| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
IS THIS THE RETURN OF THE "(UN)FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?"
We think it is and that it has long been planned and, for that matter,
rather openly proclaimed since way back during the presidential campaign. Michelle Malkin has been concerned for some time and here [link below] is her latest (with some good links) on what may be an impending disaster for talk radio. - Milt Rosenberg, WGN Radio Fairness Doctrine Watch: The FCC’s “Diversity Panel” http://michellemalkin.com/2009/05/04...versity-panel/ |
IS THIS THE RETURN OF THE "FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?" GOP agast! Ru$hfalls!
On Sat, 09 May 2009 12:35:17 -0700, obamao.sux.donki.dixsss wrote:
We think it is and that it has long been planned and, for that matter, rather openly proclaimed since way back during the presidential campaign. Michelle Malkin has been concerned for some time and here [link below] is her latest (with some good links) on what may be an impending disaster for talk radio. - Milt Rosenberg, WGN Radio would be pretty funny to take the only tool the republican't party has over it's lemmings, childish name calling. Ru$h LimpBalls would be out-a a job! Without FUD for the republican't party to use to control it's lemmings, they will be forced to come up with real ideas |
IS THIS THE RETURN OF THE "(UN)FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?"
On 9 May, 14:35, wrote:
We think it is and that it has long been planned and, for that matter, rather openly proclaimed since way back during the presidential campaign. Michelle Malkin has been concerned for some time and here [link below] is her latest (with some good links) on what may be an impending disaster for talk radio. - Milt Rosenberg, WGN Radio Fairness Doctrine Watch: The FCC’s “Diversity Panel” http://michellemalkin.com/2009/05/04...watch-the-fccs... .. .. Malkin, in her usual fashion, has failed to mention some recent items regarding the Fairness Doctrine that she and other misinformed Conservatives have harped on for so long. From: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...C0A96F9482 60 February 11, 1989 - A Federal Court has upheld the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine by the Federal Communications Commission. and from: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/firs...ness-doctrine/ Wednesday, February 18, 2009 - President Obama opposes any move to bring back the so-called Fairness Doctrine, a spokesman told FOXNews.com Wednesday. Why does Malkin attempt to revive a non-relevant issue? She makes it sound like the Fairness Doctrine will be re-instated next week. Is it being done just to stir up doo-doo? I think it is. RO |
IS THIS THE RETURN OF THE "(UN)FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?"
On May 9, 4:34*pm, Ron wrote:
Malkin, in her usual fashion, has failed to mention some recent items regarding the Fairness Doctrine that she and other misinformed Conservatives have harped on for so long. From:http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...143EF932A25751... February 11, 1989 - *A Federal Court has upheld the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine by the Federal Communications Commission. and from:http://www.foxnews.com/politics/firs.../white-house-o... Wednesday, February 18, 2009 - President Obama opposes any move to bring back the so-called Fairness Doctrine, a spokesman told FOXNews.com Wednesday. Why does Malkin attempt to revive a non-relevant issue? *She makes it sound like the Fairness Doctrine will be re-instated next week. *Is it being done just to stir up doo-doo? *I think it is. RO THE ABOVE IS ALL LIBERAL FASCIST PROPAGANDA LIES The Neo-Commie unFairness Doctrine is very much alive! http://www.unfairair..org "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press..." Government censorship has many disguises. By whatever name — “Equal Time,” “Localism,” or the Orwellian “Fairness Doctrine,” — it is censorship and un-American. Sadly, in the wake of the 2008 elections and FCC changes, powerful politicians in Washington have become emboldened to press for direct or creeping censorship of news and talk radio. DO NOT BECOME COMPLACENT - REJECT THE 0baMa0 LIBERAL FASCIST PROPAGANDA LIES On May 7, Obama’s FCC Chairman convened the first “Diversity Committee” meeting. A dozen left-wing advocacy groups and politically correct corporate flunkies are about to make federal policy on who will be allowed to own a radio station. This is the first shot. We can either duck and cover or we can fight back. What Obama is doing is now in plain sight. FCC Chairman Copps: “The sad truth is that the diversity of this great nation is not reflected in the ownership of its media and telecommunications facilities. The time has come to chart a new course, to roll up our sleeves and get to work to craft sustainable solutions.” Translation: If Obama can take over America’s largest banks, insurance companies and auto makers, he can regulate a way to take over America’s free media. And they are coming after radio first. We need to see the specific tactic Obama will use through his FCC and majority in Congress before we can target fire to stop it. But in the meantime, we’ve got to keep recruiting an online army. 0baMa0 will purposefully legislate the radio industry into bankruptcy. As with the banks, insurance companies and automobile companies, they will then takeover every radio station in the U.S. Then they will set their sites on the internet. Kiss your Free Speech goodbye! It will be Liberal Fascist Propaganda 24 hours a day 7 days a week on every media outlet everywhere. FREEDOM ISN'T FREE - FIGHT BACK http://www.unfairair.org |
IS THIS THE RETURN OF THE "(UN)FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?"
|
IS THIS THE RETURN OF THE "FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?" GOP agast! Ru$h falls!
