FLASH: FCC REPLACES JOSEPH GOEBBELS 

February 22, 2014

On this, the 282nd birthday of the Father of our Nation, George Washington, I pause to recollect my reading of history.

George Washington was a surveyor, a farmer, a statesman, an Army General, the Commander-in-Chief of the American Army during the Revolutionary War, and the first President of the United States.

George Washington was also the President of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia that hot summer of 1787 (hot due most likely to global warming). In this role he oversaw the production of a miracle. That miracle was the crafting of a document which defined the United States and guaranteed the enumerated freedoms which would later become the Bill of Rights.

All I can say now is that the founder of our nation has to be turning over in his grave. Were he alive today, he would be the first to call for a revolution against the government which his Convention founded. The grounds would be that this is not the government called for in the Constitution. It is quite different.

During this past week, we were informed of the anti-Constitutional development by the Federal Communication Commission to begin the process of the Nazification of America and the crowning of the FCC as the successor of Nazi Germany's Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels.

The Federal Communications Commission is an "independent government agency" and was born when Congress signed the Communications Act of 1934. Its purpose, as reported by AllGov.com, was to prevent a monopoly of the airwaves: “Concerned over the growing power of large corporations and conglomerates…President Franklin Roosevelt wanted the FCC to make sure the country’s budding mass communications systems did not fall into the hands of a select few.

Today’s interpretation would add the caveat "unless that monopoly is the government." Thursday, news broke that the FCC plans to plant "researchers" (read "agents") in every print newsroom, internet news outlet, television station, radio and cable news network for a "study" they are conducting. The stated purpose of the "research" is "a study of critical information needs."

These plans have been in the works for some time.  Ajit Pai, Commissioner of the FCC, published an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal on February 10 in which he voiced his concerns: "…Last May the FCC proposed an initiative to thrust the federal government into newsrooms across the country. With its ‘Multi-Market Study of Critical Information Needs,' or CIN, the agency plans to send researchers to grill reporters, editors and station owners about how they decide which stories to run. A field test in Columbia, S.C., is scheduled to begin this spring." Mr.  Pai continued by exposing the true agenda of the study: "The purpose of the CIN, according to the FCC, is to ferret out information from television and radio broadcasters about ‘the process by which stories are selected' and how often stations cover ‘critical information needs,' along with ‘perceived station bias’ and ‘perceived responsiveness to underserved populations.'"

Perceived responsiveness to "underserved population?" But who is "underserved" in a nation where network television reaches everyone with a television? Where radio is ubiquitous and skewed to local populations? More important, who is doing the "perceiving?"

In the WSJ, Mr. Pai provided part of the answer: "…the agency selected eight categories of ‘critical information' such as the 'environment' and 'economic opportunities,' that it believes local newscasters should cover. It plans to ask station managers, news directors, journalists, television anchors and on-air reporters to tell the government about their 'news philosophy' and how the station ensures that the community gets critical information."

That sounds familiar. Let’s put it this way; those concerns, including the not-so-thinly-veiled racial shibboleths, are the favorite stalking horses, ceaselessly flogged by The Lyin' King, Obama.

In case you were wondering, the FCC only has jurisdiction over the broadcast industry, not over cable news or print publications. The latest information reports that a power-drunk FCC is seeking to correct that oversight.

Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice, a conservative legal group, said he worries the CIN could be used to intimidate certain news organizations into covering issues that government officials feel are important. He went on to say:

This is an extremely troubling and dangerous development that represents the latest in an ongoing assault on the Constitution by the Obama administration…We have seen a corrupt IRS unleashed on conservatives. We have seen an imperial president bypass Congress and change the law with executive orders. Now we see the heavy hand of the Obama administration poised to interfere with the First Amendment rights of journalists…It’s clear that the Obama administration is only interested in utilizing intimidation tactics – at the expense of Americans and the Constitution.

The "Fairness Doctrine" narrowly avoided implementation by court order but this workaround would suit the regime even better. Prospective control of the media in its entirety, in a straightforward blitz on the first amendment. "News" agencies are, belatedly, concerned that Our Beloved Leader is infringing upon their inviolable "rights." They are, to their amazement, discovering that their rights are as meaningless to The Dictator-In-Chief as is the rest of the Constitution.

The "change" that is approaching is neither original nor quite what they might have "hoped" for. What Obama is establishing is a redo of historical absolutism. The German National Socialist government could not have aspired to better. Move over Joe Goebbels.

Jay Sekulow says that the federal government has no place attempting to control the media, using the unconstitutional actions of repressive regimes to squelch free speech. This sentiment was also shared by Ajit Pai, in the WSJ as he said “…everyone should agree on this: The government has no place pressuring media organizations into covering certain stories.”

Well, perhaps not but, historically, it still happened. And history, whether or not the willfully ignorant that foisted our Emperor on America understand, always repeats itself.

If we could only have Dear George back to muster his troops. Again we would witness history repeated as we would witness the overthrow of a tyrant king.


We believe that the Constitution of the United States speaks for itself. There is no need to rewrite, change or reinterpret it to suit the fancies of special interest groups or protected classes.