Spot on. To the commenter who says that this is anecdotal: sure, of course this particular incident is, but you can haul out a pretty truck-full and build quite a rigorous case if you prefer. In general, the Left will resort to whatever means are necessary to suppress conservative voices.
It is to my mind very telling that the most liberal voice on the airwaves is a government mandate. What sense does it make to have public broadcasting in the first place? Should the Discovery Channel, A&E, the History Channel and the Learning Channel all be forced to finance another competitor? Because that’s what they’re doing.
Where I take issue with Pam Meister’s point is where she gets into the Orwellian Fairness Doctrine. Call me old-fashioned, but the tattered and much-abused First Amendment still means something to me. Second, you don’t honestly think that turn-around will actually happen, do you? Don’t be naive. During the days when it was around, the bureaucrats who administered it found numerous ways to exempt liberal programming from the requirement. And what “opposing views” did make it onto the air were designed to be unpalatable straw men.
Just look at what the FEC does. They rule election year propaganda movies by Michael Moore to be just fine, while banning conservative films for violating McCain Feingold by expressing an opinion in an election year.
Pragmatism and principle line up perfectly here.
