"Fairness Doctrine" Brazen Liberal Ploy to Muzzle Opposition

Since liberal talk radio has been unable to successfully compete in the free market, liberals are again pushing for the re-imposition of the so-called Fairness Doctrine, the purpose of which is to force radio broadcasters to preempt commercially viable conservative talk radio. It's really that horribly simple.

By forcing broadcasters to provide "equal time" to less marketable opposing points of view, the disarmingly misnamed Fairness Doctrine would, in effect, grant presidential-appointed Federal Communications Commission (FCC) bureaucrats, reminiscent of Goebbel's Propaganda Ministry, the draconian power to shut down conservative talk radio.

Rep. Louise Slaughter, entrenched local congressional rep, her party boss, Nancy Pelosi, easily the most shamelessly partisan, obscenely self-serving and obstructionist House Speaker in American history, and Senator Diane Feistein, another liberal lackey from California, have been key proponents of the Fairness Doctrine's re-imposition on American broadcasters and upon the American people.

In alliance with these protectors of our 1st amendment rights, the so-called "media reform movement"--of which Dan Rather, disgraced CBS anchor, and Bill Moyers, an inveterate left wing nut, are members--is pulling all stops to ensure that broadcast consumers--you and I--are denied the choice of what we wish to hear on the airwaves. And because conservative talk radio has been so popular--and, thus, more commercially viable than liberal talk radio--the Democratic Party finds it once again necessary to do what the free market is unwilling to do: to silence conservative talk radio once and for all. Apparently, de facto liberal domination of TV and the print media is simply not enough.

To explain it another way, in a free market, programming dictates listenership and the level of advertising dollars to sustain that programming. Naturally, advertisers are not interested in doling out advertising dollars for programming with lousy listenership. That's just good 'ole common business sense. And since unpopular programming, such as liberal talk radio, will not attract the level of advertiser dollars needed to profitably sustain those broadcasts, the Fairness Doctrine will enable the FCC to compel broadcasters to shut down conservative radio programming as well. All in the lofty interest of fairplay and of leveling the playing field, of course. Get it? Clever ploy, huh?

In his politically expedient effort to tack to the center, Obama recently professed his opposition to the Fairness Doctrine. But, since his heart-felt positions on other issues over the past several months have proven to be disturbingly meaningless, I don't count on his keeping his word on this important issue either. Should Obama become President of the United States and attempt to transform this country into the "Socialist Republic of America", the transition will entail relentless--and very likely successful--efforts to effectively quell opposing political viewpoints as well. To suppress conservative talk radio, all a President Obama would need do is appoint one more liberal to the FCC and, by FCC fiat alone, consumer choice in radio broadcasting will be dead, and with it another nail in the coffin of our once inalienable rights will have been driven. And what will be next? It would only be a matter of time before cable, satellite and the internet are also "regulated"> Big Brother is on the move again.

To counter this encroachment on our freedom of choice, Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind) has introduced the Broadcaster Freedom Act (HR 2905) which would permanently bar reinstatement of the sinister Fairness Doctrine. Currently stuck in the Democrat-controlled Energy & Commerce Committee, he has been pushing hard for a discharge petition which would force an up or down vote on the House Floor. So far, he has 200 signatures--but not ONE Democrat has signed on! Needed as of today are 18 more signatures to get the bill to the floor over the objection of Comrade Pelosi and her lickspittles on the Committee.

If Americans are prohibited from choosing the programming or newsprint they wish to hear or read, democracy will have been dealt another blow and tyranny will have won a crucial victory. Safeguarding our future as a vibrant republic of laws and individual liberty is up to us alone.

Please call, write or email your reps in D.C. and DEMAND of them that they sign on to Rep. Mike Pence's discharge petition, thus allowing the Broadcaster Freedom Act to come to the floor for a vote NOW! You've only your 1st amendment rights to lose if you don't take a stand.

("Our massive strategy was to use the Fairness Doctrine to challenge and harass right-wing broadcasters and hope the challenges would be so costly to them that they would be inhibited and decide it was too expensive to continue." Bill Ruder, JFK's Assistant Secretary of Commerce on the Fairness Doctrine)

("Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation begins by subduing freeness of speech." Benjamin Franklin)

("If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all." Noam Chomsky)

Honest Vetting of Obama's Background Urgently Needed

Absent responsible scrutiny of Senator Obama by a fawning media blinded by his rhetorical flourishes and pop-star glitter, some of the Senator's more alarming associations and endorsements--all of which are readily verifiable--bear as much repeating as do his radical voting record and policy positions.

