NOWHERE did the fairness doctrine deny free speech..period.
NOWHERE did I mention free speech!
It provided a dialogue Graywolf.
No it provided government interference.
I could careless what a conservative and a liberal have to say
Maybe you do care, but I couldn't care less what they have to say because they are all saying the same thing.
as long as I am given the opportunity to hear both sides of their argument,
You are only going to hear one side fo the argument if you are only hearing from them, anyway.
Now you called my arguement a lie,
To imply that anyone opposed to government interference is afraid of being proven wrong, is a lie. As I said, there are some that probably feel that way, but there are others, like me, that oppose it for legit reasons.
well its funny how some TV religous commentators, and a few lesser know syndicated conservative commentators recently have said that the proponents of the fairness doctrine would shut down the conservative voice( a lie) and "WE" shouldnt allow liberals to broadcast their. Who were they? Pat Robertson's son, Larry Bates.Lars Larson, and that Jerry guy who used to be ob "Babylon 5" (appropriate).
A couple of flapping jaws doesn't mean everyone!
Sorry Graywolf, conservatives dont want an equal opposing viewpoint on the air,that may point out how their opinion could actually be wrong.
There you go lying about some people again.
The bottom line the airwaves belong to the tax payer,
That is the socialist lie...
the stations are licensed to serve its community with no religous or political preference, the people should be fully, not partially served , in hearing opposing view points ,equally and fairly..no censorship is advocated.
They have that choice, if they know where to find opposing viewpoints. They will not find it listening to R & D flapping jaws...as they are all arguing for the same thing.