October 30, 2008
Last week, New Mexico Democrat Jeff Bingaman went on an Albuquerque talk radio and declared his support for the so-called “Fairness Doctrine,” the FCC regulation that requires broadcasters to present “opposing viewpoints.” In 1987, the FCC abolished the doctrine, stating that it restricted the journalistic freedom of broadcasters, and as a result Congress attempted to codify and reimpose the law. President Reagan, however, vetoed this legislation, and when Congress tried again in 1991 their effort stalled under a veto threat by then president H.W. Bush.
|New Mexico senator Bingaman on the Fairness Doctrine.|
Democrats have not abandoned their effort to restrict talk radio. In addition to Bingaman, House Speaker Pelosi and senator Richard Durbin have expressed a desire to limit the constitutional rights of broadcasters. In June, Pelosi told John Gizzi of Human Events she supports the doctrine and the Democrats would deal with it after the election.
Some big names, according to John Eggerton, writing for Broadcasting & Cable, support the reimposition of the Fairness Doctrine, including John Kerry and John Edwards. Edwards went so far as to suggest the doctrine would become part of his “media agenda” if he was elected. Other Democrats in favor of regulating the First Amendment include John Dingell, Louise Slaughter, and unfortunately Dennis Kucinich.
Obama has said he would not seek to reimpose the Fairness Doctrine if elected. However, as J. D. Longstreet notes, Obama’s campaign trail promises are hardly something “you want to hang your hat on,” especially when the Democrat controlled Congress appears ready to stifle the competition. “If a bill reaches his desk, ready for his signature, he will be reminded of the support those same leaders gave him in his campaign for the presidency, and he’ll sign it. Bet on it,” writes Longstreet.
Cliff Kincaid, editor of Accuracy In Media, explains that with Obama in the White House and a Democrats in control of both houses of Congress, it would be easy to reimpose the Fairness Doctrine by simply installing a Democrat friendly FCC. “This may be what is planned,” Kincaid told the Cybercast News Service.
“Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual, uninvolved, uninformed,” declared Obama’s CFR connected wife, Michelle, earlier this year. “He is going to demand that you shed your cynicism. That you put down your divisions.” In other words, once elected, Obama will use the truncheon of government to curtail what it considers defeatist cynicism, that is to say disagreement with the government. As an example of how an Obama administration will react to the opposition, consider the Obama campaign’s response to the opposition in Missouri. In September, Obama “truth squads” enlisted Missouri sheriffs and prosecutors to go after folks who had the audacity to disagree with him. As Webster Tarpley has observed, this sort of behavior smacks of classical fascism.
As Sandra Carney reminds us, Obama and the Democrats consistently push Fabian socialist policies. Not only do the Fabians support the abolition of private property, a graduated income tax, and centralization of monetary policy, they also favor control of mass communication by the state. “Government has control over much the media via the FCC. Telephone communication is regulated by the government. How long before the Fabians in the government regulate the Internet?” writes Carney.
“Idiots like Bingaman and Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama can’t handle dissent,” opines Joseph Farah. “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.”
Unfortunately, Mr. Farah has fallen victim to the false right-left paradigm. In fact, there is no such thing as a “free and open marketplace of ideas” in the mainstream media, that is unless the ideas presented conform to government policy and the corporate media agenda, regardless of what faction of the One Party system sits in the White House. As a neocon supporter, Farah seems oblivious to fact the neocons have consistently attacked the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, including the First Amendment. Pelosi and the “idiots” in Congress will certainly use the control and repression grid constructed by the neocons to effectively muzzle dissent. In fact, the control grid was designed to be used against the American people no matter what stripe of One Party politician sits in Congress or the Oval Office.
This article was posted: Thursday, October 30, 2008 at 12:26 pm