Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: rktman

One chapter is out there on the interweb. Basically calls for the nationalization of Fox News. Of all media actually. How would news then be disseminated without EEEEEVIL corporations involved? By “community groups and public stakeholders”. Dig into the boilerplate of what the hell that means, and basically, it means unions.

So stories about Miley Cyrus’ twerking and Richard Sherman’s histrionics would be replaced by stories about how Joe Blow down at the meat packing plant is getting SCROOOOD by his bosses.

And how would these “journalists” be paid? With big public subsidies, of course.

My theory is that they are trying to push the ball down the field as far as they can rhetorically, so that when Obama only gets us halfway there we’ll all go “phew!” and breathe a big sigh of relief.


15 posted on 01/21/2014 9:20:40 AM PST by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Buckeye McFrog

From the American Thinker article, there was this line from the media ownership bit:

“In a socialist society a portion of the media would be reserved for news disseminated by the democratically elected governing bodies, that is, working people elected by and for working people.”

So they would be like the EPA, eh? We elect someone, somewhere down the line and unelected, unaccountable, idelogical bureaucrats write their own laws?

And no “equal time” for counter viewpoints?


18 posted on 01/21/2014 10:10:45 AM PST by a fool in paradise ("Health care is too important to be left to the government.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson