Yeah, Right, Whatever

Long ago (before I cared about talk radio), there was something called the Fairness Doctrine. In a nutshell, if someone on a radio station criticized someone, the criticized person had the "right" to demand time on said radio station for rebuttal. Because of all of the time and hassle that would require, no one allowed much pontification on the airwaves as a result.

Thanks to President Reagan, the Fairness Doctrine went the way of the do-do, and talk radio in its current incarnation was born (all hail the Godfather, Rush Limbaugh).

Now, let's be honest. The airwaves are open to everyone. Anyone who has the cash can get a license, buy a station, and say what they want (within the bounds of decency). There are talk radio stations in every market (some with more than one station). If you don't succeed (Air America), it's because no one wants to hear what you're saying, not because it's not "fair."

Rational people can figure it out. Which explains why Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer don't have a clue.

According to two members of the House Democrat Caucus, Reps. Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer have informed them that they will "aggressively pursue" reinstatement of the so-called Fairness Doctrine over the next six months. In January, Democrat presidential candidate Rep. Dennis Kucinich announced that he was going to pursue the Fairness Doctrine through his Government Reform subcommittee. That announcement was greeted with silence. But now, Pelosi has moved things to the front burner.

...The decision to press for re-establishment of the Fairness Doctrine now seems to have developed for two reasons. "First, [Democrats] failed on the radio airwaves with Air America, no one wanted to listen," says a senior adviser to Pelosi. "Conservative radio is a huge threat and political advantage for Republicans and we have had to find a way to limit it. Second, it looks like the Republicans are going to have someone in the presidential race who has access to media in ways our folks don't want, so we want to make sure the GOP has no advantages going into 2008."

So, because y'all are as exciting on the radio as watching paint dry, you want to "level the playing field." How... "fair" of you.

If you read the entire article, you'll see that the Democrats want to (somehow) limit the exposure of Fred Thompson if he runs for the White House. (How are they going to do that? He's been on television for years. They can't go back in time and put Obama on a couple of sitcoms or something.) Their other target is the Maha Rushie. Good luck with that one.

Here's what Senator Mitch McConnell had to say about it:

Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell made the following statement regarding attempts by Congressional Democrats to revive the misnamed “fairness doctrine”:

“Our Founding Fathers understood free speech is fundamental to our nation and sought to protect it with the First Amendment. As a strong supporter of First Amendment freedoms for all Americans, I will continue to work to prevent government limitations on speech.

“The latest attempt by House Democrats to revive the misnamed ‘fairness doctrine’ will silence active political voices and limit the free flow of information. Government is not the speech police and I will not support these efforts to restrict free speech.

“Political debate is among the most important democratic traditions of our nation and a hallmark of free society. We must continue to preserve the right of all Americans to express their views.”

Uh... yeah... what he said. All in caps.

Last time I checked, the First Amendment was put in the Bill of Rights to protect (above all else) political speech. Not pornography or cuss words or "art"- political speech, which is (shall we say?) stifled in other countries. The right to stand up and speak (protest on the court house steps, rant into a microphone, or frantically type on a keyboard) is one of the BIG things that put the United States in a league of its own. It's one of the reasons why millions upon millions have risked life and limb to get here over the past two hundred years.

But that's where the Liberals get confused. It's the right to free speech, not the right to be listened to. You can yell into the wind all you want. If you don't have a message worth hearing, no one has to stand there and be force-fed your opinion. Yet another beauty of the freedoms found in America.

There's no need for a "Fairness Doctrine." It's already there, in the BIll of Rights. But, I guess if you can't compete in a free market of ideas, the only thing you can do is silence the competition, right?