Why are conservatives afraid of the "Fairness Doctrine"?

As someone who reject government interference in private businesses, I fail to see why anyone would want to accept forcing a broadcast company to bend over backwards to suit someone's idea of "fairness". Unless you've gone blind, deaf, and dumb, then you know that Rush's views HAVE been challenged. You can challenge anyone's opinions on other broadcasted shows, the internet, and any other form of media. The government should not be forcing any private broadcasting company into giving equal time to everyone's views if they don't want to.

Because it is his show and he can do it anyway he wants. I am not a fan of Rush's. I find him annoying. Same with Anne Culter. The reason the fairness doctrine is being pushed by some liberal elected officals is because the democratic party has not been able to break into talk radio sucessfully. They tried several times but everytime the radio station or radio show went bankrupt pretty fast. Not enough people listened to it for it to stay on air. So instead of actually coming up with a liberal show that liberals want to listen to they want to make the conservative shows also show their point of view for them. I do not know why conservatives will listen to talk radio and liberals won't. But for some reason that is the case. Or maybe they just have not come up with a show that the liberal people want. Who knows. But it is called supply and demand. THey need to find a show that fills a demand. So far they have been unable to do that. I do not like the idea of the "fairness Doctrine". I do listen to some political talk radio (there is more than just rush out there you know). When I do I do not want to listen to endless bickering between two people on opposite sides. I see enough of that on the news.

"The question I have for all of you is: If you believe so strongly in something, and know so much about something, then why can't you debate someone who has an opposing view? " Not that he couldn't, wouldn't....but that he should not be forced by law to do so. It is just so much an abomination to everything this country was founded on. I would expect him to have to put a 50/50 mix of views on his show any more than I would ask msnbc to do the same. I choose who to watch and what views I wiish to get. I watch all ends of the spectrum (their all propagandsa machines anyway) and I supliment it with internet news and forums. I can make these choices for myself and shouldn't have to have "choice" forced on me.

On the surface, it does indeed to be "fairness". However, when you look at the deeper issue, it becomes a mush more ominous issue. What this is is regulating "fairness". It is regulating speech and meida and the content there in. this is something that though sounds nicey-nice, should be avoided at all cost. The danger is in the ideology presented. A government controlling the airwaves and having say over how much of what is said.

I think that the whole idea is that someone is forcing a station to introduce an opposing view. I am assuming this applies mainly to radio? Here is the way I see it people listen to what they like, on television and or radio, if they do not like the views posed by a certain person they will change the channel, right? So basically people already have a choice of opposing views to listen to. You can listen to Rush or Pat Robinson or whomever you choose to listen too, it is not like one viewpoint takes over all the air waves.... well except for the news stations on television... The point is who has the right to demand that someone pose the opposing view? Howard Stern, Rush Limbaugh and thousands of others should be able to have their shows the way they want them and the government should butt out. Smacks of censorship to me. Just my opinion

Thegreatdebater, Might I point out that Rush has offered or even challenged someone with opposite views to debate him on live radio! Whom do you suppose that is and why hasn't he accepted the debate yet? (hint:his name rymes with Osama)

To show you haw redicolous the Fairness Doctrine can be you have to remember how it has been used in the past. During his campaign for President Ronald Reagan had all of his movies removed from TV because of the Fairness Doctrine. The Smothers Brothers who had a comedy show on TV and did political comedy. CBS censored what they could use so as not to run afoul of the Fairness Doctrine. They had a very funny section of the show during the presidential election with Pat Paulson running for President. He was not making fun of the candidates as much as he was making fun of the political process. He was removed because of the Fairness Doctrine. Even Snoopy was in trouble with the Fairness Doctrine when he decided to run for president and it appeared in a cartoon on TV. When Rush started his show on AM Radio there were very few radio stations. You had your choice of what type of music you could listen to. The only way he is able to broadcast today is he has the sponsors to pay for it and he has them because he has the people who will listen to him and support them with their purchases. There is nothing stopping liberals from having a radio show. Any station will host them if they can draw an audience. The problem is they don't have a following. There are many liberals who call into to Rush or Hannity ant tell them that they listen because they hear different viewpoints. One of their biggest complaints against liberal talk radio was it was so depressing and all you heard was how bad everyone was and the poor victims. IF you want the fairness doctrine back get ready to have you choices limited because the radio stations can not make money if they have to give away air time every time they disagree with something said on the radio. Can you just see it. The station reports the farm markets and an animal rights group wants to have time to explain the dangers of eating meat. Then another group wants time to talk about the credulity of killing animals for food. Then a someone else wants time to explain the benefits of Organic raised meat. So what you will get is music all day long until someone claims that songs have a message and they have a right to have their point of view expressed in music. You turn on your radio to listen to easy listening only to find a Acid Rock group playing because someone felt it was the fair thing to do.

Left wing hate radio had its opportunity but it stank and no one wanted to listen to it. Radio stations couldn't afford it because it was costing them money. Imagine being forced to remove programs that are making money for your station and replacing them with programs that are going to lose money for you. Where's the fairness in that? The Democrats don't want us to hear a different opinion so the, so called, "Fairness Doctrine," is a way to stop us from hearing a different opinion. Conservatives voted for George W. Bush because he was determined to protect our country. We didn't have that assurance with John Kerry. Do you listen to Rush? If he gets calls from Liberals he will debate them. Sean Hannity debated Alan Combs every weekday until Combs quit the show. He also debates them on his radio show. "Why can't you debate someone who has an opposing view?" I could ask you a similar question. If the Democrats are so sure of their views, why are they trying to shut up the Republicans with the Fairness Doctrine? Why don't they debate?