Amber Alerts.

Folks, if we don't put a stop to these New World Order types, this is what I'm afraid is going to happen. I would remind everyone that these conservative talk programs pay for the salaries of those who broadcast these life saving severe weather warnings and Amber Alerts. if we allow these politicians to get between us and our radios, all of us are gonna end up getting portable and battery powered TV's to get this information. Think about that.

Is this what we wnat america to become? I don't.
Regards..........

13 posted on 01/24/2006 5:09:36 AM PST by E.G.C.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fenris6; All

that 'violating our constitution' did need to be framed i.e. 'violating'. . .(as we and they know. . .President Bush was not violating our Constitution - as Leftist like to chant)


14 posted on 01/24/2006 5:12:51 AM PST by cricket
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: E.G.C.

I can shush O'Riley. Just turn off the TV or radio.


15 posted on 01/24/2006 5:15:39 AM PST by Coldwater Creek ("Over there, over there, We won't be back 'til it's over Over there.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: unionblue83
Lately, I have begun to think that the Second American Revolution will happen in my lifetime.

Stay armed, stay alert.

16 posted on 01/24/2006 5:16:47 AM PST by basil (Exercise your Second Amendment--buy another gun today!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IGOTMINE

Bump for later read.


17 posted on 01/24/2006 5:18:54 AM PST by IGOTMINE (Front Sight. Press. Follow Through. It's a way of life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: unionblue83
If the facts of this are true, the First Amendment is in serious trouble.

Except for liberals, who will still be free to say anything they want. All animals are created equal, but some are more equal than other.

18 posted on 01/24/2006 5:21:29 AM PST by shezza (17 days)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: unionblue83
From the atricle

Small wonder, then, that House Democrats proposed two bills in 2005 to bring the Fairness Doctrine back—and as a law, rather than a mere agency regulation. New York Democratic representative Louise Slaughter, who introduced the first of the two bills, says that Right-ruled radio is a grave threat to American freedoms, “a waste of good broadcast time, and a waste of our airwaves.” People “may hear whatever they please and whatever they choose,” she tells PBS’s Bill Moyers, in a statement as incoherent as it is illiberal. “And of course they have the right to turn it off. But that’s not good enough either. The fact is that they need the responsibility of the people who are licensed to use our airwaves judiciously and responsibly to call them to account if they don’t.” In other words, people can’t be trusted with freedom but need the supervision of a paternalist government.

Listen, sweetie. I can turn it off if I want. But, I won't and neither will millions of others. And, I bet Rush won't quit, either.

Unbelievable... but, then again not coming from the Left.

Oh, and another thing.. Dubya really dropped the ball by not vetoing campaign finance "reform". A MAJOR blunder.

19 posted on 01/24/2006 5:31:38 AM PST by fuquadukie (If you can't hang with the big dogs, then don't jump off the porch.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: unionblue83
Attempting to regulate speech will fail. It always fails. It failed in the old Soviet Union. It will ultimately fail in China. It damn well better fail in the USA!

That said, the old saw about the 2nd amendment being an insurance policy for the 1st is more important than ever.

Let a million iPods bloom.

20 posted on 01/24/2006 5:35:21 AM PST by 6SJ7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: unionblue83; Congressman Billybob; Common Tator; CasearianDaoist; headsonpikes; beyond the sea; ...
Today's lead editorial in The Wall Street Journal has encouraging word that
"a unanimous Supreme Court ordered a lower court to reexamine a key challenge to the McCain-Feingold campaign restrictions. . . . this could be a first step toward rolling back a 'reform' that has served little purpose other than to muzzle the political speech of Americans."
Possibly the substitution of Alito for O'Connor will mean that this McCain-Feingold travesty will finally be brought to book. McCain-Feingold makes the owner and editor of an establishment journalism outlet explicitly superior in rights to the rest of us, even though the difference in principle between us is that I have not started a newspaper yet.

McCain-Feingold should never have been passed, never have ben signed, never have been approved by the court.


21 posted on 01/24/2006 5:38:16 AM PST by conservatism_IS_compassion (The idea around which liberalism coheres is that NOTHING actually matters but PR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: unionblue83

I don't think anybody involved has quite gotten his head wrapped around the idea that it's damn near impossible to regulate the internet as it's currently set up. What was that obscenity-on-the-internet regulation they passed a few years back that the Supremes knocked down? I was all poised to have a friend overseas register a domain to his name for me to post naughty words on.


22 posted on 01/24/2006 5:49:14 AM PST by prion (Yes, as a matter of fact, I AM the spelling police)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: unionblue83

McCain-Feingold: Shame on John McCain (there may not be enough shame in this world to cover this guy up) and shame on President Bush for signing this putrid legislation. Let's hope for an opportunity for the "next" Supreme Court to take this up and flush it down the tubes.


