Discussion:
OT - HOWARD STERN SILENCED
(too old to reply)
R2D2
2004-04-01 11:33:24 UTC
Permalink
The Howard Stern radio show has been pulled of the air in every market by
the suits at Viacom due to the actions of the FCC. Stern will probably be
back on the air on the XM band within a few months.
Brent Geery
2004-04-01 11:51:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by R2D2
The Howard Stern radio show has been pulled of the air in every market by
the suits at Viacom due to the actions of the FCC. Stern will probably be
back on the air on the XM band within a few months.
It's a joke. "Fun without the filth"? LOL.
--
BRENT - The Usenet typo king. :)

Fast Times At Ridgemont High Info http://www.FastTimesAtRidgemontHigh.org
Voted #87 - American Film Institute's Top 100 Funniest American Films
R2D2
2004-04-01 12:35:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by R2D2
The Howard Stern radio show has been pulled of the air in every market
by the suits at Viacom due to the actions of the FCC. Stern will
probably be back on the air on the XM band within a few months.
Sorry for the false announcement. It was an April fool's prank.
George Kerby
2004-04-01 14:11:59 UTC
Permalink
Thank God for small favors! The man is a 'throwback'. The son of "Lucy", the
prehistoric ape. Good riddance!!!
Post by R2D2
The Howard Stern radio show has been pulled of the air in every market by
the suits at Viacom due to the actions of the FCC. Stern will probably be
back on the air on the XM band within a few months.
_______________________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
Bowzah
2004-04-01 18:52:19 UTC
Permalink
Sorry, George. Howard was playing a joke on everyone, and it worked.

Are you for censorship?
Post by George Kerby
Thank God for small favors! The man is a 'throwback'. The son of "Lucy", the
prehistoric ape. Good riddance!!!
Post by R2D2
The Howard Stern radio show has been pulled of the air in every market by
the suits at Viacom due to the actions of the FCC. Stern will probably be
back on the air on the XM band within a few months.
____________________________________________________________________________
___
Post by George Kerby
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
http://www.uncensored-news.com
Post by George Kerby
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source
<><><><><><><><>
George Kerby
2004-04-02 13:29:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bowzah
Sorry, George. Howard was playing a joke on everyone, and it worked.
Are you for censorship?
Of course not. Are you entertained by Stern? If you are, don't bother to
reply, OK?


_______________________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
Bowzah
2004-04-02 14:16:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Kerby
Post by Bowzah
Sorry, George. Howard was playing a joke on everyone, and it worked.
Are you for censorship?
Of course not. Are you entertained by Stern? If you are, don't bother to
reply, OK?
OK, good. My views on Stern are irrelevant. What bothers me is censorship,
and this is how it always starts. Go after the "bastards," and then move on
from there to a complete erosion of free speach. As far as Stern goes, I
don't know of anybody who's being forced to listen. If you don't like him,
turn him off.
____________________________________________________________________________
___
Post by George Kerby
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
http://www.uncensored-news.com
Post by George Kerby
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source
<><><><><><><><>
William Graham
2004-04-03 01:36:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bowzah
On 4/1/04 12:52 PM, in article
Post by Bowzah
Sorry, George. Howard was playing a joke on everyone, and it worked.
Are you for censorship?
Of course not. Are you entertained by Stern? If you are, don't bother to
reply, OK?
OK, good. My views on Stern are irrelevant. What bothers me is censorship,
and this is how it always starts. Go after the "bastards," and then move on
from there to a complete erosion of free speach. As far as Stern goes, I
don't know of anybody who's being forced to listen. If you don't like him,
turn him off.
Hear, hear......
George Kerby
2004-04-03 15:30:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
On 4/1/04 12:52 PM, in article
Post by Bowzah
Sorry, George. Howard was playing a joke on everyone, and it worked.
Are you for censorship?
Of course not. Are you entertained by Stern? If you are, don't bother to
reply, OK?
OK, good. My views on Stern are irrelevant. What bothers me is censorship,
and this is how it always starts. Go after the "bastards," and then move
on
Post by Bowzah
from there to a complete erosion of free speach. As far as Stern goes, I
don't know of anybody who's being forced to listen. If you don't like him,
turn him off.
Hear, hear......
NO I DON'T want to hear him!!!
LOL!

Seriously, he is despicable, but I support his right to do and say what he
does. The FCC is over-reacting because of the 'boob' Bowl.


_______________________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
Bowzah
2004-04-03 16:34:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Kerby
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
On 4/1/04 12:52 PM, in article
Post by Bowzah
Sorry, George. Howard was playing a joke on everyone, and it worked.
Are you for censorship?
Of course not. Are you entertained by Stern? If you are, don't bother to
reply, OK?
OK, good. My views on Stern are irrelevant. What bothers me is censorship,
and this is how it always starts. Go after the "bastards," and then move
on
Post by Bowzah
from there to a complete erosion of free speach. As far as Stern goes, I
don't know of anybody who's being forced to listen. If you don't like him,
turn him off.
Hear, hear......
NO I DON'T want to hear him!!!
LOL!
Seriously, he is despicable, but I support his right to do and say what he
does. The FCC is over-reacting because of the 'boob' Bowl.
Heh, heh... "Nipplegate." BTW, did you hear what Stern did that got him in
trouble (the latest one)? He played an interview that contained sexually
explicit material. The FCC pounced. He then revealed the source of his
material: a two day old Oprah show, when she interviewed a sex therapist.
Now it gets funny. Do you think the head of the FCC, Colin (thanks dad)
Powell JR is going to sue Oprah as well as Stern? Never happen. But Stern
has them by the balls, and can prove absolute bias against his show, since
the Oprah show went untouched, while they sue him for the exact same
material. It's beautiful.
____________________________________________________________________________
___
Post by George Kerby
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
http://www.uncensored-news.com
Post by George Kerby
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source
<><><><><><><><>
George Kerby
2004-04-03 16:40:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bowzah
Post by George Kerby
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
On 4/1/04 12:52 PM, in article
Post by Bowzah
Sorry, George. Howard was playing a joke on everyone, and it worked.
Are you for censorship?
Of course not. Are you entertained by Stern? If you are, don't bother
to
Post by George Kerby
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
reply, OK?
OK, good. My views on Stern are irrelevant. What bothers me is
censorship,
Post by George Kerby
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
and this is how it always starts. Go after the "bastards," and then
move
Post by George Kerby
Post by William Graham
on
Post by Bowzah
from there to a complete erosion of free speach. As far as Stern goes,
I
Post by George Kerby
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
don't know of anybody who's being forced to listen. If you don't like
him,
Post by George Kerby
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
turn him off.
Hear, hear......
NO I DON'T want to hear him!!!
LOL!
Seriously, he is despicable, but I support his right to do and say what he
does. The FCC is over-reacting because of the 'boob' Bowl.
Heh, heh... "Nipplegate." BTW, did you hear what Stern did that got him in
trouble (the latest one)? He played an interview that contained sexually
explicit material. The FCC pounced. He then revealed the source of his
material: a two day old Oprah show, when she interviewed a sex therapist.
Now it gets funny. Do you think the head of the FCC, Colin (thanks dad)
Powell JR is going to sue Oprah as well as Stern? Never happen. But Stern
has them by the balls, and can prove absolute bias against his show, since
the Oprah show went untouched, while they sue him for the exact same
material. It's beautiful.
You aren't a fan or anything are you?
It isn't clear.
:-)


_______________________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
Bowzah
2004-04-03 21:45:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Kerby
Post by Bowzah
Post by George Kerby
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
On 4/1/04 12:52 PM, in article
Post by Bowzah
Sorry, George. Howard was playing a joke on everyone, and it worked.
Are you for censorship?
Of course not. Are you entertained by Stern? If you are, don't bother
to
Post by George Kerby
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
reply, OK?
OK, good. My views on Stern are irrelevant. What bothers me is
censorship,
Post by George Kerby
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
and this is how it always starts. Go after the "bastards," and then
move
Post by George Kerby
Post by William Graham
on
Post by Bowzah
from there to a complete erosion of free speach. As far as Stern goes,
I
Post by George Kerby
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
don't know of anybody who's being forced to listen. If you don't like
him,
Post by George Kerby
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
turn him off.
Hear, hear......
NO I DON'T want to hear him!!!
LOL!
Seriously, he is despicable, but I support his right to do and say what he
does. The FCC is over-reacting because of the 'boob' Bowl.
Heh, heh... "Nipplegate." BTW, did you hear what Stern did that got him in
trouble (the latest one)? He played an interview that contained sexually
explicit material. The FCC pounced. He then revealed the source of his
material: a two day old Oprah show, when she interviewed a sex therapist.
Now it gets funny. Do you think the head of the FCC, Colin (thanks dad)
Powell JR is going to sue Oprah as well as Stern? Never happen. But Stern
has them by the balls, and can prove absolute bias against his show, since
the Oprah show went untouched, while they sue him for the exact same
material. It's beautiful.
You aren't a fan or anything are you?
It isn't clear.
:-)
Seriously? I listen about 10% of the time. Most of the time, he simply isn't
funny. Sometimes, he's great. After the usual news and traffic reports, I'll
tune in, see if the bit is any good, and then decide to listen or switch. I
don't believe I qualify as a member of his "wack pack."
____________________________________________________________________________
___
Post by George Kerby
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
http://www.uncensored-news.com
Post by George Kerby
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source
<><><><><><><><>
George Kerby
2004-04-03 22:48:32 UTC
Permalink
"William
Post by George Kerby
Post by Bowzah
Post by George Kerby
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
On 4/1/04 12:52 PM, in article
Post by Bowzah
Sorry, George. Howard was playing a joke on everyone, and it
worked.
Post by George Kerby
Post by Bowzah
Post by George Kerby
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
Post by Bowzah
Are you for censorship?
Of course not. Are you entertained by Stern? If you are, don't
bother
Post by George Kerby
Post by Bowzah
to
Post by George Kerby
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
reply, OK?
OK, good. My views on Stern are irrelevant. What bothers me is
censorship,
Post by George Kerby
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
and this is how it always starts. Go after the "bastards," and then
move
Post by George Kerby
Post by William Graham
on
Post by Bowzah
from there to a complete erosion of free speach. As far as Stern
goes,
Post by George Kerby
Post by Bowzah
I
Post by George Kerby
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
don't know of anybody who's being forced to listen. If you don't like
him,
Post by George Kerby
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
turn him off.
Hear, hear......
NO I DON'T want to hear him!!!
LOL!
Seriously, he is despicable, but I support his right to do and say what
he
Post by George Kerby
Post by Bowzah
Post by George Kerby
does. The FCC is over-reacting because of the 'boob' Bowl.
Heh, heh... "Nipplegate." BTW, did you hear what Stern did that got him
in
Post by George Kerby
Post by Bowzah
trouble (the latest one)? He played an interview that contained sexually
explicit material. The FCC pounced. He then revealed the source of his
material: a two day old Oprah show, when she interviewed a sex
therapist.
Post by George Kerby
Post by Bowzah
Now it gets funny. Do you think the head of the FCC, Colin (thanks dad)
Powell JR is going to sue Oprah as well as Stern? Never happen. But
Stern
Post by George Kerby
Post by Bowzah
has them by the balls, and can prove absolute bias against his show,
since
Post by George Kerby
Post by Bowzah
the Oprah show went untouched, while they sue him for the exact same
material. It's beautiful.
You aren't a fan or anything are you?
It isn't clear.
:-)
Seriously? I listen about 10% of the time. Most of the time, he simply isn't
funny. Sometimes, he's great. After the usual news and traffic reports, I'll
tune in, see if the bit is any good, and then decide to listen or switch. I
don't believe I qualify as a member of his "wack pack."
Myself, if I have the time, I like to watch that old ex-drunk/drughead Imus
on MSNBC. Now there is one caustic dude!


_______________________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
Bowzah
2004-04-04 04:03:59 UTC
Permalink
Imus. There's a curious case. When did he make the transition from second
rate disc jockey to druken political pundit? I admit, I wasn't paying
attention.

