<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Dems&#8217; Strange Search For News Independence</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.cheatseekingmissiles.com/2009/05/06/dems-strange-search-for-news-independence/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.cheatseekingmissiles.com/2009/05/06/dems-strange-search-for-news-independence/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Mar 2011 15:16:07 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Laer</title>
		<link>http://www.cheatseekingmissiles.com/2009/05/06/dems-strange-search-for-news-independence/comment-page-1/#comment-2938</link>
		<dc:creator>Laer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 May 2009 13:04:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cheatseekingmissiles.com/?p=6738#comment-2938</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Fox already does air liberal views, Dan, for all the good it&#039;s done its reputation among the liberals.  Do you think for a moment this foul-smelling dead horse would have been whipped back to feeble life if liberal talk radio had succeeded? NanPo and her storm troopers can&#039;t stand that we have a channel.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;And where does it stop? Why limit fairness to just libs and conservatives?  You know the litigation will follow - Satanists and Chrisitians will want to be heard.  Then Muslims will demand government to give them a voice.  &lt;em&gt;Hey, Ed, do you know where we can get a vampire child molester to balance out this cross-burning Dr. Spock guy?&quot;&lt;/em&gt;  C&#039;mon!&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fox already does air liberal views, Dan, for all the good it&#8217;s done its reputation among the liberals.  Do you think for a moment this foul-smelling dead horse would have been whipped back to feeble life if liberal talk radio had succeeded? NanPo and her storm troopers can&#8217;t stand that we have a channel.</p>
<p>And where does it stop? Why limit fairness to just libs and conservatives?  You know the litigation will follow &#8211; Satanists and Chrisitians will want to be heard.  Then Muslims will demand government to give them a voice.  <em>Hey, Ed, do you know where we can get a vampire child molester to balance out this cross-burning Dr. Spock guy?&#8221;</em>  C&#8217;mon!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan Chmielewski</title>
		<link>http://www.cheatseekingmissiles.com/2009/05/06/dems-strange-search-for-news-independence/comment-page-1/#comment-2933</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan Chmielewski</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 May 2009 20:55:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cheatseekingmissiles.com/?p=6738#comment-2933</guid>
		<description>The Fairness Doctrine applies only to radio and TV stations operating under license to use public airwaves; it does not apply to newspapers, magazines, blogs, satellite radio, satelliet and cable TV, the Internet, the Web, et al because these broadcast stations are operating undeer a limited spectrum.  As a former radio news director, it was never a problem to get both sides (or in some cases, mutiple sides) toi a story; you didn&#039;t air it until you have opposing views represented.  This notion that the Fairness Doctrine is a censorship bill is straight bull.  With it, those liberal bastions of NBC, ABC and CBS willl have to air conservative views and Fox will have to view liberal views. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Fairness Doctrine applies only to radio and TV stations operating under license to use public airwaves; it does not apply to newspapers, magazines, blogs, satellite radio, satelliet and cable TV, the Internet, the Web, et al because these broadcast stations are operating undeer a limited spectrum.  As a former radio news director, it was never a problem to get both sides (or in some cases, mutiple sides) toi a story; you didn&#8217;t air it until you have opposing views represented.  This notion that the Fairness Doctrine is a censorship bill is straight bull.  With it, those liberal bastions of NBC, ABC and CBS willl have to air conservative views and Fox will have to view liberal views. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MAS1916</title>
		<link>http://www.cheatseekingmissiles.com/2009/05/06/dems-strange-search-for-news-independence/comment-page-1/#comment-2930</link>
		<dc:creator>MAS1916</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 May 2009 15:38:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cheatseekingmissiles.com/?p=6738#comment-2930</guid>
		<description>Propping up a liberal mouthpice will indeed be a priority for this administration.  Relying on these institutions to promote leftist propaganda and to circulate the words used to mollify the population, the Obama administration very much needs these to control the flow of information.  What could go wrong with that?
Obama is a fabulous speaker.  The voters apparently thought last November that a good speaker always makes a competent leader.  As Pakistan teeters on the brink of collapse and US industries are hurrying to move jobs to China to avoid excessive taxation, Obama is running out of words.
Obama&#039;s words (Obamawords?) like &#039;inherited&#039; or &#039;dialogue&#039; need to be controlled.  The Globe helps him keep control of the messaging.  However, the public won&#039;t tolerate tax money used for a bail out like this.
There are several words that Team Obama has overused in the past 100 days or so.  They have taken on new meanings since the Leader began reading them incessantly from His teleprompter.  You can see this list and their new definitions at:
http://firstconservative.com/blog/top-ten/obamas-words-or-obamawords
 
 
 
 </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Propping up a liberal mouthpice will indeed be a priority for this administration.  Relying on these institutions to promote leftist propaganda and to circulate the words used to mollify the population, the Obama administration very much needs these to control the flow of information.  What could go wrong with that?<br />
Obama is a fabulous speaker.  The voters apparently thought last November that a good speaker always makes a competent leader.  As Pakistan teeters on the brink of collapse and US industries are hurrying to move jobs to China to avoid excessive taxation, Obama is running out of words.<br />
Obama&#8217;s words (Obamawords?) like &#8216;inherited&#8217; or &#8216;dialogue&#8217; need to be controlled.  The Globe helps him keep control of the messaging.  However, the public won&#8217;t tolerate tax money used for a bail out like this.<br />
There are several words that Team Obama has overused in the past 100 days or so.  They have taken on new meanings since the Leader began reading them incessantly from His teleprompter.  You can see this list and their new definitions at:<br />
<a href="http://firstconservative.com/blog/top-ten/obamas-words-or-obamawords" rel="nofollow">http://firstconservative.com/blog/top-ten/obamas-words-or-obamawords</a><br />
 <br />
 <br />
 <br />
 </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

