Sharpton Going To FCC: Limbaugh "Doesn't Have The Right" To Use Public Airwaves

[red states rule]

Once again, "offended" liberals want to silence those who they disagree with

Talk radio is a thorn in the side of liberals , and they are always looking for ways to pull the plug on them


<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/mUf1km5vWtw?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/mUf1km5vWtw?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

[NightTrain]

Limbaugh has been exposing that fraud for 18 years now, and Sharpton hates him bitterly for it. Now that Sharpton has an ally in the white house, he's going to see if he can get a gag on Limbaugh.

It won't fly. But it's a win/win for Sharpton - he'll get free press out of it and keep his name in the media which is all he really craves anyway.

Remember when that clown was one of the democratic presidential contenders and tried to debate the others? I was almost embarrassed for him. Almost. Except I was laughing too hard.

[red states rule]

Limbaugh has been exposing that fraud for 18 years now, and Sharpton hates him bitterly for it. Now that Sharpton has an ally in the white house, he's going to see if he can get a gag on Limbaugh.

It won't fly. But it's a win/win for Sharpton - he'll get free press out of it and keep his name in the media which is all he really craves anyway.

Remember when that clown was one of the democratic presidential contenders and tried to debate the others? I was almost embarrassed for him. Almost. Except I was laughing too hard.

I found it funny Rev Al would appear on Sgt Schult's show and was talking about "hate" speech

Lets take a look back over what Sgt Schultz has said on his show

<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/TOgz9rV7w9E?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/TOgz9rV7w9E?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

[johnwk]

Sharpton Going To FCC


Let's get one thing straight about "public airways" and the big lie! They are not “public airways”. They are used by the public but are not “public airways” in the sense that Congress may regulate them. Congress has never been granted power to regulate radio transmissions, and until the people have given their consent under Article 5 of our Constitution, under which a power is granted to Congress to regulate the “airways”, Congress has no authority to delegate authority to the FCC to meddle in the transmission of radio waves. This in fact was already pointed out less than twenty years after the adoption of our Constitution by our very own Supreme Court:


“The government of the United States is of the latter description. The powers of the legislature are defined and limited; and that those limits may not be mistaken or forgotten, the constitution is written. To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing; if these limits may, at any time, be passed by those intended to be restrained? The distinction between a government with limited and unlimited powers is abolished, if those limits do not confine the persons on whom they are imposed, and if acts prohibited and acts allowed are of equal obligation. It is a proposition too plain to be contested, that the constitution controls any legislative act repugnant to it; or, that the legislature may alter the constitution by an ordinary act.

Between these alternatives there is no middle ground. The constitution is either a superior, paramount law, unchangeable by ordinary means, or it is on a level with ordinary legislative acts, and like other acts, is alterable when the legislature shall please to alter it.

If the former part of the alternative be true, then a legislative act contrary to the constitution is not law: if the latter part be true, then written constitutions are absurd attempts, on the part of the people, to limit a power in its own nature illimitable.

Certainly all those who have framed written constitutions contemplate them as forming the fundamental and paramount law of the nation, and consequently the theory of every such government must be, that an act of the legislature repugnant to the constitution is void.” ____ MARBURY v. MADISON, 5 U.S. 137 (1803)


Sharpton and his PROGRESSIVE DOMESTIC ENEMY CROWD (http://cpc.grijalva.house.gov/index.cfm?ContentID=166&amp;ParentID=0&SectionID=4&SectionTree=4&lnk=b&ItemID=164) need to start obeying our written Constitution or receive some well deserved PUNISHMENT (http://www.imageenvision.com/illustration/1775-the-bostonians-paying-the-exciseman-or-tarring-and-feathering-by-jvpd)

JWK



"The Constitution is the act of the people, speaking in their original character, and defining the permanent conditions of the social alliance; and there can be no doubt on the point with us, that every act of the legislative power contrary to the true intent and meaning of the Constitution, is absolutely null and void. ___ Chancellor James Kent, in his Commentaries on American Law (1858)

[fj1200]

Godwin in 3... 2... 1...

I think the Nazis wanted to stifle free speech.





How we doin' log?

[fj1200]

Congress has never been granted power to regulate radio transmissions, and until the people have given their consent under Article 5 of our Constitution...

Good to see you're not getting sidetracked by the trappings of modern society. I hope you're not a baseball fan.

[johnwk]

Congress has never been granted power to regulate radio transmissions, and until the people have given their consent under Article 5 of our Constitution...


Good to see you're not getting sidetracked by the trappings of modern society. I hope you're not a baseball fan.

What is good to know is our wise founding fathers provided a method to accommodate changing times, Article V. But keep in mind it requires consent of the people via the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, and does not allow for the arbitrary path which our beloved Revvvvvvvv Al Sharpton would like to pursue just like Senator John RINO McCain and his McCain-Feingold Campaign Reform Act attempted ___ more appropriately dubbed the incumbent full employment act ___ designed to infringe upon freedom of political speech and preclude the American people‘s right, and especially preclude right to life groups, from airing political ads which mentioned the name of a member of Congress and their voting record 60 days before an election. What part of shall make no law which is found in our Constitution do these dirt bags not understand?

