-
bullshits reblogged this from hilker and added:
Obama is NOT the candidate of the First Amendment. He will use the FCC to further his agenda JUST as much as any...
-
jeffmiller reblogged this from technicoloryawn and added:
wasn’t sent by campaign staff, it was sent by...lawyer and quoted case law. As
-
technicoloryawn reblogged this from jeffmiller and added:
A quote from someone I know - “I think that the whole asking a station to not air something is minuscule. If you’re...
-
frothyparadise reblogged this from hilker and added:
All I can really say to respond is that your dictionary must be using a different version of the word “threat” than mine...
-
vb reblogged this from jeffmiller
-
hilker reblogged this from jeffmiller
-
sds reblogged this from jeffmiller
-
jeffmiller posted this
Could someone please point to the portion of the letter where Obama “threatens” any entity that doesn’t stop running to ads? I can’t seem to find it.
Okay. See above.
This language of the letter strongly suggests to media outlets that they are subject to action to revoke their licenses if they run the NRA’s ads. Their threat is based upon a Factcheck.org review of the ad, which seems to have been mistaken.
Think about this for a second. Obama himself has run a ton of false or misleading ads, ads that have been found to be false or misleading by Factcheck.org, but he didn’t pull any of these ads from the air … he kept paying stations to run them.
This is worse than hypocrisy … it’s thuggery. It’s Chicago style politics. It’s Audacity without the Hope.
All I can really say to respond is that your dictionary must be using a different version of the word “threat” than mine is.
And while I don’t disagree that Obama has run misleading ads — he has — I would say that the use of the word “thuggery” in reaction to that letter is, well, kind of reaching a bit, don’t you think?