Did you ever see his book of photography? I was in Barnes and Noble, saw it
in the "$1.99" pile, and took a look. Instantly, I felt better about my
meager photographic talents.

snip> >>
Post by George Kerby
Myself, if I have the time, I like to watch that old ex-drunk/drughead Imus
on MSNBC. Now there is one caustic dude!
____________________________________________________________________________
___
Post by George Kerby
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
http://www.uncensored-news.com
Post by George Kerby
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source
<><><><><><><><>
George Kerby
2004-04-04 16:07:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bowzah
Imus. There's a curious case. When did he make the transition from second
rate disc jockey to druken political pundit? I admit, I wasn't paying
attention.
Did you ever see his book of photography? I was in Barnes and Noble, saw it
in the "$1.99" pile, and took a look. Instantly, I felt better about my
meager photographic talents.
Yeah, he's a whore for Nikon for sure. He's in it for the money and gear.
All he has to do is mention what equipment he uses and he gets anything they
have.


_______________________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
Mike
2004-04-04 16:44:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Kerby
Post by Bowzah
Imus. There's a curious case. When did he make the transition from second
rate disc jockey to druken political pundit? I admit, I wasn't paying
attention.
Did you ever see his book of photography? I was in Barnes and Noble, saw it
in the "$1.99" pile, and took a look. Instantly, I felt better about my
meager photographic talents.
Yeah, he's a whore for Nikon for sure. He's in it for the money and gear.
All he has to do is mention what equipment he uses and he gets anything they
have.
Do I detect a note of jealousy here George?........lol
Bowzah
2004-04-04 23:43:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Kerby
Post by Bowzah
Imus. There's a curious case. When did he make the transition from second
rate disc jockey to druken political pundit? I admit, I wasn't paying
attention.
Did you ever see his book of photography? I was in Barnes and Noble, saw it
in the "$1.99" pile, and took a look. Instantly, I felt better about my
meager photographic talents.
Yeah, he's a whore for Nikon for sure. He's in it for the money and gear.
All he has to do is mention what equipment he uses and he gets anything they
have.
Do you have the phone number of his pimp? I could be a Nikon whore. Yes, I
could.
____________________________________________________________________________
___
Post by George Kerby
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
http://www.uncensored-news.com
Post by George Kerby
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source
<><><><><><><><>
Alan Browne
2004-04-03 19:09:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bowzah
Heh, heh... "Nipplegate." BTW, did you hear what Stern did that got him in
trouble (the latest one)? He played an interview that contained sexually
explicit material. The FCC pounced. He then revealed the source of his
material: a two day old Oprah show, when she interviewed a sex therapist.
Now it gets funny. Do you think the head of the FCC, Colin (thanks dad)
Powell JR is going to sue Oprah as well as Stern? Never happen. But Stern
has them by the balls, and can prove absolute bias against his show, since
the Oprah show went untouched, while they sue him for the exact same
material. It's beautiful.
Is the above documented anywhere online? I'd like to read more about
this. (We had Howard Stern on the radio here for a couple months. I
listened for a week while driving to work and then lost interest.
Became a bit repetitive...)

Cheers,
Alan
--
e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
Bowzah
2004-04-03 21:51:45 UTC
Permalink
Some of it is here, except the part about the lawsuit, which they can't
discuss publicly:

http://www.howardstern.com/-%20Oprah%20Oral%20Anal.htm

Hypocrisy at it's worst.
Post by Alan Browne
Post by Bowzah
Heh, heh... "Nipplegate." BTW, did you hear what Stern did that got him in
trouble (the latest one)? He played an interview that contained sexually
explicit material. The FCC pounced. He then revealed the source of his
material: a two day old Oprah show, when she interviewed a sex therapist.
Now it gets funny. Do you think the head of the FCC, Colin (thanks dad)
Powell JR is going to sue Oprah as well as Stern? Never happen. But Stern
has them by the balls, and can prove absolute bias against his show, since
the Oprah show went untouched, while they sue him for the exact same
material. It's beautiful.
Is the above documented anywhere online? I'd like to read more about
this. (We had Howard Stern on the radio here for a couple months. I
listened for a week while driving to work and then lost interest.
Became a bit repetitive...)
Cheers,
Alan
--
e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
Lewis Lang
2004-04-02 09:49:29 UTC
Permalink
Subject: Re: OT - HOWARD STERN SILENCED
Date: Thu, Apr 1, 2004 10:11 AM
Thank God for small favors! The man is a 'throwback'. The son of "Lucy", the
prehistoric ape.
C'mmon Lucille Ball was alot more attractive than any prehistoric simian. Yaba
daba don't! "...And don't call me Dino!"

Check out my photos at "LEWISVISION":

http://members.aol.com/Lewisvisn/home.htm

Remove "nospam" to reply

***DUE TO SPAM, I NOW BLOCK ALL E-MAIL NOT ON MY LIST, TO BE ADDED TO MY LIST,
PING ME ON THE NEWSGROUP. SORRY FOR THE INCONVENIENCE. :-) ***
William Graham
2004-04-01 20:51:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by R2D2
The Howard Stern radio show has been pulled of the air in every market by
the suits at Viacom due to the actions of the FCC. Stern will probably be
back on the air on the XM band within a few months.
Yes....I understand he and Larry Flynt are starting a children's show......
Bowzah
2004-04-02 00:33:18 UTC
Permalink
Some of us find Stern far less objectionable than a president who would go
to war over some mythical weapons, spend many lives and dollars trying to
find them, and then joke about it when it turns out he had his head up his
ass.
Post by William Graham
Post by R2D2
The Howard Stern radio show has been pulled of the air in every market by
the suits at Viacom due to the actions of the FCC. Stern will probably be
back on the air on the XM band within a few months.
Yes....I understand he and Larry Flynt are starting a children's show......
William Graham
2004-04-02 00:37:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bowzah
Some of us find Stern far less objectionable than a president who would go
to war over some mythical weapons, spend many lives and dollars trying to
find them, and then joke about it when it turns out he had his head up his
ass.
Wha???....Did I say that I found Howard Stern objectionable? - I must be
missing something here....Do you have to politicize everything? - Come
on....Give me a break!.......
Bowzah
2004-04-02 12:14:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
Some of us find Stern far less objectionable than a president who would go
to war over some mythical weapons, spend many lives and dollars trying to
find them, and then joke about it when it turns out he had his head up his
ass.
Wha???....Did I say that I found Howard Stern objectionable? - I must be
missing something here....Do you have to politicize everything? - Come
on....Give me a break!.......
Sorry, I misinterpreted your reply. It's that Kerby. He gets me going...
George Kerby
2004-04-02 13:44:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bowzah
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
Some of us find Stern far less objectionable than a president who would
go
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
to war over some mythical weapons, spend many lives and dollars trying
to
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
find them, and then joke about it when it turns out he had his head up
his
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
ass.
Wha???....Did I say that I found Howard Stern objectionable? - I must be
missing something here....Do you have to politicize everything? - Come
on....Give me a break!.......
Sorry, I misinterpreted your reply. It's that Kerby. He gets me going...
Then PAY ATTENTION!!!
;-)


_______________________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
Bowzah
2004-04-02 14:14:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Kerby
Post by Bowzah
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
Some of us find Stern far less objectionable than a president who would
go
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
to war over some mythical weapons, spend many lives and dollars trying
to
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
find them, and then joke about it when it turns out he had his head up
his
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
ass.
Wha???....Did I say that I found Howard Stern objectionable? - I must be
missing something here....Do you have to politicize everything? - Come
on....Give me a break!.......
Sorry, I misinterpreted your reply. It's that Kerby. He gets me going...
Then PAY ATTENTION!!!
Hey, I spend all my money on camera gear and can't afford to pay attention.
Post by George Kerby
;-)
____________________________________________________________________________
___
Post by George Kerby
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
http://www.uncensored-news.com
Post by George Kerby
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source
<><><><><><><><>
William Graham
2004-04-03 01:28:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bowzah
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
Some of us find Stern far less objectionable than a president who
would
Post by Bowzah
go
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
to war over some mythical weapons, spend many lives and dollars trying
to
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
find them, and then joke about it when it turns out he had his head up
his
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
ass.
Wha???....Did I say that I found Howard Stern objectionable? - I must be
missing something here....Do you have to politicize everything? - Come
on....Give me a break!.......
Sorry, I misinterpreted your reply. It's that Kerby. He gets me going...
That's OK.....I get that a lot. It's because I am a social liberal, but only
an economic conservative. As soon as people find out I'm conservative, they
think that I am a narrow minded, born again "whatever". In fact, I believe
that every woman has the right to get an abortion, but I think that they
should have to pay for it themselves, and not expect the taxpayers to foot
the bill......:^)
George Kerby
2004-04-03 02:14:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
Some of us find Stern far less objectionable than a president who
would
Post by Bowzah
go
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
to war over some mythical weapons, spend many lives and dollars trying
to
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
find them, and then joke about it when it turns out he had his head up
his
Post by William Graham
Post by Bowzah
ass.
Wha???....Did I say that I found Howard Stern objectionable? - I must be
missing something here....Do you have to politicize everything? - Come
on....Give me a break!.......
Sorry, I misinterpreted your reply. It's that Kerby. He gets me going...
That's OK.....I get that a lot. It's because I am a social liberal, but only
an economic conservative. As soon as people find out I'm conservative, they
think that I am a narrow minded, born again "whatever". In fact, I believe
that every woman has the right to get an abortion, but I think that they
should have to pay for it themselves, and not expect the taxpayers to foot
the bill......:^)
Interesting viewpoint! I do not believe in abortion (although I have been a
party to one-which I will regret for the rest of my life), I think that the
patients should pay for them as well. Thanks for your honesty, William.


_______________________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
PCportinc
2004-04-02 01:13:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bowzah
Some of us find Stern far less objectionable than a president who would go
to war over some mythical weapons, spend many lives and dollars trying to
find them, and then joke about it when it turns out he had his head up his
ass.
well, actually your friend Saddam did gas Iranians and the defenseless Kurds.
Ever seen that footage?
Its like saying concentration camps didnt exist because Zyklon-B cant be found.
Bowzah
2004-04-02 12:19:25 UTC
Permalink
What year did he use the chemical weapons? And what year did UN inspections
start? And what year did Dumbya decide to invade? The weapons were long
gone, the UN inspectors were doing their job, but this idiot decided to go
in anyway, and now he's caused the bottom to fall out of support for the US.
He's an embarassment. And now, to compound his errors, he jokes about not
finding the weapons. He's a very sick individual.
Post by PCportinc
Post by Bowzah
Some of us find Stern far less objectionable than a president who would go
to war over some mythical weapons, spend many lives and dollars trying to
find them, and then joke about it when it turns out he had his head up his
ass.
well, actually your friend Saddam did gas Iranians and the defenseless Kurds.
Ever seen that footage?
Its like saying concentration camps didnt exist because Zyklon-B cant be found.
William Graham
2004-04-03 01:36:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bowzah
What year did he use the chemical weapons? And what year did UN inspections
start? And what year did Dumbya decide to invade? The weapons were long
gone, the UN inspectors were doing their job, but this idiot decided to go
in anyway, and now he's caused the bottom to fall out of support for the US.
He's an embarassment. And now, to compound his errors, he jokes about not
finding the weapons. He's a very sick individual.
To me, what's sick, is to let things like what happened in Rwanda in the
90's, where around 800,000 people were slaughtered to death, without doing
something about it. Bush was not sick when he went into Iraq. All the other
presidents have been sick in the past, and Bush is the only one in recent
years who has his head screwed on right.....Roosevelt had his head screwed
on right when he went into Europe and got rid of Adolf Hitler, and Bush has
his screwed on right too. Just my humble opinion.....
Matt Clara
2004-04-03 02:05:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bowzah
Post by Bowzah
What year did he use the chemical weapons? And what year did UN
inspections
Post by Bowzah
start? And what year did Dumbya decide to invade? The weapons were long
gone, the UN inspectors were doing their job, but this idiot decided to go
in anyway, and now he's caused the bottom to fall out of support for the
US.
Post by Bowzah
He's an embarassment. And now, to compound his errors, he jokes about not
finding the weapons. He's a very sick individual.
To me, what's sick, is to let things like what happened in Rwanda in the
90's, where around 800,000 people were slaughtered to death, without doing
something about it. Bush was not sick when he went into Iraq. All the other
presidents have been sick in the past, and Bush is the only one in recent
years who has his head screwed on right.....Roosevelt had his head screwed
on right when he went into Europe and got rid of Adolf Hitler, and Bush has
his screwed on right too. Just my humble opinion.....
Maybe Bush shouldn't have lied about it, then? Nukes from africa, a
connection to al quada, weapons of mass destruction--when did he once say
we're going in there to help the people? Not once, until the WMD's weren't
showing up. Bush is the most dishonest president since Richad Nixon, and
over twice as secretive, too. After four years in office, Nixon had met
with the press 23 times, Bush after the same time, just 11. His own dad had
met with the press 71 times after 4 years...
--
Regards,
Matt Clara
www.mattclara.com
William Graham
2004-04-03 02:56:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matt Clara
Post by Bowzah
Post by Bowzah
What year did he use the chemical weapons? And what year did UN
inspections
Post by Bowzah
start? And what year did Dumbya decide to invade? The weapons were long
gone, the UN inspectors were doing their job, but this idiot decided
to
Post by Matt Clara
go
Post by Bowzah
Post by Bowzah
in anyway, and now he's caused the bottom to fall out of support for the
US.
Post by Bowzah
He's an embarassment. And now, to compound his errors, he jokes about
not
Post by Bowzah
Post by Bowzah
finding the weapons. He's a very sick individual.
To me, what's sick, is to let things like what happened in Rwanda in the
90's, where around 800,000 people were slaughtered to death, without doing
something about it. Bush was not sick when he went into Iraq. All the
other
Post by Bowzah
presidents have been sick in the past, and Bush is the only one in recent
years who has his head screwed on right.....Roosevelt had his head screwed
on right when he went into Europe and got rid of Adolf Hitler, and Bush
has
Post by Bowzah
his screwed on right too. Just my humble opinion.....
Maybe Bush shouldn't have lied about it, then? Nukes from africa, a
connection to al quada, weapons of mass destruction--when did he once say
we're going in there to help the people? Not once, until the WMD's weren't
showing up. Bush is the most dishonest president since Richad Nixon, and
over twice as secretive, too. After four years in office, Nixon had met
with the press 23 times, Bush after the same time, just 11. His own dad had
met with the press 71 times after 4 years...
--
Regards,
Matt Clara
www.mattclara.com
Well, I have often said in the past, that if I were elected president, I
would never talk to the press or the people at all, and just figure that I
would get 4 years to do as much as I could, and then pass it over to the
next guy.....but that means that I would give up campaigning, and any hope
of reelection, which is why I will never be president in the first
place.....Which brings me to the point....These guys have to be dishonest in
order to have any chance of becoming president, so why would you expect them
to suddenly get a case of galloping honesty after the fact?
Matt Clara
2004-04-03 03:45:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by William Graham
Post by Matt Clara
Post by Bowzah
Post by Bowzah
What year did he use the chemical weapons? And what year did UN
inspections
Post by Bowzah
start? And what year did Dumbya decide to invade? The weapons were
long
Post by Matt Clara
Post by Bowzah
Post by Bowzah
gone, the UN inspectors were doing their job, but this idiot decided
to
Post by Matt Clara
go
Post by Bowzah
Post by Bowzah
in anyway, and now he's caused the bottom to fall out of support for
the
Post by Matt Clara
Post by Bowzah
US.
Post by Bowzah
He's an embarassment. And now, to compound his errors, he jokes about
not
Post by Bowzah
Post by Bowzah
finding the weapons. He's a very sick individual.
To me, what's sick, is to let things like what happened in Rwanda in the
90's, where around 800,000 people were slaughtered to death, without
doing
Post by Matt Clara
Post by Bowzah
something about it. Bush was not sick when he went into Iraq. All the
other
Post by Bowzah
presidents have been sick in the past, and Bush is the only one in
recent
Post by Matt Clara
Post by Bowzah
years who has his head screwed on right.....Roosevelt had his head
screwed
Post by Matt Clara
Post by Bowzah
on right when he went into Europe and got rid of Adolf Hitler, and Bush
has
Post by Bowzah
his screwed on right too. Just my humble opinion.....
Maybe Bush shouldn't have lied about it, then? Nukes from africa, a
connection to al quada, weapons of mass destruction--when did he once say
we're going in there to help the people? Not once, until the WMD's
weren't
Post by Matt Clara
showing up. Bush is the most dishonest president since Richad Nixon, and
over twice as secretive, too. After four years in office, Nixon had met
with the press 23 times, Bush after the same time, just 11. His own dad
had
Post by Matt Clara
met with the press 71 times after 4 years...
--
Regards,
Matt Clara
www.mattclara.com
Well, I have often said in the past, that if I were elected president, I
would never talk to the press or the people at all, and just figure that I
would get 4 years to do as much as I could, and then pass it over to the
next guy.....but that means that I would give up campaigning, and any hope
of reelection, which is why I will never be president in the first
place.....Which brings me to the point....These guys have to be dishonest in
order to have any chance of becoming president, so why would you expect them
to suddenly get a case of galloping honesty after the fact?
It's true, the whole system is screwed up. The only person who should be
allowed to be president is the qualified person who doesn't _want_ to be
president!
--
Regards,
Matt Clara
www.mattclara.com
Paolo Pizzi
2004-04-05 21:28:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by William Graham
Well, I have often said in the past, that if I were elected
president, I would never talk to the press or the people
at all
Just like Adolf Hitler...
William Graham
2004-04-06 03:21:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paolo Pizzi
Post by William Graham
Well, I have often said in the past, that if I were elected
president, I would never talk to the press or the people
at all
Just like Adolf Hitler...
If you think Hitler never spoke to the people, you've got some history to
catch up on....That was his big shtick.....his best-known achievement....his
ability to give the rousing speech that got him the backing of the German
people.....He even took lessons from public speaking experts when he was
younger......
Paolo Pizzi
2004-04-06 08:24:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by William Graham
Post by Paolo Pizzi
Post by William Graham
Well, I have often said in the past, that if I were elected
president, I would never talk to the press or the people
at all
Just like Adolf Hitler...
If you think Hitler never spoke to the people, you've got some
history to catch up on...
I know you love him, but to me "speaking to the people" means
being *honest* to them, not conning them into monstrosities
such as the Holocaust and WWII. But hey, you are a "libertarian",
meaning that you don't blame Hitler but the "stupid" German people
who got conned. After all, what you want is the law of the jungle
and you actually admire those who get rid of the "weak"... No
wonder you like Hitler.
Post by William Graham
That was his big shtick.....his best-known
achievement....his ability to give the rousing speech that got him
the backing of the German people.....He even took lessons from public
speaking experts when he was younger......
I'm not surprised that someone like you, who adores con artists
and criminals and blames the law for going after them, is a great
admirer of the Fuehrer...
Dallas
2004-04-06 15:59:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paolo Pizzi
I know you love him, but to me "speaking to the people" means
being *honest* to them, not conning them into monstrosities
such as the Holocaust and WWII. But hey, you are a "libertarian",
meaning that you don't blame Hitler but the "stupid" German people
who got conned. After all, what you want is the law of the jungle
and you actually admire those who get rid of the "weak"... No
wonder you like Hitler.
Post by William Graham
That was his big shtick.....his best-known
achievement....his ability to give the rousing speech that got him
the backing of the German people.....He even took lessons from public
speaking experts when he was younger......
I'm not surprised that someone like you, who adores con artists
and criminals and blames the law for going after them, is a great
admirer of the Fuehrer...
Adolf Hitler used the injustices of the Treaty of Versailles to gain the
favour of German people. He preyed on the fact that their nationalistic
pride was eroded by the ToV and all those nations who sought to minimalise
the German people with this "payment" for The Great War of 1914-1917.

Nazi is short for Nazionale, which directly translated means National, or
Nationalists. He promised Germans that they would be great again and that
nationalistic pride is the ride that took him to power in 1931 (or was it
1936?).

Hitler and his croonies were evil, not the German people as a whole. They
were simply duped by him.
--
Don't choose one camera brand over another.
Encompass and embrace them all if you can.

www.dallasdahms.com
William Graham
2004-04-07 21:49:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paolo Pizzi
Post by William Graham
Post by Paolo Pizzi
Post by William Graham
Well, I have often said in the past, that if I were elected
president, I would never talk to the press or the people
at all
Just like Adolf Hitler...
If you think Hitler never spoke to the people, you've got some
history to catch up on...
I know you love him, but to me "speaking to the people" means
being *honest* to them, not conning them into monstrosities
such as the Holocaust and WWII. But hey, you are a "libertarian",
meaning that you don't blame Hitler but the "stupid" German people
who got conned. After all, what you want is the law of the jungle
and you actually admire those who get rid of the "weak"... No
wonder you like Hitler.
Post by William Graham
That was his big shtick.....his best-known
achievement....his ability to give the rousing speech that got him
the backing of the German people.....He even took lessons from public
speaking experts when he was younger......
I'm not surprised that someone like you, who adores con artists
and criminals and blames the law for going after them, is a great
admirer of the Fuehrer...
I said he was an expert on public speaking, and your interpretation of that
is that I am a "great admirer of the Fuehrer"........This kind of says it
all about you, Paolo........
Paolo Pizzi
2004-04-08 07:10:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by William Graham
Post by Paolo Pizzi
I'm not surprised that someone like you, who adores con artists
and criminals and blames the law for going after them, is a great
admirer of the Fuehrer...
I said he was an expert on public speaking, and your interpretation
of that is that I am a "great admirer of the Fuehrer"........This
kind of says it all about you, Paolo........
You've said plenty about yourself, and it's not pretty. You have
no compassion at all, a trait you share with Hitler.

Paolo Pizzi
2004-04-05 21:26:59 UTC
Permalink
All the other presidents have been sick in the past, and Bush
is the only one in recent years who has his head screwed on
right...
Correction: FAR right, next to Hitler.
Paul Schmidt
2004-04-06 11:37:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paolo Pizzi
All the other presidents have been sick in the past, and Bush
is the only one in recent years who has his head screwed on
right...
Correction: FAR right, next to Hitler.
You need to review your history and not the male bovine manure that
American gulability bought from the USSR in regards to Nazis. Nazis
were not rightists, they were socialist control freaks, somewhat along
the same line as Soviet style communists.

Paul
Paolo Pizzi
2004-04-08 07:09:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul Schmidt
Post by Paolo Pizzi
Correction: FAR right, next to Hitler.
You need to review your history and not the male bovine manure that
American gulability bought from the USSR in regards to Nazis. Nazis
were not rightists, they were socialist control freaks, somewhat along
the same line as Soviet style communists.
Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Does it mean John Ashcroft is a "commie"?
Paolo Pizzi
2004-04-05 21:25:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by PCportinc
Post by Bowzah
Some of us find Stern far less objectionable than a president who
would go to war over some mythical weapons, spend many lives and
dollars trying to find them, and then joke about it when it turns
out he had his head up his ass.
well, actually your friend Saddam did gas Iranians and the
defenseless Kurds.
Yep, using know-how from none other than HALLIBURTON...
But Rush and Faux News would never tell you that, so I guess
you just don't know...
Mark M
2004-04-03 09:25:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bowzah
Some of us find Stern far less objectionable than a president who would go
to war over some mythical weapons, spend many lives and dollars trying to
find them, and then joke about it when it turns out he had his head up his
ass.
Politicize all you like, but Stern isn't worth the piece of crap he flies to
daily.
The FCC shouldn't HAVE to do anything. In a better world, this guy would be
run out of town on a rail by people who are sick of his low-life antics.
Unfortunately, enough of the world we live in gravitates toward his brand of
puke to keep him afloat in it. He may be rich, but he's riding the sewers
to the bank and would do the world a favor by retiring.
George Kerby
2004-04-03 15:44:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
Some of us find Stern far less objectionable than a president who would go
to war over some mythical weapons, spend many lives and dollars trying to
find them, and then joke about it when it turns out he had his head up his
ass.
Politicize all you like, but Stern isn't worth the piece of crap he flies to
daily.
The FCC shouldn't HAVE to do anything. In a better world, this guy would be
run out of town on a rail by people who are sick of his low-life antics.
Unfortunately, enough of the world we live in gravitates toward his brand of
puke to keep him afloat in it. He may be rich, but he's riding the sewers
to the bank and would do the world a favor by retiring.
Bravo!!! Well said.


