Focusing on guns and politics, here is today's Second Amendment News Roundup:
Fred Thompson visited a major gun show in South Carolina, where he picked up some support:
http://carolinacountryside.blogspot.com/2007/11/fred-thompson-vists-south-carolina-gun.html
Mike McCarville is reporting that U.S. Senator Trent Lott, R-Mississippi, is retiring from the Senate and will not finish his current term:
http://wwwtmrcom.blogspot.com/2007/11/fox-news-lott-to-resign-u-s-senate-seat.html
Michelle Malkin has the late-breaking update:
http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/26/report-trent-lott-resigning/
A Keyboard and a .45 observes that we are on the brink of living in an Orwellian society and 'Big Brother is watching':
http://akeyboardanda45.blogspot.com/2007/11/big-brother-is-watching.html
Alphecca says that gun control must be used by the GOP as a wedge issue to take votes away from Democrats, since they are highly vulnerable on this issue:
http://www.alphecca.com/?p=542
Neo-cons are NOT true conservatives. And, as I have been saying for months, Fox News' neo-cons have been going after Fred Thompson and building up Rudy Giuliani. Born Again Redneck says that Thompson blasted Fox when he appeared with Chris Wallace yesterday. Good for Fred!:
http://bornagainredneck.blogspot.com/2007/11/fred-claims-fox-is-biased-against-him.html
Cap'n Bob and the Damsel write about their trip to a major gun show in California:
http://capnbob.us/blog/2007/11/24/today-at-the-gun-show/
Dustin's Gun Blog says to support your favorite gun rights organization:
http://dustinsgunblog.blogspot.com/2007/11/support-your-favorite-gun-rights.html
Syd at Front Sight, Press reminds us that at one time in America, even liberals recognized the value of gun rights:
http://www.snubnose.info/wordpress/rkba/eleanor-roosevelts-concealed-carry-application/
David Hardy at Of Arms and the Law has a great read on U.S. vs. Heller and the various political campaigns:
http://armsandthelaw.com/archives/2007/11/parker_and_poli.php
The MUST-read of the day is over at Oscar Poppa, and it is an excellent piece:
http://oscarpoppa.us/?p=802
Say Uncle posts a key poll concerning how to help win the antis around to our side:
http://www.saysuncle.com/archives/2007/11/26/in_line_at_the_local_retailer/
As always, Robb Allen admirably responds to an anti-gun diatribe written by a 'journalist':
http://blog.robballen.com/archive/2007/11/26/Nasty-little-journalist-isnt-he.aspx
Snow Flakes in Hell blogs on why gun-control is having a difficult time in Pennsylvania:
http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=1992
You gotta see this! Squeaky says that on 60 Minutes last evening a report was issued concerning the sleep medication, Ambien. As it turns out, Ambien has another effect on some people that is quite unexpected:
http://www.squeakywheelseeksgrease.com/blog/2007/11/25/tonight-on-60-minutes/
The Bitch Girls say that it is time to open up our wallets to support Academics for the Second Amendment, a very worthy organization:
http://www.thebitchgirls.us/?p=7644
Wanna read a good joke on the Hildabeast? Breda has a GOOD one!:
http://thebredafallacy.blogspot.com/2007/11/pants-on-fire.html
Nicki at The Liberty Zone responds to an asshole's assertion that pro-gun scholars 'twist' the meaning of the Constitution on the Second Amendment:
http://libertyzone.blogspot.com/2007/11/pro-gun-scholars-twist-constitution.html
The War on Guns posts an interesting read from the Arizona Constitutional Convention of 1910:
http://waronguns.blogspot.com/2007/11/most-dangerous-and-vile.html
Xavier has a sickening story, but you gotta read it just to know how dastardly some of the 'we're the only ones' have become. I'll tell you one thing, if some jackbooted thug shows up at my door wanting to murder my dog, he'll be staring down double-barrels!:
http://xavierthoughts.blogspot.com/2007/11/dog-killing.html
Showing posts with label Senator Trent Lott. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Senator Trent Lott. Show all posts
Monday, November 26, 2007
Friday, June 29, 2007
The House Blocks 'the Fairness Doctrine'
Washington, DC (TLS). In a striking victory for free speech and conservative talk radio, the U.S. House of Representatives today voted to block federal funding to revive the so-called 'Fairness Doctrine.'