23 posted on 01/24/2006 5:49:53 AM PST by ReleaseTheHounds
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: unionblue83
Plato’s Apology is a drama that portrays the current Left wing frustration with talk radio in America. The people of Athens (the Left) are demanding that Socrates (Rush) be silent. Socrates refuses and the elite of Athens demands the execution of Socrates. The modern Left wants a figurative execution of Rush Limbaugh and others like him (although ‘figurative’ would quickly become tangible, if the Left ever had the unchecked power they desire, just as it was with Socrates). In terms of this ‘figurative execution’, the cancellation of the Michael Savage and Dr. Laura Schlessinger television shows are perfect examples!

Radio is the focus of only one of the five senses. A listener has to really tune in to the subject matter and focus on the content of the ideas - - one reason, among others, why so-called "liberal" talk radio has been and is a failure in the free market.

Television is a combination of sensory focus and it is far easier to distract and misdirect viewer attention from essential topics presented.

Considering that 90% of people tend to be more influenced by the visual, television has become a new religion. It is analogous to Plato’s cave allegory and the pagan Oracle of Delphi. Television as a propaganda tool helps create visual phantasms or fantastical images of the brain.

There are three ways people are influenced according to the school of behavioral psychology - - visual (sight), auditory (sound), kinesthetic (emotion). The kinesthetic or ‘feeling’ is also based on olfactory and tactile sense, just like Pavlov’s salivating dogs.

Visual images and sound portrayed can be used to anchor emotional and/or conditioned responses desired by those that present them, which in the case of television, is the Leftist television media, actors who create phantastical images in film, and Leftist politicians who pander to ‘symbolism over substance’ (like Rush Limbaugh always says about them).

The print media somewhat also uses the visual aspects of that phenomenon. Interactive talk radio requires thought; television does not and relies on this as a means to influence viewers. One should also notice the emphasis on interactive talk radio, something "public radio" is careful to avoid; unlike most commercial talk radio programming.

Part of this is the promotion of "public radio." The government funded NPR and other "public radio" non-profit Leftist garbage is not making it. While I am not enamoured with some of the canned music formats of much commercial radio, I am no fan of the Leftist non-profit NPR-like stations that play third world, grass skirt, bone-in-the-nose pagan voodoo music either, with the touchy-feely, multi-cultural, anti-USA Leftist commentary of the hosts. These insipid people actually think they are clever with the sedate, monotone presentations (neuro-linguistic programming).

[Observe when in public places, at your workplace or in other community activities (i.e., restaurants, retail stores, gas stations, etc.) the pervasive presence of some exposure to music or television. This is because many people are actually terrified of being alone with their own thoughts or at the prospect of it (neuro-linguistic programming).

Try an experiment, turn radios off at work, request as a customer patronizing private businesses that music or television is unplugged so you can have some personal tranquility with your family, friends, associates, etc. You will find a great resistance, even hostility to such a request. Ask yourself why, then consider what thoughts such people have they are so afraid of, if they are capable of or desire to have any of their own.]

Also part of this is the loss of broadcasting licenses by "public radio" stations to a company that is buying licenses to broadcast Christian programming. This is pushing many Leftist public radio stations off the air. There is more to this issue than most people realize and it is not exclusive to the attack on talk radio. The recent moves to prevent more deregulation of FCC broadcasting and ownership rules in the Congress are the latest Leftist attempts to kill free speech. (President Bush has threatened a veto.)

Like the necromancy of the late Senator Paul Wellstone’s funeral rally, or "funerally" (see the Steven Plaut article, The Rise Of Tikkun Olam Paganism, Arutz Sheva: December 27, 2002, in reference to the Wellstone brand of Judaism), the use of Martin Luther King Day, or constantly invoking the "spirit of the ‘60’s," the Left attempts to raise spirits of the dead as a totem for worship.

24 posted on 01/24/2006 5:50:08 AM PST by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: unionblue83

Comrade, don't you know that "War is peace", "freedom is slavery", and "Love is hate"? Trust in the Ministry of Truth to conscientiously administer the "Fairness" Doctrine and all will be well. That way the march of the Jacobins will be led by the NY Times, Newsweek, PBS, ABCCBSNBCCNN, The Washington Post, AP, Reuters, BBC, and their minions. Soon, free expression of opinion on sites such as Free Republic, would become mere memories, and we could resume our march to coerced virtue in Dystopia. There, one's ideas won't have to compete for support. The power of the state will enforce egalitarian gauranty of results rather than of opportunity. The ideas of Bill Buckley and Howard Dean will warrant the exact same attention regardless of merit. A dug-out canoe will be lauded as "equal" in design to a nuclear submarine. Everything will be perfect; perfectly bad.


25 posted on 01/24/2006 5:51:10 AM PST by CharlesThe Hammer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: unionblue83

The First Amendment has been in trouble for a long time. The only thing that finally protects it is the 2nd.

These people (the libs) better wake up to the fact of which side of us owns all of the guns.

Don't ever surrender your weapons. It's the last defense against tyrannical government we have.


26 posted on 01/24/2006 5:52:27 AM PST by Leatherneck_MT (An honest man can feel no pleasure in the exercise of power over his fellow citizens.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sir Francis Dashwood

Nice post.


