Open Letter From Rush Limbaugh To President Obama

Wall Street Journal - Mr. President, Keep the Airwaves Free
As a former law professor, surely you understand the Bill of Rights

Dear President Obama:

I have a straightforward question, which I hope you will answer in a straightforward way: Is it your intention to censor talk radio through a variety of contrivances, such as "local content," "diversity of ownership," and "public interest" rules -- all of which are designed to appeal to populist sentiments but, as you know, are the death knell of talk radio and the AM band?

You have singled me out directly, admonishing members of Congress not to listen to my show. Bill Clinton has since chimed in, complaining about the lack of balance on radio. And a number of members of your party, in and out of Congress, are forming a chorus of advocates for government control over radio content. This is both chilling and ominous.

As a former president of the Harvard Law Review and a professor at the University of Chicago Law School, you are more familiar than most with the purpose of the Bill of Rights: to protect the citizen from the possible excesses of the federal government. The First Amendment says, in part, that "Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press." The government is explicitly prohibited from playing a role in refereeing among those who speak or seek to speak. We are, after all, dealing with political speech -- which, as the Framers understood, cannot be left to the government to police.

When I began my national talk show in 1988, no one, including radio industry professionals, thought my syndication would work. There were only about 125 radio stations programming talk. And there were numerous news articles and opinion pieces predicting the fast death of the AM band, which was hemorrhaging audience and revenue to the FM band. Some blamed the lower-fidelity AM signals. But the big issue was broadcast content. It is no accident that the AM band was dying under the so-called Fairness Doctrine, which choked robust debate about important issues because of its onerous attempts at rationing the content of speech.

After the Federal Communications Commission abandoned the Fairness Doctrine in the mid-1980s, Congress passed legislation to reinstitute it. When President Reagan vetoed it, he declared that "This doctrine . . . requires Federal officials to supervise the editorial practices of broadcasters in an effort to ensure that they provide coverage of controversial issues and a reasonable opportunity for the airing of contrasting viewpoints of those issues. This type of content-based regulation by the Federal Government is . . . antagonistic to the freedom of expression guaranteed by the First Amendment. . . . History has shown that the dangers of an overly timid or biased press cannot be averted through bureaucratic regulation, but only through the freedom and competition that the First Amendment sought to guarantee."

Today the number of radio stations programming talk is well over 2,000. In fact, there are thousands of stations that air tens of thousands of programs covering virtually every conceivable topic and in various languages. The explosion of talk radio has created legions of jobs and billions in economic value. Not bad for an industry that only 20 years ago was moribund. Content, content, content, Mr. President, is the reason for the huge turnaround of the past 20 years, not "funding" or "big money," as Mr. Clinton stated. And not only has the AM band been revitalized, but there is competition from other venues, such as Internet and satellite broadcasting. It is not an exaggeration to say that today, more than ever, anyone with a microphone and a computer can broadcast their views. And thousands do.

Mr. President, we both know that this new effort at regulating speech is not about diversity but conformity. It should be rejected. You've said you're against reinstating the Fairness Doctrine, but you've not made it clear where you stand on possible regulatory efforts to impose so-called local content, diversity-of-ownership, and public-interest rules that your FCC could issue.

I do not favor content-based regulation of National Public Radio, newspapers, or broadcast or cable TV networks. I would encourage you not to allow your office to be misused to advance a political vendetta against certain broadcasters whose opinions are not shared by many in your party and ideologically liberal groups such as Acorn, the Center for American Progress, and MoveOn.org. There is no groundswell of support behind this movement. Indeed, there is a groundswell against it.

The fact that the federal government issues broadcast licenses, the original purpose of which was to regulate radio signals, ought not become an excuse to destroy one of the most accessible and popular marketplaces of expression. The AM broadcast spectrum cannot honestly be considered a "scarce" resource. So as the temporary custodian of your office, you should agree that the Constitution is more important than scoring transient political victories, even when couched in the language of public interest.

We in talk radio await your answer. What will it be? Government-imposed censorship disguised as "fairness" and "balance"? Or will the arena of ideas remain a free market?

Sources:
Wall Street Journal - Mr. President, Keep the Airwaves Free

From The Emails 060608

The Fairness Doctrine. I have been warning you.

Hey folks,

It's Friday, time to go to the Emails.

"I guess you were right. Check this out."

Why would you even question me? {Smile} Of course I'm right. It has been out there for a while. From you killing the Amnesty Bill. Now the GWBS Bill, they are getting frustrated that they cannot just run over you. When you killed the Amnesty bill, even some Republicans showed their frustration. Remember this? Trent Lott of Mississippi, who supports the bill, said:

"Talk radio is running America. We have to deal with that problem."

Check out OPNTalk - The Fairness Doctrine Montage for all the information you could possibly want on this subject. Back on October 04, 2007 I said this.

"Translation time. Wait until we have no opposition. Look for an even more increased attack on Talk Radio. They are very vindictive people. Watch the push to bring back the Fairness Doctrine. Watch for a push by the Mass Media Drones to attack Republicans running for President and start praising the Democrats. They will now try any and everything they can to get Hillary in there."

Well, Hillary may be out, but Obama is said to be even worse. So the push is on. Here is the article

“Media Reform” Targets Conservatives

AIM Column By Cliff Kincaid June 3, 2008

Led by a Muslim Democrat, members of the Federal Communications Commission, and Bill Moyers, Phil Donahue, and Dan Rather, a well-funded campaign to move the media in a more left-wing direction will gather in Minneapolis from June 6-8. Thousands of “progressive” activists are expected to attend. Accuracy in Media will cover the event.

Moyers recently achieved notoriety for using his public television program to give a national platform to Barack Obama’s controversial former pastor Jeremiah Wright, while Donahue, who began his career as a tabloid TV talk-show host, recently completed an anti-Iraq War film. Donahue and his former MSNBC sidekick, Jeff Cohen, the founder of Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting who is now a university professor, continue to travel around the country insisting that the media are too right-wing.

Dan Rather, of course, is the disgraced former CBS Evening News anchorman who used phony documents in an effort to smear President Bush before the 2004 election. He left CBS News and sued the network after this debacle, claiming he was treated unfairly. Rather now anchors “Dan Rather Reports” on a little-watched cable channel, HDNet.

Ironically, Rather is appearing on a panel at the National Conference for Media Reform that is supposed to unveil a “Big Media Hall of Shame.” Presumably, the inductees will be conservative media voices.

At the opening session of the conference, Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Mn.), the first Muslim elected to Congress, will discuss the “opportunity to wrest control of media access and distribution from the few to the many,” according to the official conference program. This is liberal doublespeak for using the power of the federal government to hand over more media properties to liberals.

However, as the Moyers example suggests, they already have access, courtesy of the U.S. taxpayers, to 350 television stations affiliated with the Public Broadcasting Service. The 860 stations affiliated with National Public Radio are also regarded as reliable outlets for liberal or “progressive” opinion. Pacifica Radio, an openly “progressive” radio network, includes five stations owned by the Pacifica Foundation, one associate station, and 132 affiliates. Pacifica has also received taxpayer funding.

In addition, they have MSNBC, the evening news programs of the three broadcasting networks, and most of the national press.

In Minneapolis, the conference has the support of AM 950, KNTF, “The Voice of Minnesota,” which is a home for Air America Radio, the liberal network that went through bankruptcy and was bailed out by a wealthy liberal family that includes former Democratic politician Mark Green.

But this is not enough media control and reach to satisfy them. The “progressives” are angry that since the deregulation of the media, beginning in the 1980s, the liberal media monopoly has been challenged and that talk radio and cable news have found that there is a receptive audience for conservative programming.

