THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Volume X, Issue # 181, July 23, 2008
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Government Committed to & Acting in Accord with Conservative Principles
Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity
THE "FAIRNESS" DOCTRINE: AMERICA IN THE BALANCE
By Christopher G. Adamo
LIBERAL DEMOCRATS & THE THREAT TO THE FIRST AMENDMENT: THE LIBERAL DEMOCRATS' PLAN TO DESTROY
FREE SPEECH & EXPRESSION THROUGH RESUSCITATION OF THE SOCALLED "FAIRNESS DOCTRINE" -- PROPOSALS TO
AUTHORIZE THE U.S. CENTRAL GOVERNMENT, AT THE BEHEST LIBERAL LEFTIST SPECIAL INTERESTS, TO SELECTIVELY
HARASS & INTIMIDATE RADIO STATIONS WHOSE BROADCASTING FORMAT LIBERALS IN THE FEDERAL BUREAUCRACY
FIND OBJECTIONABLE -- THREATENING WITH EVENTUAL EXTINCTION CONSERVATIVE TALK-RADIO & VIRTUALLY ALL
OF THE ALTERNATIVE MEDIA -- PREVENTING CONGRESSIONAL FLOOR DEBATE ON A MEASURE WHICH WOULD ENSURE
THAT POLITICAL DISCOURSE ON THE RADIO, LIKE ALL OTHER FORMS OF PUBLIC DIALOGUE, IS PROTECTED FROM THE
SPECTER OF GOVERNMENT REGULATION & CONTROL
FULL STORY:
Lurking in the gloom of the Democratic Party agenda is a resuscitation of the socalled “Fairness Doctrine,” which would
allow the U.S. central government, at the behest of Liberal Leftist special interests, to selectively harass and intimidate
radio stations whose broadcasting format it finds objectionable. Thus, the proliferation of Conservative talk-radio and
virtually all of the alternative media would be threatened with eventual extinction.
U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi is unquestionably moving in such a direction once again. In only
the past few weeks, she has castigated what she terms “Rightwing hate-radio,” while refusing to allow even for
Congressional floor debate on a measure that would ensure political discourse on the radio, like all other forms of public
dialogue, is protected from the specter of government regulation and control.
Even the most superficial understanding and regard for the critical importance of free speech and expression should
generate nearly universal opposition to the “Fairness” Doctrine from across the political spectrum. After all, if the rights
of any segment of society can be abridged, the rights of all others are threatened. And the contentious battle that ensued
among the two major Democratic camps this past Spring ought to convince both sides of their vital need to have a say, if
they are to have any hopes for a political future.
Nevertheless, forces are at work within the Liberal political establishment, striving to achieve nothing less than a repeal
of free speech, at the discretion of those in power. To understand just how tenuous is the current status of the First
Amendment, consider the recent close call concerning the Second Amendment.
Admittedly, for the moment at least, the U.S. Supreme Court has conceded that it will uphold the United States
Constitution and its guarantee of the inherent rights of the citizens to own and bear arms, the Court making this
concession in its recent decision, District of Columbia v. Heller (2008). But, while Americans can be somewhat
reassured that no immediate federal plans are in the works to confiscate their guns, the decision to abide by the clear
language of the Second Amendment, at five to four in favor, was hardly reflective of a general respect for the U.S.
Constitution and its First Ten Amendments (the Federal Bill of Rights).
In essence, four of the nine Supreme Court “Justices” are comfortable with the concept of simply ignoring the clear
language of American constitutional law, and substituting their own perceptions and ideologies in its place. Liberal
Justice John Paul Stevens, in his dissent, even went so far as to substantiate his arrogant attempt to seize power by
scoffing at the notion that the Founders intended for the citizenry to be able to defend itself and its rights.
Stevens unabashedly expressed his derision at the possibility that the Framers of the Constitution would have made
“a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons,” which any honest
historian knows is exactly what they did. To offer such a disparaging commentary on the past two hundred years of
freedom enjoyed by Americans, Stevens must perceive governmental power as the sole asset of the state.
In Stevens’ world, along with that David Souter and Clinton appointees Stephen Breyer and Ruth Ginsburg, the power
of the government does not derive from the consent of the governed (as stated in the Declaration of Independence).
Rather, it is imposed upon the people from on high, at the pleasure of those possessing the wisdom, skill, and muscle to
dispense governmental power. Moreover, by this and other recent opinions handed down from the High Court, Stevens
clearly considers his own office as proof of membership in the “ruling class.”
