Thursday, January 1, 2009

The Fairness Doctrine Looms on the Horizon Part 2

I was recently asked to look into the Fairness Doctrine by a friend of mine on Digg. The result is the two posts I have written for my blog, this being the second. I will also include links at the end for all the articles I had time to read. Clearly, I have a bias against the Fairness Doctrine. If you have a problem with that, I suggest you stop reading now.
I have no doubt Obama considers The Fairness Doctrine a priority. I know he will pass it if it gets through Congress. All Americans should be concerned about this. As a Conservative* political artist and blogger, I have alot to worry about from the Fairness Doctrine. Some of the same people supporting this are also calling for regulation of the internet. It is looking pretty scary.
It takes alot of work on things like this before I even start a painting. Now that I am trying to get into the habit of blogging, I have even less time. If you're interested in seeing my work, the site is:
http://www.machinepolitick.com/. You will understand pretty quickly how the Fairness Doctrine will affect me if it extends to the internet. More importantly, it is yet another attack on the Constitution and our civil liberties.
There are some people out there screaming about the Fairness Doctrine and its repercussions. I fear that there are not enough of us, and no one else is listening. We are just a bunch of bigoted wing nuts after all.
I'm glad some people understand that America was not founded on Socialist principles. I was starting to wonder. Now we have to figure out how to educate the masses before we are silenced. I used to think all this Orwellian Big-Brother talk was a bunch of conspiracy nonsense. Now I am not so sure. Clearly, our government no longer cares what we think.
McCain-Feingold was passed under the premise of making politics more transparent. We all know it really keeps the big guys in office and shuts up the rest of us. Then the bailout was passed with an overwhelming outcry against it by the people because government knows best and we’re supposed to think they’re looking out for our best interests.
Sorry, I tend to digress and address multiple subjects in a rant. Please bear with me.
I have a question concerning the Fairness Doctrine: Why is it that people who talk so much about freedom of expression and conservative war mongers always support use of government suppression? Things like the Fairness Doctrine are the first step of a repressive government to control the people. Our government has already betrayed us and the Constitution with McCain Feingold, the Patriot Act, the bailouts, etc. We need to take a stand now, while we still can. Make your voices heard people.
There are plenty of communist and socialist countries in the world. It's time for these people to move there, and let the rest of us restore America to
the free country it used to be. But wait, Communism doesn't work. Maybe their true objective is to be in charge so they can enjoy the spoils of our labor. We all know when the wealth gets spread around everyone ends up poor because the government sucks up most of the goodies.

* (Note: by Conservative, I do not mean Republican. If you must label me use Libertarian or Objectivist, they are better fits. I may decide to do a self-description at some point in the future. Clearly, I also need to write an article on the real meaning of the word Conservative.)

That’s it for now. Here are some articles you can read:

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=27566&page=4&viewID=668648
http://www.google.com/search?q=democrats+fairness+
http://www.thomas.gov/home/gpoxmlc109/h3302_ih.xml
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/record.xpd?id=110-h20071018-47&bill=h110-2905 http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-2905 http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=27566#continueA http://www.google.com/search?q=democrats+fairness+doctrine&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

6 comments:

Muchacho Enfermo said...

Alright... I'm intrigued now. To be honest I'm far too lazy to read all the articles you've put up but from your two posts I can gather that this is a pretty stupid idea.

I'm not an American so I might be misinformed on the subject or naive about your politicians; but something as ludicrous as the Fairness Doctrine will never pass. I mean is your government blind to the ramifications of this?

In Canada we may not have as many networks but the ones we do have don't have to show specific programs that present all sides. Most politically minded shows try to, as it makes it more interesting for everyone. But it's not a law.

The only one that does something even resembling that is CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) which is a publicly funded television station and even then it's only during election time and all they do is provide equal advertising time to all political parties for free.

All that to say, I don't like this fairness doctrine and I cross my fingers that your government isn't retarded (no offense to special people) enough to pass it.

Kelley said...

Your post is right on. I come from New Mexico where one of our senators, Jeff Bingaman, has been on record as supporting the reinstatement of some kind of fairness doctrine. I've already contacted him to let him know how I feel about his stance, though I doubt it did much good. Still, I will continue to hound my representatives whenever they do or say something of which I disapprove.

I read 1984 and Brave New World as a kid. The premises of both books scared me, even though at the time they seemed far fetched. Now I'm beginning to wonder.

I've heard that the new "fairness doctrine" will take on a new angle to sound more palatable to people by using the argument of "localism," with programs geared more toward local communities. Sounds harmless enough until they start deciding that radio shows like Rush or Hannity or any other conservative shows don't benefit anyone on the local level.

foutsc said...

The fairness doctrine is not about fairness. It is about choking talk radio and draining all color from it, turning it back into the bland medium it was 20 years ago.

In reality, there will be no balancing. Station and network owners will simply revert to noncontroversial programming, depriving conservatives of their main medium, while harming the liberal cause not at all.

This is why the founders wrote our constitution, and this is why liberals want to treat it as a living document.

Kelley said...

I ran across a link to a site with video of New Mexico Senator Bingaman saying he supports the revival of the Fairness Doctrine: http://radioequalizer.blogspot.com/2008/10/new-mexico-democrat-will-push-to.html

machinepolitick said...

Thanks for the feedback everyone. Thanks Kelly for the link, I will check it out.
I hope Muchacho is right, and it won't pass. However, the current state of our government leads me to think it will go through regardless of public opinion. Especially since Pelosi won't let a bill making the Fairness Doctrine illegal get out of committee. So much for bipartisanship. You would think the party that has been crying so loudly about censorship, bias, and civil liberties for the last 8 + years would be a little more open-minded.
Even more frightening is the bill being proposed under the guise of fighting terrorism. Now, the government wants to extend the label 'terrorist' to people who speak out against the government. There is also a frightening amount of chatter recently about people being targeted for being Constitutionalists. I don't know much about the second topic, but am looking into it. It all seems very Orwellian to me.
Here are a couple more links for the Constitutional issue and HR 1955:
http://www.thefalseoswalds.com/wp-content/plugins/wp-download_monitor/user_uploads/FBI_flyer_links_defenders_of_Constitution_with_terrorists.pdf
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=45419
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-1955

machinepolitick said...

I also highly recommend Ayn Rand's writings. She had some pretty good insight into the way things are going. She knew first-hand the evils of socialism.
I'm currently reading her journals as research for a series of paintings on her writings. I think I'll do a blog entry on her soon, because her philosophy is so fitting to the direction our country is going.