In order to counter this conservative trend, “progressive” groups have proposed to stop the process of media deregulation, which included the FCC’s decision to abolish the Fairness Doctrine, and force broadcasters to limit or even eliminate airtime for conservatives and put more left-wingers on the air.

As AIM has documented in the book, “The Death of Talk Radio?,” and in a TV advertisement, the movement to control the content of the media is a real danger to the First Amendment guarantee of freedom of speech. But the Broadcaster Freedom Act, which would stop the return of the Fairness Doctrine, is being bottled up by congressional liberals, who don’t want it to come up for a vote.

As a result, if Obama captures the White House and gets the opportunity to appoint the FCC chairman, liberals would then have a 3-2 majority capable of bringing back the Fairness Doctrine through administrative action, without the need for congressional approval. A new Fairness Doctrine could be challenged in the courts but the U.S. Supreme Court previously upheld it. In the meantime, as court battles proceed, conservatives could be forced off the air by liberal FCC bureaucrats exercising arbitrary power in the name of fairness.

The potential danger has already been dramatized by the coordinated effort of the radical Muslim group CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) to force conservative broadcaster Michael Savage off the air through an advertiser boycott. With a federal Fairness Doctrine in place, these groups could go straight to the FCC with their complaints and get bureaucrats to fine, punish or revoke the licenses of conservative broadcasters. Conservative complaints about liberal media bias would, of course, be dismissed out of hand.

Ominously, one of the featured speakers at the National Conference for Media Reform is Senator Byron Dorgan (D-ND), a prominent opponent of media deregulation who backs Barack Obama for president. Dorgan wants more FCC oversight over and control of the media.

Equally serious, a session on “Standing Up Against Hate Speech” in the media will feature Mark Kappelhoff, Chief of the Criminal Section of the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice, and representatives of various Hispanic and civil rights organizations. Their task will be, according to the conference program, to use the “verifiable data that links hate speech to hate crimes” and come up with “strategies and solutions” to muzzle or remove offending radio and TV hosts and programs from the air. They usually define “hate speech” as being commentary or news coverage that is critical of illegal aliens or minority groups. Indeed, the term “illegal alien” is even considered to be offensive.

Of particular interest is the panel, “Media Policy in a New Congress and Administration,” featuring two members of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), Jonathan S. Adelstein and Michael J. Copps, with comments also from Rep. Mike Doyle (D-Pa.). Doyle was among the liberal politicians who erroneously accused conservative radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh in a piece of legislation (H. Con. Res. 221) of calling combat troops opposed to the Iraq War “phony soldiers.” The bill reflects the intent of liberal legislators to monitor and control the content of what is said on the air.

“Holding local broadcast stations accountable at the FCC” is the name of another panel at the Minneapolis conference.

In one of the most bizarre panels and workshops, “Owning Our Own and Reaching the Masses,” somebody who goes by the name “stic.man” of a hip-hop group called “dead prez” is one of the listed speakers. One of the group’s songs is titled, “Revolutionary But Gangsta,” and their website features an obscene gesture. Stic.man is supposed to be an expert on the dangers of “corporate media.”

Randall Pinkston of CBS News will be appearing on a panel devoted to how the FCC can “put consumer and citizen interests first,” while another session is on “Purple Politics Coverage of LGBT Issues in the Media.” LGBT refer to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender. One of the panel members is from the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, which exists to silence criticism of the homosexual lifestyle in the media.

Some of the financial support for the conference is being concealed under a reference in the conference guide to anonymous “public charities, private foundations and individual donors,” but in the past the event has been generously subsidized by the Open Society Institute of leftist billionaire George Soros, another Obama supporter.

This year, the official conference sponsor, known as the “Free Press,” acknowledges funders that include the Wallace Global Fund, an entity named after Henry A. Wallace, the “progressive” former vice-president under FDR who was dumped from the ticket and was ostracized even by Democrats at the time for his pro-communist views.

The 2007 National Conference for Media Reform, also covered by Accuracy in Media, included members of the Revolutionary Communist party and other Marxist groups.

Link

Trust the facts folks, Free Speech is merely the first Right that will be stripped away by this NEW Socialist America. See you Sunday.
Peter

Note: "From The Emails" is a weekly segment in the Friday edition of the OPNtalk Blog. If you care to send in News Articles, Comments, Stories, or anything else you may wish to share, please feel free to send it to opntalk@netscape.net As always, you never know what you are going to see here.

History Of Warnings of The Quest for Tyranny

Hey folks,

Get yourself a cup of coffee, sit back, and spend some time with me. I am posting this because someone wanted to know how I truly felt about Hillary becoming President. They asked if I really believe the things I say about the NEW Democrat party, the LWL {Left Wing Looneys}. The answer is YES. So since we have many new OPNers out there, and since I have been warning you about this since around April on 2006 here at the OPNTalk, I figured the easiest way to help all understand how I feel, is to take you on a trip down memory lane. It’s going to be a LONG trip, so get ready.

Back on Saturday, April 22, 2006 I posted this. After re-reading it again, I have realized that the things I was talking about then, are even truer today. Here it is. Antepenultimate Power / Utter Destruction

I have been told that I’m too hard on the Liberals and the Left. I’ve been called a hate monger, Republican Radical, one of those Christian Looneys , etc It doesn’t matter how many times I say I’m an Independent, the Left just cannot stand the fact I tell the truth about the failures and idiocies of the fridge’s actions. Since I speak out against them, TRY to help them, do not blindly follow their lead and drink the cool aid, I must be a Conservative Christian Right Wing Radical. Wrong. But, they will believe as they do.

One of the reasons I TRY to help the Left is the fact, we live in dangerous times. They are getting worse. Please HEAR what I’m saying here. Forget what you may or may not think of my political affiliation. Just listen.

As we speak, we are moving ever so closer to Iran. Now even Sen. Joseph Lieberman says he would back a U.S. air strike on Iran's nuclear facilities if diplomatic options fail, becoming the first Democrat to announce his support for such a move. He said, I think the only justifiable use of military power would be an attempt to deter the development of their nuclear program if we felt there was no other way to do it, He indicated that such an attack would be to delay Iran's nuclear program, saying that he was hoping that by the time they catch up back to where they were, there's been a change in the government. That's the limited objective that I would see. This is in response to Iranian President Mamoud Ahmadinejad, threatened just last week to annihilate Israel. The movement is growing.

Meanwhile, in the rest of the world, we have Russia supplying Iran with materials, the North Korea situation, China and Taiwan situation, and Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez on Wednesday again raised the specter of U.S. designs to oust him and promised that his government will blow up his country's oil fields if the United States should ever attack.. Couple this all together with a President with a Cowboy, renegade attitude, with a free pass to do whatever he wants, you have a VERY dangerous situation. Are we heading to WW3?

The only way to stop this, or at least slow it down, is to bring balance back to the government. With only 199 days left to the election, and two and halve years til 2008, the left is running out of time. They NEED to stop playing the stupid games. They NEED to forget Bush. Get in there and change the things you do not like. With the House, Senate, and even Supreme Court all controlled by one party, the party has antepenultimate power. I would feel this way no matter which party is in this situation. There must be a balance. In nearly every case, ultimate power leads to ultimate destruction. But the Left is NOT going to get there with Hate Bush . They are not going to get there with Impeach Bush . They are not going to get there without a plan.

If it seems I’m being too critical of the Left from time to time, it is because I AM. As an Independent, I am not bound by political parties. Nor am I a sheep that will jump aboard a bandwagon. You need to talk TO me and tell me what you can do to make this country better. So far, NOTHING. Time is ticking, in more ways than one.
Peter

So maybe that will lay to rest some of you thinking all I am is a water carrier for Bush. Probably not. But this is fact. I then continued warning you about this on July 17, 2006,

Well, today, the concept is being tossed around by talk shows, from Hannity, The Factor , and others, along with Neut Ginrich, who reiterated these sentiments on Meet the Press Sunday morning. He said that if you connect the dots between the threats and conflicts in Iraq, Lebanon, North Korea, etc., it looks like World War III has already begun.

