Wednesday, November 12, 2008

The "Fascist Doctrine"

Please note: Congressional action on the "Fascist Doctrine" is not necessary. No dissenting voices, no debate, no constituency complaints need to be heard or considered:

"Although he has said he doesn’t “plan” to tackle the Fairness Doctrine, Obama has hired former FCC Commissioner and Fairness-Doctrine proponent Henry Rivera to run the team that will select the next FCC Chairman. Note: What most people do not realize is that reinstating the FD requires nothing more than a majority vote of FCC Commissioners. No one else is involved. Now that the Democrats have free rein (and reign) over everything USA, its reinstatement is a virtual foregone conclusion.


Remember, if the Wonderboy allows this go into effect, he will have confirmed, without doubt that he is a fascist, seeking only to crush dissent.

We were warned.

The Gunslinger

17 comments:

  1. GEE-zus! It's not enough that the Left controls "MSM" (which has been losing ratings in the true democracy of the marketplace),but for this decision to be under the control of FIVE individuals is...well,obvious Orwellistic terms apply.Same as "multi"-culturalism,etc....EVERY phrase/term uttered by THEM is opposite of their intentions."Ministry of Truth","Department of Peace",just like the French Jacobins had their "Committee of Public Safety" to facilitate executions."What is Past is Prologue",etc.,but now The "Liberationists" have more tools in their Brainwash bag o'tricks...Oy vey!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Guess I gotta watch that third stiff drink....Fiction melding with non-Fiction.Hard to tell the difference...which is the point with tactics of these nefarious nincompoops of...oh well,twas said before.Talk about de-construction...we are witnesses.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Just think of someone like Rush getting silenced. Why, he might have to set up a shortwave "Radio Free America" in the Caymans. And you know that whatever's banned becomes more popular.

    All those lovely millions in advertising going to an offshore instead of a taxable US account.

    Of course this might be why I have been hearing about broadband over powerlines. Surely, I'm just being paranoid.

    ReplyDelete
  4. We are witnesses, and the last defense of freedom...goddamnit! How about just a nice comfy retirement? But NO!

    Anon,

    Broadband over powerlines?...'splain yourself!

    ReplyDelete
  5. I don't really know enough to explain broadband over powerlines. So if I get some facts wrong sue me. Basically, it's putting internet on the grid so that getting on line is as easy as plugging your computer in. The plan is to provide the "people's internet".

    They were talking about it a half-dozen years ago or so. The RFID crowd claimed every device you plugged in would be reporting to its masters to form a massive commercial database on you. The ham radio types were saying it would block large protions of the radio spectrum. What the truth is, I don't really know. I saw a blurb somewhere that the feds are looking into it again. If it does go through it will be one of those quiet FCC decisions with no discussion.

    ReplyDelete
  6. You know, we had the Fairness Doctrine for 38 years up until 1987. (During the Red Scare even.) It didn't result in this extreme Fascism you are predicting.

    It makes sense that because the PUBLIC airwaves are limited we make sure they are not taken over by one voice (ClearChannel I am looking at you).

    Contrast this to print media or internet media which are nearly unlimited. The Fairness Doctrine is only for PUBLIC AIRWAVES. The history of the doctrine show it being used very prudently to allow equal access in a few limited cases - good!

    I'm sorry. Just because you're a millionaire doesn't mean you should be the only voice on the limited, public airwaves.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Are you suggesting that the fairness doctrine would have prevented the overwhealming landslide of Obama hype this election cycle?

    Are the limited communist TV airwaves going to have the same restrictions as conservative radio?

    For the fairness doctrine to work, it requires a government that is basically fair.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Jag, I'm not saying it will RESULT in fascism. I'm saying it IS fascism.

    If Democrats impose the"Fascist Doctrine", they will be signaling their intention to silence dissent...at gunpoint, through the coercive power of the STATE.

    That's Fascism.

    Anon...

    Cable channels will be exempt, newspapers will be exempt, movies will be exempt, Television "news" will be exempt. News magazines will be exempt. NPR and PBS will be exempt (Leftist propaganda paid for by taxpayers—no fairness, or "balance" required.)

