Check These Out: Buddy Finder | Videos | SpouseBUZZ | My Friend Network | News | Military Equipment


Military.com    Military.com Forums  Hop To Forum Categories  Hot Topics & Current Events  Hop To Forums  Point-Counterpoint    Czar wants parallel government broadcasting system
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
  Login/Join 
-------------------

Proud Member Derelict
Veterans Group

-------------------

Picture of 14713742
Posted
A careful read of this article would lead one to believe broadcasters will have to pay for alternative views on their dime. Is this correct? Is this a way to end a stations format for theose who pay nothing to broadcast their messages?

September 25, 2009
Czar wants parallel government broadcasting system
By Lee Cary

President Obama's diversity Czar at the Federal Communications Commission proposes adding a vast public broadcasting system to the growing list of Obama's parallel institutions.


Mark Lloyd has attracted attention for his controversial statements. Most notably, he praised Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez for leading a democratic revolution.


In Prologue to a Farce: Communication and Democracy in America, Lloyd proposes what would become a huge federal broadcasting system and yet another Obama parallel institution. It would join the "civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded" as the U.S. military that candidate Obama proposed, and the cadre of Czar advisors that parallels the Cabinet Secretaries.


To that list could be added government control over two of the three U.S. auto companies, significant influence in several large banks, a monopoly in the mortgage and student loan financial markets, and the proposed control of the nation's healthcare system.


If, as predicted elsewhere in the American Thinker, Obama's next big push is to mute his most successful critics in the media, Mark Lloyd would be a leading character in that effort. And, while an initial FCC move to fully implement what Lloyd proposes is unlikely, a scaled-down version could be on the horizon. If so, it will be the camel's-nose-under-the-tent.


Here's an overview of what Lloyd proposes, and his arguments on its behalf.


In his book, Lloyd begins with words that James Madison wrote in the context of advocating a national postal service.


"A popular Government, without popular information or the means of acquiring it, is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy; or, perhaps both. Knowledge will forever govern ignorance; and a people who mean to be their own Governors, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives." (p. 11)


From Madison's words, Lloyd leaps to the claim that the "American experiment in democracy is failing...because we have allowed our public sphere [of information dissemination] to be dominated by the interest Madison called merchants." (bolding added)


Lloyd extrapolates a case for a parallel government-sponsored communications network -- think of PBS on steroids -- based on Madison's support for a national postal service. The fatal flaw in Lloyd's revisionist history logic is that the post office was, and still is, a channel for information, not an arbiter of the content of what gets communicated -- except in cases of illegal activity like mail fraud. Lloyd imagines, because it never existed in reality, an early federal government that embraced "the responsibility to ensure the communications capability of all." (p.22)


As for his definition of the "public sphere," Lloyd borrows "strongly" from Regulatory Czar Cass Sunstein's argument that Madison believed that the American republic "put a premium on broad, reasoned discussion among political equals." (p. 12) So Obama's FCC Diversity Czar is playing off of the Regulatory Czar. A case of Czar inbreeding.


In an argument that we'll likely hear if Lloyd's proposal is promoted by the Obama administration, he states,


"The abdication of a government duty to provide for the diverse political communications between citizens has allowed our democracy, our republican mechanisms of deliberation, to wither under the dominance of one faction...To allow large corporations, one faction of our nation, to dominate the creation and dissemination of what we call news, however, destroys the careful balance struck by the founders between a variety of competing factions...Corporate liberty has overwhelmed citizen equality." (p. 17)


Lloyd preemptively offers a rebuttal to those who will claim that the increasing array of communication outlets, principally the internet, have broadened the freedom of speech.