In article ,
who are you? wrote: On Sat, 09 May 2009 12:35:17 -0700, obamao.sux.donki.dixsss wrote: We think it is and that it has long been planned and, for that matter, rather openly proclaimed since way back during the presidential campaign. Michelle Malkin has been concerned for some time and here [link below] is her latest (with some good links) on what may be an impending disaster for talk radio. - Milt Rosenberg, WGN Radio would be pretty funny to take the only tool the republican't party has over it's lemmings, childish name calling. Yeah, Americans losing their free speech rights would be hilarious. I think we should start with you. Ru$h LimpBalls would be out-a a job! You would have nothing whine about. Without FUD for the republican't party to use to control it's lemmings, they will be forced to come up with real ideas This from a KooK-aid drinking lefty. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
IS THIS THE RETURN OF THE "(UN)FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?"
In article
, Ron wrote: On 9 May, 14:35, wrote: We think it is and that it has long been planned and, for that matter, rather openly proclaimed since way back during the presidential campaign. Michelle Malkin has been concerned for some time and here [link below] is her latest (with some good links) on what may be an impending disaster for talk radio. - Milt Rosenberg, WGN Radio Fairness Doctrine Watch: The FCC¹s ³Diversity Panel² http://michellemalkin.com/2009/05/04...watch-the-fccs... . . Malkin, in her usual fashion, has failed to mention some recent items regarding the Fairness Doctrine that she and other misinformed Conservatives have harped on for so long. From: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...25751C0A96F948 260 February 11, 1989 - A Federal Court has upheld the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine by the Federal Communications Commission. I expect the left's continued attack on free speech rights to continue. The "progressive" types will "craft" another bill by another name to silence speech they don't like. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
IS THIS THE RETURN OF THE "(UN)FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?"
On 9 May, 17:16, wrote:
On May 9, 4:34*pm, Ron wrote: Malkin, in her usual fashion, has failed to mention some recent items regarding the Fairness Doctrine that she and other misinformed Conservatives have harped on for so long. From:http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...143EF932A25751... February 11, 1989 - *A Federal Court has upheld the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine by the Federal Communications Commission. and from:http://www.foxnews.com/politics/firs.../white-house-o... Wednesday, February 18, 2009 - President Obama opposes any move to bring back the so-called Fairness Doctrine, a spokesman told FOXNews.com Wednesday. Why does Malkin attempt to revive a non-relevant issue? *She makes it sound like the Fairness Doctrine will be re-instated next week. *Is it being done just to stir up doo-doo? *I think it is. RO THE ABOVE IS ALL LIBERAL FASCIST PROPAGANDA LIES The Neo-Commie unFairness Doctrine is very much alive!http://www.unfairair.org (SNIPPED) THE ABOVE IS ALL LIBERAL FASCIST PROPAGANDA LIES Well, Poon Cheeks, if you want to insist that the earth is flat, then have at it. But read the following http://blogcritics.org/politics/arti...e-fake-debate/ Someone needs to explain why it is that CONSERVATIVES CONTINUE TO INSIST that liberals want to reinstitute the FCC’s 1949 Fairness Doctrine. While it is true that the old regulation is brought up from time to time, IT HAS NO TRACTION IN EITHER THE HOUSE OR SENATE. The administration is opposed to it. THE SUPREME COURT WOULD RULE AGAINST IT. Still, conservative talk radio continues to chant about the "Hush Rush Bill" as if it were a real threat that has real backing. It isn’t, it doesn’t, and it’s not going to happen. Nor will the sky fall. Obama's opposition to re-instating the FD is well....legendary. Notice the list of cites following this even includes one from Fox News! Get off the meds you are using and get a colon cleanse. http://dailycensored.com/2009/02/21/...e-is-bad-news/ "This week the Obama administration made it clear that they had no intention to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine." ******************************** http://www.iterasi.net/openviewer.as..._0cqw6xdhsy6qw "The fairness doctrine, which was scrapped by the FCC as unconstitutional in 1987,...." ******************************** http://www.broadcastingcable.com/art...Do ctrine.php "President Barack Obama has reiterated his opposition to reimposing the Fairness Doctrine." ******************************** http://www.foxnews.com/politics/firs...ness-doctrine/ "A White House spokesman tells FOXNews.com President Obama opposes any move to bring back the so-called Fairness Doctrine." ******************************** http://24ahead.com/obama-reiterates-...concentrate-hi "As the president stated during the campaign, he does not believe the Fairness Doctrine should be reinstated." and on and on.... RO |
IS THIS THE RETURN OF THE "(UN)FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?"
