"Fairness Doctrine" (a wolf in sheep's clothing)

When Human Events editor John Gizzi asked if she would support a return of the "Fairness Doctrine" on June 24, 2008, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) answered with a solid, "yes". This should be disturbing to any American who believes in freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and well...freedom in general. The name "Fairness Doctrine" is another way of controlling what broadcasters can broadcast in the good name of being "fair". It has been common knowledge that conservative talk radio shows have been an incredible success, particularly since Bill Clinton came into office with Rush Limbaugh. At a time when the mainstream news was drooling over the Clintons, Limbaugh became a voice for Conservatism, giving a platform for conversation, and even put a spotlight on issues that the media overlooked. Today, there are a number of successful conservative, and even libertarian, radio hosts with shows that has listeners in the millions every day.

Liberals, usually Democrat, will complain and argue that these shows are biased. Of course they are biased, they are conservative talk shows. There is no hiding that fact. That is the purpose of these talk shows. Just like Air America, or Alan Colmes, these sell themselves as being conservative or liberal. Unlike the NBC Nightly News with Tom Brokaw, which is to deliver the news of the day, without bias (which I still question), these are talk shows, even entertainment. It is obvious that the liberal based talk radio shows are not as successful as the conservative shows. In fact, conservative talk radio has played a huge role in rallying Republican and conservative independent voters; a much larger role then liberal talk radio. Could this have anything to do with Nancy Pelosi and her thought police trying to bring this "Fairness Doctrine" back into play? Whey would anyone who believes in freedom of speech want this doctrine? I would say that they want to shut down, and shut up conservative talk radio.

Supporters of this doctrine will tell us that this is not censorship, but rather a way of allowing equal debate. That is fine and dandy if that is the purpose of a radio program; like the cable program Hannity & Colmes. But if the sole purpose of a radio program is to talk about topics from a conservative perspective, not hiding that fact from the get go, then who has the right to come in and "police" that speech and platform. This is a free country, and liberals have had successful talk radio program too. They have that right, and many of those people are also against this doctrine. Talk radio is just not as popular among liberal listeners as conservative listeners. The numbers speak for themselves. But that does not give the government a right to be the program director of the Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, or Alan Colmes for that matter.

It is sad, but has become the norm, to see people who claim to be free thinkers, even "liberal minded", be willing to put a proverbial dog muzzle on the mouths of Americans who want to speak freely on our airwaves. When will they decide to control what we, the bloggers, can write about. Will they force me to write, equally, about liberal topics that I don't agree with? Why do liberals always live by the "do as I say, not as I do" motto. I think the new name for Democrats should be the "Hipocratic Party" (they can keep the donkey, stubborn as they are). My fellow Americans, liberal, independent, conservative; Barack Obama says he wants to bring "change" to our government. Once again, is this the type of change that he intends. Remember it is Pelosi and the Democrat run Congress that has been running things for the past couple years- this is a little preview of "change". Obama, Pelosi and gang- we don't want YOUR kind of change. Don't Tread on Us!