"[A]s communications technologies become even more important to democratic participation, the government's inherent responsibility to protect and advanced democratic engagement is increased." (p. 20)


The bulk of Lloyd's book traces the evolution of communication technologies from the telegraph to the internet. In each episode of technological advancement, the federal government, by his analysis, failed to balance private interests, held by corporations, with public interests. Consequently, "U.S. communications policy has failed our democracy." (p. 167) And, as a result of this failure, "our present lived democracy does not reflect the core tenets of the republic established by the founders." (p. 229), and is, therefore, "the farce Madison feared" (p. 282).


So what does Lloyd propose?


"We must build a confrontational movement to reclaim our democracy, a movement committed to active and sustained protest against the present order." (p. 269)


As examples of the "confrontational movement" required for reclaiming "our democracy," he cites "the civil rights movement, Saul Alinsky, and the campaign to prevent the Supreme Court nomination of the ultra-conservative jurist Robert Bork." (p. 271)


As a "general outline of a plan," Lloyd proposes, among other things,


"Federal and regional broadcast operations and local stations should be funded at levels commensurate with or above those spending level at which commercial operations are funded. This funding should come from license fees charged to commercial broadcasters. Funding should not come from congressional appropriations. Sponsorship should be prohibited at all public broadcasters." (p. 278)


And, in a specific suggestion that reveals the political agenda behind Lloyd's proposal,


"The current wrangling over what to do about the future security of the social security system might be informed by the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) working in conjunction with community senior centers." (p. 279)


If the intent of Lloyd's plan for a new federal communication's policy isn't transparent yet, here's another look behind the curtain:


"The goal is only to allow citizens and community groups the same ability as major corporations or government to communicate their messages and concerns across those electronic media platforms that have become our new public sphere. The above proposal to support an independent public broadcasting system could also support the work of direct service groups by allowing them to produce and distribute over pubic broadcasting and cable access operations education programs and public service announcement." (pp. 280-281)


Imagine Lloyd's media utopia: ACORN daily programming is funded by fees on commercial networks. Community organizers and their organizations have ready access to the airways, funded by tolls levied against the capitalist broadcasters who must make a profit to operate, as well as fund their public network competitors. Citizen activists for political equality are allocated broadcast bands to promote their doctrines and philosophies. Imagine Breaking News from the civilian national security force (CNSF) channel. All this, and more, in order to enlighten the "equal citizen deliberation" required to authenticate that America is a legitimate democracy.


So, yet another parallel institution may be coming at us from the Obama administration, this time from the FCC. If so, as with the others, its ulterior motive will be to weaken the established institution it parallels.

Page Printed from: *http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/09/czar_wants_parallel_government.html*
 
Posts: 505 | Registered: Wed 30 May 2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Sarcastic Member
Picture of thorin001
Posted Hide Post
I sincerely hope that you are just the boy who is crying wolf. Otherwise this is ******* scary.
 
Posts: 8462 | Registered: Thu 22 March 2001Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
-------------------

Proud Member Derelict
Veterans Group

-------------------

Picture of 14713742
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by thorin001:
I sincerely hope that you are just the boy who is crying wolf. Otherwise this is ******* scary.


Not crying wolf and I surely hope I'm wrong.
 
Posts: 505 | Registered: Wed 30 May 2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Member
Picture of psychoABN
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by 14713742:
quote:
Originally posted by thorin001:
I sincerely hope that you are just the boy who is crying wolf. Otherwise this is ******* scary.


Not crying wolf and I surely hope I'm wrong.


You and me both...
 
Posts: 2441 | Registered: Sat 09 April 2005Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
----------------
Proud Member

----------------




Posted Hide Post
Yeah. This isn't the conspiracy theories forum, but I'll play, Phil.

First I think that an actual 'American Thinker' should sue the website that publishes this nonsense---little thought, great deal of imagination, smothered in paranoid delusion.

quote:
If, as predicted elsewhere in the American Thinker, Obama's next big push is to mute his most successful critics in the media, Mark Lloyd would be a leading character in that effort.


Delusions of grandeur to boot--I see the American Thinker thinks very highly of the American Thinker.

