The Fairness Doctrine is still dead

Fine question, indeed. And a big contributor to the downfall of the Republican party.

• Link
• Report this comment

You’ve really done it now, Jay. Should make for some entertaining reading later. Nothing like a rainy day to take a nap.

Seems like they always have to have bogie man.

• Link
• Report this comment

Well, if Rush or Hannity or any of those new defacto leaders of the minority party want to run in the next Republican primary, they can rest assured that they have my vote. The last thing that I would want to do is suggest that Rush is a big mouth arrogant a$$ that’s just in the biz of showing his a$$ for the advancement of his a$$-kicking bank account that he has managed to amass off the a$$es of his loyal Republican minority party following. Why, it’s free-market capitalism at its finest.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bookman,
do you even understand why many conservatives think that the democrats are going to bring back the Fairness Doctrine? Let me clue you in. HERE GOES. IT’S BECAUSE DEMOCRATS LIKE NANCY PELOSI AND BILL CLINTON BRING IT UP! It’s not some “right-wing” conspiracy that somehow keeps you up at night. Get a clue Bookman because your newspaper is headed the way of the dinosaurs. And so are you.

• Link
• Report this comment

getalife,
democrats gave Bush a blank check. Get your facts straight before posting BS.

• Link
• Report this comment

I would like to thank Mr. Derbyshire for pointing out the lowest common denominator that pervades talk radio these days.

I’m also glad that liberals are showing us how to be the bigger person on blogs and discussion boards like this. No need for name calling and 5-year old insults when you’ve got the ideas on your side!

• Link
• Report this comment

I didn’t know our national debt was now 22 trillion. Is that what Rush is spewing. Well, in all fairness, that’s a lie.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay’s theory is that all Republicans live in fear of the Fairness Doctrine, but isn’t this the 4th time in about two weeks that Jay has posted a commentary about this.

If Jay is correct then Republicans are to the Fairness Doctrine as Democrats are to Bush Derangement Syndrome. Which is more sad?

• Link
• Report this comment

AJC Communist, you are right. It is easy to make fun of Rush, but he isn’t running the party. That just makes for good ridicule.

You are absolutely CORRECT that we must be diligent about the Fairness Doctrine because Clinton and Pelosi have stated clearly that they support it. The right is being called paranoid because they want us to let our guard down. Part of our trip to minority status is that the elected GOP officials listen to the left’s criticism too much. If they are trying to deceive is, we need to ignore them; if it is their sincere belief, we just don’t care what they think.

Two thinks are going to happen next; Obama’s attempts to stimulate the economy will fail miserably, and he and the rest of the dems will be tossed out on their buts; or, these stupid gestures will work, and I’ll join the donkey party.

• Link
• Report this comment

It’s the “carny barkers” AND the holy-rolling religious nuts who’ve hijacked the Repug Party — that makes for quite a circus! Maybe they should rename themselves the “Circus Party” while they try to re-brand for 2010.

• Link
• Report this comment

GayGrayGeek,
EXPLAIN THIS!

“[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.” — From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

“This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies.” — From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others

“Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to permit monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections; Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive progress toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities” — From a joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002

“Saddam’s goal … is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed.” — Madeline Albright, 1998

“(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983″ — National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998

“Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement.” — Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002

“The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability.” — Robert Byrd, October 2002

“There’s no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat… Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He’s had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001… He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn’t have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we.” — Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002

“What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad’s regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs.” — Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002

“The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow.” — Bill Clinton in 1998

“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security.” — Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

“I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons…I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out.” — Clinton’s Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003

“Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people.” — Tom Daschle in 1998

“Saddam Hussein’s regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal.” — John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

“The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction.” — John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

“I share the administration’s goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction.” — Dick Gephardt in September of 2002

“Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.” — Al Gore, 2002

“We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction.” — Bob Graham, December 2002

“Saddam Hussein is not the only deranged dictator who is willing to deprive his people in order to acquire weapons of mass destruction.” — Jim Jeffords, October 8, 2002

“We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.” — Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002

“There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein’s regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed.” — Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002

“I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force – if necessary – to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.” — John F. Kerry, Oct 2002

“The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation.” — John Kerry, October 9, 2002

“(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. …And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War.” — John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003

“We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them.” — Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002

“Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States.” — Joe Lieberman, August, 2002

“Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 – 1994, despite Iraq’s denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq’s claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction.” — Patty Murray, October 9, 2002

“As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.” — Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998

“Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production.” — Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998

“There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources — something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.” — John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

“Saddam’s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq’s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East.” — John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

“Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration’s policy towards Iraq, I don’t think there can be any question about Saddam’s conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts.” — Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002

• Link
• Report this comment

Tell us Bookman, how exactly does your column vary from Limbaugh’s radio show, well besides the 30,000,000 listeners you and Derbyshire don’t have?

