Obama makes it clear: No ‘Fairness Doctrine’

From Fox News:

“President Obama opposes any move to bring back the so-called Fairness Doctrine, a spokesman told FOXNews.com Wednesday.

The statement is the first definitive stance the administration has taken since an aide told an industry publication last summer that Obama opposes the doctrine — a long-abolished policy that would require broadcasters to provide opposing viewpoints on controversial issues.

“As the president stated during the campaign, he does not believe the Fairness Doctrine should be reinstated,” White House spokesman Ben LaBolt told FOXNews.com….

Fueling discussion, a report in the American Spectator this week said aides to Democratic Rep. Henry Waxman, Calif., met last week with staff for the Federal Communications Commission to discuss ways to enact Fairness Doctrine policies. The report said Waxman was also interested in applying those standards to the Internet, which drew ridicule from supporters and opponents of the doctrine.

Both the FCC and Waxman’s office denied the report.”

As Fox notes, the idea that the Fairness Doctrine could somehow be applied to the Internet exposes that entire American Spectator report as nonsensical rubbish. Besides the utter impractibility — what, personal blogs would have to offer balance? — broadcast outlets could be legally bound by the Fairness Doctrine only because they were using publicly owned airwaves. The Internet is not publicly owned.

Of course, Obama’s clear statement doesn’t mean that the right will stop getting hysterical about this issue. That is what they do, that is what they will continue to do, and the rest of the country will increasingly tune them out as a result.

152 comments Add your comment

CommunistAJC

February 19th, 2009
1:05 pm

It will be brought in as a new name. It’s no coincidence that Bill Clinton, Nancy Pelosi and a lot of other democrats are talking about this plan. For all we know it could have been slipped into the stimulus package. Why, because NO ONE READ IT!

Vinny

February 19th, 2009
1:05 pm

Jay, Jay, Jay. Since when can we believe a word that comes out of Barry the bumbler’s mouth? (No pork or earmarks in stimulus, and No Lobbyists in his Cabinet didn’t exactly ring true, now did it?)

When people like Senator Harkin, Senator Stabenow, & Senator Bingaman start calling for bringing back the Fairness Doctrine, you have to take it that they mean it.

Barry has proven himself to be nothing but an incompetent liar, so we will not take his word on anything.

Copyleft

February 19th, 2009
1:07 pm

See what trying to reason with the wingnuts gets you, Jay? About the same thing it got Obama… denial, delusion, and venom.

Just ignore them. We have a country to repair.

ByteMe

February 19th, 2009
1:08 pm

and the rest of the country will increasingly tune them out as a result.

And then Commie comes with: It will be brought in as a new name. It’s no coincidence that Bill Clinton, Nancy Pelosi and a lot of other democrats are talking about this plan

And here’s ByteMe changing the channel to tune him out…..

DB, Gwinnettian

February 19th, 2009
1:15 pm

“They get bitter, and they cling to guns, and religion, and belief that the PC Police will impose an super-magical Fairness Doctrine while forcing their sons to wear dresses and their ministers to perform gay marriages.”

–what Obama should’ve said.

Bosch

February 19th, 2009
1:24 pm

DB,

You forgot the prayer mats.

getalife

February 19th, 2009
1:29 pm

Red meat to keep the cons scared.

Such cowards.

Scared of words like these:

“They’re worse than useless. These are terrorists. These are domestic terrorists. They want the country
to fail, for God’s sake. They want exactly what anyone who attacked this country on September 11, 2001 wanted.
The real internal terrorists are the Republicans, I mean, isn’t that clear? Rush Limbaugh is a bigger threat to
this country than Osama bin Laden. He’s a bigger threat than anybody that the CIA can invent. He’s a bigger
threat than any terrorist that ever leveled its sights against the United States, Limbaugh is, so why isn’t he
arrested and sentenced for treason?”

— Mike Malloy

Ray

February 19th, 2009
1:31 pm

Obama will spend his efforts on education – the ultimate weapon for taking out FOX. Much like there are those who swear by the GLOBE while waiting in line to pay for their pigs feet and PBR, there will always be a plop of cheney dung that calls FOX news. However, as education goes up – this nasty weight on America will inevitable decrease.

CommunistAJC

February 19th, 2009
1:32 pm

ByteMe,
oh no, ByteMe, you really hurt my feelings. What ever will I do? Go sell stupid somewhere else.

Analysis: Democrats self-destructing over ethics

By LARRY MARGASAK

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Obama administration and the new Congress are quickly handing over to Republicans the same “culture of corruption” issue that Democrats used so effectively against the GOP before coming to power.

Freshman Sen. Roland Burris, D-Ill., is only the latest embarrassment.

Senate Democrats accepted Burris because they believed what he told them: He was clean. Burris now admits he tried to raise money for Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich, who authorities say sought to sell President Barack Obama’s former Senate seat.

