Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Tell me what part of the fairness doctrine do you not like?
Still no one can outline what the fairness doctrine will do?
Still no one can outline what the fairness doctrine will do?
"A system of limitless individual choices, with respect to communications, is not necessarily in the interest of citizenship and self-government,"
"We propose a Civility Check that can accurately tell whether the e-mail you're about to send is angry and caution you, 'warning: this appears to be an uncivil e-mail. do you really and truly want to send it?'" they wrote. "
"[A]lmost all gun control legislation is constitutionally fine. And if the Court is right, then fundamentalism does not justify the view that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to bear arms."
"Sunstein first proposed the notion of imposing mandatory "electronic sidewalks" for the Net. These "sidewalks" would display links to opposing viewpoints. "
Well, sure... sounds peachy, but... oh c'mon, that's just a silly idea.
Admittedly, this guy has some pretty silly ideas. I especially found these quotes humorous:
"A system of limitless individual choices, with respect to communications, is not necessarily in the interest of citizenship and self-government,"
... Huh?? It's called communism! redacted
"We propose a Civility Check that can accurately tell whether the e-mail you're about to send is angry and caution you, 'warning: this appears to be an uncivil e-mail. do you really and truly want to send it?'" they wrote. "
That is just plain retarded. well, it is retarded but remember it's written by an American hating lefty
"[A]lmost all gun control legislation is constitutionally fine. And if the Court is right, then fundamentalism does not justify the view that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to bear arms."
Well, let me tell you something guys: I'm no constitutional scholar, and I'm no gun-nut. In fact, I favour gun legislation! But... uh...
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
^ that might be a problem.
"Sunstein first proposed the notion of imposing mandatory "electronic sidewalks" for the Net. These "sidewalks" would display links to opposing viewpoints. "
For every dopey left wing post you make, you will also be forced to make a dopey right wing post.Still no one can outline what the fairness doctrine will do?
Obama's regulatory czar wants "Fairness Doctrine" for the Internet...
U.S. regulatory czar nominee wants Net 'Fairness Doctrine'
Well if this becomes law (which I doubt) the traffic on this forum will change dramatically and some us will be off the air for extended periods of time.
What a load of opportunistic crap.
Obama's regulatory czar wants "Fairness Doctrine" for the Internet...
U.S. regulatory czar nominee wants Net 'Fairness Doctrine'
Well if this becomes law (which I doubt) the traffic on this forum will change dramatically and some us will be off the air for extended periods of time.
What a load of opportunistic crap.
you meant communistic crap didn't ya? Yes, I'm sure you did,, you just forgot yourself..
Obama's regulatory czar wants "Fairness Doctrine" for the Internet...
U.S. regulatory czar nominee wants Net 'Fairness Doctrine'
Well.. you DO have the freedom to use your little keyboard, mouse and google to look up an opposing viewpoint yourself... just as you DO have the freedom to find another radio show with a differing viewpoint
But there is no need to have it spoonfed to you... on the net, on the radio waves, in bar conversation, or wherever else
Barack Obama's nominee for "regulatory czar" has advocated a "Fairness Doctrine" for the Internet that would require opposing opinions be linked and also has suggested angry e-mails should be prevented from being sent by technology that would require a 24-hour cooling off period.
Note not one could tell us in their own words what the fairness doctrine really dies.
In your own words tell us what the fairness doctrine says?
It says that for every opinion, there has to be an opposing opinion.
Like Gunny said, this could backfire bad in the liberals face. In their blind rage to silence EVERYTHING conservative, they may just wind up silencing the VAST MAJORITY of their OWN voice, since 90% of everything on TV and in print is liberal.
In your own words tell us what the fairness doctrine says?
It says that for every opinion, there has to be an opposing opinion.
Like Gunny said, this could backfire bad in the liberals face. In their blind rage to silence EVERYTHING conservative, they may just wind up silencing the VAST MAJORITY of their OWN voice, since 90% of everything on TV and in print is liberal.
Nope that is not what the fairness doctrine said
Heres how it goes .
You have present all sides of an issue and not just one side.
If you dont present all sides then someone can demand time on your show to present their side of the issue.
Most shows would be just fine except Fox.
I'm going to have to ask you if you think MSNBC is balanced? Please give me a straight anwer without a smirk on your face.Heres how it goes .
You have present all sides of an issue and not just one side.
If you dont present all sides then someone can demand time on your show to present their side of the issue.
Most shows would be just fine except Fox.
