Archive for the censorship Category

Can the media really be this clueless about the Tea Parties?

Posted in censorship, freedom, media bias, politics, socialism with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on April 15, 2009 by wgreen

I watched the video posted here of the Rachel Maddow show–a piece from MSNBC, and I was amazed at how apparently clueless these ladies were about the ideas behind the tea parties.  They revealed a slight amount of knowlege in linking them to Ron Paul’s supporters, but other wise they appeared to have no idea what they were all about.  There are two possibilites:  either these ladies are too lazy to simply pull up the reteaparty.com website, or they are purposely trying to confuse people and misrepresent the movement.   Their strange fixation/obsession  on the word teabagging was a notable.  Journalism is truly dead.

They also engaged in the standard “crazy ideas” assessment of Ron Paul and his movement.  I believe it may seem crazy to them.  As Carabini writes in his new book:

 

I have often wondered why those with strong opinions about social affairs are always attracted toward one of two opposing poles. There are those inclined to liberty—freedom of the individual to live his or her life in any peaceful way. And there are those who are inclined to mastery—permitting others to live their lives only as another sees fit. 

 

 

 

 

Ron Paul Tea Party? « America’s Independence Day Tea Party.

 

The effort to silence Joe the plumber: The Obama gestapo at work.

Posted in censorship, media bias, politics with tags , , , , on October 31, 2008 by wgreen

An Ohio official has admitted approving investigations into the personal files of Joe the plumber.  From NewsMax:

Helen Jones-Kelley, director of the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services (ODJFS), admitted that she approved a check on Wurzelbacher’s child support papers. Joe maintains he is not involved in a child support case.

The agency “also checked Wurzelbacher in its computer systems to determine whether he was receiving welfare assistance or owed unemployment compensation taxes,” the Columbus Dispatch reported.

Jones-Kelley is an Obama supporter and contributed the maximum amount to his presidential campaign…

In addition to Jones-Kelley, investigators have found other suspicious uses of state computer resources to access information on Wurzelbacher.

Toledo police records clerk Julie McConnell has been charged with gross misconduct for accessing the Law Enforcement Automated Date System to retrieve Wurzelbacher’s address as a favor to a reporter, according to Malkin.

Officials in Ohio also say the Cuyahoga County social service office was compromised and an outside contractor with access to data belonging to the state attorney general “similarly searched Wurzelbacher’s data,” Malkin noted.

“Moreover, his driver’ license and vehicle registration information were obtained from the Bureau of Motor Vehicles.”

My goodness.  Is Obama a presidential candidate or a Mafia Don?  One individual speaks his mind and Obama sends out the gestapo.  I’m telling you, this is another indication of the censorship of ideas that will take place under an Obama regime.  The liberals cannot allow the opposition to be heard.  It’s just like the Soviet Regime, there was only one way for them to hold power.  The Fairness Doctrine, Hate Crimes legislation, character assassination…  we’ll see it all and more.

What is the fairness doctrine, and why you should fear it.

Posted in censorship, media bias, politics with tags , , , on October 28, 2008 by wgreen

The “Fairness Doctrine“, supported by Nancy Pelosi, would apparently require radio stations that air “controversial” talk shows to give equal air time to opposing views.  This is a blatant attack on conservative and libertarian talk radio, which the liberals desire to suppress.  There are few liberal talk shows, and those few have been not nearly as successful as their conservative counterparts.  Therefore, stations will not be able to air coneservative talk, because the liberal shows that they would be required to air (to satisfy the Fairness Doctrine) are not profitable.  The rule would require them to air the liberal talk “for free”, which of course would be cost prohibitive.  Thus, the Doctrine amounts to censorship. 

While Obama has apparently stated he does not support the Fairness Doctrine, I have a hard time believing he would veto such a bill, especially in light of his handling of the NRA ads.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.