Senate Rescinds Media Ownership Rules.

[Mr. Bird]

I am not getting into another concurrent receipt thread....

[Sunshine Sister]

You are correct. A person would think that we have so many ways to get news now, that trying to shut up a conservative would be impossible. What are these idiots thinking?

[hchutch]

Enough to sustain a veto.

[concerned about politics]

You are correct. A person would think that we have so many ways to get news now, that trying to shut up a conservative would be impossible. What are these idiots thinking?

IF the fairness doctrine is in the bill, and it gets through, unite to boycott liberal radio and it's sponsers? After all, Democrats have only welfare checks. Republicans have the money. "Choose" to target the sponsers.

[Militiaman7]

No one asked you to. My comment concerned Mr. Bush's veto threats.

[dufekin]

Doesn't the "fairness doctrine" abridge the freedom of the press, hence violate the First Amendment? Apparently, some in Congress just don't know who the Congress is. (These include, among others, Schumer "Congress [Clear Channel Communications Corporation] can't make laws [can't make editorial decisions] abridging freedom of speech [to stop playing the Ditzy Twits]" and Kerry "As president, I will make laws [do the job I'm supposed to be doing now]."

[Mr. Bird]

OK. I was trying to say that veto threats are much more effective if you actually veto something. It's been nearly 3 years, and the man has signed everything that's landed on the desk. This includes CFR, quite possibly the most blatantly unconstitutional law passed in my lifetime. (Well, I admit I didn't think that last sentence through. It's a bad law though.)