As published in The Washington Post
Sunday, February 8

PROGRESSIVE VOICES SILENCED IN WASHINGTON

By: Bill Press

If you’re looking for a break from those conservative voices that dominate talk radio, take time out today to listen to local station Obama 1260 AM.

Providing a welcome relief from the constant Obama-bashing by Rush Limbaugh and others, you’ll hear the progressive voices of Stephanie Miller, Ed Schultz, Lionel – or, during morning drive, my own “Bill Press Show.” Unfortunately, today’s the last day you’ll be able to do so.

As first reported by the Post’s media critic, Howard Kurtz, Dan Snyder’s Red Zebra Broadcasting Company, owner of Obama 1260, has announced plans to jettison all progressive talk and replace it with canned, pre-recorded financial advice programming.

The commercial use of public airwaves is supposed to reflect the local community. But not in Washington. On the AM dial, 630 WMAL features wall-to-wall conservative talk. So do stations 570 WTNT and 1580 WHFS. For the last two years, AM 1260 - even with a weak signal that can not be heard in downtown Washington – was the one exception. No longer. Starting Monday, February 9, our nation’s capitol, where Democrats control the House, Senate, and White House, and where Democrats outnumber Republicans ten to one, will have no progressive voices on the air.

Or maybe one. In order to mollify critics, Red Zebra has said it will add Ed Schultz to its conservative line-up on 570 AM. Which means Shultz will be outgunned in this market by at least 15 conservative talkers: Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Mark Levin, Chris Plante, Michael Smerconish, Michael Savage, Andy Parks, Fred Grandy, Bill Bennett, Monica Crowley, Bill O’Reilly, Dennis Miller, and Lars Larsen. No matter how good Schultz is, that’s not a fair contest – nor a fair use of the public airwaves.

Unfortunately, what’s happening in Washington reflects what’s happened in one city after another across the country. In Miami, Clean Channel recently dumped progressive talk for sports: the same move made by Clear Channel stations in San Diego and Cincinnati. Sacramento abandoned progressive talk for gospel music. In fact, according to a study released by the Center for American Progress and Free Press, there are nine hours of conservative talk for every one hour of progressive talk.

Why? Station owners complain they can’t get good ratings or make any money with progressive talk, but that’s nonsense. In Minnesota, independent owner Janet Robert has operated KTNF AM 950 profitably for five years. Madison’s 92.1 just scored its highest ratings ever. And Portland, Oregon’s KPOJ soared with progressive talk from #23 in market ratings to #1. Nationwide, progressive talkers Randi Rhodes, Ed Schultz and Stephanie Miller have proven that, given a level playing field, they can more than hold their own in ratings – and make money for their stations.

In fact, the only reason there’s not more competition on American airwaves is that the handful of companies which own most radio stations do everything they can to block it. In many markets – witness Philadelphia, Boston, Providence, or Houston – they join in providing no outlet for progressive talk. In others, as in Washington, they limit it to a crappy signal, spend zero dollars on promotion, and soon pull the plug.

In other words, there is no free market in talk radio today. The airwaves have been taken over by an oligopoly offering conservative talk only, which totally contradicts what commercial radio is supposed to offer.

Companies are given a license to operate public airwaves – free! – in order to make a profit, yes, but also, according to the terms of their FCC license, “to operate in the public interest and to afford reasonable opportunity for the discussion of conflicting views of issues of public importance.” Stations are not operating in the public interest when they offer only conservative talk.

For years, the Fairness Doctrine prevented such abuse by requiring licensed stations to carry a mix of opinion. However, under pressure from conservatives, President Reagan’s FCC cancelled the Fairness Doctrine in 1987, insisting that in a free market stations would automatically offer a balance in programming.

That experiment has failed. There is no free market in talk radio today, only an exclusive, tightly-held, conservative media conspiracy. The few holders of broadcast licenses have made it clear they will not, on their own, serve the general public. Maybe it’s time to bring back the Fairness Doctrine - and bring competition back to talk radio.

Bill Press is working on a new book on talk radio.

Bush Insider who Planned to testify About Stolen Election Killed

The Intriguing Death Of Top GOP Consultant Michael Connell

At 3:31 PM Friday, December 19, Michael L. Connell, a top Internet consultant for the Republican National Committee and for the Bush and McCain presidential campaigns, left Washington from the small airport in College Park, Md. Alone at the helm of a single engine Piper Saratoga, Connell's flight plan anticipated arrival at his hometown Akron-Canton Airport in a little over two hours, at 5:43 PM.

Instead, about three miles short of the Akron-Canton Airport, Connell's plane crashed to the ground in an upscale section of Lake Township, killing Connell instantly. "I was standing in the kitchen and I looked out the window and all I saw was fire," Taylor Fano told The Akron Beacon Journal. "It took out the flagpole and the cement blocks surrounding the flagpole . . . . It skidded across the driveway and right in-between a line of pine trees and a small fence around an in-ground pool."

The Federal Aviation Administration is investigating the accident and has not yet filed a report, but there was no immediate evidence of wrong-doing or sabotage.

Many in the blogosphere have called for further investigation of the crash, suggesting that Connell was about to provide crucial information in the case of alleged vote fraud in the 2004 Ohio presidential contest, and that that information would implicate Karl Rove and others in the Bush administration. [see update below]

Just last month, Connell was deposed in the ongoing case, King Lincoln Bronzeville Neighborhood Association v. Blackwell. According to accounts of the November 3rd deposition, Connell denied any knowledge of attempts to fraudulently manipulate 2004 Ohio vote counts.

There is, however, a more immediate and relevant question: How much will Connell's death, even if the accident was entirely without malfeasance, impede congressional committee investigations into the more controversial activities of the Bush administration over the past eight years - including the ongoing investigation into thousands of missing White House-RNC emails sent and received by some 22 White House political aides, including Rove. These emails are believed likely to shed light on the political firings of U.S. Attorneys, and to show if the White House had any role in controversial decisions to prosecute former Alabama Democratic Governor Don Siegelman.

After first emerging as a web consultant during the 1998 gubernatorial campaign of Jeb Bush, Connell quickly became a key member of the Republican brain trust and quickly became part of a small network of political consultants and lobbyists favored by Rove. He advised both Bush-Cheney campaigns, and was a regular consultant to the RNC and other GOP committees.

Connell, and his firms - New Media Communications, Govtech and Connell Donatelli Inc. - were part of a universe that included such other GOP operatives as Tony Feather and Jeff Larson of FLS Connect, Tom Synhorst of the DCI Group, and Jeff Averbeck of Smartech. Their companies have received millions of dollars from the Bush-Cheney campaign committees of 2000 and 2004 from the three major - national, congressional and senatorial - Republican Party committees; from such conservative interest groups as the National Rifle Association and Citizens Against Government Waste; from a host of corporations and trade associations seeking to remain in the administration's good graces; and from dozens and dozens of Republican House and Senate campaigns.

Story continues below

Two of Connell's firms received at least $8.78 million from the RNC from 2004 to 2008 and from the Bush-Cheney 2004 campaign. FLS got $39.5 million between 2004 and 2008 from the RNC alone, and Smartech got $9.74 million from the RNC over the same period, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

These revenue reports only touch the surface. Before his death, Connell's New Media listed 90 clients on its web site from the Alabama Republican Party to the Business Roundtable to the Free Enterprise Fund, to the Republican Jewish Coalition to USAID. The scope of Connell's client list is a reflection of the Midas touch of the Bush administration in signaling to prospective clients which firms were in good stead.

As it stands now, whatever Connell knew about the activities of Karl Rove and other Republican operatives will go with him to his grave at St. Hilary Catholic Church in Fairlawn, Ohio. His family released a statement on the New Media web site declaring, "Mike was a devoted husband and father, who, with his wife of 18 years, raised a family of four wonderful children. Mike was also a committed man of faith, who regularly worshipped with his family at St. Hillary's and who lived his faith through mission work to help the poor and less fortunate at home and around the world. Finally, Mike was an engaged citizen, who was actively involved at all levels of our political system."

In a telephone interview, Connell's wife Heather adamantly declared "he was a good man. He did nothing wrong. He wasn't about to talk, because there was nothing to talk about. Nobody did anything wrong. We won the elction fair and square. Deal with it." Asked if he ever spoke about the disputed emails, Heather Connell said "I have no clue about that. I just know it's not him."

A close friend who worked extensively with Connell in Republican politics said, however, that he believes Connell "was more involved in that than a lot of people were let to believe." This associate of Connell's, who first brought the accident to the attention of the Huffington Post, said Connell, who was deeply religious and firmly pro-life, may have been "developing second thoughts" after years of being convinced that "working for the Republican cause was doing God's work."

UPDATE:
An earlier version of this story claimed: "Connell's death provoked a groundswell of commentary among conspiracy theorists on the web, including Larisa Alexandrovna, Raw Story, Velvet Revolution, ePluribus Media, and TheZoo."

To be fair: Larisa Alexandrovna acknowledged that suspicions that Connell's death was the result of sabotage were unproven, and she urged that empirical evidence be pursued. Her articles and those that she cites legitimately raised questions that in many cases are worthy of pursuit (See Alexandrovna's letter concerning this story here.) I regret using "conspiracy theorists" to describe Larisa Alexandrovna, Raw Story, and the others.

source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/12/25/the-intriguing-death-of-t_n_153518.html

URGENT!!!! Write your senators and protect your First Ammendment Rights!

The end of Free Speech in America has arrived at our doorstep. It's a new law called the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act, and it is worded in a clever way that could allow the U.S. government to arrest and incarcerate any individual who speaks out against the Bush Administration, the war on Iraq, the Department of Homeland Security, the FDA, or any government agency (including me for sending this email and sending letters to the House and Senate!!!) . The law has already passed the House on a traitorous vote of 405 to 6, and it is now being considered in the Senate where a vote is imminent.

This act defines homegrown terrorism as: "(3) HOMEGROWN TERRORISM- The term homegrown terrorism' means the use, planned use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual born, raised, or based and operating primarily within the United States or any possession of the United States to intimidate or coerce the United States government, the civilian population of the United States, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives. "

This act also allows for a central organization to be created to monitor, detect, and report on suspicious "homegrown terrorist activity within the United States". The definition of such activity is vague, leaving room for the possibility of anyone seriously advocating social change, restoration of the constitution, and advocating the organization of protests to "coerce the United States government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof".

This Act is undermining, and threatening, the constitutional rights of U.S. citizens to organize in dissent of the Patriot Act, NSA surveillance, telecom immunity, social injustice, the War on Terror, or any other program that the citizenry feels is in violation of their inalienable rights as U.S. citizens.

The link to the Act, in full detail, is listed here: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:h.r.01955:

This is real - it has passed the house and is off to the senate, there is a reason mainstream Media is not covering this story - they don't want you to know what is going on!!!!

Please write your congresspersons on this. All U.S. citizens who are doing nothing but voicing their opinions against a government that has expanded their executive powers, bypassed our congressional check and balance, and has undermined our U.S. Judiciary System, are now at risk, by this new act, of being labeled and prosecuted as a terrorist. You may copy and paste the following letter if you would like when writing your elected officials.

I strongly oppose S. 1959, the Violent Radicalization & Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act. This is a misguided and dangerous piece of legislation. This legislation focuses the weight of the US government inward toward its own citizens under the guise of protecting us against "violent radicalization."

There are many causes for concern in HR 1955. The legislation specifically singles out the Internet for "facilitating violent radicalization, ideologically based violence, and the homegrown terrorism process" in the United States. Such language may well be the first step toward US government regulation of what we are allowed to access on the Internet. Are we, for our own good, to be subjected to the kind of governmental control of the Internet that we see in unfree societies? This bill certainly sets us on that course.

This seems to be an unwise and dangerous solution in search of a real problem. Previous acts of ideologically motivated violence, though rare, have been resolved successfully using law enforcement techniques, existing laws against violence, and our court system. Even if there were a surge of "violent radicalization" -- a claim for which there is no evidence -- there is no reason to believe that our criminal justice system is so flawed and weak as to be incapable of trying and punishing those who perpetrate violent acts.

This legislation will set up a new government bureaucracy to monitor and further study the as-yet undemonstrated pressing problem of homegrown terrorism and radicalization. It will no doubt prove to be another bureaucracy that artificially inflates problems so as to guarantee its future existence and funding. But it may do so at great further expense to our civil liberties. What disturbs me most about this legislation is that it leaves the door wide open for the broadest definition of what constitutes "radicalization." Could otherwise non-violent anti-tax, antiwar, or anti-abortion groups fall under the watchful eye of this new government commission? Assurances otherwise in this legislation are unconvincing.

The Violent Radicalization & Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act does not spell out terrorist behavior and leaves it up to the Commission itself to identify what is terrorism and what isn't. Language inserted in the act does partially define "homegrown terrorism" as "planning" or "threatening" to use force to promote a political objective, meaning that just thinking about doing something could be enough to merit the terrorist label. The act also describes "violent radicalization" as the promotion of an "extremist belief system" without attempting to define "extremist."

Legislation such as this demands heavy-handed governmental action against American citizens where no crime has been committed. It is yet another attack on our Constitutionally protected civil liberties. It is my sincere hope that we will reject such approaches to security, which will fail at their stated goal at a great cost to our way of life.

The citizens of the United States are protected under the constitution – this strips them of our first amendment rights of free speech. I Strongly urge you to vote no to this bill when it reaches the floor. The bill is far too vague and truly innocent people may be targeted for simply speaking their mind, or even writing their congressperson.

Thank you for your time,

Be sure to share this -

We need to protect our constitutional rights!!!