A product of the notoriously corrupt Chicago/Illinois political machine, among the Senator's growing list of very troubling associations are his now notorious and intimate 20-year friendship with his spiritual advisor and mentor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, purveyor of a divisive race-centric culture of victimhood and adherent to an exlusionary Black Liberation Theology-- whom the Senator only recently disavowed when that association became a serious political liability; the Senator's friendly association with unrepentant domestic terrorists William Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn; his 5-year relationship in Hawaii with Frank Marshall Davis, a member of the Communist Party USA, who, after Barack Obama's grandfather abandoned the family, became Barack's father-figure and role model from 1975 - 1979; his association with the Chicago branch of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), an affiliate of the Socialist International (SI), which enjoys "consultative status" with the U.N.; and his links with Rashid Khalidi, a PLO agent from 1976 - 1982 and founder of the Arab American Action Network (AAAN), a pro-Palestinian and anti-Israeli group which received $75,000 in grants from the Woods Foundation in Chicago (of which Obama and Ayers were board directors)and whose AAAN vice-president, Ali Abunimah, recalls Senator Obama's having spoken against "Israeli occupation" during an AAAN charity event in 1999.

Add to this his actively campaigning for Sen. Sanders of Vermont, the only openly socialist in Congress, verified reports of some of his campaign workers displaying a flag featuring Marxist Che Guevara in their campaign headquarters, and the Senator's tortured excuse for not wearing an American flag lapel pin, only to have later opted to sport the pin when it became politically expedient, and we have a presidential candidate whose profile is, to say the very least,extremely unique in the annals of presidential history.

Spoken during what he thought was a private San Francisco fundraiser, the Senator's comtemptuous assault on small town Americans whom he described as bitter, clinging to their religion and guns, and with antipathy toward immigrants and those who may look different from themselves was breathtaking in its unconcealed disdain for heartland America. Worse, that haughty viewpoint neatly mirrors the prevailing elitist thinking on the radical left.

His wife's description of America as "downright mean" and that only after decades as an American citizen is she now proud of her country clearly suggests a visceral bitterness and hateful view of America very much in keeping with sentiments on the far left.

Finally, what is acutely distressing are the endorsements, albeit unsolicited, the Senator has received from the Communist Party USA, Move-On.org, the Democratic Socialists of America, and, yes, HAMAS, a terrorist organization.

Even among his most ardent followers, and despite the Senator's recent manipulative tacking to the center, this litany of alarming endorsements and disturbing associations--which cannot be easily taken out of context--should raise very serious questions about his character, judgement and core beliefs.

Indeed, given this checkered biography it is doubtful that the Senator would pass the required security background investigation were he to apply for federal employment.And we should take leave of our commonsense and blindly entrust the Presidency to him?

I hope that I'm not alone when I assert that it would be a stretch beyond credulity to believe that the Senator has remained unaffected by these radical influences in his life and that his political views, his character and his cultural attitudes haven't been in some substantial ways shaped by them.

I genuinely believe that if we choose to rationalize, willfully ignore, artfully dodge or white-wash these alarming associations and endorsements, we do so at our own peril.

In the final analysis, Obama's version of the "American Dream" may very well turn out to be something completely foreign to us--perhaps even a "Nightmare". So, be vigilant, folks. Take the time to carefully listen and to carefully weigh and dissect the commentary and spin we'll all be subjected to over the next several months. And be fearlessly objective and honest in your appraisal of the candidates now before us. Difficult and time-consuming though that process may be, as Americans and defenders of future generations, that is our duty.

Supreme Court Ruling Imperils Americans

On June 12th in Boumediene vs Bush, five associate justices, a majority of the U.S. Supreme Court, ruled that unlawful combatants/terrorists detained outside sovereign U.S. territory should be granted the right of habeas corpus.

In one fell swoop, these five liberal justices nullified court rulings Ex Parte Quirin (1942), Duncan vs Kahanamoku (1946), In re Yamashita (1946), Johnson vs Eisentrager (1950), and Coleppaugh vs Looney (1956). Not to be out-done, they overruled the Administration and Congress as well.

The net effect of this preposterous ruling is that unlawful combatants/terrorists may now be treated as nothing more than petty American criminals who may enjoy the same benefits of due process as are bestowed by our Constitution on American citizens.

It should be patently obvious to all that dealing with terrorism as a law enforcement issue most certainly didn't work before 9/11 to protect the homeland, and that it definitely won't work this time around either. Seems some of us just never learn.

This reprehensible ruling all but ensures that GITMO detainees will live to fight another day. (Note: 30 detainees previously released ended upon on the battlefield once again attacking American soldiers and slaughtering innocent civilians.)

What's next? Reading unlawful combatants their Miranda Rights on the battlefield before shooting at them in self-defense? Yes, probably, if out-of-touch legal elites have their way.

If history is any accurate guide, and I believe that it is, President Abraham Lincoln would have swiftly arrested these justices for sedition, and President Andrew Jackson would have simply ignored their dunderheaded ruling.

It appears that the only way to countervail this feckless and dangerous ruling in order to protect Americans and civilian innocents alike is to swiftly place all future battlefield captives in the custody of our allies who could then mete out appropriate punishment in accordance with their own system of justice.

If there is ever a more compelling reason to vote for John McCain in November, this is it. Make no mistake: Barack Obama, who strongly agrees with this flamboyant and irresponsible decision, would do all he could as President to expand the power of liberal elites on U.S. courts.

My fear is that as we the people fiddle and Islamofascists rejoice in our self-destructive foolishness, our "Rome" is slowly burning around us.