Please explain why you never whine about Keith Blowberman or Jon Stewdirt?

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?

• Link
• Report this comment

Bookman,
the AJC really needs to get a new writer. You’ve obviously run out of topics. About two weeks ago I predicted what your next topic would be that day. Sarah Palin it was.

List of Jay Bookman’s topics: Rush is stupid, Bush is a monkey, Sarah Palin is a hillbilly from Alaska, The GOP is full of racists, Barrack Obama is the bestest most awesomist person in the universe, Bill Clinton is second awesomist, Capitalism is bad, Reagan was a socialist (opps you already wrote that crap), Christians are evil and Muslims are cool. Does that sum you up, Bookman?

• Link
• Report this comment

Besides which, as usual, the democrats lie-

Senators have adopted an amendment offered by Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL) to the D.C. House Voting Rights Act (S. 160) by a vote of 57 to 41.

The amendment would direct that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) “shall take action to encourage and promote diversity in communication media ownership.” Republicans argue that this broad language could pave the way for aspects of the Fairness Doctrine to be implemented at some point.

Fairness doctrines of different names are still Fairness doctrines.

duh

• Link
• Report this comment

You can portray conservatives as out of touch, paranoid fools all you want. You can believe your liberal redistribution policies will lead the country to nirvana. Time however is the enemy. Time will show how fanciful and empty the liberal dreams are.

The “Fairness Doctrine has been declared dead”, but like all the other illusions the mainstream media hopes to portray, the truth is in Dick Durbin’s latest piece of legislation which places limits on radio station ownership. Other legislation will soon follow. But you won’t report it.

• Link
• Report this comment

Taxpayer,
I have a knack for putting you to sleep? If you mean, your ridiculous liberal theological lies, then yes, I do put them to sleep. Don’t blame me for your lack of not having a rebuttal. If you want to debate then great, if not, shut up.

• Link
• Report this comment

Both sides voted for the war. But it was the Republicans in power at the time. Of course, it took some lil’ ole white lies to get the Dems to go along with the vote for war…

Reading through Commies comment you can connect the dots between the lies told by Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell, etc, as Democrat leaders attempted to rationalize the case for war by using the bogus information given to them by the intelligence community.

• Link
• Report this comment

Clint Eastwood, probably only behind John Wayne and Charlton Heston in Hollywood icons, has this to say about political correctness. Suck on that all of you whiny girly liberal weenies!

Eastwood thinks political correctness has made society humourless.

London, February 27 (ANI): Acting legend Clint Eastwood , 79, apparently believes that political correctness has rendered modern society humourless, for he accuses younger generations of spending too much time trying to avoid being offensive.

The Dirty Harry star insists that he should be able to tell harmless jokes about nationality without fearing that people may brand him “a racist”.

“People have lost their sense of humour. In former times we constantly made jokes about different races. You can only tell them today with one hand over your mouth or you will be insulted as a racist,” the Daily Express quoted him as saying.

“I find that ridiculous. In those earlier days every friendly clique had a ‘Sam the Jew’ or ‘Jose the Mexican’ – but we didn’t think anything of it or have a racist thought. It was just normal that we made jokes based on our nationality or ethnicity. That was never a problem. I don’t want to be politically correct.

We’re all spending too much time and energy trying to be politically correct about everything,” he added. (ANI)

• Link
• Report this comment

Mike,
I also have liberal friends, but sadly, they only watch Katie Couric and Chris Matthews.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay-if it was just a wacky rightwing rumor started by rightwing radio hosts,then why did they even have a vote? Seems like there was a call for the fairness doctrine from somewhere. Or does the left really FEAR rightwing talk show hosts that much? And do they yeild that much power?

• Link
• Report this comment

I believe there wera bout five or six of the lame brained Democrats who wanted to revive that stupidity. As far as I can tell that means that about 500 others in Washington did not. DeMint is just another HeadRush lackey and neo-con proving himself a gadfly and a huge waste of time in a time when the nation reels under enormous and legitimately critical issues.

The non neo-cons here, of course, have much fun ribbing the GOP faithful about the Once Grand Old Party’s current sorry state. And the fact that the future looks equally abysmal.

Need proof that their “base” of hemorrhaging ostriches and BushCo apologists are as intransigent as ever?

