[WilliamofCarmichael]

Yes we can protest and demand too; but we don't. We have to work while JFK, LBJ, Carter, BJ, and Obama hire shills like Acorn, et al. to do the deeds.

"You might also think that they would recall the notorious Fairness Doctrine, which was used to 'harass and intimidate' right-wing radio broadcasts, in the words of one unabashed Kennedy-Johnson operative. When that censorious policy was ended in 1987 by former broadcaster Ronald Reagan, there was an explosion of talk formats that gave voice to popular concerns (for a while, Rush Limbaugh even billed himself as equal time)."

As reported by Fred Friendly in his book appropriately entitled The Good Guys, the Bad Guys, and the First Amendment, this was part of a "massive strategy . . . to challenge and harass the right-wing broadcasters and hope that the challenges would be so costly to them that they would be inhibited, and decide it was too expensive to continue." This strategy was said to have been successful in almost all respects.

[WilliamofCarmichael]

RE: "Fairness Doctrine" disguised as localization as a way to make it easier to harass, intimidate and silence conservative talk -- and make it appear to be "the will of the people."

It ain't just Rush they're after. I'd be remiss if I didn't include this aimed at us:

Here's how President Obama's former head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs and author of "Republic.com", Cass Sunstein, describes FreeRepublic.com as "group polarization," where people segregate themselves so effectively online with other like-minded thinkers that they create an echo chamber where the group's worst and most malevolent opinions get reinforced and strengthened. "We might want to consider," Sunstein startlingly told the Times recently, "the possibility of ways of requiring or encouraging sites to link to opposing viewpoints."