Why are Democrats afraid free speech?

Question

The First Amendment of the Constitution reads, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or 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.”
More recognizable perhaps than any other provision of our Constitution, the freedoms bestowed to the American people by the First Amendment have been treasured for more than two centuries. Throughout our history, Americans have vigilantly fought to defend these freedoms.
Shockingly, Americans today face a Democrat Congress seeking to deteriorate our freedom under the guise of “fairness.” Our First Amendment rights are being threatened by Congressional Democrats who seek the revival of the Fairness Doctrine, a law to drastically increase government regulation of free speech on television and radio. The proposal requires Washington regulation of news and debate in the media.
The American people know an open society, the ability to speak freely, is fundamental to a functioning democracy. The free flow of information empowers the electorate against an overbearing government. It is impossible to have a government of, by and for the people without an active media and electorate freely sharing information and opinions.
Throughout history, freedom-averse nations have used government control over the media to advance political propaganda and suppress opposing voices. During the Cold War, the Soviets used censorship to hide the atrocities of their oppressive government from its unknowing people. But Mikhail Gorbachev’s openness doctrine, Glasnost, led to the demise of the communist regime.
Even today we can see the practice of oppressive censorship in place in Venezuela. For more than five years, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has used the media to spread his socialist propaganda and silence those critical of him. In May of 2007, freedom-respecting Venezuelans protested in the streets of Caracas as Chavez closed the last remaining independent television network.
The dishonestly named “Fairness Doctrine” was a 1949 Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rule that required broadcasters to provide equal time for “contrasting points of view” on matters of public importance. It is a relic of a bygone era when the majority of news and information was distributed by one or two outlets. At the time, a lack of competition in news raised concerns that a lone broadcaster could control the nation’s thinking.
But after nearly 40 years of trial, the Fairness Doctrine proved to actually stifle public debate and discourage important reporting. In 1987, the FCC discontinued the Fairness Doctrine, citing its unintended consequences that left the electorate less informed.
Today, justification for the Fairness Doctrine is folly, as Americans have innumerable resources to access public information and debate. The advent of the internet and the booming cable and satellite radio industries have given an interested American more competition of ideas than at any time in our nation’s history.
The crux of this debate is the Democrats’ desire to stonewall conservative talk radio. While talk radio may lean to the right, this is not because of any inequity in our system. Talk radio is among the most egalitarian, open vehicles for political speech. No other medium gives Americans as much freedom to share with the masses their individual views on the issues of public importance.
Democrat leaders are unwilling to recognize that, regardless of the current political climate, we are a right-of-center nation. Poll after poll has shown that the average voter considers themselves leaning right. Liberal rhetoric simply does not resonate with the average hard-working American, and this is translated over the radio waves. Rather than accept public discussion of ideas that conflict with leftward Democrats, they desire to silence public opinion.
Their proposal is about suppressing political speech that is inconsistent with a liberal ideology. An insult to American intellectual freedom and a blow to the freedom of the press, the proposal reveals to all Americans that Democrat leaders do not respect your right to speak freely.
At every turn, this new Democrat majority is calling for increased Washington control over the lives of Americans. Now they are working to extend their blanket of authority onto political speech and the public airwaves.
The American people refuse to move in the direction of Soviet-era Russia and Chavez’s Venezuela. There is no greater fairness than freedom, and America will forever vigilantly stand for our freedom of speech and expression.

Answer 1

Because they afraid of listening to each other

Answer 2

Hillary Clinton proposed a motion to start regulating radio media. As we learned she also helped create Media Matters (Google it go to marooned in marin down3/4 first page).
So the attacks are out there and we have one of the sources by her own admission. But some of this was during the Imus scandal. Like Al & the Rev J, they jump on the bandwagon. Only until it is forgotten. If it's cleared and so on, we don't go there.HRClinton rarely apologizes for anything.

http://freedomagenda.com/iraq/wmd_quotes
Speak your mind over these airwaves and neglect
any truth should bias alter and go on to the popular vote.
WJ Clinton, what? To a nation pointed the finger stating I did not have sex with that woman??? So a dress brings him to Obstruction of Justice & Perjury ?? That's a smart man right there?

I guess some from both aisle want to corral free speech depending on their interpretations. Democrats seem more willing to shut people down easier. More so because they don't like the message or that it is too close to the truth that hurts them politically. Thanks.

*Funny part to some of this is Rupert Murdoch is a great Clinton backer. His Fox network benefits with every feud created. That's in listener number's not individual's reputations etc. Yet , they are shock jocks? Even BO"Reilly has become one. It's all dollars and nonsense in my opinion.

Answer 3

I am old enough to remember talk radio back in the days of the Fairness Doctrine. It is a myth that talk radio was bland during that period. Radio in general was far more interesting before deregulation - stations actually had varied formats and did not just have syndicated programming or play the same 20 songs over and over. At the time, there were opinionated talk host on the right and the left.

Talk radio was much more challenging during the Fairness Doctrine days because you actually heard real debate and differing opinions. The hosts were not muzzled but simply had to give some time to present opposing views.

Most of talk radio today is simply propaganda. A handful of corporations (owning the vast majority of radio stations) give us only the opinions that they want us to hear. Many of the hosts just recite talking points from the RNC. The only exception that I can think of is a rare moderate like Jim Bohananon or Michael Medved - a conservative talk host who often features guests that he disagrees with. We deserve more than one-sided propaganda on the airwaves - I don't care if it is coming from Rush Limbaugh from the right or Air America from the left.

Answer 4

Ever hear of Fox news? The are the official mouthpiece of the republican party. Check them out sometime. I'm sure you'll be pleased, Mr. Democrat. No, you don't have "free speech" out here. Read the Terms of Service page. And yes, people can report you for anything, but you can appeal it too.

Answer 5

They are politicians, as are the Republicans and several other groups and the one thing politics says it wants and can not stand is a true open and honest discussion of the issues.

Just for fun, watch political debates sometimes and really pay attention to the responses. I use the word responses instead of answers because there will be VERY few answers of substance. You will hear a lot of buzzwords, and political platitudes along with a lot of political B.S. You will hear almost nothing of substance, though. They are AFRAID of real answers. If the real answers were given, then they may have to take real action to solve the real problems and would soon be out of work. Their current major occupation is not in doing things to improve the Nation. It is getting reelected.

Answer 6

Is it not fair already when radio stations make more money through commercials with talk hosts who draw the most people, who debate opposing views of guests or callers, and do not present a string of yes men like Air America? I'm speaking of course about Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity who are the most popular, and happen to be conservative.

Answer 7

While the fairness doctrine is all on the democrats remember the Fiengold McCain bill supposedly improving the fairness of politics. It limits your ability to speak with your money in a campaign during its final month. Free speech is under assault in many ways in America because it propels an agenda that is not in tune with what the "powers" that be want. It is sad.

Answer 8

Have all the religion you want. Just keep it separate and apart for government. Why is it OK to have a theorcracy?
It certainly is not legal or Constitutional. Why are you afraid of a Fairness Doctrine? Don't your arguements stand up against scrutiny? I think you are making unfounded assumptions regarding left or right wing affiliation.

Answer 9

Democrats do no fear speech... it has been the fascists Republicans that repeatedly ostracize anyone that speaks out against THEIR war or their idea of how American life should be...

Answer 10

Only democrats?

Answer 11

If people truly have free speech they will condradict what the Democrats have to say!~!