Patterico's Pontifications

11/17/2010

Fascist Quote of the Day

Filed under: General — Aaron Worthing @ 6:30 pm



[Guest post by Aaron Worthing; send your tips here.]

From Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-ictatorial):

There’s a little bug inside of me which wants to get the FCC to say to FOX and to MSNBC: “Out. Off. End. Goodbye.” It would be a big favor to political discourse; to our ability to do our work here in Congress; and to the American people, to be able to talk with each other and have some faith in their government and more importantly, in their future.

Well, thank God the FCC can’t control pure cable channels the way it can control broadcast.  So even if they wanted to, they couldn’t comply.

[Posted and authored by Aaron Worthing.]

64 Responses to “Fascist Quote of the Day”

  1. Would love to hear, specifically, what “ability to do our work here in Congress” has been prevented by any media.

    My lack of faith in government is based on the government. That is all.

    TimesDisliker (799368)

  2. One Conservative Channel. 50 Liberal.

    Heck of a trade Jay. You must have gotten your great-grand daddy’s brains as well as your inheritance.

    Torquemada (a8a9b2)

  3. Yes, not having opposition, or any media people willing to call out your asshattery would make your job easier, Jay.

    JD (c8c1d2)

  4. I have a little bug inside of me to.

    My little bug wants to get a large crowd of like-minded people and drag Senator Rockefeller from his office, screaming in terror, and hang him from a lamppost with non-exploitatively-cultivated green-approved hemp rope until he stops twitching and his bowels empty.

    Maybe my bug and his bug can have drinks sometime.

    Ken (2e87a6)

  5. Dude, you’re so tough and admirable.

    What’s the weather like around your compound, by the way?

    Leviticus (30ac20)

  6. If you think he’s nasty about what adults are watching, you should hear what he’s saying about what’s on kids TV.

    imdw (3ac9fb)

  7. “I have a little bug inside of me to. ”

    Oh wow was that you that wrote the Turner Diaries?

    imdw (906b05)

  8. and have some faith in their government

    I don’t want to have faith in my government and that Senator Rockefeeler thinks that would be a good thing for me, reminds me that his view of government and it’s function is quite different than mine.

    Faith is for a savior.

    Too bad Senator Rockefeller can’t be straight up about this: I believe the reason he wants to see controls over the cable airwaves and knock out Fox and MSNBC, etc., is because it certainly does hinder the work of Congress – there is now a 24/7 news cycle and the American people know more than ever before what their Congress is, and is not doing. Eyes are watching, witnesses tell, and it’s become more and more difficult to keep the public in the dark.

    Dana (8ba2fb)

  9. Yet again, imdw reaches deeeeeep into his bag of rhetorical tricks and pulls out …

    the racist name calling for the four millionth time.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  10. The Standard Oil scion, should quell those sentiments, they didn’t serve his great grandfather
    at Ludlow any good at all

    narciso (82637e)

  11. I don’t watch much cable news, but I don’t see much evidence that people or our discourse are more informed by it.

    imdw (c982ed)

  12. A state controlled media is every leftard’s dream come true.

    Be the lefties Nazis, Commies or Dems…they all want the same thing.

    Dave Surls (775682)

  13. imdw

    The issue is not whether we should value this expression or not. I mean if we wanted to get into that, i would say that the NYT, WaPo, LA Times, NBC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC all could be trashed as leaving us ill informed.

    But the question is not whether a majority of the people like expression or not, but whether it is expression or not. And given that it is, then we have no business evaluating its usefulness, except insofar as we are decided what we personally want to consume.

    Aaron Worthing (b8e056)

  14. <a href="http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_remedy_is_more_speech

    ” target=”_blank”>As Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis advised, in his famous Whitney v. California opinion in 1927, “If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence.”

    Fritz (ac48cc)

  15. My little bug says nothing, because the whole idea is kind of creepy.

    My little brain says that when politicians start listening to little bugs that say suppression of speech is a good idea, then perhaps their little bugs need a little sunlight.

    And when their little bugs tell them that agencies, rather than the voice of the people through the elected Congress and the Constitution, should enforce correct speech, it may be time to use some Raid.

    Ag80 (e828a4)

  16. “The issue is not whether we should value this expression or not. ”

    Somebody did bring it up. I don’t need to be told that first amendment protections don’t and shouldn’t depend on the perceived value of expression. Not too long ago I was on here praising modern art in the weimar.

    But lets also not kid ourselves about what cable news delivers:

    “I mean if we wanted to get into that, i would say that the NYT, WaPo, LA Times, NBC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC all could be trashed as leaving us ill informed.”

    And in quite a few ways, you’d be right that at key moments, our media fails us. I’m sure you have your favorite moments. The run up to the Iraq war was among mine.

    imdw (8bb588)

  17. The run up to the Iraq war was among mine.

    As well as the run-up to the 2008 election. That is among mine.

    Ag80 (e828a4)

  18. Good freaking Allah. Can you be more mendoucheous, dimwit?!?!?!

    JD (c8c1d2)

  19. “Well, thank God the FCC can’t control pure cable channels the way it can control broadcast. So even if they wanted to, they couldn’t comply.”

    Where there’s a commerce clause, there’s a way.

    beer 'n pretzels (3d1d61)

  20. “As well as the run-up to the 2008 election. That is among mine.”

    That’s what I figured. Not enough explanation of the McCain/Palin cap and trade plan, huh?

    “Good freaking Allah. Can you be more mendoucheous, dimwit?!?!?!”

    You mean I haven’t yet explained to you how only McClathy got it right on WMDs?

    imdw (df0dab)

  21. “You mean I haven’t yet explained to you how only McClathy got it right on WMDs?”

    imdw – Do you think McClatchy issued any corrections to their reporting after the last Wikileaks dump?

    daleyrocks (940075)

  22. You don’t explain squadouche to anyone. You lie.

    Hat tip to Norman Chad for squadouche. Skwadoosh.

    How many names have you posted under?

    JD (c8c1d2)

  23. imdw gets us every time. There’s not an argument against that logic and wit.

    You sir, or mam, are the greatest. All others fall to their knees in your sharp, incisive commentary.

    Thank you.

    Ag80 (e828a4)

  24. “imdw – Do you think McClatchy issued any corrections to their reporting after the last Wikileaks dump?”

    If you’re familiar with what they wrote and what the wikileaks documents show, you wouldn’t think so either.

    imdw (8bb588)

  25. Bush lied people died and McClatchy dimwit Kos and Michael Moore were the only twoof tellers.

    JD (c8c1d2)

  26. imdw’s going to have to troll really, really hard to distract us from the fact that democrats are agitating for the silencing of any non leftist television. Only a fool sees MSNBC as proof he’s gunning for both ‘extremes’. Here’s a hard leftist angry that one channel attempts to present both sides. No old style network even approaches Fox’s balance.

    We still have the power to vote against democrats, so it’s not legitimate to resort to violence. However, government silencing free speech is a legitimate justification for bloodshed. Rockefeller is only agitating in an obnoxiously veiled way… and he probably has no power to do what he’d like.

    But our first amendment rights are only guaranteed by the second. Our elections are only guaranteed by the second. So long as we have free elections, it’s extremely wrong to resort to violence, but I think it’s healthy to have awareness that what Rockefeller is preaching is an opposition to liberty.

    We have had a few very powerful and overreaching leaders over the decades, and they were smart enough to calculate just how far they’d have to go before people started revolting. I’m very glad Americans like Ken have that little bug inside them, under control.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  27. “imdw’s going to have to troll really, really hard to distract us from the fact that democrats are agitating for the silencing of any non leftist television.”

    Seriously. Go see what Rockefeller thinks the kids are watching.

    imdw (41a598)

  28. It is studiously trying to distract from the lib Dem’s actual words.

    JD (c8c1d2)

  29. No no. I’m asking you to go find his actual words. You’ll see the history is his dislike of the media isn’t partisan.

    imdw (41a598)

  30. No. You want us to go find other words on other topics not related to his desire to silence critics in the MFM.

    JD (c8c1d2)

  31. “actual words” not good enough for you huh? so now you want to move the goalposts? tsk tsk tsk.

    imdwa (01e88f)

  32. “you wouldn’t think so either.”

    McClatchy and Wilson lied, people died.

    daleyrocks (940075)

  33. Ironic. The very reasons he wants to eliminate a free press are why the founders protected it.

    They did not want what his people are doing to be easy, or secret.

    Machinist (74634b)

  34. At least Jay Rock didn’t dust off the ‘Fairness Doctrine’ talking points. Point of interest: Fox draws about 6x MSNBC’s viewership.

    TimesDisliker (799368)

  35. “Out. Off. End. Goodbye.” It would be a big favor to […] our ability to do our work here in Congress

    Machinist, you’re right. This SOB is angry that political speech slowing down legislation.

    Rockefeller’s sentiments are damnable. imdw can snark that he’s just critical of TV generally, but only because he didn’t watch the link or even the post.