_______________________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
Bowzah
2004-04-03 21:49:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
Some of us find Stern far less objectionable than a president who would go
to war over some mythical weapons, spend many lives and dollars trying to
find them, and then joke about it when it turns out he had his head up his
ass.
Politicize all you like, but Stern isn't worth the piece of crap he flies to
daily.
The FCC shouldn't HAVE to do anything. In a better world, this guy would be
run out of town on a rail by people who are sick of his low-life antics.
Unfortunately, enough of the world we live in gravitates toward his brand of
puke to keep him afloat in it. He may be rich, but he's riding the sewers
to the bank and would do the world a favor by retiring.
Again, whether or not anyone listens to him is purely voluntary. He's not
important, in fact, in the big picture, he's nothing. Certainly not worth
getting into an argument over. And, what's offensive is a matter of taste.
During the Clinton administration, the six o'clock news was far more lewd
and offensive than anything Stern ever did.

On another note, I do not believe that the function of the FCC should
include censorship. The FCC should police frequencies, and that's it.
Content isn't their game, and should never be.
George Kerby
2004-04-03 22:49:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bowzah
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
Some of us find Stern far less objectionable than a president who would
go
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
to war over some mythical weapons, spend many lives and dollars trying
to
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
find them, and then joke about it when it turns out he had his head up
his
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
ass.
Politicize all you like, but Stern isn't worth the piece of crap he flies
to
Post by Mark M
daily.
The FCC shouldn't HAVE to do anything. In a better world, this guy would
be
Post by Mark M
run out of town on a rail by people who are sick of his low-life antics.
Unfortunately, enough of the world we live in gravitates toward his brand
of
Post by Mark M
puke to keep him afloat in it. He may be rich, but he's riding the sewers
to the bank and would do the world a favor by retiring.
Again, whether or not anyone listens to him is purely voluntary. He's not
important, in fact, in the big picture, he's nothing. Certainly not worth
getting into an argument over. And, what's offensive is a matter of taste.
During the Clinton administration, the six o'clock news was far more lewd
and offensive than anything Stern ever did.
On another note, I do not believe that the function of the FCC should
include censorship. The FCC should police frequencies, and that's it.
Content isn't their game, and should never be.
The FCC is a joke. Do you rememer how effective they were during the CB
craze of the late 70's?


_______________________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
Bowzah
2004-04-04 04:05:20 UTC
Permalink
That's a big 10-4. Y'know, I can't think of many goverment agencies that
aren't jokes.

snip> >
Post by George Kerby
The FCC is a joke. Do you rememer how effective they were during the CB
craze of the late 70's?
____________________________________________________________________________
___
Post by George Kerby
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
http://www.uncensored-news.com
Post by George Kerby
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source
<><><><><><><><>
Mark M
2004-04-03 23:05:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bowzah
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
Some of us find Stern far less objectionable than a president who
would
Post by Bowzah
go
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
to war over some mythical weapons, spend many lives and dollars trying
to
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
find them, and then joke about it when it turns out he had his head up
his
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
ass.
Politicize all you like, but Stern isn't worth the piece of crap he
flies
Post by Bowzah
to
Post by Mark M
daily.
The FCC shouldn't HAVE to do anything. In a better world, this guy
would
Post by Bowzah
be
Post by Mark M
run out of town on a rail by people who are sick of his low-life antics.
Unfortunately, enough of the world we live in gravitates toward his
brand
Post by Bowzah
of
Post by Mark M
puke to keep him afloat in it. He may be rich, but he's riding the sewers
to the bank and would do the world a favor by retiring.
Again, whether or not anyone listens to him is purely voluntary. He's not
important, in fact, in the big picture, he's nothing. Certainly not worth
getting into an argument over. And, what's offensive is a matter of taste.
During the Clinton administration, the six o'clock news was far more lewd
and offensive than anything Stern ever did.
On another note, I do not believe that the function of the FCC should
include censorship. The FCC should police frequencies, and that's it.
Content isn't their game, and should never be.
I'm not commenting on the FCC.
I'm simply stating that Stern is a glorified pile of dung.
-Not interested in an argument.
George Kerby
2004-04-04 01:32:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
Some of us find Stern far less objectionable than a president who
would
Post by Bowzah
go
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
to war over some mythical weapons, spend many lives and dollars trying
to
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
find them, and then joke about it when it turns out he had his head up
his
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
ass.
Politicize all you like, but Stern isn't worth the piece of crap he
flies
Post by Bowzah
to
Post by Mark M
daily.
The FCC shouldn't HAVE to do anything. In a better world, this guy
would
Post by Bowzah
be
Post by Mark M
run out of town on a rail by people who are sick of his low-life antics.
Unfortunately, enough of the world we live in gravitates toward his
brand
Post by Bowzah
of
Post by Mark M
puke to keep him afloat in it. He may be rich, but he's riding the
sewers
Post by Bowzah
Post by Mark M
to the bank and would do the world a favor by retiring.
Again, whether or not anyone listens to him is purely voluntary. He's not
important, in fact, in the big picture, he's nothing. Certainly not worth
getting into an argument over. And, what's offensive is a matter of taste.
During the Clinton administration, the six o'clock news was far more lewd
and offensive than anything Stern ever did.
On another note, I do not believe that the function of the FCC should
include censorship. The FCC should police frequencies, and that's it.
Content isn't their game, and should never be.
I'm simply stating that Stern is a glorified pile of dung.
AGREED!!!


_______________________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
Bowzah
2004-04-04 04:06:15 UTC
Permalink
I don't think he's glorified!

Heh, heh...

snip>
Post by Mark M
I'm not commenting on the FCC.
I'm simply stating that Stern is a glorified pile of dung.
-Not interested in an argument.
Ray Fischer
2004-04-04 02:19:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
Some of us find Stern far less objectionable than a president who would go
to war over some mythical weapons, spend many lives and dollars trying to
find them, and then joke about it when it turns out he had his head up his
ass.
Politicize all you like, but Stern isn't worth the piece of crap he flies to
daily.
The FCC shouldn't HAVE to do anything. In a better world, this guy would be
run out of town on a rail by people who are sick of his low-life antics.
Unfortunately, enough of the world we live in gravitates toward his brand of
puke to keep him afloat in it. He may be rich, but he's riding the sewers
to the bank and would do the world a favor by retiring.
A lot of people feel the same way about Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, and Coulter.
--
Ray Fischer
***@sonic.net
Mark M
2004-04-04 02:53:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
Some of us find Stern far less objectionable than a president who would go
to war over some mythical weapons, spend many lives and dollars trying to
find them, and then joke about it when it turns out he had his head up his
ass.
Politicize all you like, but Stern isn't worth the piece of crap he flies to
daily.
The FCC shouldn't HAVE to do anything. In a better world, this guy would be
run out of town on a rail by people who are sick of his low-life antics.
Unfortunately, enough of the world we live in gravitates toward his brand of
puke to keep him afloat in it. He may be rich, but he's riding the sewers
to the bank and would do the world a favor by retiring.
A lot of people feel the same way about Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, and Coulter.
Those people are targeted based on political vision for their country.
With Stern, it's simply an issue of a man who finds purpose in being as
sexually vile as he can get away with. Stern isn't a fighter for speech
freedoms. -He is interested ONLY in preserving his cash flow. Anyone who
sees him as some sort of free speech hero is a fool. Your comparison of
Stern to political commentators who find opposition from those with
differing governmental/political goals is a poor comparison at best.

