“Bbbbut we’re not trying to bring back the Fairness Doctrine!!!!”

This would be hilarious if it weren’t such a serious issue related to our free speech rights. The Nutroots left is actually trying to persuade people that they are ‘not’ in favor of bringing back the Fairness Doctrine – even though the things their advocating reeks of exactly the type of rules and regs and restrictions the Fairness Doctrine put in place. Seriously. Read some of the arguments posted at that link.

This is so typical of the left. It’s kinda like when they talk about “bringing our troops home now” yet when you accuse them of wanting to cut and run, they shout, “bbbbut I never said we should cut and run!” as if they actually have to say the words for you to know what they’re talking about. Priceless.

Check out what Tim Karr at the HuffPo had to say:

The report has clearly touched a raw nerve among these folks. Perhaps their attack is prompted more out of fear than anger. Fear of a media system that better reflects the diversity of the Americans it’s supposed to serve — and one that is less of an echo chamber for those that now control what millions of people hear when they scan the dial.

“Our goal is not less speech, it’s more speech,” said Ben Scott, policy director for Free Press and co-author of the report. “We want more voices on the radio.”

Isn’t conservatism all about localism? What could be more local than radio programming that’s rooted in the community?

This sort of independence and diversity in the media should be a rallying cry for true conservatives and not cause for division and alarm.

These people are completely fanatical, frenzied, and fascistic in their demands for ‘equality in broadcasting’ courtesy of the state. Never, ever let the left get away with telling you they’re the true ‘protectors’ of free speech – I’ve always snickered when I’ve heard them make that claim in so many words before, but I’m not laughing now, because what they’re advocating goes against everything this country stands for.

Here’s all you need to know about MORA (Media Ownership Reform Act), in particular:

IV. Establishes a New Media Ownership Review Process

MORA creates a new review process, to be carried by the FCC every three years, on how the commission’s regulations on media ownership promote and protect localism, competition, diversity of voices, diversity of ownership, children’s programming, small and local broadcasters, and technological advancement. The bill requires the FCC to report to Congress on its findings.

V. Requires Reports for Public Interest

MORA requires broadcast licensees to publish a report every two years on how the station is serving the public interest. The legislation also requires licensees to hold at least two community public hearings per year to determine local needs and interests.

Here’s the “fact sheet” and the “co-sponsors” for this bill in the House.

Surrrrrre it’s not the Fairness Doctrine reborn … !

Related: Bob Owens blogs about a conflict of interest related to one liberal’s attack on conservative talk radio.

More from Brian Maloney: “Talk Radio Report Downplayed Actual ‘Progressive’ Content.”

Read more via Jeff Goldstein, La Shawn Barber, JammieWearingFool, Bookworm Room, JonJayRay at Stop The ACLU

Prior this week:

Cowboys at the Panthers (Weekend open thread) (UPDATE: PANTHERS LOSE 20-13)


Let the trash talkin’ begin! \:d/

Game time is 8:15 pm ET. The Panthers are trying to keep their longshot playoff hopes alive, while the Cowboys are trying to hold on to home field advantage, and are hoping to recover from last week’s embarassing loss to the Eagles:

Despite its struggles over the last two games, Dallas has already clinched a first-round bye and is tied with Green Bay for the best record in the NFC. The Cowboys own the tiebreaker after beating the Packers 37-27 on Nov. 29, so a win and a Green Bay loss in Chicago this weekend will ensure Dallas home-field advantage throughout the postseason.

“We’re very fortunate to lose a game and get a first-round bye and still have an opportunity to have home-field advantage. We’ve just got to win out,” [Receiver Terrell] Owens said.

The Dallas defense will be without one of their star players:

The Cowboys, though, need to get their offense going, while the defense will be without safety Roy Williams, who was suspended one game after his third illegal “horse collar” tackle of the season and fourth in two seasons last week. Williams appealed the decision, but the league upheld the ban Wednesday.

Williams leads the team with 65 solo tackles and is second in total tackles with 83.

Carolina’s defense may be without one of their own star players, Julius Peppers, who is listed as “doubtful” for tonight’s game (sprained ankle). My prediction is that he definitely won’t play, as he hasn’t practiced all week. Not that he has been putting up fantasy numbers this year anyway, but still, he’s a strong motivator for the Carolina defense, so his absence will most assuredly be felt tonight.

I participated in a football pool this week, and out of the eleven total who signed up for it, only one picked the Panthers in an upset. It wasn’t me. I’ve heard the jokes about the Cowboys being “cowgirls” but the only time they seem to act like cowgirls is when they have a famous one cheering their QB on in the stands. <):) Keep in mind that I say that as someone who used to be a big Dallas fan when I was very young, back in the days when Landry was the coach and Roger Staubach was QB. Those were the days … sigh.

