Democrats block amendment to prevent Fairness Doctrine

[maineman]

How do you know it was not a combination of both?

KC could be trying to make money and get the tree huggers to buy the machines

After all, the liberal media gave alot of coverage to the nuts who said we should limit the use of toilet paper to save the planet

Then a month lor so later KC rolls out the machine

KC's customers are not tree huggers. They are shopping malls and restaurants and airports.

and I know that the singularly premier motivation for all corporations is the maximizng of shareholder wealth.

That was the first and foremost motivation of KC. period. Hannity never even indicated that profit had anything to do with it. Hannity portrayed this as an edict from the liberal nanny state.

And when I called the number to complain, his staff asked me my name, city, state and topic that I wished to discuss, and when I told them I wanted to argue the point about KC, they prompty hung up on me. so much for debating ideas on the airwaves.

 

[maineman]

and the op eds on the front pages of the NY Times and Washington Post? Or the slanted coverage from the networks and NPR?

Libs have 95% of the meida in their pocket - and they whine about the 5% that is talk radio

shall we both stop our whining about media bias? yes or no?

 

[red states rule]

shall we both stop our whining about media bias? yes or no?

As far as your post how PBS is not biased

PBS Bans Moderate Muslims Because of Gaffney
By Sharon Hughes | July 22, 2007 - 17:57 ET


Today FOX News Specials with E.D. Hill aired the film banned by PBS, "Muslims Against Jihad".

According to FOX: "It was commissioned as part of the PBS series "America at the Crossroads" about the post 9/11 world, but PBS executives rejected it."

Why? PBS said it was because the filmmakers were "alarmist, overreaching and unfair."

The filmmakers, which include Frank Gaffney, however say it was because of liberal bias at PBS. One of the filmmakers said he was asked by PBS, "Don't you screen the politics of those you use?" (specifically of Gaffney).

The film includes stories of moderate Muslims who are against Jihad in France, the banning of which is reminescent of Steve Ermerson's film, "Jihad in America - Terrorists Among Us," the 1994 PBS Documentary on terrorist cells in America, that was banned by PBS from further broadcasts.

Question: Ah, isn't PBS public broadcasting?

Oh, and it was financed with $675,000 of taxpayers' money.

Sharon Hughes is Founder and President of The Center for Changing Worldviews and a radio talk show host on KDIA in San Francisco, RIGHTALK.com, NPLR and Salem Web Network’s Oneplace.com. Her column appears in many recognized news sites and publications, including FRONTPAGEMAG. Websites www.changingworldviews.com, WOMANTalk.us, and Blog

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/sharon-hughes/2007/07/22/pbs-bans-moderate-muslims-because-gaffney

 

[maineman]

shall we both stop our whining about media bias? yes or no?

I guess the answer is no?

If it IS no, they quit your bitching when the left pushes the fairness doctrine.

plain and simple.

 

[red states rule]

I guess the answer is no?

If it IS no, they quit your bitching when the left pushes the fairness doctrine.

plain and simple.

It seems you are ready to throw in the towel when you can't counter the facts

The truth is, libs can't compete with conservatives the the world of talk radio so they want to fiddle with the free market and force people to listen to what they would otherwise not want to listen to

 

[maineman]

It seems you are ready to throw in the towel when you can't counter the facts

The truth is, libs can't compete with conservatives the the world of talk radio so they want to fiddle with the free market and force people to listen to what they would otherwise not want to listen to

FACTS? You are the one who claims that KC is an agent of the liberal nanny state!

 

[red states rule]

FACTS? You are the one who claims that KC is an agent of the liberal nanny state!

As I said, KC could be doing both

Making a profit and appeasing the tree huggers

 

[maineman]

As I said, KC could be doing both

Making a profit and appeasing the tree huggers

they COULD be?

That is certainly not what Hannity said!

And, if a firm can gain market share, why would they care who they appease or don't appease? Their mandate is maximizing shareholder wealth. period.

Hannity stated that KC's actions were done by order of an edict from the liberal nanny state. and his staff hung up on me when I called to complain.

 

[red states rule]

they COULD be?

That is certainly not what Hannity said!

And, if a firm can gain market share, why would they care who they appease or don't appease? Their mandate is maximizing shareholder wealth. period.

Hannity stated that KC's actions were done by order of an edict from the liberal nanny state. and his staff hung up on me when I called to complain.

Once again, a company out to make a profit

Given your language - I would hang up on you as well

 

[maineman]

Once again, a company out to make a profit

Given your language - I would hang up on you as well

I am completely for a company making a profit.

I am completely appalled by a conservative hack on the radio attempting to portray KC's BUSINESS decision as something forced on them by the "liberal nanny state".

I complained about the assertion and told them that I wanted to talk to Sean about how he could so misstate such an event. I wanted him to tell me what was wrong about KC wanting to make a profit and I wanted him to tell me where the liberal nanny state directed any of the actions of corporate business. his staff hung up. clearly, he choses not to field tough questions and prefers to trade "you're a great american" adoration with his koolaid soaked faithful.

 

[red states rule]

I am completely for a company making a profit.

I am completely appalled by a conservative hack on the radio attempting to portray KC's BUSINESS decision as something forced on them by the "liberal nanny state".

I complained about the assertion and told them that I wanted to talk to Sean about how he could so misstate such an event. I wanted him to tell me what was wrong about KC wanting to make a profit and I wanted him to tell me where the liberal nanny state directed any of the actions of corporate business. his staff hung up. clearly, he choses not to field tough questions and prefers to trade "you're a great american" adoration with his koolaid soaked faithful.

Lets see, libs speak out how we need to use less toilet paper

A company come out with a machine that does just that

Sean says KC is responding to the demand

MM shits his pants

Please use only 5 sheets - do your part to save the Earth

 

[maineman]

Lets see, libs speak out how we need to use less toilet paper

A company come out with a machine that does just that

Sean says KC is responding to the demand

MM shits his pants

Please use only 5 sheets - do your part to save the Earth

Sean didn't say that KC was responding to any market demand. he said it was an edict from the "liberal nanny STATE". And your own link about this issue clearly stated that KC's introduction of this product was aimed at increasing market share in the "away from home toilet paper market".

And his staff hung up on a caller who wanted to do something other than kiss his ass and call him a great american. imagine that!

 

[red states rule]

Sean didn't say that KC was responding to any market demand. he said it was an edict from the "liberal nanny STATE". And your own link about this issue clearly stated that KC's introduction of this product was aimed at increasing market share in the "away from home toilet paper market".

And his staff hung up on a caller who wanted to do something other than kiss his ass and call him a great american. imagine that!

The way Dems have attacked many other companies - KC was not taking any chances

They are appeasing the enviro wackos and making money at the same time

 

[maineman]

The way Dems have attacked many other companies - KC was not taking any chances

They are appeasing the enviro wackos and making money at the same time

do you think there is an approach that KC might take that would allow them to INCREASE their market share even further in the lucrative away-from-home toilet paper market that would involve strategies that would displease the environmental movement?

 

[red states rule]

do you think there is an approach that KC might take that would allow them to INCREASE their market share even further in the lucrative away-from-home toilet paper market that would involve strategies that would displease the environmental movement?

Boy the libs are never happy

A company does what they want them fo, Sean points out the connection - and you flip out

 

[maineman]

Boy the libs are never happy

A company does what they want them fo, Sean points out the connection - and you flip out

Sean claimed that KC's actions were as a result of an "edict" from the "liberal nanny state."


That is a lie.

That is my only point. If you care to acknowledge it, we can move on.

and can you please try to ANSWER this question:

do you think there is an approach that KC might take that would allow them to INCREASE their market share even further in the lucrative away-from-home toilet paper market that would involve strategies that would displease the environmental movement?

 

[red states rule]

Sean claimed that KC's actions were as a result of an "edict" from the "liberal nanny state."


That is a lie.

That is my only point. If you care to acknowledge it, we can move on.

and can you please try to ANSWER this question:

do you think there is an approach that KC might take that would allow them to INCREASE their market share even further in the lucrative away-from-home toilet paper market that would involve strategies that would displease the environmental movement?

I am looking at the events of the recent months. The liberla media was reporting the comments of the enviro wackos about using less toilet paper - KC comes out with a machine that does just that

Sean points out the connection, and you have a cow

Seems Sean struck a nerve with you

 

[maineman]

I am looking at the events of the recent months. The liberla media was reporting the comments of the enviro wackos about using less toilet paper - KC comes out with a machine that does just that

Sean points out the connection, and you have a cow

Seems Sean struck a nerve with you

if you had heard Sean, you would know he did not "point out a connection". Hannity stated that KC's actions were as a result of an "edict" from the "liberal nanny STATE". that is a lie. you cannot admit it.

 

[red states rule]

if you had heard Sean, you would know he did not "point out a connection". Hannity stated that KC's actions were as a result of an "edict" from the "liberal nanny STATE". that is a lie. you cannot admit it.

I did not hear the broadcast - and you are hardly an unbiased source

I do see the connection and I suspect Sean was pointing out that connection

 

[maineman]

I did not hear the broadcast - and you are hardly an unbiased source

I do see the connection and I suspect Sean was pointing out that connection

I am telling you that Hannity called KC's actions an edict from the liberal nanny state. Are you calling me a liar when you did not even hear the broadcast and I did?