this post was submitted on 19 Feb 2026
150 points (98.1% liked)

politics

28460 readers
2150 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Carr says the Federal Communications Commission has also opened an enforcement action into ABC’s the View

The chair of the US’s top media regulator claimed on Wednesday that journalists had been tricked into covering claims by the late-night host Stephen Colbert that he had been blocked by his network from interviewing a Texas Senate candidate.

Brendan Carr, the avowedly pro-Trump chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), made his comments after Colbert accused the Trump administration and CBS of censorship.

CBS has countered Colbert’s claims in a statement, saying it had not blocked him from interviewing James Talarico, a Texas Democrat, but had merely provided legal guidance that such an interview might trigger equal time regulations that would require him to also platform Talarico’s campaign rivals.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Lodespawn@aussie.zone 19 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Meh, do it, lets see how these ghouls stand up to a grilling from Colbert. I'm sure they will be fine with risking that kind of negative press.

[–] ParlimentOfDoom@piefed.zip 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Part of the issue is that there's like 8 people running for that one position at this point, before the primaries.

[–] Lodespawn@aussie.zone 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

What was the interview, like 10/20 minutes? Doesn't seem like a big drama, particularly when half the candidates will likely not want to risk the potential for hard questioning and looking like a moron.

[–] ParlimentOfDoom@piefed.zip 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

And you think it's reasonable to devote 40-80 minutes of show time of a national comedy show to interviewing every candidate for a single state race?

[–] Lodespawn@aussie.zone 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It doesn't have to be the same episode, and if there is one outstanding candidate then yeah let's give him some time and allow the others to demonstrate their incompetence. It's hilarious watching bigoted arseholes try to justify the garbage ideas. There's no rule about treating them all the same or not having bias in interview strategy, just giving them the time.

[–] ParlimentOfDoom@piefed.zip 0 points 1 day ago

You missed the important part where this is just one of thousands of races going on in the country. It's a comedy show, they're not going to spend an entire week doing interviews for one single race.