Jim Clyburn wants to reinstate the “Fairness Doctrine” in response to the Arizona shooting
Just when you thought that all of the talk about reinstating the “Fairness Doctrine” had died down along comes a politically driven, ideologist sheriff in Arizona looking to capitalize on a shooting to push his partisan agenda and thrusts the talk of the “Fairness Doctrine” back into the limelight.
Anyone who heard the words of Arizona Sheriff Clarence Dupnik could realize that they were politically charged conjecture motivated by an agenda. He was supposed to be briefing the press on the FACTS of the Arizona shooting, but instead used his time in the spotlight to go off on a diatribe about violent rhetoric and talk radio.
It was only a matter of time before someone on the left used the opportunity given to him by the irresponsible words of Sheriff Dupnik to propose taking another look at re-instituting the “Fairness Doctrine” and now that is exactly what Representative Jim Clyburn has in mind.
The shooting is cause for the country to rethink parameters on free speech, Clyburn said from his office, just blocks from the South Carolina Statehouse. He wants standards put in place to guarantee balanced media coverage with a reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine, in addition to calling on elected officials and media pundits to use ‘better judgment.’
There you have it; between the “Fairness Doctrine,” gun control, and the defense of “Net Neutrality,” the left was handed a tragedy and they do not intend to waste it. I find it in extremely bad taste for these people to be looking at this shooting as a means to accomplish political goals while we still have families mourning their loved ones, and others still in the hospital recuperating. But to the left the end justifies the means, and they are going to get as much political mileage out of this as they possibly can; apparently they don’t think there is anything wrong with politicizing this horrible event.
America's Watchtower 
No, no, no, no, no, no, no!
No fairness doctrine, no control of political speech, no control of speech, period, except for such things as “FIRE” in a crowded theater or inciting to riot . . .
There is nothing “fair” about a so-called fairness doctrine, and it boggles the mind to consider the complexities of enforcing it. First and most perplexing, who would be responsible for determining what’s fair, what speech must be given “equal time” for opposing points of view and what doesn’t rise to that level? Would the radio stations that carry Rush Limbaugh because he helps them in their capitalist mission to make a profit, be required to provide equal time for opposing points of view? Mind you, I pretty much despise brother Rush, but I don’t despise his right to entertain his adherents, and efforts to limit that right should frighten the hell out of all of us.
Take good care, and here’s to a glorious 2011 for all!
TGY
LikeLike
Every once in awhile we agree on an issue, and this is one of those time! 🙂 I also do not like many of the people who are on television and while I disagree with them they have the right to say what they do, I would never try to take it away from them.
Happy New Year my friend!
LikeLike
Sweet, who gets the axe, NBC, CBS or ABC? Since they are granted licenses by the government to use the “free” television spectrum, one of them has gotta go to make room for a conservative alternative.
And when can we expect CPBS (Conservative PBS) to be on the air. I look forward to watching documentaries that are not 10 part and dedicated to racial ineqaulity (yeah, I am talking about Ken Burns).
LikeLike
Somehow I don’t think the “fairness” will be reflected in the outlets that are already leaning to the left.
LikeLike
With any luck, they will tilt off the Progressive table. We can only hope the Independents are not duped by all of this. I must say, I am waiting for Zero and his appearance in AZ. That may tell us where we are headed, and whether his luster remains.
LikeLike
It is going to be interesting to see how Obama handles this with his remarks in Arizona.
LikeLike
I know you’re waiting for Zero, but I thought you would enjoy what Dr. Zero has to say until then: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=41117
LikeLike
That was interesting and I do agree with the article when it claims that Barack Obama is in a tight spot here. I think he will dial down the rhetoric because he can’t afford to upset mainstream America and this is not going to play well with the far left. We will know soon enough.
LikeLike
I think that the “Fairness Doctrine” should be enacted, specifically for elected officials who work for the people. Do your damn jobs and stop infringing on our rights! With attacks on our rights so prevalent why do these people wonder why we are so mad?
LikeLike
They simply do not get it, and if they have their way we will not have an outlet to tell them!
LikeLike
Thought this insiteful as it relates to the Sheriff: http://maryohsocontrary.wordpress.com/2011/01/11/its-pronounced-dupenik/
LikeLike
Thanks for the link, I will be checking it out shortly.
LikeLike
Chavez passed a similar law here three years ago. It is terrible. News stations promote their programing as being balanced and fair. Balanced I understand but what the hell is fair news? News is neither fair or unfair. News is news, period!
LikeLike
Good point, the problem with the “news” is that they don’t actually report anything anymore, they simply try to spin the news to fit their agenda.
LikeLike
This surprises me not a bit. I was listening to NPR this evening and one of the members of Congress they had on talking about gun control openly said that if they could get “something good” to come out of this, all would not be lost. Never let a crisis go to waste, I think someone once said.
LikeLike
There are going to be three issues that the left tries to promote with this: gun control, the fairness doctrine, and net neutrality. In terms of pushing the far left agenda this is a gold mine of a crisis and they will not let it go to waste.
LikeLike
Just the fact that you are all parroting the same conservative party line, proves your minds have been pickled in the brine of one-sided opinion. You have helped permit a take-over of the American public by corporate interest, who prey on your paranoia about losing your guns.
Well, three years into your big commie enemy Obama’s reign, I have heard not Word One about anybody’s legal weapons being confiscated. I have heard, instead, of thousands of people losing their jobs, savings, and homes, as Wall Street, the banks, and insurance, and corporate outsourcing have decimated the American dream.
Go ahead and stick your heads in the sand. You have been hornswoggled into a state of uninformed stupor about who is really on the side of decent everyday Americans. Enjoy your slavery– guns or no.
At this point, only a reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine will give the public a chance to see all of the facts, and to influence political awareness so that everone can see how badly they have been betrayed by one-sided information.
LikeLike