“The story seems to be changing day by day,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said Wednesday.

The political mess for the Democratic Party, however, isn’t Burris’ conduct alone; it’s the pattern that has developed so quickly over the past few months.

_The chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., is the subject of a House ethics investigation. It’s partly focused on his fundraising practices for a college center in his name, his ownership financing of a resort property in the Dominican Republic and his financial disclosure reports.

_Federal agents raided two Pennsylvania defense contractors that were provided millions of dollars in federal funding by Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., chairman of the House Appropriations defense subcommittee.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j44ku9zUM9IEdkkoWbIYStDVE6SwD96EH4JO0

jdelaney3

February 19th, 2009
1:32 pm

In cohoots with others in the liberal “leaderhsip”, Waxman (Commerce Comm. Chair) and Copps (Acting FCC Chairperson)are contining to plot reinstatement of some form of the Fairness Doctrine. Of course, being the…slippery…fellows they are, it won’t be called Fairness Doctrine. Look for “localism” and “local broadcaster advisory boards” and “broadcast diversity”. Code words for broadcaster control A rose by any other name. These relentless socialists haven’t given up. You can take that to the bank.

Cherokee

February 19th, 2009
1:33 pm

So predictable, a clear statement by the Prez, but Vinny – led by his leaders in talk radio – will soldier on.

The Dems would never re-implement the Fairness Doctrine anyway – Limbaugh, Hannity, and Boortz are the best friends the Dems have. Every time Boortz whines about the “Mexican Invasion”, a few more people are driven into the arms of the Dems.

ByteMe

February 19th, 2009
1:38 pm

Commie: (Fingers in ears) La La La La La La La…. I can’t heeeeear youuuuuu!!!!

Heh heh.

CommunistAJC

February 19th, 2009
1:44 pm

ByteMe,
I don’t think that’s a finger in your ear. I think you’ve been in the stalls with Larry Craig one too many times. Joke ByteMe. Don’t get all offended on me.

Taxpayer

February 19th, 2009
1:49 pm

ByteMe,

You funny. 8O

Foxie news lover!!!

February 19th, 2009
1:50 pm

This cannot be true. I heard just the opposite on Fox and several of the honest true Americans on AM talk shows. I am sorry. But this is just false information propigated by the AJC which is in the pocket of the pinko lefty communist in the goverment who are better known as democrats.

Mrs. Godzilla

February 19th, 2009
1:50 pm

Commie….

Your supposed to be checking for another source for top ten list with reagan on it….get busy dude. (read downstairs for compassionate smackdown)

On current topic:

First it seems odd that anyone would oppose something called a “fairness” doctrine. But I guess it’s a republispeak issue.

We can certainly do without it.

Perhaps a more careful and painstaking review at renewal time as to whether they are fulfilling their responsibility to serve the public good is in order.

Taxpayer

February 19th, 2009
1:51 pm

How we know you Foxie. You have picture to prove.

Chad Harris

February 19th, 2009
1:53 pm

Elections have consequences and the consequences of all Presidential and 2010/2012s are that Wingnutters are confined to pointless crying on blogs far from any input into decisions that matter.

Chad Harris

February 19th, 2009
1:55 pm

Let’s see if ole to the right of the Base Jindal enrages LA voters by turning down the Stim money, biting off his wingnut nose to spite his wingnut face.

CommunistAJC

February 19th, 2009
1:56 pm

Mrs. Godzilla,
you wrote: First it seems odd that anyone would oppose something called a “fairness” doctrine. But I guess it’s a republispeak issue.

Um, hate to break it to you comrade but Bookman doesn’t support it. It curbs free speech. You do enjoy free speech don’t you?

Midori

February 19th, 2009
2:00 pm

Getalife!!

you listen to Mike, too?

I LOVE THAT GUY!!!

BTW – lives in my neighborhood :)

Chad Harris

February 19th, 2009
2:08 pm

The fact that the base touts Faux as a legitimate news source is evidence that they will be again relegated to the decision making sidelines in 2010/2012.

Looks like a lot of Republican tax cheats (17,000)are about to have the IRS and DOJ sicked on ‘em since UBS has agreed to turn snitch on their 17,000 Swiss secret illegal bank account havens. Who is the Chief Lobbyist and Board Member of UBS? Ole Dereg ah made the Depression himself–Phil Gramm. Here’s hopin ole Phil and Wendy Lee had money stached in a UBS account hiding it from the IRS.

Roy Blunt will face Dem Secretary of State Robin Carnahan for retiring Kit Bond’s Senate seat and this is one more chance for the Dems to push over 60 in 2010. This is going to be a close race and hugely financed.
Blunt will probably have a primary challenger and he already has a lot of money as does his opponent.

