Minnesota, a long-time left wing state (far enough to the left that most other states consider their republicans to be liberal) has new competition.
Al Franken has been in the running for a senate seat.
You may remember him as a somewhat funny SNL actor. One or two of you might have even heard that he had a radio show on something called Air America (A Failure of a left wing talk radio station.)
Well, he now has direct competition. From the one.... the only... Jessie "The Body" Ventura! Jesse, you'll remember, served as governor in MN, amid a flurry of "My governor can beat up your governor" bumperstickers (which he hated), and moved to mexico 'in hiding' while publishing his new tin-foil hat conspiracy theory book.
He believes that he knows what REALLY happened during the Kennedy Assassination, and now he's running for federal office.
Good luck Minnesota. You get to choose between a looney, a lefty and Norm Coleman (who some believe was responsible for Wellstone's death, because republicans would do things like that according to left wing nut-jobs.)
In the interest of fairness, I'll admit that I (in my youthful stupidity) voted for Ventura for Governor.
In my defense, he ended up doing two good things.Â
First, he got the state congress to lower the taxes on vehicles, making it cheaper to get car tags.Â
Second, when the Wellstone memorial service was televised and turned (by the democrats) into a Vote Democrat Rally, Ventura not only walked out, but publically said that he was going to appoint a democrat to replace wellstone because the people of minnesota voted for a democrat, however after the spectacle the Democrats made of the memorial service he was going to appoint an independent instead.
Now, however, not only am I GREATLY more intelligent, but now Ventura has turned into a looney toon. He spouts conspiracy theories about everything under the sun and even claimed that he had to go to Mexico to 'flee' from some people after him. (Frankly, if someone were trying to 'get him' . . . being in Mexico would make it easier)
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
Nothin' like Thom Hartmann on Air America.
Coal is to shaving as nuclear power is to waxing. For the time being, they are both relatively cheaper options, and each is a fast fix to the energy problem. Now, factor global warming back in --"Hairy Sustainability" by A-squared, a ProU blogger
Don't even know who that is, but I can tell you that Air America is a failure.
Most radio stations have people pay for airtime and then the radio station pays for shows like Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck.
Air America pays for airtime on many radio stations.
That is why Air America is doomed to fail. That is, also, why the left is trying to push the "Fairness Doctrine". . .. that way people like Rush will be required to share his showtime with people like Al Franken.
Nothing says "Free Speech" like a requirement to not say what you want to say.
Lolz. Yeah don't you just love how our information is now driven by the advertisement department of news organizations? And that professors have been sounding the alarm about bisphenol A for years, and yet it's not a national story until 2008? Shux, I'm glad that we don't have a Fairness Doctrine that requires radio stations to deliver a public service to the community. What a safe, healthy and educated citizenship we're rearing.
Coal is to shaving as nuclear power is to waxing. For the time being, they are both relatively cheaper options, and each is a fast fix to the energy problem. Now, factor global warming back in --"Hairy Sustainability" by A-squared, a ProU blogger
Yeah, that's what the Fairness Doctrine is all about.... chemicals in plastics....
All hail the Professors! For only they have the real truth! All the media is run by [enter current conspiracy theory here] and no actual truth gets out!
If only we could have the government control the media, then we could have such high quality programming as AlJazeera and the Chinese News Service!
. . .. Yes, in case you don't understand, that is sarcasm.
You have heard the term "Useful Idiot" before, right?
Yeah, let's ignore the scientific discoveries of our age. Last time I checked you weren't advocating for a regression to the caves. Pass the gorp.
By the way, "chemicals and plastics" was merely an example of truth that "gets out"... just a whee bit late.
"Useful Idiot"-- that's has a communist connotation, correct? Or is that the contemporary usage-- so I'm a mindless follower of a group's idears? I reckon yer right.
Coal is to shaving as nuclear power is to waxing. For the time being, they are both relatively cheaper options, and each is a fast fix to the energy problem. Now, factor global warming back in --"Hairy Sustainability" by A-squared, a ProU blogger
Now you're trying to shift the topic away from Fairness Doctrine.
