On Saturday, March 5, 2016 at 12:47:41 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Fri, 4 Mar 2016 18:15:35 -0800 (PST), wsnell01 wrote:

On Friday, March 4, 2016 at 10:23:11 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Fri, 4 Mar 2016 04:30:48 -0800 (PST), wsnell01 wrote:

On Thursday, March 3, 2016 at 12:20:38 PM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:

The fairness doctrine attempts to ensure that all political viewpoints
have reasonable access to a limited public resource.

What are the opposing "political viewpoints" to the idea that, for example, there should be affirmation action and quotas for short people?

Whatever the regulatory agency decides. That's the function of a
regulatory agency.

You are evading the question, peterson.

No, I'm not. It isn't my job to make the determination. That's what
regulatory agencies exist for.

If you are favor of the fairness doctrine then you must be prepared to answer any or all questions posed to you about it.




Actually, if I see a child misbehave and the parents don't deal with the misbehavior, I assume that they are wimps.

Well, as a convicted abuser yourself, that hardly surprises me.

I am not a "convicted abuser" or any sort of "abuser." You just committed another libel. Contact your lawyer.