Stern's crap is not based on any particular end or purpose other than to
grind away at what the public will tolerate in terms of explicit language,
situations, and rudeness...and to pad his wallet by appealing to the lowest
among us.
Ray Fischer
2004-04-04 05:37:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
Some of us find Stern far less objectionable than a president who would
go
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
to war over some mythical weapons, spend many lives and dollars trying
to
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
find them, and then joke about it when it turns out he had his head up
his
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
ass.
Politicize all you like, but Stern isn't worth the piece of crap he flies
to
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
daily.
The FCC shouldn't HAVE to do anything. In a better world, this guy would
be
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
run out of town on a rail by people who are sick of his low-life antics.
Unfortunately, enough of the world we live in gravitates toward his brand
of
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
puke to keep him afloat in it. He may be rich, but he's riding the
sewers
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
to the bank and would do the world a favor by retiring.
A lot of people feel the same way about Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, and
Coulter.
Those people are targeted based on political vision for their country.
With Stern, it's simply an issue of a man who finds purpose in being as
sexually vile as he can get away with.
Sex is bad, but promoting racism and hatred and class warfare is just
fine. You can call for wars which kill tens of thousands of people,
but if you talk too much about making love then the FCC will shut you
down.
Post by Mark M
Stern isn't a fighter for speech
freedoms. -He is interested ONLY in preserving his cash flow.
A lot of people feel the same way about Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, and
Coulter. At least Stern is largly harmless.
Post by Mark M
Anyone who
sees him as some sort of free speech hero is a fool. Your comparison of
Stern to political commentators who find opposition from those with
differing governmental/political goals is a poor comparison at best.
Those "political commentators" get rich selling lies and hatred.
--
Ray Fischer
***@sonic.net
Mark M
2004-04-04 06:15:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
Some of us find Stern far less objectionable than a president who would
go
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
to war over some mythical weapons, spend many lives and dollars trying
to
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
find them, and then joke about it when it turns out he had his head up
his
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
ass.
Politicize all you like, but Stern isn't worth the piece of crap he flies
to
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
daily.
The FCC shouldn't HAVE to do anything. In a better world, this guy would
be
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
run out of town on a rail by people who are sick of his low-life antics.
Unfortunately, enough of the world we live in gravitates toward his brand
of
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
puke to keep him afloat in it. He may be rich, but he's riding the
sewers
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
to the bank and would do the world a favor by retiring.
A lot of people feel the same way about Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, and
Coulter.
Those people are targeted based on political vision for their country.
With Stern, it's simply an issue of a man who finds purpose in being as
sexually vile as he can get away with.
Sex is bad,
No.
Sex is good.
However, the cheapening of sexuality is a negative thing.
Post by Ray Fischer
but promoting racism and hatred and class warfare is just
fine. You can call for wars which kill tens of thousands of people,
but if you talk too much about making love
Oh brother.
Stern doesn't talk about making love.
Stern talks about "Oh God, I'd love to bang you, baby" and "let's see those
tits."
There's no connection with making love there.
Post by Ray Fischer
then the FCC will shut you
down.
Post by Mark M
Stern isn't a fighter for speech
freedoms. -He is interested ONLY in preserving his cash flow.
A lot of people feel the same way about Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, and
Coulter. At least Stern is largly harmless.
There will always be political disagreements.
We're not talking about a political talk show host here.
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Anyone who
sees him as some sort of free speech hero is a fool. Your comparison of
Stern to political commentators who find opposition from those with
differing governmental/political goals is a poor comparison at best.
Those "political commentators" get rich selling lies and hatred.
That is a matter of opinion.
That Stern degrades women (and anyone else he can) is not.
Ray Fischer
2004-04-04 21:03:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Stern isn't a fighter for speech
freedoms. -He is interested ONLY in preserving his cash flow.
A lot of people feel the same way about Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, and
Coulter. At least Stern is largly harmless.
There will always be political disagreements.
We're not talking about a political talk show host here.
Smirk.
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Anyone who
sees him as some sort of free speech hero is a fool. Your comparison of
Stern to political commentators who find opposition from those with
differing governmental/political goals is a poor comparison at best.
Those "political commentators" get rich selling lies and hatred.
That is a matter of opinion.
No it isn't.
Post by Mark M
That Stern degrades women (and anyone else he can) is not.
Whereas Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, and Coulter are outright bigots who
promote hatred for anybody who don't goose-step to their immoral
screeching. They degrade all people.
--
Ray Fischer
***@sonic.net
Mark M
2004-04-04 22:23:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Stern isn't a fighter for speech
freedoms. -He is interested ONLY in preserving his cash flow.
A lot of people feel the same way about Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, and
Coulter. At least Stern is largly harmless.
There will always be political disagreements.
We're not talking about a political talk show host here.
Smirk.
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Anyone who
sees him as some sort of free speech hero is a fool. Your comparison of
Stern to political commentators who find opposition from those with
differing governmental/political goals is a poor comparison at best.
Those "political commentators" get rich selling lies and hatred.
That is a matter of opinion.
No it isn't.
Of course it is.
If it weren't, then you and I would agree.
We don't...because your opinion on it differs from mine.
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
That Stern degrades women (and anyone else he can) is not.
Whereas Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, and Coulter are outright bigots who
promote hatred for anybody who don't goose-step to their immoral
screeching. They degrade all people.
Again... An opinion to which you are entitled.
Ray Fischer
2004-04-04 23:35:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Stern isn't a fighter for speech
freedoms. -He is interested ONLY in preserving his cash flow.
A lot of people feel the same way about Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, and
Coulter. At least Stern is largly harmless.
There will always be political disagreements.
We're not talking about a political talk show host here.
Smirk.
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Anyone who
sees him as some sort of free speech hero is a fool. Your comparison
of
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Stern to political commentators who find opposition from those with
differing governmental/political goals is a poor comparison at best.
Those "political commentators" get rich selling lies and hatred.
That is a matter of opinion.
No it isn't.
Of course it is.
It is not a matter of opinion that they sell lies and hate. The lies
have been documented. The hate and bigotry is obvious.
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
That Stern degrades women (and anyone else he can) is not.
Whereas Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, and Coulter are outright bigots who
promote hatred for anybody who don't goose-step to their immoral
screeching. They degrade all people.
Again... An opinion to which you are entitled.
Not according to a lot of you right-wing fanatics.
--
Ray Fischer
***@sonic.net
Mark M
2004-04-05 02:35:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Stern isn't a fighter for speech
freedoms. -He is interested ONLY in preserving his cash flow.
A lot of people feel the same way about Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, and
Coulter. At least Stern is largly harmless.
There will always be political disagreements.
We're not talking about a political talk show host here.
Smirk.
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Anyone who
sees him as some sort of free speech hero is a fool. Your comparison
of
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Stern to political commentators who find opposition from those with
differing governmental/political goals is a poor comparison at best.
Those "political commentators" get rich selling lies and hatred.
That is a matter of opinion.
No it isn't.
Of course it is.
It is not a matter of opinion that they sell lies and hate. The lies
have been documented. The hate and bigotry is obvious.
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
That Stern degrades women (and anyone else he can) is not.
Whereas Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, and Coulter are outright bigots who
promote hatred for anybody who don't goose-step to their immoral
screeching. They degrade all people.
Again... An opinion to which you are entitled.
Not according to a lot of you right-wing fanatics.
Hmmm... I just told you that you are entitled to your opinion, and yet you
say that I'm a right-wing fanatic who won't allow you that. It cannot be
both ways, according to your statement...and yet I have behaved differently
than you insist I would.
So...Either your assumptions about right-leaning folk are wrong...or I'm not
a right wing fanatic.
Ray Fischer
2004-04-05 03:23:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Stern isn't a fighter for speech
freedoms. -He is interested ONLY in preserving his cash flow.
A lot of people feel the same way about Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, and
Coulter. At least Stern is largly harmless.
There will always be political disagreements.
We're not talking about a political talk show host here.
Smirk.
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Anyone who
sees him as some sort of free speech hero is a fool. Your
comparison
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
of
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Stern to political commentators who find opposition from those with
differing governmental/political goals is a poor comparison at
best.
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Those "political commentators" get rich selling lies and hatred.
That is a matter of opinion.
No it isn't.
Of course it is.
It is not a matter of opinion that they sell lies and hate. The lies
have been documented. The hate and bigotry is obvious.
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
That Stern degrades women (and anyone else he can) is not.
Whereas Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, and Coulter are outright bigots who
promote hatred for anybody who don't goose-step to their immoral
screeching. They degrade all people.
Again... An opinion to which you are entitled.
Not according to a lot of you right-wing fanatics.
Hmmm... I just told you that you are entitled to your opinion, and yet you
say that I'm a right-wing fanatic who won't allow you that.
So you're illiterate. What a surprise.
--
Ray Fischer
***@sonic.net
Mark M
2004-04-05 05:50:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Stern isn't a fighter for speech
freedoms. -He is interested ONLY in preserving his cash flow.
A lot of people feel the same way about Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, and
Coulter. At least Stern is largly harmless.
There will always be political disagreements.
We're not talking about a political talk show host here.
Smirk.
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Anyone who
sees him as some sort of free speech hero is a fool. Your
comparison
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
of
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Stern to political commentators who find opposition from those with
differing governmental/political goals is a poor comparison at
best.
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Those "political commentators" get rich selling lies and hatred.
That is a matter of opinion.
No it isn't.
Of course it is.
It is not a matter of opinion that they sell lies and hate. The lies
have been documented. The hate and bigotry is obvious.
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
That Stern degrades women (and anyone else he can) is not.
Whereas Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, and Coulter are outright bigots who
promote hatred for anybody who don't goose-step to their immoral
screeching. They degrade all people.
Again... An opinion to which you are entitled.
Not according to a lot of you right-wing fanatics.
Hmmm... I just told you that you are entitled to your opinion, and yet you
say that I'm a right-wing fanatic who won't allow you that.
So you're illiterate. What a surprise.
I was giving you the benefit of the doubt that you weren't just an ignorant
jerk, but you have extinguished my patience and revealed yourself to be just
that.
Please continue without me if you wish.
PLONK.
William Graham
2004-04-05 06:52:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Stern isn't a fighter for speech
freedoms. -He is interested ONLY in preserving his cash flow.
A lot of people feel the same way about Rush, Hannity,
O'Reilly,
Post by Mark M
and
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Coulter. At least Stern is largly harmless.
There will always be political disagreements.
We're not talking about a political talk show host here.
Smirk.
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Anyone who
sees him as some sort of free speech hero is a fool. Your
comparison
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
of
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Stern to political commentators who find opposition from those
with
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
differing governmental/political goals is a poor comparison at
best.
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Those "political commentators" get rich selling lies and hatred.
That is a matter of opinion.
No it isn't.
Of course it is.
It is not a matter of opinion that they sell lies and hate. The lies
have been documented. The hate and bigotry is obvious.
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
That Stern degrades women (and anyone else he can) is not.
Whereas Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, and Coulter are outright bigots who
promote hatred for anybody who don't goose-step to their immoral
screeching. They degrade all people.
Again... An opinion to which you are entitled.
Not according to a lot of you right-wing fanatics.
Hmmm... I just told you that you are entitled to your opinion, and yet
you
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
say that I'm a right-wing fanatic who won't allow you that.
So you're illiterate. What a surprise.
I was giving you the benefit of the doubt that you weren't just an ignorant
jerk, but you have extinguished my patience and revealed yourself to be just
that.
Please continue without me if you wish.
PLONK.
Thanks a lot....He'll just continue with me....:^)
Mark M
2004-04-05 07:51:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Stern isn't a fighter for speech
freedoms. -He is interested ONLY in preserving his cash flow.
A lot of people feel the same way about Rush, Hannity,
O'Reilly,
Post by Mark M
and
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Coulter. At least Stern is largly harmless.
There will always be political disagreements.
We're not talking about a political talk show host here.
Smirk.
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Anyone who
sees him as some sort of free speech hero is a fool. Your
comparison
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
of
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Stern to political commentators who find opposition from those
with
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
differing governmental/political goals is a poor comparison at
best.
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Those "political commentators" get rich selling lies and
hatred.
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
That is a matter of opinion.
No it isn't.
Of course it is.
It is not a matter of opinion that they sell lies and hate. The lies
have been documented. The hate and bigotry is obvious.
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
That Stern degrades women (and anyone else he can) is not.
Whereas Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, and Coulter are outright bigots
who
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
promote hatred for anybody who don't goose-step to their immoral
screeching. They degrade all people.
Again... An opinion to which you are entitled.
Not according to a lot of you right-wing fanatics.
Hmmm... I just told you that you are entitled to your opinion, and yet
you
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
say that I'm a right-wing fanatic who won't allow you that.
So you're illiterate. What a surprise.
I was giving you the benefit of the doubt that you weren't just an
ignorant
Post by Mark M
jerk, but you have extinguished my patience and revealed yourself to be
just
Post by Mark M
that.
Please continue without me if you wish.
PLONK.
Thanks a lot....He'll just continue with me....:^)
He will challenge your patience, William, but never your intellect.
You are one of the few folks around here that remind me that all is not
lost.
Ray Fischer
2004-04-05 18:29:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Stern isn't a fighter for speech
freedoms. -He is interested ONLY in preserving his cash flow.
A lot of people feel the same way about Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly,
and
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Coulter. At least Stern is largly harmless.
There will always be political disagreements.
We're not talking about a political talk show host here.
Smirk.
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Anyone who
sees him as some sort of free speech hero is a fool. Your
comparison
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
of
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Stern to political commentators who find opposition from those
with
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
differing governmental/political goals is a poor comparison at
best.
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Those "political commentators" get rich selling lies and hatred.
That is a matter of opinion.
No it isn't.
Of course it is.
It is not a matter of opinion that they sell lies and hate. The lies
have been documented. The hate and bigotry is obvious.
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
That Stern degrades women (and anyone else he can) is not.
Whereas Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, and Coulter are outright bigots who
promote hatred for anybody who don't goose-step to their immoral
screeching. They degrade all people.
Again... An opinion to which you are entitled.
Not according to a lot of you right-wing fanatics.
Hmmm... I just told you that you are entitled to your opinion, and yet
you
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
say that I'm a right-wing fanatic who won't allow you that.
So you're illiterate. What a surprise.
I was giving you the benefit of the doubt that you weren't just an ignorant
jerk,
Which is why you chose to ignore what I actually wrote in order to
justify a retreat.
--
Ray Fischer
***@sonic.net
William Graham
2004-04-05 06:51:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Not according to a lot of you right-wing fanatics.
Hmmm... I just told you that you are entitled to your opinion, and yet you
say that I'm a right-wing fanatic who won't allow you that.
So you're illiterate. What a surprise.
--
Ray Fischer
I have been following this exchance rather carefully, and it seems to me
that the illiterate bigot is you, Ray.
Ray Fischer
2004-04-05 18:30:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by William Graham
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Not according to a lot of you right-wing fanatics.
Hmmm... I just told you that you are entitled to your opinion, and yet
you
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
say that I'm a right-wing fanatic who won't allow you that.
So you're illiterate. What a surprise.
I have been following this exchance rather carefully, and it seems to me
that the illiterate bigot is you, Ray.
I fact I never claimed that he didn't allow me my opinion. You, and
he, are illiterate morons who apparently cannot read what is actually
written.
--
Ray Fischer
***@sonic.net
George Kerby
2004-04-06 13:26:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by William Graham
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Not according to a lot of you right-wing fanatics.
Hmmm... I just told you that you are entitled to your opinion, and yet
you
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
say that I'm a right-wing fanatic who won't allow you that.
So you're illiterate. What a surprise.
I have been following this exchance rather carefully, and it seems to me
that the illiterate bigot is you, Ray.
I fact I never claimed that he didn't allow me my opinion. You, and
he, are illiterate morons who apparently cannot read what is actually
written.
You live in your own demented little world, asshole. It IS apparent to the
MAJORITY here that you are an ignorant fuckwad, just like your butt-buddy,
Pizza-Face. F.O.A.D., Douchebag!


_______________________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
William Graham
2004-04-05 06:51:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Stern isn't a fighter for speech
freedoms. -He is interested ONLY in preserving his cash flow.
A lot of people feel the same way about Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, and
Coulter. At least Stern is largly harmless.
There will always be political disagreements.
We're not talking about a political talk show host here.
Smirk.
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Anyone who
sees him as some sort of free speech hero is a fool. Your comparison
of
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Stern to political commentators who find opposition from those with
differing governmental/political goals is a poor comparison at best.
Those "political commentators" get rich selling lies and hatred.
That is a matter of opinion.
No it isn't.
Of course it is.
It is not a matter of opinion that they sell lies and hate. The lies
have been documented. The hate and bigotry is obvious.
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
That Stern degrades women (and anyone else he can) is not.
Whereas Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, and Coulter are outright bigots who
promote hatred for anybody who don't goose-step to their immoral
screeching. They degrade all people.
Again... An opinion to which you are entitled.
Not according to a lot of you right-wing fanatics.
--
Ray Fischer
I heard Rush give the mike to a liberal caller once for over 5 minutes. He
(Rush) didn't interrupt the guy until he started repeating himself. I have
listened to a lot of liberal talk show hosts who couldn't stand still for a
conservative caller for more than about 10 seconds. There is one liberal
talk host in the Bay Area, (Ray Taliaferro) who called Ronald Regan a killer
for weeks every night, when the KAL flight 800 was shot down by the Russians
back in the 80's. He (Ray) said that Regan was using it as a spy plane, and
as a result, was responsible for the deaths of over 300 people. When the
Russian pilot who actually pulled the trigger on that plane gave an
interview to the Wall Street Journal, years later, after the "fall" of
Soviet communism, he said that his watch commander knew full well that
Flight 800 was just an airliner that was off course, and was no spy plane,
but gave the order to shoot it down anyway. I listened to Ray Taliaferro
carefully after that story came out to see if he would apologize to Regan
for calling him a murderer.....Guess what....I am still waiting.....There is
a lot more integrity in the conservative talk hosts than there is in the
liberal ones....I can tell you that.....
Paolo Pizzi
2004-04-05 08:04:19 UTC
Permalink
When the Russian pilot who actually pulled the trigger on
that plane gave an interview to the Wall Street Journal, years
later, after the "fall" of Soviet communism, he said that his
watch commander knew full well that Flight 800 was just an
airliner that was off course
Must be like the Iraqi "scientist" in exile who swore Iraq was
full of WMD's. Why am I not surprised that people like you
buy such bullcrap at face value?
There is a lot more integrity in the conservative talk hosts
Yeah, especially when the preach on the evil of illegal
drugs while using them every day. Some "integrity"!!!
Mark M
2004-04-05 08:11:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paolo Pizzi
When the Russian pilot who actually pulled the trigger on
that plane gave an interview to the Wall Street Journal, years
later, after the "fall" of Soviet communism, he said that his
watch commander knew full well that Flight 800 was just an
airliner that was off course
Must be like the Iraqi "scientist" in exile who swore Iraq was
full of WMD's. Why am I not surprised that people like you
buy such bullcrap at face value?
There is a lot more integrity in the conservative talk hosts
Yeah, especially when the preach on the evil of illegal
drugs while using them every day. Some "integrity"!!!
To be accurate...
...He became addicted to legal drugs.

A far cry from your friendly neighborhood crack-head.
Paolo Pizzi
2004-04-05 08:28:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paolo Pizzi
Yeah, especially when the preach on the evil of illegal
drugs while using them every day. Some "integrity"!!!
To be accurate....He became addicted to legal drugs.
Wrong, they're only legal when they are LEGALLY
PRESCRIBED. But it's funny how right-wingers twist
the truth...
A far cry from your friendly neighborhood crack-head.
Double standard, as usual...
Mark M
2004-04-05 09:54:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paolo Pizzi
Post by Paolo Pizzi
Yeah, especially when the preach on the evil of illegal
drugs while using them every day. Some "integrity"!!!
To be accurate....He became addicted to legal drugs.
Wrong, they're only legal when they are LEGALLY
PRESCRIBED. But it's funny how right-wingers twist
the truth...
A far cry from your friendly neighborhood crack-head.
Double standard, as usual...
Gross generalizations of convenience...as usual.

Rush screwed up badly.
But you would bolster your credibility if you would try to maintain some
hint of differentiation.
Paolo Pizzi
2004-04-05 14:30:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark M
Post by Paolo Pizzi
Post by Paolo Pizzi
Yeah, especially when the preach on the evil of illegal
drugs while using them every day. Some "integrity"!!!
To be accurate....He became addicted to legal drugs.
Wrong, they're only legal when they are LEGALLY
PRESCRIBED. But it's funny how right-wingers twist
the truth...
A far cry from your friendly neighborhood crack-head.
Double standard, as usual...
Gross generalizations of convenience...as usual.
Really? How so?
Do you deny that Rush used drugs that were NOT prescribed
and therefore ILLEGAL?
Post by Mark M
Rush screwed up badly.
...but you "forgive" him. While of course you wouldn't have one
once of compassion for the junkie round the corner...
Post by Mark M
But you would bolster your credibility if you would try to maintain
some hint of differentiation.
Sure, the only differentiation is that Rush is a fascist and racist
hatemonger
full of money while the junkie round the corner is just a desperate soul
who deserves help and compassion. That's the only difference.
Unsurprisingly, you prefer the hypocrite who claims to fight illegal drugs
while using them...
Mark M
2004-04-05 19:33:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paolo Pizzi
Post by Mark M
Post by Paolo Pizzi
Post by Paolo Pizzi
Yeah, especially when the preach on the evil of illegal
drugs while using them every day. Some "integrity"!!!
To be accurate....He became addicted to legal drugs.
Wrong, they're only legal when they are LEGALLY
PRESCRIBED. But it's funny how right-wingers twist
the truth...
A far cry from your friendly neighborhood crack-head.
Double standard, as usual...
Gross generalizations of convenience...as usual.
Really? How so?
Do you deny that Rush used drugs that were NOT prescribed
and therefore ILLEGAL?
Post by Mark M
Rush screwed up badly.
...but you "forgive" him. While of course you wouldn't have one
once of compassion for the junkie round the corner...
It amazes me, Paolo, that you pretend to know these things about me, and who
I am.
You know NOTHING about me, and couldn't be more wrong.
These statements of supposed fact that you make about the minds of others
are what rob your aguments of any credibility. For your own sake, you
really do need to stop that.
Post by Paolo Pizzi
Post by Mark M
But you would bolster your credibility if you would try to maintain
some hint of differentiation.
Sure, the only differentiation is that Rush is a fascist and racist
hatemonger
full of money while the junkie round the corner is just a desperate soul
who deserves help and compassion. That's the only difference.
Unsurprisingly, you prefer the hypocrite who claims to fight illegal drugs
while using them...
Oops... He didn't use illegal drugs. He became addicted to legal drugs,
But he broke the law in how he obtrained them.
He is guilty of breaking that law.
Interestingly, even his political opponents have admited that authorities
have gone after Rush in ways that NO OTHER PERSON has been persued given
similar circumstances. This is a far better example of that double standard
you keep blathering about.
Paolo Pizzi
2004-04-05 20:19:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark M
Post by Paolo Pizzi
...but you "forgive" him. While of course you wouldn't have one
once of compassion for the junkie round the corner...
It amazes me, Paolo, that you pretend to know these things about
me, and who I am.
I know you by what you say here. You show "compassion" for
an ultra-rich hatemonger who preaches racism and hatred but
you want the desperate junkie to be arrested and tried...
Post by Mark M
Oops... He didn't use illegal drugs.
Legal drugs become ILLEGAL when they're not LEGALLY
PRESCRIBED. You don't seem to understand that.
Post by Mark M
Interestingly, even his political opponents have admited that
authorities have gone after Rush in ways that NO OTHER
PERSON has been persued given similar circumstances.
Really? Now try to imagine how a black kid would have been
treated in a situation like that. You are right, they gave Rush special
treatment, but it's not what you mean.
Post by Mark M
This is a far better example of that double standard you
keep blathering about.
Is Rush rotting in jail where he deserves to be? No, he's not
and he never will be. Some justice!! A black kid caught with
those drugs would be beaten by the police first, jailed immediately,
tried and sentenced to several years of prison. Only a racist like
you can't see the difference, because he doesn't want to see it.
Mark M
2004-04-05 22:00:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paolo Pizzi
Post by Mark M
Post by Paolo Pizzi
...but you "forgive" him. While of course you wouldn't have one
once of compassion for the junkie round the corner...
It amazes me, Paolo, that you pretend to know these things about
me, and who I am.
I know you by what you say here. You show "compassion" for
an ultra-rich hatemonger who preaches racism and hatred but
you want the desperate junkie to be arrested and tried...
I want that based on what I've said here?
I'll give you $1,000 if you can quote me saying that.
Post by Paolo Pizzi
Post by Mark M
Oops... He didn't use illegal drugs.
Legal drugs become ILLEGAL when they're not LEGALLY
PRESCRIBED. You don't seem to understand that.
Post by Mark M
Interestingly, even his political opponents have admited that
authorities have gone after Rush in ways that NO OTHER
PERSON has been persued given similar circumstances.
Really? Now try to imagine how a black kid would have been
treated in a situation like that.
I don't have to imagine it.
It happens every day to people of all races and classes.
--They are sent to re-hab.
They are not sent to jail.
Post by Paolo Pizzi
You are right, they gave Rush special
treatment, but it's not what you mean.
Post by Mark M
This is a far better example of that double standard you
keep blathering about.
Is Rush rotting in jail where he deserves to be?
Name one person in jail for drug use that isn't associated with any other
crime or criminal record. You can't, because people RARELY go to jail for
this.
Post by Paolo Pizzi
No, he's not
and he never will be. Some justice!! A black kid caught with
those drugs would be beaten by the police first, jailed immediately,
tried and sentenced to several years of prison.
Do your research.
Post by Paolo Pizzi
Only a racist like
you can't see the difference, because he doesn't want to see it.
I was born in Bogotá, Colombia, South America where I grew up...taught
school children in Brasil (you spell it "Brazil"), worked in the Sepik River
Valley jungles in Papua New Guinea...re-built storm-destroyed charities in
both Haiti and Puerto Rico---(voluntarily paid my own way), have worked in
homeless shelters here in my own city voluntarily (where there were no
caucasions). None of the people I served in the above places were white.
If I'm a racist, I must be very confused indeed.
You're a funny guy, Paolo.
Paolo Pizzi
2004-04-05 23:48:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark M
Post by Paolo Pizzi
I know you by what you say here. You show "compassion" for
an ultra-rich hatemonger who preaches racism and hatred but
you want the desperate junkie to be arrested and tried...
I want that based on what I've said here?
I'll give you $1,000 if you can quote me saying that.
Look, you were trying to defend the indefensible, you even
claimed Limbaugh never used illegal drugs, when, in fact,
by using them WITHOUT A LEGAL PRESCRIPTION
he indeed used illegal drugs.
Post by Mark M
Post by Paolo Pizzi
Really? Now try to imagine how a black kid would have been
treated in a situation like that.
I don't have to imagine it. It happens every day to people of all
races and classes. --They are sent to re-hab. They are not sent
to jail.
Really? Is that why our jails are crammed with black people?
Don't tell me, you believe they are all a bunch of criminals,
right? Black people are harassed by the police only because
they're black. There is no doubt that if the police found the
same quantity of ILLEGAL drugs (as in "not legally prescribed")
in a car owned by a black person, they would arrest him in
a millisecond. Where do you live, on Mars?
Post by Mark M
Post by Paolo Pizzi
Is Rush rotting in jail where he deserves to be?
Name one person in jail for drug use that isn't associated with any
other crime or criminal record. You can't, because people RARELY
go to jail for this.
Oh yeah, sure, everyone who's in jail MUST be guilty of something.
You have never heard about people *framed* by the cops, especially
black people. Oh no, it's not happening, right?
Post by Mark M
Post by Paolo Pizzi
No, he's not
and he never will be. Some justice!! A black kid caught with
those drugs would be beaten by the police first, jailed immediately,
tried and sentenced to several years of prison.
Do your research.
Open your eyes. But you won't, because you are a racist and you
do like the status quo.
Post by Mark M
I was born in Bogotá, Colombia, South America where I grew up...taught
school children in Brasil (you spell it "Brazil"), worked in the
Sepik River Valley jungles in Papua New Guinea...re-built
storm-destroyed charities in both Haiti and Puerto
Rico---(voluntarily paid my own way), have worked in homeless
shelters here in my own city voluntarily (where there were no
caucasions). None of the people I served in the above places were
white. If I'm a racist, I must be very confused indeed.
There's a lot of confused people in the US... There's even black people
who help the corporate white fascists further oppress their own people
for financial gain...
Post by Mark M
You're a funny guy, Paolo.
You are a complete idiot, Mark. If that is your real name.
William Graham
2004-04-06 03:13:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark M
Post by Paolo Pizzi
Post by Mark M
Post by Paolo Pizzi
...but you "forgive" him. While of course you wouldn't have one
once of compassion for the junkie round the corner...
It amazes me, Paolo, that you pretend to know these things about
me, and who I am.
I know you by what you say here. You show "compassion" for
an ultra-rich hatemonger who preaches racism and hatred but
you want the desperate junkie to be arrested and tried...
I want that based on what I've said here?
I'll give you $1,000 if you can quote me saying that.
Post by Paolo Pizzi
Post by Mark M
Oops... He didn't use illegal drugs.
Legal drugs become ILLEGAL when they're not LEGALLY
PRESCRIBED. You don't seem to understand that.
Post by Mark M
Interestingly, even his political opponents have admited that
authorities have gone after Rush in ways that NO OTHER
PERSON has been persued given similar circumstances.
Really? Now try to imagine how a black kid would have been
treated in a situation like that.
I don't have to imagine it.
It happens every day to people of all races and classes.
--They are sent to re-hab.
They are not sent to jail.
Post by Paolo Pizzi
You are right, they gave Rush special
treatment, but it's not what you mean.
Post by Mark M
This is a far better example of that double standard you
keep blathering about.
Is Rush rotting in jail where he deserves to be?
Name one person in jail for drug use that isn't associated with any other
crime or criminal record. You can't, because people RARELY go to jail for
this.
Post by Paolo Pizzi
No, he's not
and he never will be. Some justice!! A black kid caught with
those drugs would be beaten by the police first, jailed immediately,
tried and sentenced to several years of prison.
Do your research.
Post by Paolo Pizzi
Only a racist like
you can't see the difference, because he doesn't want to see it.
I was born in Bogotá, Colombia, South America where I grew up...taught
school children in Brasil (you spell it "Brazil"), worked in the Sepik River
Valley jungles in Papua New Guinea...re-built storm-destroyed charities in
both Haiti and Puerto Rico---(voluntarily paid my own way), have worked in
homeless shelters here in my own city voluntarily (where there were no
caucasions). None of the people I served in the above places were white.
If I'm a racist, I must be very confused indeed.
You're a funny guy, Paolo.
Paolo, like many liberals, is fond of putting everyone in a bag....If you
are conservative, then he puts you in the white racist, religious,
born-again christian bag......He can't conceive of a conservative who is an
atheist, or who is a social libertarian, or who has any compassion for
anyone. If you don't want the government to take all of your money and give
it to the poor, then you must not want to give anything to cripples and the
insane, and people who had nothing to do to with bringing on their own
infirmities. This is the true racism. I don't like my government giving
special privileges to American Indians, or people of color solely because of
their race. So, in Paolo's eyes, this makes me a racist.....It's amazing
that not wanting to discriminate against people because of their race,
color, or religion makes one a racist in the liberals view.....I was brought
up to believe that this kind of discrimination WAS the definition of
racism......Now, the whole meaning of racism has been twisted around to mean
the opposite. I believe that every woman should have the right to get an
abortion.....Just as long as I don't have to pay for it. So this means that
I discriminate against women, because I don't want the government to give
them free abortions....I want them to have to pay their own way......I think
that Rush is politically correct in his conservatism, but I disagree with
him on his support of religion in the schools and having "In God we Trust"
printed on my money.....But, because I like his political agenda, I must be
a religious fanatic in Paolo's eyes......At no time, can any part of me peek
out of his bag......You are either all in the bag, or no part of you is in
the bag.....This is the true racism.......Denying that you are a human
being, capable of making up your own mind on every issue, independent of any
party platform.
Paolo Pizzi
2004-04-06 08:04:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by William Graham
Paolo, like many liberals, is fond of putting everyone in a bag....If
you are conservative, then he puts you in the white racist, religious,
born-again christian bag......He can't conceive of a conservative who
is an atheist, or who is a social libertarian, or who has any
compassion for anyone.
What's really hilarious about your posting is that what follows proves
exactly the OPPOSITE of your point.
Post by William Graham
If you don't want the government to take all of your money
and give it to the poor
You hate poor people.
Post by William Graham
I don't like my government giving special privileges to American
Indians
You are a racist. Only a racist would call them "Indians."
They're NATIVE AMERICANS and this is THEIR land.
Post by William Graham
So, in Paolo's eyes, this makes me a racist....
You ARE a racist, only you pretend you don't know that.
You have such hatred for the underprivileged and especially
for oppressed minorities.
Post by William Graham
It's amazing that not wanting to discriminate against people
because of their race, color, or religion makes one a racist
in the liberals view...
You speak like a 1930 Republican: "I have nothing against
ni**ers, I just don't want them around and I don't want to
help them. I'm no racist."
Post by William Graham
I believe that every woman should have the right to get an
abortion.....Just as long as I don't have to pay for it.
So, basically you believe that only RICH women have the
right to get an abortion. You are digging yourself into a bigger
and bigger hole...
Post by William Graham
So this means that I discriminate against women, because I don't
want the government to give them free abortions...
Of course you do discriminate against women, it's not a surprise
here...
Post by William Graham
I think that Rush is politically correct in his conservatism
You are one of those nuts who believe Rush is too "moderate."
Intersting...
Post by William Graham
But, because I like his political agenda, I must be a religious fanatic
in Paolo's eyes...
How would you call someone who agrees with Al Qaeda but he
claims to be an atheist? Don't tell me, a second standard applies,
right?
Post by William Graham
You are either all in the bag, or no part of you is in the bag.....
Didn't your president say whoever is not with me is against me?
Double standard again?
Post by William Graham
This is the true racism...
Yeah right, you despise Native Americans, you despisen Muslims,
you despise poor people, you despise people who try to help out
and you even have the galls to accuse people of being racist just
because they OPPOSE racism? Hilarious.
Mark M
2004-04-06 09:07:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paolo Pizzi
Post by William Graham
Paolo, like many liberals, is fond of putting everyone in a bag....If
you are conservative, then he puts you in the white racist, religious,
born-again christian bag......He can't conceive of a conservative who
is an atheist, or who is a social libertarian, or who has any
compassion for anyone.
What's really hilarious about your posting is that what follows proves
exactly the OPPOSITE of your point.
Post by William Graham
If you don't want the government to take all of your money
and give it to the poor
You hate poor people.
Oh Paolo...
Things just aren't so clear cut as that.
Look, even a dog can see in black and white...but a great many issues of the
world truly tend to come in shades of grey--with certain elements which fall
into areas that are neither all right nor all wrong. People are this way
too. I know of very few truly evil people. I know of very few truly good
people. But make no mistake--There IS evil, and there IS good.
There is a truth to be had...it's just that it should not be cheaply
thrashed about and declared with such wrecklessness as is your tendency.

