The "Fairness Doctrine" Drumbeat Heating Up!

[GTaudiophile]

Man, the Dems must feel so threatened! The last bastion of non-Liberal-controlled media is under fire. Wait a minute, what about NPR? If the FD passes under Obama, I hope the next Republican Prez axes tax payer funds to NPR.

Of course, if Obama goes along with this, he will completely alienate everyone on the right as well as a lot of moderates I bet. This is nothing short of government censorship.

FD Drumbeat Heats Up!

 

[AndrewR]

People don't want liberal radio (as evidenced by the lack of listeners despite multiple attempts to start it), yet some in Congress want to mandate its existence. If it's so necessary and so in demand, why did Air America not succeed? This kind of government meddling in the marketplace is ridiculous.

If there are barriers to entry, then lift them. Air America didn't seem to have a barrier to entry, however; it just failed commercially. I don't get it.

 

[Moonbeam]

Muzzling right winged talk radio is like muzzling the Hitler movement or inoculating the public against polio. It feeds a sickness that needs to be destroyed. It preys on the insane making them sicker.

 

[MovingTarget]

Repost x ?

The topic of the fairness doctrine has been beaten to death here. There has been an increasing drumbeat of support for reinstating it, but I'm not sure if that is anything more than rumor at this point, manufactured or not. Hell, there was an article recently about former president Clinton saying it should be reinstated. Stories about person X,Y,or Z supporting the FD seem to come out every few weeks. Until Congress holds hearings on the issue or the FCC mentions it, it is largely a moot issue, more suited to scare tactics by the right.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Muzzling right winged talk radio is like muzzling the Hitler movement or inoculating the public against polio. It feeds a sickness that needs to be destroyed. It preys on the insane making them sicker.

Bring on the gas chambers and be done with it...the sooner we do this the sooner we have utopia. :roll:

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Originally posted by: MovingTarget
Repost x ?

The topic of the fairness doctrine has been beaten to death here. There has been an increasing drumbeat of support for reinstating it, but I'm not sure if that is anything more than rumor at this point, manufactured or not. Hell, there was an article recently about former president Clinton saying it should be reinstated. Stories about person X,Y,or Z supporting the FD seem to come out every few weeks. Until Congress holds hearings on the issue or the FCC mentions it, it is largely a moot issue, more suited to scare tactics by the right.

Maybe if the left wouldn't keep bringing it up then the right wouldn't react to it and invoke their 'scare tactics' (lol)....just a thought.

 

[PokerGuy]

You can't have complete brainwashing of the public to the left if they still have ways of getting alternate (non-pc non-leftist) views out there. Surely the right wings views must be squashed by any means needed.

 

[dphantom]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Muzzling right winged talk radio is like muzzling the Hitler movement or inoculating the public against polio. It feeds a sickness that needs to be destroyed. It preys on the insane making them sicker.

Well, we now know what the leftists want, a people who are allowed to think and express thoughts in only the approved manner - approved by the left.

Last I heard, we called that censorship. Something protected under the 1st amendment.

You don't like what conservative talk radio has to say, tune in to NPR or Air America.

 

[MovingTarget]

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: MovingTarget
Repost x ?

The topic of the fairness doctrine has been beaten to death here. There has been an increasing drumbeat of support for reinstating it, but I'm not sure if that is anything more than rumor at this point, manufactured or not. Hell, there was an article recently about former president Clinton saying it should be reinstated. Stories about person X,Y,or Z supporting the FD seem to come out every few weeks. Until Congress holds hearings on the issue or the FCC mentions it, it is largely a moot issue, more suited to scare tactics by the right.

Maybe if the left wouldn't keep bringing it up then the right wouldn't react to it and invoke their 'scare tactics' (lol)....just a thought.

The right seems to be bringing this up systematically while those on the left have not. They have power to do so right now, but they do not. There will always be some that support the FD, but that has a snowball's chance in hell of even being brought up for official debate. This is really a right wing attempt to circle the wagons through the usual FUD. Like I said, when it is announced that it will be brought up in Congress, then it will be an issue. Until then, nothing to see here...

 

[chrisho]

Originally posted by: MovingTarget

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: MovingTarget
Repost x ?

The topic of the fairness doctrine has been beaten to death here. There has been an increasing drumbeat of support for reinstating it, but I'm not sure if that is anything more than rumor at this point, manufactured or not. Hell, there was an article recently about former president Clinton saying it should be reinstated. Stories about person X,Y,or Z supporting the FD seem to come out every few weeks. Until Congress holds hearings on the issue or the FCC mentions it, it is largely a moot issue, more suited to scare tactics by the right.

Maybe if the left wouldn't keep bringing it up then the right wouldn't react to it and invoke their 'scare tactics' (lol)....just a thought.

The right seems to be bringing this up systematically while those on the left have not. They have power to do so right now, but they do not. There will always be some that support the FD, but that has a snowball's chance in hell of even being brought up for official debate. This is really a right wing attempt to circle the wagons through the usual FUD. Like I said, when it is announced that it will be brought up in Congress, then it will be an issue. Until then, nothing to see here...

Regardless, the fact that Democrat Congressmen talk about introducing it again shows that only favor freedom of speech when it agrees with them. How long before they attempt to enforce this on other mediums they can claim the Constitution does not protect? After all MSNBC gets pummeled by Fox on TV perhaps that isn't fair? One attempt even wanted enforcement to cover websites because a lot of their targets (read Rush, Beck, and a few others) are well established there.

The simple fact is is that this is the worse thing for liberals to allow their Congressmen to bring forward because it not only shows they don't care for the rights of others but that they give the right unlimited ammunition to keep beating the drums.

It was stupid before and it would be worse now. I would never have known of the impending health care changes if I didn't hear it on radio...

Rush isn't all about politics, nor is Beck, Boortz, or even Hannity. They are also about entertainment. They know how to speak to people. They know what matters. They also know that making it seem they are willing to debate people adds to that magic.

 

[MovingTarget]

Originally posted by: chrisho

Originally posted by: MovingTarget

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: MovingTarget
Repost x ?

The topic of the fairness doctrine has been beaten to death here. There has been an increasing drumbeat of support for reinstating it, but I'm not sure if that is anything more than rumor at this point, manufactured or not. Hell, there was an article recently about former president Clinton saying it should be reinstated. Stories about person X,Y,or Z supporting the FD seem to come out every few weeks. Until Congress holds hearings on the issue or the FCC mentions it, it is largely a moot issue, more suited to scare tactics by the right.

Maybe if the left wouldn't keep bringing it up then the right wouldn't react to it and invoke their 'scare tactics' (lol)....just a thought.

The right seems to be bringing this up systematically while those on the left have not. They have power to do so right now, but they do not. There will always be some that support the FD, but that has a snowball's chance in hell of even being brought up for official debate. This is really a right wing attempt to circle the wagons through the usual FUD. Like I said, when it is announced that it will be brought up in Congress, then it will be an issue. Until then, nothing to see here...

Regardless, the fact that Democrat Congressmen talk about introducing it again shows that only favor freedom of speech when it agrees with them. How long before they attempt to enforce this on other mediums they can claim the Constitution does not protect? After all MSNBC gets pummeled by Fox on TV perhaps that isn't fair? One attempt even wanted enforcement to cover websites because a lot of their targets (read Rush, Beck, and a few others) are well established there.

The simple fact is is that this is the worse thing for liberals to allow their Congressmen to bring forward because it not only shows they don't care for the rights of others but that they give the right unlimited ammunition to keep beating the drums.

It was stupid before and it would be worse now. I would never have known of the impending health care changes if I didn't hear it on radio...

Rush isn't all about politics, nor is Beck, Boortz, or even Hannity. They are also about entertainment. They know how to speak to people. They know what matters. They also know that making it seem they are willing to debate people adds to that magic.

Sigh. The FD was never meant to cover non-OTA mediums. Public airwaves are a finite resource to be used for public benefit, as per the FCC licensing requirements. They cannot be equated with free speech. Free press plays a part, but the very nature of OTA broadcast medium makes any such comparison inadequate. The FD isn't about "fairness" as determined by any one side, but more of a way to prevent any OTA medium from being entirely one-sided. This has been discussed ad nauseum. See the other FD threads.

Are we going to have a new thread about this every other week when Drudge or some other outlet links to another "X wants to bring back the FD" blog post? Lets merge these things and be done with it. It is okay to discuss the merits of the FD, but to call it news every time this happens is a bit farcical.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Originally posted by: MovingTarget

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: MovingTarget
Repost x ?