27 posted on 01/24/2006 5:53:31 AM PST by CharlesThe Hammer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Sir Francis Dashwood

"Radio is the focus of only one of the five senses"

The only reason we have conservative AM radio is because we were shut out of the MSM and had to set up a parralel venue to promote the free exchange of ideas. Small wonder that the Left wants to shut down radio & internet speech.

Bush would not be President if sites like FR, LGF, and Powerline hadn't debunked CBS so quickly.


28 posted on 01/24/2006 5:56:18 AM PST by Fenris6 (3 Purple Hearts in 4 months w/o missing a day of work? He's either John Rambo or a Fraud)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: mariabush

"I can shush O'Reiley"

Me too. Do it every night. Can't stand that pompus windbag. Last night he was equating the Left smear attack on the WashPost with conservative blogs... click!


29 posted on 01/24/2006 5:57:39 AM PST by Fenris6 (3 Purple Hearts in 4 months w/o missing a day of work? He's either John Rambo or a Fraud)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Sir Francis Dashwood

Excellent commentary!


30 posted on 01/24/2006 6:01:41 AM PST by SAJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: cricket
Hentoff: The History and Possible Revival of the Fairness Doctrine
Imprimis ^ | January 2006 | Nat Hentoff

Why Broadcast Journalism is
Unnecessary and Illegitimate


31 posted on 01/24/2006 6:02:04 AM PST by conservatism_IS_compassion (The idea around which liberalism coheres is that NOTHING actually matters but PR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: conservatism_IS_compassion

AMEN!!!!!! Media bias bump.


32 posted on 01/24/2006 6:08:01 AM PST by E.G.C.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Jazzman1
I thought LIBERALS loved the First Amendment. Oh wait, that's only when it suits them!
Liberalism is just arrogance - the idea that cheap talk is better than action, that if you don't have facts on your side the only important question is whether or not you can change the subject.

The First Amendment in particular, and the Constitution in general, are predicated on equality of citizens under law. That's not good enough for the liberal; liberals are better than you and me.


33 posted on 01/24/2006 6:15:55 AM PST by conservatism_IS_compassion (The idea around which liberalism coheres is that NOTHING actually matters but PR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Jazzman1
"Are the hundreds of political blogs that have sprouted over the last few years—twenty-first-century versions of the Revolutionary era’s political pamphlets—“press,” and thus exempt from FEC regulations? Liberal reform groups like Democracy 21 say no. “We do not believe anyone described as a ‘blogger’ is by definition entitled to the benefit of the press exemption,” they collectively sniffed in a brief to the FEC. “While some bloggers may provide a function very similar to more classical media activities, and thus could reasonably be said to fall within the exemption, others surely do not.” The key test, the groups claimed, should be whether the blogger is performing a “legitimate press function.” But who decides what is legitimate? And what in the Constitution gives him the authority to do so?"


Isn't it amazing how easily they rationalize their efforts to control information by denying the entire population of this nation the First Amendment Rights they so eagerly and frequently invoke?

34 posted on 01/24/2006 6:46:39 AM PST by Zacs Mom (Proud wife of a Marine! ... and purveyor of "rampant, unedited dialogue")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: numberonepal
Exactly what I was thinking. Let's see them enforce any blog laws.

They should be stopped in Congress from even trying to place un-Constitutional limits on free speech, in ads, on websites, in blogs, or anywhere else.

35 posted on 01/24/2006 7:49:08 AM PST by Giant Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: conservatism_IS_compassion
Thanks for the links. . .will check it out. . .

I know Rush has addressed this seriously on occasion; amd otherwise made 'reference' ; but really does not go there too often.

36 posted on 01/24/2006 8:14:22 AM PST by cricket
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: conservatism_IS_compassion
Possibly the substitution of Alito for O'Connor will mean that this McCain-Feingold travesty will finally be brought to book.

I call it "Loopholes Are For Me Not You". May McCain-Feingold fade into the dustbin of history along with its namesakes.

37 posted on 01/24/2006 8:18:59 AM PST by auboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: conservatism_IS_compassion
Possibly the substitution of Alito for O'Connor will mean that this McCain-Feingold travesty will finally be brought to book

We can hope...

38 posted on 01/24/2006 8:52:00 AM PST by A.Hun (Common sense is no longer common.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: unionblue83
Great topic, great article, but I will wager than not 1 person will finish that article for every 100 who begin reading it.

Pity. They could have tightened it up considerably.

39 posted on 01/24/2006 12:38:02 PM PST by gaijin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: unionblue83

The liberal view of 1st amendment rights applies to only prurient speech. Only pornography and obscenity are deserving of Constitutional protection. Their goal is to destroy and subvert all cultural, institutional and religious values (see Gramsci). Conservative political speech is known as hate speech. In Europe and in Canada liberals have managed to make expressing opposition to abortion, sodomy and even immigration a hate crime. This is the exact opposite of the intent of the first amendment here, which was to protect political speech, or speech of consequence.


40 posted on 01/24/2006 4:11:11 PM PST by Rightwing Conspiratr1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson