Wednesday, June 27, 2007
It really outrages me that there are politicians like Diane Feinstein who seek to re-impose the Fairness Doctrine. It will be interesting to see which groups support it. Obviously, the incumbent plutocrats who don't like criticism -- the same saintly bunch who sought to silence criticism in McCain-Feingold -- but who else? I would not be surprised to find MSM institutions, like the networks and the establishment newspapers, trying to do the same thing, because (like McCain-Feingold again) it would not effectively restrict them. But what other low-lifes are there out there who will support it. I would like to know.
And, to tell you the truth, I am not really scared about it happening. I am usually a pessimist about things political, but I don't fear the doctrine's re-emergence. I think talk radio and the blogosphere are strong enough that they can defend themselves. My guess is that those who seek restrain these groups will end up with egg on their face, and it will be fun to see it. Call me a naive optimist, if you will, but that is how I see it.
And my optimism has nothing to do with any hope that President Bush would veto a bill that sought to reimpose the Unfairness Doctrine. Bush signed McCain-Feingold, and I think it is quite possible he would do the same for the Unfairness Doctrine. By contrast, we know what the Gipper would do with such a bill: He would veto it, just as he did the last time Congress sought to reimpose it. I can still remember being at OLC when the veto statement was written. That veto is another reason why Reagan's legacy is so significant, just as the real possibility that Bush would not veto it helps to explain why his legacy will be far less important and beneficial.