The topic of the fairness doctrine has been beaten to death here. There has been an increasing drumbeat of support for reinstating it, but I'm not sure if that is anything more than rumor at this point, manufactured or not. Hell, there was an article recently about former president Clinton saying it should be reinstated. Stories about person X,Y,or Z supporting the FD seem to come out every few weeks. Until Congress holds hearings on the issue or the FCC mentions it, it is largely a moot issue, more suited to scare tactics by the right.

Maybe if the left wouldn't keep bringing it up then the right wouldn't react to it and invoke their 'scare tactics' (lol)....just a thought.

The right seems to be bringing this up systematically while those on the left have not. They have power to do so right now, but they do not. There will always be some that support the FD, but that has a snowball's chance in hell of even being brought up for official debate. This is really a right wing attempt to circle the wagons through the usual FUD. Like I said, when it is announced that it will be brought up in Congress, then it will be an issue. Until then, nothing to see here...

And the left is not bringing this up systematically? Dude...did you read the article? Hinchey's the one who brought up the subject and voiced his intentions to make the Fairness Doctrine part of a bill later this year and...God forbid... the right had the odasity to react? What are you saying...they should just STFU until it's actually brought up in Congress? Yet it's OK for Hinchey to freely express his opinion and any reaction to his intentions "is really a right wing attempt to circle the wagons through the usual FUD". Hitting the bottle a little early today?

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: dphantom

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Muzzling right winged talk radio is like muzzling the Hitler movement or inoculating the public against polio. It feeds a sickness that needs to be destroyed. It preys on the insane making them sicker.

Well, we now know what the leftists want, a people who are allowed to think and express thoughts in only the approved manner - approved by the left.

Last I heard, we called that censorship. Something protected under the 1st amendment.

You don't like what conservative talk radio has to say, tune in to NPR or Air America.

I want you to be able to express any view you like, exactly like, or almost so, anyway, as you can here. All I want is that there be no single voice of insanity broadcasting to millions and millions of people. Rush Limpbrow is a piece of shit. He can say whatever he likes as far as I car, but he has to have somebody there with alternate views to round out, and file off his insanity. He is a fucking turd and a liar and is responsible for great disaster in America. He is a disease. I want him to broadcast along with penicillin. Prevent calls from being screened or him having control of the mike. Fairness is what I ask for.

Remember the real function of that asshole is to deliver a bunch of uncritical fools into the hands of advertisers. People who buy into Rush will buy anything.

By the way, NPR has a huge conservative audience as many conservatives are intelligent human beings. NPR gets as many complaints about being to the left as it does to the right. It's folk who are extreme but fancy themselves normal who cause this.

 

[MotF Bane]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: dphantom

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Muzzling right winged talk radio is like muzzling the Hitler movement or inoculating the public against polio. It feeds a sickness that needs to be destroyed. It preys on the insane making them sicker.

Well, we now know what the leftists want, a people who are allowed to think and express thoughts in only the approved manner - approved by the left.

Last I heard, we called that censorship. Something protected under the 1st amendment.

You don't like what conservative talk radio has to say, tune in to NPR or Air America.

I want you to be able to express any view you like, exactly like, or almost so, anyway, as you can here. All I want is that there be no single voice of insanity broadcasting to millions and millions of people. Rush Limpbrow is a piece of shit. He can say whatever he likes as far as I car, but he has to have somebody there with alternate views to round out, and file off his insanity. He is a fucking turd and a liar and is responsible for great disaster in America. He is a disease. I want him to broadcast along with penicillin. Prevent calls from being screened or him having control of the mike. Fairness is what I ask for.

Remember the real function of that asshole is to deliver a bunch of uncritical fools into the hands of advertisers. People who buy into Rush will buy anything.

By the way, NPR has a huge conservative audience as many conservatives are intelligent human beings. NPR gets as many complaints about being to the left as it does to the right. It's folk who are extreme but fancy themselves normal who cause this.

Moonie, have you heard of the First Amendment? Why do you hate the Constitution?

 

[MovingTarget]

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: MovingTarget

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: MovingTarget
Repost x ?

