Posted on 06/17/2004 12:30:21 PM PDT by XBob
no... he said it passed
I think thats what the post is saying.
Tried to...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1155313/posts
They appear to have amended a bill, but the bill has yet to be passed.
I know, but apparently a bil amendment passed the Senate to censor his program. AFN has carried Rush for years.
Really? No more Rush on the Armed Forces Network? Is this a joke?
Think Bush will sign it?
I read the Amendment and it just call for fair and balance program. To the Democrats that proposed it, I am sure they are convinced it means banning Rush. It could easily be interpreted as meaning more Rush.
Fine ake it fair and balanced. Play Rush at noon and Al Franken at midnight.
You're exaggerating quite a bit. There's no specific mention of Rush in the amendment. It's a vague, non-specific call for "balance."
At worst, it will end up causing Err America to have an equal number of hours to Rush or something, which is bad enough, of course, but it wasn't a specific "take Rush off the air" amendment.
It's an appropriation bill for the military, it has to pass. The only question is in what form and what will happen to it in committee.
HA! Wouldn't that be a freaking hoot! AFRTS management turns to implement the law and increases Rush from 1hr/day to 3hrs/day!
4 - Yes, you link goes to this story, about what I was saying:
Headline: "Harkin Leads Senate in Unanimous Vote Demanding Political Balance on American Forces Radio and Television Service"
I think censorship is an inappropriate word. Censorship is the gov't stopping someone else from saying something. AFN is government owned. The government choosing not to put something out is not technically censorship.
That being said, I think the solution is to allow AFN to determine what to put out based on the ratings among the military and family listeners. Being a vet, I have no doubt that would lead to more Rush, not less. Although I think the idea of 'fairness doctrine' is inappropraite, this action against Rush on AFN sets a precedent to demand changes at NPR.
In order for there to be "balance" Rush would have to be on for all three hours.
I guess a lot will depend on who gets to define "balance." My guess is, the courts will decide that all liberal equals balance, eventually.
Ah, you obviously don't remember "The Fairness Doctrine." It didn't specifically mention Rush, either, but it was correctly dubbed the "Hush Rush Doctrine."
The amendment (which passed the Senate) just refers to "balance" without specifically refering to Rush; however, Rush had a sound bite from harkin where harking proclaims his outrage (and he was mad) at Rush's program being on Armed Forces Radio (which is paid for by all taxpayers) and Rush's influence on the Iraq war!!! horrible harkin sneaked this amendment in to harm Rush. The total bill now has to go to conference between the houses for compromise and the amendment may be changed there.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.