“Fairness Doctrine” vs. First Amendment

Irvine, CA--At the National Conference for Media Reform last weekend, several lawmakers called for the return of the "Fairness Doctrine," which demands that television and radio broadcasters give a balanced presentation of all sides of controversial issues.

"The Fairness Doctrine is a violation of broadcasters' right to free speech," said Dr. Yaron Brook, executive director of the Ayn Rand Institute. "Broadcasters should not be forced to promote ideas they may disagree with.

"Defenders of the Fairness Doctrine claim that, left unrestrained, broadcast corporations will stop some views from being heard. But no private individual or organization can keep people from voicing dissenting views--it is only the government that has the power to suppress speech. By granting a cabal of government bureaucrats the power to arbitrarily dictate what ideas should and should not be heard on the air, the Fairness Doctrine is the real threat to free speech.

"Those who think their views are not being heard have every opportunity to promote them--on television, on radio, in print, online--but they must earn their audience, not demand that it be provided to them ready-made. As Ayn Rand put it, 'The right of free speech means that a man has the right to express his ideas without danger of suppression, interference or punitive action by the government. It does not mean that others must provide him with a lecture hall, a radio station or a printing press through which to express his ideas.'

"Those who value the First Amendment must oppose the Fairness Doctrine as a grave threat to freedom of speech."

Immigration: Let Them In or Keep Them Out?

Immigration is a hotly debated issue today, entailing a number of considerations. What does a rational moral code have to say about allowing immigrants into the country versus having restrictive policies or a closed border? What is to be done about potential terrorists and criminals? What are the economic ramifications of immigration? Do immigrants displace jobs? Will open immigration cause an unjust drain on the welfare system--more so than is the case currently? Will overcrowding be a problem? What value do immigrants pose to a country? Will an influx of immigrants irrevocably alter the cultural atmosphere? Do immigrants have the right to come to America? Do Americans have the commensurate right to employ and sell housing to immigrants?

Who: Dr. Yaron Brook, executive director of the Ayn Rand Institute, and Mr. Carl Braun, executive director of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps of California. What: A panel discussion and Q&A on the issue of immigration. Where: UCLA Campus: Moore 100, Los Angeles, CA. When: Tuesday, February 6, 2007 at 7:00 PM. Admission is FREE. For more information e-mail events@aynrand.org

Dr. Harry Binswanger, member of the Board of Directors of the Ayn Rand Institute, will moderate the panel discussion, and the audience questions to the panelists.

Yaron Brook's bio: Dr. Yaron Brook holds a Ph.D. in Finance (1994, University of Texas at Austin) and is the president and executive director of the Ayn Rand Institute. He lectures on Ayn Rand's philosophy of Objectivism, business ethics, and foreign policy at colleges, community groups, and corporations throughout the world. His articles have appeared in academic business journals, magazines, and popular newspapers, including USA Today. His numerous media appearances include recent interviews on On the Money (CNBC) and The O'Reilly Factor (Fox News Channel).
 
Carl Braun's bio: Mr. Carl Braun is a founding member and the Executive Director for the 2,000+ Minuteman Civil Defense Corps of California; one of the oldest and largest Borderwatch organizations in the United States. He is responsible for directing the efforts of a 12-person leadership team and coordinating border security efforts across a 35-mile stretch of California's southern border with Mexico.

Bush’s Iran Policy Encourages More Attacks on Americans in Iraq

Irvine, CA--In his January 10 speech, President Bush acknowledged that Iran is providing key material support for attacks on American troops in Iraq.

"Iran's support for these attacks constitutes an act of war against the United States--the latest act of war in a long series stretching back to the Iranian hostage crisis," said Dr. Yaron Brook, executive director of the Ayn Rand Institute. "Our government has a moral obligation to respond to these vicious acts by taking decisive military action against Iran: hostile nations must not be given a blank check to murder American citizens.

"Shamefully, instead of vowing to retaliate against Iran, President Bush has  meekly announced plans to 'disrupt' future attacks and destroy isolated 'networks' of Iranian agents plotting to murder more American citizens.

"President Bush's inaction against Iran will encourage the regime to sponsor further attacks on Americans in Iraq, and to expand the scope of its aggression further. Those who value the lives of our soldiers and the security of America must demand that the Bush administration change course and eliminate the Iranian threat."

Belly Up in Venezuela

From Cox and Forkum:

From CNN: Venezuela to nationalize 'absolutely all' energy sector.

Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez said on Saturday the country's entire energy sector had to be nationalized, reinforcing his socialist revolution and possibly giving himself more targets for state take-over. But he said he would permit foreign firms to hold minority stakes in energy deals. The anti-U.S. leader, in power since 1999, this week announced he would nationalize power utilities and the country's biggest telecommunications firm, confirming his status as the catalyst of Latin America's swing to the left. "We have decided to nationalize the whole Venezuelan energy and electricity sector, all of it, absolutely all," Chávez said in his annual state of the nation address to parliament, potentially opening up more projects for state acquisition in the No. 4 crude exporter to the United States. The president was reinaugurated this week for a term that runs through 2013. Chávez has already pursued oil and gas projects and power utilities but on Saturday left no leeway for a private company to hold a majority in operations anywhere in the energy sphere.

What will be targeted? It was not immediately clear whether his pronouncement on nationalizing the whole sector was a precursor to moves against specific projects or companies. Venezuela will have to judge how closely private firms must be connected to the country's oilfields, refineries, pipelines, gasoline stations and coal mines to count as targets for nationalization. Huge oil service companies such as Halliburton and Schlumberger operate in Venezuela but Chávez gave no indication whether deals involving such businesses were now in his sights.

Also from CNN: Venezuela, Iran to finance opposition to U.S..

Venezuela's Hugo Chavez and Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad -- fiery anti-American leaders whose moves to extend their influence have alarmed Washington -- said Saturday they would help finance investment projects in other countries seeking to thwart U.S. domination. The two countries had previously revealed plans for a joint $2 billion fund to finance investments in Venezuela and Iran, but the leaders said Saturday the money would also be used for projects in friendly countries throughout the developing world. "It will permit us to underpin investments ... above all in those countries whose governments are making efforts to liberate themselves from the [U.S.] imperialist yoke," Chavez said.

"This fund, my brother," the Venezuelan president said, referring affectionately to Ahmadinejad, "will become a mechanism for liberation." "Death to U.S. imperialism!" Chavez said. Ahmadinejad, who is starting a tour of left-leaning countries in the region, called it a "very important" decision that would help promote "joint cooperation in third countries," especially in Latin America and Africa.

The Injustice of Saddam’s Trial

From the archives:

"A trial that presumes Hussein's innocence can achieve nothing but a travesty of justice.Saddam Hussein is not a private citizen, whose guilt requires proof in an objective court of law, but a dictator whose incontestable evil was manifest to any rational observer of his tyranny. The Bush administration, after all, determined that Hussein was so vicious that we had to go to war to topple his regime." -- Elan Journo, The Injustice of Saddam's Trial (February 1, 2006)


 

Voice of Capitalism

Capitalism news delivered every Monday to your email inbox.

Subscribed. Check your email box for confirmation.

Pin It on Pinterest