Control Freaks

American Spectator ^ | 05 july 07 | R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr.

[rellimpank]

WASHINGTON -- At first the liberal Democrats were coy about reports that they wanted to impose government control on talk radio. When it was reported that Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton had discussed the matter with Senator Barbara Boxer, both denied it. That is characteristic. They lied to the public. Now the Democrats admit to this assault on the First Amendment. There was no point in continuing to lie when it was time to take action against the Rush Limbaughs of this world. Washington's energetic newspaper covering the federal government, the Hill, has quoted Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin as saying "It's time to reinstitute the Fairness Doctrine. I have this old-fashioned attitude that when Americans hear both sides of the story, they're in a better position to make a decision."

[rellimpank]

--"freaks" is right--

[Darkwolf377]

"I have this old-fashioned attitude that when Americans hear both sides of the story, they're in a better position to make a decision."

Tell me, Dick, where in the Constitution does it say it's your right as a government official to impose "both sides" on a communications industry?

Will you ask the New York Times to hire a conservative "co-editor"? Because I have this old-fashioned attitude that liberals only buy liberal papers, so in order for them to be in a better position to make a decision, we really do owe it to them to impose a conservative point of view on their private newspaper, Dick.

[billybudd]

The liberal totalitarians will fail.

[sgtbono2002]

I have this old-fashioned attitude that when Americans hear both sides of the story, they’re in a better position to make a decision.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~``

Perhaps if Turban Durbin himself would give equal credence to both sides of an issue, instead of fawning over what his Democrat puppetmasters put out he would make a better civil servant.

[libstripper]

Does Durbin really envisage a government regulatory agency that could fairly monitor all these sources, all these voices, and not become totalitarian?

Of course he doesn't. He's an out-and-out Stalinist who desperately craves a totalitarian government that will suppress all but leftist orthodox speech. Anyone who doesn't believe that just needs to look at what happened to Larry Summers at Harvard.

[COBOL2Java]

This effort by liberals to limit free speech by imposing government control over radio and presumably over television reveals just how out of touch the liberals are -- and how impatient they are with a free society. They would use the so-called Fairness Doctrine to order talk radio to balance conservative talkers whom listeners have voted for by tuning them in with presumed liberal talkers, whom listeners have usually voted against by tuning them out. Air America, the liberal alternative to conservative talkers, endowed by millions of dollars from liberal investors, went belly up last fall because not enough listeners wanted to listen. Now Durbin and his ilk will force listeners to listen, or at least they will force talk radio to carry these money-losing talkers.

Unfortunately, even that won't happen. What WILL happen is that broadcast businesses will rip out talk radio from their lineup to avoid the hassle of having to bring "balance". Look for the return of easy-listening, elevator music radio stations.

[philman_36]

They better watch that they don’t get hoisted on their own petard ‘cause it’s a whole lot easier to show liberal bias/slant today than it was twenty years ago.

[longtermmemmory]

Fairness doctrine is to eliminate the FACT the left wing ideas do not sustain themselves in a free and open discussion. IOW if RADIO will only ecconomically support non-leftist talk, what is proping up CNN, MSNBC, the aphabets, and NPR?

This is about cover so they can point and say “debate is over” the left wins, or there is no debate on this issue so the conservative view is not needed.

Look how the left HOWELED when the global warming lie fell apart and into ridicule and disrepute.