The Coming 1st Amendment Crackdown

In Things I Agree with in the Political Arena on October 30, 2008 at 1:54 pm

Conservative Hippie>>>[I agree with joseph Farah. The liberals hate “dissent.” They will want us all to line up like little clones all in the name of unity.]

Joseph Farah:

Who says you have to know something to serve in the U.S. Senate?and most of the Democrats in both houses want is simply to muzzle radio voices with whom they disagree. They don’t like the First Amendment guarantees of free speech and freedom of the press, and, despite its prohibitions against Congress making any law to infringe upon those unalienable rights, they’re going to do it any way next year. They can’t wait. They’re champing at the bit.

I can prove you don’t.

Exhibit A: Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M.

Bingaman told Albuquerque radio station KKOB he would like to bring back the Fairness Doctrine: “I would want this station and all stations to have to present a balanced perspective and different points of view, instead of always hammering away at one side of the political [spectrum].”

Now that’s dumb enough. It’s evil, too. What Bingaman and his totalitarian friends in Congress, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid

But Bingaman really exposed himself as a know-nothing with his next statement – patently and provably untrue.

He claimed that when the Fairness Doctrine was in place prior to 1987, there were “a lot of talk stations that seemed to do fine.”

“For many, many years we operated under a Fairness Doctrine in this country,” he said. “I think the country was well-served. I think the public discussion was at a higher level and more intelligent in those days than it has become since.”

This is a subject I know a little something about, having researched it for my book,

“Stop the Presses! The Inside Story of the New Media Revolution.” Here’s what I found. It’s stunning! decide? Or is the marketplace the best guide?can’t handle dissent. They know their detestable policies cannot win the day in the free and open marketplace of ideas. So what they do is what demagogues and would-be tyrants have always done – they use the coercive power of government to control debate.

In 1987, when President Ronald Reagan drove the wooden stake through the heart of unconstitutional monster known as the Fairness Doctrine, there were a total of 75 talk-radio shows in all of these United States. Bingaman claims there were many talk stations. He’s dreaming. There were no more than a handful of stations willing to risk airing controversial, stimulating and opinionated talk programs as we have come to know since.

Think about that! A total of 75 talk-radio programs across the entire breadth of the United States. Do you know how many there are today? More than 3,000. That’s a phenomenal 4,000 percent explosion. In fact, my friend Rush Limbaugh, who challenged Bingaman’s ill-informed nostalgia for the good old days of a muzzled media on his show last week, said there are more than 2,000 talk-radio stations offering, of course, countless points of view from the extreme left to the extreme right and everything in between.

What does that tell you?

Do you think we really had more fairness back then?

Or is real fairness and balance achieved with the explosion of voices we witnessed beginning in 1987?

Do you think we had a more lively political debate then or now?

And, most importantly, who should decide which views are aired on the public airwaves? Should government bureaucrats make those decisions? Should politicians

Know this: Idiots like Bingaman and Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: