I say the federal government doesn't have the Cosntitutional authority to issue broadcast licenses, period.
On top of that, the government has no legal authority to regulate content.
And to put cherries on it, the Internet is rapidly making broadcast TV irrelevant.
"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"
Cicero Marcus Tullius
It's a political ploy for whoever feels like they are not receiving enough serious attention.
"No religion is true, but some religion, any religion, is politically necessary. Law and morality are insufficient for the large majority of men. Obedience to the law and to the morals are insufficient for making men happy. […]Law and morality are therefore in need of being supplemented by divine rewards and punishments."
So will non-DEMS/REPS get air time with this "Fairness Doctrine" or is it
only Fairness for the REP-DEM Monopoly ?
2001-2008: Dissent is the highest form of patriotism.
2009-2016: Dissent is the highest form of racism.
2017-? (Probably): Dissent is the highest form of misogyny.
Moderator's Warning: Let's keep it civil. Next time I won't be so accomodating.
אשכנזי היהודי • Белый Россию
I would of course be against the so-called "fairness doctrine". The entire concept completely goes against the 1st amendment.