If a one-vote majority is all that currently separates a traditionally free America from a future in which its Second
Amendment right of self-defense can be seized under some pretense of the “greater good,” is it beyond the realm of
possibility that the First Amendment right to protest such an abysmal situation would remain unthreatened? If, as
Stevens and the other dissenting Justices have indicated, the ultimate right to bear arms belongs only to those in high
office, is it also their opinion that the determination over who can speak freely is the sole propriety of the state?
Clearly, the balance of power at inner circles of the U.S. national government teeters between those who respect the
constitutionally instituted boundaries and limitations on government necessary for a free society, and those who regard
such boundaries and limitations as an ongoing nuisance that must eventually be eradicated.
During the past few decades, the Liberal juggernaut that had once seemed destined to thoroughly dominate the future
of the nation has been regularly thwarted by grassroots activism, itself inspired and motivated by loud voices of
Conservatism in the alternative media. An open discussion between “Left” and “Right” has all too often resulted in the
derailing of grandiose Liberal plans to reinvent America. And the political Left simply cannot abide an indefinite
continuation of that situation.
So, among those who presume the governing of the “peasantry” to be their inherent right, and any accountability as
merely a needless annoyance (as was inarguably the case with the dissenting Justices in D.C. v. Heller), efforts
to encroach on all the other precepts of the Bill of Rights hinge on the government’s success in neutralizing and thus
abolishing the First Amendment. Eliminate the ability of the general public to speak freely, and those in command can
eventually negate any passage of the Constitution that they find problematic.
Americans beware of the innocuous sounding term of “Fairness” in this looming Pandora’s box. For any concept of
“fairness” to be substantiated, some individual or cabal must hold sufficient power to arbitrate over which speech is
deemed “fair” and permissible, and which speech is not. And those on the political Left would gladly assume such
control over the rest of society, with no intention of ever letting it go.
LINKS TO RELATED TOPICS:
U.S. Constitutional Law & Political Philosophy
The Constitution of the United States of America
Political Correctness, Censorship, Thought Control:
Supression of Unacceptable Views & Opinions
American Politics & Political Competition:
Elections, PACs, & Political Parties
The American Political System:
Politics & Government in the U.S.A.
The American Political & Cultural Left:
Liberals, Statists, Socialists, & Other Leftists
Christopher G. Adamo is a freelance writer who lives in southeastern Wyoming and works in the field of industrial instrumentation.
He is actively involved in Wyoming's political process, serving as a delegate to successive Wyoming State Republican Conventions
and as a member of the Wyoming State Republican Central Committee. He has assisted Republican candidates for local and state
legislatures and for the United States Congress. His articles, which appear regularly in The Progressive Conservative, U.S.A.,
and on a number of other websites, reflect a major concern with the damage being done to Conservatism and Conservative causes by
the Liberal Leftist faction in the Republican Party as well as by the much larger and more powerful Liberal Leftist faction in the
Democratic Party. During the early and middle 1990s, Adamo was Editor of the Wyoming Christian Coalition's official news organ,
The Wyoming Christian.
Return to Top of Page
Go to the WEBSITE INDEX
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Public Issues & Political Controversies
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
Most Recent Articles
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Volume X, 2007
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Subject Matter Highlights
Return to POLITICAL EDUCATION Homepage
CONTACT & ACCESS INFORMATION
This is not a commercial website. The sole purpose of the website is to share with interested persons information regarding civics,
civic and social education, political science, government, politics, law, constitutional law and history, public policy, and political
philosophy and history, as well as current and recent political developments, public issues, and political controversies.
POLITICAL EDUCATION, CONSERVATIVE ANALYSIS
POLITICS, SOCIETY, & THE SOVEREIGN STATE
Website of Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr.
Government, Politics, Public Policy, Legal Issues, Constitutional Law, Government & the Economy, Cultural Values, Foreign Affairs,
International Relations, Military Defense & National Security, Geopolitics, Terrorism & Homeland Security, American National Interests,
Political Systems & Processes, Political Institutions, Political Ideologies, & Political Philosophy
INDEX FOR THE ENTIRE WEBSITE
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Conservative & Free-Market Analysis of Government, Politics & Public Policy, Covering Political, Legal, Constitutional, Economic,
Cultural, Military, International, Strategic, & Geopolitical Issues
Conservative Government Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity