"Most Ethical Congress" Seeks Investigation Into Dangerous Thing Called "Free Speech"

Here we go again, once more on the "Fairness Doctrine" merry-go-round. This is how it works with liberals like Harry Reid and Nacy Pelosi; If it's flag burning or pornography in the streets, it's free speech, but if a guy on the radio says he's tired of illegal immigration or says he's offended by porn in the streets it's hate speech. The thing that free speech and hate speech have in common , apparently, is that both are defined by liberals. Once you realise this, it should not be a surprise that Rep. Henry Waxman, Democrat, California, is reportedly launching an investigation on famed talk radio host Rush Limbaugh. That's right, the people who promised us back in January the most ethical congress in our country's history are wasting taxpayer time and money digging up dirt on one of their biggest critics in an attempt to shut him up. These self-proclaimed sentinels of our most sacred rights as citizens are the first ones to tell you they stand for freedom of speech and are invariably the first ones to try to take it away from you. "You can't say that! That's hate speech! That's not politically correct! Why, something has to be done about all of these people expressing their personal views! There ought to be a law! We need to launch investigations, hearings, hangings! How dare you say something I personally disagree with!" Calling themselves the Democratic Party is an insult to the very word "democratic." Now, I'm not really worried about Rush Limbaugh. He can take care of himself. As he said on his program, "It's a pretty serious charge that the chairman of the House Government Oversight Committee is going to compile reports and conduct investigations of private citizens who work on the radio." This is bigger than Rush, or Hannity, this threatens anyone who states an opinion, anywhere, anytime, in any forum. I've told you before, folks, if they succeed in resurrecting the Fairness Doctrine, it will spill over into the internet, into coffee houses, and even your overheard cell phone conversations. It has nothing to do with "fairness." It has everything to do with silencing the opposition. Conservatives like myself are usually called nasty names like "Nazi," but let me ask you this...what seems more American to you, offering up an opposing viewpoint or trying to silence it? Think about it.

Here We Go Again...

I knew this was coming. As I was reading the news today at worldnetdaily, I happened upon a story about Rush Limbaugh suggesting the V Tech shooter was a liberal. Immediately following the story was a long list of reader comments, many of which called for Rush to be fired. Then, on the view this morning, right after defending freedom of speech for rappers, the vacuous women began a big "shame on you" pecking party on Rush, pointing out his former addiction to prescription medicine. I wasn't surprised by the character assassination or the hypocrisy, because we all know how badly they want to silence any voice from the right. They talk about freedom of speech for guys like Master P or Ice-T, but when a talk show host suggests that a crazy guy with a gun might be a liberal, well, "he must be silenced! And if he can't be, well, you don't have to listen to him because he's a junkie." What's interesting is that Rush knew this would happen, too. In an explanation of this to a caller on his show, Rush said, "Look, last week, as a means of illustrating on this show how the words of conservative talk show hosts are twisted and taken out of context, I blamed the liberals for the Virginia Tech shooting. I said the guy had to be a liberal, and I went through and I said, "You watch. There's going to be a website that picks this up, and a bunch of people are going to read it and they're going to be outraged that I would possibly say this," and they said, "Yeah, you got a guy that hates the rich. You got a guy that thinks the American culture is debauched. Who is it telling us all this and who is it doing all this? It's the liberals," and sure enough Media Matters fell for it hook, line and sinker." Well, as the title of one of his books goes, "See, I Told You So." The same people who defend racist and sexist speech in the arts want him to loose his career in shame for saying something that, at most, is insensitive to a dead guy. When Mel Gibson opens his big, fat antisemitic mouth, he just says, "Sorry! I was drunk!" and the lefties give him a pass, and he insulted an entire race. I'll say this again, for those of you who missed the last few posts. We must see the Fairness Doctrine for what it is and reject it, because free speech, even speech you find despicable, must be protected. Without it, there is no free and open debate. All of you leftie bloggers out there should be ashamed of yourselves for supporting this, for calling on Rush to be fired, because the next thing to go will be the Internet, and who knows if the Web Police will come for you, too?

The Fairness Doctrine and Free Speech

If you are clapping because Don Imus was fired and dreaming of the day when Rosie O'Donnell hits the unemployment line, just remember there are people who are gunning for Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannitty, too. Thanks to the Reagan Administration and a veto by Reagan himself in 1987, the Fairness Doctrine was put in the grave, but there are many people out there who insist it be resurrected simply because they disagree with certain people's opinions. Rush Limbaugh's radio program reaches a lot of listeners, and this scares people on the left because they aren't just listening, they're becoming true believers. AM talk radio is just about the only place where you get a right wing perspective (don't shake your head at me, Al Franken, you know it's true, ), and these shows are continually growing because, not only are they virtually the only forum for conservatives, they are actually entertaining. They are also not always politically correct, which infuriates the left, the people who sold everyone on this tortured language we all have to use now to avoid getting sued or fired, and that's the ammunition they think they have. Still, it isn't so much about being "fair," or "PC," the Fairness Doctrine is about shutting the mouths of people who have a lot of influence and making sure there is only one opinion to be heard, and to me, that sounds like state-controlled media. Very unAmerican, wouldn't you say? It also flies in the face of free enterprise when government tells you what you are allowed to say, or that you must take valuable airtime away from your own message and give it to an opponent. Radio and television are private industries that get money from selling airtime, after all...that's what got Don Imus fired. His advertisers no longer wanted to be associated with him, so they yanked their ads, which cost MSNBC money. They stopped airing his simulcast, and CBS radio feared the same thing, so they canned him, too. Rush Limbaugh's advertisers can make that same judgement if they choose, they don't need a Federal law to gag him, because if he goes over the line, consumers will let them know. Freedom of speech is one of the most important parts of the Bill of Rights because once you silence people on the air or in print, you open the door to tyranny, and it's already knocking, ready to come in. Let Imus make fun of whomever he chooses, let Rosie claim the president is responsible for 9/11, and let the consumers decide if they want to buy that garbage. It's not government's place to shut them or anyone else up just because I disagree, and I would never support a law that claims otherwise. Remember, what people can't change with votes, they can change with their wallets and purses. I don't want to wake up in a country where I get sent to prison because I didn't let Al Gore comment on my blog. Still, in the interest of "fairness," I allow and encourage anyone to comment, because after all, free and open debate is one of our greatest national treasure. Enjoy it. Employ it. Defend it.