Twenty-nine percent of Republicans questioned in a new CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Friday say they are most likely to support Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin for the GOP presidential nomination in 2012. Right behind the 2008 Republican vice presidential nominee, and well within the poll’s 4.5 percent sampling error, is former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee. Twenty-six percent of those questioned say they are most likely backing the former, and possibly future, Republican presidential candidate.

Twenty-one percent of Republicans polled say they most likely would support former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, another GOP hopeful from the last campaign who may put his hat into the ring again.

Palin, Huckabee, Romney and the Louisiana Flash? THAT’S IT???

It’s awfully early of course, but I think I see Electoral Bloodbaths, Parts Trois and Quatre coming up…

• Link
• Report this comment

BD –

I forgot Al Gore’s quote:

“We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.” — Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

Again, his opinions were formed based on his years in the White House. He didn’t hold office in 2002.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bosch –

These quotes are all post 9/11:

“There is no doubt that … Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies.” Letter to President Bush, Signed by: — Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001

“We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them.” — Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

“We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.” — Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

“Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.” — Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

“We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.” — Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

“The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons…” — Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

“I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.” — Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

“There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years … We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.” — Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

“He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do” — Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members … It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.” — Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

“We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction.” — Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

“Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime … He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation … And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction … So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real…” — Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

• Link
• Report this comment

Mike-The left has alway’s been known for short term memory loss. In fact that’s what there leaders depend on. Good fact reporting

• Link
• Report this comment

Taxpayer -

” what is this “liberal theological” crap that you are spewing, little fella.”

It’s much the same as your conservative bashing, so spare us the hypocrisy.

BTW: You have never put anyone in their place. You are the king of refusing to have a back and forth. When presented with evidence that you are dead wrong, you just pretend you don’t see it.

Kind of like when you made your brilliant observation that the total expense of $787 billion at 10% interest was $866 billion. LOL

• Link
• Report this comment

Taxpayer,
oh I forgot, yes, I do have authority, pal.

• Link
• Report this comment

Commie at 2:54 Don’t blame me for your lack of not having a rebuttal

Well, OK, Commie. I won’t blame you. But, only since you insisted.

• Link
• Report this comment

James Dobson resigned……

• Link
• Report this comment

Mrs. Godzilla,
he’s in his 70’s. It was planned 6 years ago for him to hand over his power to the next guy. If you are trying to insinuate something you’d better have some proof. Otherwise, it’s a non issue.

• Link
• Report this comment

People-you should know the game Taxpayer plays. He throws something out to instigate arguments not dialogue. Then he try’s to denigrate those who dis-agree with him. Ignore him,not worth the time or energy.

• Link
• Report this comment

Mike,

No one is arguing that Saddam Hussein wasn’t a dangerous guy – what I have always argued is that he and the weapons (that turned out to be imaginary) were not an IMMINENT threat (which was told to Congress when they voted).

And also my point has always been that we can not go around the world and invade and topple governments we don’t like – or even who we view as a threat – just because of their weapon arsenal. North Korea? Iran? Pakistan? We can’t do that – it’s not a sustainable policy.

Commie,

Yes, and we should learn from our mistakes in Vietnam – and we haven’t. We are eventually gonna have to leave Iraq – maybe you don’t think so, but we are, we can not sustain a presence there. The American people don’t want us there anymore because most of us view is as unneccesary, and the Iraqi people don’t want us there either.

Yes, Vietnam and Iraq were both wastes and in my opinion, we will look back on Iraq when things eventually unfold, and our history will judge it to be a miserable failure as well.

So what’s next? We march in Iran? We march into North Korea? Where does it end?

I don’t have to look just at Michigan to see a state in shambles – your description could apply to most states in the union. Look at California – same thing. Georgia isn’t doing so swell either. It’s everywhere Commie, not just in Michigan.

I really wish that you and Mike would stop blaming everything on the Democrats just to suit your ideological partisan fantasies. It’s simply not true.

• Link
• Report this comment

[[Many conservatives have been downright certain the Democrats were going to try to revive the Fairness Doctrine and thus silence right-wing talk radio. Why did they think that?]]

Umm, because House and Senate Democrats said they were interested?

[[Interestingly, though, more and more folks on the right are coming to understand just how damaging talk-radio has become to their cause.]]

Isn’t that one of the benefits of free speech? Get it out in the open, to as wide an audience as possible, where it can be examined, then accepted or ridiculed by the people?

Unlike the example we heard of the other day from the college student who reported when a conservative speaker was slated, hundreds of students called the ‘bias hotline’ to complain. Or speakers at, say, Columbia who’ve been disinvited.