Now it is time to stop playing politics. It is time to figure out what to do about this very dangerous time in which we live. Oil is blowing past all time highs, because we ARE heading down a very dangerous road. All the countries around the world seem to be getting their military ready. We here, in this country, NOW, need to stop looking at this one situation politically. We need to come together. We need to fix it. Before we arrive at a destination where we do NOT want to be..

In November I EVEN said this.

Now I hope the President is going to say what I’m about to say here. It’s time, like it or not, that we, ALL Americans, extend our hands to the Democrats, and even the Looneys that are running them, and attempt to trust them. Americans voted them in, lets see if they truly DO have a better direction for America. {I’ll reserve my right to say why I think they were voted in for a later time}

So what happened? Why did I change my opinion? I actually didn’t. I just did not want THIS new democrat AKA the LWL in power. The Democratic Party came under siege by the LWL far Left fringe. It was COMPLETELY taken over and bought and paid for by the LWL. The Democratic Party is dead. Long live the LWL. In They Even Eat Their Own, I said this.

I am starting to firmly believe that the Left have been hijacked by the LWL. I really am. I truly believe that the Left Wing Looney fringe has nearly taken over the party. They are continuing to attack President Bush, the war, anything Christian, and now even their own, if you do not subscribe to their insanity.

In Why I AM The Way I Am,

I AM completely sick and tired of some in this country attacking this country and it’s leaders. I AM tired of some who want to change the laws, popular opinion, history, traditions, and freedoms, the very foundation of this country, just to accommodate a small minority. I AM tired of people thinking that they have a right to be offended. I AM tired of those who do not know that right is right, and wrong is wrong. I AM tired of Political Correctness . I AM tired of those who truly believe anything goes . I AM tired of those who do not want to play by the rules. I AM tired of cry babies. I AM tired of laziness. People that want things made easier for them, who want the American Dream , but do not want to work for it. I AM tired of being told that I am wrong when I tell the TRUTH, and back it with FACTS. I AM tired of the Not my fault crowd, excuse makers, who see self responsibly as bad. I AM tired of insanity on both sides. I AM tired of not being able to have an intelligent debate with someone who knows NOTHING but what the Mass Media or the Far Left Fringe tell them. Who cannot think for themselves.

You see folks, I seem to lean right, because I better associate with the core beliefs of the Right. If you look at just about any poll in the past 12 years or so, even further back than that, you will see that the vast MAJORITY in this country do as well. I agree with SOME of the ORIGINAL core beliefs of the Left. But here is the problem. I see the left being completely taking over by those with completely idiotic and looney ideals. As of late, the FAR LEFT Fringe, the LWL, is no longer the far left fringe. It is becoming the entire party. What the Democrats USE to stand for, what they truly believed has been reduced to Hate Bush , Hate the War and get into power at any cost. If you do anything even remotely against them, they want you destroyed. Ask Lieberman. They are allowing themselves to be taken over by the LWL, and the LWL WANT to change this country, and not for the better.

Well we now know that this happened and is complete. MoveOn.org has even came right out and said it. We own them. Talking about the MMD the Mass Media Drones, and the MMD Guru, George Soros? I started pointed out that there are just way to many similarities in the news. I started showing you things evidence that the Mass Media seems to be getting talking points. I understand a story is a story. The facts are the facts. But things like “political jujitsu?” How many people would come up with THAT? Everyone was reporting it. The Birth of the MMD, June 9, 2006.

As I’ve said before, I’m sure that there is a mass media drones guru behind the curtain, giving out the word or phrase of the day. Actually, I like that, mass media drones {MMDs} Today the magic word is multiple 500 pound bombs. The guru wants them to use this as much as possible to put the image of a massive, over needed, use of force against a house. Then he wants them to conjure up the imagine that there is some kind of cover up. Then on top of that, make sure that you throw in there, innocent people dying.

I have given many examples. Like their use of Towel snapping , Collective Punishment. Katrina , and my all time favorite, if there was any doubt, it was done away with Political Jujitsu. September 8,

Oh and the Guru word of the day seems to be jujitsu , for those that might have missed that. Over and over again, in various outlets, jujitsu seems to be the definition of the President’s announcement. But no, they do not work together.

Then we found out about this. ABC’s The Note. said,

The Old Media -- giddy with excitement over the prospect of the Bush-Cheney-Rove-Mehlman machine losing, filled with guilt over complicity in an Iraq war it wants ended, flush with anticipation over two years of anti-Bush leaks from a gavel-wielding Henry Waxman, and substantially more interested in revelations about congressional pages than in trying to tell voters the truth about whether or not the economy is strong and getting stronger -- can barely contain itself on its secret morning conference calls with Howard Dean and George Soros, during which it was agreed just this morning that, yes, we can keep the meta-narrative ('The Democrats are going to beat Bush and run Congress ') going for another 19 days, without interruption.

That’s right folks, on October 20,2006, I unmasked the MMD Guru. George Soros.

WAIT A SECOND secret morning conference calls with Howard Dean and George Soros The media is having morning conference calls with Howard Dean and George Soros? Then it says, during which it was agreed just this morning that, yes, we can keep the meta-narrative ('The Democrats are going to beat Bush and run Congress ') going for another 19 days, without interruption. The media ADMITS that they get their walking orders from Howard Dean, and or George Soros? They ADMIT that they have an agenda to get the LWL in power?

If I had to bet, at least between these two, I would bet that, the little man behind the big black and white curtain is none other than George Soros. Could HE really be the MMD Guru? It makes sense.

And it is George Soros. Now EVERYONE is talking about it. We learned just recently that he funds MoveOn.org, Media Matters, {Along with the fact Hillary herself helped start it} among other thing. I have been telling you that the MMD now merely report what they are told to.

This is another historic day. Well, the day before. A day when Rush Limbaugh actually admitted I was right, and he was wrong. On his radio show, he said this.

“Now, I have said in the past, long ago, in discussing media bias, that I don't think that the old media and the drive-bys got together and had their conference calls in the morning to decide what news was going to be and how it was going to be reported, what wasn't going to be news and all that, I said because they don't have to. They basically think the same, they see things the same, and I think if they do get together it's in the bar after work over adult beverages where such unified phrases as gravitas and other things happen to spread throughout the Drive-By Media.

But now, having read this from ABC's the Note, I'm obviously wrong. These people are obviously having conference calls with Democrat fund-raisers, policy makers, and the chairman of the Democrat National Committee to discuss the Democrat narrative and how the Drive-By Media can continue to carry it for 19 days uninterrupted. So I guess they are getting together. That's what this implies. Maybe I should better say, That's how I infer this. The old media giddy with excitement over two years of anti-Bush leaks from a gavel-wielding Henry Waxman?”

More on Waxman in a bit.

So we have the LWL taking over the Democratic Party. We have the MMD controlled by one man, Soros. What is their goal? Tyranny. A Socialist society. For those who need a littler further help in understanding this concept, picture a new Soviet Union waving a red white and blue flag.

Don’t believe that this could happen here? Listen to them. Listen to the supposed Democrat nominee. Supreme Leader Wannabe Hillary.

"The other day the oil companies reported the highest profits in the history of the world. I want to take those profits and I want to put them into a strategic energy fund that will begin to fund alternative, smart energy, alternative and technology that will begin to actually move us toward the direction of independence. I have to tell you, I am not running for president to put Band-Aids on our problems. "

The Democratic senator said what the Bush administration touts as an ownership society really is an on your own society that has widened the gap between rich and poor.

"I prefer a 'we're all in it together' society," she said. "I believe our government can once again work for all Americans. It can promote the great American tradition of opportunity for all and special privileges for none. "

"There is no greater force for economic growth than free markets. But markets work best with rules that promote our values, protect our workers and give all people a chance to succeed, she said. Fairness doesn't just happen. It requires the right government policies. "

"We have sent a message to our young people that if you don't go to college ... that you're thought less of in America. We have to stop this, she said. Our country cannot run without the people who have the skills that are taught in this school. "

Now it would take a whole other article to break down each one of these, but do not fret, if she DOES get it, I will. But she comes right out and tells you want she wants. She also said, that if she cannot get it through the normal process, she will use Executive Orders.

Executive Orders are controversial because they allow the President to make major decisions, even law, without the consent of Congress. This, of course, runs against the general logic of the Constitution -- that no one should have power to act unilaterally. Nevertheless, Congress often gives the President considerable leeway in implementing and administering federal law and programs. Sometimes, Congress cannot agree exactly how to implement a law or program. In effect, this leaves the decision to the federal agencies involved and the President that stands at their head. When Congress fails to spell out in detail how a law is to be executed, it leaves the door open for the President to provide those details in the form of Executive Orders.

Again,

Clinton said some of the proposed changes would be made through executive order and others through legislation. She said she'd move quickly as president to implement the changes.

Folks, another article from me that some of you laughed at, and said “It could never happen.”America IS At Stake

It’s Friday. I normally do not like getting upset on Fridays, being my favorite day of the week, but I AM upset. I’m actually getting down right angry. I understand that the election is a long way off. Hell, even the primaries are a long way off, but we NEED to get ready. America needs to wake up. You NEED to educate yourselves on what the LWL {Left Wing Looneys} are really up to. It couldn’t be any more clear. I am fully convinced that this very country, the America founded by our Forefathers. The America our Fathers came here for. The America they grew up in, that YOU grew up in, is at risk.

I cannot put it any more bluntly than that. When you go to the polls in 08, this very country is at stake. Your very life as you know it, is at stake. The American Dream, could very well DIE. Do not underestimate, down play, or just wave this off as politics. This is REAL. America itself could very well die in a matter of a couple of years. Why? Because there are some that want to kill her. I’m not talking about terrorists, I’m talking about the LWL.

Then they begin their quest to silence their opposition. They start talking about the Fairness Doctrine

"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."

According to another Democrat leadership aide, Pelosi and her team are focused on several targets in the fight, including Rush Limbaugh and the Salem Radio Network. In fact, Kucinich's staff has begun investigating Salem, one of the fastest growing radio networks in the country, which features such popular -- and highly rated -- conservative hosts as Bill Bennett and Michael Medved, and Christian hosts such as Dr. Richard Land.

Enter Waxman. Waxman, Media Matters, the MMD, and Rush’s two words, “Phoney Soldiers.”

Waxman said he has asked his investigative staff to begin compiling reports on Limbaugh, and fellow radio hosts Sean Hannity and Mark Levin based on transcripts from their shows to build a case for bringing back the Fairness Doctrine.

As reported by the American Specter. Now of course, Waxman is back pedaling, or outright lying, because he got CAUGHT? Because YOU flooded his office with phone calls after learning about his plans? Because what he wanted to do was brought to light? Like cockroaches scattering when the light comes on, the LWL scatter when their hidden agendas are brought to light. I leave you with this, sorry I have no time to comment more, but it seems pretty obvious.

Do you know the first thing that EVERY Dictator does when he takes over a country is kill all the reporters? Takes over or closes down the opposition media? He then shuts down free trade, takes over corporations, and raises taxes. Then he gives the masses what they “want.” Universal Healthcare. He levels the playing field, making everyone equal. As long as everyone depends on the Government. He promises them to take care of them for the rest of their lives. No need for them to worry.

Back to Hillary.

Takes over or closes down the opposition media. She supports the Fairness Doctrine.

Shuts down free trade, takes over corporations, and raises taxes.

"The other day the oil companies reported the highest profits in the history of the world. I want to take those profits and I want to put them into a strategic energy fund that will begin to fund alternative, smart energy, alternative and technology that will begin to actually move us toward the direction of independence. I have to tell you, I am not running for president to put Band-Aids on our problems. "

"There is no greater force for economic growth than free markets. But markets work best with rules that promote our values, protect our workers and give all people a chance to succeed, she said. Fairness doesn't just happen. It requires the right government policies. "

Then gives the masses what they “want.” Universal Healthcare.

She has a plan to cover ALL Americans.

Levels the playing field, making everyone equal.

"I prefer a 'we're all in it together' society, she said. I believe our government can once again work for all Americans. It can promote the great American tradition of opportunity for all and special privileges for none. "

As long as everyone depends on the Government. He promises them to take care of them for the rest of their lives. No need for them to worry.

"We have sent a message to our young people that if you don't go to college ... that you're thought less of in America. We have to stop this, she said. Our country cannot run without the people who have the skills that are taught in this school. "

Translation, “You do not need to worry about educating yourselves. We will take care of you. Learn trades to better the new society.”

It is right here in front of you. It is happening. Back to the first article I was talking about. With the House, Senate, and even Supreme Court all controlled by one party, the party or President of that party, has antepenultimate power. If you allow Supreme Leader Wannabe Hillary into the White House in 08, this is what you should expect. You will get a TRILLION dollar tax increase. Universal Healthcare, that has failed EVERY TIME it’s tried, Amnesty, the silencing of YOUR voices, and a Socialist Society. The American Dream of the LWL, the new Soviet Union waving a red, white, and blue flag.

THIS IS REALITY I have been warning you about this longer than anyone else out there. Some are coming around now, it’s big news now, but I have been sounding the alarm for a while. The EVIDENCE is right there in front of you, even though I’ve been telling you it’s coming. It’s here now. It’s happening NOW. Get ready. Get Educated, when the time comes, think about the America you want, then go vote.
Peter

Sources:
OPNTalk- Antepenultimate Power / Utter Destruction, WWIII, Bipartisanship Promised By Both Sides
OPNTalk-They Even Eat Their Own. July 7 Why I AM The Way I Am, July 15
OPNTalk -Same Day
OPNTalk -Quest For Tyranny Series
OPNTalk -America IS At Stake
OPNTalk - Fairness Doctrine Series

Preview Out of Necessity

Hey folks,

I planed on talking a lot about H. Res. 106. There is a very specific reason that some in Congress wanted to pass this non-binding resolution blaming Turkey of genocide. Turkey has a potential of hindering the War effort. More on that to come either later or tomorrow.

Actually I got a lot I want to talk about. However, I found out late yesterday that I have to leave, well soon, to go to a meeting this morning. So I leave you with this to think about. How much you want to bet Rep. Henry Waxman is back pedaling, or outright lying, because he got CAUGHT? Because YOU flooded his office with phone calls after learning about his plans? Because what he wanted to do was brought to light? Like cockroaches scattering when the light comes on, the LWL scatter when their hidden agendas are brought to light. I leave you with this, sorry I have no time to comment more, but it seems pretty obvious. See you soon.
Peter

CNS News -Waxman Denies Investigation of Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin By Nathan Burchfiel CNSNews.com Staff Writer October 10, 2007

(1st Add: Includes comments from the American Spectator.)

(CNSNews.com) - Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) on Wednesday denied that he is conducting or ever planned to conduct a congressional investigation of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Mark Levin and called on a conservative magazine to retract its report that he asked investigators to compile information on the popular conservative talk radio hosts.

"The American Spectator report about a congressional investigation into talk radio is completely false," Waxman, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said in a statement to Cybercast News Service. "There is no investigation."

Waxman was referring to a report Monday that he "has asked his investigative staff to begin compiling reports on Limbaugh, and fellow radio hosts Sean Hannity and Mark Levin based on transcripts from their shows" to build a case for bringing back the Fairness Doctrine.

When asked if there had been ideas or plans to compile reports on the talk radio hosts, a spokesman for Waxman said, "No, there were not."

In his statement, Waxman called on the Spectator to "immediately retract the item and apologize for the confusion its fictitious report has caused."

In a posting on its Web site, an unnamed American Spectator author wrote that Waxman's denial "won't sway us from our reporting of earlier this week. And we stand by our story, which was conveyed to us by an Oversight Committee staffer."

"Further," the statement says, "we have been made aware of some conversations between staff on Oversight and career staff at the Federal Communications Commission about how best to approach oversight hearings on FCC policies."

The magazine accused Waxman of "looking for any opportunity to 1. Pursue and attack conservatives and the Bush administration; and 2. Gain gobs of publicity for Democrats in general and Rep. Waxman specifically. He accomplishes these lofty goals by using taxpayer dollars to investigate any number of individuals, organizations, government entities, corporations and industries."

Limbaugh came under fire from Democrats recently when he used the term "phony soldiers" in setting up discussion about Jesse Macbeth, an anti-war activist who was sentenced to five months in prison for falsifying his military records.

Macbeth claimed to have served in Iraq and Afghanistan and said in online videos that he witnessed U.S. troops committing atrocities there. But Macbeth never served overseas, having been in the Army only 44 days.

Limbaugh's comment set off a firestorm of criticism from Democrats in Congress and the liberal media critic group Media Matters for America, which claimed that Limbaugh used the "phony soldiers" label to describe all soldiers who oppose the war in Iraq.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and other Democrats sent a letter to Clear Channel Communications asking the broadcasting giant to force Limbaugh to apologize.

In the House, Rep. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) introduced a resolution that would have condemned Limbaugh.

Rep. Jack Kingston (R-Ga.), who introduced his own resolution in support of Limbaugh, said Democrats' efforts to condemn the popular talk radio host were an attempt to lay the groundwork for bringing back the Fairness Doctrine.

The Fairness Doctrine is a federal regulation that requires broadcasters to present both sides of a controversial issue. The rule was enforced from 1949 to 1987, when the Reagan administration allowed it to lapse.

Attack On Rush, They TOLD You They Were Going To

Hey folks,

OK, OK, OK, I tap, I’ll talk about this JUST because you want to know what I have to say about it. As I told you before, I sometimes ignore some news stories for various reasons. NO, I did NOT miss this one. How could you? But I haven’t commented on it for very specific reasons. Since you want to know what I think, I’ll address this.

First off, I have been talking about the root cause of this for a while now. It’s called the Fairness Doctrine. The attempt to silence YOU. YOUR voice from being heard. YOU from being told the truth. YOU from being able to learn what the MMD {Mass Media Drones} do not want you to hear.

I told you back on May 19, 2007 that they have come right out and TOLD you they were going after Rush.

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."

STOP! Hold it a second. {Laughing} Give them an A for honesty. "No one wanted to listen." {Laughing} Truer words were never spoken. But THIS is not the reason the Fairness Doctrine was in place. They DID and CAN have as many radio stations they want. That is not their problem. Their problem is that contrary to some "polls" out there, there are not enough "Looneys" out there to support them. That is NONE’s fault but their’s alone.

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."

Translation time folks. They will do ANYTHING to win in 08. They remember Reagan. They are talking about Fred Thompson. The fact he was an actor. We all know what happened with Reagan. They are afraid that because Fred Thompson was an actor, he will have more chances to be on TV, and on the radio. Uh, OK. Can you tell me how much air time, print, and attention Clinton and Obama get? {Sigh} Thompson is not even officially RUNNING yet.

According to another Democrat leadership aide, Pelosi and her team are focused on several targets in the fight, including Rush Limbaugh and the Salem Radio Network. In fact, Kucinich's staff has begun investigating Salem, one of the fastest growing radio networks in the country, which features such popular -- and highly rated -- conservative hosts as Bill Bennett and Michael Medved, and Christian hosts such as Dr. Richard Land.

"They are identifying senior employees, their political activities and their political giving," says a Government Reform committee staffer. "Salem is a big target, but the big one is going to be Limbaugh. We know we can't shut him up, but we want to make life a bit more difficult for him."

On June 23, 2007, I told you this.

You see, they report and ignore what they are told to. Before about 1986, all was well. You got what you got, most believed what they heard. But now, thanks to Rush, Sean Hannity, and many more lessor more locally known talk show hosts, you get the TRUTH. They back it with FACTS. They PROVE what they say. So of course, the LWL and the MMD want their power and control back.

Break,,

Rush has what, 22 million listeners in any given 15 minute segment? Sean is second. Fox? A lot. Of course it has an effect. When you tell people the TRUTH, they react to it.

Break,,,

This is why they want to shut it down folks. You want to know what the American people are thinking? What we are saying? What we believe? Look at the numbers. Compare the Mainstream News outlets to Fox. Compare Conservative talk radio to Liberal talk,,never mind, you can skip that one.

This is why the push for the “Fairness Doctrine.” This is why the push to silence talk radio. YOU MATTER. You have the power, regardless of what the MMD tell you. Keep up the good work. Keep calling. Keep your voices being heard. See you all tomorrow.

On June 29, 2007 talking about the fact YOU killed the Amnesty bill, I said this.

Translation time. Wait until we have no opposition. Look for an even more increased attack on Talk Radio. They are very vindictive people. Watch the push to bring back the Fairness Doctrine. Watch for a push by the Mass Media Drones to attack Republicans running for President and start praising the Democrats. They will now try any and everything they can to get Hillary in there.

Well, now we have today. We have Media Matters, which Hillary just told the world that she created and helps fund. Taking TWO words out of context “Phoney Soldiers” and attempted a Smear campaign against Rush.

Some completely ignorant Senators, who now look even more like idiots for not checking facts, ran with it. They denouced Rush, a Private Citizen on the Senate and House floor. 41 Senators signed Traitor Reid’s little letter to have Rush spanked but his Syndicator. Some threatened the Advertisers. Blah, Blah, Blah.

Only one problem. Rush didn’t say it, or mean it, the way that Media Matters claims. Worse yet, it was a news article from ABC. Rush CLEARLY, the day before, talked about the Phoney Soldiers in the news. It is completely CRYSTAL CLEAR, BLACK AND WHITE, WELL DOCUMENTED, founded in STONE, what Rush meant. What Rush ACTUALLY said. The FACTS are there for ANYONE to see.

Yet, the MMD got their marching orders. Media Matters was told how to present this. The Moronic Senators followed what their handlers told them to. And they are all starting to look like idiots. None of it is true. The REALLY sad thing, is that even though this is backfiring big time, some are STILL going ahead with it.

According to Rush himself "Phony Soldiers" Smear Rolls On; The Mad Bomber of Bosnia Attacks

RUSH: The phony soldier smear is going on out there -- so we are forced to continue, not really forced, because it's an opportunity to continue to discuss this. Today, all over television after posting on the Internet yesterday, was the mad bomber of Bosnia. That would be General Wesley Clark known affectionately here as Ashley Wilkes. General Clark is lying through his teeth today. His impetus, purpose for going on television, is to get me taken off of Armed Forces Radio. On MSNBC this morning, General Clark said that I have a long history of disrespect and criticism of uniformed military personnel, a long history. This is Kafkaesque. The Hillary Clinton front group, Media Matters for America, has taken two of my words, "phony soldiers," and used hundreds and thousands of words now to manipulate it into a smear.

I encourage you to check it out for yourself. If you want FACTS. Rush doesn’t need someone like me to carry his water. He is a big boy {No pun intended} He has 22 Million listeners. THAT is why they TOLD you they wanted to, and now they are TRYING to, shut him down.

This is TOTALLY made up. This is a TOTAL smear campaign. They TOLD you they were going to do this. This should be no surprise to you. As I keep telling you, if the LWL get their way in 08. If Hillary is elected, ALL these things that they want to do, WILL happened. Amnesty, the Fairness Doctrine. Taxes. Universal Healthcare. All of it. YOU will no longer be able to stop it. They will see to that.
Peter

Sources:
OPNTalk -Attack on Rush Limbaugh, and Free Speech
OPNTalk -The Attack On Talk Radio, AKA YOUR Voice Continues
OPNTalk -You Did It, Again
RUSH -"Phony Soldiers" Smear Rolls On; The Mad Bomber of Bosnia Attacks

First Dems Now Republicans "Silence Critics"

Hey folks,

I saw this yesterday, but I did not comment on it then. Why? Because I’m NOT "Talk Radio." I scanned over it and thought to myself that this is a strange comment for him to make being a Republican Senator and one that talk radio came to his defense on more than one occasion. I thought to myself that this just shows the desperation and dying grasp on a dead bill that 69 percent of Americans DO NOT WANT.

But then this morning I saw another article by CNN that reminded me of the one in the New York Times. Not related, or ARE they?

What I am talking abut is the Article in the NYT -Senate Leaders Agree to Revive Immigration Bill. Pretty much the same old same old, except for THIS.

Comments by Republican senators on Thursday suggested that they were feeling the heat from conservative critics of the bill, who object to provisions offering legal status. The Republican whip, Trent Lott of Mississippi, who supports the bill, said: "Talk radio is running America. We have to deal with that problem."

"Talk radio is running the country?" {Laughing} Someone has to. Congress sure is not doing anything. The President doesn’t seem to realize that this amnesty, uh, sorry, immigration bill is NOT what is best for the country.

All kidding aside folks, this is a stupid comment. They are mad that talk radio told you the TRUTH about this bill. They gave us the details of the bill. You know, like the details they are doing EVERYTHING possible to keep top secrete this time around, until it’s to late to deal with? They are upset that YOU voiced your disagreement. LOUDLY. They do not like YOU preventing them from something they want to do. Democrats NOR Republicans.

But then this morning I see this from CNN-Conservative bloggers in full revolt over immigration By Peter Hamby CNN Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Different conservative blogs have different pet issues -- government transparency, federal judges, Fred Thompson, to name a few.

But no issue in recent memory has united conservative bloggers like the debate over immigration. Their frustration has culminated in a full-scale revolt against the Bush administration and a Senate bill that activists say does little to solve the country's border security problems.

President Bush's pledge to support $4.4 billion in additional border security funds has breathed new life into the bill, but the drumbeat against the legislation shows no signs of quieting.

That’s because as we keep pointing out to you, the money is ALREADY there. They already voted on and set funds aside for the fence. They haven’t done anything about it yet. But the money is there.

This article goes on to quote some Bloggers and spends a good portion on this. This is what I keep telling you that most Americans WANT.

Bloggers: Secure the border first

Conservative bloggers make various arguments against the bill. Some say the bill grants amnesty to illegal immigrants who have already broken the law. Others say normalizing millions of new workers would depress wages and harm American workers.

Most conservative bloggers see border enforcement as the priority, an issue they say the president can enforce on his own without having to push a bill through Congress.

So does 69 percent of Americans.

According to several top conservative bloggers, Bush simply has a credibility problem when it comes to border security.

Because he has done little to secure it. The MONEY is THERE. Secure the boarder FIRST. Then we will talk about the rest.

But you have to look at this total picture. Trent Lott says "Talk radio is running America. We have to deal with that problem." Then you have this talking about Bloggers. I guess both sides are starting to see Freedom of Speech as a problem?

This could get into very dangerous territory. With someone like Trent Lott, which a friend of mine tells me MAY be on Sean Hannity’s Radio Show this Monday, to say that talk radio is a problem that needs to be dealt with. The Dems attempting to revive the "Fairness Doctrine" and now a major news outlet like CNN talking about the power Bloggers have? This could lead into a united attack by BOTH Democrats and Republicans against Free Speech. We had better keep a close eye on all this. Or someday, you will NOT have the right to call wrong, wrong.
Peter
Sources;

NYT -Senate Leaders Agree to Revive Immigration Bill

CNN-Conservative bloggers in full revolt over immigration

Attack on Rush Limbaugh, and Free Speech.

Remember when I reported this.

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.


STOP! Hold it a second. {Laughing} Give them an A for honesty. "No one wanted to listen." {Laughing} Truer words were never spoken. But THIS is not the reason the Fairness Doctrine was in place. They DID and CAN have as many radio stations they want. That is not their problem. Their problem is that contrary to some "polls" out there, there are not enough "Looneys" out there to support them. That is NONE’s fault but their’s alone.

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."

Translation time folks. They will do ANYTHING to win in 08. They remember Reagan. They are talking about Fred Thompson. The fact he was an actor. We all know what happened with Reagan. They are afraid that because Fred Thompson was an actor, he will have more chances to be on TV, and on the radio. Uh, OK. Can you tell me how much air time, print, and attention Clinton and Obama get? {Sigh} Thompson is not even officially RUNNING yet.

According to another Democrat leadership aide, Pelosi and her team are focused on several targets in the fight, including Rush Limbaugh and the Salem Radio Network. In fact, Kucinich's staff has begun investigating Salem, one of the fastest growing radio networks in the country, which features such popular -- and highly rated -- conservative hosts as Bill Bennett and Michael Medved, and Christian hosts such as Dr. Richard Land.


"They are identifying senior employees, their political activities and their political giving," says a Government Reform committee staffer. "Salem is a big target, but the big one is going to be Limbaugh. We know we can't shut him up, but we want to make life a bit more difficult for him.

Well, at the top of the 2pm hour, Rush told his audience that NBC’s "The Today Show" was going to do a piece on his playing the parody song entitled "Barack The Magic Negro." They said to have even had the "Video" for it. They feel that, like Imas, this is crossing the line and perhapse Rush should meet the same fate.

OK, here is the problems they are about to face if they go with this.

One, Rush has been playing this song for the past two months. Noone is upset about it, including Barack. When doing an interview with Radio Show host PAUL W. SMITH, the enchange went like this.

OBAMA: (Laughing.) You know, I have not heard it but I've heard of it. I confess that I don't listen to Rush on a daily basis. On the other hand, I'm not one of these people who -- who takes myself so seriously that I get offended by -- by every -- every comment made about me. You know, the -- you know, what Rush does is entertainment, and although it's probably not something that I listen to much, I don't --

PAUL W. SMITH: But you said not every day, so you do listen a little then, and why wouldn't you?

OBAMA: I don't mind. I don't mind -- I don't mind folks poking fun at me. That's part of the job.

The self appointed representative of the entire Africa-American community does not have a problem with it. On CNN’s Showbiz Tonight "A. J. Hammer," and his guest was the Reverend Sharpton. Here's the question from the reporter, A. J. Hammer, and the Reverend’s answer.

HAMMER: You look at a guy like Rush Limbaugh, okay? He has certainly said things and then later apologized for them. He talks about Barack Obama on his show all the time. He has referred to that man as a Halfrican. He has played a song called "Barack the Magic Negro." On surface, I find that offensive. A lot of people find that offensive. But the outrage over that paled in comparison. Where do you draw the line and decide who you go after?

SHARPTON: I don't know, because Mr. Lumbard [sic] has done years of stuff against me, now Obama, others. He has a right to do that with individuals. That is not -- we're talking about when you castigate a race or a gender, and he's very, very careful that he will hit individuals. I think he wanted us to come after that.