    ALL broadcast TV will probably be exempt because there are "so many channels". They'll even probably find a way to exempt FM radio.

    Only AM Radio, home of Conservative Talk Radio will be affected.

    And they'll pretend it's about "Fairness".

    ReplyDelete
  9. When I was a kid, we had four channels over broadcast TV. My dad had a remote control...it was me. Yes, in those days kids, you had to get off the couch to change the channel.

    With 4 channels, it made sense to insure some equal time, although conservative voices were silenced for many years. We didn't know any better. It broke my heart to find out what a flaming lib Walter Cronkite (sp?) was.

    These days, we have hundreds of options, cable, satellite, broadcast, etc. If we had the fairness doctrine...would it mean ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, would have to look more like the Fox New Channel...hmm.

    The fairness doctrine is silly and unnecessary. All the talk radio had no impact on the election of the Messiah, so I don't know why their so afraid...with all TV broadcast media, MSNBC and other media in the tank for Obama.

    If they put free talk radio out of business al la Air America, I would buy a subscription to satellite radio to hear my favorite shows. I'm sure the rest of us would do that as well.

    Democrats are the biggest threat to free speech in America. They ought to be ashamed, as they are the least tolerant of opposing views as any group I've ever seen. The reason conservative talk radio exists is that we were shut out of broadcast TV

    ReplyDelete
  10. Re:"not result in Fascism,it IS Fascism",I had half-good,half-bad response to my own re-posting of some of Gunny's best recent blogs on myspace.I was labelled a "Neo-Con Fascist" (usual cliches).Responded to nay-sayers with,basically,"You're into giving all this Power to an in-experienced cipher based on feel-good blather,aren't you at all uneasy with that surrender?" No response to actual query,just ad hominem attack,so THAT evidenced their idiocy.Pampered libs.Again,to quote an old tune,"well-educated,with no Common Sense".Sad,that so much money is wasted on "college" (these were Vanderbilt and Belmont grads).First Rule of Marxist Undermine Society Battleplan is brainwash the children of the elite...

    ReplyDelete
  11. Wilber, EXACTLY!

    I certainly hope all our favorite voices have a plan.

    But imagine the sort of money they'll lose! I hope they persevere.

    ReplyDelete
  12. All this talk about satellite, AM and short wave talk radio sounds like Radio Free Europe to me; very disturbing indeed. Statements like, "they'll move the programs off shore" and "I'll pay for satellite radio" sounds like shooting at the target and hitting the backstop to me. I think determined and aggressive action is needed. Blog, tell friends and fence sitters, write letters to editors, and be factual, sincere and honest with people who disagree with your position and point of view. And be willing to listen to people who disagree; something the fascist left is incapable of.

    We can talk amongst ourselves until we're blue in the face. All we accomplish is validating our own self interests. The dazed and confused in America won’t be tuning in to hear the blow-hard hypocrite Rush Limbaugh pontificate from the pulpit. But they might listen to you.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Hell, I can't even talk to my own family about it. They get mad.

    Liberals!

    But I get your point.

    And I've got half an idea forming about it...stay tuned!

    ReplyDelete
  14. There's a thing called BlogTalkRadio that an acquaintance uses.Don't know details,but noticed more diverse callers on her show than on "regular" radio shows,so it wasn't such a "self-massaging" exercise.Deeper discussions on the whole,tho there weren't all.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Those of our favourite voices that have a brain (most of them, I hope), will lose as much money as the liquer companies lost with prohibition and FN has lost with those restrictive European gun control laws.

    The losers always are; 1) the freedom of the people on the one hand, and 2) the ability of the govenrment to control the people.

    Kind of a weird coupling, I know. How do we use this?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Good point!

    Understanding the psychology of citizens vis a vis their "government"...

    Lex malla lex nulla.

    Bad law is no law.

    Make too many bad laws, and even good citizens cease to respect the law.

    As American Fundamentalists, our first goal is for people to understand that The STATE is the enemy; the fundamental underlying belief of the Founders—and the whole point of our Constitution!

    Let's face it. A really bad STATE helps us teach that lesson by providing a live example!

    Once people re-learn THAT lesson, all the rest is gravy.

    ReplyDelete