The topic of the fairness doctrine has been beaten to death here. There has been an increasing drumbeat of support for reinstating it, but I'm not sure if that is anything more than rumor at this point, manufactured or not. Hell, there was an article recently about former president Clinton saying it should be reinstated. Stories about person X,Y,or Z supporting the FD seem to come out every few weeks. Until Congress holds hearings on the issue or the FCC mentions it, it is largely a moot issue, more suited to scare tactics by the right.

Maybe if the left wouldn't keep bringing it up then the right wouldn't react to it and invoke their 'scare tactics' (lol)....just a thought.

The right seems to be bringing this up systematically while those on the left have not. They have power to do so right now, but they do not. There will always be some that support the FD, but that has a snowball's chance in hell of even being brought up for official debate. This is really a right wing attempt to circle the wagons through the usual FUD. Like I said, when it is announced that it will be brought up in Congress, then it will be an issue. Until then, nothing to see here...

And the left is not bringing this up systematically? Dude...did you read the article? Hinchey's the one who brought up the subject and voiced his intentions to make the Fairness Doctrine part of a bill later this year and...God forbid... the right had the odasity to react? What are you saying...they should just STFU until it's actually brought up in Congress? Yet it's OK for Hinchey to freely express his opinion and any reaction to his intentions "is really a right wing attempt to circle the wagons through the usual FUD". Hitting the bottle a little early today?

Systematically? No, as anytime the FD has been brought up by those on the left it has been individuals expressing support for it, but not actually advocating for someone to go ahead and reinstate it. It is way more of an issue for Rush et. al. than it is for the lefties. The right has been hammering on the FD for quite some time before this, even before this congressional session. They have cried 'wolf' one too many times for me to really take such claims seriously, even as a supporter of the FD. It has a snowball's chance in hell of making it beyond a mere motion in either house right now.

 

[spidey07]

LOL at people supporting it!

Freedom of speech and press, as long as you agree with us.

 

[dphantom]

The whole FD is such a misrepresentation of what those words realy mean. Here we have leftists who see someone like Rush who has 20 million voluntary listeners 5 days a week. And because there is nothing equivalent for the left, the left now wants to coerce radio stations and force them to air a so-called opposing viewpoint.

So on the one hand we have free people freely choosing and on the other hand we have people being forced to do something. What the left can never understand is that if their principles and beliefs were so strong, they would be the ones with an audience of 20 million free and voluntary listeners.

 

[QuantumPion]

I like the argument proponents of the FD make -- that the airwaves are a limited resource and therefore the government should be allowed to control who gets to use it. Not mentioning the fact that it is the government that makes the airwaves a limited resource in the first place. It would be as if the government limited the amount of oil we are allowed to drill for, and then, claiming that oil is a limited resource, restrict or outlaw the use of gas guzzling vehicles.

Oh wait, they ARE doing that.

Besides, network tv which is broadcast over the air is just as much a limited resource as radio, yet in the case of network news the lefties just claim that they (and NPR) are non-partisan respectable journalism (lulz).

 

[MovingTarget]

Originally posted by: QuantumPion
I like the argument proponents of the FD make -- that the airwaves are a limited resource and therefore the government should be allowed to control who gets to use it. Not mentioning the fact that it is the government that makes the airwaves a limited resource in the first place. It would be as if the government limited the amount of oil we are allowed to drill for, and then, claiming that oil is a limited resource, restrict or outlaw the use of gas guzzling vehicles.

Oh wait, they ARE doing that.

Besides, network tv which is broadcast over the air is just as much a limited resource as radio, yet in the case of network news the lefties just claim that they (and NPR) are non-partisan respectable journalism (lulz).

I don't even know where to begin with that one, even if I do set the FD aside completely. The airwaves are a limited resource as there is only a certain amount of spectrum to go around. There has to be some sort of guidelines for use/allocation of radio spectrum, otherwise you will have complete and utter chaos when it comes to interference with different devices/stations/etc. Oil is a physically limited resource, as we only have a finite amount underground in our many known and unknown reserves. EM spectrum is limited by practical necessity, otherwise you'd have everyone and their brother trying to transmit/receive amongst many different devices and nothing would get through. You cannot compare them to cable television as whatever goes down one company's lines will not affect what another company does. Hell, by your logic, you could say the same thing about print media! FAIL.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Originally posted by: MovingTarget

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: MovingTarget

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: MovingTarget
Repost x ?

