In the first 36 of the so called 100 hour (a promise made by Newt in 94 – no new ideas for democrats. Steal conservative ones.) Democrats have managed with the help of so called republicans to give away some of your tax money calling it a ‘Increase in minimum wage." Raise gas prices by recending a tax break the Clinton administration gave to the "BIG" oil companies and "oh yea" gave away some of your tax money to fund embryo stem cell research that cannot get private funding because it shows not promise. Notice there is no tax payer money for Adult Stem Cell Research? That’s because it has shown promise and can get private money for research.

It seems that every time Democrats take control of congress they begin by taking away something from the people. Now they are reaching for your right to "Free Speech" and participation in the political debate. John McCain -R- started this process with the Election finance reform act. Now a NY Democrat has introduced a bill to reinstate the so-called "Fairness Doctrine".

What is the "Fairness Doctrine" you might ask! Basically it says that any "Radio" (notice the absence of TV) station must broadcast a decenting opinion from any of its listeners at no cost to the decenter. No cost equals no revenue so how does the stations deal with this? They stay away from controversy. Seems the liberal/progressive democrats have found a way of shutting up opponents instead of welcoming them to the debate.

I heard the sponsor of the latest bill being interviewed on the Sean Hanity radio show. Hanity asked him to address the 1^st Amendment. He hemmed and hawwed mumbling something about "right to redress" After awhile it was embarrassing to hear an elective representative prove he knew nothing about the 1^st Amendment. He then went on about how the airwaves were public property. (He failed to mention this public property like parks etc. cannot be used by the public without government approval.)

Let me remind you and him about the 1^st Amendment.

Amendment I - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Over the years liberal/progressive Democrats have used the courts to redefine the 1^st Amendment. It seems that the second part of each sentence is ignored. On religion "Or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;" It doesn’t say you can exercise your religion only in a certain place. Schools, parks, courthouses etc are public property and the 1^st Amendment gives every religion the right to exercise there religious beliefs in the Public.

On speech, "Or abridging the freedom of speech." This means that we all have the right to state our opinion by what ever means available especially in the "Public" forum. In public parks of past speakers have mounted "soap boxes" and shouted their message often drowning out the other person who was trying to express their opinion.

The discovery of radio frequencies gave the people another forum for free speech. Since these waves of sound could cross state lines I understand why the Federal Government is charged with regulating the frequencies since the Constitution charges them with "regulating interstate commerce." They do this by reserving certain radio frequencies for specific uses. This keeps one station from blasting another off the air. Ever gotten mad that late at night a station in Canada or Mexico drowns out your favorite station? This happens because neither Canada nor Mexico regulates the bands and transmission power.

In stead of telling people who have a grievance against talk radio to "Change the channel" or "
Go get sponsors and start your own talk program." The Democrats want to reintroduce the "Fairness Doctrine"

Seems that the liberal/progressives put up money for liberal talk radio called "Air America." But they couldn’t keep an audience even after Democrat supporters poured millions of dollars into funding them. They didn’t succeed so, much like embryo stem cell research, the funds dried up. Why couldn’t they keep and audience? My belief is that no one wants to hear a radio commentator repeat the same things they have heard on TV and read in the newspapers. I also believe that conservative talk radio succeeds because it gives a different opinion and slant other than we read and hear from the "Mainstream Media."

KC

To my friend who receive notification of my post.

Thanks for accepting my post whether you read them or not. This makes me feel that I am doing something. I really would like your input on these blobs. I promise no flames or agitations. Or ask me questions regarding either party and I will do the research and give you the honest answer. I believe that the republican party is leaving its conservative base just as have the democrats, that it is a time for a new conservative party that represents all conservatives regardless of which party they have supported in the past.