Obama "Would like to teach the world to sing"
 

"Mark Rand" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 21:21:34 -0500, "Ed Huntress"

wrote:


"Hawke" wrote in message
...


Have you gone back to hitting the bottle again?

You're thinking of someone else. Type I diabetics who "hit the bottle" are
dead diabetics.


Aww schit. Now he tells me. Anyone want to come to my wake?

G

Play with fire if you like. d8-)

Hey, A1c dropped from 7.2 to 6.6 after a month on the pump. And it will drop
more after a full three-month cycle. A neat piece of technology, it is.

--
Ed Huntres

Obama "Would like to teach the world to sing"
 

The station I listen to is usually 91.5 FM in St Louis. Are there no
frequencies available for Liberal talk radio? I wouldn't know anything
about the fairness doctrine if I haven't heard about it on the FM station.
The liberals would like to take our freedom of speech from us without us
knowing about it. You see, liberals, terrorist, and those who hate America
are all on the same team. Why do you think the Obamanator is Pro-Choice?
Because it kills Americans before they are even born, the terrorists and all
who hate America, and all who hate God are all on the same team.

The radio waves might belong to the public but not the radio stations. If
there are no available frequencies available to the liberals then I agree
that they should be able to get some stations. But a conservative radio
station shouldn't be forced to play liberal broadcasts anymore than a
country music station should be forced to play rap. If I want to listen to
liberal talk radio I should be able to tune in that station, If I want to
listen to conservative talk radio I should be able to tune that in.
Likewise for the kind of music station I prefer, that is fair, forcing
stations to play what they don't want and what their listeners don't want to
hear is not fair.

RogerN

"Hawke" wrote in message
...


As usual, guys like you are listening to AM talk radio way too much and
the
hosts have gotten you all riled up over the "fairness doctrine". The truth
is without them making a big deal out of it you wouldn't even know what it
is. If you want to understand the doctrine all you need to know is what it
was originally meant for. The radio waves are owned by the public just
like
the national parks or any other nationally owned asset. As such it was not
supposed to be taken over by any political group and used exclusively to
promote it's agenda. If you can't see that AM radio has been taken over by
the right wing then you are blind as a bat. Believe me, if AM radio was
nothing but left wing propaganda you would be up in arms against the
"theft"
of a national resource. Reinstitution the fairness doctrine would only
make
it where radio couldn't be controlled by any single political party like
AM
radio is now. But then you probably think there is nothing wrong with
radio
being controlled by one party as long as it is the one you belong to.

Hawke

Obama "Would like to teach the world to sing"
 

On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 17:25:52 -0600, "RogerN"
wrote:

The station I listen to is usually 91.5 FM in St Louis. Are there no
frequencies available for Liberal talk radio? I wouldn't know anything
about the fairness doctrine if I haven't heard about it on the FM station.
The liberals would like to take our freedom of speech from us without us
knowing about it. You see, liberals, terrorist, and those who hate America
are all on the same team. Why do you think the Obamanator is Pro-Choice?
Because it kills Americans before they are even born, the terrorists and all
who hate America, and all who hate God are all on the same team.

The radio waves might belong to the public but not the radio stations. If
there are no available frequencies available to the liberals then I agree
that they should be able to get some stations. But a conservative radio
station shouldn't be forced to play liberal broadcasts anymore than a
country music station should be forced to play rap. If I want to listen to
liberal talk radio I should be able to tune in that station, If I want to
listen to conservative talk radio I should be able to tune that in.
Likewise for the kind of music station I prefer, that is fair, forcing
stations to play what they don't want and what their listeners don't want to
hear is not fair.

RogerN

"Hawke" wrote in message
...