I still wonder if the Dem leadership doesn’t keep bringing it up just to appease farfarleft base.

I Report/You Whine 2:52

[[encourage and promote diversity in communication media ownership]]

Now there’s a scary thought. Speech – free and open in the political realm. Yet the government – those against whom much speech is directed – will define a group or groups and encourage their ownership of the means of dissemination.

Just how does one define ‘diversity’ in ownership, anyhow?

I kinda like the Brit papers. Their papers, and their readership, freely admitted their biases, unlike our system, where all broadcasters are ‘neutral observes who merely report.” There was a great comedy series that put it this way:

Prime Minister: “Don’t tell me about the press. I know exactly who reads the papers. The Daily Mirror is read by people who think they run the country, the Guardian is read by people who think they ought to run the country, the Times is read by people who actually do run the country, the Daily Mail is read by the wives of the people who run the country, the Financial Times is read by people who own the country, the Morning Star is read by people who think the country ought to be run by another country and the Daily Telegraph is read by people who think it is.”

Head of the civil service: “Prime Minister, what about the people who read the Sun?” [[the Sun is a daily paper with a topless girl on page 3)’

PM’s assistant: “Sun readers don’t care who runs the country, as long as she’s got big t!ts.”

• Link
• Report this comment

Taxpayer,
I’ve already posted my credentials. Auburn and Duke. Good enough for you? Shall I post the names of my professors, classes, credits, GPA, SAT scores and whatever else I have? I don’t think I have to prove anything to you, comrade. Seeing that I’ve pretty much blown you away on several topics today I see you as no threat. By the way, not once have you ever written about your education.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay, you really tweaked the nutjobs with the boogieman Fairness Doctrine. For your two mentions of it, there have been hours of AM bloviating.

As a fine example of the ironic conniptions of the parrots: MIKE W. write: “The right is being called paranoid because they want us to let our guard down.”

Mike W. is not paranoid, they are just out to get him.

ha ha . too much.

• Link
• Report this comment

Commie to Taxpayer – “I believe Mike has promptly put you in your place.”

Commie – I’m sorry to say that is not possible because, according to Taxpayer, nobody on this blog has EVER corrected him – only attacked him. This, according to one of his posts yesterday.

The man is truly a legend in his own mind.

• Link
• Report this comment

PJ-Stating KO for anything,you lose all credibility!! True Rush is out there,but KO is just Blowhard that likes to hear himself talk. He’s been like that even back to his days on ESPN.

• Link
• Report this comment

And yet, it is I, taxpayer, who commands the position of prominence amongst the cry babies of the Republican minority party that come here to “debate”. What a laugh. DEBATE. FROM YOU PUNKS. HA HA HA. Gotta go pick up my little one.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bosch,
I call it like I read it. Georgia doesn’t have people leaving it in mass exodus. Michigan does. I live in Chicago and know this for fact. I’ve talked to many Michigan grads. Democrats have controlled that state for YEARS! At least Sonny has not driven away businesses. Oh, and by the way, Atlanta is the biggest city in the south in case you did not know that. Take away Atlanta and the south suffers.

Now, as far as Iraq goes, you do not know what history will say about it. Your not a historian. Vietnam was MUCH worse than Iraq. Iraq will be looked at as a debacle that will hopefully become a success story. Free elections and democracy. And yes, we should bomb Irans nuke factories. And Pakistans.

• Link
• Report this comment

Commie,

Wow, you and Rush are buds? Hey, can you score me some Oxy?

• Link
• Report this comment

Taxpayer writes, “Gotta go pick up my little one.”

OMG, he has offspring! Be affraid. Be very affraid.

• Link
• Report this comment

Citing data from the University of Illinois’ Arctic Climate Research Center, as interpreted on Jan. 1 by Daily Tech, a technology and science news blog, the column said that since September “the increase in sea ice has been the fastest change, either up or down, since 1979, when satellite record-keeping began.” According to the center, global sea ice levels at the end of 2008 were “near or slightly lower than” those of 1979. The center generally does not make its statistics available, but in a Jan. 12 statement the center confirmed that global sea ice levels were within a difference of less than 3 percent of the 1980 level.

On Feb. 18 the U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center reported that from early January until the middle of this month, a defective performance by satellite monitors that measure sea ice caused an underestimation of the extent of Arctic sea ice by 193,000 square miles, which is approximately the size of California. The Times (”All the news that’s fit to print”), which as of this writing had not printed that story, should unleash Revkin and his unnamed experts.-George Will.

