Bloodthirsty Liberal

The United States has before passed amendments to the Constitution, only to repeal them.

I just didn’t expect it to happen to the First Amendment:

Remember when the Left laughed at conservatives’ concerns over the Fairness Doctrine? Barack Obama already said he opposed the reimposition of the FCC rule, they said. After all, Obama’s campaign gave this definitive statement in June 2008:

“Senator Obama does not support re-imposing the Fairness Doctrine on broadcasters,” said press secretary Michael Ortiz in an e-mail to B&C late Wednesday.

“He considers this debate to be a distraction from the conversation we should be having about opening up the airwaves and modern communications to as many diverse viewpoints as possible,” said Ortiz.

…

Today, Chris Wallace interviewed David Axelrod and asked him directly about the Fairness Doctrine — and suddenly the White House adviser got a lot less definitive:

WALLACE: Will you rule out reimposing the Fairness Doctrine?

AXELROD: I’m going to leave that issue to Julius Genachowski, our new head of the FCC, to, and the president, to discuss. So I don’t have an answer for you now.

…

The American media should be ashamed of themselves on this issue. They pose as the defenders of the First Amendment and free speech. Why are Chris Wallace and Michael Calderone the only MSM people pursuing this?

I like Ed Morrissey a lot, but he’s being disingenuous here. The American media are practically leading the charge for the Fairness Doctrine. Too many members are motivated by ideology, not information, and anyone who is not singing frm the same hymnbook as they (Rush, Sean), will be kicked out of the choir.

There is nothing fair about suspending the Constitution for political gain.

Charles Schumer can’t define free speech, but he knows it when he sees it.

And he doesn’t like it:

Asked if he is a supporter of telling radio stations what content they should have, Schumer used the fair and balanced line, claiming that critics of the Fairness Doctrine are being inconsistent.

“The very same people who don’t want the Fairness Doctrine want the FCC [Federal Communications Commission] to limit pornography on the air. I am for that… But you can’t say government hands off in one area to a commercial enterprise but you are allowed to intervene in another. That’s not consistent.”

Well, that’s obscene, isn’t it? The marketplace of ideas is set to become a red-light district.

Of course, in his mind—and all liberal minds—this logic is impeccable. Conservative thought is pornographic. What a boob. (I could have found an even pithier word, but it’s not that kind of blog.)