On 1/9/2012 8:16 AM, George Plimpton wrote:

You are the one that says there is a monopoly in AM broadcasting in
your area. And so I pointed out that you could enter that market.
You might have to spend some time and get educated on running an radio
station, but I believe you are unemployed at this time so you could do
that.

Is he? As in, long-term chronic unemployment? That would explain a lot.

What would that explain? What does the fact that I don't have to work to
live say about me? I've done great? I'm lazy? I'm unlucky or lucky? What
does it say? You're the one that's guessing.

But instead of doing something about having a radio station
that operates as you think it should, you seem to prefer to do nothing
but criticize and want the government to make a rule that says the
station must do as hawke says.

Isn't that consistent with his entire political ideology? If he can't
get what he wants in life based on his own ingenuity and effort, he
wants Big Government to give it to him, by forcing others to work
involuntarily on his behalf?

Sorry but that isn't consistent with anything but the fact I like things
to be fair whenever possible. Further, because it's true that the
country ran very well under the "fairness doctrine" for many years is no
indication I have any inclination to big government. In fact, you're
such an idiot that you haven't a clue what I'm like. Anyone who knows me
would tell you I'm about as anti government as you can get without being
a nut, I mean Libertarian. Your guesses about me are as off kilter as
thinking a bull's balls are utters.

Hawke-Ptooey would be right at home as a mid-level North Korean
functionary.


Pimpton would be right at home in prison.


Hawke

On 1/10/2012 3:48 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 1/9/2012 8:16 AM, George Plimpton wrote:

You are the one that says there is a monopoly in AM broadcasting in
your area. And so I pointed out that you could enter that market.
You might have to spend some time and get educated on running an radio
station, but I believe you are unemployed at this time so you could do
that.

Is he? As in, long-term chronic unemployment? That would explain a lot.

What would that explain? What does the fact that I don't have to work to
live say about me? I've done great? I'm lazy? I'm unlucky or lucky? What
does it say? You're the one that's guessing.

"Don't have to work to live" - ha ha ha! That expression *usually*
means, and is taken to mean, that someone lives off investment income.
If that were the case, then you'd be a one-percenter, and clearly you
are not.

It might also mean that you're a househusband - your wife supports you -
or that you live off public assistance. Maybe you're an old guy who
lives off his grown job-holding children.

Of all the ways one might conceivably "not have to work to live," the
only one for certain that doesn't apply to you is being a one-percenter.
You clearly don't have much, and you're bitterly resentful of those
who do.


But instead of doing something about having a radio station
that operates as you think it should, you seem to prefer to do nothing
but criticize and want the government to make a rule that says the
station must do as hawke says.

Isn't that consistent with his entire political ideology? If he can't
get what he wants in life based on his own ingenuity and effort, he
wants Big Government to give it to him, by forcing others to work
involuntarily on his behalf?

Sorry but that isn't consistent with anything but

It's consistent with what I said: you expect the government to stick a
gun in the ribs of successful people, take some of what they product,
and redistribute it to deadbeats like you.


the fact I like things
to be fair whenever possible.

We've been through this already. You can't define "fair"; it's
meaningless. What it seems to mean, but you're just barely cagey enough
not to blurt it out, is that people get what you think they ought to
get. In other words, it's entirely whimsical.


Further, because it's true that the
country ran very well under the "fairness doctrine" for many years

The "country" didn't run well under the (un)Fairness Doctrine, you idiot
- you feel radio ran well. But it didn't - it wasn't as good.



no indication I have any inclination to big government.

Your inclination to big, oppressive government is very well established
by the totality of your writing on display here.


Hawke-Ptooey would be right at home as a mid-level North Korean
functionary.


Pimpton would be right at home in prison.

I wouldn't be at all at home there, either as a guard or as an inmate.

You didn't deny what I said. You want to live off the efforts of
others, without producing anything yourself. You don't expect to be at
the top, but you expect to live better than you can do from your own
innate talent and effort. That suits you to be a mid-level functionary
in a totalitarian state.