The topic of the fairness doctrine has been beaten to death here. There has been an increasing drumbeat of support for reinstating it, but I'm not sure if that is anything more than rumor at this point, manufactured or not. Hell, there was an article recently about former president Clinton saying it should be reinstated. Stories about person X,Y,or Z supporting the FD seem to come out every few weeks. Until Congress holds hearings on the issue or the FCC mentions it, it is largely a moot issue, more suited to scare tactics by the right.

Maybe if the left wouldn't keep bringing it up then the right wouldn't react to it and invoke their 'scare tactics' (lol)....just a thought.

The right seems to be bringing this up systematically while those on the left have not. They have power to do so right now, but they do not. There will always be some that support the FD, but that has a snowball's chance in hell of even being brought up for official debate. This is really a right wing attempt to circle the wagons through the usual FUD. Like I said, when it is announced that it will be brought up in Congress, then it will be an issue. Until then, nothing to see here...

And the left is not bringing this up systematically? Dude...did you read the article? Hinchey's the one who brought up the subject and voiced his intentions to make the Fairness Doctrine part of a bill later this year and...God forbid... the right had the odasity to react? What are you saying...they should just STFU until it's actually brought up in Congress? Yet it's OK for Hinchey to freely express his opinion and any reaction to his intentions "is really a right wing attempt to circle the wagons through the usual FUD". Hitting the bottle a little early today?

Systematically? No, as anytime the FD has been brought up by those on the left it has been individuals expressing support for it, but not actually advocating for someone to go ahead and reinstate it. It is way more of an issue for Rush et. al. than it is for the lefties. The right has been hammering on the FD for quite some time before this, even before this congressional session. They have cried 'wolf' one too many times for me to really take such claims seriously, even as a supporter of the FD. It has a snowball's chance in hell of making it beyond a mere motion in either house right now.

So the crux of your rebuttal revolves around what a subjective term means to you ("systematically"), a simplistic stereotype that reflects a simplistic world view, and a perception that any reaction to FD is all the usual right wing FUD regardless of Hinchey's stated actual intentions. Your logic defies me.

 

[frostedflakes]

Kind of lame, I don't really agree with the fairness doctrine. Obama has said he doesn't support it, though, so here's to hoping he will live up to his word and veto any FD legislation that comes out of Congress.

 

[dphantom]

Originally posted by: QuantumPion
I like the argument proponents of the FD make -- that the airwaves are a limited resource and therefore the government should be allowed to control who gets to use it. Not mentioning the fact that it is the government that makes the airwaves a limited resource in the first place. It would be as if the government limited the amount of oil we are allowed to drill for, and then, claiming that oil is a limited resource, restrict or outlaw the use of gas guzzling vehicles.

Oh wait, they ARE doing that.

Besides, network tv which is broadcast over the air is just as much a limited resource as radio, yet in the case of network news the lefties just claim that they (and NPR) are non-partisan respectable journalism (lulz).

See, that isreally the issue here. The left claim they are fair and balanced to steal a term and so does the right. When in reality, both are pushing an agenda. For the governemnt to have the power to decide what you are or are not allowed to hear regardless of the fact it is a "public" airwave is simply unconscionable.

Conservative talk radio was not mandated by the government nor were people forced to listen to it. It is popular because it gives a message people want to hear. It is not political speech because it is the espousing of a conservative agenda, not a Republican Party agenda though the two at times are similar. Anyone who listens to conservative talk radio know how disgusted and critical many conservatives were over the Bush admin handling of any number of issues.

Air America or NPR espouses a liberal agenda. That is the great thing about this country is we can freely choose what we listen to or read or say. Now, because Air America and other liberal talk outlets have failed or are marginal players at best, we have the left claiming unfairness when in reality it is their message that is not energizing the American people.

Therefore, the left must force people to listen to alternatives which is completely anathema to anyone who believes in our Bill of Rights.

 

[umbrella39]

More FUD brought to you by under the bed crew. GTFU. Next.

 

[MovingTarget]

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: MovingTarget

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: MovingTarget

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: MovingTarget
Repost x ?

The topic of the fairness doctrine has been beaten to death here. There has been an increasing drumbeat of support for reinstating it, but I'm not sure if that is anything more than rumor at this point, manufactured or not. Hell, there was an article recently about former president Clinton saying it should be reinstated. Stories about person X,Y,or Z supporting the FD seem to come out every few weeks. Until Congress holds hearings on the issue or the FCC mentions it, it is largely a moot issue, more suited to scare tactics by the right.