Chad Harris

February 19th, 2009
2:12 pm

The “fairness doctrine” could never be enforced on the web even if it happened (and it won’t) and most of the large media organizations are owned by Right wingers including Cox News.

What happened to Bill Maher when he had the guts to state the truth –that the Iraq fiasco was a waste of lives and a money hamorrhage. Disney canned him.

Clear Channel has been a right wing big foot for its entire existence although it’s financially on the ropes with it’s buyout threatened (thassa good thing as Martha Steward would say) right now.

Joe

February 19th, 2009
2:18 pm

Chad,

Jindal isn’t a wingnut. He’s just trying to get the VP bid that should have been his instead of Palin’s.

On topic: We have not needed such a statute in decades, especially in the era of the internet, satellite TV, and the scourge of Bosch’s life, DVRs and Tivo.

Recall, the Fairness Doctrine was originally meant to allow people to respond to personal attacks. Now, they can do so by posting to their blog or going on satellite radio or channel 600 or whatever.

Joe

February 19th, 2009
2:21 pm

The “fairness doctrine” could never be enforced on the web even if it happened (and it won’t) and most of the large media organizations are owned by Right wingers including Cox News.

Would that be the same Cox News who owns the AJC? But wait, aren’t the media, by definition, a bunch of leftist loons?

Maybe, just maybe, someone is correct and the media care only about profits…

ByteMe

February 19th, 2009
2:29 pm

Commie: I mention fingers and your mind jumps to the infamous toilet stall? Uh…. I’m speechless.

Ok, let me throw in a “Not that there’s anything wrong with that.”

CommunistAJC

February 19th, 2009
2:33 pm

ByteMe,
just throwing out one of your favorite republicans. I mean, I see his name mentioned on these blogs frequently. Again, in case you didn’t read the rest of my comments. IT WAS A JOKE!

Chad Harris

February 19th, 2009
2:34 pm

Joe all your comments about the media and profits particularly in this incredibly tough environment are right on point. Jindal’s track record has been a very right wing religious oriented agenda (I’m old fashioned and think it is hypocritical for both sides to use religion as a political campaign crutch including Obama although I don’t doubt the important role it plays in his personal life –which is fine but I don’t see the need for it in government or think it’s appropriate).

Jindal has threatened to turn down the money from the Stim but legally although I haven’t seen the details translated and I’m not going to read an 1100 plus bill he couldn’t turn down many of its components anyway.

I hope he tries though.

gttim

February 19th, 2009
2:41 pm

Funny how the wingnuts always call the media liberal and unfair to them, but when presented with the Fairness Doctrine to even it up, so they can get their fair share or representation in the media, they scream like scalded children that they “do not want it!” What does that tell you about their ludicrous claims of the media, owned and operated by the largest and most conservative corporations in the country, being liberal?

Mrs. Godzilla

February 19th, 2009
2:48 pm

gttm

BRILLIANT!

Truth

February 19th, 2009
2:48 pm

gttim… That is because we believe in the fair market. Yes most of the news media are libral, but the most watched network is Fox News… Air America couldn’t make it because there isn’t a demand for it. Rush, Hannity, Boortz, etc. have a demand therefore they succeed.

Chad Harris

February 19th, 2009
2:53 pm

How ’bout this paradox. The most watched Cable network is Faux–yet Rachel Maddow and KO are beating them in their time periods and the fact that Faux is the most watched Cable overall simply means that their viewers are out of touch and can’t muster the votes to matter in any election with the exception of poorly educated red necked white cracker states like Jaw Jaw.

Faux viewers can’t help the Repubs win in 2010 in House or Senate nor in 2012 against Obama.

gttim

February 19th, 2009
2:54 pm

[T]he most watched network is Fox News

The most watch “cable news network” is Fox. All network news kills it. WWE wrestling kills it. If MSNBC was offered on basic cable like Fox is, they would kill it. However, MSNBC is not basic cable lineups because the people with the cable, and satellite systems won’t put it on most basic cable lineups. Yet, being available in far less households, MSNBC beats Fox in many demos. Plus, Fox is bleeding viewers.

FYI Liberals hate CNN as much as you guys do. And MSNBC can’t be called all that liberal when they still employ Scarborough, which has really crappy ratings, doesn’t it?

Chad Harris

February 19th, 2009
2:56 pm

I’d like to hear the wingnuts name one media organization whose control is by anything but very conservative executives including Cox News because Anne Cox Chambers, the world’s six richest woman has little input in the day to day running of Cox. She has more impact on wings in the High Museum.

AJC/DNC Management

February 19th, 2009
2:58 pm

Yeah, I wonder what the democrats will change the name to when they bring it back.

ew

Chad Harris

February 19th, 2009
2:58 pm

Name one media corp. controlled by liberals.

