Kucinich sues NBC in Nevada for Breach of Contract
Submitted by RonPaulLincoln on Mon, 01/14/2008 - 20:03
http://www.scribd.com/doc/1018871/Politinks-Kucinich-vs-NBC-...
This is the only thing that big Corps. recognize. Ron should sue FOX News for being "unfair and biased".
»





















FCC response
I wrote to the FCC after Ron Paul was barred from the NH debate forum and this was their response back:
There is no violation of the law in anything you are complaining about. It might demonstrate basic unfairness about candidate coverage, but there is no rule violation. Although the FCC licenses broadcast stations, we have virtually no control over the content of what is broadcast. That's because the First Amendment guarantees broadcasters free speech to air pretty much whatever they want (short of obscenity or indecency). Further, the Communications Act, which established the FCC back in 1934, has a provision that specifically prohibits the FCC from censoring broadcast content. As a result, the FCC cannot tell stations and networks what to air or what not to air. There is, however, an equal time law that does require stations giving air time to one candidate to give air time to opponents, as well. Nevertheless, Congress has carved out several exceptions to that rule, including candidate appearances on newscasts, most interview programs, and in debates. Consequently, a station or network could have some candidates on in those formats but not all of their opponents. So if a station chooses not to cover - or even mention - one candidate on its news, it is entitled to do so. Similarly, it can exclude whatever candidates it wants from candidate debates. The equal time rule is largely aimed at paid political advertising, such that if one candidate purchases time on the air, his opponent is entitled to buy an equal amount of time.
Sincerely,
Mark Berlin
Policy Division (political office)
Media Bureau
Excellent
The First Amendment is working. Government should not be controlling what is in the news. Asking for that is asking for trouble.
Paul supports freedom of the press. It's in the Constitution.
Paul would never ask government to control the media. He believes the only regulator should be the market.
You show your ignorance with
You show your ignorance with your comment.
Dr Paul was very much aware of Fox treating him unfairly by excluding him from the Fox forum - or don't you read his words and listen to his voice when he gives interviews? He in fact even mentioned the words "sue them" during his Leno interview.
Regardless of the fact that he would not ask government to intervene in such a case, you have no basis for expounding on the "market driven media".
All old media is owned by the spider web started around 700 AD and continuing through the ages thanks in main part to our enemies the Rothschilds.
You must have recently had a business class on "freedom of the press" or some such nonsense, because that's all you seem to discuss on here.
Maybe you could go to work for Fox news?
_______________________
*** God bless Ron Paul ***
* Ron Paul For President *
______________________
*** God bless Ron Paul ***
* Ron Paul For President *
It was a joke
He was joking about suing them. If he was serious, he would lose all credibility since he's a defender of the Constitutional right to a free press.
Read his writings about how
Read his writings about how old media blocks him. And listen to radio interviews he gives admitting that it is "necessary" for supporters to "pressure" Fox.
Get back to me after your history lesson on the Rothschilds and other delectable Ashkenazis...maybe you are one, come to think of it...'tis a very, very wide web they weave....
____________________
*** God bless Ron Paul ***
* Ron Paul For President *
______________________
*** God bless Ron Paul ***
* Ron Paul For President *
There's a difference
In Kucinich's case, he charged breach of contract because they offered to have him and he accepted and relied on it, and then they breached.
In Ron Paul's case, he was never invited.
Ron Paul joked later that he thought about it, and decided that they could do what they want, but perhaps he should sue for fraud over the "fair and balanced" claim.
IMissLiberty
IMissLiberty
Wouldn't work
Fox tells us it's fair and balanced but we the viewers didn't sign a contract with them, nor is "fair and balanced" defined. What's fair and balanced anyway is very subjective. Does Fox have to include the candidate for the U.S. Socialist Party, Brian Moore, equal news coverage and allow him in debates to be fair and balanced? You could go on and on with this.
Network TV and yes, even CABLE
are government controlled media.
THEREFORE: It is NOT FREE MARKET!!
WE subsidize the bastards, they should serve OUR interests (that would be "We the People").
Good for you
Kucinich!!
And WINS!
http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2008/01/14/judge-finds...
Same reason he doesn't press
Same reason he doesn't press for a recount. The prize is the presidency. Ron Paul cannot afford waste time if he is to garner support from the other states. He's on a tough schedule, and only has so much energy. He has to choose and pick his fights carefully. It not that it's not a good idea--But he's gotta concentrate on a much better goal.
__________________________________________________
"No matter how cynical you get, it's impossible to keep up!"
--Lily Tomlin
Conscience does not exist if not exercised
"No matter how cynical you get, it's impossible to keep up!
---Lily Tomlin
Why not Paul
I don't understand why Ron Paul's team do not take the same action??
Ron Paul supporter and friend of Liberty
Ron Paul supporter and friend of Liberty
P.S. Just heard about a Ron Paul ad on tv in Vegas
RonPaulLincoln
RonPaulLincoln
RON PAUL SUES FOX
Hey do you know why Ron Paul does not do the same thing? I would think that would be the first action.
Ron Paul supporter and friend of Liberty
Ron Paul supporter and friend of Liberty