OT - HOWARD STERN SILENCED

Page 2 of 3  
On 6 Apr 2004 16:29:47 -0700 snipped-for-privacy@spamcop.net (Fred the Red Shirt) wrote in Message id:

Hello Fred the Red Shirt,
I'm conducting an impromptu study in outrageous Usenet stupidity, and I've chosen you to be my test subject, you lucky guy!
My question is: Why are you posting this follow-up in alt.flame, when the person you're replying to won't even see it, you cowardly tit? It's not as though the person you're replying to set the follow-ups out of his subscribed group or anything. Also, why is it that your post is entirely devoid of flame and off-topic for this newsgroup? I mean, If you're dim-witted enough to post a reply in a group where the person you're following up to doesn't even read, and you're not going to entertain me with a flame, why not use alt.test? For that matter, you might even use alt.personals where some other sad sack of wet shit much like yourself might read it and, who knows, you just might find a mate or something? Stranger things have happened...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

He'll see it if he wants to.

Thanks for keeping this thread OT for this ng.
--

FF

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 7 Apr 2004 13:52:14 -0700 snipped-for-privacy@spamcop.net (Fred the Red Shirt) wrote in Message id:

How do you figure that, dumbass?

Which one?
--
"I'm not a good flamer, I'm a great flamer. The best thing EVER. Better
than jesus handing you cinnamon toast, a million dollars, and a papal
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
    Greetings and Salutations...
wrote:

    *snip*.
    While I am not really interested in joining the contest, I have to point out one glaring factual error here. There is no lead in a "lead" pencil. The core is graphite, with a binder (Clay of some sort, I seem to recall...ah yes...here is a link: http://www.officemuseum.com/pencil_history.htm ) There may have been lead in the paint on the outside of the pencil, at one TIME, but, not for years.     Regards     Dave Mundt     
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The difference between fat, alcohol and cigarettes is one of use vs abuse.
Abuse of alcohol and fat (overuse, shall we say) is bad for you; simple _use_ of a cigarette is bad for you.
Renata
wrote: -snip-

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Bill Everette wrote: ...

Bloody well done.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Bravo, Bill. Well done.
--
It's probably time to change my sig line, eh?

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

From your original post, I had no doubt that it would.
Have a nice week...
Trent
What do you call a smart blonde? A golden retriever.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Not only that, but while you're free to speak, that doesn't include the free use of the broadcast equipment owned by someone else. Clear Channel owns the radio stations, they can change their mind about what they broadcast for any reason or for no reason at all. Stern has no say over what they choose to broadcast.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
If you are using this as a segue to argue the for\against the interpretation of the 2nd amendment. Feel free, but your point is lost on me.
"> Are you so sure it was inadvertent? "Am I sure it was inadvertent? Absolutely! Taking the context of the amendment, as well as the history and circumstances of the writers - ensuring "free speech" of contemporary filth was the farthest from their mind. They wanted folks of future generations to have the Constitutionally protected power to speak, print, and gather against government.
"> Yes."Jesus - ok... If you think the Founding Fathers would condone and protect via "Free Speech" most of what's on the radio, hehe - cripes - You win. I can't argue with that logic.
I'm a pretty basic fellow. Pretty shallow in about every area of life. So, I don't have the wisdom or heady ideals to argue such things... I guess for that reason, it seems pretty cut and dried to me. So some of your stuff is over my head.
"You have your idea of what does and doesn't qualify and so do most others. That is precisely why the First Amendment was written as an absolute."
You say the 1st is an "absolute?" Yet you also argue, "the Supreme Court ruled" on this 30 yrs ago. If something is an absolute, why rule or interpret? Absolute is absolute. Right? Are you saying there should be no question as to "Free Speech?" It's all relative, right?
But again, my point isn't morality. 1st amendment is about anti-government speech, print, etc - or at least in intent.
If you want to add one to allow Howard Stern to say anything he wants - feel free. Honestly, I don't care.
*And as to the "turn off the TV," or "watch your kids" arguments. That's pretty stupid - Yea, we all get the point, and agree - with "Change the channel," but please concede that it isn't that easy. About 3 months ago, I was shopping for WW books - Bill Hylton's router book in fact - tucked behind the WW books - I find an explicit book of erotic, lesbian photography. While it didn't bother me (ex-Navy guy), I wondered "Cripes! What if some kid found this?"
-jbd, Denver
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<Secret> wrote in message

Not true. There is a "perception" that their isn't an absolute (based on the "collective" argument and the Miller case - and that's a modern thing). Gun control groups place all their 2nd amendment arguments in that one basket. There is very little precedent or case law for any gun control legislation (It exists but has not been tested up to the supreme court). And that which is there (Emerson - at the federal appellate level) puts gun control legislation on tenuous ground (In effect clairifying that the Miller case may limit non military weapons (In that case a sawed of shotgun) - but allowing anything the military would use. Including automatic weapons) - placing the argument against gun control based on the collective rights argument on slippery ground. Just for clarification.
So in sum. Gun legislation either tries to skirt second amendment issues or is based on the sole supreme court case of Miller. In other words - until a Second Amendment case is presented to the supreme court on gun control merits - it is still an absolute right, and the well regulated milita clause is still a predicated clause.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'm saying I don't want to HAVE to roll up the window. Even though my Dad probably did when a hot rod pulled up next to him blaring Bo Diddley.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 01 Apr 2004 13:03:41 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com (BUB 209) wrote:

You do. <G>

Agreed, and that should be taken up with the store's management, not the FCC. Any retailer that has Howard on in the store is a bit lacking in the brains department, wouldn't you think?

Also agreed, along with music. In fact I was once sitting next to a vehicle at a red light with NPR's Saturday Afternoon OPERA cranked to the hilt! It was funny, but still annoying. Some of the localities in my area have "Boom Box" laws restricting car stereo volume. So far, it's just one more law that goes unenforced, right along with speed limits, use of dealer plates, motor vehicle exhaust noise laws, etc...
Barry
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
GOOD!!!
--
"Cartoons don't have any deep meaning.
They're just stupid drawings that give you a cheap laugh."
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

If this is true - I'm celebrating...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It was an April fools gag.. And a pretty funny one at that
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 01 Apr 2004 13:13:56 -0600, Secret Squirrel <Secret> wrote:

They did a great job, the fake show was very convincing. It snagged Fox News! <G>
Another station, WPLR in New Haven, had "man on the street" reporters interviewing motorists and truck drivers about Connecticut's "No smoking in your car" law that they said took effect today. Of course, there is no such law, at least not yet.
Some of the interviews were absolute classics. <G>
Barry
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
APRIL FOOL!!! Har har yuk yuk and other expressions of childish glee. Even made the local news this morning. Sigh.     gloom,     jo4hn
Gabe wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Dose he prefer power tools or hand tools?
--

FF

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I think he would prefer HAND tools.....
Some hotties hands that is

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.