Chad Harris

February 19th, 2009
3:00 pm

The only thing the dems are bringing back is a fillibuster proof Senate and defeat for thugs in 2010, 2012,and 2016. You can take that to your Gramm Depression ridden bank.

Truth

February 19th, 2009
3:10 pm

Chad, you need to chill out… Your token guy is in the office. Your anger is boiling over and it is becoming quite funny.

gttim

February 19th, 2009
3:13 pm

That is because we believe in the fair market.

So you are saying that since you believe in the fair market, and Fox News has tiny percentage of viewers compared to the so called “liberal” network news and other cable news shows, then there are really hardly any conservatives interested in watching a conservative network. You are saying that Fox News is a ratings failure? You seem to be going around in circles. I just want to get your position nailed down.

Joe

February 19th, 2009
3:15 pm

“Truth”,

Your posts (and those of several others in the wake of the election) stand as evidence that Attorney General Holder’s comments are accurate.

Bosch

February 19th, 2009
3:18 pm

“Rush, Hannity, Boortz, etc. have a demand therefore they succeed”

Which sometimes causes me to lose sleep at night.

AJC/DNC Management

February 19th, 2009
3:19 pm

Taxpayer February 19th, 2009 1:01 pm Run, you tax evaders, you scum. Run. Run faster.

Don’t stand in the doorway of the democrat Congressional caucus, because if you do, you’ll get trampled, bwahahahahahaha, bozos.

Shawny

February 19th, 2009
3:20 pm

The ‘right is hysterical about this issue’ because the left keeps threatening to use it. Without the threats, there is no hysteria…duh. Now get off your high horse and get real.

Obama is smart enough to know that the ‘fairness’ doctrine amounts to censorship, and that is a trick box he does not want to get into. Therefore, we need to ‘cull the herd’ and eliminate all legislators that favor it. It is wrong.

Rodney D

February 19th, 2009
3:22 pm

All radio stations are in business for the money. If there was a left based talk show host that could bring in the money that Rush and Hannity do, they’d be put on. But there’s not. If I owned a station I’d put on the host that could bring in the most revenues. It wouldn’t be based on political agenda; it’s based on da money. The Dems. Just don’t have any hosts worth listening to, or they’d be on. So basically this is about free enterprise and free speech.

Shawny

February 19th, 2009
3:22 pm

2:58. General Electric, parent of NBC, and even worse, MSNBC which is extremely liberal. Olbermann, Maddow, et al are sickenly partisan.

Copyleft

February 19th, 2009
3:24 pm

Aside from the fact that there’s no effort to reinstitute it (which is a shame)… what, exactly, is wrong with it? At a conceptual level, “fairness” shouldn’t terrify people who claim to value free speech and open debate as much as the wingnuts do.

radiowxman

February 19th, 2009
3:26 pm

New York Times corp.

CommunistAJC

February 19th, 2009
3:27 pm

Chad Harris,
you wrote: yet Rachel Maddow and KO are beating them in their time periods and the fact that Faux is the most watched Cable overall

Not according to the Neilsen ratings, Chad. Maddow finished behind a walking corpse. Larry King beat her Chad. Maddow didn’t even get as many viewers as Keith Olberslug.

8PM – P2+ (25-54) (35-64)
The O’Reilly Factor—3,494,000 viewers (991,000) (1,455,000)
Campbell Brown—1,006,000 viewers (243,000) (402,000)
Countdown w/Keith Olbermann –1,385,000 viewers (482,000) (762,000)
CNBC Reports—249,000 viewers (97,000) (152,000)
Nancy Grace –1,245,000 viewers (429,000) (633,000)

9 PM – P2+ (25-54) (35-64)
Hannity–2,658,000 viewers (732,000) (1,102,000)
Larry King Live—1,761,000 viewers (449,000) (719,000)
Rachel Maddow Show –1,240,000 viewers (397,000) (656,000)
Saving GM: Inside Crisis–393,000 viewers (189,000) (246,000)
Lou Dobbs Tonight- 529,000 viewers (234,000) (299,000)

Disgusted

February 19th, 2009
3:27 pm

Democrats ought to help pay for right-wing radio. The more these nut cases spout off, the more they get dismissed by independents.

Consider this and other AJC blogs as a reflection of that nuttiness. Here’s a guy who wants to eliminate all government except for police and the armed forces. Wacko alert! Here’s another who wants us to return to the gold standard as monetary policy. Wacko alert! Here’s still another who wants blacks to resegregate as a means of fighting whitey. Wacko alert! And here’s another guy who claims that Franklin D. Roosevelt not only caused the Great Depression, but also made it worse. Wacko alert!

Democrats can’t buy that kind of support from any other type of campaign expenditure. Pay Rush and Hannity and all the other right-wing mouths under the table if you have to. The more they talk, the better Democrats look to voters.

Truth

February 19th, 2009
3:27 pm

gttim… quit trying to confuse yourself. Take it for what it is. And I meant free market. I apoloogize for that.

CommunistAJC

February 19th, 2009
3:28 pm

Bosch,
you wrote: Which sometimes causes me to lose sleep at night.

If you lose sleep over talk show hosts then you seriously need to seek help.

Joe

February 19th, 2009
3:35 pm

All radio stations are in business for the money. If there was a left based talk show host that could bring in the money that Rush and Hannity do, they’d be put on. But there’s not. If I owned a station I’d put on the host that could bring in the most revenues. It wouldn’t be based on political agenda; it’s based on da money. The Dems. Just don’t have any hosts worth listening to, or they’d be on. So basically this is about free enterprise and free speech.

There’s less of a market for left leaning talk shows because people on the left READ.

radiowxman

February 19th, 2009
3:36 pm

Nothing wrong with “fairness” per se. It’s the implementation and determination of fairness which is a) vaguely Orwellian and b) impractical.

First, I don’t necessarily want or trust the government to determine what is “fair” when it comes to speech and how to organize said speech to maintain some sort of fairness.

Secondly, it’s impractical. Say you run a radio station. Your host says something vaguely controversial. 14 people call in to your studio demanding equal time. You are then forced to put those people on the air to “counter” what your host said — forcing you to move commercials and programming around to fit. Repeat this every time one of your hosts says anything that someone has an issue with. How long would it take before you just throw up your arms and say “forget it!”

Besides, if “fairness” was truly the ideal, why do the never talk about implementing the Doctrine for broadcast television?

If our founding fathers realized that such a thing as broadcast media existed, they would have included it in the First Amendment.

Mrs. Godzilla

February 19th, 2009
3:37 pm

General Electric?

Big defense department contractor….BIG BIG BIG

Top 100 Defense Contractors

http://www.govexec.com/features/0807-15/0807-15s3s1.htm

They have two proudly liberal hours of programming in Maddow and Olberman…..and 3 hours of conservative former GOP Reo Joe “who’s that dead lady in my office” Scarborough.

Thou shalt not grasp at straws.

Joe

February 19th, 2009
3:38 pm

radiowxman,

While members of their editorial board may be left leaning, the Times Corp. itself is just that: corporate. They care about the Benjamins.

Oh, and FTR!

Joe

February 19th, 2009
3:41 pm

Good points regarding fairness, radiowxman.

Your example basically recounts exactly how the Fairness Doctrine started.

But not only is not practical, it is also not necessary. If I don’t like what you say, I can go out and blog about it or broadcast via satellite.

Copyleft

February 19th, 2009
3:46 pm

RadioMan: If you’re a news broadcaster, your responsibility is to the public as much as to your advertisers. A lot of modern “journalists” seem to have forgotten that fact.

radiowxman

February 19th, 2009
3:47 pm

I wouldn’t necessarily call Arthur “I apologize” Shulzburger a staunch conservative. But you’re right, all corporations care about making money. And talk radio has overwhelmingly found that conservative talk makes money. If they thought Janine Garafolo and Randi Rhodes would get more listeners than Rush or Hannity, those guys would be kicked to the curb faster than Arod’s cousin.

Joe

February 19th, 2009
3:48 pm

Copyleft,

A lot of modern journalists HAVE remembered that they need to pay their mortgages and feed their families. In fact, one could argue that some of the talking heads whom some of us bash in this blog fall into that category…

Truth

February 19th, 2009
3:49 pm

You think these “right-wing” radio hosts are such villians, but Olbermann is pure hate! Mr. Restless Feet Syndrome has a fetish with hate. I don’t want him silenced… I just don’t watch him. It is that easy!

Bosch

February 19th, 2009
3:51 pm

Commie,

Oh, you can joke but no one else. But seriously, the fact that there are that many people out there who listen to those idiots does concern me.

CommunistAJC

February 19th, 2009
3:52 pm

Joe,
you wrote: There’s less of a market for left leaning talk shows because people on the left READ.

Now, on Jays other blog you wrote this: We’re not the angry, uneducated ones throwing personal attacks around…

Now, either your a hypocrite or you are just forgetful. I’ll take both.

Joe, you claim that only those on the left read. That’s funny Joe because not only do I subscribe to the Wall Street Journal, The Chicago Tribune BUT I also have a subscription to The Economist. I want to ask you this Joe, since you say that people like me are uneducated, I’d like to know where you attended college. I went to Duke, comrade.

CommunistAJC

February 19th, 2009
3:54 pm

Bosch,
life’s too short to lose sleep over talk show hosts. Talk show hosts don’t have nukes, don’t blow up buildings and will not cut off your wifes head.

Paul

February 19th, 2009
3:58 pm

Chad Harris

[[The fact that the base touts Faux as a legitimate news source is evidence that they will be again relegated to the decision making sidelines in 2010/2012.]]

