No to the Bailout!

There is no need to prop up any segment of the media.

The Hill - "Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.) has introduced S. 673, the so-called 'Newspaper Revitalization Act,' that would give outlets tax deals if they were to restructure as 501(c)(3) corporations. That bill has so far attracted one cosponsor, Cardin's Maryland colleague Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D).

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs had played down the possibility of government assistance for news organizations, which have been hit by an economic downturn and dwindling ad revenue."

I too mourn the passing of the traditional News PAPER. Heck, I was a paperboy delivering for the "Daytona Beach News-Journal" in 1968. Let's get real though, hard print news media has been in decline for years, the only thing buoying them up being the increasing population. The clue is in the very names of our newspapers. Once in Daytona Beach there was a "News" and a "Journal." They merged into one. Daytona Beach is vastly larger than it was when there were two papers, but there is only one now. Similarly you can find evidence of that in Orlando with their paper being the "Sentinel Star."

" 'I haven't seen detailed proposals yet, but I'll be happy to look at them,' Obama told the editors of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and Toledo Blade in an interview."

Look, but don't you dare touch you dingbat. If the Apocalypse comes and we lose our electronic media, new newspapers will spring up overnight. Like mushrooms. All we need is the freedom to publish them. See now? In that very quote you have the "Pittsburgh Post-Gazette," yet another evidence of the merger of two papers.

At one time papers that are now one, that used to be two were "Morning" and "Afternoon" publications. You got one to see what happened yesterday. You got the other in the afternoon to see what happened in the morning. You sat down to dinner to watch Walter Concrete and see what happened while they were printing the afternoon paper (and what to think about all of it) and you maybe went to bed watching the evening news at 10 or 11 with the wife, who probably thought she was the news, not what was on the tube.

It's all different now and we don't need these various papers, that's why they're asking for a bailout. With copy machines, email, faxes and PC's there will always be news publication and dissemination. There is no need for a bailout.

Saturday I mentioned why cars were important and why a domestic car industry was important to all of us. A domestic paper press? It's only as important as we want it to be, and if you want it to be important, buy the paper. If you don't, let 'em die. Until we're deaf, dumb and blind, and DEAD, there will always be news, and it will always get out. Somehow. Just let me keep my 1st Amendment, and we'll never need a bailout. Talking is not going to go away.

What's really going on? Democrats are propping up mouthpieces that are favorable to them. Even if this was not the case, how "objective" would media that most go to the hand it just thought about biting, to get the operating cash it needs to continue? Doesn't that question answer itself?

More →

Sphere: Related Content

1st Amendment? Welcome to the "Silent Hill"

It's starting to sound like an insurance policy, that doesn't cover anything, what with all the exceptions.

Chairwoman Louise M. Slaughter, US House of Representatives Committee on the Rules Majority Office.

Under section 370 of the House Rules and Manual it has been held that a Member could:

* refer to the government as “something hated, something oppressive.”
* refer to the President as “using legislative or judicial pork.”
* refer to a Presidential message as a “disgrace to the country.”
* refer to unnamed officials as “our half-baked nitwits handling foreign affairs.”

Likewise, it has been held that a member could not:

* call the President a “liar.”
* call the President a “hypocrite.”
* describe the President’s veto of a bill as “cowardly.”
* charge that the President has been “intellectually dishonest.”
* refer to the President as “giving aid and comfort to the enemy.”
* refer to alleged “sexual misconduct on the President’s part.”

Sure you have free speech, just don't use it here.

More →

Sphere: Related Content