Long derided by conservatives as a ruse by which Democrats seek to shut down conservative talk radio, and thus silence their voices entirely from most of the traditional media, the Fairness Doctrine was born in an era when there was no television, no cable or satellite TV, and no Internet.
In fact, one has to travel all the way back to the year 1929 to understand the context out of which the Fairness Doctrine was born.
Radio was the only source of electronic media in those days. Print newspapers and radio were the only game in town. The Fairness Doctrine was implemented as a means to insure the fair reporting of all sides of political news, since radio was one of only two sources of such news.
Thus, the Fairness Doctrine prevented radio from being dominated by one point of view. Plus, there was no such thing in those days as 'conservative talk radio,' which is funded by market-driven forces based upon ratings.
With the advent of various and sundry different forms of news reporting, such as television, direct mail, and the Internet, no longer did radio have a monopoly on electronic media. Suddenly people could get their political news and commentary in a variety of media.
This meant the end of the Fairness Doctrine, since the circumstances which necessitated it no longer existed.
Liberal politicians within the Democratic Party have long envied the remarkable success of conservative talk radio. And, they most certainly have bemoaned its influence, in spite of the fact that ever since the beginning of television news, political news has been reported with a definite liberal bias.
As legendary ABC News icon Howard K. Smith stated in the 1970s, 'Let's face it. Most of us in this business are liberal Democrats. This is bound to reflect on the manner in which we report the news.'
Yet, in spite of this consistent leftward leaning medium of television, the Democrats simply could not resist turning green with envy when they looked at Rush Limbaugh's ratings. They even attempted several failed forays into talk radio themselves, featuring liberals such as Al Franken and others, all of whom met a quick demise due to low ratings.
When no one is listening to your show, it's hard to get advertisers to spend money getting you to promote their products.
The failure of 'liberal talk radio' in the open marketplace of ideas led many Democrats to conclude that if they cannot compete with the conservatives on the radio, then they should force radio stations through legislation to put liberals on the air.
That legislation came in the form of the revival of the Fairness Doctrine.
The House of Representatives, however, under the leadership of several conservative Republicans, successfully passed an amendment to an appropriations bill today that blocks using federal dollars to fund any revival of the Fairness Doctrine.
Not surprisingly, many conservative Democrats joined them in voting for the amendment.
Over in the Senate, don't expect the Fairness Doctrine to have any more success than it did in the House, despite Trent Lott's retort about talk radio 'ruining this country.' A very humbled and contrite Trent Lott appeared on Chris Wallace's Sunday morning program on Fox News to state that, 'Talk radio has helped me in many ways through the years. I believe that they should have the right to say whatever they please.'
Does this mean, then, that Democrats and liberals will be barred from lending their voices to the issues of the day, simply because they cannot shut down conservative talk radio? In spite of the fact that this is obviously what they want the voters to think, don't believe it for a second.
The Democrats still have the New York Times, the Boston Globe, the Los Angeles Times, the Miami Herald, Time Magazine, Newsweek Magazine, ABC News, CBS News, CNN, NBC News, more than a dozen filmmakers in Hollywood, and countless other forms of news to roll out the liberal party line in the media.
And this is precisely why their whines concerning the 'unfairness' of conservative talk radio are simply not credible. In fact, the entire charade makes them look like a bunch of spoiled cry-babies.
Long derided by conservatives as a ruse by which Democrats seek to shut down conservative talk radio, and thus silence their voices entirely from most of the traditional media, the Fairness Doctrine was born in an era when there was no television, no cable or satellite TV, and no Internet.
In fact, one has to travel all the way back to the year 1929 to understand the context out of which the Fairness Doctrine was born.
Radio was the only source of electronic media in those days. Print newspapers and radio were the only game in town. The Fairness Doctrine was implemented as a means to insure the fair reporting of all sides of political news, since radio was one of only two sources of such news.
Thus, the Fairness Doctrine prevented radio from being dominated by one point of view. Plus, there was no such thing in those days as 'conservative talk radio,' which is funded by market-driven forces based upon ratings.
With the advent of various and sundry different forms of news reporting, such as television, direct mail, and the Internet, no longer did radio have a monopoly on electronic media. Suddenly people could get their political news and commentary in a variety of media.
This meant the end of the Fairness Doctrine, since the circumstances which necessitated it no longer existed.
Liberal politicians within the Democratic Party have long envied the remarkable success of conservative talk radio. And, they most certainly have bemoaned its influence, in spite of the fact that ever since the beginning of television news, political news has been reported with a definite liberal bias.
As legendary ABC News icon Howard K. Smith stated in the 1970s, 'Let's face it. Most of us in this business are liberal Democrats. This is bound to reflect on the manner in which we report the news.'
Yet, in spite of this consistent leftward leaning medium of television, the Democrats simply could not resist turning green with envy when they looked at Rush Limbaugh's ratings. They even attempted several failed forays into talk radio themselves, featuring liberals such as Al Franken and others, all of whom met a quick demise due to low ratings.
When no one is listening to your show, it's hard to get advertisers to spend money getting you to promote their products.
The failure of 'liberal talk radio' in the open marketplace of ideas led many Democrats to conclude that if they cannot compete with the conservatives on the radio, then they should force radio stations through legislation to put liberals on the air.
That legislation came in the form of the revival of the Fairness Doctrine.
The House of Representatives, however, under the leadership of several conservative Republicans, successfully passed an amendment to an appropriations bill today that blocks using federal dollars to fund any revival of the Fairness Doctrine.
Not surprisingly, many conservative Democrats joined them in voting for the amendment.
Over in the Senate, don't expect the Fairness Doctrine to have any more success than it did in the House, despite Trent Lott's retort about talk radio 'ruining this country.' A very humbled and contrite Trent Lott appeared on Chris Wallace's Sunday morning program on Fox News to state that, 'Talk radio has helped me in many ways through the years. I believe that they should have the right to say whatever they please.'
Does this mean, then, that Democrats and liberals will be barred from lending their voices to the issues of the day, simply because they cannot shut down conservative talk radio? In spite of the fact that this is obviously what they want the voters to think, don't believe it for a second.
The Democrats still have the New York Times, the Boston Globe, the Los Angeles Times, the Miami Herald, Time Magazine, Newsweek Magazine, ABC News, CBS News, CNN, NBC News, more than a dozen filmmakers in Hollywood, and countless other forms of news to roll out the liberal party line in the media.
And this is precisely why their whines concerning the 'unfairness' of conservative talk radio are simply not credible. In fact, the entire charade makes them look like a bunch of spoiled cry-babies.
Saturday, June 23, 2007
Take It Back, Mr. Lott
Senator Trent Lott's mouth has gotten him in a heap of trouble yet again.
Remember a few years back when the Mississippi Republican, who was then Senate Majority Leader, uttered a few unfortunate remarks at Senator Strom Thurmond's 100th birthday party, and was forced to step down as Majority Leader?
Guess who was most vigorous in his defense?
Conservative talk radio.
Talk radio hosts from across the nation blasted Lott's critics, claiming they had made a mountain out of a molehill by treating as racist an off-the-cuff remark about Thurmond's 1948 bid for the White House.
Thurmond was a segregationist at the time.