Maybe if the left wouldn't keep bringing it up then the right wouldn't react to it and invoke their 'scare tactics' (lol)....just a thought.

The right seems to be bringing this up systematically while those on the left have not. They have power to do so right now, but they do not. There will always be some that support the FD, but that has a snowball's chance in hell of even being brought up for official debate. This is really a right wing attempt to circle the wagons through the usual FUD. Like I said, when it is announced that it will be brought up in Congress, then it will be an issue. Until then, nothing to see here...

And the left is not bringing this up systematically? Dude...did you read the article? Hinchey's the one who brought up the subject and voiced his intentions to make the Fairness Doctrine part of a bill later this year and...God forbid... the right had the odasity to react? What are you saying...they should just STFU until it's actually brought up in Congress? Yet it's OK for Hinchey to freely express his opinion and any reaction to his intentions "is really a right wing attempt to circle the wagons through the usual FUD". Hitting the bottle a little early today?

Systematically? No, as anytime the FD has been brought up by those on the left it has been individuals expressing support for it, but not actually advocating for someone to go ahead and reinstate it. It is way more of an issue for Rush et. al. than it is for the lefties. The right has been hammering on the FD for quite some time before this, even before this congressional session. They have cried 'wolf' one too many times for me to really take such claims seriously, even as a supporter of the FD. It has a snowball's chance in hell of making it beyond a mere motion in either house right now.

So the crux of your rebuttal revolves around what a subjective term means to you ("systematically"), a simplistic stereotype that reflects a simplistic world view, and a perception that any reaction to FD is all the usual right wing FUD regardless of Hinchey's stated actual intentions. Your logic defies me.

No. There are many legitimate reactions to the FD, as are arguments against the concept of the FD. However, I dismiss this particular story as something new as a patturn has emerged over quite some time with right wing idealogues crying wolf when they know damn well it isn't going to be brought back. It is dead. Kaput. The only purpose it has served is to rally Rush's listeners. Every other week it seems there is yet another blog touching off yet another FD debate that we have already had ad nauseum. Until something happens beyond what we have already seen, it won't hold any water with me.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: MotF Bane

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: dphantom

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Muzzling right winged talk radio is like muzzling the Hitler movement or inoculating the public against polio. It feeds a sickness that needs to be destroyed. It preys on the insane making them sicker.

Well, we now know what the leftists want, a people who are allowed to think and express thoughts in only the approved manner - approved by the left.

Last I heard, we called that censorship. Something protected under the 1st amendment.

You don't like what conservative talk radio has to say, tune in to NPR or Air America.

I want you to be able to express any view you like, exactly like, or almost so, anyway, as you can here. All I want is that there be no single voice of insanity broadcasting to millions and millions of people. Rush Limpbrow is a piece of shit. He can say whatever he likes as far as I car, but he has to have somebody there with alternate views to round out, and file off his insanity. He is a fucking turd and a liar and is responsible for great disaster in America. He is a disease. I want him to broadcast along with penicillin. Prevent calls from being screened or him having control of the mike. Fairness is what I ask for.

Remember the real function of that asshole is to deliver a bunch of uncritical fools into the hands of advertisers. People who buy into Rush will buy anything.

By the way, NPR has a huge conservative audience as many conservatives are intelligent human beings. NPR gets as many complaints about being to the left as it does to the right. It's folk who are extreme but fancy themselves normal who cause this.

Moonie, have you heard of the First Amendment? Why do you hate the Constitution?

The first amendment was interpreted by the Supreme court to mean that money is speech. Who the hell elected them to make that determination. That ruling is killing our nation. The Germans don't allow free speech when it comes to Nazism. 50 million dead convinced them that it's not always a good idea. I am all for speech that can be opposed by other speech. I am opposed to speech that has no counter voice. You are an absolutist who thinks that anything can be said. I say that a functioning intelligence can discriminate between hate speech, fire in the theater speech, and reasonable speech. I don't believe being a nut case to the point your country is destroyed to be a good idea. Shut that fat fuck, Limpbrow, up with speech from others to counter his. In a marketplace of ideas, he has none.