Is the crackdown on opposition TV stations in Venezuela just Chavez's version of the FCC's fairness doctrine?

Gore and other liberals are pushing to eliminate private choice in telecommunications by instituting the "fairness doctrine" thought the FCC. Under this doctrine, the government would regulate content of broadcasting stations to make sure they were politically "balanced" between left and right. Of course, the obvious problem with that is that the government decides what constitutes "balanced" broadcasting.

Isn't that what Chavez is doing in Venezuela? Is he the model for liberal thought in this country when it comes to interpreting the First Amendment?

Queen, thank you for your answer. If you disagree with my take on the Fairness doctrine, here are three links. I suggest you read them all.

First, a link that purports to be neutral:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_Do...

Next, an article in favor of the Fairness Doctrine:

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2053

And, finally, an article against the Fairness Doctrine:

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Regulat...

I list all three in the interest of "balance," but also to show that no one on any side of this issue seems to disagree with my general characterization of the Doctrine. Some might disagree with the choice of words I use to describe it.

Al Gore is trying to get rid of Sean Hannity and several others who give voice to millions of us in this country who are never heard. He has no intention of dealing with CNN, MSNBC, CBS, NBC, ABC, and Air-America (they're already balanced).

Chavez is a communist. Whole different ball of wax.....

He even had people going out into nicer neighborhoods on the pretext of "giving" people energy efficient light bulbs for their homes. The people distributing the bulbs were required to install the bulbs. This was a pretext to get inside peoples homes to see what they own so that the government could confiscate personal belongings.

However I do not agree with what you state liberals are trying to do either.