Jay used Fox the other day as the news source for a thread Same as he did with this thread, which, he wrote, “As Fox notes, the idea that the Fairness Doctrine could somehow be applied to the Internet exposes that entire American Spectator report as nonsensical rubbish.”

I had no idea Jay was part of ‘the base that touts Faux as a legitimate news source.’ Wow. The things one learns by reading blogs -

Bosch

February 19th, 2009
4:00 pm

I personally think it would be hilarious if Rush and the other boobs (and Olbermann too) HAD to, yes, actually FORCED to give both sides.

Oh, and before y’all start going ballistic, I’m just kidding.

Can you imagine Rush stopping mid sentence/sputter and going….”Well, on the other hand.”

My first post this morning, I mentioned Anne Coulter and how I had read something somewhere – don’t know, that she really didn’t believe all the crap she screeched, she did it for $$$$$$ – and that really sucks because one, there are people that stupid enough to listen to her and think what she is saying is real, and two, that stupid hag is making tons more money than me and it’s not fair!!!

J/K again.

But I do think it’s dangerous for these folks to constantly day after day entice such hate – because the truly idiotic amongst us think that what these guys/gals are saying is based is absolutely true – and it’s just not – and they are doing alot of damage to the country in the meantime.

GodHatesTrash

February 19th, 2009
4:03 pm

This is a little off-topic, but ever notice that the only time Rush Limpjaw ever looks happy is when he’s making fun of Parkinson’s Disease, or sucking on a very big stogie?

Bosch

February 19th, 2009
4:04 pm

Commie,

Dude, I don’t lose sleep over it. Really, I don’t. It was a joke.

Paul

February 19th, 2009
4:05 pm

This from Katie Couric in a recent interview:

“I often went to lunches that I was invited to before the State of the Union, before they announced the surge, and that was really interesting because I think President Bush felt a lot more relaxed and was a lot more facile with information and details and policy than I think probably the American people gave him credit for and were exposed to.”

Geee, I wonder what the American people were listening to that gave the impression the Pres was a dunce who couldn’t read and didn’t like details. Maybe Katie’s been co-opted by the Dark Side?

Mrs. Godzilla

February 19th, 2009
4:05 pm

….or getting of the plane with a pocketful of somebody elses viagra after a guys only vacation…..

radiowxman

February 19th, 2009
4:06 pm

I don’t stalk Rush 24/7, so I can’t say when he’s happy or sad.

Besides, I don’t blame him. A fine cigar is a great thing.

ByteMe

February 19th, 2009
4:09 pm

Commie: of course it was a joke. Relax. Looks like you’re getting a “warming spell” up there tomorrow. All’s good.

Paul

February 19th, 2009
4:12 pm

Mrs. Godzilla

Interesting comment from someone who’s generally liberal in attitude. The underlying meaning seems to be that being homosexual is something to be ashamed of or embarrassed by? Maybe you think Limbaugh’s homophobic so this is another example of hypocrisy like Larry Craig? I don’t know if he is or not – or has made anti-gay remarks or not. Just was struck by a comment one would normally expect to hear from a judgemental rightwingreligious type.

Don’t tell me you’ve been co-opted by the Dark Side, too?

@@

February 19th, 2009
4:14 pm

Well clearly, jay, you are impressed with Obama’s transparency or lack thereof?

Stimulating, ain’t it?

He’s the master of nuance so forgive me if I don’t buy what he’s sellin’.

Truth

February 19th, 2009
4:16 pm

Bosch… That would be hilarious!

Taxpayer

February 19th, 2009
4:16 pm

Now, why would Obama want to do anything to upset the pecking order within the new Republican party. I image if Obama wanted to anything with this issue, it would be to implement an unfairness policy. He would likely insist that Rush and Neal and Anne, etc., dominate the airwaves in the red states. Dang, Obama’s a smart President. By the way, how’s the Rushpublican economic plan coming along. Are they ready to introduce their bill in Congress yet. What’s taking them so long. Have they managed to get any support from across the aisle.

Joe

February 19th, 2009
4:17 pm

Bosch,

Obviously, someone can only understand a joke when he makes it.

I find it interesting that he feels the need to prove himself by naming his subscriptions and his alma mater. Not that it matters, but I used to subscribe to The Economist, Financial Times, Liberty (which is a Libertarian magazine), Mother Jones, Utne Reader, Dissent, and Reason. Oh, and I also hold a degree from a top private school from the South. Big freaking deal. It’s a blog, yet someone gets his blood boiling over minor comments and jokes (while ignoring questions asked directly to him).