On May 9, 6:47*pm, dave wrote:
wrote: ery media outlet everywhere. The airwaves belong to everyone and cannot be used to create a poisonous political atmosphere. *Licensees have an obligation to serve the public interest. ------- Then let the public decide what is in their best interest. Or would you prefer a liberal administration, or any administration for that matter, supersede the will of THE PEOPLE and do it for them? Go ahead, keep pushing us around. GO AHEAD PUNK! ------- Newspapers can print whatever they like, because anybody can start a newspaper. *Spectrum is a finite commodity. *They cannot be coralled and used to further political objectives of the capital class to the detriment of everyone else. ------- IOW, you don't give a **** about the will of THE PEOPLE of the United States. ------- |
IS THIS THE RETURN OF THE "(UN)FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?"
wrote:
0baMa0 will purposefully legislate the radio industry into bankruptcy. Why bother? As with the banks, insurance companies and automobile companies, they will then takeover every radio station in the U.S. Then they will set their sites on the internet. Kiss your Free Speech goodbye! It will be Liberal Fascist Propaganda 24 hours a day 7 days a week on every media outlet everywhere. FREEDOM ISN'T FREE - FIGHT BACK http://www.unfairair.org The advertisers are withdrawing commercials, which is cutting the incomes of newspapers, TV, and radio. Sure they can put ads on the web, but who bothers looking at them? If you wanna buy something, and actually have some money, you comparison shop. Free speech has long been drowned out by paid for corporate speech. It will be nice to see what citizens, like yourself, have to say for a change. |
IS THIS THE RETURN OF THE "(UN)FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?"
Genaro wrote:
On May 9, 6:47 pm, dave wrote: The airwaves belong to everyone and cannot be used to create a poisonous political atmosphere. Licensees have an obligation to serve the public interest. ------- Then let the public decide what is in their best interest. That is precisely why broadcast media needs to be more down the middle. People cannot make informed decisions if all they hear is propaganda. When I was a kid, EVERY radio station did regular newscasts, (at least one an hour). |
IS THIS THE RETURN OF THE "(UN)FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?"
(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) Unemployed? No need to be:
www.LayoffRemedy.com wrote: On Sat, 09 May 2009 15:57:53 -0700, Telamon wrote: I expect we are going to get the "fairness doctrine" shoved down out throats in the near future but it will be called something else. CLUE, Mindless Loser -- FAIRNESS *cannot** be FORCED upon anyone any more than any FREEDOM can For public airwaves to be ABUSED to give ONE-sided and BIGOTED views -- as FAUX News has been doing. is UNfair. Fox News is a cable channel. The big scary fairness doctrine only applies to wireless broadcast, e.g. radio and TV stations.. |
IS THIS THE RETURN OF THE "(UN)FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?"
"dave" wrote in message m... (¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) Unemployed? No need to be: www.LayoffRemedy.com wrote: On Sat, 09 May 2009 15:57:53 -0700, Telamon wrote: I expect we are going to get the "fairness doctrine" shoved down out throats in the near future but it will be called something else. CLUE, Mindless Loser -- FAIRNESS *cannot** be FORCED upon anyone any more than any FREEDOM can For public airwaves to be ABUSED to give ONE-sided and BIGOTED views -- as FAUX News has been doing. is UNfair. Fox News is a cable channel. The big scary fairness doctrine only applies to wireless broadcast, e.g. radio and TV stations.. Hardly matters -- that's Rush's backyard and you know how the dittoheads circle to protect their queen pig... Jim |
IS THIS THE RETURN OF THE "(UN)FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?"
On May 9, 5:47*pm, dave wrote:
wrote: ery media outlet everywhere. The airwaves belong to everyone and cannot be used to create a poisonous political atmosphere. *Licensees have an obligation to serve the public interest. "Poisonous" as defined by whom? Little Liberal Fascist Diktators in your local Hitlery "It Takes A Village"? There is no better way to determine satisfaction of a licensees obligation of serving the public than the Public actually listening. Through which the radio station gains its Market Share Rating and allows the station to make enough advertizing revenue to continue opperating. If Free Market Capitalism (you and me consuming radio product) is not allowed to operate than WHO/WHAT will decide which stations continue to operate? A Politician? An 0baMa0 appointed Liberal Fascist/Neo-Communist? Kiss your freedom goodbye. And Dr.DaviD, you can kiss my ass! Newspapers can print whatever they like, because anybody can start a newspaper. *Spectrum is a finite commodity. *They cannot be coralled and used to further political objectives of the capital class to the detriment of everyone else. Ah yes! A typical Liberal Fascist explaination. The "Capital Class". As if that excludes everyone except rich as defined by 0baMaoists - bwaHAHAHAHAHA! Yes, Dr.DaviD - Heil 0baMao Hitler - our great leader will decide what is good for every single individual Serf. **** OFF YOU LIL'NEO-COMMIE IMBECILE! |
IS THIS THE RETURN OF THE "(UN)FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?"
