It seems that I have been taken to task by Mitch Berg over some remarks that I made about him in the weekly romp:
HOLY CRAP, the Democratic leadership in Congress is pushing the Fairness Doctrine. Who are the magical creatures that can pass a doctrine without nary a bill in existence? Seriously, I thought Mitch Berg was supposed to be the smart one.
I was greeted with not just a pithy comment from Mr. Berg but an entire post devoted to myself and my obvious ignorance over an issue that he "genuinely" cares about. Well, he got one thing right: I couldn't care less about the fairness doctrine. I have little interest in seeing this doctrine reinstated as it probably helps my cause more than it hurts and I also find a tiny bit of sadomasochistic pleasure in listening to some of these yahoos (not you Mitch!).
Yet, a few things confused my obviously feeble brain in this new and improved post about the Fairness Doctrine. Perhaps someone, even the always logical Berg, could assist me in unraveling this collection of seemingly contradictory statements.
Yet, a few things confused my obviously feeble brain in this new and improved post about the Fairness Doctrine. Perhaps someone, even the always logical Berg, could assist me in unraveling this collection of seemingly contradictory statements.
In the original post which I was referring to and mocking, Berg makes this statement:
The liberal response is “But President Obama isn’t pushing the Fairness Doctrine”.
I answer “he’s not President for five more days, and it doesn’t matter; the Democrat leadership in Congress is, and I doubt Obama would waste a veto to protect Conservative talk.
However, in this new and improved post, I learned:
And - just so’s you learn something, LITLOC - let’s be clear; Congress needn’t pass a single bill to reinstate the “Fairness” Doctrine. If Obama puts three pro-Doctrine members on the FCC Board, the “Doctrine” can become fact again by executive fiat; no legislation will be needed, beyond confirmation hearings. This, indeed, is the most dangerous scenario for supporters of free speech; Obama (and the smarter Dems) don’t want to pee on the third rail by legislating censorship - but how much political capital do you think Obama will burn getting in the way of an allied bureaucracy doing it for them?
So, at first the threat is coming from Congress and it doesn't matter that Barack Obama actually doesn't have any interest in reinstituting the Fairness Doctrine. Did you see that? The original thesis of Mr. Berg is that Obama doesn't really matter in this whole deal. Then, when I point out that in the two years Congress has been controlled by Democrats there have been ZERO attempts to bring back the dreaded DOCTRINE, I am smacked down because I am obviously STUPID for using the premise of his post and assuming he was referring to some imminent bill being pushed by Congressional leadership. Why am I stupid for using his own premise? Well, that is because Congress doesn't matter and the REAL threat is Barack Obama who could secretly appoint Pro-Doctrine FCC members even though we have already established that Obama has no interest in bringing this back.
Did you get that? I'll try to sum it up...
Congress is the REAL threat because they are going to bring back the Fairness Doctrine (even though NO ONE has put the issue into legislation form) but Barack Obama is the REALLY REAL threat because he is going to secretly appoint Pro-Doctrine FCC members (even though he has already said that he has no interest in doing so).
WOW, this guy really is the smart one...
Did you get that? I'll try to sum it up...
Congress is the REAL threat because they are going to bring back the Fairness Doctrine (even though NO ONE has put the issue into legislation form) but Barack Obama is the REALLY REAL threat because he is going to secretly appoint Pro-Doctrine FCC members (even though he has already said that he has no interest in doing so).
WOW, this guy really is the smart one...
2 responses to "He Really IS The Smart One..."
Mitch Berg isn't worth the few keystrokes it takes to shoot down his feeble attempts at "logic"--even in the dark. He's like one of those bottom-weighted inflatable clowns that you punch over and over and he keeps popping back up for more. In fact, he even looks like one of em.
Funny, "Anonymous" - I don't recall any anonymous people "shooting down" *any* of my arguments; in fact, I doubt you have ever tried. It'd take some guts - something anonymous trolls don't have.
So LITLOC: ad-homina aside; are you trying to make this complicated to be obtuse, or do you really not understand? You think because Congress has taken no action that the moves various congresspeople are making aren't worth watching? You think because Obama says something now that it's binding?
And again, I'm not the smart one. I'm the cute one. With the fists of steel.
Hey, c'mon down to the MOB party on 3/7 at Keegan's. We don't argue politics much, but it's fun anyway.