The “Fairness” Doctrine: America In The Balance - Page 3 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

aklim · #31 07-24-2008, 11:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt L

If you're of the opinion that the airwaves are owned by the broadcasters, of course you would not want to control it. If you're of the opinion that the airwaves are owned by the public, things may look different.

I'm of the opinion that the the broadcasters should be free to broadcast what they want and you should be free to listen to what you want.

Matt L · #32 07-25-2008, 12:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aklim

I'm of the opinion that the the broadcasters should be free to broadcast what they want and you should be free to listen to what you want.

So the broadcasters own the airwaves?

Botnst · #33 07-25-2008, 12:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt L

So the broadcasters own the airwaves?

No. The frequencies are leased. Just as minerals or forests or grazing rights on public land are leased.

B

aklim · #34 07-25-2008, 12:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt L

So the broadcasters own the airwaves?

Who owns the receiver? They can transmit all they want but you can also turn them off. Turn them off and they cannot keep going at it indefinately. Where is the issue? The broadcasters lease the transmission frequency. You do own the receiver. What else do you want?

Botnst · #35 07-25-2008, 12:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aklim

Who owns the receiver? They can transmit all they want but you can also turn them off. Turn them off and they cannot keep going at it indefinately. Where is the issue? The broadcasters lease the transmission frequency. You do own the receiver. What else do you want?

The receiver police will put you in jail if you don't listen to Rush Limbaugh 24/7. I know it's true because I saw it in the newspaper.

B

RichC · #36 07-25-2008, 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hatterasguy

Liberals are scary people!

People that have been so brainwashed by the right wing that they think
the left is the axis of evil are truly scary.

There is a bit of bad in the best of us.
And a bit of good in the worst.

.

tankdriver · #37 07-25-2008, 10:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

Products sell best to large audiences, therefore, audience numbers are important.

Get your friends together and call for a boycott. If there are enough of you, you will affect advertising and if advertising dollars drop, so will revenue and if revenue drops, say goodbye to that program.

That's what I said.

Quote:

OTOH, if your boycott has no effect on the advertiser's revenue stream, what does that tell us about the popularity of your political argument concerning government managing content of airways?

B

I didn't make a political argument, but if people listened to me there wouldn't be reality television. Some people like crap. If there are enough of them, you get crap.

Botnst · #38 07-26-2008, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tankdriver

That's what I said.

I didn't make a political argument, but if people listened to me there wouldn't be reality television. Some people like crap. If there are enough of them, you get crap.

That's what we call a free market. It works for goods and services and it works for ideas. When the government decides which goods and services are fair and balanced or which ideas are suppressed, we shift responsibility for our lives and ideas from ourselves to our government. This is a great step toward tyranny.

RichC · #39 07-27-2008, 10:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

That's what we call a free market. It works for goods and services and it works for ideas. When the government decides which goods and services are fair and balanced or which ideas are suppressed, we shift responsibility for our lives and ideas from ourselves to our government. This is a great step toward tyranny.

.

You mean like tax incentives for the large companies.
Or the corporate welfare we are giving the baking and lending industry.
Or lobbyists pouring millions into the pockets of our congress people
to sway their vote.

That free market ?

...

We do not have a free market !!!
The government is already doing all the things you right wing guys
are complaining about.
But you don't see it.

The biggest recipients of welfare are the largest companies.
We are bailing out the banks right now.
Millions of or tax dollars go toward incentives for large companies.

We are living in the government controlled state you are worrying the
liberals are gonna set up.

RichC

.

cudaspaz · #40 07-27-2008, 10:51 AM

Back to the subject of the fairness doctrine.

Bottom line, government control of the airwaves to stifle any opposing viewpoint that may question the government.

Who is for the fairness doctrine?

Let's see......anyone who does not understand the bill of rights that has a great disdain of the phrase "For the people by the people."
Who would that be?
Let's see, what is "for the people?"
Freedom of the press is for the people,1'st ammendment. Who is against that?(democrats).
An individual right to protects oneself and family with deadly force if necessary.second ammendment. Who is against that? (Democrats.)
Seems like the democrats are against anything pertaining to an individual speaking, providing, protecting, advancing, themselves (without) the help or reliance of the government.
Why would the democrats want that?

Why does the thought of individualism scare the democrats so much?

What do they do to drive their agenda forward?
They drive a wedge between the social and racial divides, and once they succeed in that, they have paved the way for their agenda of total government control of the masses.
Basic socialism 101 that I learned in 8'th grade history class.
Stalin would be proud to see what the democrats have become.

Welcome to the "new former soviet union."

Is Bush free from ridicule, hell no, he had his hand in some dirty deals that infringed on our rights as well, and authority should always be questioned and government should always be kept in check by the people as the foundation of our system guarantees us these rights as the "people."
The peoples rights should never be stifled as a bargaining chip for political favors such as getting a certain bill passed, but compromising rights to do so.
Such was the case with Bush signing onto the so called campaign finance reform bill sponsored by McCain/Feingold.
Sorry, I have no love for John McCain either and will question any authority that does not have the best interest of the "People' at hand.

The only "people" I can see supporting such a blatant infringement on the first ammendment are the lemmings who want to live in a nanny state where government takes over the smallest aspect of our lives, rips us from our comfort zones as Obama's Wife refers to, and changes the way we do things.
Who would support this other than people who who do not wish to work hard to succeed or do not really care about helping others, are too afraid to carry a gun because they are not disciplined enough to trust themselves with one cause they may start popping other people or themselves when they take their little hissy fits.

Just another "change" that's coming if the master, marxist, "I'll stand with the Muslim's, messiah gets in office.

Gonna be interesting when the government decides to start rounding up the dissidents again, but I'm just paranoid and delusional right?

No, we don't need to take heed to warning signs that remind us of a bloody past history where dictators set up a game plan to strip the people of their voice, their identity, and their means of protection.
We need to support them wholeheartedly right?
We need to listen to all their rhetoric that their liberal media tells us as true, fair, and balanced.
We need to do as they say, take everything at face value and not question their authority even if it means pissing on the graves of the men and women who fought and died protecting our shores from this very exact mindset.

We need to turn in our neighbors who may have "questionable" attitudes about the current government because we all know what may be coming if we don't.
We need to turn in our guns, we need to surrender our radio programs that are not manipulated by government propoganda.
This will make us safer and more in line with the "Global community."

Oh how fast we forget history when we don't think for ourselves anymore.

RichC · #41 07-27-2008, 05:24 PM

.

I have really been hospitalized with people with fewer paranoid and delusional ideas than you have in this one post.

.

RichC

.

Botnst · #42 07-27-2008, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RichC

.

I have really been hospitalized with people with fewer paranoid and delusional ideas than you have in this one post.

.

RichC

.

No doubt.

cudaspaz · #43 07-27-2008, 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

No doubt.

Is that the best you commies got?

Botnst · #44 07-27-2008, 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cudaspaz

Is that the best you commies got?

I couldn't think of a way to shorten it an convey the same ironical message. I'm not sure 2 words was sufficient.

B

LUVMBDiesels · #45 07-27-2008, 07:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cudaspaz

Back to the subject of the fairness doctrine.

Bottom line, government control of the airwaves to stifle any opposing viewpoint that may question the government.

Who is for the fairness doctrine?

Let's see......anyone who does not understand the bill of rights that has a great disdain of the phrase "For the people by the people."
Who would that be?
Let's see, what is "for the people?"
Freedom of the press is for the people,1'st ammendment. Who is against that?(democrats).
An individual right to protects oneself and family with deadly force if necessary.second ammendment. Who is against that? (Democrats.)
Seems like the democrats are against anything pertaining to an individual speaking, providing, protecting, advancing, themselves (without) the help or reliance of the government.
Why would the democrats want that?

Why does the thought of individualism scare the democrats so much?

What do they do to drive their agenda forward?
They drive a wedge between the social and racial divides, and once they succeed in that, they have paved the way for their agenda of total government control of the masses.
Basic socialism 101 that I learned in 8'th grade history class.
Stalin would be proud to see what the democrats have become.

Welcome to the "new former soviet union."

Is Bush free from ridicule, hell no, he had his hand in some dirty deals that infringed on our rights as well, and authority should always be questioned and government should always be kept in check by the people as the foundation of our system guarantees us these rights as the "people."
The peoples rights should never be stifled as a bargaining chip for political favors such as getting a certain bill passed, but compromising rights to do so.
Such was the case with Bush signing onto the so called campaign finance reform bill sponsored by McCain/Feingold.
Sorry, I have no love for John McCain either and will question any authority that does not have the best interest of the "People' at hand.

The only "people" I can see supporting such a blatant infringement on the first ammendment are the lemmings who want to live in a nanny state where government takes over the smallest aspect of our lives, rips us from our comfort zones as Obama's Wife refers to, and changes the way we do things.
Who would support this other than people who who do not wish to work hard to succeed or do not really care about helping others, are too afraid to carry a gun because they are not disciplined enough to trust themselves with one cause they may start popping other people or themselves when they take their little hissy fits.

Just another "change" that's coming if the master, marxist, "I'll stand with the Muslim's, messiah gets in office.

Gonna be interesting when the government decides to start rounding up the dissidents again, but I'm just paranoid and delusional right?

No, we don't need to take heed to warning signs that remind us of a bloody past history where dictators set up a game plan to strip the people of their voice, their identity, and their means of protection.
We need to support them wholeheartedly right?
We need to listen to all their rhetoric that their liberal media tells us as true, fair, and balanced.
We need to do as they say, take everything at face value and not question their authority even if it means pissing on the graves of the men and women who fought and died protecting our shores from this very exact mindset.

We need to turn in our neighbors who may have "questionable" attitudes about the current government because we all know what may be coming if we don't.
We need to turn in our guns, we need to surrender our radio programs that are not manipulated by government propoganda.
This will make us safer and more in line with the "Global community."

Oh how fast we forget history when we don't think for ourselves anymore.

Well call me paranoid or call me a patriot, but I agree 100%