• But in here it's so delightful - thoughts on Obama and the weather
• Protectionism: Everybody stimulate yourself!
• I like the pictures
• Mandela, King, Gandhi... Blagojevich
• Shovels are so 1933
• The cutting edge is nipping at its own tail
• Funny Because It's True (yet again)
• Obligatory Gaza
• Being Reasonable--reaction from the Muslim family recently thrown off a flight by AirTrain
• Won't you be my neighbor?
• Snowzilla
• ZOMG! Radioactive coal sludge will kill us all! (updated)
• Quick points on the auto industry bailout
• Slow and Steady
• Foreign policy and international public opinion

• January 2009
• December 2008
• November 2008
• October 2008
• September 2008
• August 2008
• July 2008
• June 2008
• May 2008
• April 2008
• March 2008
• February 2008
• January 2008
• November 2007
• October 2007
• September 2007
• August 2007
• July 2007
• June 2007
• May 2007
• April 2007
• March 2007
• February 2007
• January 2007
• December 2006
• November 2006
• October 2006
• September 2006
• August 2006
• July 2006
• June 2006
• May 2006
• April 2006
• March 2006
• February 2006
• January 2006
• December 2005
• November 2005
• October 2005
• September 2005
• August 2005
• July 2005
• June 2005

« Will Obama win Virginia? | Main | David Paterson and a hint of fiscal responsibility »

Fairness Doctrine and Blogs

Via Slashdot, Rasmussen reports that

31% [of Americans] believe the Internet sites should be forced to balance their commentary.

31%? Are you kidding me? How would that even work? By what mechanism could this possibly be enforced? [insert Gulag references here]

More:

Democrats oppose government-mandated balance on the Internet by a 48% to 37% margin. Sixty-one percent (61%) of Republicans reject government involvement in Internet content along with 67% of unaffiliated voters.

Only 48% of Democrats and 61% of Republicans oppose the application of the Fairness Doctrine to blogs and other websites?

O'RLY?

Well, then in the interest of fairness, here is a detailed and articulate rebuttal from an opposing point of view, you bastards.

What should be the truly key point from the Rasmussen article: "Voters in all categories agree by sizable margins that it is possible for just about any political view to be heard in today’s media."

In other words, as much as the Fairness Doctrine is a heap of bullshit, it's especially so with regard to the internet. But just because something is blatantly unConstitutional, unworkable, and unnecessary, don't expect it to go away without a lot of "discussion".