PDA

View Full Version : Obama's Attack on Free Speech. Yep, wait and See!!


SUPDOG
02-16-2009, 12:06 AM
Obama administration no longer issuing denials on Fairness Doctrine


http://hotair.com/archives/2009/02/15/obama-administration-no-longer-issuing-denials-on-fairness-doctrine/


Yes, I figured as much, once they make a big move to lock up the financial system, it is now time to tackle the social issues.


So, what are your thoughts on this liberals?

posted at 12:00 pm on February 15, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Send to a Friend | Share on Facebook | printer-friendly

"Remember when the Left laughed at conservatives’ concerns over the Fairness Doctrine? Barack Obama already said he opposed the reimposition of the FCC rule, they said. After all, Obama’s campaign gave this definitive statement in June 2008:
“Senator Obama does not support re-imposing the Fairness Doctrine on broadcasters,” said press secretary Michael Ortiz in an e-mail to B&C late Wednesday.
“He considers this debate to be a distraction from the conversation we should be having about opening up the airwaves and modern communications to as many diverse viewpoints as possible,” said Ortiz.
As our friend Jim Geraghty reminds us, all of Barack Obama’s statements come with an expiration date. Today, Chris Wallace interviewed David Axelrod and asked him directly about the Fairness Doctrine — and suddenly the White House adviser got a lot less definitive:

WALLACE: Will you rule out reimposing the Fairness Doctrine?
AXELROD: I’m going to leave that issue to Julius Genachowski, our new head of the FCC, to, and the president, to discuss. So I don’t have an answer for you now.
That’s hardly a denial, as Politico’s Michael Calderone notes:
Lester Kinsolving, the conservative radio host, has twice asked Robert Gibbs about it in the briefing room, and each time, the press secretary didn’t reveal the administration’s position.
Last week, I reached out to press office staffers in order to find out if the administration’s position is the same as in June, and have not yet received a response.
If Obama’s position on the Fairness Doctrine is the same as during the campaign — and I have no reason to believe it isn’t — stating such clearly would quickly silence a lot of conservative critics who assume the Democratic president is going to try and reinstate the defunct policy. Otherwise, the Fairness Doctrine chatter on the airwaves isn’t likely to die down.
It’s an easy question. Does this administration believe in free speech or government censorship? Their sudden inability to provide a clear answer, when they had no problem giving such assurances eight months ago, does not bode well for the answer.
I’d like to say I told you so to all of those who accused us of paranoia, but the window on that ability to do so on the airwaves looks like it’s about to expire — like all of Obama’s campaign promises.
The American media should be ashamed of themselves on this issue. They pose as the defenders of the First Amendment and free speech. Why are Chris Wallace and Michael Calderone the only MSM people pursuing this?
Buzz up!32 votes

MonoxideChild
02-16-2009, 12:15 AM
You do know axelrod's job is pretty much to say he has to check with the other advisors right? Do you even know what the fairness doctrine is?

Gtrght77
02-16-2009, 03:27 AM
You guys are arguing politics with someone who thinks the Earth is just a few thousand years old.

SUPDOG
02-16-2009, 09:13 AM
You guys are arguing politics with someone who thinks the Earth is just a few thousand years old.

Yeah, and this guy beleives he will be a God of his own planet after he dies.

Anyway, are you saying that the fainess doctrine won't come to be? Yes or no?

You still haven't told us about your big day with your president.

Nevada_Ballin
02-16-2009, 09:38 AM
Typical Supdog.... Obama hasn't done anything on this issue and nothing in that article is actually from Obama's mouth - yet he'll make a post as if it was and yell DEVIL!!!

lol


.

SUPDOG
02-16-2009, 10:12 AM
Typical Supdog.... Obama hasn't done anything on this issue and nothing in that article is actually from Obama's mouth - yet he'll make a post as if it was and yell DEVIL!!!

lol


.

So you think it has no validity? then why wouldn't Gibbs, when asked on two different occasions come out and say, "President Obama is not interested in bringing the Fairness Doctrine back?" Why not just end the story? I mean Dem after Dem are talking it up. You agree with this don't you? This is reality, right?

So, what are YOUR thoughts Nevada? Mr. Liberty? What would you say if it does happen?

Let me guess, since "you don't care", its "no big deal", right?

Remember what I told you.

Nevada_Ballin
02-16-2009, 10:19 AM
So you think it has no validity? then why wouldn't Gibbs, when asked on two different occasions come out and say, "President Obama is not interested in bringing the Fairness Doctrine back?" Why not just end the story? I mean Dem after Dem are talking it up. You agree with this don't you? This is reality, right?

So, what are YOUR thoughts Nevada? Mr. Liberty? What would you say if it does happen?

Let me guess, since "you don't care", its "no big deal", right?

Remember what I told you.


Nothing is valid when nothing has been done on it. Why would i care what Gibbs has or hasn't said about it? Is he the president? I have zero thoughts on this because, on the surface, it seems like worhtless garbage from the right wing just to have something else to talk about. How fitting the website is "hotair".com.

Talk to me when it actually happens.


.

