Obama Nation: If You Don't Like The Message Shoot the Messenger

FAMILIAR VOICES COULD BE GONE IF FAIRNESS DOCTRINE IS ENACTED. MANY DEMOCRATS STRONGLY ADVOCATE.

MEANWHILE, OBAMA FORCES ATTEMPT TO MUZZLE AD.

Obama Campaign's attempt to muzzle attack ad raises ugly questions about the far-left and Democratic party's attitude toward attempts to provide opposing points of view.

x
The Obama campaign is showing its true heart born in the radical associations with the likes of Weatherman founder, William Ayers, an unapologetic domestic terrorist and devote Marxist in how it is responding to informational spots by conservative 527 groups attempting to show the public what we've all been anxious to know, "Who is the REAL Barack Obama?" My heart says, "Methinks he's a communist in polite media friendly sheep's clothing." Yeah, communist sounds so old-fashioned to Gen-X'ers and younger, but WAKE UP!

x

Here's the story ,courtesy of a blong posted by WRAL-TV in Raleigh, North Carolina. Similar information has been provided by columnist, Michelle Malkin, among others. We're looking for an official news story to confirm, but this looks like one of those cases where the blogger buzz is accurate and beating the Obama loving media to the story. Note: WRAL is not the Sinclair owned station in Raleigh.

x

http://www.wral.com/golo/blogpost/3433610/?d_comment_order=forward

x

Obama spokesman, Michael Ortiz indicated via email to industry publication, Broadcasting and Cable, Obama does not support the Fairness Doctrine. Here's the the excerpt direct from the June 28, 2008 posting:

x
Sen. Obama does not support reimposing the Fairness Doctrine on broadcasters," press secretary Michael Ortiz said in an e-mail to B&C late Wednesday.

x
"He considers this debate to be a distraction from the conversation we should be having about opening up the airwaves and modern communications to as many diverse viewpoints as possible," Ortiz added. "That is why Sen. Obama supports media-ownership caps, network neutrality, public broadcasting, as well as increasing minority ownership of broadcasting and print outlets."

x

Complete Article:

xhttp://www.broadcastingcable.com/index.asp?layout=article&articleid=CA6573406

x

Many prominent Democrats are anxious to reimpose the Fairness Doctrine which amounts to defacto government censorship of radio and television programming by insisting all political views must be counterbalanced with time for the opposing position. Here's how it gets ugly. First who determines what represents "mainstream" thinking -- as in those issues and positions that are not tilted left or right? If the standard bearers insist that Global Warming is the consequence of human behavior, for instance, only those who oppose global warming politics would be the extreme view needing to be balanced. Since the media is demonstrably liberal, yet they define themselves as the central balanced view, where does that put everyone else?

x

The liberal bias is demonstrated repeatedly when Republican politicians are quickly singled out as "conservative" while Democratic politicians are not labelled as "liberal." When politicians get in trouble like the Craig affair from Utah, his party affiliation is all over the place. If Democrats do the naughty, hmm, what party does this naughty boy belong to? They just don't want to let the reader know.

x

Under the scenario given above, liberal values are status quo, thus anyone questioning them are automatically expressing viewpoints that would need to be balanced in the interest of what they call "fairness." Exactly what kind of views would be shown as "left of center." Barack Obama is left of center for sure even if compared to the previously stated positions of Democrats like Hilary Clinton, Joe "Blowhard" Biden, Harry Reid, and well...even Barbara Boxer as Obama has been defined as the most LIBERAL member of the Senate.

x

How would radio programmers handle having shows like Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Dave Preger, Glenn Beck, Laura Ingraham, Mark Levin, Neal Boortz, Hugh Hewitt, G. Gordon Liddy, Laura Schlessinger, Mike Gallagher, Larry Elder, Brian Wilson, and even Baltimore's own Ron Smith deal with the necessity to "balance" these commentator's programming?

x

Try some Liberal counter programming? Like Air America? The bankrupt Air America? They sure have some tough talkers, don't they -- lefty blabbers: Al Franken, Randi Rhodes, Keith Olbermann....those kind of folks. ARRGHHH!!!!

x

Radio programmers are in the business of making money, if a station commits to broadcasting as many stations do in the Eastern Time Zone, Rush Limbaugh followed by Sean Hannity, then they need SIX hours of Liberal programming. Kiss the lucrative morning drive slot bye-bye??

xx

The truth is the Liberal movement in this country has no tolerance for dissent, no patience for "diversity" when it comes to varying points of view, and total contempt for the first amendment not just on this issue but others (...the free expression part of Freedom of Religion, gun control, lots more) as well. Television news ABC, CBS, CNN, and NBC range from traditionally liberal to absolutely far left. Only Fox news provides some balance where a wide range of viewpoints are aired and conservatives at least get their time on issues. The weekly news magazines go from traditionally liberal, US News and World Report often a pretty responsible source, to Time (same crew as CNN) to Newsweek which is right on the level of the DailyKOS. The New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times and Boston Globe set the tone for the extreme liberal bias shown by most major market daily newspapers. Internet headliners like Google, Comcast, Yahoo, Salon, and others are both Leftist and gossipy.

x
Talk radio is the only information source that the left in this country has not overtaken. Conservative talk show hosts provide entertaining, fast-paced, highly-listenable programming which has become an oasis of sanity for so many Americans looking for a medium that shares their hopes, dreams, fears, and doubts.

x

Most Conservative talk shows have substantial listener call-in segments where opposing views are expressed, but surely that won't count. Now here's something that probably would. Assume there were such a thing as a "moderate" or "middle-the-road" talk show. What happens when the callers to the station express decidedly conservative viewpoints. To the "fairness guardians" tally how many "conservative" versus "mainstream" callers are given air time? Where does it stop?

x
Obama can have this issue both ways. Surely, if it comes up for a vote before January, President Bush will veto it. Obama won't be present for the vote -surprise, surprise. Should the unthinkable happen and Obama seizes control of the White House, should a Democrat Senate and House pass the "Fairness Doctrine" would a President Obama veto his own party's legislation on this issue?

x

Not a fat chance.

x

This is but one issue that makes the Obama Nation unthinkable, but the far-left's attempt to silence its opponents by any means necessary will continue. God forbid the whole "hate" speech concept gains momemntum. Who would decide what is hate speech and who is guilty. On the surface it seems so contrary to the first amendment but who's going to be able to appoint justices to the agining Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court...another reason to fight aggressively the onslaught of Obama Nation.

x

Yes it is that bad. Don't kid yourself.