`Notwithstanding section 303 or any other provision of this Act or any other Act authorizing the Commission to prescribe rules, regulations, policies, doctrines, standards, or other requirements, the Commission shall not have the authority to prescribe any rule, regulation, policy, doctrine, standard, or other requirement that has the purpose or effect of reinstating or repromulgating (in whole or in part) the requirement that broadcasters present opposing viewpoints on controversial issues of public importance, commonly referred to as the `Fairness Doctrine', as repealed in General Fairness Doctrine Obligations of Broadcast Licensees, 50 Fed. Reg. 35418 (1985).'.9:11: The conversation begins (all these are paraphrased - I'm doing this live).
Steigerwald: If Obama wins, do we get the Fairness Doctrine again?
Hart: I think we do.
Hart: Altmire is trying to have it both ways. He supports the bill but won't sign a discharge petition forcing the bill to the floor.
9:14: Steigerwald Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer both say we need the fairness doctrine.
This whole argument seems to be based on this:
Conservative critics have been very concerned that Congress had supported a one-year moratorium on the return of the Fairness Doctrine, but has not supported the Broadcaster Freedom Act (BFA), which would permanently prevent these regulations from returning.
Representative Mike Pence (R-Ind.) introduced the BFA last June, where it is still awaiting a vote. As of June 25, 200 Members have signed a discharge petition which would force the House to make an up or down vote on the legislation, but an additional 18 signatures are needed.
“And so far, not one single House Democrat has signed our petition for an up-or-down vote on broadcast freedom...and now we know why,” announced Pence in response to Pelosi’s comments. “I say to Speaker Pelosi with respect: Defending freedom is the paramount interest of every Member of the American Congress.”
9:20: Now they're talking about off-shore drilling.9:23: The drilling is stopped because the Democrats are dependent on radical environmental groups, like Moveon.org.
9:25: Steigerwald: What about Conservatives' criticism of Bush on spending?
Hart: Bush should have vetoed more than he did.
Steigerwald: Was that about Bush "getting along" and going a little too far?
Hart: I think he should have been stronger.
9:27: Steigerwald: McCain has gained 5 points in the recent Quinnipiac poll. From 12 points down to 7 points down in Pennsylvania, so that should be good news to Republicans in the state.
9:29 Steigerwald: Biggest differences between Altmire and Hart?
Hart: I say what I believe in and act on it. He does a lot of flip-flopping. He says he's pro-live but he's voted pro-abortion.
Submitted for your approval.
I'm always amazed at the "fairness doctrine" argument. It seems that everyone and his uncle on the right is screaming about how liberals are looking to bring the fairness doctrine back. Their panic is palpable. It'll be the end of the republic if those lib'ruls get their way and reinstitute the fairness doctrine, they rant. Then they complain about how the mainstream media is silent about the issue - thus proving the conspiracy to reinstate it.
Hart's and Steigerwald's argument seems to be that Pelosi and Altmire want to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine because they're not fighting tooth and nail to bring the "Broadcaster Freedom Act of 2007" to the floor. Altmire in particular because while he cosponsers the bill, he won't sign the discharge petition to force a vote.
So that proves he's in favor of reinstatement.
Can someone explain the logic to me?
The thing is, if nothing happens, then the Fairness Doctrine is still inert, right? So explain to me how keeping something inert actually supports reinstating it?
Especially when Senator Obama is NOT in support of reinstatement?
Conservative logic - an oxymoron if ever there was one.
But, of course to the wingnuts, since Bill Clinton cheated on his wife and then lied about it, that invalidates "Democrat Logic."