The use of [brackets] to make certain we know the intent of the guy writing the piece is nice, but the quote seems to echo the largest complaint I hear from the conservatives on this board:

quote:
American experiment in democracy is failing...because we have allowed our public sphere [of information dissemination] to be dominated by the interest Madison called merchants.


The Bias Of The Main Stream Media. Corporate control, as in Bought And Paid For.

I find it fascinating that the supporters of Rupert Murdoch's 'Fair and Balanced' approach at Faux News(?) are the largest detractors of taxpayer and listener supported Public Broadcasting.

It speaks volumes to the the desire to dictate the 'arbiter of content', since he who pays the piper is apt to call the tune.

You wanna lay out your concern with this particular quote?
quote:
As for his definition of the "public sphere," Lloyd borrows "strongly" from Regulatory Czar Cass Sunstein's argument that Madison believed that the American republic "put a premium on broad, reasoned discussion among political equals."


I guess some favor the childish brand of turd-flinging shoutfest that passes for debate these days.

Lord knows that broad, reasoned discussion among political equals will never match up to the wisdom of the American Thinker.


Now go a-way or I shall taunt you a second time!
 
Posts: 1885 | Registered: Mon 11 May 2009Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
-------------------

Proud Member Derelict
Veterans Group

-------------------

Picture of 14713742
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Yooper_tj:
Yeah. This isn't the conspiracy theories forum, but I'll play, Phil.

First I think that an actual 'American Thinker' should sue the website that publishes this nonsense---little thought, great deal of imagination, smothered in paranoid delusion.

quote:
If, as predicted elsewhere in the American Thinker, Obama's next big push is to mute his most successful critics in the media, Mark Lloyd would be a leading character in that effort.


Delusions of grandeur to boot--I see the American Thinker thinks very highly of the American Thinker.

The use of [brackets] to make certain we know the intent of the guy writing the piece is nice, but the quote seems to echo the largest complaint I hear from the conservatives on this board:

quote:
American experiment in democracy is failing...because we have allowed our public sphere [of information dissemination] to be dominated by the interest Madison called merchants.


The Bias Of The Main Stream Media. Corporate control, as in Bought And Paid For.

I find it fascinating that the supporters of Rupert Murdoch's 'Fair and Balanced' approach at Faux News(?) are the largest detractors of taxpayer and listener supported Public Broadcasting.

It speaks volumes to the the desire to dictate the 'arbiter of content', since he who pays the piper is apt to call the tune.

You wanna lay out your concern with this particular quote?
quote:
As for his definition of the "public sphere," Lloyd borrows "strongly" from Regulatory Czar Cass Sunstein's argument that Madison believed that the American republic "put a premium on broad, reasoned discussion among political equals."


I guess some favor the childish brand of turd-flinging shoutfest that passes for debate these days.

Lord knows that broad, reasoned discussion among political equals will never match up to the wisdom of the American Thinker.


Of course, one has the right to believe or not believe the communicator albeit electronic or otherwise. The last I checked I have never heard of giving equal free speech time when someone else is paying the dime for time. However, if this has some merit based on what the POTUS put in place elsewhere in his administration, it most certainly gives one pause.
 
Posts: 505 | Registered: Wed 30 May 2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
----------------
Proud Member

----------------




Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by 14713742:
Of course, one has the right to believe or not believe the communicator albeit electronic or otherwise.


It's not fact to be proved or debunked, Phil--it's speculation...Since evil Obama hired this person who wrote this book which I'll snip a few words at a time from, and he quoted that czar (we don't like czars, do we?), then he might do this in conjunction with that other thing we said he might do...

quote:
The last I checked I have never heard of giving equal free speech time when someone else is paying the dime for time.


So...only speech that's bought and paid for is really Free.

Right?

Seems disingenuous to decry bias in the media while advocating paid punditry and Hannity and Colmes-type staged 'debate' over reasoned discussion among political equals.

quote:
However, if this has some merit based on what the POTUS put in place elsewhere in his administration, it most certainly gives one pause.


