Why is Gingrich’s attack upon conservative talk radio a non issue among supporters?

[johnwk]

I am disappointed that Gingrich voting to have the federal government regulating the political content of radio and tv talk shows appears to be a non issue among those who support him when our Constitution declares in crystal clear language that Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Perhaps the majority of today‘s “conservatives” do not recall the1980s and/or listened to radio talk shows back then which had a substantial number of “conservative” talk show hosts who exposed the lies and distortions of a progressive dominated print media. And this drove our progressive pinko crowd up a wall. How dare a “conservative” point of view was allowed to filter through and “control the electronic media”, and effectively be heard by America? Keep in mind at the time the print media was, as is currently the case today, infested with and controlled by un-American progressives. But conservatives finally found their outlet and our un-America progressive crowd was determined to shut it down with the Fairness in Broadcasting Act of 1987, and Gingrich was one of the advocates of this censorship in broadcasting! For a list of the snakes, RINOs and pinko progressives who were in favor of folks in government regulating the political content of radio and tv talk shows, CLICK HERE (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d100:HR01934:@@@P:..)

Fortunately, President Ronald Reagan vetoed the bill on June 22, 1987 which had passed both Houses, and our pinko progressive’s domination of the print media is today counter balanced by our radio and tv talk media, which could change if progressives get their way! Keep in mind that dictatorships and communist governments exercise the very power which New Gingrich was willing to place in Congress’ hands!

So, has Mr. Gingrich changed his mind on his blatant attack upon our Constitution and freedom of speech? Having listened to Mr. Gingrich before and while he was drummed out of Congress, I don’t believe this snake has changed his ways but rather, is now seeking retribution and will do and say anything to get his finger on the switch. His progressive un-American record is very long and very intentional. He has spat upon our Constitution too many times and repeatedly sold out America in the past for “conservative” Americans to believe his mission is anything other than revenge against those who were not smitten by his “father knows best” attitude while in Congress.

There is still time for conservatives to reconsider and take note of the real Newt Gingrich!

JWK

Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me

[Gaffer]

So now it's Gingrich's turn to get trashed by jwk. Who's next? The next front runner? Who are your here to promote? I haven't noticed you trashing romney or santorum or paul. Your a mud slinger so those three need equal time. Do you have a preference or are you a dark lord fan?

[red states rule]

So now it's Gingrich's turn to get trashed by jwk. Who's next? The next front runner? Who are your here to promote? I haven't noticed you trashing romney or santorum or paul. Your a mud slinger so those three need equal time. Do you have a preference or are you a dark lord fan?

The ONLY reason Newt is in first place is bacause he is on Fox News

At least that is what Chris Matthews says (and his fellow lib buddies)


<IFRAME title="MRC TV video player" height=360 src="http://www.mrctv.org/embed/108229" frameBorder=0 width=640 allowfullscreen></IFRAME>

[johnwk]

So now it's Gingrich's turn to get trashed by jwk. Who's next? The next front runner? Who are your here to promote? I haven't noticed you trashing romney or santorum or paul. Your a mud slinger so those three need equal time. Do you have a preference or are you a dark lord fan?Stay on topic. JWK

[fj1200]

That is the topic.

[Gaffer]

Stay on topic. JWK

Try answering a question. GAFFER

[johnwk]

Try answering a question. GAFFER

When it relates to Gingrich and his record I will consider answering. I’m not running for office so please have the decency to not make me the subject of the thread.

Aside from that, why do so many “conservative” talk show hosts support Gingrich since he was all in favor of the Fairness in Broadcasting Act of 1987 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d100:HR01934:@@@P:..) and wanted to regulate the political content of their shows? Something stinks and I believe there may be many RINO talk show hosts who are now exhibiting their progressive leanings.

JWK

[Gaffer]

When it relates to Gingrich and his record I will consider answering. I’m not running for office so please have the decency to not make me the subject of the thread.

Aside from that, why do so many “conservative” talk show hosts support Gingrich since he was all in favor of the Fairness in Broadcasting Act of 1987 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d100:HR01934:@@@P:..) and wanted to regulate the political content of their shows? Something stinks and I believe there may be many RINO talk show hosts who are now exhibiting their progressive leanings.

JWK

True, but romney is a much more progressive candidate and many of the talk show hosts seem to favor him. I find it interesting that other than the candidates running against him no one seems to be digging up dirt on romney. Romney has always been considered the leader by the media and supposed polls. Yet any time anyone else moves to the top they get hit with some sort of "dirty past". The media and DNC want romney as the gop candidate. Another McLame that they can beat easily.

As for the fairness in broadcasting act. It was in 1987. Maybe Newt was playing politics with it because the media was liberal controlled at all levels. Talk radio barely existed at the time. There was no FOX news so many repubs needed to be able to get their message out. It was initially designed to give fairness to everyone, while the dems want to use it to shut everyone down.

Your giving opinions of who you don't like. How about an opinion of who you do like. Asking you that is not attacking you. It's a simple question.

[red states rule]

The left is really going over the edge when it comes to Newt. They are showing signs of panic when it comes to Obama re-election chances

<IFRAME title="MRC TV video player" height=360 src="http://www.mrctv.org/embed/108278" frameBorder=0 width=640 allowfullscreen></IFRAME>

[johnwk]

As for the fairness in broadcasting act. It was in 1987. Maybe Newt was playing politics with it because the media was liberal controlled at all levels. Talk radio barely existed at the time. There was no FOX news so many repubs needed to be able to get their message out. It was initially designed to give fairness to everyone, while the dems want to use it to shut everyone down.