JWK

[fj1200]

What is good to know is our wise founding fathers provided a method to accommodate changing times, Article V. But keep in mind it requires consent of the people via the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, and does not allow for the arbitrary path which our beloved Revvvvvvvv Al Sharpton would like to pursue just like Senator John RINO McCain and his McCain-Feingold Campaign Reform Act attempted ___ more appropriately dubbed the incumbent full employment act ___ designed to infringe upon freedom of political speech and preclude the American people‘s right, and especially preclude right to life groups, from airing political ads which mentioned the name of a member of Congress and their voting record 60 days before an election. What part of shall make no law which is found in our Constitution do these dirt bags not understand?

JWK

Indeed Sharpton is an idiot and M-F was an abomination against free speech but I don't believe we need an amendment for every bit of law/regulation that comes down the pike.

And you're not really going to get anywhere if every issue becomes "THE FOUNDING FATHERS NEVER AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

:)

[johnwk]

Indeed Sharpton is an idiot and M-F was an abomination against free speech but I don't believe we need an amendment for every bit of law/regulation that comes down the pike.



We are not talking about needing an amendment for every bit of law/regulation that comes down the pike.

We are talking about a specific subject matter which just happens to affect political speech, and an amendment to our Constitution already forbids making any law which abridges freedom of speech.


JWK

[fj1200]

We are not talking about needing an amendment for every bit of law/regulation that comes down the pike.

We are talking about a specific subject matter which just happens to affect political speech, and an amendment to our Constitution already forbids making any law which abridges freedom of speech.

JWK

No, you're bringing up the right of Congress to regulate radio transmissions which I called BS on. Now that your bringing it back to freedom of speech I will agree that Sharpton is full of BS and the FCC has no place in regulating speech here or in a potential reestablishment of the Fairness Doctrine.

[red states rule]

Bottom line is, in Rev Al's world all networks would be like MSNBC - and all TV hosts would be like Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, and Ed Schultz

Libs are all for free speech until they hear something they disagree with

[johnwk]

Bottom line is, in Rev Al's world all networks would be like MSNBC - and all TV hosts would be like Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, and Ed Schultz

Libs are all for free speech until they hear something they disagree with


I am disappointed that so much attention has been focused on Al Sharpton in this thread, when Sharpton is not the enemy here, but is being used as a target to blame for what Mark Lloyd may attempt to accomplish. Al Sharpton is only the messenger, and in this case the messenger should not be attacked! Sharpton stated:

"Rush Limbaugh has the right to say whatever he wants to say, he does not have the right, though, to do it on publicly regulated airwaves. The FCC has the responsibility to set standards," .

“The FCC has the responsibility to set standards" is what we should be very, very concerned with because the real enemy here is not Al Sharpton, but rather, Mark Lloyd, the FCC's chief diversity officer appointed by Julius Genachowski who heads the Federal Communications Commission and is a longtime friend of Obama!

In 2007 Mark Lloyd wrote: Forget the Fairness Doctrine (http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2007/07/lloyd_fairness.html), and those who read the article will immediately realize Al Sharpton is not the threat. But Mark Lloyd and Julius Genachowski are a threat, and Sharpton merely indicated they have the responsibility to set “standards” for the airwaves.

But do these un-elected political appointees have power to “set standards” for the airwaves, especially when Mark Lloyd thinks in terms of “right-wing talk radio and their echo chambers in the conservative blogosphere and Fox News”?

The fact is ___ and every freedom loving person who supports our constitutionally limited system of government must always keep this in mind ___ under the fundamental rules of constitutional law Congress may not delegate its essential lawmaking powers to establish principles, standards, or general public policy! And the president’s powers are extremely limited as defined in our written Constitution.


Keep in mind that “all” legislative [law making] power is vested in Congress, and for our president or an un-elected presidential appointee to attempt to set “standards“, is not only usurping a power, it would be a circumvention of the separation of powers written into our Constitution and be nothing less than a despotic attack upon our Constitution’s guarantee to a “Republican Form of Government” [see art. 4, sec. 4] in which each State’s elected Representatives and Senators who are solely vested with the law making power, are to debate such issues and then enact law should new law be found necessary to deal with a new circumstances.

But in this case, regarding the “airwaves”, not even Congress has been granted a power to regulate the specific subject matter mentioned!


JWK

"On every question of construction [of the Constitution], carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed."--Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Johnson, June 12, 1823, The Complete Jefferson, p. 322.

[red states rule]

The saga continues on the Sgt Schultz show

Now Rev Al bellows how can the government ALLOW people to say what they want?

<object width="518" height="419"><param name="movie" value="http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=hd6UkU4zpr" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=hd6UkU4zpr" allowfullscreen="true" width="518" height="419" /></object>

[SassyLady]

The saga continues on the Sgt Schultz show

Now Rev Al bellows how can the government ALLOW people to say what they want?

<object width="518" height="419"><param name="movie" value="http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=hd6UkU4zpr" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=hd6UkU4zpr" allowfullscreen="true" width="518" height="419" /></object>

Government acting like they own the airwaves ..... and Sharpton wants the government to take away free speech???

[red states rule]

Government acting like they own the airwaves ..... and Sharpton wants the government to take away free speech???

If it were to Sgt Schultz and Rev Al this is how ALL media outlets would be


<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/LbZPmywKY4Y?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/LbZPmywKY4Y?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>