He who laughs last laughs the loudest, bwahahahahahahahaha, bozos.

• Link
• Report this comment

Commie,

That can not keep being our foreign policy position to attack all the other countries we perceive as a threat. It is not sustainable. I know you and I are gonna have to agree to disagree on that one.

And you are right – I am no historian, and no, I don’t know – but it doesn’t look too promising right now. I hope I am wrong – horribly wrong and things work out swimmingly over there – historically it would be the first time anything like that happened, and who knows, there is always room for a miracle. Right?

People are leaving Michigan in droves maybe – I don’t know – but isn’t that because of the car companies who haven’t made a worthy product in decades? I don’t think that’s government intervention there, I think it’s poorly run companies by people like Nardelli and the like.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bosch-Leftist with a sense of humor? How can that be?

• Link
• Report this comment

Goldie,
AND YOUR IDIOTIC DEMOCRAT PARTY VOTED FOR AND FUNDED THE SAME WAR.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bosch- I respect your opinion.me I believe in proactive when it comes to my family/country, not re-actionary.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bosch,
name one war that was not horrific. Name one war that didn’t have casualties.

Ah yes, the car companies. What you fail to mention is the unions who have driven up labor costs. GM is more of an insurance company now than car company. And no, American car companies make great cars. Saturns, Subaru’s and many other cars are great.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay -

” he knew that Bush claims of a tie between Saddam and bin Laden were bogus”

I know that Cheney made such a claim, but I am unaware of Bush making such a claim.

I know that our current Secretary of State made such a claim:

“”In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members … It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.” — Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002″

Why not call her out, Jay?

• Link
• Report this comment

Bosch,
can I get you some Oxy? Sure Bosch, can you get me a Bill Clinton signed cigar?

• Link
• Report this comment

Sad Seal aka Brad Steal,
Who I listen to is my business. Now, if you want to make fun of Duke, please provide the name of the university in which you received your degree. Oh wait, you probably didn’t get your GED. Sorry Sad Seal. Guess Clayton Co didn’t work out did it? Moron.

• Link
• Report this comment

Commie, if the demise of the AJC is a dark cloud on the horizon, then the silver lining will be never having to read another one of your childish, asinine posts.

Can I get an AMEN?

Have a good weekend, everybody.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay-I’ve read similar articles stating the same.But whose to say their info was correct and others was’nt. How did so many throughout the world not mention mid-east have it so wrong? And if he did’nt have wmd’s what were we inspecting for? And what was it that he used on his own people? I know you truly believe that,I respect that. I don’t buy it.

• Link
• Report this comment

Here’s why your entire article lacks any merit whatsoever.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=88823

• Link
• Report this comment

Taxpayer,
I am educated, and no, you make fun of people whom you disagree with. That’s a fact, comrade. Doesn’t matter if I was a Harvard grad. Again, what university did you attend? Because right now I don’t believe that you even went to a college or university.

• Link
• Report this comment

If you want to see a US President weaving Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein together go read Bill Clinton’s 1999 SotU address.

ANd then there’s this

San Jose Mercury News
SUNDAY MORNING FINAL EDITION
Feb. 14, 1999

U.S. intelligence officials are worried that a burgeoning alliance between terrorist leader Osama bin Laden and Iraqi President Saddam Hussein could make the fugitive Saudi’s loose-knit organization much more dangerous

• Link
• Report this comment

Bosch,
you wrote: The labor unions have absolutely nothing to do with what is produced. The car companies are producing pieces of crap and putting all the profits in their own pockets.

Then who is putting these cars together, Unicorns?

• Link
• Report this comment

Communist — I’ll take the state of Michigan over your “red state” of Kansas, where the religious bigots try to control their educational system and people are leaving in droves. Oh, wait — kinda like the state of GA, another “red state”…

• Link
• Report this comment

Commie,

The workers (and unions) do not decide what is made – they put together the crappy pieces of crap that the bosses tell the to put together. Unicorns and the unions have nothing to do with that.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay -

That is a gross distortion of what Bush said. but that’s fine. I guess you think Colin Powell lied too, right? Sure, you do.

Then you move on to distorting my statements. I never said that the Senators in question did agree with Bush to go to war (although almost half of them did.) As I stated very clearly, I posted those quotes in response to the claim that Bush lied about Saddam’s WMD. The Senators very clearly agreed with him on that matter. As usual, you never argue the points I actually make, just the ones that you think you have an easy answer for.

No response on my question about Hillary’s direct claim of explicit ties between Saddam and AQ? Big shocker.

And of course you don’t consider yourself left-wing. But of course, you have no problem believing that conservative pundits are right-wing. Just as you have no problem believing that Fox is biased but the AJC is not. Self-awareness is not your strong suit.

• Link
• Report this comment

Hi Everybody,
If you haven’t heard the of-so-clever Communist when to Duke? And incase, you did not get that Communist went to Duke and his college record was Duke. Has anyone heard that Communist went to Duke?

• Link
• Report this comment

Goldie,
you are retarded. I have never been to Kansas. I live in Chicago. Oh, please go back to Michigan and freeze to death.

Bosch,
low? Hypocrite, go back and look at all the names your buddies have called many people on this blog.

Brad Steal,
you’ve proven my point. You never went to college did you? Poor Brad. Make fun of my education all you want pal because right now I’m sitting pretty in Chicago.

• Link
• Report this comment

Mike: You’re 100% right that many Democrats considered Saddam a problem, a tyrant, and a murderous bastard.

However, it was ONLY the Bush administration that insisted we had to go to war with him. And that war turned out to be completely unnecessary, a proven fact.

Next question?

• Link
• Report this comment

This is probably pushing it since I certainly go off topic quite a bit, but it’s pretty funny that Jay B has come in with three off topic comments so far.

• Link
• Report this comment

Sad Seal,
where did you attend college? Curious because you keep on making fun of my school.

• Link
• Report this comment

Commie,

Hypocrite? No, that would be if I called Jay a crybaby and then called you out for calling him one, and that’s not what I did, I said it was low of you to do so.

What others do on this blog does not concern me.

• Link
• Report this comment

Copyleft,
so if democrats were all for getting rid of Saddam then how is Bush the bad guy? He actually had the balls to go in. Ha, no pun intended. Bill Clinton was too busy with his balls in Monica’s mouth. Opps, did that offend someone?

• Link
• Report this comment

WASHINGTON — Amid complaints from has own party that he’s moving too slowly to end the war in Iraq, President Barack Obama will announce Friday that U.S. combat troops will be withdrawn by Aug. 31, 2010, but that as many as 50,000 Marines and soldiers would remain until the end of 2011.

hehehehehehe

• Link
• Report this comment

Commie @ 4:02 –

Are you asking me if I like you? I don’t know you that well. And nope, that’s not my job to ask others not to mention your school – you seem to be proud of your school and education – why apologize for it?

• Link
• Report this comment

Commie,

Yeah, that was tasteless, and Clinton did bomb Iraq in 1998.

• Link
• Report this comment

Commie @ 4:09 –

What? No, Commie, it’s not just in my mind – it’s here on the blog for all to see.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bosch,
what was tasteless? Clinton bombed a sand dune with a cruise missile.

• Link
• Report this comment

Mike,
Jay only thinks that Republicans can be evil and racists.

• Link
• Report this comment

Commie,

The balls joke was tasteless and you need to read more if you think all Clinton did was bomb a sand dune.

Are we arguing? I never argue – but I’m not sure, you keep changing the subject.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bosch,
the balls joke was not a joke. What Clinton did was tasteless. Well, except for Monica because she tasted it. Anyway, get a sense of humor, Bosch. OH, yes, Clinton bombed an empty factory. That sure showed Osama didn’t it?

• Link
• Report this comment

Observer, Communist AJC, Mike and caz1158-

We are wasting our time, these people are not capable of engaging in mature debate.

Notice how all of the liberals must use childish ridicule in their conversations- demeaning nicknames and labels, insults, calling someone “little man”, boasting of their education, et. al. They cannot defend their positions without resorting to name-calling and creating straw men to topple because their ideas are not compatible with the original American values.

We probably should avoid these blogs and refuse to read Bookman, but it’s like tryng to avoid looking at a car accident. You try and you try, but you find yourself looking at the carnage.

• Link
• Report this comment

Commie,

I do not ask you to openly debate since I have proven time and time again that you do not know how to debate. I said that I challenge you to prove your claimed education and I will do the same by us sending documentation to Jay. That way, your fear of losing your anonymity is removed and we can see once and for all who speaks the truth about the education. Come now, little fella, that’s not asking too much of one so proud of his “Duke” education, is it? After all, you would put it on your resume, wouldn’t you?