Talk radio barely existed at the time.

That is simply not true. There were many “conservative” talk radio shows in the 1980s, and this is the very reason our pinko progressive crowd came up with the Fairness in Broadcasting Act of 1987. Pinko progressives couldn’t stand “conservatives” getting their message out and wanted to shut down the only conservative voice being heard in America.

I guess you didn’t read my above post in which I wrote:


Perhaps the majority of today‘s “conservatives” do not recall the1980s and/or listened to radio talk shows back then which had a substantial number of “conservative” talk show hosts who exposed the lies and distortions of a progressive dominated print media. And this drove our progressive pinko crowd up a wall. How dare a “conservative” point of view was allowed to filter through and “control the electronic media”, and effectively be heard by America? Keep in mind at the time the print media was, as is currently the case today, infested with and controlled by un-American progressives. But conservatives finally found their outlet and our un-America progressive crowd was determined to shut it down with the Fairness in Broadcasting Act of 1987, and Gingrich was one of the advocates of this censorship in broadcasting! For a list of the snakes, RINOs and pinko progressives who were in favor of folks in government regulating the political content of radio and tv talk shows, CLICK HERE (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d100:HR01934:@@@P:..)

Fortunately, President Ronald Reagan vetoed the bill on June 22, 1987 which had passed both Houses, and our pinko progressive’s domination of the print media is today counter balanced by our radio and tv talk media, which could change if progressives get their way! Keep in mind that dictatorships and communist governments exercise the very power which New Gingrich was willing to place in Congress’ hands!



In any event, the question is, why do so many “conservative” talk show hosts support Gingrich since he was in favor of the Fairness in Broadcasting Act of 1987 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d100:HR01934:@@@P:..) and wanted to shut down America’s only conservative voice being heard at the time? Something tells me we have quite a few undercover “progressive” and “RINO” talk show hosts masquerading as conservatives.

JWK

[fj1200]

^Still poisoning the water eh?

[Gaffer]

Well JWK I lived through the 80's. All the FM stations were music stations. And better than half of the AM stations were music stations. A few talk shows were just getting their start back then. Including Limbaugh. Most of the "talk shows" consisted of doctor so and so giving advice on child raising or animal care. There wasn't much politics involved.

Would you care to address my questions now?

[avatar4321]

Actually, I think Newt is alot more progressive than Romney. I also think I can trust Romney alot more.

But at this point we have alot of choices than just the two of them.

[red states rule]

I guess the left is really starting to worry that hopey changey stuff is not working out

They are funny when they get desperate. Seems everyone else is to blame for our problems and not the man currently in the WH

<IFRAME title="MRC TV video player" height=360 src="http://www.mrctv.org/embed/108322" frameBorder=0 width=640 allowfullscreen></IFRAME>

[DragonStryk72]

Well JWK I lived through the 80's. All the FM stations were music stations. And better than half of the AM stations were music stations. A few talk shows were just getting their start back then. Including Limbaugh. Most of the "talk shows" consisted of doctor so and so giving advice on child raising or animal care. There wasn't much politics involved.

Would you care to address my questions now?

Gaffer, JWK doesn't have the balls to answer real questions. How have you not worked that out by now?

[Gaffer]

Gaffer, JWK doesn't have the balls to answer real questions. How have you not worked that out by now?

Just wanted to see if I could get him to answer. But to no avail. He's just another copy and paste poster with no real thoughts of his own.

[johnwk]

Gaffer, JWK doesn't have the balls to answer real questions. How have you not worked that out by now?

Who I like is a real question? To answer your irrelevant question, as of now I am not too fond of any of them because not one of them adheres to our Constitution, and I like our Constitution. Haven‘t you noticed that by now?

In any event a real question is, Why is Gingrich’s attack upon conservative talk radio a non issue among his supporters and especially a non issue among “conservative” talk show hosts? Why are “conservative” talk show hosts not brining up Gingrich co-sponsoring the Fairness in Broadcasting Act of 1987 which was specifically intended by its promoters to stifle “conservative” political talk shows? Something smells very fishy and I think it is a legitimate subject for discussion.

As to the 80’s [especially pre 1987] I am more familiar with those years as related to talk radio than most because during those years I was contacting various talk radio shows around the country to set up interviews to promote tax reform and have my associate discuss other political issues of the time. I still have my 80s edition of “spot radio” in my library which lists radio stations around the country and their format, and I can assure you there were many political talk shows around the country and many hosts had a “conservative” point of view and it drove our pinko progressive crowd up a wall because they couldn’t control the political content of those shows as they could, and were, with print media.

Now, my question to you is, why do a certain number of posters here continually make it a point to personalize a thread, rather than keeping to the subject matter? Why is there a constant desire to attack the messenger rather than discuss the message?

JWK

[johnwk]

Actually, I think Newt is alot more progressive than Romney. I also think I can trust Romney alot more.But at this point we have alot of choices than just the two of them.

I agree with you on Newt vs. Romney. And I also agree that there are other choices. And since our nation’s future hangs in the balance [unlike a local election] our decision becomes very complicated and why we must base our decision on a candidate’s vision and actions as they relate to “national issues” rather than inconsequential matters. For example, Newt wanted to affect talk radio on a national basis while Romney chose to affect “health care” as it related to a particular State.

JWK