Hey, want to try and distract Tony Romo at tonight’s game, Panthers fans? The National Ledger reports that a website has been created to help do just that. The local media have been all over it. Download your Jessica Simpson mask here! :D

In an interesting twist, Matt Moore, who originally wanted to be a Cowboys QB but was denied, will be starting tonight. Will revenge be in the cards?

Dallas CowboysThe game is being broadcast on the NFL network, which a lot of people don’t get, but you should be able to watch it here. I suspect a local network here will be showing the game, too (most likely WBTV). I won’t be around for a good part of the game, but will try and check in before it’s over. Of course, it may be over before it really gets started good :-ss

Also, please utilize this as an open thread for this weekend, although non-football fans be warned: this thread will likely be taken over tonight for a few hours by Cowboys and Packers fans, with the Packers fans hoping for a Dallas loss, which would take the Packers one step closer to home field advantage. That GB/Chicago game, BTW, will be played in Chicago, at 1 pm ET tomorrow.

Update: The Panthers lost to the Cowboys 20-13, with some help from the officials in the 4th quarter. I coulda called the dang game better than they did! Don’t any of the striped shirts know what pass interference looks like??

Main beneficiary of John Edwards’ poverty center fundraising: himself

Via the NYT:

John Edwards ended 2004 with a problem: how to keep alive his public profile without the benefit of a presidential campaign that could finance his travels and pay for his political staff.

Mr. Edwards, who reported this year that he had assets of nearly $30 million, came up with a novel solution, creating a nonprofit organization with the stated mission of fighting poverty. The organization, the Center for Promise and Opportunity, raised $1.3 million in 2005, and — unlike a sister charity he created to raise scholarship money for poor students — the main beneficiary of the center’s fund-raising was Mr. Edwards himself, tax filings show.

A spokesman for Mr. Edwards defended the center yesterday as a legitimate tool against poverty.

The organization became a big part of a shadow political apparatus for Mr. Edwards after his defeat as the Democratic vice presidential nominee in 2004 and before the start of his presidential bid this time around. Its officers were members of his political staff, and it helped pay for his nearly constant travel, including to early primary states.

While Mr. Edwards said the organization’s purpose was “making the eradication of poverty the cause of this generation” its federal filings say it financed “retreats and seminars” with foreign policy experts on Iraq and national security issues. Unlike the scholarship charity, donations to it were not tax deductible, and, significantly, it did not have to disclose its donors — as political action committees and other political fund-raising vehicles do — and there were no limits on the size of individual donations.


Mr. Edwards mixed policy and politics in a way that allowed his supporters to donate to the causes he believed in — and to the organizations he had set up. He also set up two political action committees, something commonly done by politicians thinking of running for president.

But it was his use of a tax-exempt organization to finance his travel and employ people connected to his past and current campaigns that went beyond what most other prospective candidates have done before pursuing national office. And according to experts on nonprofit foundations, Mr. Edwards pushed at the boundaries of how far such organizations can venture into the political realm. Such entities, which are regulated under Section 501C-4 of the tax code, can engage in advocacy but cannot make partisan political activities their primary purpose without risking loss of their tax-exempt status.

The $400 haircutJust more proof that John Edwards is a dishonest, self-serving creep who is more interested in feathering his own nest while trying make others feel guilt about not ‘doing more for the poor.’ Anyone who would attempt to channel the words of an unborn baby girl in the courtroom in order to pander to the jury, use his wife’s cancer announcement as a fundraising tool, and claim that he and his running mate would cure diseases and make people walk again if they were elected certainly isn’t beyond using a center he created to ‘help the poor’ to help advance his own political interests. I remember when I first heard about him creating the poverty center and thinking to myself “he’s up to something.” Sure enough, he was.

This man is a slick, lying snake oil salesman, and any Democrat who believes he’s an honest man is a fool.

Edwards new campaign motto should be: “Ask not what you can do for the poor, but what the poor can do for you.”

More: Tom Bevan thinks the article is unfair to Edwards, because what Edwards did is not illegal. I don’t think the legality of what he was doing is at issue. What IS at issue is his sincerity (or lack thereof) in claiming to ‘fight for the poor’ while in reality it’s less about helping the poor than making yourself out to be a ‘sensitive, caring’ candidate.

Others blogging about this: Byron York, Captain Ed (who thinks the Hillary camp might have had a hand in this article, Betsy Newmark, and Susan Madrak at the HuffPo – who provides the typical liberal response