more than just talk?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/02/12/dems-consider-reviving-fairness-doctrine/

People have mocked conservative radio hosts for raising alarms about things Obama might do to push us towards socialism--and it kills me that they are still being mocked even when their predictions are coming to pass. I think they have been conservative by choosing the term "socialist" as opposed to "communist."

Already, Obama has plunged this country into more spending/debt than we've ever seen, and that's saying a LOT. Under the guise of "stimulus" he is sneaking in nationalized health-care, and proposing to hire more government workers (you know...people paid for by tax dollars to waste time and space, and who are virtually un-firable).

The "fairness doctrine" is a step towards silencing anyone who recognizes the direction we are headed and is bold enough to say something about it. It sounds warm and fuzzy--we all think life should be fair, right? But it is bringing the freedom of speech to an end, and bringing us even closer to socio/communism.

In a Capitalist country, those given airtime on radio waves are picked by those who listen to the radio. I am curious as to why radio listeners overwhelmingly support conservative hosts over liberal ones. I am also curious to know why television is overwhelmingly liberal. I don't get it. But apparently that's the way it is.

The "fairness doctrine" will attempt to give equal radio time to liberals and conservatives. Like I said, it sounds good, it sounds "fair." But is it fair to radio stations who will lose advertising dollars when people stop tuning in because they are broadcasting hosts they don't want to listen to?

Is it fair to impose these restrictions on one medium, the radio, and not television? To say to one, "You MUST comply and give equal time to both conservatives and liberals," and let the other persist in its liberal bias unnoticed?