Perhaps one, but not this one. Just what was it that President Obama put in place elsewhere in his administration that's giving you such heartache, Phil?

Do you get some Civilian National Security Forces Channel that I don't have access to up here in God's Country?


Now go a-way or I shall taunt you a second time!
 
Posts: 1885 | Registered: Mon 11 May 2009Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Member
Posted Hide Post
Ahh yes americanthinker the same blog that posted they had proof that obama`s book was ghost written by ayers[sp] and they where going to produce proof before the election.
I do love the sources that those on the far right get their "facts" and fears from.
 
Posts: 609 | Registered: Sun 19 October 2008Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
-------------------

Proud Member Derelict
Veterans Group

-------------------

Picture of 14713742
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Yooper_tj:
quote:
Originally posted by 14713742:
Of course, one has the right to believe or not believe the communicator albeit electronic or otherwise.


It's not fact to be proved or debunked, Phil--it's speculation...Since evil Obama hired this person who wrote this book which I'll snip a few words at a time from, and he quoted that czar (we don't like czars, do we?), then he might do this in conjunction with that other thing we said he might do...

That's right speculation and I have heard ramblings on other conservative networks concerning the FCC Chief's possiblr plane to mute free speech through overreguation and costs. maybe it's just conjecture based on propaganda from the right.

quote:
The last I checked I have never heard of giving equal free speech time when someone else is paying the dime for time.


So...only speech that's bought and paid for is really Free.

Right?

From what I understand Free Speech was not set in such a fashion whereby you must give equal time to rebutt it as law. Unless, of course the media gives that option at their own expense. As for private businesses that use electronic media and pays for it; the last I heard they were not mandated to give equal time on their dime.

Seems disingenuous to decry bias in the media while advocating paid punditry and Hannity and Colmes-type staged 'debate' over reasoned discussion among political equals.

Do you know for a fact it was staged between Hannity and Colmes. If so, I have not heard it. I'm sure MSNBC, CNN, ABC. CBS gives equal time.

quote:
However, if this has some merit based on what the POTUS put in place elsewhere in his administration, it most certainly gives one pause.



Perhaps one, but not this one. Just what was it that President Obama put in place elsewhere in his administration that's giving you such heartache, Phil?

Anita Dunn comes to mind. You know, the one who worships Mao Tse Tung.

Do you get some Civilian National Security Forces Channel that I don't have access to up here in God's Country?
I'll pass on that one you master baiter...youSmile
 
Posts: 505 | Registered: Wed 30 May 2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
----------------
Proud Member

----------------




Posted Hide Post
See now...to rehash another thread:

Anita Dunn says (tongue in cheek) that she's going to use her two favorite political philosophers to make a point, and you've now decided that she 'worhips Mao Tse Tung.' That's the sort of leap I'm talking about, Phil. We've already determined that many many conservatives are now reading Alinsky because his philosophy--his general strategy--is effective, even if you don't agree with some of his tactics, or his endgame.

Anita Dunn is a paid propagandist, like Ari Fleischer, Tony Snow, Dana Perino, Dee Dee Myers, Bob Gibbs...She was hired in the interim to control the White House message....perhaps with a bonus portfolio to rouse rabble among the right. You dislike her because she's doing a maahhhvelous job of doing her job. Think Beck for a much smaller salary.

Alan Colmes left that farce when a Black Liberal was elected---he took the **** he got from that other gasbag for a paycheck...and maybe because Saul Alinsky himself would have approved of his charade if the revolutionaries had planted him there to make liberals look weak, while actually demonstrating just what monsters hide in that corner of the world. I'll be looking for a book---and I'll buy it in hardcover. Hannity won't be happy...

Staged or not, it hardly qualified as 'reasoned discussion among political equals'.

quote:
As for private businesses that use electronic media and pays for it; the last I heard they were not mandated to give equal time on their dime.


They're not, and I don't think that they should be. I find myself more than able to rebut the noise from the corporate bully pulpit, but not all can differentiate between news and 'news'...and I still call bull **** on a conservative decrying the slant of a medium while insisting that those airwaves be filtered by who buys and pays for the time.

So how do you like it? Loudest microphone to the highest bidder--that's really what we have now, isn't it? Are the repeated references to Saul Alinsky making you uneasy?

There are a whole lot of folk reading his work these days--thank the panic-mongers and hate-speakers for putting him back in the public eye.


Now go a-way or I shall taunt you a second time!
 
Posts: 1885 | Registered: Mon 11 May 2009Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
New Member
Picture of charlie_echo
Posted Hide Post
Parallel government broadcasting, hm, reminds me of Tokyo Rose.
 
Posts: 239 | Registered: Sun 24 May 2009Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Experienced Member
------------------

Proud Member
Derelict Veterans Group
OF MUNERIS UT TOTUS
(Of Service To All)
------------------

Picture of SignalSgtWilliams
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by charlie_echo:
Parallel government broadcasting, hm, reminds me of Tokyo Rose.


More like Lord Haw-Haw soon to be broadcasting from the new Thousand Year Reich.

I have studied the german political movement and power from 1933 to 1945 and so much I have seen and hearing I've already read about. There is truth in the saying, "History repeats itself" ya know. I just don't like these parallel agencies being put into place. Scary at the least.............
 
Posts: 6007 | Registered: Fri 16 June 2006Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Experienced Member
Picture of FriscoLady01
Posted Hide Post
What country are we living in and in what time period?

As others have alluded to this is far more akin to 1930's Germany than too the United States.

SignalSgtWilliams the parallels are scary to you and I. Can you imagine how scary it is too those who came here for freedom after living through the Third Reich?

I can attest that those that I know that did - are terrified.

Frisco

This message has been edited. Last edited by: FriscoLady01,
 
Posts: 3093 | Registered: Fri 22 December 2006Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
----------------
Proud Member

----------------




Posted Hide Post
Ahh...I get it now.

PBS

Parallel Broadcasting System.

Well...those commie basturds are gonna sponsor a streaming rebroadcast of the original 1974 taping of the Willie Nelson concert that started the Austin City Limits thing---available for a month starting tomorrow (Saturday, October 17th) here:
EDIT::>>I corrected the link--this is worth a look if you've ever liked anything about Willie Nelson..


http://video.pbs.org/video/1294292042/program/1273976454
I think Willie might still have been dodging income taxes and partaking of illicit substances back in that day---only the Parallel Broadcasting System would sanction the philosophy of such a rogue...I'll hook the laptop up to the big screen Sony and bask in the counterculture of the Obamanation.

Lawrence Welk? Old Time Gospel with the Gaithers? Sesame Street?

The (gasp) Red Green Show?

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Yooper_tj,


Now go a-way or I shall taunt you a second time!
 
Posts: 1885 | Registered: Mon 11 May 2009Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post


"My word is my bond"
Picture of m551sheridan
Posted Hide Post
I have faith in the "soul" of America and Americans are getting pretty fed up with the BS this administration is trying to put over on us. And we sure as hell do not like the "character" of those PO surrounds himself with. If this were the early 19th century this phoney in the White House would be damn close to being tarred, feathered and run out of town on a rail...... to bad those days are gone. All in the House and Senate better be careful, they're all in for a surprise come this time next year. Maybe this turmoil will actually birth a "real" conservative and third party, one can hope.


One Flag......One Heart......One Nation............EVERMORE
 
Posts: 8964 | Registered: Wed 26 January 2005Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Experienced Member
Picture of jdksfcret
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by m551sheridan:
I have faith in the "soul" of America and Americans are getting pretty fed up with the BS this administration is trying to put over on us. And we sure as hell do not like the "character" of those PO surrounds himself with. If this were the early 19th century this phoney in the White House would be damn close to being tarred, feathered and run out of town on a rail...... to bad those days are gone. All in the House and Senate better be careful, they're all in for a surprise come this time next year. Maybe this turmoil will actually birth a "real" conservative and third party, one can hope.


A third party made up of the farthest right of the wing nut nation. A real roguish move if you ask me. With the upcoming publication of ‘Going Rogue’ it would be the perfect chance to develop another ‘grass roots’ movement. Sarah will most assuredly be doing a book signing national tour. Her faithful followers will have ample opportunity to bond with each other and set up organizing committees. No doubt the Democrats will benefit in the coming elections when the already fractured GOP becomes even less relevant. Go for it I say.
 
Posts: 4182 | Registered: Thu 30 November 2006Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Member
Picture of psychoABN
Posted Hide Post
The Democrats are begining to fracture...The far left of the party are becoming disenchanted with President Obama because of the delay in keeping promises, and if he sends more troops to Afghanistan, that's going to manifest quickly. The right wing of the party are uncomfortable with some of the policies that he's trying to cram through, and with health care reform and cap and trade, that's going to manifest quickly. What matters most are the Independents....and as far as they go, they aren't too pleased with the current state of affairs...The stimulus hasn't stimulated the economy. Sure, the stock market is doing better, but the value of the dollar is sinking like a rock. If hyperinflation kicks in before the mid-terms...adios' Democratic majority...guaranteed.
 
Posts: 2441 | Registered: Sat 09 April 2005Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
*
Picture of MilitaryFanSupporter
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by jdksfcret:
quote:
Originally posted by m551sheridan:
I have faith in the "soul" of America and Americans are getting pretty fed up with the BS this administration is trying to put over on us. And we sure as hell do not like the "character" of those PO surrounds himself with. If this were the early 19th century this phoney in the White House would be damn close to being tarred, feathered and run out of town on a rail...... to bad those days are gone. All in the House and Senate better be careful, they're all in for a surprise come this time next year. Maybe this turmoil will actually birth a "real" conservative and third party, one can hope.


A third party made up of the farthest right of the wing nut nation. A real roguish move if you ask me. With the upcoming publication of ‘Going Rogue’ it would be the perfect chance to develop another ‘grass roots’ movement. Sarah will most assuredly be doing a book signing national tour. Her faithful followers will have ample opportunity to bond with each other and set up organizing committees. No doubt the Democrats will benefit in the coming elections when the already fractured GOP becomes even less relevant. Go for it I say.

You just keep thinking that way, soupy. Wink


JMHO, I could be wrong...
 
Posts: 1113 | Registered: Tue 11 September 2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
"We have met the enemy, and he is us."
- Pogo
Picture of OldDoc
Posted Hide Post
Those who hope to see the two party system fall apart should just come out and state their one world ditatorship belief and quit dicking around. As Ron White says "You can't cure....".
 
Posts: 1498 | Registered: Thu 21 September 2000Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Experienced Member
------------------

Proud Member
Derelict Veterans Group
OF MUNERIS UT TOTUS
(Of Service To All)
------------------

Picture of SignalSgtWilliams
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by FriscoLady01:
What country are we living in and in what time period?

As others have alluded to this is far more akin to 1930's Germany than too the United States.

SignalSgtWilliams the parallels are scary to you and I. Can you imagine how scary it is too those who came here for freedom after living through the Third Reich?

I can attest that those that I know that did - are terrified.

Frisco


I've been wondering how those that survived the death camps that are still alive today that live in Skokie, Illinois feel about these things happening. At one time (70s) there was a HUGE population in Skokie that were immigrants from those camps.
 
Posts: 6007 | Registered: Fri 16 June 2006Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
  Powered by Eve Community  
 

Military.com    Military.com Forums  Hop To Forum Categories  Hot Topics & Current Events  Hop To Forums  Point-Counterpoint    Czar wants parallel government broadcasting system

© 2009 Military Advantage, Inc.