The way you cast people into one extreme definition or another is your own
personal brand of dehumanization. You are committing the very wrong you
claim a "racist" commits--that of "branding" someone based on one single
criterion. This type of wild, blind generalization serves no cause...It
undermines your ability to persuade **anyone**, and generally makes you
sound irrational and unconvincing. I'm sure that you are a good guy in a
lot of ways, Paolo. But when it comes to argumentation, you just don't seem
to have a grasp of the way that you cast incredibly blind blankets of
generality over nearly every topic you delve into (note I said
**nearly**...not all).

You would do well to examine this tendency in yourself.
As you do that, understand that I have examined my own life, mind, and
personal bias (we all have these) literally thousands of times, and
continuously to consider the same issues you so fanatically bring up.
Racism is an important issue to me, and it might shock you to discover that
some political conservatives actually feel quite strongly in ways you would
appreciate in this regard.

Your performance here, however, falls into a classic mode that can be
observed a lot these days by those claiming to hate "judgemental religious
right-wingers", etc. I have rarely seen as many rash declarations about the
character of people as you do here in these threads. You know very little
about anyone in this thread, and yet I honestly wonder what it is about you
that makes you feel comfortable with making horrible declarations about us
here. You simply cannot know these things. If you want to persuade, you
really need to save your strongest language for those few situations/people
that are so entirely known to you that you have a thorough basis by which
you can pass judgement with discernment and wisdom. You are simply not in a
position where that is at all possible, and therefore should refrain from
doing it.

I realize that it is unlikely that these words will change your pattern of
behavior/conduct, but I believe that until you hear it and believe it, you
will simply continue on your endless path to nowhere.
Paolo Pizzi
2004-04-06 20:04:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark M
I realize that it is unlikely that these words will change your
pattern of behavior/conduct, but I believe that until you hear it and
believe it, you will simply continue on your endless path to nowhere.
I realize that it's so typical of conservatives to start with ad
personam attacks when they're completely losing the argument.
Suddenly the center of the debate is my character. Yeah right,
just like with Dick Clarke, every time you guys are painted in
a corner, you start demonizing your opponents.
Mark M
2004-04-06 20:33:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paolo Pizzi
Post by Mark M
I realize that it is unlikely that these words will change your
pattern of behavior/conduct, but I believe that until you hear it and
believe it, you will simply continue on your endless path to nowhere.
I realize that it's so typical of conservatives to start with ad
personam attacks when they're completely losing the argument.
Suddenly the center of the debate is my character. Yeah right,
just like with Dick Clarke, every time you guys are painted in
a corner, you start demonizing your opponents.
You continue to amaze me with your pattern of responding to reasoned
argument
with NOTHING...and then claiming victory.

