Democrats block amendment to prevent Fairness Doctrine

[dilloduck]

Yup, but it's not the only motive.

How about linking us to the other "motives".

 

[Gunny]

Yup, but it's not the only motive.

So, are you saying Dems are trying to corner the asswipe market?

 

[ReillyT]

So, are you saying Dems are trying to corner the asswipe market?

Ohhhh.... I resent the implications of that statement. Bad GunnyL!

 

[Nevadamedic]

So, are you saying Dems are trying to corner the asswipe market?

They already did that making Harry Reid the Majority leader!

 

[Nevadamedic]

How about linking us to the other "motives".

If I had links I would have posted them.

 

[Gunny]

Ohhhh.... I resent the implications of that statement. Bad GunnyL!

I just figured if they were, I could understand NevadaMedic's concern ...

 

[dilloduck]

If I had links I would have posted them.

In other words--you're just relying on your "Liberals all suck" mentality ? Why don't you expand your horizons a bit instead of playing petty partisan games?

 

[red states rule]

It goes along with Al Gore and his whoe enviornmental stuff. I'm sure they are going to be getting something from the Deomcrats for it.

You mean the same Al Gore who flys in private jets, owns four mansions, uses 20 times the energy of the average American home, and riding in limos - all while telling us to cut back on our energy use?

We would not know about this if not for talk radio. The liberal media, for the most part, ignores stroies like these.

 

[red states rule]

They already did that making Harry Reid the Majority leader!

and San Fran Nan Speaker of the House

 

[maineman]

I notice that no conservative can even begin to honestly address the inconsistency of saying, on one hand, that conservative talk radio "exposes the truth" and then reconciling that with Sean Hannity taking a story about unabashed corporate greed whereby American businesses will attempt to increase their profits by limiting the toilet paper it allows customers to use in public restaurants and trying to spin that into something about the "liberal nanny state".

Let's all run away from that glaring inconsistency....

run away or change the subject, because it is quite clear that no one on the right is going to be able to realistically explain it.

 

[red states rule]

I notice that no conservative can even begin to honestly address the inconsistency of saying, on one hand, that conservative talk radio "exposes the truth" and then reconciling that with Sean Hannity taking a story about unabashed corporate greed whereby American businesses will attempt to increase their profits by limiting the toilet paper it allows customers to use in public restaurants and trying to spin that into something about the "liberal nanny state".

Let's all run away from that glaring inconsistency....

run away or change the subject, because it is quite clear that no one on the right is going to be able to realistically explain it.

Here is the REAL reason why libs want to silence conservative talk radio

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1506331/posts


The Air America station in Washington DC is in LAST PLACE

Meanwhile the station with Rush and Sean are #1 when it comes to talk radio stations

 

[red states rule]

BTW Fox News continues to destroy the left leaning CNN and MSNBC

http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2007/07/03/q2-2007-primetime-channel-ranker/

 

[maineman]

I notice that no conservative can even begin to honestly address the inconsistency of saying, on one hand, that conservative talk radio "exposes the truth" and then reconciling that with Sean Hannity taking a story about unabashed corporate greed whereby American businesses will attempt to increase their profits by limiting the toilet paper it allows customers to use in public restaurants and trying to spin that into something about the "liberal nanny state".
Let's all run away from that glaring inconsistency....

run away or change the subject, because it is quite clear that no one on the right is going to be able to realistically explain it.

and RSR steps up and makes my case for me!

 

[red states rule]

and RSR steps up and makes my case for me!

Yea, I blew your ass out of water with facts

 

[maineman]

no...

you ran away from a clear example of Hannity spinning his ass off. and posted a bunch of cut and paste articles to blow smoke into the room and avoid talking about the point that I raised.

I predicted you would and you did just as I predicted.

thanks.

 

[red states rule]

no...

you ran away from a clear example of Hannity spinning his ass off. and posted a bunch of cut and paste articles to blow smoke into the room and avoid talking about the point that I raised.

I predicted you would and you did just as I predicted.

thanks.

hannity smokes the libs - which is why you hate him

 

[maineman]

hannity smokes the libs - which is why you hate him

can't seem to address the point I made? I didn't think so.

 

[red states rule]

can't seem to address the point I made? I didn't think so.

Is this what you are ranting about?

Even the Clinton News Network was not excitied


CNN's 'Your Money' Not Enthralled With New Automatic Toilet Paper Dispenser
By Joe Steigerwald | July 16, 2007 - 17:34 ET
“Alright, now for the moment the world has been waiting for.”


These were the words from Ali Velshi, co-host of last Saturday’s “Your Money” on CNN, to introduce a segment on a brand new invention: the automatic toilet paper dispenser, the newest contender for the title of “least needed product ever.”


Now don’t worry, Ali was obviously not serious with the little teaser, so please, halt those nasty e-mails to CNN.


This new product was reviewed by Allen Wassler, who was obviously (for good reason) less than thrilled about it.


According to the segment, the automatic toilet paper dispenser is supposed to cut down on the amount of toilet paper that Americans use, which Ali helpfully pointed out, is double what Europeans use. A fact bemoaned by co-host Christine Romans who commented


“We use twice as much everything as Europeans.”


(I might be tempted to insert an obvious “European people need to use more soap” joke here, but that’s just too easy.)


While co-host Christine Romans didn’t seem too impressed with the new product, she did hint that she thought it was a good idea and seemed hopeful that it would help reduce American’s wanton use of T.P. saying


“I think it’s an interesting idea, maybe it will help us consume a little bit less.”


Mr. Wassler on the other hand…?

“A quota on toilet paper, I don’t believe it… Where’s this country going to?”

Good question.

Although the machine regulates how many squares come out per push, there is nothing that prevents people from pushing again and again and there’s nothing that allows for just one square to come out each time. (There goes the Sheryl Crow endorsement.)

You know the global warming hysteria is getting out of hand when the freedom of choice now includes debates over how much toilet paper to use.

http://newsbusters.org/node/14145

 

[maineman]

the product was introduced by Kimberly-Clark in an effort to gain market share - and thus PROFITS - in the marketplace (not because of the "liberal nanny sate") It is being marketed to businesses who are willing to inconvenience the public and restrict our use of toilet paper while in their establishements in an effort to reduce their paper products COSTS and thus INCREASE their PROFITS.

To cast this as yet another example of the "liberal nanny state" trying to regulate people's behavior is not a truthful assertion. It is shameless rightwing spin from the master....

could you explain why Kimberly-Clark would NOT take steps to increase their profits...can you explain why businesses would NOT take steps to cut their costs? Can you explain how either of those motives and the steps taken are in any way directed or caused by interference from the liberal nanny state?

 

[red states rule]

the product was introduced by Kimberly-Clark in an effort to gain market share - and thus PROFITS - in the marketplace (not because of the "liberal nanny sate") It is being marketed to businesses who are willing to inconvenience the public and restrict our use of toilet paper while in their establishements in an effort to reduce their paper products COSTS and thus INCREASE their PROFITS.

To cast this as yet another example of the "liberal nanny state" trying to regulate people's behavior is not a truthful assertion. It is shameless rightwing spin from the master....

could you explain why Kimberly-Clark would NOT take steps to increase their profits...can you explain why businesses would NOT take steps to cut their costs? Can you explain how either of those motives and the steps taken are in any way directed or caused by interference from the liberal nanny state?

OMG - a company wants to make a profit

Oh the inhumanity of it all!!!!!!!!!!!!!