As usual, guys like you are listening to AM talk radio way too much and
the
hosts have gotten you all riled up over the "fairness doctrine". The truth
is without them making a big deal out of it you wouldn't even know what it
is. If you want to understand the doctrine all you need to know is what it
was originally meant for. The radio waves are owned by the public just
like
the national parks or any other nationally owned asset. As such it was not
supposed to be taken over by any political group and used exclusively to
promote it's agenda. If you can't see that AM radio has been taken over by
the right wing then you are blind as a bat. Believe me, if AM radio was
nothing but left wing propaganda you would be up in arms against the
"theft"
of a national resource. Reinstitution the fairness doctrine would only
make
it where radio couldn't be controlled by any single political party like
AM
radio is now. But then you probably think there is nothing wrong with
radio
being controlled by one party as long as it is the one you belong to.

Hawke



It should be noted..that the spit Fairness Doctrine DOES NOT apply
to the major TV media, which is very leftwing, reactionary and quite
frankly, likes like a bad carpet.

The Liberals who want to silence the conservative voice on radio, dont
mention that the major media, NBC/CBS/ABC/CNN have literally hundreds
of leftwingers preaching their leftwing propaganda, versous about 10
talking heads on the right, on AM radio.

Leftwingers would go absolutely ape**** if the Fairness Doctrine was
to be applied to TV and FM, and Cable such as MSNBC etc

The quite obvious fact of the matter is that they want a total lock on
communicating their message, and want to censor and block the
communication of anyone with an alternate point of view.

Which is simply more proof that they are above all, totalitarians and
care nothing about Freedom of Speech, unless its THEIR speech.

If Liberal points of view were desired..why have time after time,
Lefties gotten their very own radio shows, and no
one..nobody..bupkis...nada, zip, zero listened to them? Need I
remind the leftards about the failure...nay..the disaster that was Air
America?

The Fairness Doctrine is nothing more than a backdoor attempt to
censor conservative speech out of existance.

Since conservative radio makes the station owners money and Liberal
radio is basically a money pit..yet they are forced to play
leftwingers...they have a problem. The conservative makes them money,
the leftwings costs them money...and if they are forced to carry
both..they are likely to simply go Top 40 and say the hell with talk
radio, because its a wash.

Which is exactly what the leftwingers want, because they still have
the Major Media to spread their agendas and they dont care about nor
need AM radio, except that those that critize or refute them can be
found there..and having them there, exposing their dirty laundry, or
calling on the listeners to fight the Leftwiner agendas.

Its no wonder the Parakeet and his ilk want to do away with talk
radio. It keeps them honest.

Gunner

Obama "Would like to teach the world to sing"
 

"Gunner" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 17:25:52 -0600, "RogerN"
wrote:

snip

Which is exactly what the leftwingers want, because they still have
the Major Media to spread their agendas and they dont care about nor
need AM radio, except that those that critize or refute them can be
found there..and having them there, exposing their dirty laundry, or
calling on the listeners to fight the Leftwiner agendas.

Its no wonder the Parakeet and his ilk want to do away with talk
radio. It keeps them honest.

Gunner

Sounds more like a censorship doctrine. Wonder why they narrowed it down to
only apply to talk radio and not TV or other broadcasts? Before long we'll
have to invite a liberal to edit our email and usenet messages so we don't
say anything against them. Since liberals are always wanting to take away
our freedoms and the constitution has to constantly be defended against
their attacks, why don't me make liberal reservations something like the
indian reservations? Just a thought.

RogerN

Obama "Would like to teach the world to sing"
 

"Gunner" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 17:25:52 -0600, "RogerN"
wrote:

The station I listen to is usually 91.5 FM in St Louis. Are there no
frequencies available for Liberal talk radio? I wouldn't know anything
about the fairness doctrine if I haven't heard about it on the FM station.
The liberals would like to take our freedom of speech from us without us
knowing about it. You see, liberals, terrorist, and those who hate
America
are all on the same team. Why do you think the Obamanator is Pro-Choice?
Because it kills Americans before they are even born, the terrorists and
all
who hate America, and all who hate God are all on the same team.