NO he doesn’t. He is not bating you. He is making fun of the LWL {Left Wing Looneys} and the MMD {Mass Media Drones} They are the ones obsessed with Obama’s race. He is illustrating the absurd by being absurd. This brings me to problem number two. He isn’t the one who came up with the phrase. LA Times -Obama the 'Magic Negro' By David Ehrenstein, L.A.-based DAVID EHRENSTEIN writes about Hollywood and politics.March 19, 2007

AS EVERY CARBON-BASED life form on this planet surely knows, Barack Obama, the junior Democratic senator from Illinois, is running for president. Since making his announcement, there has been no end of commentary about him in all quarters — musing over his charisma and the prospect he offers of being the first African American to be elected to the White House.

But it's clear that Obama also is running for an equally important unelected office, in the province of the popular imagination — the "Magic Negro."

The Magic Negro is a figure of postmodern folk culture, coined by snarky 20th century sociologists, to explain a cultural figure who emerged in the wake of Brown vs. Board of Education. "He has no past, he simply appears one day to help the white protagonist," reads the description on Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_Negro .

He's there to assuage white "guilt" (i.e., the minimal discomfort they feel) over the role of slavery and racial segregation in American history, while replacing stereotypes of a dangerous, highly sexualized black man with a benign figure for whom interracial sexual congress holds no interest.

As might be expected, this figure is chiefly cinematic — embodied by such noted performers as Sidney Poitier, Morgan Freeman, Scatman Crothers, Michael Clarke Duncan, Will Smith and, most recently, Don Cheadle. And that's not to mention a certain basketball player whose very nickname is "Magic."

Poitier really poured on the "magic" in "Lilies of the Field" (for which he won a best actor Oscar) and "To Sir, With Love" (which, along with "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner," made him a No. 1 box-office attraction). In these films, Poitier triumphs through yeoman service to his white benefactors. "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner" is particularly striking in this regard, as it posits miscegenation without evoking sex. (Talk about magic!)

The same can't quite be said of Freeman in "Driving Miss Daisy," "Seven" and the seemingly endless series of films in which he plays ersatz paterfamilias to a white woman bedeviled by a serial killer. But at least he survives, unlike Crothers in "The Shining," in which psychic premonitions inspire him to rescue a white family he barely knows and get killed for his trouble. This heart-tug trope is parodied in Gus Van Sant's "Elephant." The film's sole black student at a Columbine-like high school arrives in the midst of a slaughter, helps a girl escape and is immediately gunned down. See what helping the white man gets you?

And what does the white man get out of the bargain? That's a question asked by John Guare in "Six Degrees of Separation," his brilliant retelling of the true saga of David Hampton — a young, personable gay con man who in the 1980s passed himself off as the son of none other than the real Sidney Poitier. Though he started small, using the ruse to get into Studio 54, Hampton discovered that countless gullible, well-heeled New Yorkers, vulnerable to the Magic Negro myth, were only too eager to believe in his baroque fantasy. (One of the few who wasn't fooled was Andy Warhol, who was astonished his underlings believed Hampton's whoppers. Clearly Warhol had no need for the accouterment of interracial "goodwill.")

But the same can't be said of most white Americans, whose desire for a noble, healing Negro hasn't faded. That's where Obama comes in: as Poitier's "real" fake son.

The senator's famously stem-winding stump speeches have been drawing huge crowds to hear him talk of uniting rather than dividing. A praiseworthy goal. Consequently, even the mild criticisms thrown his way have been waved away, "magically." He used to smoke, but now he doesn't; he racked up a bunch of delinquent parking tickets, but he paid them all back with an apology. And hey, is looking good in a bathing suit a bad thing?

The only mud that momentarily stuck was criticism (white and black alike) concerning Obama's alleged "inauthenticty," as compared to such sterling examples of "genuine" blackness as Al Sharpton and Snoop Dogg. Speaking as an African American whose last name has led to his racial "credentials" being challenged — often several times a day — I know how pesky this sort of thing can be.

Obama's fame right now has little to do with his political record or what he's written in his two (count 'em) books, or even what he's actually said in those stem-winders. It's the way he's said it that counts the most. It's his manner, which, as presidential hopeful Sen. Joe Biden ham-fistedly reminded us, is "articulate." His tone is always genial, his voice warm and unthreatening, and he hasn't called his opponents names (despite being baited by the media).

Like a comic-book superhero, Obama is there to help, out of the sheer goodness of a heart we need not know or understand. For as with all Magic Negroes, the less real he seems, the more desirable he becomes. If he were real, white America couldn't project all its fantasies of curative black benevolence on him.

{Laughing} This is THEM calling him the "Magic Negro" NOT Rush. Yet they want to report Rush a bigot because he repeated THEM. Got to love it.

Problem number three, and possibly the BIGGEST problem they WILL have, if they decide to go with this on Monday morning? The video. Rush Limbaugh is a RADIO guy. He has a RADIO show. He is not in the business of making videos. OK REAL slow so even Liberals can understand this. Radio is AUDIO. This means that you use the things on the side of your head. They are called EARS. Some are large, ask Obama, some are small. They can be pierced or not. They are used to pick up sound waves. A radio show produces sound waves for your ears to pick up on. Any visual effects of this, are those created in the LISTENER’s own mind.

Eyes, are used to see imagines with. They can be brown, blue, hazel, green, ETC. Some even get different color contacts to put in them to make them appear to be a different color than they naturally are. They pick up things like TV, nature, one’s surroundings, and yes VIDEOS. What would be the point for a radio guy, to use video?

He did not create the video. He has told EVERYONE that it is not his. He nor the EIB had ANYTHING whatsoever to do with the Video.

I warned you folks about this. They came right out and TOLD you what they were planning to do. Now the MMD Guru, George Soros has spoken. He told the MMD, that write and report only what they are told to, go after Rush. I can hear him now. "We cannot win. But go after him anyway. When we lose, we will spin it to create a stir of support to bring back the Fairness Doctrine."

You see folks. They CANNOT win. Rush OWNS the EIB. He IS the Boss. Noone can fire him. He is on over 600 radio stations. He is the number one Radio show with the biggest following EVER. But, big BUT, if they go after him a fail, they maybe able to stir it up enough to garner enough support for the what they REALLY want to do. Since Rush is to big to take down, the Fairness Doctrine will legally limit his power. Get the point?

Like I said before. These are little people with a big mouth. They tried to compete. But nobody wanted to listen to their daily hatred. So since they could not play, they want to take their ball and go home. There is another problem with this. It’s NOT their ball.

Should be interesting to see what the "Today Show" does with this on Monday. I will be recording. I’ll let you know.
Peter

Sources:

ME
Rush
LA Times -Obama the 'Magic Negro'

This is How Juvenile The Democrats Are.

Hey again folks,

So OK. We learned that the Fairness Doctrine was basically all about space. The limited station availability back in the early days. Then we learned that it was to give a fair and balanced perceptions or points of views. Equal time so to speak. We also learned why it was bad and why it was done away with.

So this is what the Democrats "want?" No. Not really. They just want to silence anyone that doesn’t agree with them. Plain and simple. As a matter of fact, they just came right out and TOLD you that.

According to The Washington Prowler -Her Royal Fairness.

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.

Now get THIS!

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.

STOP! Hold it a second. {Laughing} Give them an A for honesty. "No one wanted to listen." {Laughing} Truer words were never spoken. But THIS is not the reason the Fairness Doctrine was in place. They DID and CAN have as many radio stations they want. That is not their problem. Their problem is that contrary to some "polls" out there, there are not enough "Looneys" out there to support them. That is NONE’s fault but their’s alone.

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."

Translation time folks. They will do ANYTHING to win in 08. They remember Reagan. They are talking about Fred Thompson. The fact he was an actor. We all know what happened with Reagan. They are afraid that because Fred Thompson was an actor, he will have more chances to be on TV, and on the radio. Uh, OK. Can you tell me how much air time, print, and attention Clinton and Obama get? {Sigh} Thompson is not even officially RUNNING yet.

According to another Democrat leadership aide, Pelosi and her team are focused on several targets in the fight, including Rush Limbaugh and the Salem Radio Network. In fact, Kucinich's staff has begun investigating Salem, one of the fastest growing radio networks in the country, which features such popular -- and highly rated -- conservative hosts as Bill Bennett and Michael Medved, and Christian hosts such as Dr. Richard Land.

BIG SURPRISE THERE! Conservatives and Christians. Not Al-Qaeda, but Conservatives and Christians and the Democrat’s, the LWL {Left Wing Looney fringe leadership} enemy. They must silence their opposition. To hell with Free Speech.

Again, and A for honesty.

"They are identifying senior employees, their political activities and their political giving," says a Government Reform committee staffer. "Salem is a big target, but the big one is going to be Limbaugh. We know we can't shut him up, but we want to make life a bit more difficult for him."

This is how absolutely juvenile these sad little people are. They HAD the opportunity. They failed. Now they are acting like, "Well if we can’t have a radio show, NO ONE can. Huff!" How idiotic can they really get? OK, dumb question.

The truth of the matter is this. Conservative Talk radio IS fairness. You have the big three. ABC, CBS, NBC. You have The NYT, LA Times, and many other print media. You have Moveon.orq., Media Matters, and many other web sites. I know of a couple of Radio hosts that are far from Conservative. Then you have Rush, Hannity, and uh, well, no offense, a couple of others. So where is the unfairness?

The simple fact is NOT that they want "fairness." What they want is to silence anyone from telling YOU the truth. The have lost their monopoly. They want it back. Yes, it IS, just that simple.
Peter

Source:
American Spectator / Washington Prowler-Her Royal Fairness

The Fairness Act. New Tool?

Hey folks,

Good to be back in the chair. Happy Hump day to you. Thank you again for both Prof. Darko for his expert analysis of the Fort Dix Six, and DS Harford for filling in yesterday. I HAVE to comment on this one folks. I heard about it briefly in the car on Monday and HAD to comment. Fret not, I will be back up to speed tomorrow. But, even know this is "old news," this just goes to show you how juvenile the Democrats really are.

For those of you who may not know, the "Fairness Doctrine" has been put on the front burner in Congress. We’ll get to that in a second. For those of you who do not know what the "Fairness Doctrine" is. According to The Museum of Broadcast Communications, MBC -Fairness Doctrine.

The policy of the United States Federal Communications Commission that became known as the "Fairness Doctrine" is an attempt to ensure that all coverage of controversial issues by a broadcast station be balanced and fair. The FCC took the view, in 1949, that station licensees were "public trustees," and as such had an obligation to afford reasonable opportunity for discussion of contrasting points of view on controversial issues of public importance. The Commission later held that stations were also obligated to actively seek out issues of importance to their community and air programming that addressed those issues. With the deregulation sweep of the Reagan Administration during the 1980s, the Commission dissolved the fairness doctrine.
This doctrine grew out of concern that because of the large number of applications for radio station being submitted and the limited number of frequencies available, broadcasters should make sure they did not use their stations simply as advocates with a singular perspective. Rather, they must allow all points of view. That requirement was to be enforced by FCC mandate.

So basically folks, it was a space issue. In a matter of speaking. Give everyone a fair chance to be heard. This is an important point. Remember this.

From the early 1940s, the FCC had established the "Mayflower Doctrine," which prohibited editorializing by stations. But that absolute ban softened somewhat by the end of the decade, allowing editorializing only if other points of view were aired, balancing that of the station's. During these years, the FCC had established dicta and case law guiding the operation of the doctrine.

In ensuing years the FCC ensured that the doctrine was operational by laying out rules defining such matters as personal attack and political editorializing (1967). In 1971 the Commission set requirements for the stations to report, with their license renewal, efforts to seek out and address issues of concern to the community. This process became known as "Ascertainment of Community Needs," and was to be done systematically and by the station management.

The fairness doctrine ran parallel to Section 315 of the Communications Act of 1937 which required stations to offer "equal opportunity" to all legally qualified political candidates for any office if they had allowed any person running in that office to use the station. The attempt was to balance--to force an even handedness. Section 315 exempted news programs, interviews and documentaries. But the doctrine would include such efforts. Another major difference should be noted here: Section 315 was federal law, passed by Congress. The fairness doctrine was simply FCC policy.

The FCC fairness policy was given great credence by the 1969 U.S. Supreme Court case of Red Lion Broadcasting Co., Inc. v. FCC. In that case, a station in Pennsylvania, licensed by Red Lion Co., had aired a "Christian Crusade" program wherein an author, Fred J. Cook, was attacked. When Cook requested time to reply in keeping with the fairness doctrine, the station refused. Upon appeal to the FCC, the Commission declared that there was personal attack and the station had failed to meet its obligation. The station appealed and the case wended its way through the courts and eventually to the Supreme Court. The court ruled for the FCC, giving sanction to the fairness doctrine.

The doctrine, nevertheless, disturbed many journalists, who considered it a violation of First Amendment rights of free speech/free press which should allow reporters to make their own decisions about balancing stories. Fairness, in this view, should not be forced by the FCC. In order to avoid the requirement to go out and find contrasting viewpoints on every issue raised in a story, some journalists simply avoided any coverage of some controversial issues. This "chilling effect" was just the opposite of what the FCC intended.

And would happen again. But that is what they actually WANT.

By the 1980s, many things had changed. The "scarcity" argument which dictated the "public trustee" philosophy of the Commission, was disappearing with the abundant number of channels available on cable TV. Without scarcity, or with many other voices in the marketplace of ideas, there were perhaps fewer compelling reasons to keep the fairness doctrine. This was also the era of deregulation when the FCC took on a different attitude about its many rules, seen as an unnecessary burden by most stations. The new Chairman of the FCC, Mark Fowler, appointed by President Reagan, publicly avowed to kill to fairness doctrine.

By 1985, the FCC issued its Fairness Report, asserting that the doctrine was no longer having its intended effect, might actually have a "chilling effect" and might be in violation of the First Amendment. In a 1987 case, Meredith Corp. v. FCC, the courts declared that the doctrine was not mandated by Congress and the FCC did not have to continue to enforce it. The FCC dissolved the doctrine in August of that year.

However, before the Commission's action, in the spring of 1987, both houses of Congress voted to put the fairness doctrine into law--a statutory fairness doctrine which the FCC would have to enforce, like it or not. But President Reagan, in keeping with his deregulatory efforts and his long-standing favor of keeping government out of the affairs of business, vetoed the legislation. There were insufficient votes to override the veto. Congressional efforts to make the doctrine into law surfaced again during the Bush administration. As before, the legislation was vetoed, this time by Bush.

The fairness doctrine remains just beneath the surface of concerns over broadcasting and cablecasting, and some members of congress continue to threaten to pass it into legislation. Currently, however, there is no required balance of controversial issues as mandated by the fairness doctrine. The public relies instead on the judgment of broadcast journalists and its own reasoning ability to sort out one-sided or distorted coverage of an issue. Indeed, experience over the past several years since the demise of the doctrine shows that broadcasters can and do provide substantial coverage of controversial issues of public importance in their communities, including contrasting viewpoints, through news, public affairs, public service, interactive and special programming.

I’ll be right back, for part two. The Juvenile Democrats.
Peter

Source:
MBC -The Fairness Doctrine