http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/02/21/fcc-announces-it-will-back-off-plan-to-monitor-newsrooms/
Yes, I realize the FCC has backed off from this attempt at this time. But that's beside the point.... What brought it back to consideration??
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/02/21/watch-greta-van-susteren-answers-proposed-fcc-questionnaire-for-newsrooms-and-nails-it/
Greta tells it like it should have been told by every news agency across the country that was involved with any questionnaire from the FCC. It's not a matter of information gathering since that is rather obvious according to broadcast content. It's a matter of trying to project influence and control.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/02/21/white-house-not-commenting-on-federal-monitoring-of-newsrooms/
Not a surprising event with the White House.
But wait a minute..... Isn't the FCC a Federal agency?? Shouldn't, of all times, there be a condemnation of the FCC attempted actions??
Oh!! But of course....
There wasn't an incident involving a shooting of a black youth, the comment of a music star, the sale of illegal substances in various states, the name of a professional sports team etc....!!!
Those occasions, among others, are worthy of comment by a sitting president but not the actions of a Federal Agency?? Could it be any more obvious where the roots of this travesty run to??
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/02/20/meet-the-fcc-commissioner-whos-blowing-the-whistle-on-his-own-agencys-planned-study-of-newsrooms/
Another "whistle blower". How many from the last several years have come out, at one level or another concerning this administration??
How many voices crying "Foul" have to be heard before the acceptance of reality can set in??
The issue is, as I see it, that the attempt was even thought to be possible!!
And this is not the first time the press has been the subject to manipulation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_Doctrine
Removal of the Fairness Doctrine, in affect since 1949, from the backs of the press in 1987 assured political spin. Now there doesn't have to be a "fair and balanced" sharing of information, as Fox News claims to provide. But who is it that determines that??
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB122990390599425181
An attempt from several years ago was made in trying to once again control how and what the press reported. I remember the amount of uproar from mainly Conservative media concerning the "fairness" being sought by Democratic leadership. This one event polarized my attitude toward Big Government even greater than anything previously encountered in my still growing political interests.
Obama did, in 2009, oppose the reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine. That's a fair enough statement. But in my view, why would you want to force an opposing view of those media outlets that so obviously demonstrated gushing adoration without qualification??
Some differences now vs. the times gone by, is that there is a crumbling base of support within the ranks of the MSM. The rather lengthy honeymoon with the Obama administration has lost it's luster, and with it, the spin that once was.
With having that opinion, it's no surprise to me that a stance of No Comment has been taken by the administration. There can be no opinion offered from an administration seeing it's glory fade and is desperate to regain it.
Only the information consumer can decide what is right and accurate. But that also brings the requirement for the consumer to think and be educated in the truth, should they actually be seeking it.
In our information sharing environment, we have nearly limitless access to events around our world. But what we believe is subject to our individual abilities and desires to seek the truth, should we desire the truth in the first place.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/02/21/battle-for-venezuela-is-being-fought-as-vigorously-online-as-in-the-streets/
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/02/21/ukrainian-protesters-agree-to-presidents-deal-to-end-crisis/
A movement is afoot in foreign lands to remove the very type of tyranny making similar impacts on our nation.
Admittedly, the level of destruction is not the same here. And with that in mind we must acknowledge, however, the promise sold to these countries began as some form of "Hope and Change" as was sold here. People looking for a leader in uncertain times are being faced with a harsh reality that a corruption and betrayal has taken place.
Betrayal by ones government, of a trust, takes many forms and is universal in it's reach.
We have felt this betrayal in the United States. We are not immune to the abuse of power and are feeling the results of a political malaise among a nation of disinterested voters. Being easily swayed by flowery words and celestial promises has become a hallmark of our society. But this observation is not the first I've made concerning this issue.
When the people of America decide they've had enough, we will also face such an issue of discontent. But I for one hope it doesn't come to that. I love my country and would rather see a transition of power without a struggle to force it.
Either Stand Up And Defend Freedom When It's Challenged, Or Sit Down And Shut Up When That Freedom Disappears Because You Did Nothing....
Hope My Rage Is Your Rage.... If Not.... I Welcome Your View....
Yes, I realize the FCC has backed off from this attempt at this time. But that's beside the point.... What brought it back to consideration??
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/02/21/watch-greta-van-susteren-answers-proposed-fcc-questionnaire-for-newsrooms-and-nails-it/
Greta tells it like it should have been told by every news agency across the country that was involved with any questionnaire from the FCC. It's not a matter of information gathering since that is rather obvious according to broadcast content. It's a matter of trying to project influence and control.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/02/21/white-house-not-commenting-on-federal-monitoring-of-newsrooms/
Not a surprising event with the White House.
But wait a minute..... Isn't the FCC a Federal agency?? Shouldn't, of all times, there be a condemnation of the FCC attempted actions??
Oh!! But of course....
There wasn't an incident involving a shooting of a black youth, the comment of a music star, the sale of illegal substances in various states, the name of a professional sports team etc....!!!
Those occasions, among others, are worthy of comment by a sitting president but not the actions of a Federal Agency?? Could it be any more obvious where the roots of this travesty run to??
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/02/20/meet-the-fcc-commissioner-whos-blowing-the-whistle-on-his-own-agencys-planned-study-of-newsrooms/
Another "whistle blower". How many from the last several years have come out, at one level or another concerning this administration??
How many voices crying "Foul" have to be heard before the acceptance of reality can set in??
The issue is, as I see it, that the attempt was even thought to be possible!!
And this is not the first time the press has been the subject to manipulation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_Doctrine
Removal of the Fairness Doctrine, in affect since 1949, from the backs of the press in 1987 assured political spin. Now there doesn't have to be a "fair and balanced" sharing of information, as Fox News claims to provide. But who is it that determines that??
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB122990390599425181
An attempt from several years ago was made in trying to once again control how and what the press reported. I remember the amount of uproar from mainly Conservative media concerning the "fairness" being sought by Democratic leadership. This one event polarized my attitude toward Big Government even greater than anything previously encountered in my still growing political interests.
Obama did, in 2009, oppose the reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine. That's a fair enough statement. But in my view, why would you want to force an opposing view of those media outlets that so obviously demonstrated gushing adoration without qualification??
Some differences now vs. the times gone by, is that there is a crumbling base of support within the ranks of the MSM. The rather lengthy honeymoon with the Obama administration has lost it's luster, and with it, the spin that once was.
With having that opinion, it's no surprise to me that a stance of No Comment has been taken by the administration. There can be no opinion offered from an administration seeing it's glory fade and is desperate to regain it.
Only the information consumer can decide what is right and accurate. But that also brings the requirement for the consumer to think and be educated in the truth, should they actually be seeking it.
In our information sharing environment, we have nearly limitless access to events around our world. But what we believe is subject to our individual abilities and desires to seek the truth, should we desire the truth in the first place.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/02/21/battle-for-venezuela-is-being-fought-as-vigorously-online-as-in-the-streets/
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/02/21/ukrainian-protesters-agree-to-presidents-deal-to-end-crisis/
A movement is afoot in foreign lands to remove the very type of tyranny making similar impacts on our nation.
Admittedly, the level of destruction is not the same here. And with that in mind we must acknowledge, however, the promise sold to these countries began as some form of "Hope and Change" as was sold here. People looking for a leader in uncertain times are being faced with a harsh reality that a corruption and betrayal has taken place.
Betrayal by ones government, of a trust, takes many forms and is universal in it's reach.
We have felt this betrayal in the United States. We are not immune to the abuse of power and are feeling the results of a political malaise among a nation of disinterested voters. Being easily swayed by flowery words and celestial promises has become a hallmark of our society. But this observation is not the first I've made concerning this issue.
When the people of America decide they've had enough, we will also face such an issue of discontent. But I for one hope it doesn't come to that. I love my country and would rather see a transition of power without a struggle to force it.
Either Stand Up And Defend Freedom When It's Challenged, Or Sit Down And Shut Up When That Freedom Disappears Because You Did Nothing....
No comments:
Post a Comment
What you think about what I think......