The radio waves might belong to the public but not the radio stations. If
there are no available frequencies available to the liberals then I agree
that they should be able to get some stations. But a conservative radio
station shouldn't be forced to play liberal broadcasts anymore than a
country music station should be forced to play rap. If I want to listen
to
liberal talk radio I should be able to tune in that station, If I want to
listen to conservative talk radio I should be able to tune that in.
Likewise for the kind of music station I prefer, that is fair, forcing
stations to play what they don't want and what their listeners don't want
to
hear is not fair.

RogerN

"Hawke" wrote in message
...


As usual, guys like you are listening to AM talk radio way too much and
the
hosts have gotten you all riled up over the "fairness doctrine". The
truth
is without them making a big deal out of it you wouldn't even know what
it
is. If you want to understand the doctrine all you need to know is what
it
was originally meant for. The radio waves are owned by the public just
like
the national parks or any other nationally owned asset. As such it was
not
supposed to be taken over by any political group and used exclusively to
promote it's agenda. If you can't see that AM radio has been taken over
by
the right wing then you are blind as a bat. Believe me, if AM radio was
nothing but left wing propaganda you would be up in arms against the
"theft"
of a national resource. Reinstitution the fairness doctrine would only
make
it where radio couldn't be controlled by any single political party like
AM
radio is now. But then you probably think there is nothing wrong with
radio
being controlled by one party as long as it is the one you belong to.

Hawke



It should be noted..that the spit Fairness Doctrine DOES NOT apply
to the major TV media, which is very leftwing, reactionary and quite
frankly, likes like a bad carpet.

The Fairness Doctrine doesn't apply to anything, and hasn't for 21 years.
And yes, it applied to the "major TV media" back then.

The rest of your post is a paranoid stew of delusion and ignorance.

--
Ed Huntress

Obama "Would like to teach the world to sing"
 

"RogerN" wrote in message
m...

"Gunner" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 17:25:52 -0600, "RogerN"
wrote:

snip

Which is exactly what the leftwingers want, because they still have
the Major Media to spread their agendas and they dont care about nor
need AM radio, except that those that critize or refute them can be
found there..and having them there, exposing their dirty laundry, or
calling on the listeners to fight the Leftwiner agendas.

Its no wonder the Parakeet and his ilk want to do away with talk
radio. It keeps them honest.

Gunner

Sounds more like a censorship doctrine. Wonder why they narrowed it down
to only apply to talk radio and not TV or other broadcasts?

First, the Fairness Doctrine was terminated by the FCC and the Supreme Court
in 1987. So you're talking about a delusion. It was almost never applied in
the first place.

Before long we'll have to invite a liberal to edit our email and usenet
messages so we don't say anything against them.

Before long you'll have to invite one to give you an education. Your
willingness to believe this right-wing bull**** is on a par with a
learning-disabled teenager.

Roger, instead of sitting there and speculating about an imaginary law, you
could have spent five minutes looking up the Fairness Doctrine, in which
case you would have learned that it no longer exists, that it applied
primarily to TV when it did exist, that there has been grumbling to
reinstate it since the beginning of this decade but that it has remained
nothing but grumbling by a few fringe legislators, and that Obama has
declared that he's opposed to it.

Instead, you suck up Gunner's bull**** as if he knew what he was talking
about. When are you going to wise up?

Since liberals are always wanting to take away our freedoms and the
constitution has to constantly be defended against their attacks, why
don't me make liberal reservations something like the indian reservations?
Just a thought.

Why don't you read the Constitution so you know what it says, first?

--
Ed Huntress

Obama "Would like to teach the world to sing"
 

Gunner wrote:
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 17:25:52 -0600, "RogerN"
wrote:

The station I listen to is usually 91.5 FM in St Louis. Are there no
frequencies available for Liberal talk radio? I wouldn't know anything
about the fairness doctrine if I haven't heard about it on the FM station.
The liberals would like to take our freedom of speech from us without us
knowing about it. You see, liberals, terrorist, and those who hate America
are all on the same team. Why do you think the Obamanator is Pro-Choice?
Because it kills Americans before they are even born, the terrorists and all
who hate America, and all who hate God are all on the same team.