SUPDOG
02-16-2009, 10:22 AM
Nothing is valid when nothing has been done on it. Why would i care what Gibbs has or hasn't said about it? Is he the president? I have zero thoughts on this because, on the surface, it seems like worhtless garbage from the right wing just to have something else to talk about. How fitting the website is "hotair".com.

Talk to me when it actually happens.


.

I will................

SUPDOG
02-16-2009, 01:51 PM
Nothing is valid when nothing has been done on it. Why would i care what Gibbs has or hasn't said about it? Is he the president? I have zero thoughts on this because, on the surface, it seems like worhtless garbage from the right wing just to have something else to talk about. How fitting the website is "hotair".com.

Talk to me when it actually happens.


.

I am curous though....Why don't you want to make a comment on it now? I mean, how would your response be different after it passes?

Why not be a true patriot and denounce it for what it is? Censorship.

Talk about the Patriot Act----NB is in a rage.

Talk about the Fairness Doctrine-- "Let's wait and see approach."

Hmmmm, are you formulating a spin maybe?:eek:

Milwaukee
02-16-2009, 02:26 PM
Talk about the Patriot Act----NB is in a rage.



This works both ways though....where was your rage when the Patriot Act was passed? Hypocrite like I've never seen.

Nevada_Ballin
02-16-2009, 03:11 PM
I am curous though....Why don't you want to make a comment on it now? I mean, how would your response be different after it passes?

Why not be a true patriot and denounce it for what it is? Censorship.

Talk about the Patriot Act----NB is in a rage.

Talk about the Fairness Doctrine-- "Let's wait and see approach."

Hmmmm, are you formulating a spin maybe?:eek:

The Patriot Act actually happened.

Reality - what a concept

:D

sanantonio
02-16-2009, 05:07 PM
I am curous though....Why don't you want to make a comment on it now? I mean, how would your response be different after it passes?

Why not be a true patriot and denounce it for what it is? Censorship.

Talk about the Patriot Act----NB is in a rage.

Talk about the Fairness Doctrine-- "Let's wait and see approach."

Hmmmm, are you formulating a spin maybe?:eek:

The wheels on the bus go round and round,
round and round,
round and round.
The wheels on the bus go round and round,
all through the town. :p

MonoxideChild
02-16-2009, 09:52 PM
you know, the thing about the fairness doctrine is that the only people that bring it up are the neo-cons (notice I didn't use the word Republican) after they start getting slammed. Seriously, look into it, Google, fairness doctrine 1985 and see what comes up. And as for "Free Speech", it doesn't exist. Supdog, sorry, but I think you just need to come to terms with the reality of our country. And please don't shoot back with some "It was a Democracy before it was an obamanation, blah, blah, blah, socialism, blah, blah, Liberal, blah blah..." Try to stick to the actual topic.

resnor
02-18-2009, 01:45 PM
The fact of the matter is that the Fairness Doctrine would shut down talk radio, which is almost entirely conservative. Talk radio is really the only alternative to the mainstream media.

Nevada, you should have no problem saying that the Fairness Doctrine is a bad thing. Why pussyfoot around it? The thing is, Obama and the Dems may not actually bring back the Fairness Doctrine, but rather, impose new rules and regulations requiring radio stations to carry local programming, which would cut out the nationally syndicated hosts...in other words, Rush Limbaugh, and Sean Hannity.

Censorship is a stinky cologne, and I'm smelling it all over the Dems.

R-ILLA
02-18-2009, 01:57 PM
All I know is that there has been an attack on Freedom of Speech and "Civil Liberties" for quite some time now.

Nevada_Ballin
02-18-2009, 02:57 PM
The fact of the matter is that the Fairness Doctrine would shut down talk radio, which is almost entirely conservative. Talk radio is really the only alternative to the mainstream media.

Nevada, you should have no problem saying that the Fairness Doctrine is a bad thing. Why pussyfoot around it? The thing is, Obama and the Dems may not actually bring back the Fairness Doctrine, but rather, impose new rules and regulations requiring radio stations to carry local programming, which would cut out the nationally syndicated hosts...in other words, Rush Limbaugh, and Sean Hannity.

Censorship is a stinky cologne, and I'm smelling it all over the Dems.

Again, talk to me when it actually happens. Obviously, being the liberal-minded person i am, I would be against any kind of censorship of anyone's political viewpoints (see my defense of Huffington Post reporters being allowed to ask the Prez a question just like anyone else).

But right now, I have seen nothing in motion to indicate that the Fairness Doctrine - or any form of it - is on the horizon.

sanantonio
02-18-2009, 04:47 PM
Again, talk to me when it actually happens. Obviously, being the liberal-minded person i am, I would be against any kind of censorship of anyone's political viewpoints (see my defense of Huffington Post reporters being allowed to ask the Prez a question just like anyone else).

But right now, I have seen nothing in motion to indicate that the Fairness Doctrine - or any form of it - is on the horizon.

How about the Muzzle Doctrine for Sup? :p

Nevada_Ballin
02-18-2009, 05:12 PM
How about the Muzzle Doctrine for Sup? :p

lol..... we'd eventually have to have a congressional hearing on violations....