Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 61 to 80 of 80

Thread: Chuck Shumer really really wants Fairness Doctrine (ie to restrict speech)

  1. #61
    It is a toss up between whom I would fear more than Obama as president.... Schumer or Pelosi.

    Schumer is a complete jerk. He gave the same commencement speech 3 years in a row at the HS graduation for my sons (same district I teach in).

  2. #62
    [QUOTE=fukushimajin;2844130]I've already got mine. First, freedom of speech and use of a licensed public airway are two different things. Second, I said "why bother with the fairness doctrine?" Third, In Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. FCC, 395 U.S. 367 (1969), the U.S. Supreme Court upheld[B] (by a vote of 8-0)[/B] the constitutionality of the Fairness Doctrine in a case of an on-air personal attack, in response to challenges that the Doctrine violated the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Basically,now it is up to the discretion of the FCC.
    Evidence once again that Conservatives just say stuff --without any basis in fact or reality. Also, where were all you brave Constitutional Warriors when GW Dummy was wiretapping whoever based on his "inherent authority"? Oh that's right you were listening to Hannity, Limbaugh and O'reilly tell you all day that it was just fine.

    You know, thanks to this dumb thread -- I read the case & related history and now am fully in support of the fairness doctrine and will call Chuck S. to say: go for it.[/QUOTE]

    I must've missed in Article I Section 8 where it says the Fed can regulate communication.

  3. #63
    [QUOTE=JCnflies;2844495]It is a toss up between whom I would fear more than Obama as president.... Schumer or Pelosi.

    Schumer is a complete jerk. He gave the same commencement speech 3 years in a row at the HS graduation for my sons (same district I teach in).[/QUOTE]

    No-one I know in NY likes this guy. How does he keep getting elected? Maybe the GOP can get a high profile guy (pataki?) to run against him, or Hillary will convince a dem to take him on in the primary - I don't think she like being the "junior" Senator from NY.

  4. #64
    [QUOTE=BrooklynBound;2844626]I must've missed in Article I Section 8 where it says the Fed can regulate communication.[/QUOTE]

    Interstate commerce -- its clearly covered. Broadcasting is almost the definition of this.

  5. #65
    [QUOTE=SONNY WERBLIN;2844967]No-one I know in NY likes this guy. How does he keep getting elected? Maybe the GOP can get a high profile guy (pataki?) to run against him, or Hillary will convince a dem to take him on in the primary - I don't think she like being the "junior" Senator from NY.[/QUOTE]

    Chuck Schumer is, bar-none, the hardest working politician in the state. He's almost manic about it. He has a better constituent service operation than Al D'Amato and travels relentlessly to the unpopulated regions of the state. He is also a master fund-raiser and wicked-smart. Granted, his Sunday press-conferences are ridiculous, but that's just his work-a-holic nature. Most people just laugh.

  6. #66
    [QUOTE=pauliec;2843720]Oftentimes the CoS has the President's ear on a lot of issues, and if it's a guy who the President likes and trusts (like Emanuel), then this will be even more so.

    Don't underestimate the influence of the CoS.[/QUOTE]

    don't overestimate it either....

  7. #67
    [quote=fukushimajin;2845283]Interstate commerce -- its clearly covered. Broadcasting is almost the definition of this.[/quote]

    The regulation has to be somewhat related to commerce; the content on the airwaves isn't commerce, and the government can't regulate political speech, even under the commerce clause, absent a pretty damn compelling state interest in doing so. With the vast expansion of usable radio space since Red Lion, there is no such interest

  8. #68
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Long Island & Section 337
    Posts
    4,859
    [QUOTE=JCnflies;2844495]It is a toss up between whom I would fear more than Obama as president.... Schumer or Pelosi.

    Schumer is a complete jerk. He gave the same commencement speech 3 years in a row [B]at the HS graduation for my sons [/B](same district I teach in).[/QUOTE]

    GC?

  9. #69
    Hall Of Fame
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    L.I. NY (where the Jets used to be from)
    Posts
    13,472
    [QUOTE=fukushimajin;2845293]Chuck Schumer is, bar-none, the hardest working politician in the state. He's almost manic about it. He has a better constituent service operation than Al D'Amato and travels relentlessly to the unpopulated regions of the state. He is also a master fund-raiser and wicked-smart. Granted, his Sunday press-conferences are ridiculous, but that's just his work-a-holic nature. Most people just laugh.[/QUOTE]

    Hardest working politican is an oxymoron.

    What does that even mean? He travels alot?:barf:

    He is so busy that his biggest concern is the Fairness doctrine?

  10. #70
    [QUOTE=Piper;2846065]Hardest working politican is an oxymoron.