The radio waves might belong to the public but not the radio stations. If
there are no available frequencies available to the liberals then I agree
that they should be able to get some stations. But a conservative radio
station shouldn't be forced to play liberal broadcasts anymore than a
country music station should be forced to play rap. If I want to listen to
liberal talk radio I should be able to tune in that station, If I want to
listen to conservative talk radio I should be able to tune that in.
Likewise for the kind of music station I prefer, that is fair, forcing
stations to play what they don't want and what their listeners don't want to
hear is not fair.

RogerN

"Hawke" wrote in message
...

As usual, guys like you are listening to AM talk radio way too much and
the
hosts have gotten you all riled up over the "fairness doctrine". The truth
is without them making a big deal out of it you wouldn't even know what it
is. If you want to understand the doctrine all you need to know is what it
was originally meant for. The radio waves are owned by the public just
like
the national parks or any other nationally owned asset. As such it was not
supposed to be taken over by any political group and used exclusively to
promote it's agenda. If you can't see that AM radio has been taken over by
the right wing then you are blind as a bat. Believe me, if AM radio was
nothing but left wing propaganda you would be up in arms against the
"theft"
of a national resource. Reinstitution the fairness doctrine would only
make
it where radio couldn't be controlled by any single political party like
AM
radio is now. But then you probably think there is nothing wrong with
radio
being controlled by one party as long as it is the one you belong to.

Hawke

Liberal talk radio doesn't work because liberals aren't good with
dialogue. All they want is a megaphone and a soapbox. Reasonable
opposing views not welcome. It doesn't take long for the lights to go out.

Most decent talk show hosts look for callers with different views.
It makes for good entertainment. Sure, some - Mark Levin - are rude to
them, so I don't listen to their shows. But most will actually
fast-track a caller with an opposing view and try to engage them in
honest debate. A real liberal won't debate, they just try to filibuster
until the host gives up on them.
Heard a union guy this morning on Mike Gallagher like that. He was
basically reading a UAW bullet points list as fast as he could, ignoring
the hosts counterpoints. He made no allies with his call.

Obama "Would like to teach the world to sing"
 

Ed Huntress wrote:
"RogerN" wrote in message
m...
"Gunner" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 17:25:52 -0600, "RogerN"
wrote:

snip
Which is exactly what the leftwingers want, because they still have
the Major Media to spread their agendas and they dont care about nor
need AM radio, except that those that critize or refute them can be
found there..and having them there, exposing their dirty laundry, or
calling on the listeners to fight the Leftwiner agendas.

Its no wonder the Parakeet and his ilk want to do away with talk
radio. It keeps them honest.

Gunner
Sounds more like a censorship doctrine. Wonder why they narrowed it down
to only apply to talk radio and not TV or other broadcasts?

First, the Fairness Doctrine was terminated by the FCC and the Supreme Court
in 1987. So you're talking about a delusion.

Pay attention, Ed: "Democrats Seek to Revive Broadcasting's 'Fairness'
Doctrine"

http://www.citizenlink.org/CLtopstories/A000003652.cfm

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/...008-11-04.html

Typical 'logic' from Schumer:

“The very same people who don’t want the Fairness Doctrine want the FCC
to limit pornography on the air. I am for that… But you can’t say
government hands off in one area to a commercial enterprise but you are
allowed to intervene in another. That’s not consistent.”

Obama "Would like to teach the world to sing"
 

"RB" wrote in message
...
Ed Huntress wrote:
"RogerN" wrote in message
m...
"Gunner" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 17:25:52 -0600, "RogerN"
wrote:

snip
Which is exactly what the leftwingers want, because they still have
the Major Media to spread their agendas and they dont care about nor
need AM radio, except that those that critize or refute them can be
found there..and having them there, exposing their dirty laundry, or
calling on the listeners to fight the Leftwiner agendas.

Its no wonder the Parakeet and his ilk want to do away with talk
radio. It keeps them honest.

Gunner
Sounds more like a censorship doctrine. Wonder why they narrowed it
down to only apply to talk radio and not TV or other broadcasts?

First, the Fairness Doctrine was terminated by the FCC and the Supreme
Court in 1987. So you're talking about a delusion.

Pay attention, Ed: "Democrats Seek to Revive Broadcasting's 'Fairness'
Doctrine"

Pay attention, RB:


http://www.citizenlink.org/CLtopstories/A000003652.cfm

Kucinich, Hinchey, and Slaughter...


http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/...008-11-04.html

Schumer, Durbin, and Feinstein.

There you have it. Throw in Kerry, Pelosi, and Bingaman. That's the same
bunch of outliers who have been grumbling about it for years, exactly as I
said. They got a bill into committee in 2005, with 23 co-sponsors. It wasn't
quite the old Fairness Doctrine, but it was in the neighborhood. It never
got out of committee.

Meantime, the Broadcaster Freedom Act of 2007, which explicitly says the
Fairness Doctrine shall not be revived, is in House committee with 208
co-sponsors and in the Senate with 35 co-sponsors.

It's an old chestnut that Right-Wing Wacko Radio has been using to whip up
the troops. It's already been shot down by a Supreme Court decision, so any
attempt to revive it is going to run into a brick wall. And everyone, except
perhaps you and the Talk Radio Kool-Aid drinkers, knows it.

That's what happens when you get your "information" from sources like
Citizenlink. Notice that much of that supposed story was about the
talk-radio jocks wailing and moaning, not an analysis of what's really
happening in Congress. The story from TheHill, in contrast, was about
Schumer's interview and the fact that some Democrats want to reinstate the
Fairness Doctrine. That's a legitimate story, although it just reports the
attitudes and statements of the outliers.

--
Ed Huntress

Obama "Would like to teach the world to sing"
 

On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 09:47:15 -0600, RB wrote:

Gunner wrote:
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 17:25:52 -0600, "RogerN"
wrote:

The station I listen to is usually 91.5 FM in St Louis. Are there no
frequencies available for Liberal talk radio? I wouldn't know anything
about the fairness doctrine if I haven't heard about it on the FM station.
The liberals would like to take our freedom of speech from us without us
knowing about it. You see, liberals, terrorist, and those who hate America
are all on the same team. Why do you think the Obamanator is Pro-Choice?
Because it kills Americans before they are even born, the terrorists and all
who hate America, and all who hate God are all on the same team.

The radio waves might belong to the public but not the radio stations. If
there are no available frequencies available to the liberals then I agree
that they should be able to get some stations. But a conservative radio
station shouldn't be forced to play liberal broadcasts anymore than a
country music station should be forced to play rap. If I want to listen to
liberal talk radio I should be able to tune in that station, If I want to
listen to conservative talk radio I should be able to tune that in.
Likewise for the kind of music station I prefer, that is fair, forcing
stations to play what they don't want and what their listeners don't want to
hear is not fair.

RogerN

"Hawke" wrote in message
...

As usual, guys like you are listening to AM talk radio way too much and
the
hosts have gotten you all riled up over the "fairness doctrine". The truth
is without them making a big deal out of it you wouldn't even know what it
is. If you want to understand the doctrine all you need to know is what it
was originally meant for. The radio waves are owned by the public just
like
the national parks or any other nationally owned asset. As such it was not
supposed to be taken over by any political group and used exclusively to
promote it's agenda. If you can't see that AM radio has been taken over by
the right wing then you are blind as a bat. Believe me, if AM radio was
nothing but left wing propaganda you would be up in arms against the
"theft"
of a national resource. Reinstitution the fairness doctrine would only
make
it where radio couldn't be controlled by any single political party like
AM
radio is now. But then you probably think there is nothing wrong with
radio
being controlled by one party as long as it is the one you belong to.

Hawke

Liberal talk radio doesn't work because liberals aren't good with
dialogue. All they want is a megaphone and a soapbox. Reasonable
opposing views not welcome. It doesn't take long for the lights to go out.