• Link
• Report this comment

Bush lied, people died. I for one see nothing remotely funny about that statement. My God, you people seem to think that because some people or some country went along with this unnecessary war that the consequences are justifiable. I am glad the war dead will now receive the televised home coming honors they rightly deserve (as all our allies do). Maybe we would have called for an end sooner if we had been doing it all along. Nothing, nothing was worth what Bush and Co. has done to our military. Diplomacy was a bad word to them but the lives and limbs of our troops meant the war machine could make millions. I am sick of stay at home orators singing the Star Spangled Banner while others did the sacrificing. Tax cuts for the rich in a time of war, outrageous. You are all a bunch of cowards. YOU MAKE ME SICK!

• Link
• Report this comment

PJ -

“My God, you people seem to think that because some people or some country went along with this unnecessary war that the consequences are justifiable.”

Nobody said that, so no reason to hyperventilate about it. I am simply asking why Bush is a liar and Hilalry is not. Still can’t get a single Bush-hater to answer the question. It’s a simple one.

“You are all a bunch of cowards. YOU MAKE ME SICK!”

You think I care what some frothing partisan who shouts in caps thinks?

Please. Your arguments are boilerplate garbage.

Just remember: anyone who doesn’t share your every view is evil.

• Link
• Report this comment

I know that math is not a Republican’s strong suit so I’ll try once again for the benefit of the slower ones here: Now, pull out your calculators and don’t forget to turn it on, it won’t work otherwise. Now, enter 787 times 1.1 and press the little equals button and magically it displays 866. If you did not get 866, then please keep banging the keys until you do. Also, please note that 865.7 is rounded up to 866 if you happen to get that far.

• Link
• Report this comment

Taxevader,
you’re very, what’s the word, ah yes, moronic. So now we, evil republicans, can’t do simple math. Do you have a poll for this statement? No, it’s just made up crap like the rest of your rhetoric.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay –

As usual, you take the time to argue against a bunch of points that I never made, yet utterly refuse to address the points I did make. That is incredibly lame, but par for the course for you.

• Link
• Report this comment

Taxevader,
yes it is common to post resumes. TO POTENTIAL EMPLOYERS YOU MORON. I have NOTHING to prove to you. You are nobody with nothing important to say. You are looking more and more like an uneducated Clayton County Non-Grad. Go sell your stupidity somewhere else.

What tough moment in my life? You don’t know anything about me. Keep talking Taxevader because you are a clown.

• Link
• Report this comment

Like I said, you are a bunch of cowards. The truth hurts and Mike and Comm.AJC prove my point. Strap on a uniform and a gun like my son is doing now, and his father did, and his father before him. like my dad did and like my brother did and then come back with your glorious war talk. Until you do take your college degrees and opinions and stick them where the sun doesn’t shine. GET THAT LOUD AND CLEAR!

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay,
what about Hillary’s lies about Vince Foster and Whitewater?

Bosch,
Clinton bombed an empty factory. There was nothing in it. He did not get Bin Laden or go after Al Queda. Bush went after Al Queda. End of story.

• Link
• Report this comment

Paul W.,

No one forces you to be here, and if you’ll look at the posts of the people you named, they collectively do what you are describing. So are you saying that Commie et all are liberals?

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay –

Just to be clear:

You know for a fact that Bush knew there were no WMD and hence IS a liar?

Any chance that he was just wrong too? Why the benefit of the doubt for the current Sec of State?

• Link
• Report this comment

“so if democrats were all for getting rid of Saddam then how is Bush the bad guy?”

They weren’t the ones pushing for a WAR as the only possible response to Saddam. That was the Bushies. And, as everyone now knows, they were wrong.

Kind of like a lot of people here snipe about how Obama is evil… but the guy who actually picks up a gun and takes a shot at him is still the Bad Guy. He pushed it too far.

• Link
• Report this comment

Guy’s-sorry about the rant. I’m just so tired of sissy A*SSSSSSES that would rather see us (USA) fail as oppose to succeed!!!! Same as with the Economy-Screw the people that succeed,because of a few rotten apples.BUT reward the MANY scumbbuckets that rely solely on government and blame the rich for their pathetic existance!!!!!!!!!!!!!

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay-Then how did he lie,if the evidence does’nt support it!

• Link
• Report this comment

CommAJC – all talk no action.

caz1158 – All war is politics and if you don’t know that ask some one who does. Be it about land, slaves, the bible or WMD’s it’s all politics. As someone once wrote, “all wars are holy to thoses who don’t have to fight them”.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bosch,
who bombed the embassy in Kenya? USS COLE? What was the cruise missile going to accomplish? You’re confused Bosch.

• Link
• Report this comment

PJ-True Wars are mostly polictical. But what I said,politics should’nt govern strategies.Your putting the worlds finest in harms way,then let do what they have to do.Politics at home(ie-funding,equipment,left/right blame games) should stay out.