On May 9, 7:58*pm, dave wrote:
Genaro wrote: On May 9, 6:47 pm, dave wrote: The airwaves belong to everyone and cannot be used to create a poisonous political atmosphere. *Licensees have an obligation to serve the public interest. ------- Then let the public decide what is in their best interest. That is precisely why broadcast media needs to be more down the middle. Ja, let Heil 0baMa0 Hitler decide what is "down the middle" instead of Free Market Consumers - (me and you) * People cannot make informed decisions if all they hear is propaganda. or go to public schools and be taught Liberal fascist Neo-Communist PROPAGANDA LIES from K to PhD! Right IMBECILE Dr.DaviD,PhD? When I was a kid, EVERY radio station did regular newscasts, (at least one an hour). Ooooh - Dr.DaviD can taste the Liberal Fascist power - HEIL HITLER!!!! |
IS THIS THE RETURN OF THE "FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?" GOP agast! Ru$hfalls!
On May 9, 3:27*pm, who are you? wrote
would be pretty funny to take the only tool the republican't party has over it's lemmings, childish name calling. Ru$h LimpBalls would be out-a a job! * *Without FUD for the republican't party to use to control it's lemmings, they will be forced to come up with real ideas HEIL 0baMa0 HITLER!!!! |
IS THIS THE RETURN OF THE "FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?" GOP agast! Ru$hfalls!
On Sat, 09 May 2009 16:00:37 -0700, Telamon wrote:
In article , who are you? wrote: On Sat, 09 May 2009 12:35:17 -0700, obamao.sux.donki.dixsss wrote: would be pretty funny to take the only tool the republican't party has over it's lemmings, childish name calling. Yeah, Americans losing their free speech rights would be hilarious. I think we should start with you. Anybody was able to say anything they wanted before and after the Fairness Doctrine was repealed. The reason for the reinstatement is that with all the rich republican'ts owning all the media outlets, fat dumb sausage suckers (like Ru$h and Beck) spewing an acid bath of hate that is being presented as the only fact. Without the Fairness Doctrine, your only hearing one side of the issue... Theirs! And, if your only hearing their side, it's probably NOT in your favor. Republican't attitude... **** you! I'm right and you don't need to know more Without FUD for the republican't party to use to control it's lemmings, they will be forced to come up with real ideas |
IS THIS THE RETURN OF THE "FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?" GOP agast! Ru$h falls!
In article ,
who are you? wrote: On Sat, 09 May 2009 16:00:37 -0700, Telamon wrote: In article , who are you? wrote: On Sat, 09 May 2009 12:35:17 -0700, obamao.sux.donki.dixsss wrote: would be pretty funny to take the only tool the republican't party has over it's lemmings, childish name calling. Yeah, Americans losing their free speech rights would be hilarious. I think we should start with you. Anybody was able to say anything they wanted before and after the Fairness Doctrine was repealed. SNIP Baloney, people reading this news group were not born yesterday. I remember the way things were before and after the "unfairness doctrine" was enforced. For some reason you got the left point of view and that was it. I could not stand listening to talk radio with the liberals in control as a right wringer calling in would get shouted down by the host. Basically people that called in got the same treatment from the hosts as the liberal assholes that spew their crap on Usenet do here today. The same old liberal lying crap said over and over like that will make it true. Well keep dreaming that the "unfairness doctrine" will make a comeback as it is the only chance you got to fool people into believing the liberal lie. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
(OT) : Who Needs The Fairness Doctrine When You Could Have Obama-Talk©
On May 9, 1:27*pm, who are you? wrote:
On Sat, 09 May 2009 12:35:17 -0700, obamao.sux.donki.dixsss wrote: We think it is and that it has long been planned and, for that matter, rather openly proclaimed since way back during the presidential campaign. Michelle Malkin has been concerned for some time and here [link below] is her latest (with some good links) on what may be an impending disaster for talk radio. - Milt Rosenberg, WGN Radio would be pretty funny to take the only tool the republican't party has over it's lemmings, childish name calling. Ru$h LimpBalls would be out-a a job! * *Without FUD for the republican't party to use to control it's lemmings, they will be forced to come up with real ideas WAY - Speaking of 'childish name calling' * 'lemmings' * 'Ru$h LimpBalls' - - - = = = RHF's Canned Reply 'Rant' = = = - - - [: To Liberal-Fascist Name Calling :] ROTFL - You Know When You Are Winning An Argument : When a Super-Smart 'Enlightened" Liberal Starts Name Calling*. * They Lose Their Ability To Think And Get Emotional - rotfl ~ RHF http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r...8979fbe8546cfa |
IS THIS THE RETURN OF THE "(UN)FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?"
In article ,
"(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) Unemployed? No need to be: www.LayoffRemedy.com" wrote: SNIP TRANSLATION: SNIP Your translator is broken retard. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
(OT) : Who Needs The Fairness Doctrine When You simplemindedoneway thought proccess RHF
On Sat, 09 May 2009 23:03:56 -0700, ~ RHF wrote:
On May 9, 1:27Â*pm, who are you? wrote: On Sat, 09 May 2009 12:35:17 -0700, obamao.sux.donki.dixsss wrote: We think it is and that it has long been planned and, for that matter, rather openly proclaimed since way back during the presidential campaign. Michelle Malkin has been concerned for some time and here [link below] is her latest (with some good links) on what may be an impending disaster for talk radio. - Milt Rosenberg, WGN Radio would be pretty funny to take the only tool the republican't party has over it's lemmings, childish name calling. Ru$h LimpBalls would be out-a a job! Â* Â*Without FUD for the republican't party to use to control it's lemmings, they will be forced to come up with real ideas WAY - Speaking of 'childish name calling' * 'lemmings' * 'Ru$h LimpBalls' sigh I was doing my part to communicate with your type :-) |
RETURN OF THE "FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?" line in the sand challenge
On Sat, 09 May 2009 22:31:24 -0700, Telamon wrote:
In article , who are you? wrote: On Sat, 09 May 2009 16:00:37 -0700, Telamon wrote: In article , who are you? wrote: On Sat, 09 May 2009 12:35:17 -0700, obamao.sux.donki.dixsss wrote: would be pretty funny to take the only tool the republican't party has over it's lemmings, childish name calling. Yeah, Americans losing their free speech rights would be hilarious. I think we should start with you. Anybody was able to say anything they wanted before and after the Fairness Doctrine was repealed. SNIP Baloney, people reading this news group were not born yesterday. I remember the way things were before and after the "unfairness doctrine" was enforced. snip unrelated biased opinion O yea?! early in mass coommmunications, Talkshows and call-ins were rare but viewpoint programs were not. In radio and TV, there were people with timers to make sure different viewpoints were equally represented, at least by equality in time. Perhaps there were mistakes by not having a fully qualified guest making the response for one side or another but never-the-less, there WAS a response and the audience was not left with the impression that the host of the "show" was "the authority". What we have today are groups of people who follow what they like to hear and believe as fact, most anything said by the program moderator. There is little if no confirmation of facts and the program host will let the audience conjecture bogus attitudes on a subject or person when the basis of the subject is truly unfounded. With a fairness doctrine, no individual will loose any civil rights. If you feel differently, please explain. The only people I feel will loose (financially but not civilly) are the corporations who own all the media outlets. Their gain (by keeping the public in the dark) is simply your lose to make educated opinion or judgment. |
IS THIS THE RETURN OF THE "(UN)FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?"
|
IS THIS THE RETURN OF THE "FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?" GOP agast! Ru$hfalls!
Telamon wrote:
In article , who are you? wrote: On Sat, 09 May 2009 16:00:37 -0700, Telamon wrote: In article , who are you? wrote: On Sat, 09 May 2009 12:35:17 -0700, obamao.sux.donki.dixsss wrote: would be pretty funny to take the only tool the republican't party has over it's lemmings, childish name calling. Yeah, Americans losing their free speech rights would be hilarious. I think we should start with you. Anybody was able to say anything they wanted before and after the Fairness Doctrine was repealed. SNIP Baloney, people reading this news group were not born yesterday. I remember the way things were before and after the "unfairness doctrine" was enforced. For some reason you got the left point of view and that was it. I could not stand listening to talk radio with the liberals in control as a right wringer calling in would get shouted down by the host. Basically people that called in got the same treatment from the hosts as the liberal assholes that spew their crap on Usenet do here today. The same old liberal lying crap said over and over like that will make it true. Well keep dreaming that the "unfairness doctrine" will make a comeback as it is the only chance you got to fool people into believing the liberal lie. What ARE you talking about? Give a concrete example. Hell, Limbaugh started during the era of the Fairness Doctrine. What about Joe Pyne? Morton Downey Junior? Wally George? etc? |
Dave -speaks-out-about- The Capital Class To The Detriment OfEveryone Else
~ RHF wrote:
On May 9, 3:47 pm, dave wrote: wrote: ery media outlet everywhere. The airwaves belong to everyone and cannot be used to create a poisonous political atmosphere. Licensees have an obligation to serve the public interest. Newspapers can print whatever they like, because anybody can start a newspaper. Spectrum is a finite commodity. - - They cannot be coralled and used to further - political objectives of the capital class to the - detriment of everyone else. Dave -speaks-out-about- The Capital Class To The Detriment Of Everyone Else You are a tool. If you aren't part of the solution you are the problem. Get out of the way or you will be run over. |
RETURN OF THE "FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?" line in the sand challenge
who are you? wrote:
On Sat, 09 May 2009 22:31:24 -0700, Telamon wrote: In article , who are you? wrote: On Sat, 09 May 2009 16:00:37 -0700, Telamon wrote: In article , who are you? wrote: On Sat, 09 May 2009 12:35:17 -0700, obamao.sux.donki.dixsss wrote: would be pretty funny to take the only tool the republican't party has over it's lemmings, childish name calling. Yeah, Americans losing their free speech rights would be hilarious. I think we should start with you. Anybody was able to say anything they wanted before and after the Fairness Doctrine was repealed. SNIP Baloney, people reading this news group were not born yesterday. I remember the way things were before and after the "unfairness doctrine" was enforced. snip unrelated biased opinion O yea?! early in mass coommmunications, Talkshows and call-ins were rare but viewpoint programs were not. In radio and TV, there were people with timers to make sure different viewpoints were equally represented, at least by equality in time. No there weren't. It was never enforced that rigidly. At best, persons with opposing viewpoints were given an open invitation to come in with their views, which rarely happened, and even when it did, it just provided an amusing program. Think Floyd Turbo on the old Tonight Show. |
IS THIS THE RETURN OF THE "FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?" GOP agast! Ru$h falls!
