Senate Democrats foil attempt to bar 'Fairness Doctrine'

The Washington Times ^ | Kara Rowland

[JKrive]

Senate Democrats last night beat back a Republican attempt to attach an anti-Fairness Doctrine bill as an amendment to education legislation.

The doctrine, a former requirement that broadcasters present opposing points of view on political issues, was scrapped in 1987 by the Federal Communications Commission, which said the policy restricted journalistic freedom. The bill by Sen. Norm Coleman, Minnesota Republican, would prevent the FCC from reinstating the doctrine.

"We live in an age of satellite radio, of broadband, of blogs, of Internet, of cable TV, of broadcast TV. There is no limitation on the ability of anyone from any political persuasion to get their ideas set forth," Mr. Coleman argued in support of the Broadcaster Freedom Act of 2007. "The public in the end will choose what to listen to."

By a vote of 49-48, senators voted not to consider Mr. Coleman's amendment after Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat, raised a point of order. Senate rules require 60 votes to waive a point of order.

[JKrive]

Once again, Teddy chose to be irrational. Sen. Kennedy's excuse was that he didn't want unrrelated amendments attached to the education bill. Need I remind everyone of the time that Kennedy tried to tack on a 'hate crimes' provision to the Child Safety act. Since when was the homosexual agenda related to child safety?

Read more at Critical Mass

[Robert A. Cook, PE]

Kennedy wants talk radio restricted .....

Can’t have free speech ya know, unless you’re stuffing homosexual tools up a man’s anus, or burning the (American) flag.

[jrooney]

Liberals own television news propaganda, newspaper propaganda but can’t control radio news, except for PBS. If they want the fairness doctrine, then it should apply equally to television and radio too. The worthless lying liberal bastards do not want that though. Scumbags all of them. Hell will freeze over before I ever vote democrat or libertarian.

[samtheman]

This is separate from a previous measure, which did pass, which bars the FCC from spending money on Fairness Doctrine activities. No?

[Paperdoll]

Okay. Today is the day to call our Senators to support Coleman’s amendment to this Communist “Fairness” Doctrine.
Ready, set, DIAL!

[stm]

I think this goes directly to just how deeply the dimbulbs really fear conservative talk radio in this country.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Hell will freeze over before I ever vote democrat or libertarian.

With all due respects, Libertarians oppose the Fairness Doctrine too.

[FightforFreedomCA]

"Since when was the homosexual agenda related to child safety?"

Sadly, they are related, but not in the way any of us like to think about. Teddy is such a pompous windbaggin' @ss.

[mysterio]

Hell will freeze over before I ever vote democrat or libertarian.

Libertarians oppose the fairness doctrine even more than Republicans do.

[bassmaner]

Hell will freeze over before I ever vote democrat or libertarian.

You actually believe that libertarians would support the so-called 'Fairness Doctrine'? Is the sky green on your planet?

[DirtyPigpen]

If the “fairness doctrine” is reinstated, would that mean all the liberal TV channels would have to close down?

[jrooney]

Let me clarify. I NEVER said Libertarians supported the fairness doctrine. I said Liberals do. I said I would never vote democrat (for a thousand reasons) or libertarian. I will never vote libertarian for their views on the WOT and isolationism. I should have been clearer about that.

[jrooney]

“Is the sky green on your planet?” No it is not Paulnut.

[robertpaulsen]

Maybe he meant democrat or librarian. Or libertine.

[kc8ukw]

Much as I hate the fairness doctrine, I also hate unrelated riders, so this doesn’t trouble me too much. (And Kennedy is being hypocritical, yes.)

[Niteranger68]

This article needs the Fairness Doctrine applied to it.

[PEACE ENFORCER]

Something else the Democrats have done....
JULY 19 2007,
Congressional Democrats today failed to include a provision in homeland security legislation that would protect the public from being sued for reporting suspicious behavior that may lead to a terrorist attack.....
.
These scumfuc%ers in the Senate had better hope NO ONE in my family gets injured by one of these RAGHEADS.

[Heartland Mom]

Once again, the Dims only support free speech when it is their opinion being expressed. If anyone dares to speak a differing viewpoint, they don’t have a logical response, and so much kill the messenger.

[PetroniDE]

Hell will freeze over before I ever vote democrat or libertarian.

Hell Did Freeze Over. Check the back page of the New York Daily News, Thursday, 21 October 2004. If I can find my copy of the photo, I will post it.

[rmlew]

Can someone explain to me why a Senator with cajones could not tape such a remark by the Senator and play it during remarks when debating another bill where the Democrats are trying to sneak something in?

[SunkenCiv]

Ping!

[unixfox]

[lonevoice]

Congressional Democrats today failed to include a provision in homeland security legislation that would protect the public from being sued for reporting suspicious behavior that may lead to a terrorist attack.....

Perhaps the Dimmies would like to enact the fairness doctrine so CAIR can have un-rebutted time during the Limbaugh show to tell us that the ROP should have specially protected religious privileges in airports.

[UglyinLA]

WASHINGTON, July 16 (UPI) — The U.S. Libertarian Party has opposed the Democratic-sponsored legislation to remove American forces from Iraq.

In a statement Friday, the Libertarian Party said it had “serious concerns about the plan’s flaws” and said it “would jeopardize the safety of U.S. forces.”

jrooney... what part of this statement are you having a problem with?

[brivette]

You’ve got that right.