Clark Kent
<B>News Bot</B>
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2006
- Messages
- 7,128
- Reaction score
- 6
The UnFairness Doctrine
By franci1911 - Sat, 21 Jul 2007 01:16:07 GMT
Originally Posted at: FMATalk
====================
I recently received this email from, GUN OWNERS OF AMERICA. I decided to post it here on FMATalk.com because it reminds me of how easy one can forget how we can lose our Ammendment rights. Here on FMATalk we are very free with our comments, sometimes we agree, sometimes we agree to disagree, and there are those times where we get downright angry with each other. That's the world we live in that allows us to express ourselves the way we do on FMATalk.com As I see it, if we are not wary and diligent to preserve our ammendment rights, they can easily go awry.
Even though this article was meant for GUN OWNERS it is still pertinent to how we express ourselves on a daily basis. I hope that you find the following article informative and possibly you may become more involved in keeping our rights in order.
Please Read:
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2007 17:19:17 -0400 (EDT)
From: Gun Owners of America
Subject: A Different Kind Of Threat: The UnFairness Doctrine
UnFairness Doctrine Could Ultimately Restrict Second Amendment Rights
Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://www.gunowner s.org
Friday, July 20, 2007
Even while we are busy defending our Second Amendment rights against
efforts to enhance the Brady Law, there is a movement afoot to
restrict our First Amendment rights as well... a movement that can
make the defense of our liberties that much harder.
You may have heard of this effort as the "Hush Rush" bill or, just
simply, as the Fairness Doctrine. No matter how you look at it,
however, there is nothing fair about it.
Better termed the UnFairness Doctrine, it would radically limit the
type of information you hear in the media and would greatly restrict
access by Gun Owners of America to the airwaves.
Access to talk radio has been crucial for GOA. If we had to depend
on network news alone, one would think that crime is out of control.
Talk radio has given Second Amendment supporters the opportunity to
present the data that more guns in the hands of the public has
actually lowered crime.
On June 28, the House of Representatives voted 309 to 115 for an
amendment -- offered by pro-gun Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN) -- to defund
enforcement of the unFairness Doctrine. This was a great victory.
But even though the amendment -- which was added to a Federal
Communication Commission appropriation (HR 2829) -- was a victory for
supporters of the First Amendment, it does not give lasting comfort
to supporters of free speech.
The vote on the appropriations amendment applies only to FCC actions
in 2008. Since no one thinks that the Commission would move to
reimpose the UnFairness Doctrine until after 2008, what is needed is
enactment of S. 1748, the Broadcaster Freedom Act which was
introduced by Senator Norm Coleman (R-MN).
The so-called Fairness Doctrine is openly touted as a way to squelch
conservative' s market-driven dominance of talk radio. For example,
Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma reports overhearing a conversation
between Senators Hilary Clinton (NY) and Barbara Boxer (CA). The two
Senators were complaining about conservatives' success in the free
market of ideas on radio and said "We've got to have a balance.
There's got to be a legislative fix for this."
The UnFairness Doctrine is on its face an attack on free speech.
Were folks like Senators Clinton and Boxer truly interested in
balance, they would want to extend their UnFairness Doctrine to the
Public Broadcasting System and the network news programs, almost all
of which tilt to the left.
The anti-free speech forces in Congress may want to gag talk radio
because Air America has staggered into bankruptcy. Air America,
which was the left's failed attempt to compete with conservative talk
radio, has almost no audience. It got its clock cleaned and has only
itself to blame. It should not be allowed to hide behind a phony
"Fairness Doctrine."
Remember, the First Amendment protects free speech, not fairness.
Free speech is a constitutional doctrine; using the power of
government to mandate political "fairness" is a socialist doctrine.
ACTION: Please help keep our First Amendment freedoms intact. You
can use the letter below to help direct your comments to your two
U.S. Senators. Please visit the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center
at http://www.gunowner s.org/activism. htm to send the letter as a
pre-written e-mail message to your Senators.
----- Pre-written letter -----
Dear Senator:
I hope you will strenuously OPPOSE any effort to reimpose the
misnamed "Fairness Doctrine," which was soundly rejected by the
courts in the late 1980s.
On June 28, the House of Representatives overwhelmingly voted for an
amendment to defund enforcement of the UnFairness Doctrine. But
though this was a great victory for supporters of the First
Amendment, it does not give lasting comfort to supporters of free
speech.
The vote on the Pence amendment (to HR 2829) applies only to FCC
actions in 2008. Since no one thinks that the Commission would move
to reimpose the UnFairness Doctrine until after 2008, what is needed
is enactment of S. 1748, the Broadcaster Freedom Act which was
introduced by Senator Norm Coleman (R-MN).
The misnamed Fairness Doctrine is on its face an attack on free
speech. Were the supporters of this "UnFairness" truly
interested in
balance, they would want to extend this doctrine to the Public
Broadcasting System and the network news programs, almost all of
which tilt to the left.
The First Amendment protects free speech, not fairness. Free speech
is a constitutional doctrine; using the power of government to
mandate political "fairness" is a socialist doctrine.
Thus, I hope you will work to retain the Pence amendment in HR 2829
AND will cosponsor the Coleman bill (S. 1748).
Read More...
------------------------------------
FMATalk.com Post Bot - FMA Feed
By franci1911 - Sat, 21 Jul 2007 01:16:07 GMT
Originally Posted at: FMATalk
====================
I recently received this email from, GUN OWNERS OF AMERICA. I decided to post it here on FMATalk.com because it reminds me of how easy one can forget how we can lose our Ammendment rights. Here on FMATalk we are very free with our comments, sometimes we agree, sometimes we agree to disagree, and there are those times where we get downright angry with each other. That's the world we live in that allows us to express ourselves the way we do on FMATalk.com As I see it, if we are not wary and diligent to preserve our ammendment rights, they can easily go awry.
Even though this article was meant for GUN OWNERS it is still pertinent to how we express ourselves on a daily basis. I hope that you find the following article informative and possibly you may become more involved in keeping our rights in order.
Please Read:
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2007 17:19:17 -0400 (EDT)
From: Gun Owners of America
Subject: A Different Kind Of Threat: The UnFairness Doctrine
UnFairness Doctrine Could Ultimately Restrict Second Amendment Rights
Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://www.gunowner s.org
Friday, July 20, 2007
Even while we are busy defending our Second Amendment rights against
efforts to enhance the Brady Law, there is a movement afoot to
restrict our First Amendment rights as well... a movement that can
make the defense of our liberties that much harder.
You may have heard of this effort as the "Hush Rush" bill or, just
simply, as the Fairness Doctrine. No matter how you look at it,
however, there is nothing fair about it.
Better termed the UnFairness Doctrine, it would radically limit the
type of information you hear in the media and would greatly restrict
access by Gun Owners of America to the airwaves.
Access to talk radio has been crucial for GOA. If we had to depend
on network news alone, one would think that crime is out of control.
Talk radio has given Second Amendment supporters the opportunity to
present the data that more guns in the hands of the public has
actually lowered crime.
On June 28, the House of Representatives voted 309 to 115 for an
amendment -- offered by pro-gun Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN) -- to defund
enforcement of the unFairness Doctrine. This was a great victory.
But even though the amendment -- which was added to a Federal
Communication Commission appropriation (HR 2829) -- was a victory for
supporters of the First Amendment, it does not give lasting comfort
to supporters of free speech.
The vote on the appropriations amendment applies only to FCC actions
in 2008. Since no one thinks that the Commission would move to
reimpose the UnFairness Doctrine until after 2008, what is needed is
enactment of S. 1748, the Broadcaster Freedom Act which was
introduced by Senator Norm Coleman (R-MN).
The so-called Fairness Doctrine is openly touted as a way to squelch
conservative' s market-driven dominance of talk radio. For example,
Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma reports overhearing a conversation
between Senators Hilary Clinton (NY) and Barbara Boxer (CA). The two
Senators were complaining about conservatives' success in the free
market of ideas on radio and said "We've got to have a balance.
There's got to be a legislative fix for this."
The UnFairness Doctrine is on its face an attack on free speech.
Were folks like Senators Clinton and Boxer truly interested in
balance, they would want to extend their UnFairness Doctrine to the
Public Broadcasting System and the network news programs, almost all
of which tilt to the left.
The anti-free speech forces in Congress may want to gag talk radio
because Air America has staggered into bankruptcy. Air America,
which was the left's failed attempt to compete with conservative talk
radio, has almost no audience. It got its clock cleaned and has only
itself to blame. It should not be allowed to hide behind a phony
"Fairness Doctrine."
Remember, the First Amendment protects free speech, not fairness.
Free speech is a constitutional doctrine; using the power of
government to mandate political "fairness" is a socialist doctrine.
ACTION: Please help keep our First Amendment freedoms intact. You
can use the letter below to help direct your comments to your two
U.S. Senators. Please visit the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center
at http://www.gunowner s.org/activism. htm to send the letter as a
pre-written e-mail message to your Senators.
----- Pre-written letter -----
Dear Senator:
I hope you will strenuously OPPOSE any effort to reimpose the
misnamed "Fairness Doctrine," which was soundly rejected by the
courts in the late 1980s.
On June 28, the House of Representatives overwhelmingly voted for an
amendment to defund enforcement of the UnFairness Doctrine. But
though this was a great victory for supporters of the First
Amendment, it does not give lasting comfort to supporters of free
speech.
The vote on the Pence amendment (to HR 2829) applies only to FCC
actions in 2008. Since no one thinks that the Commission would move
to reimpose the UnFairness Doctrine until after 2008, what is needed
is enactment of S. 1748, the Broadcaster Freedom Act which was
introduced by Senator Norm Coleman (R-MN).
The misnamed Fairness Doctrine is on its face an attack on free
speech. Were the supporters of this "UnFairness" truly
interested in
balance, they would want to extend this doctrine to the Public
Broadcasting System and the network news programs, almost all of
which tilt to the left.
The First Amendment protects free speech, not fairness. Free speech
is a constitutional doctrine; using the power of government to
mandate political "fairness" is a socialist doctrine.
Thus, I hope you will work to retain the Pence amendment in HR 2829
AND will cosponsor the Coleman bill (S. 1748).
Read More...
------------------------------------
FMATalk.com Post Bot - FMA Feed