• Link
• Report this comment

CommAJC – You hide your ignorance behind college degrees. I stated my opinion and told of my family. I am proud of my son and encouraged him to serve his country. Does that mean I can’t criticize what I see as wrong. It’s people of your ilk that makes one justified in saying you are a hypocrite and a coward.

• Link
• Report this comment

PJ,
nothing you say can bother me.

• Link
• Report this comment

PJ-although I don’t agree with your politics,I respect your right to them. I Salute all members of your family for there service of this GREAT COUNTRY!!

• Link
• Report this comment

TOM-All true,but is not also true that these shows are ratings homeruns and that advertising dollars reflect it. There’s always more to the story,please tell it.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bosch,
what did that missile strike accomplish?

I’m only confused because you have yet to make a point. Paul W. was actually agreeing with me on a few things. Also, I have never “boasted” about my degree. I only wrote about it, originally, because someone said that all Duke grads were racists. Taxpayer brought up the topic today when he challenged my education. Look for yourself.

• Link
• Report this comment

Commie,

What has the war in Iraq accomplished in regards to al-Qaeda? We can go round and round and come to the same conclusion as always. I’ve got things to do now.

Later.

• Link
• Report this comment

Before you assume all conservative syndicated talk radio is wildly profitable, I suggest you look at some of the stocks of talk radio companies. Salem Communications — penny stock. Citadel (owner of the station that launched Limbaugh and Hannity, WABC) — just de-listed from the New York Stock Exchange. All is not well in syndicated talk radio land.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bosch –

“What has the war in Iraq accomplished in regards to al-Qaeda?”

Well, Al-Zwahiri said that Iraq was AQ’s highest priority battlefield. They lost there decisively. Partially due to that defeat, they have been discredited as realistic opposition to the US.

• Link
• Report this comment

Tom-Was’nt assuming anything. The majority of talk shows that are profitable are right wing-sorry. In the early to mid 80’s there quite a few left wing shows (even here in ATL,wish I could remember names.Maybe someone can help me) but they did’nt last long.They were in alot of cities put up against right wing shows and failed miserabily.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay-Man the lenghth one goes to prove a point!!! Him and You!!

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay-What happened to your last post-disappeared

• Link
• Report this comment

ALL-Have a Great Weekend albeit wet!!! Off for some Chicago style Pizza,anyone ever eatin at Nancy’s Pizza???

• Link
• Report this comment

Midori,
yes. I went to Duke. LOLOLOLOL.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bosch-

Though this is not exclusive to either side of the political spectrum, I find that the left is so full of hate and vitriole that they find it very difficult to addrsss issues without name-calling and demeaning labels for their opponents. They can’t even bring them selve to refer to our former president- who this country elected twice, with using disrespectful terms to refer to him.

If a conservative chooses to start speaking of “Oblama” or “Pellatio”, as some have, their credibilty is shot, also.

Leftists hate Bush; I disagree with Obama’s policies and fear his inexperience, naivete and arrogance, but I don’t hate him. And while we are on the subject, President Obama is only the 3rd most powerful person in DC at best, behind Pelosi and Reid. It is those two setting the agenda in Washington right now.

When you have to use a demeaning name to identify your opponebts, you have assumed the personal of a foolish child, and left the battle of ideas. It reflects a likely simpleton when you read such things.

• Link
• Report this comment

the reason why the republican party wasny elected is becaus ethe presidential elect was mccain and not sarah palin. mccain isnt a true republican, but now we all get to watch obama fail miserably at his attempts tto bring wealth to all. i love that obama “inherited” (even though he voted for most of the bills that caused the recession) the recession becuase if the economy was thriving rite now he would just tax the piss out of the rich and give it to the poor and he would be given the misnomer of “one of the greatest” for making everyone middle class even though after his term is up and taxes return to normal the poor are once again poor and no longer middle class. but i would like to thank obama for the recession, the upcoming recession and the return of the republicans. TRULY OBAMA THANK YOU!!!

• Link
• Report this comment

Can we maybe get this insanity back on track here and talk about the amendment DeMint put in the Voting Rights bill for D.C.?

In reading my copy of the U.S. Constitution (I’m already hearing the groans from the left), I can’t find anything in there that would allow a Federal District to have voting representation in the House of Representatives. So while DeMint’s amendment is great to see, if the ensuing law is declared “unconstitutional”, would the amendment still be in effect? I don’t think so.

• Link
• Report this comment