Damn them all to HELLL!!!!!! (Pentax)

On Tue, 8 Mar 2016 10:32:05 -0800 (PST), wrote:

You completely missed the point, as usual. There are NO experts on such matters.

There is no reason that we can't have experts on such matters.

Incorrect. No one person, or group of people, can possibly decide what all of the opposing viewpoints are to quotas/affirmative action for short people is, other than perhaps to say "No to any quotas for anyone," which doesn't really make for much of a discussion, now does it? Their guesses would not be any better than those of talk show host, or most anyone else.

Happily you are wrong. We are able to function because we have expert
bureaucratic agencies administering all sorts of things.

The fairness doctrine is about ensuring equal access, not about
restricting any specific speech.

If the talk show host wanted to have a guest spend an hour talking about affirmative action for short people, then the station would have to waste another hour about affirmative action for tall people, another hour about affirmative action for blondes, another about affirmative action for Presbyterians, etc. Faced with that, the station would probably choose to air something much less controversial. Result: free speech restricted.

An unfounded assumption.

It's obviously best to keep the government out of it.

I disagree. My right to access limited public resources is being
defended by my government in this case. I fully support it, and would
consider it anarchy for the government to abdicate its responsibility.