Thursday, January 18, 2007
Wednesday, January 17, 2007
Intolerant Tolerant, Yet Again.
The latest issue that is grinding my gears is the so called "Fairness Doctrine". Like most leftist ideas, the bill appears to be appealing until you dig just below the thin surface to discover its unsavory content. Libs might realize this fact if they took the time think about what they're spoon fed on David Letterman, Jon Stewart, Oprah Winfrey, MTV and the View.
The "Fairness Doctrine" is a bill being pushed by the left that would require broadcasters to present both sides of a controversial issue. The push comes in the wake of a slew of failed liberal talk radio shows. Its not so much a stab at fairness as much as an attempt to stifle conservative talk show hosts. To take away their freedom to present material as they see fit and thereby damaging their product.
Lets face it, people tune into these shows to hear a rebuttal of all the leftist propaganda they hear from the moment they wake up, until the moment they go to sleep. They don't tune in to hear the other side get 50% air-time or even 25% for that matter.
I tune to these shows as a respite from all the leftist attacks, slander and propaganda. I want to hear them play what I watched on Oberman, Stewart, Matthews or Russert the night before and then take their arguments apart. I'm hearing both arguments, aren't I? Its not like we could avoid liberalism no matter how hard we might try. But then, they have to know this and so I have to think their bill is not so much to be heard, but to sabotage conservative product.
Today, while listening to several radio talk shows, I was struck by the state of denial some liberals live in. When confronted with the prospect of forcing MSNBC, CNN, NPR, etc. to present both sides, they actually argued that these outlets are fair and they check themselves, thus they wouldn't be included. Are they kidding? I've listened to Chris Matthews rail on Bush night after night along with his elitist leftist snobs for months now, toasting each other, because they are so smart and the right is so inept and incompetent. It has become blatantly unfair. The Liberal idea of "fair" was the show "Crossfire" on CNN. It was always stacked against the conservatives, because the guests were usually liberal and the venue was always a heavily liberal venue in which the conservatives would be shouted down and scorned while the liberals cheered.
Laura Ingraham had Rep. Maurice Hinchey on her show today to defend his work on the bill. She brought up a lot of good points that Hinchey couldn't honestly answer though he tried to rationalize. She asked if he would insist that Hollywood, Comedy Central, and all the leftist propaganda in music, on TV and in movies would be forced to present the other side too. His only response was to claim that this is a different issue entirely. Is it? If they are using the public airwaves to present any political view, aren't they subject to comply with this bill? Personally, though it is an annoyance to me that until Fox News there was no conservative voice on TV news, I didn't cry about it and argue for government regulation. I figured that if the country didn't want it, they'd stop watching. Indeed, it did take care of itself as Fox News was born out of their unfairness. Things like this have a way of working themselves out when consumers can choose for themselves.
Why is it that the so called "champions of free speech", don't suffer ideas that aren't lock-step with theirs? Listen Left! If you don't like what your opponents say, beat them in the market-place of ideas, don't try to destroy their freedom to say and air what they want to. Yet another case of the "intolerant-tolerant".
It seems to me that the left have controlled the networks and all the major newspapers for so long, they just don't know how to handle the fact that conservatives are finding outlets on the radio, cable and the Internet. As Monk would say, "unless I'm wrong, which, ya know, I'm not."
The "Fairness Doctrine" is a bill being pushed by the left that would require broadcasters to present both sides of a controversial issue. The push comes in the wake of a slew of failed liberal talk radio shows. Its not so much a stab at fairness as much as an attempt to stifle conservative talk show hosts. To take away their freedom to present material as they see fit and thereby damaging their product.
Lets face it, people tune into these shows to hear a rebuttal of all the leftist propaganda they hear from the moment they wake up, until the moment they go to sleep. They don't tune in to hear the other side get 50% air-time or even 25% for that matter.
I tune to these shows as a respite from all the leftist attacks, slander and propaganda. I want to hear them play what I watched on Oberman, Stewart, Matthews or Russert the night before and then take their arguments apart. I'm hearing both arguments, aren't I? Its not like we could avoid liberalism no matter how hard we might try. But then, they have to know this and so I have to think their bill is not so much to be heard, but to sabotage conservative product.
Today, while listening to several radio talk shows, I was struck by the state of denial some liberals live in. When confronted with the prospect of forcing MSNBC, CNN, NPR, etc. to present both sides, they actually argued that these outlets are fair and they check themselves, thus they wouldn't be included. Are they kidding? I've listened to Chris Matthews rail on Bush night after night along with his elitist leftist snobs for months now, toasting each other, because they are so smart and the right is so inept and incompetent. It has become blatantly unfair. The Liberal idea of "fair" was the show "Crossfire" on CNN. It was always stacked against the conservatives, because the guests were usually liberal and the venue was always a heavily liberal venue in which the conservatives would be shouted down and scorned while the liberals cheered.
Laura Ingraham had Rep. Maurice Hinchey on her show today to defend his work on the bill. She brought up a lot of good points that Hinchey couldn't honestly answer though he tried to rationalize. She asked if he would insist that Hollywood, Comedy Central, and all the leftist propaganda in music, on TV and in movies would be forced to present the other side too. His only response was to claim that this is a different issue entirely. Is it? If they are using the public airwaves to present any political view, aren't they subject to comply with this bill? Personally, though it is an annoyance to me that until Fox News there was no conservative voice on TV news, I didn't cry about it and argue for government regulation. I figured that if the country didn't want it, they'd stop watching. Indeed, it did take care of itself as Fox News was born out of their unfairness. Things like this have a way of working themselves out when consumers can choose for themselves.
Why is it that the so called "champions of free speech", don't suffer ideas that aren't lock-step with theirs? Listen Left! If you don't like what your opponents say, beat them in the market-place of ideas, don't try to destroy their freedom to say and air what they want to. Yet another case of the "intolerant-tolerant".
It seems to me that the left have controlled the networks and all the major newspapers for so long, they just don't know how to handle the fact that conservatives are finding outlets on the radio, cable and the Internet. As Monk would say, "unless I'm wrong, which, ya know, I'm not."
Sunday, January 14, 2007
Monk, We Love You!
This is in honor of the Monkathon they've been playing on USA. One of the greatest shows of all time. Unfortunately, the Monk scenes are limited on Youtube, but this will do.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
