Rush Limbaugh: Regulate the 'Drive-By Media'

SO now Limbaugh wants to censor speech that is politically disagreeable to him, rather than have the free marketplace of ideas sort it out. Sounds like he want fascist totalitarianism. But of course, thinking people already knew that. He cares nothing about the Constitution and liberty.

 

Rush is speaking to the attempts by the left to regulate free speach by means of requiring talk radio to give all sides of the argument or say nothing. This is just an attempt to hinder free speech. Interesting they are not trying to do it on tv. It is the libs who care nothing about the consitution and liberty. It is their attempts to regulate free speech that is being done in congress.

 

Your fearmongering gets you no where. NNE in congress is trying to limit free speech by anyone. The Fairness Doctrine NEVER limited anyone's right to speech, nor censored anyone. It merely allowed equal time for opposing views. It would not limit Rush or Schultz, Savage or Rhodes, Coulter or Malloy, from continuing to speak.

 

Teh fairness doctrine does restrain free speech if they will not give a platform for opposing views. Why should shows like Rush's which is about conservative values give a platform for trhe lies of the left. Theat is inhibiting free speech as it puts requirements on it that are not fair. And it is a sad attempt to accomplish what the left has failed to do on its own through the free market. No one wants to buy their rubbish apparently.

 

No, it doesn't. And why are you afraid of opposing views?

Again, you demonstrate you don't know how the Fairness Doctrine worked. That is not what it did. The equal time is not on a particular program, but on the broadcast facility itself. You are forming opinions based on half truths and outright untruths. Speaking of untruths, why should you determine what is a lie? And it works both ways... why should Air America have to give equal time to the "lies" of people like Limbaugh? You righties are sure afraid of people hearing other opinions, aren't you?

 

In your first post, you said (indirect quote) "let the free market sort it out". Now, you want to force businesses (radio broadcast companies) to abandon that idea, in favor of giving both sides of the argument. Do you honestly believe that broadcast companies are not out to make money? If they could make money on liberal talk radio, they would. Air America failed miserably because no one supported their views, not because they didn't have plenty of money (George Soros) backing the failed ventures. Why did they fail? The answer lies in the free market, which you claim to support.

Furthermore, you do not want this extended to the TV broadcast companies (NBC, ABC, and CBS). That appears to be a little hypocritical, but I bet you already believe they give both sides.:laugh:

 

I never suggested that the failed and bankrupt Air America should have to give time to anything else. I have no clue why you brought that up. And you assume to much about the fears of the right. What you fail to acknowledge, either by diceit or by ignorance, is that if the radio station must give equal time to the lefts programs as they do to the right it will shut down the rights programs. Why? Well I am glad you asked! Because the programs of the left do not sell. They cannot obtain advertisers. And stations are not going to play programs that do not sell. So if the free speech of the right is dependent on the ability of the left to peddle their ideologies in the open market then the right will have to either carry the costs of the left on their shoulders or shut down.

When the ability to speek freely in a venue that depends on sales in the open market is dependent on something that does not sell in the open market, then free speech has been squashed.

 

I can get an opposing view to anything I want. This isn't the 1950s. If I want an opposing view to Fox News, I can turn on CNN. If I want an opposing view of Keith Olbermann, I can turn on Glenn Beck. Or I can turn on Hannity and Colmes and get two views at the same time. Why? The free market works.

 

One of the most subtle ways that this so-called fairness doctrine hinders free speech is that shows are commercially driven. Since no on one wants to listen to the liberal sewage, as is evidenced by the failure of Err Amerika, those shows will not prosper generally in the free market, and companies would then be forced to subsidize that junk using tight revenue, so then the marginally profitable shows would also be canned.

 

A specious argument.

"Opposing views" can buy their time just like anyone else and the audience will decide who they listen to.

 

And that, my friend, is exactly the way it should be.

Forcing stations to subsidize opposing viewpoints is un-American, and is unconstitutional.

 

You should know, by now, the leftists only worry about the constitution when it helps them bash Bush. Otherwise, they have no more use for it than a dog has for a marriage liscense.

 

HOO HA!!!!!! Very aptly put!

 

Not exactly.....

Regards, hope all is well in the Volunteer State,
BiR (in Baltimore tonight)

 

Yes, carpro, WE KNOW. You have made this statment (or a similar variant) ad nauseum.

I wonder how many times you make this statement in this discussion.

 

Now that you have followed me here, I'm sure I'll have to repeat it at least once. Everyone else probably got it the first time.:BangHead:

 

Yes carpro: I followed you here. That is precisely why I responded to TomVols first......

 

Air America has new backers and is doing fine. I listen to their Denver/Boulder affiliate (KKZN AM 760) every day during my commute.