[Datom]

Mark Belling who subs for Rush once in a while is on WISN Milwaukee following Rush at 3:00 CDT. They can be heard on the internet.

[ThomasMore]

If they didn’t, the group asked the Obama Administration’s FCC to deny at least one station – WTMJ – its license to broadcast.

TRANSLATION: they asked the ObamaNazis to pull off a Kristallnacht.

[kcvl]

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

The idea that “conservative” political discussion should be censored depends on the planted axiom that journalism is objective. However,

People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices. It is impossible indeed to prevent such meetings, by any law which either could be executed, or would be consistent with liberty and justice. But though the law cannot hinder people of the same trade from sometimes assembling together, it ought to do nothing to facilitate such assemblies; much less to render them necessary. - Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations (Book I, Ch 10)

. . . and the “Associated” Press is nothing if not a virtual meeting of all major news organizations - a meeting which has been going on since before the Civil War. It didn’t take long for that continuous meeting to produce “a conspiracy against the public” in the form of journalism’s claim of “journalistic objectivity.” A century and a half later, the AP is little else but “a conspiracy against the public.”

When journalists claim “objectivity,” they mean nothing other than what the ancient Greek Sophists meant by “wisdom.” That resulted in the Philosophy school of thought, which eschewed any claim of superior wisdom, insisting only to love wisdom, and to demand facts and logic as the basis of argumentation. The Sophists gave their name to “sophistry” - which is the opposite of dependence on evidence and logic. “Objective Journalism” is sophistry, is a conspiracy against the public.

[kcvl]

Sue Wilson

TY @votegun Real reporting is costly, involves developing sources, discovering facts. Talk is cheap, opinions re other’s work. bitly/ZBNBoN
(1 hour ago )

“My battle with right wing radio is heating up. I need to clone about three more of me to keep up.” http://t.co/L2ihV1eoRL #p2b
(1 June 2013 11:45 AM, PDT )

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3302369/twitter

The right wing is coming out in force to attack me. Please lend your voice to the convo! http://t.co/5QIIHJedXm via @HuffPostMedia #tcot
(30 May 2013 1:32 PM, PDT )

Stations claiming Right wing talk radio is “bonafide news.” Say NO in a big way! http://t.co/3yAi0VwltW #p2b
(30 May 2013 11:06 AM, PDT )

[kcvl]

Can’t compete...bitch & sic the government on your enemy.

The liberals way.

[kcvl]

[Biggirl]

Can’t the liberals come in and debate the conservative radio show hosts?

[GreenHornet]

Maybe the libs could start their own liberal radio network to counter conservative talk radio. They could buy up local stations around the country,and hire liberal hosts like Randi Rhodes and Mike Malloy. They could come up with a catchy name for the network, something like "Air America”, and they could......oh......wait a minute.....never mind!

[WilliamofCarmichael]

The FCC "Fairness Doctrine" was used by liberals/progressives to restrict the First Amendment without having to repeal it -- they enforced "fairness" by threatening to take the radio station owners' licenses if citizens complained about their programming content

• "You might also think that they would recall the notorious Fairness Doctrine, which was used to 'harass and intimidate' right-wing radio broadcasts, in the words of one unabashed Kennedy-Johnson operative. When that censorious policy was ended in 1987 by former broadcaster Ronald Reagan, there was an explosion of talk formats that gave voice to popular concerns (for a while, Rush Limbaugh even billed himself as equal time)."
• As reported by Fred Friendly in his book appropriately entitled The Good Guys, the Bad Guys, and the First Amendment, this was part of a "massive strategy . . . to challenge and harass the right-wing broadcasters and hope that the challenges would be so costly to them that they would be inhibited, and decide it was too expensive to continue." This strategy was said to have been successful in almost all respects.

IOW there are subtle ways especially today that could take the courts decades to catch on. Some courts did finally start ruling that the Fairness Doctrine was not needed a few years preceding Reagan ending the FCC's ability to enforce Fairness Doctrine.

I remember all those years.. we were the silenced generation even though we had the First Amendment. We still have the Second Amendment but pukes are working around the clock to take the guns away with deleting the Second Amendment.. like making it almost impossible to buy ammo -- or declaring that we are all nutcases.