Charles Krauthammer Calls On The House To Withhold Funding For FCC Study (Video)

On Thursday evening’s Special Report Charles Krauthammer called the FCC’s controversial newsroom gambit “an outrage disguised as a study.”

He continued,  “the FCC regulates the media and it has the power to remove your license – meaning to ruin you overnight. So any questions it asks are never innocent. And what is it asking about critical information needs? Who decides what’s a critical information need? A critical information need is a concept that you have in Kiev or Moscow – not in the United States. Everyone decides on their own. The idea that we don’t have enough diversity in the media in the United States? We have more media today than in the history of mankind – including cave drawings.” Krauthammer then recommended that the House pass a law withholding funding from such a study.

Video via National Review

Previously: 

Greta Van Susteren: Obama’s News Police Meant to Intimidate, Stifle and Chill Speech (Video)

SEE ALSO:

The Anchoress: Over FCC Plans, MSM Finally a Bit Curious re Obama Admin:

“What are they thinking?” Mr. Kurtz, it’s pretty obvious; they’re thinking no one in the mainstream press has asked them a difficult or challenging question in 7 years, so why would they start now.

• They’re thinking an obsequious press that couldn’t be bothered to sustain outrage over intrusions into its own phone and internet records won’t have a problem with the government parking itself into the newsroom.
• They’re thinking that if the mainstream press could forgive them for considering espionage charges against a member of the press — for doing what reporters are supposed to do — and then re-commence their habitual boot-licking, there is no real risk of media folk suddenly calling out a “red line”, or even being able to identify one.
• They’re figuring that with this president, the mainstream media has no idea what “a bridge too far” might mean. Nor, “abuse of power”; nor “cover-up”; nor “mendacity”,“incompetence”, “ineptitude” or “constitutional illiteracy.”
• They know that half the people in the newsroom are either married or to (or social buddies with) influential members of this government, and that everyone is all comfy and nicely settled in for the revolution.
• They know that the press willfully surrendered its own freedoms some time ago, in the interests of ideology, and so they really won’t mind a little editorial supervision from the masters: