On MSNBC’s Monday airing of “The ED Show,” host Ed Schultz asked his guest, National Action
Network President Al Sharpton, if there should be ways that the Federal Communications Commission could intervene in the wake of the alleged hostile reaction to a California state senator’s proposed boycott of Rush Limbaugh.
“How would you anticipate the FCC governing what talkers might say on the air in situations like this?” Schultz said. “Would there be a review board? Would it go — because obviously once the license is given out, they still put talkers on the air. What if they continue to act like that and who would be the judge on what’s over the line?”
Sharpton said Schultz’s suggestions could work and would be appropriate just as profanity is regulated on the airwaves.
If Mr. Schultz and his ilk had the capacity to think rather than spout off, he may not like what he is wishing for. The theory of unintended concquences ring a bell?
Typical liberal ”government-is-the-solution” even when there is no problem idea.
First add a big government watchdog.
Then add plenty of watchers.
Then add plenty of watchers’ little helpers.
Then add assistants to the little helpers.
Then how about a cadre of volunteers who do the watching in exchange for lower tuition.
Finally you do what you wanted to do in the first place: get rid of any talkers you disagree with.
Like with ACORN, if you are proven wrong you can throw a freebie watcher under the bus as needed.
This only costs BILLIONS!
Think a second.
Right now, any offended viewer can write to the government if he doesn’t like whats on the airwaves….and it is the FCC that investigates.
The well working system is already in place.
They live under the fantasy it would and could only be used against Republicans.