But since I’m not talking to that someone (for some reason, he feels the need to try to call me out so that if I reply, he’ll say “well, you said you wouldn’t talk to me…”), I’ll continue to ignore its presence.

gttim

February 19th, 2009
4:17 pm

CommunistAJC: You are cherry picking ratings. Taken from mid-year 2008, before O’Reilly’s vacation:

Total & (25-54)
ABC — 7,530,000 viewers (2,200,000)
NBC — 7,170,000 viewers (2,070,000)
CBS — 5,930,000 viewers (1,680,000)
The O’Reilly Factor — 2,200,000 viewers (450,000)

O’Reilly’s ratings suck! Of course, these are the actual 8:00 ratings for O’Reilly and do not through in the additional numbers from repeats.

And Truth, I am not confusing myself. I am just trying to understand your position. You are flip flopping all over the place to try and suit your argument at the time. You are not being consistent, of course what wingnut is?

Joe

February 19th, 2009
4:19 pm

Paul,

I’ve always found the attacks on Bush’s intelligence to be somewhat disturbing. I’m in the camp that says that he is intelligent but not very articulate at times. I also think that for much of his administration, he really wasn’t the one in charge.

Mort Merkel

February 19th, 2009
4:21 pm

I don’t think people do tune them out. They harped on the climate change “debate,” within the scientific community, until that is now gospel to the masses.

CommunistAJC

February 19th, 2009
4:22 pm

gttim,
what I posted was CABLE NEWS NETWORKS, DIMWIT! I was pointing out to Chad that he was dead wrong. I posted those ratings from last week. You just stated that you’ve posted ratings from last year. Again, it is you who are confused. You claim that O’Reillys ratings are bad. Really? Because he averages 3-4 million per night. Not bad, comrade.

Joe

February 19th, 2009
4:23 pm

Bosch,

On Coulter: I’ve suspected this because she is SO over the top sometimes. But that jives with my reply to Copyleft at 3:48 today.

CommunistAJC

February 19th, 2009
4:24 pm

gttim,
where do you see regular news shows? NO WHERE!

8PM – P2+ (25-54) (35-64)
The O’Reilly Factor—3,494,000 viewers (991,000) (1,455,000)
Campbell Brown—1,006,000 viewers (243,000) (402,000)
Countdown w/Keith Olbermann –1,385,000 viewers (482,000) (762,000)
CNBC Reports—249,000 viewers (97,000) (152,000)
Nancy Grace –1,245,000 viewers (429,000) (633,000)

9 PM – P2+ (25-54) (35-64)
Hannity–2,658,000 viewers (732,000) (1,102,000)
Larry King Live—1,761,000 viewers (449,000) (719,000)
Rachel Maddow Show –1,240,000 viewers (397,000) (656,000)
Saving GM: Inside Crisis–393,000 viewers (189,000) (246,000)
Lou Dobbs Tonight- 529,000 viewers (234,000) (299,000)

Mrs. Godzilla

February 19th, 2009
4:25 pm

But Paul

IT WAS A JOKE….or has that been overused lately?

My Rush can dance in @@’s stiletto’s if he enjoys that – good for him!
(10 1/2 WWW I would guess, Republican red!) I would applaud
his audacity!

But…somebody else’s prescription meds is still illegal isn’t it?

Chad Harris

February 19th, 2009
4:25 pm

Truth everyone of your comments are based on your fantasies and projections about other commenters instead of issues. Do you have any comment that focuses on issues rather than your fantasy that another commenter is this or that? Most wingnuts don’t seem to want to read and learn issues here and their comments are directed at other commenters.

That’s called displacement and substitution but it lacks any thought on issues.

Joe

February 19th, 2009
4:26 pm

gttim,

Of course, we should only focus on cable numbers, not overall viewing, because the only people whose opinions count is those who watch and/or own cable.

If someone is going to claim that a poll is biased, and then march out ratings numbers that ONLY include cable TV for a time slot, that’s evidence that someone neither understands polling nor statistics.

Truth

February 19th, 2009
4:26 pm

gttim… What is with the name calling? It is childish and shows your cowardice. I made one comment and you claim I am running in circles. If you are the intellectual that you think you are then you would know that a circle would consist of many different stances.

Joe

February 19th, 2009
4:28 pm

Also, gttim, even if you want to look only at cable networks, the total of the other shows is higher than the Fox shows. So if these other shows are considered “liberal”, then yes, more people prefer “liberal” cable news shows than they do conservative shows.

Truth

February 19th, 2009
4:29 pm

Chad…. Just cracked my first beer and I am already laughing. Pass me the nuts! Cut me down all you want, but you aren’t gonna get under my skin. I find you very entertaining!

CommunistAJC

February 19th, 2009
4:29 pm

Joe,
you wrote: If someone is going to claim that a poll is biased, and then march out ratings numbers that ONLY include cable TV for a time slot, that’s evidence that someone neither understands polling nor statistics.

Did you read what Chad wrote? Did you read my response to Chad? Nope.

Bosch

February 19th, 2009
4:30 pm

Joe,

I love Utne Reader – never heard of the other ones (well, except the Economist and Financial Times) but yeah, I actually forgot about it – so thanks for reminding me!!!

Commie isn’t so bad – I roll my eyes at his rants, as I’m sure he rolls his eyes at mine, but he does have a sense of humor if you don’t talk politics.

How long have you blogged here? Believe me, there are worse. The best day was when someone linked this blog to Michelle Malkin’s blog – we were left with RB after that.

CommunistAJC

February 19th, 2009
4:31 pm

Chad Harris,
so why are you rambling on about how great Rachel Maddow is? I just posted the truth to your lie about her beating everyone in the cable news ratings. Chump.

CommunistAJC

February 19th, 2009
4:33 pm

Bosch,
Joes problem is that he assumes and lumps every person who disagrees with him into a certain category. He fails to read and understand different points of view. Maybe I could play the liberal tolerant card. I guess he’s intolerant of those with different political leanings. He’s not open-minded.

CommunistAJC

February 19th, 2009
4:34 pm

Joe,
name one cable news show that rates higher than Fox. Oh, and John Stewart doesn’t count. It’s satire not news.

Bosch

February 19th, 2009
4:36 pm

Joe,

Case in point, she used to date Bill Maher, but sometimes he can be over the top as well (although I think he’s funny). I mean there are couples like Carville and Matlin, but she borders on dangerous to me – I think she encites pure hate, and people believe her every word. It’s amazing.

Taxpayer

February 19th, 2009
4:37 pm

Bosch,

What about the times that Jay brought up the FairTax&tm; and the blog got all that attention from one of THOSE sites. You know the ones. The ones that people like Boortz recommends. ew.

Paul

February 19th, 2009
4:38 pm

Joe

I have pretty much the same impression. I’ve read a couple article by journalists who would not be called Bush fans who report in one on ones with no cameras he’s pretty impressive. One was particularly taken aback by his command of facts. And I do think he delegated waaaaay too much. Not ‘delegate’ as in letting people do their jobs, but ‘delegate’ as in give an assignment and then not following up. I also think he didn’t do nearly enough of reporting back to the people what he was doing, and why.

Pres Obama seems to have learned from that situation.

Mrs. Godzilla

Whew. I don’t know if the joke’s overused or not. It’s just another instance of a visual I don’t really want………………

Taxpayer

February 19th, 2009
4:38 pm

Oops. I left out a space. That should have been FairTax &tm; Does that work now?

Chad Harris

February 19th, 2009
4:39 pm

The ratings that matter most to me are the election results. Last I saw, Obama won by 9 million votes and the Senate is on the verge of being 59-41 and retirement will insure 60 or 61 Dems.

And the great thing about the more wingnuts that listen to Hannity, O’Reilly and Faux is that they confirm the entrenched views that got them stomped on Nov. 5 nationally.

The candidates for Thug President in 2012 are all clowns. They are looking dumber by the day.

The candidates for Thug Senate and House in 2010 are going to increase the Dem majority.

That means that the delusions and fantasies and inaccuracies promulgated by the rage of the clowns O’Reilly, Hannity and Beck, Rush and the Radio Right Wingnuts are entrenching the Wingnut base further into perpetual everlasting non-ending Losersville.

The niche they are carving out for you is perpetual crying on blog comment threads but no input whatsoever into decisions political decisions on planet earth.

This should be interesting. The 3 lawyers who blogged every day for years about Bush’s claim of Exec Privilege now have control of Obama DOJ’s OLC. That means that they have control along with Obama and Holder over whether Rove is forced to show up and take the 5th:

D.C. Circuit orders Obama DOJ Ordered to State its Position on Rove and Miers Chickening Out by Wed. Mar. 4

Joey

February 19th, 2009
4:40 pm

So why is the Dow matching the lows that followed the collaspe of the twin towers? It took a serious drop on Tuesday. Certainly not connected to the Stimulus. I know. Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, Boortz and those other talking head wingnuts are dragging it down. Bastards! I wish President Obama would let us institute the Fairness Doctrine. Now, that’s the ticket.

CommunistAJC

February 19th, 2009
4:40 pm

Joe,
you wrote: There’s less of a market for left leaning talk shows because people on the left READ.

Now, on Jays other blog you wrote this: We’re not the angry, uneducated ones throwing personal attacks around…

Now, either your a hypocrite or you are just forgetful. I’ll take both.

Joe, you claim that only those on the left read. That’s funny Joe because not only do I subscribe to the Wall Street Journal, The Chicago Tribune BUT I also have a subscription to The Economist. I want to ask you this Joe, since you say that people like me are uneducated, I’d like to know where you attended college. I went to Duke, comrade.