"dave" wrote in message m... Baloney, people reading this news group were not born yesterday. I remember the way things were before and after the "unfairness doctrine" was enforced. For some reason you got the left point of view and that was it. I could not stand listening to talk radio with the liberals in control as a right wringer calling in would get shouted down by the host. Basically people that called in got the same treatment from the hosts as the liberal assholes that spew their crap on Usenet do here today. The same old liberal lying crap said over and over like that will make it true. Well keep dreaming that the "unfairness doctrine" will make a comeback as it is the only chance you got to fool people into believing the liberal lie. What ARE you talking about? Give a concrete example. Hell, Limbaugh started during the era of the Fairness Doctrine. What about Joe Pyne? Morton Downey Junior? Wally George? etc? I'm plenty old enough to remember the days of the old Fairness Doctrine, and it NEVER applied to talk radio at all. It applied to stations that would give free air time to stump for a political candidate or cause, and (supposedly) required them to give free air time to an opposing opinion. As far as talkers, most of the ones I remember from my youth were conservatives like Ira Blue and Herb Jepko (well, they were conservatives at the time, nowadays, they'd be considered moderates). Liberal talkers, as today, were fairly scarce, and usually, like today, stuck on small (the one in Portland at the time, KKEY, was a 1KW daytimer) stations. And of course the ones that think that a revived 'doctrine' would affect religious programming have a screw loose. All during the time of the doctrine, there was abundant religious programming. Most every station had some sort of religious programming on Sundays, and some programs like Garner Ted Armstrong that ran nightly. This along with most cities over 100,000 population having at least one dedicated Christian radio station. Not only are nearly all of those stations still on the air, and have been in many cases for over 50 years, but most cities have added additional AM, FM, LPFM and even television stations. A revised doctrine *MIGHT* affect Fox News and MSNBC by requiring them to have actual opposing viewpoints up against the likes of Sean Hannity and Keith Olbermann, but I really doubt it. I suspect it would, as in the days of yore, apply only to campaigns and campaign issues. |
Dave -speaks-out-about- The Capital Class To The Detriment OfEveryone Else
dave wrote:
You are a tool. If you aren't part of the solution you are the problem. If you aren't part of the solution, you're precipitate... mike -- __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / / / /\ \/ /\'Think tanks cleaned cheap' /\ \/ / /_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ Densa International© For the OTHER two percent. Due to the insane amount of spam and garbage, I block all postings with a Gmail, Google Mail, Google Groups or HOTMAIL address. I also filter everything from a .cn server. For solutions which may work for you, please check: http://improve-usenet.org/ |
IS THIS THE RETURN OF THE "FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?" GOP agast! Ru$hfalls!
Brenda Ann wrote:
"dave" wrote in message m... Baloney, people reading this news group were not born yesterday. I remember the way things were before and after the "unfairness doctrine" was enforced. For some reason you got the left point of view and that was it. I could not stand listening to talk radio with the liberals in control as a right wringer calling in would get shouted down by the host. Basically people that called in got the same treatment from the hosts as the liberal assholes that spew their crap on Usenet do here today. The same old liberal lying crap said over and over like that will make it true. Well keep dreaming that the "unfairness doctrine" will make a comeback as it is the only chance you got to fool people into believing the liberal lie. What ARE you talking about? Give a concrete example. Hell, Limbaugh started during the era of the Fairness Doctrine. What about Joe Pyne? Morton Downey Junior? Wally George? etc? I'm plenty old enough to remember the days of the old Fairness Doctrine, and it NEVER applied to talk radio at all. It applied to stations that would give free air time to stump for a political candidate or cause, and (supposedly) required them to give free air time to an opposing opinion. As far as talkers, most of the ones I remember from my youth were conservatives like Ira Blue and Herb Jepko (well, they were conservatives at the time, nowadays, they'd be considered moderates). Liberal talkers, as today, were fairly scarce, and usually, like today, stuck on small (the one in Portland at the time, KKEY, was a 1KW daytimer) stations. And of course the ones that think that a revived 'doctrine' would affect religious programming have a screw loose. All during the time of the doctrine, there was abundant religious programming. Most every station had some sort of religious programming on Sundays, and some programs like Garner Ted Armstrong that ran nightly. This along with most cities over 100,000 population having at least one dedicated Christian radio station. Not only are nearly all of those stations still on the air, and have been in many cases for over 50 years, but most cities have added additional AM, FM, LPFM and even television stations. A revised doctrine *MIGHT* affect Fox News and MSNBC by requiring them to have actual opposing viewpoints up against the likes of Sean Hannity and Keith Olbermann, but I really doubt it. I suspect it would, as in the days of yore, apply only to campaigns and campaign issues. Cable TV is exempt from most FCC content restrictions. A new Fairness Doctrine would only apply to over-the-air broadcasts via the publicly owned airwaves. |
Dave -speaks-out-about- The Capital Class To The Detriment OfEveryone Else
m II wrote:
dave wrote: You are a tool. If you aren't part of the solution you are the problem. If you aren't part of the solution, you're precipitate... mike Add some heat. |
Dave -speaks-out-about- The Capital Class To The Detriment Of...