    There’s a lot of good material at the link. Allen West schools the CBC.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  36. The funny and IRONIC thing about Obama, is that he NEVER recognizes those that have SLOBBBBBERED all over him. If you BLEW HIM YESTERDAY, he didn’t thank you, and has no regard nor loyalty to you going forward. Most normal flawed peeps have a CONSCIENCE. You HELPED me. I remember that you HELPED me. Obama CLEARLY has no affinity as to LOYALTY. And I know why.
    Obama is clearly NARCISSISTIC. It’s all and always about HIM. Obama has NEVER been HELD ACCOUNTABLE. He has USED and CONNED his way through life thus far. He has WORKED the SYSTEM for his FINANCIAL ABILITY to go to COLLEGE. He has MANIPULATED his STATUS as a PART BLACK man or maybe even FOREIGN NATIONAL to get cash or station.
    Opie the Kenyan USER has shit on everyone and anyone who ACTUALLY MEANT TO HELP HIM.
    Obama feels no shame nor conscience. Obama has a Psychological drive that is unhealthy.

    gus (3c4587)

  37. TD…
    FoxNewsChannel’s viewership is greater than CNN and MSNBC combined at this time.

    AD-RtR/OS! (68ed01)

  38. 29. No no. I’m asking you to go find his actual words. You’ll see the history is his dislike of the media isn’t partisan.
    Comment by imdw — 11/17/2010 @ 9:07 pm

    — WTF is that supposed to mean? He is to the left of center politically, and he is advancing the idea of censorship; period.

    Icy Texan (c68ceb)

  39. We can’t deny this is keeping with the mindset of the likes of FCC zampolit like Mark Lloyd, who has spoken of the ‘wonderful Democratic Revolution
    of Hugo Chavez’ and how moneyed interests,almost blocked that viewpoint, from prevailing, the DISCLOSE Act, with cutouts for favored Democratic
    institutions, the attacks on American CrossRoads and the Chamber of Commerce, the belief expressedby Anita Dunn, and others, that “Fox isn’t a real network’ all adds up to the same thing, a distinctly ‘pragmatic’ view of freedom of speech’ when it does serve, the interests of ‘community
    organizing. and redistribution of wealth’

    narciso (82637e)

  40. “He is to the left of center politically, and he is advancing the idea of censorship; period.”

    Oh he’s a censor. But his targets aren’t picked based on ideology.

    imdw (56dcea)

  41. #39 Targets not based on ideology?

    You can not honestly believe that?

    It is a beyond cynical move to want to silence the one-and-only media outlet for Center Right perspective. If the cost of killing FoxNews is sacrificing MSNBC it would be a trivial price to pay.

    Not only that, many of these Degenerate Politicians would want MSNBC out b/c it simply makes their jobs tougher. Heaven forbid the hard core left ask it Degeneraticians to do what they vote him in for.

    To me MSNBC does nightly what I could not do in millions of hours of spewing — convince normal folks that leftism is a form of mental illness for the most part.

    Torquemada (a8a9b2)

  42. imdw

    just because he is at least pretending to be bipartisan, doesn’t make this any less of a proposal to regulate speech based on its content.

    For instance, suppose a city said it was illegal to wear a shirt that said the word “f-ck” on it (meaning the whole word, not my censored version), ever. This would not be partisan but it would still be in direct contradiction of S.C. precedent that said that a man could walk around the courthouse with a jacket that said “f-ck the draft.” Even a rule requiring civility, which seems to be sort of what he was getting at, is not a content neutral rule and thus violates the first amendment.

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  43. Yes, of course everyone! We all know that freedom increases when we limit the flow of information to only that which is “correct” and “useful”. Heaven knows that we are all done a disservice when a fine American like Van Jones is run out of town by the likes of (yeech!) GLENN BECK!

    How does a buffoon who vomits idiocy like this get elected to the US Senate in a state that votes relatively reliably conservative in presidential elections? Baffling.

    Tim (b0bef9)

  44. Please note that the first paragraph of my preceding post was sarcastic, and this one is not.

    Tim (b0bef9)

  45. lol, i think that was actually kind of clear, Tim. :-) but sometimes it IS hard to tell.

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  46. “You can not honestly believe that?”

    Based on his actual words too! His problem isn’t just with conservative cable news. And its not even just cable news!

    “just because he is at least pretending to be bipartisan, doesn’t make this any less of a proposal to regulate speech based on its content.”

    I called him a censor. He wants to regulate speech based on its content. It’s just that he doesn’t draw partisan lines, his lines are much bigger. Look up what he has to say about what kids are watching.

    imdw (8bb588)

  47. It’s just that he doesn’t draw partisan lines

    So, which left-leaning news channel does Rockefeller want banned?

    Some chump (4c6c0c)

  48. “So, which left-leaning news channel does Rockefeller want banned?”

    Did you read the quote?

    imdw (c5488f)

  49. Apparently you either can’t or won’t answer my question.

    Some chump (4c6c0c)

  50. Maybe if I just put in an excerpt of the quote:

    “MSNBC”

    How about now. Did you read that part of the quote?

    imdw (fc3073)

  51. I’m not sure that MSNBC cares if they get snuffed. They’re a better fit in Chavez’s Venezuala, as the state televsion station, anyway. Comentario Especial Tonight!

    East Bay Jay (2fd7f7)

  52. some

    yeah, he clearly said he wanted to ban both msnbc and fox news.

    as though the two were equal anyway. i mean is there anyone as unscrupulous as fast eddie schultz on fox news? Or as sweaty?

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  53. Sure, I’ll sacrifice an inconsequential BS outlet like MSNBC to balance out the knifing of Fox, who wouldn’t?
    It’s in the fine tradition of the Senate (see: Missouri Compromise).

    Jay (a60876)

  54. I think the real trick here is that the left badly wants to pretend Fox News is simply the same as MSNBC.

    That’s ridiculous. I can imagine a network like MSNBC, biased the way they are, for the right, but I think it would be extremely unwatchable. No democrats like Juan Williams ever show up to offer a challenging POV, no attempt to capture different perspectives on election night, or running up to an election.

    Fox News just isn’t like MSNBC. It would be interesting if someone tried that model, but I think people watch news in order to become more informed and eventually wind up at the more balanced network they trust more.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  55. “I think the real trick here is that the left badly wants to pretend Fox News is simply the same as MSNBC.”

    You’d be a fool to pretends this was the case.

    “I can imagine a network like MSNBC, biased the way they are, for the right, but I think it would be extremely unwatchable.”

    Poor morning joe.

    imdw (c982ed)

  56. You positioning of Joe as someone from the VRWC just confirms your delusional state.

    AD-RtR/OS! (a60876)

  57. VRWC? Just because he’s a republican?

    imdw (e870b9)

  58. Point and laugh. Mock and scorn. How many names, dimwit? Simple question.

    JD (c8c1d2)

  59. Well, does that mean that a Republican can be someone not from the Right?
    You’re the one who posited that Joe was from the Right.
    Hillary claimed that pretty much everyone not a Dem-Lib (redundancy alert), or who opposed her husband, was a member of the VRWC.
    Last time I checked, when he was in Congress (you do know that Joe was a GOP Congressman from FL, don’t you?),
    Joe opposed William Jefferson Clinton on pretty much everything.
    Therefore, he MUST be a member of the VRWC, as defined by Hillary.

    AD-RtR/OS! (a60876)

  60. Fascist is a pretty good label for Rockefeller, since he wants to restrict speech that makes his job of ruling the peons inconveniently difficult.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  61. He started having the vapors after a Lapham piece in Harpers (the one that coined the phrase, Laphamization, for writing of events that hadn’t happened) suggesting that he was a tool of Richard Mellon Scaife, before Murdock he was the bete noire
    of the left, he overreacted to Katrina, made a big
    stink over how Iraq was a mistake, and yadda yadda,
    there it goes

    narciso (82637e)

  62. narciso, are you talking about Joe, or Jay?

    AD-RtR/OS! (a60876)

  63. “you do know that Joe was a GOP Congressman from FL, don’t you?”

    And he gets no credit for it either! how many hours does he put in at MSNBC? Poor morning joe, everyone forgets about him.

    imdw (3ac9fb)

  64. I’ve been thinking about this Jay Rockefeller quote, since I read it. I can hardly believe it, particularly the part where Americans need to “…have faith in their government and, more importanlty, in their future.”

    In the past couple of weeks, we have all read stories about the Vatican bank laundering Mafia money, the DOJ supressing a report that the U.S. allowed 10,000 Nazis into the country after WWII, and two powerful Congress members essentially let off the hook for corruption.

    Well, this week should just add to that list of events that shakes Americans’ “faith in government” and “their future.”
    Federal authorities, capping a three-year investigation, are preparing insider-trading charges that could ensnare consultants, investment bankers, hedge-fund and mutual-fund traders and analysts across the nation, according to people familiar with the matter.

    TimesDisliker (0ad7b2)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.3752 secs.