You are using an old and very cheap ploy that, thankfully, does not work on me.
And, yes. "Useful Idiot" is a term reserved for those who actually believe in the communist/socialist agenda enough to rally to it and bash those who do not. These people tend to be the ones who do not profit from socialism or communism, but rally for it anyway.
I'm the misleading one?
You who wrote about talk show hosts being required to have on people like Al Franken. That's absolutely not true. You painted it as a freedom issue. Do you know what use the Fairness Doctrine played originally?
Shux, you know what. I propose we each write a blog piece about what the Fairness Doc means to us. Then we see what the public thinks. We'll see who's misleading. Sound real swell-like?
Coal is to shaving as nuclear power is to waxing. For the time being, they are both relatively cheaper options, and each is a fast fix to the energy problem. Now, factor global warming back in --"Hairy Sustainability" by A-squared, a ProU blogger
Considering that you're referring to the old FCC regulation, one that the Supreme Court upheld in the late 60's) as compared to the proposed plan by Hillary and a few other Democrats.
The original Fairness Doctrine sought to constrain free speech by requiring alternate ideas. It never made it past the 'plan' state and was never implimented after that Supreme Court decision. There was a form of it implimented that really never did much as the majority of the news media tilted so far to the left that moderates were viewed as radical conservatives (which is why Fox news is viewed as the 'right wing' news channel' . . . it isn't. It is just further to the right than the rest. Fox is actually moderate overall. Their 'real conservatives' are always paired with rabid liberals. This version was somewhat upheld and somewhat crunched in the mid 80's. It was stopped.
It has, however, tried to come back, with support from Democrat Senator Dick Durbin, Democrat Senator John Kerry and Democrat Senator Hillary Clinton. Democrat Representative Maurice Hinchey proposed the bill a few years back (Under the new 'catchy' name of "Media Ownership Reform Act"), and it was (thankfully) shot down. REPUBLICAN Senator Norm Coleman put an amendment in a bill to forbid the FCC from using any funds to adopt any sort of Fairness Doctrine. Unfortunately, the amendment was blocked as they wanted the FCC to determine if the FCC could use federal funds to extend its power (Yeah... that's wise...)
Their proposed idea is to require conservative talk radio stations to have 'equal time' given to liberals as the liberal talk radio stations get no play.
Frankly, you can do as you wish with your blog. I don't much care what your view on the fairness doctrine is, or what it means to you.
It is what it is and spinning it isn't going to make it 'better' for America.
You can't restrain the freedom of speech to make up for Air America's failure.
Can we put together an idea that makes news organizations more accountable to the public rather than its advertisers? Or is that foo-ey?
This is not a partisan issue to me. If the purpose of our media is to create a well-informed citizenry, it's a lower-case d, democratic issue. But if the purpose of media is to fabricate, invent and preach to a choir while remaining devout to the advertising department's interests ON THE PUBLIC AIRWAVES, I believe we should continue down the current path.
A modern Fairness Doctrine should address this conundrum.
Coal is to shaving as nuclear power is to waxing. For the time being, they are both relatively cheaper options, and each is a fast fix to the energy problem. Now, factor global warming back in --"Hairy Sustainability" by A-squared, a ProU blogger
Nope, keep the government out of the media business.
The only exception is overseas reporters reporting on our military's movements. National Security issue.
We can't have the government telling the media that for every conservative voice they should require a liberal one as well.
While I do believe that investments from companies in the way of advertising is why news stations are able to continue, I don't buy into the whole "The Corporations tell the news people what to say" stuff.
Sorry, Nike is not telling the news people to be harsh on conservatives. The liberals in the media do that on their own.
The reporters say what they want to say, when they want to say it. The closest you get to influence via advertisers is that if what one is saying is not getting listeners/viewers, they don't get advertising dollars... and that's ok.
That someone says something does not mean that we are required to fund or listen to it.
"That someone says something does not mean that we are required to fund or listen to it." At least you hit that one outta the ballpark.
my documentary...
Wanna smile on the spot?