I know the life of a blogger must seem glamorous, and trust me, it is. There's the eight-figure salary, of course, the masseuse constantly on call, the fame, the glory and, naturally, the groupies. But there are some downsides, too: For example, almost every time I read anything about what Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., is up to, I end up banging my head against my desk. This has not been good for my desk -- or my head.
You may remember DeMint from when he was protesting the stimulus bill for being anti-Christian, even though the specific provision he objected to was completely standard language that didn't do any of what he said it would. Well, now that a spokesman for President Obama has made clear that the president doesn't support the return of the Fairness Doctrine, DeMint is trying to force the Senate to vote on ... the Fairness Doctrine.
"I’m glad President Obama finally confirmed his opposition to the Fairness Doctrine, which attacks the right of free speech on talk radio, but many Democrats in Congress are still pushing it," DeMint says. "With the support of the new administration, now is the time for Congress to take a stand against this kind of censorship. I intend to seek a vote on this amendment next week so every senator is on record: Do you support free speech or do you want to silence voices you disagree with?"
Meanwhile, Rush Limbaugh has an Op-Ed in Friday's Wall Street Journal about the old FCC rule. It's written as an open letter to Obama, asking him to oppose the Fairness Doctrine, so of course it only contains one tangential reference, buried in the piece, to the fact that it's already public knowledge that he opposes the Fairness Doctrine. Limbaugh uses that reference to just move the goal posts, writing, "You've said you're against reinstating the Fairness Doctrine, but you've not made it clear where you stand on possible regulatory efforts to impose so-called local content, diversity-of-ownership, and public-interest rules that your FCC could issue."