In light of my opinion that you may well be psychologically incapable of
moving through a logical sequence in argumentation, I will leave you to
yourself.
Do you, by chance, work at Abe's of Maine?
Paolo Pizzi
2004-04-07 22:51:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark M
Post by Paolo Pizzi
Post by Mark M
I realize that it is unlikely that these words will change your
pattern of behavior/conduct, but I believe that until you hear it
and believe it, you will simply continue on your endless path to
nowhere.
I realize that it's so typical of conservatives to start with ad
personam attacks when they're completely losing the argument.
Suddenly the center of the debate is my character. Yeah right,
just like with Dick Clarke, every time you guys are painted in
a corner, you start demonizing your opponents.
You continue to amaze me with your pattern of responding to
reasoned argument with NOTHING...and then claiming victory.
You continue to amaze me with what you consider "reasoned
arguments." But then again you're a ditto-head and that explains
a lot...
Post by Mark M
In light of my opinion that you may well be psychologically incapable
of moving through a logical sequence in argumentation, I will leave
you to yourself.
The opinion of a brainwashed ultra right-wing moron is more
than irrelevant, it simply doesn't exist in the realm of logic.
Mark M
2004-04-07 22:56:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paolo Pizzi
Post by Mark M
Post by Paolo Pizzi
Post by Mark M
I realize that it is unlikely that these words will change your
pattern of behavior/conduct, but I believe that until you hear it
and believe it, you will simply continue on your endless path to
nowhere.
I realize that it's so typical of conservatives to start with ad
personam attacks when they're completely losing the argument.
Suddenly the center of the debate is my character. Yeah right,
just like with Dick Clarke, every time you guys are painted in
a corner, you start demonizing your opponents.
You continue to amaze me with your pattern of responding to
reasoned argument with NOTHING...and then claiming victory.
You continue to amaze me with what you consider "reasoned
arguments." But then again you're a ditto-head and that explains
a lot...
Post by Mark M
In light of my opinion that you may well be psychologically incapable
of moving through a logical sequence in argumentation, I will leave
you to yourself.
The opinion of a brainwashed ultra right-wing moron is more
than irrelevant, it simply doesn't exist in the realm of logic.
More of the same from Paolo.
Bye bye, Mr. Pizzi.
I kill-filed you once...
...I clearly should have done it again as soon as I configured this new
machine.
:)
I've learned my lesson--that is...
...Never look to Paolo for anything new.
Paolo Pizzi
2004-04-08 00:14:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark M
Bye bye, Mr. Pizzi.
I kill-filed you once...
Finally!!! I'm glad you did it.
Must be awful to be unable to answer my posts with anything
but ad personam attacks...
Post by Mark M
I've learned my lesson--that is...
...Never look to Paolo for anything new.
You are a diehard conservative, you are
AFRAID of the new...
William Graham
2004-04-06 02:53:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark M
Oops... He didn't use illegal drugs. He became addicted to legal drugs,
But he broke the law in how he obtrained them.
He is guilty of breaking that law.
Interestingly, even his political opponents have admited that authorities
have gone after Rush in ways that NO OTHER PERSON has been persued given
similar circumstances. This is a far better example of that double standard
you keep blathering about.
As a libertarian, I believe that everyone should have access to any drug
they want....The function of a medical doctor should be that of an advisor,
not a policeman who deals out the drugs for a fee. I should be allowed to
purchase and ingest anything I wish into my system.....If I want to poison
myself, it's nobodies business but my own. We have given the physician far
too much power in this society.....In general, we give special interest
groups power that everyone should have. In my own case, I know druggists
that will sell me anything I want without a prescription. They, like me, are
libertarians. The only problem I have had is getting these people to trust
me to begin with. Once that hurdle is over, then I can deal with them
freely. In this respect I am just as, "crooked" as Rush....So it would be
hypocritical of me to be angry with him, or to want to prosecute him.
Paolo Pizzi
2004-04-06 08:10:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by William Graham
As a libertarian, I believe that everyone should have access to any
drug they want....The function of a medical doctor should be that of
an advisor, not a policeman who deals out the drugs for a fee.
You are in favor of the law of the jungle. Con artists should vote
you for president, you would make a heck of a country for them...
Hey, whoever gets conned is an idiot, the law should leave con
artists alone (like it isn't happening enough...) After all, if you get
conned is your fault, right?
Post by William Graham
I should be allowed to purchase and ingest anything I wish into my
system.....If I want to poison myself, it's nobodies business but my
own. We have given the physician far too much power in this
society.....In general, we give special interest groups power that
everyone should have.
Riiiiiight, let's go back to the good ole' times of everyone for
himself/herself, let the weak die, they're useless in your eugenetic
society. If you can't survive the law of the jungle, it means you
are an idiot. It doesn't matter that people like Albert Einstein
or Stephen Hawking would not survive, because Libertarians
don't really value intelligence over physical prowess...
Hey, let's all revert to apes, I'm sure you'd love such a society...
Post by William Graham
In my own case, I know druggists that will sell me anything I
want without a prescription. They, like me, are libertarians.
Actually they are CRIMINALS. But I see that you like the
type...
Post by William Graham
The only problem I have had is getting these people to
trust me to begin with. Once that hurdle is over, then I can deal
with them freely. In this respect I am just as, "crooked" as
Rush....
I never doubted that.
William Graham
2004-04-06 02:43:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark M
Post by Paolo Pizzi
Post by Paolo Pizzi
Yeah, especially when the preach on the evil of illegal
drugs while using them every day. Some "integrity"!!!
To be accurate....He became addicted to legal drugs.
Wrong, they're only legal when they are LEGALLY
PRESCRIBED. But it's funny how right-wingers twist
the truth...
A far cry from your friendly neighborhood crack-head.
Double standard, as usual...
Gross generalizations of convenience...as usual.
Rush screwed up badly.
But you would bolster your credibility if you would try to maintain some
hint of differentiation.
Yes....The only difference between legal and illegal drugs is who is
collecting the money....If the government is making the money, then the
drugs are, "legal"......Half the people I've known all of my life have been
hooked on some kind of drug.....Tobacco, alcohol, or some kind of uppers or
downers, or pain killers....Even I am addicted to tobacco, but I have been,
"on the wagon" for 20 years now.......Alcohol has killed four of my close
friends, but the government makes billions taxing it every year, and even
more taxing cigarettes. It costs about 25 cents to manufacture a pack of
cigarettes, but the government makes over a dollar a pack in taxes. Even the
mob isn't that greedy.....
Ray Fischer
2004-04-05 18:33:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Stern isn't a fighter for speech
freedoms. -He is interested ONLY in preserving his cash flow.
A lot of people feel the same way about Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, and
Coulter. At least Stern is largly harmless.
There will always be political disagreements.
We're not talking about a political talk show host here.
Smirk.
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Anyone who
sees him as some sort of free speech hero is a fool. Your
comparison
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
of
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Stern to political commentators who find opposition from those with
differing governmental/political goals is a poor comparison at
best.
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Those "political commentators" get rich selling lies and hatred.
That is a matter of opinion.
No it isn't.
Of course it is.
It is not a matter of opinion that they sell lies and hate. The lies
have been documented. The hate and bigotry is obvious.
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
That Stern degrades women (and anyone else he can) is not.
Whereas Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, and Coulter are outright bigots who
promote hatred for anybody who don't goose-step to their immoral
screeching. They degrade all people.
Again... An opinion to which you are entitled.
Not according to a lot of you right-wing fanatics.
I heard Rush give the mike to a liberal caller once for over 5 minutes.
So what?

What did Coulter call her book? "Treason"? And for what?
For daring to object to the right-wing's murderous hate.
Post by Mark M
He
(Rush) didn't interrupt the guy until he started repeating himself. I have
listened to a lot of liberal talk show hosts who couldn't stand still for a
conservative caller for more than about 10 seconds.
I have listened to a lot of right-wing talk show hosts that refuse to
let opposing viewpoints on.
Post by Mark M
There is one liberal
talk host in the Bay Area, (Ray Taliaferro) who called Ronald Regan a killer
for weeks every night,
He was a killer. He promoted terrorism in Central America for years.
Post by Mark M
when the KAL flight 800 was shot down by the Russians
back in the 80's. He (Ray) said that Regan was using it as a spy plane, and
as a result, was responsible for the deaths of over 300 people.
So you're trying guilt by association? You want to try and defend
David Duke? Oliver North? Pat Robertson?
--
Ray Fischer
***@sonic.net
George Kerby
2004-04-04 16:11:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
Some of us find Stern far less objectionable than a president who would
go
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
to war over some mythical weapons, spend many lives and dollars trying
to
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
find them, and then joke about it when it turns out he had his head up
his
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
ass.
Politicize all you like, but Stern isn't worth the piece of crap he flies
to
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
daily.
The FCC shouldn't HAVE to do anything. In a better world, this guy would
be
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
run out of town on a rail by people who are sick of his low-life antics.
Unfortunately, enough of the world we live in gravitates toward his brand
of
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
puke to keep him afloat in it. He may be rich, but he's riding the
sewers
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
to the bank and would do the world a favor by retiring.
A lot of people feel the same way about Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, and
Coulter.
Those people are targeted based on political vision for their country.
With Stern, it's simply an issue of a man who finds purpose in being as
sexually vile as he can get away with.
Sex is bad, but promoting racism and hatred and class warfare is just
fine. You can call for wars which kill tens of thousands of people,
but if you talk too much about making love then the FCC will shut you
down.
Post by Mark M
Stern isn't a fighter for speech
freedoms. -He is interested ONLY in preserving his cash flow.
A lot of people feel the same way about Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, and Coulter.
Polly want a cracker?
SAME ol' line of mindless drivel.
PLEASE come up with a LOGICAL thought, moron libbie!
PLEASE!!!


_______________________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
Ray Fischer
2004-04-04 21:03:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Kerby
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
Some of us find Stern far less objectionable than a president who would
go
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
to war over some mythical weapons, spend many lives and dollars trying
to
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
find them, and then joke about it when it turns out he had his head up
his
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
ass.
Politicize all you like, but Stern isn't worth the piece of crap he flies
to
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
daily.
The FCC shouldn't HAVE to do anything. In a better world, this guy would
be
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
run out of town on a rail by people who are sick of his low-life antics.
Unfortunately, enough of the world we live in gravitates toward his brand
of
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
puke to keep him afloat in it. He may be rich, but he's riding the
sewers
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
to the bank and would do the world a favor by retiring.
A lot of people feel the same way about Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, and
Coulter.
Those people are targeted based on political vision for their country.
With Stern, it's simply an issue of a man who finds purpose in being as
sexually vile as he can get away with.
Sex is bad, but promoting racism and hatred and class warfare is just
fine. You can call for wars which kill tens of thousands of people,
but if you talk too much about making love then the FCC will shut you
down.
Post by Mark M
Stern isn't a fighter for speech
freedoms. -He is interested ONLY in preserving his cash flow.
A lot of people feel the same way about Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, and Coulter.
Polly want a cracker?
SAME ol' line of mindless drivel.
PLEASE come up with a LOGICAL thought, moron libbie!
PLEASE!!!
Q.E.D.
--
Ray Fischer
***@sonic.net
Mark M
2004-04-04 22:26:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by George Kerby
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
Some of us find Stern far less objectionable than a president who would
go
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
to war over some mythical weapons, spend many lives and dollars trying
to
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
find them, and then joke about it when it turns out he had his head up
his
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
ass.
Politicize all you like, but Stern isn't worth the piece of crap he flies
to
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
daily.
The FCC shouldn't HAVE to do anything. In a better world, this guy would
be
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
run out of town on a rail by people who are sick of his low-life antics.
Unfortunately, enough of the world we live in gravitates toward his brand
of
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
puke to keep him afloat in it. He may be rich, but he's riding the
sewers
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
to the bank and would do the world a favor by retiring.
A lot of people feel the same way about Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, and
Coulter.
Those people are targeted based on political vision for their country.
With Stern, it's simply an issue of a man who finds purpose in being as
sexually vile as he can get away with.
Sex is bad, but promoting racism and hatred and class warfare is just
fine. You can call for wars which kill tens of thousands of people,
but if you talk too much about making love then the FCC will shut you
down.
Post by Mark M
Stern isn't a fighter for speech
freedoms. -He is interested ONLY in preserving his cash flow.
A lot of people feel the same way about Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, and Coulter.
Polly want a cracker?
SAME ol' line of mindless drivel.
PLEASE come up with a LOGICAL thought, moron libbie!
PLEASE!!!
Q.E.D.
For what it's worth, Ray, I kill-filed Kerby many moons ago.
I only saw his post via yours.
George Kerby
2004-04-04 15:57:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
Some of us find Stern far less objectionable than a president who would go
to war over some mythical weapons, spend many lives and dollars trying to
find them, and then joke about it when it turns out he had his head up his
ass.
Politicize all you like, but Stern isn't worth the piece of crap he flies to
daily.
The FCC shouldn't HAVE to do anything. In a better world, this guy would be
run out of town on a rail by people who are sick of his low-life antics.
Unfortunately, enough of the world we live in gravitates toward his brand of
puke to keep him afloat in it. He may be rich, but he's riding the sewers
to the bank and would do the world a favor by retiring.
A lot of people feel the same way about Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, and Coulter.
If you equate political talkers to profanity talkers, there is absolutely a
place for you on the short schoolbus. You know, Fisher, you are making a run
for being my second Ignorant Slut. Sure you are not sockpuppeting
Pizza-Face?


_______________________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
Paolo Pizzi
2004-04-04 20:29:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Kerby
If you equate political talkers to profanity talkers, there is
absolutely a place for you on the short schoolbus.
Hey idiot, you have been a poster-child for profanity -- including
racial and ethnic slurs -- on this NG, don't you think you are being
just a tad hypocritical? Naaaah, it would take SOME intelligence
to understand that, and you clearly have none.
Post by George Kerby
You know, Fisher, you are making a run
for being my second Ignorant Slut.
Were you saying about the "profanity talkers", moron?
Ray Fischer
2004-04-04 21:05:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Kerby
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Mark M
Post by Bowzah
Some of us find Stern far less objectionable than a president who would go
to war over some mythical weapons, spend many lives and dollars trying to
find them, and then joke about it when it turns out he had his head up his
ass.
Politicize all you like, but Stern isn't worth the piece of crap he flies to
daily.
The FCC shouldn't HAVE to do anything. In a better world, this guy would be
run out of town on a rail by people who are sick of his low-life antics.
Unfortunately, enough of the world we live in gravitates toward his brand of
puke to keep him afloat in it. He may be rich, but he's riding the sewers
to the bank and would do the world a favor by retiring.
A lot of people feel the same way about Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, and Coulter.
If you equate political talkers to profanity talkers,
Ah, saying the f-word is evil, but promoting hatred and killing and
murder is just fine.
--
Ray Fischer
***@sonic.net
Loading...