Look at what B HO and those ObamaButtKissers say about Rush Limbaugh's
kidneys. www.libertypost.org cuhulin |
Dave -speaks-out-about- The Capital Class To The Detriment Of...
|
IS THIS THE RETURN OF THE "FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?" GOP agast! Ru$h falls!
In article ,
dave wrote: Telamon wrote: In article , who are you? wrote: On Sat, 09 May 2009 16:00:37 -0700, Telamon wrote: In article , who are you? wrote: On Sat, 09 May 2009 12:35:17 -0700, obamao.sux.donki.dixsss wrote: would be pretty funny to take the only tool the republican't party has over it's lemmings, childish name calling. Yeah, Americans losing their free speech rights would be hilarious. I think we should start with you. Anybody was able to say anything they wanted before and after the Fairness Doctrine was repealed. SNIP Baloney, people reading this news group were not born yesterday. I remember the way things were before and after the "unfairness doctrine" was enforced. For some reason you got the left point of view and that was it. I could not stand listening to talk radio with the liberals in control as a right wringer calling in would get shouted down by the host. Basically people that called in got the same treatment from the hosts as the liberal assholes that spew their crap on Usenet do here today. The same old liberal lying crap said over and over like that will make it true. Well keep dreaming that the "unfairness doctrine" will make a comeback as it is the only chance you got to fool people into believing the liberal lie. What ARE you talking about? Give a concrete example. Hell, Limbaugh started during the era of the Fairness Doctrine. What about Joe Pyne? Morton Downey Junior? Wally George? etc? I'm talking about pre-Limbaugh. All there was to listen to on FM opinion and news were liberals. Same deal on the public service stations. Those people were not on the air back in NY or out here in southern California. I have never listened any of the people you mentioned and I don't watch TV. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
RETURN OF THE "FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?" line in the sand challenge
In article ,
who are you? wrote: On Sat, 09 May 2009 22:31:24 -0700, Telamon wrote: In article , who are you? wrote: On Sat, 09 May 2009 16:00:37 -0700, Telamon wrote: In article , who are you? wrote: On Sat, 09 May 2009 12:35:17 -0700, obamao.sux.donki.dixsss wrote: would be pretty funny to take the only tool the republican't party has over it's lemmings, childish name calling. Yeah, Americans losing their free speech rights would be hilarious. I think we should start with you. Anybody was able to say anything they wanted before and after the Fairness Doctrine was repealed. SNIP Baloney, people reading this news group were not born yesterday. I remember the way things were before and after the "unfairness doctrine" was enforced. snip unrelated biased opinion O yea?! SNIP dumb crap Yeah! -- Telamon Ventura, California |
IS THIS THE RETURN OF THE "(UN)FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?"
In article ,
"(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) Unemployed? No need to be: www.LayoffRemedy.com" wrote: On Sat, 09 May 2009 15:57:53 -0700, Telamon wrote: I expect we are going to get the "fairness doctrine" shoved down out throats in the near future but it will be called something else. CLUE, Mindless Loser -- FAIRNESS *cannot** be FORCED upon anyone any more than any FREEDOM can Clue kook-aid drinker it's the "unfairness doctrine" For public airwaves to be ABUSED to give ONE-sided and BIGOTED views -- as FAUX News has been doing. is UNfair. That's for making my point. ALL media should be required to present ALL sides of issues, equally. And IF presented in a biased fashion, the opposite view should be presented with EQUAL vigor. You mean to say all media should required to present the point of view you like and that's it. **VIVA** the FAIRNESS Doctrine!! The "unfairness doctrine" run by the liberal fascists. -- (¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) Kook-aid drinker. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
IS THIS THE RETURN OF THE "(UN)FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?"
In article ,
"(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) Otherwise known as dork breath: SNIP The SOONER the Fairness Doctrine is reinstated, the BETTER! SNIP The liberal kook-aid drinker wants his views shoved down our throats. What a kook. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
IS THIS THE RETURN OF THE "FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?" GOP agast! Ru$hfalls!