Beware Environmentalist Tyranny

Al Gore's oft-repeated assertion there exists a "consensus" within the scientific community that human activity has accelerated global warming to perilous levels was officially and strongly rejected last month by thousands of participating scientists of the Oregon Institute of Science & Medicine (OISM).

Debunking the climatic doomsday scenarios advanced by Gore, environmental activists and their opportunistic political allies in D.C., 31,000 scientists petitioned the U.S. Government to reject Kyoto or any similar proposals noting that dire "predictions of harmful climatic effects due to future increases in minor greenhouse gases like CO2 are in error and do not conform to current experimental knowledge" and that "proposed limits on greenhouse gases would [in fact] harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind."

With scientific certitude, their petition maintained that "there is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of CO2, methane or other greenhouse gases is causing, or will in the foreseeable future cause, catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of Earth's climate."

The petition went on to state that "there is substantial evidence that increased CO2 is environmentally helpful...creating many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth."

It should be noted that the countervailing "scientific consensus" about which Gore and his minions are so fond of citing reflects the viewpoints of 600 scientists who represent less than 1% of the worldwide scientific community! Do the math.

Is it any wonder why Gore stubbornly and nimbly refuses to debate the "issue" with those representing a divergent scientific view?

Ah, yet again, another shattered myth perpetuated by our ambitious friends on the far left. Looks like the high priests of environmentalism will soon need to find another way to advance their dreams of social control and political dominance. We can only hope that their fall from grace occurs before they've managed to completely wreck our economy.

("The largest threat to freedom, democracy, the market economy, and prosperity is no longer socialism. It is, instead, the ambitious, arrogant, unscrupulous ideology of environmentalism." Pres. Vaclav Klaus, President of Czech Republic, May '08)

Obama's Policy Positions Alarming

Sen. Obama's disturbing associations aside, among some of his grimmer policy positions are the following: he pledges huge cuts in defense spending inclusive of funding for America's anti-missile defense system and investment in the development of future weapons systems; irrespective of conditions on the ground, he promises to withdraw all troops from Iraq within 16 months without sober consideration for the catastrophe which will ensue; he supports partial birth abortion, a hideous procedure likened to infanticide, and opposes notifying parents of minors who obtain out-of-state abortions; he opposes a worker's right to a secret ballot to determine union membership; he supports expiration of Bush's tax cuts in 2010 which will mean Americans' personal income will automatically drop by $113 billion in 2011; he supports passage of the Global Poverty Act, an $845 billion boondoggle supported by the UN which insanely believes that such a gargantuan expenditure by American taxpayers will magically eliminate poverty in the developing world; he supports Medicaid, welfare and drivers licenses for illegal aliens; and he supports banning the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns.

Quite a guy, huh? And this is but a sampling.

If this is any indication of the "change" he's been advocating, no thanks! Wary heartland Americans are neither impressed nor stupid.

Draft for Homeland Security Force Needed

Posted June 2008/Published October 2006

With mounting threats to our security and a military already dangerously stretched, it's now time to reinstate the draft.

Even neutral Switzerland has a universal draft in place to 1) protect its policy of neutrality, 2) ensure the availability of a trained and readied homeland reserve during times of national emergencies, and 3) enable society to derive the benefits of a citizenry which is more self-disciplined and appreciative of its democratic rights and responsibilities.

Except for bonafide medical and conscientious objection deferrals, a compulsory 6 months of military training and service followed by 8 years of reserve service should be required of all young men--no exceptions--who turn 18. Again, service should be universal and compulsory--rich, poor, black, white, ivy-leaguers, and deadbeats all.

The primary mission of this "homeland security force" would be upon border security and domestic disaster relief--not upon "frontline" combat duties overseas. This would relieve our regular volunteer forces of these additional duties, thus strengthening their ability to more effectively provide frontline combat services overseas.

Women should also be allowed to volunteer for this 6-month training/service. And both men and women who qualify, the opportunity of transitioning into our elite all-volunteer force following successful completion of active duty service should be an option.

This abbreviated 6-month active/8-year reserve service requirement would be relatively unintrusive for draftees, affordable for taxpayers, and the economic, security and societal dividends derived for America, I believe, would be incalculable.

Politics Muddling Terror Struggle

Posted June 2008/Published July 2007

Too many self-serving senators and congresspersons have long ago decided that protecting their political butts is far more important than successfully prosecuting America's global war on terror and safeguarding our porous borders.

Lest we forget, Islamofascists have often stated that the "central front" in their war against the West is, in fact, Iraq and that only America's lack of will at home will accomplish for the Islamists what they've been unable to achieve on the battlefield.

From all initial indications, the "surge" in Iraq has been working well, and enemy losses have been staggering. So why embrace retreat before the ultimate outcome of General Petraeus' counter-insurgency strategy is known? Self-serving politics, of course.

In the face of America's irresolution, al Qaeda and its Syrian and Iranian allies have been positively giddy. Nothing like emboldening and comforting our enemies merely to allow our "representatives" to keep their jobs in Washington, huh?

To restore sanity and responsibility on Capitol Hill, term limits--right across the board--are well overdue. If it's good enough for the White House, it's good enough for Congress.