Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: combjelly who wrote (451988)	1/28/2009 5:44:43 PM
From: longnshort	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) of 1576854

And from Senator Sessions: SESSIONS: At your hearing both Senator Specter and I asked about your views on the Fairness Doctrine, and you stated you had not considered the issue. Now that you have had the opportunity to review the issue more fully, would you support such a policy? Would it be constitutional? HOLDER: If a law or regulation is enacted that seeks to implement some version of the fairness doctrine, I will work with other agencies in the new administration and the Department's Office of Legal Counsel to reach a considered view about the constitutionality of the specific law or regulation under consideration. Holder’s evasive responses represent the first hint that the new Administration may re-open what has been “settled doctrine” within the Department of Justice and in the courts for over two decades; namely, that the old Fairness Doctrine is an unconstitutional restraint on free speech. Not to mention that the original argument used to justify these restrictions—that the scarcity of media outlets required the government to intervene in order to guarantee a "diversity" of political opinion—has long since been overwhelmed by the proliferation of cable channels, web sites, blogs, and so on. Perhaps for these reasons, liberals want to avoid frontal assaults on this most tarnished of Doctrines. So they advocate burdening broadcasters with "public interest obligations," the satisfaction of which will accomplish the same unconstitutional end. Broadcasters, for example, would be required to meet mind-numbing "community service" broadcasting requirements that would effectively crowd out time for popular conservative talk radio hosts. The bottom line is beware—and stay tuned to your favorite talk radio host for further details! corner.nationalreview.com

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next