Telamon wrote:
In article , dave wrote: Telamon wrote: In article , who are you? wrote: On Sat, 09 May 2009 16:00:37 -0700, Telamon wrote: In article , who are you? wrote: On Sat, 09 May 2009 12:35:17 -0700, obamao.sux.donki.dixsss wrote: would be pretty funny to take the only tool the republican't party has over it's lemmings, childish name calling. Yeah, Americans losing their free speech rights would be hilarious. I think we should start with you. Anybody was able to say anything they wanted before and after the Fairness Doctrine was repealed. SNIP Baloney, people reading this news group were not born yesterday. I remember the way things were before and after the "unfairness doctrine" was enforced. For some reason you got the left point of view and that was it. I could not stand listening to talk radio with the liberals in control as a right wringer calling in would get shouted down by the host. Basically people that called in got the same treatment from the hosts as the liberal assholes that spew their crap on Usenet do here today. The same old liberal lying crap said over and over like that will make it true. Well keep dreaming that the "unfairness doctrine" will make a comeback as it is the only chance you got to fool people into believing the liberal lie. What ARE you talking about? Give a concrete example. Hell, Limbaugh started during the era of the Fairness Doctrine. What about Joe Pyne? Morton Downey Junior? Wally George? etc? I'm talking about pre-Limbaugh. All there was to listen to on FM opinion and news were liberals. Same deal on the public service stations. Those people were not on the air back in NY or out here in southern California. I have never listened any of the people you mentioned and I don't watch TV. That sounds like KPFK. http://www.well.com/user/dmsml/kpfk1959/index.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Pyne (Rebecca De Mornay's Dad) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wally_george http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morton_Downey_Jr And in NYC, how could you miss this guy? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Grant_(radio) |
IS THIS THE RETURN OF THE "FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?" GOP agast! Ru$h falls!
In article ,
dave wrote: Telamon wrote: In article , dave wrote: Telamon wrote: In article , who are you? wrote: On Sat, 09 May 2009 16:00:37 -0700, Telamon wrote: In article , who are you? wrote: On Sat, 09 May 2009 12:35:17 -0700, obamao.sux.donki.dixsss wrote: would be pretty funny to take the only tool the republican't party has over it's lemmings, childish name calling. Yeah, Americans losing their free speech rights would be hilarious. I think we should start with you. Anybody was able to say anything they wanted before and after the Fairness Doctrine was repealed. SNIP Baloney, people reading this news group were not born yesterday. I remember the way things were before and after the "unfairness doctrine" was enforced. For some reason you got the left point of view and that was it. I could not stand listening to talk radio with the liberals in control as a right wringer calling in would get shouted down by the host. Basically people that called in got the same treatment from the hosts as the liberal assholes that spew their crap on Usenet do here today. The same old liberal lying crap said over and over like that will make it true. Well keep dreaming that the "unfairness doctrine" will make a comeback as it is the only chance you got to fool people into believing the liberal lie. What ARE you talking about? Give a concrete example. Hell, Limbaugh started during the era of the Fairness Doctrine. What about Joe Pyne? Morton Downey Junior? Wally George? etc? I'm talking about pre-Limbaugh. All there was to listen to on FM opinion and news were liberals. Same deal on the public service stations. Those people were not on the air back in NY or out here in southern California. I have never listened any of the people you mentioned and I don't watch TV. That sounds like KPFK. http://www.well.com/user/dmsml/kpfk1959/index.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Pyne (Rebecca De Mornay's Dad) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wally_george http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morton_Downey_Jr And in NYC, how could you miss this guy? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Grant_(radio) I didn't live in NYC but in western NY in the Buffalo area. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
IS THIS THE RETURN OF THE "(UN)FAIRNESS DOCTRINE?"
In article ,
"(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) Unemployed? No need to be: www.LayoffRemedy.com" wrote: On Sun, 10 May 2009 13:38:27 -0700, Telamon wrote: (¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) Unemployed? No need to be: www.LayoffRemedy.com wrote: Telamon wrote: I expect we are going to get the "fairness doctrine" shoved down out throats in the near future but it will be called something else. CLUE, Mindless Loser -- FAIRNESS *cannot** be FORCED upon anyone any more than any FREEDOM can Clue: It's the "unfairness doctrine." Wrong. Because it requires BOTH sides of issues to be presented EQUALLY. And *that* is FAIR. I'm right and you know it Mr. Minister of propaganda. For public airwaves to be ABUSED to give ONE-sided and BIGOTED views -- as FAUX News has been doing. is UNfair. ALL media should be required to present ALL sides of issues, equally. And IF presented in a biased fashion, the opposite view should be presented with EQUAL vigor. You mean to say all media should required to present the point of view you like and that's it. Wrong! I mean to present both sides as the FACTS make clear. Are you **afraid** of relevant FACTS? Get this through your very thick head. What you intend has no basis on what the liberal Dem's intend to do. **VIVA** the FAIRNESS Doctrine!! stupidity-flush You going to flush yourself O'clueless one. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:21 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com