    What does that even mean? He travels alot?:barf:

    He is so busy that his biggest concern is the Fairness doctrine?[/QUOTE]

    Also, wonder why he voted for the Bailout Bill:

    Top Contributors to Charles E. Schumer (D) during the 2006 Election Cycle
    Rank Donor Amount (US Dollars)
    1 Goldman Sachs $ 182,590
    2 JP Morgan Chase & Co $ 129,800
    3 Merrill Lynch $ 127,000
    4 Bear Stearns $ 126,400
    5 Citigroup Inc $ 111,550

  11. #71
    [QUOTE=fukushimajin;2845283]Interstate commerce -- its clearly covered. Broadcasting is almost the definition of this.[/QUOTE]

    Nope, that relates to preventing trade wars and tariffs between states

  12. #72
    All League
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Wilton, CT
    Posts
    2,744
    Heard on the news before that Barack Obama has asked Henry Rivera to be head the FCC transition team. He is a huge supporter of the Fairness Doctrine....

  13. #73
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In The Cone of Doom
    Posts
    7,087
    [QUOTE=Warfish;2843479]It's done. The Fairness Doctrine will be Law within one year.

    Better get used to the idea now. Because it is what it is.[/QUOTE]

    It will be taken to the SCOTUS and be struck down.

  14. #74
    [QUOTE=The Boston Patriot;2847478]It will be taken to the SCOTUS and be struck down.[/QUOTE]

    Funny, it was Law for quite a while and the SCOTUS never touched it before. Why would that change now, especially if it's post the two (likely) SCOTUS Nom's Obama will get to appoint?

  15. #75
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In The Cone of Doom
    Posts
    7,087
    [QUOTE=Warfish;2847481]Funny, it was Law for quite a while and the SCOTUS never touched it before. Why would that change now, especially if it's post the two (likely) SCOTUS Nom's Obama will get to appoint?[/QUOTE]

    If they expand it then the bells will go off. I agree with one exception about
    the SCOTUS appointments. If he replaces the left wingers already on the court
    with other left wingers, then no problem.

  16. #76
    the concern that the right-wingers had about obama making scotus appointments always confused the **** out of me.

    the demographics say that the justices most likely to leave are lefties, so the one who would be more likely to unbalance the court would be...

  17. #77
    [QUOTE=Ciaran;2847500]the concern that the right-wingers had about obama making scotus appointments always confused the **** out of me.

    the demographics say that the justices most likely to leave are lefties, so the one who would be more likely to unbalance the court would be...[/QUOTE]

    Well, righties would be "concerned" because they would want fellow righties, not replacement lefties. Thats all.

  18. #78
    All League
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Wilton, CT
    Posts
    2,744
    [QUOTE=Green Jets & Ham;2847521]Marxists like Shumer have been waiting for this day when they control the federal government lock, stock and barrel, and now that its here you better believe the conservative media is about to get punched dead in the face

    Elections matter and elections have consequences[/QUOTE]

    It's the beginning of the end of our freedom of speech.....
    Last edited by Green Jets & Ham; 11-07-2008 at 07:10 PM.

  19. #79
    [QUOTE=Green Jets & Ham;2847534]You know, the more I think about it, RTA, I'm actually hopeful that Obama is too smart to let some second rate Marxist like Chuck Shumer turn him into a one term President .. call me nuts, but I think there's a chance Obama might tell Shumer and his ilk to go peddle their Marxist ideas elsewhere[/QUOTE]

    I kind of agree..if Obama is as politically shrewd as he has appeared, it will only help him to be at odds with the ideological far left that is in congress and focus on the centrist dems in congress as allies.

    Then, people like Pelosi and Reid will find themselves in a much weaker position.

    Obama, right now, has all the power.

    I think it will only aid him if the fairness doctrine crosses his desk, to veto it.

    Think of the support he would get from many conservatives independents and possibly those at odds with the republican party.

  20. #80
    [QUOTE=Green Jets & Ham;2847546]EXACTLY

    Obama is smart and a very savvy politician, you don't beat the Clinton machine then win a national election by a landslide by being dumb, so I wouldn't be so sure that he'll allow clowns like Chuck Shumer to bamboozle him into polarizing the country and unneccessarily antagonizing millions of Americans .. and I say unneccessarily because he just won a landslide and the Hannity's and Limbaugh's Shumer wants to silence could not touch him .. he already knows they can't do a damn thing to hurt him, so why anger millions of Americans just to satisfy Chuck Shumer's {and his crowds} vindictive streak?

    I think he's too smart to get sucked into that mistake, and you're right piney, none of those people control him now, he is not beholden to anyone, they are beholden to him .. IMO he's the most popular democrat since FDR :eek:

    Think about it .. since FDR has any democrat won the Presidency by such a massive landslide?[/QUOTE]

    combined with the low approval ratings of the Dem congress...it is somewhat scary to think of how much leverage that Obama will have over a lot of people.

    If Obama is serious about being bipartisan and doing what is best for the country, the Dems would be playing right into his hands by giving him his first opportunity to do it.

    Imagine how handcuffed the Hannitys and Limbaughs would be if he turned around and vetoed any type of fairness doctrine legislation.

    How could they not attack the congress and in turn have to praise Obama for doing what he should do.

    How many people would Obama win over if he did that?

    Imagine Hannity killing Obama and the Dems about the fairness doctrine, then having to publicly praise Obama to his audience about a veto.

    It would be like a very quick and efficient game of chess by Obama.

    Even if he wanted to support the doctrine secretly it makes all the political sense in the world to publicly oppose it and veto it. He would gain a lot of capital with a lot of opponents.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us