Most decent talk show hosts look for callers with different views.
It makes for good entertainment. Sure, some - Mark Levin - are rude to
them, so I don't listen to their shows. But most will actually
fast-track a caller with an opposing view and try to engage them in
honest debate. A real liberal won't debate, they just try to filibuster
until the host gives up on them.
Heard a union guy this morning on Mike Gallagher like that. He was
basically reading a UAW bullet points list as fast as he could, ignoring
the hosts counterpoints. He made no allies with his call.


Which is why I maintain most lefties are unable to use reason or
logic, but live in a world controlled by emotion, feelgoodism and
talking points/sound bites given to them by someone else. They are
incapable of defending their positions because to do so, requires
thought, and if they could think...they would be forced to review
their own world view...and when they did...would be forced to change
it. Their world view is only a couple microns thick, but they stick
to it like a tick on a bitch dog in heat. And are about as smart as
that tick....

Gunner

Obama "Would like to teach the world to sing"
 

On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 09:58:40 -0600, RB wrote:

Ed Huntress wrote:
"RogerN" wrote in message
m...
"Gunner" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 17:25:52 -0600, "RogerN"
wrote:

snip
Which is exactly what the leftwingers want, because they still have
the Major Media to spread their agendas and they dont care about nor
need AM radio, except that those that critize or refute them can be
found there..and having them there, exposing their dirty laundry, or
calling on the listeners to fight the Leftwiner agendas.

Its no wonder the Parakeet and his ilk want to do away with talk
radio. It keeps them honest.

Gunner
Sounds more like a censorship doctrine. Wonder why they narrowed it down
to only apply to talk radio and not TV or other broadcasts?

First, the Fairness Doctrine was terminated by the FCC and the Supreme Court
in 1987. So you're talking about a delusion.

Pay attention, Ed: "Democrats Seek to Revive Broadcasting's 'Fairness'
Doctrine"

http://www.citizenlink.org/CLtopstories/A000003652.cfm

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/...008-11-04.html

Typical 'logic' from Schumer:

“The very same people who don’t want the Fairness Doctrine want the FCC
to limit pornography on the air. I am for that… But you can’t say
government hands off in one area to a commercial enterprise but you are
allowed to intervene in another. That’s not consistent.”


Consistancy from the Left???????????

Limosine Liberals and Mercedes Marxists telling everyone else how to
live, what to drive and how to "do it for the children"

Like the Commissars in the old USSR and their "humble dachas on the
Black Sea"......say...hows Algors house coming along these days??

Gunner

Obama "Would like to teach the world to sing"
 

On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 10:17:04 -0800, the infamous Gunner
scrawled the following:

On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 09:58:40 -0600, RB wrote:

Typical 'logic' from Schumer:

“The very same people who don’t want the Fairness Doctrine want the FCC
to limit pornography on the air. I am for that… But you can’t say
government hands off in one area to a commercial enterprise but you are
allowed to intervene in another. That’s not consistent.”

Consistancy from the Left???????????

Limosine Liberals and Mercedes Marxists telling everyone else how to
live, what to drive and how to "do it for the children"

Like the Commissars in the old USSR and their "humble dachas on the
Black Sea"......say...hows Algors house coming along these days??

Algore's house uses 20x the energy of the typical American home, but
did lots of "green" retrofitting, now uses 11% less than he had.
snicker http://edition.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS.../gore.home.ap/

Oops, they're up 10% anyway, after the "greening" of the home.
http://www.tennesseepolicy.org/main/...article_id=764

Algore seems to think that it's OK to waste energy if you buy "green"
energy while doing so. Brilliant.

Hmm, Algore is stockholder in a carbon-credit trading company and
wants the entire world to trade carbon credits, lining his pockets
further. Amazing.

Someone please take away his falsely-delivered Nobel political prize.
Algore, I spit on your grandmother's shadow. (old Apache curse)

--
Latin: It's not just for geniuses any more.