Although Thurmond later repudiated his earlier views and became a moderating influence in the Senate, even befriending that bastion of Liberalism, Joe Biden, the interest groups in the country demanded Lott's head for merely attempting to make a very old man feel good on his birthday.
NONE of these interest groups have ever once demanded an accounting on the part of Senator Robert 'Sheets' Byrd, who was a member of the Klu Klux Klan.
You see, Byrd is a Democrat. It's amazing what you can get away with as long as you have that 'Big D' beside your name.
Not only were the interest groups and their spokesmen Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton calling for Lott to step down as Majority Leader, they wanted him to resign from the Senate altogether!
Yet conservative talk radio took on Jackson and Sharpton, exposing their hypocrisy, and essentially saving Lott's political career if not his position as Majority Leader.
It is for this reason that Lott's recent comments about talk radio are very odd.
Lott was angry that we commoners out here in the heartland think the Kennedy/McCain/Bush immigration bill is one big scam. The President has relied on Lott to be one of his top lieutenants in the Senate to attempt to get the bill passed, in spite of its overwhelming lack of support among the citizens.
Thus, Lott went ape and began blaming various and sundry circumstances for the bill's unpopularity. He could not very well blame the citizens themselves, for such would be political suicide.
So what did he do? He started sounding like Hillary, Barbara Boxer, John Conyers, Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid.
Thus spoketh Lott: 'Talk radio is ruining this country, and we need to do something about that.'
Senator, talk radio saved your ass. Maybe it shouldn't have since you think it is ruining the country. Could their decision to support YOU be part of its scheme of ruination?
Take it back, Mr. Lott, or else you may find yourself not only out of a job as Majority Leader, but booted out of the Senate by the good voters in Mississippi the next time you run for re-election.
Remember a few years back when the Mississippi Republican, who was then Senate Majority Leader, uttered a few unfortunate remarks at Senator Strom Thurmond's 100th birthday party, and was forced to step down as Majority Leader?
Guess who was most vigorous in his defense?
Conservative talk radio.
Talk radio hosts from across the nation blasted Lott's critics, claiming they had made a mountain out of a molehill by treating as racist an off-the-cuff remark about Thurmond's 1948 bid for the White House.
Thurmond was a segregationist at the time.
Although Thurmond later repudiated his earlier views and became a moderating influence in the Senate, even befriending that bastion of Liberalism, Joe Biden, the interest groups in the country demanded Lott's head for merely attempting to make a very old man feel good on his birthday.
NONE of these interest groups have ever once demanded an accounting on the part of Senator Robert 'Sheets' Byrd, who was a member of the Klu Klux Klan.
You see, Byrd is a Democrat. It's amazing what you can get away with as long as you have that 'Big D' beside your name.
Not only were the interest groups and their spokesmen Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton calling for Lott to step down as Majority Leader, they wanted him to resign from the Senate altogether!
Yet conservative talk radio took on Jackson and Sharpton, exposing their hypocrisy, and essentially saving Lott's political career if not his position as Majority Leader.
It is for this reason that Lott's recent comments about talk radio are very odd.
Lott was angry that we commoners out here in the heartland think the Kennedy/McCain/Bush immigration bill is one big scam. The President has relied on Lott to be one of his top lieutenants in the Senate to attempt to get the bill passed, in spite of its overwhelming lack of support among the citizens.
Thus, Lott went ape and began blaming various and sundry circumstances for the bill's unpopularity. He could not very well blame the citizens themselves, for such would be political suicide.
So what did he do? He started sounding like Hillary, Barbara Boxer, John Conyers, Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid.
Thus spoketh Lott: 'Talk radio is ruining this country, and we need to do something about that.'
Senator, talk radio saved your ass. Maybe it shouldn't have since you think it is ruining the country. Could their decision to support YOU be part of its scheme of ruination?
Take it back, Mr. Lott, or else you may find yourself not only out of a job as Majority Leader, but booted out of the Senate by the good voters in Mississippi the next time you run for re-election.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)