I thought Conservatives just LOVED the Constitution?

[DamnYankee]

and he is upset because i am right, so he bags on my experience. it all he has, because he is wrong, he has to mock to make himself feel superior....

You realize, don't you, that he's a radio wannabee? He's obviously jealous of your better experience.

 

[Bfgrn]

YOU, sir, are the fucking moron. you might want to take a history lesson or two about the revolutionary war, like how PRIVATELY OWNED battleships participated in the war.

Now, IF you think the government would use fighters, bombers, carriers, and nuclear weapons against the citizenry, then hell fucking yes we should be able to own them as well.

IF you think they wouldn't, then no. BUT if they would employ machine guns, grenades, and OTHER pieces of armament that an individual COULD carry, then by all means we damn well should be able to own them.

Let me end this ridiculous banter...

IF you think the government would use fighters, bombers, carriers, and nuclear weapons against the citizenry, then hell fucking GET OUT of this country.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

You realize, don't you, that he's a radio wannabee? He's obviously jealous of your better experience.

that explains why he thinks NO ONE listens to the broadcast in the station...he obviously has no clue...i'm tempted to call into a local radio station and ask them...i would bet money they would agree with me, not zappa

its ludicrious to think radio stations do no have anyone montoring talk radio...and whats humorous, is that he ADMITTED there is a delay so someone can LISTEN for the words "fuck you"....he is just to ignorant to realize he just admitted i'm right because someone does in fact have to listen

 

[Bfgrn]

I've seen the video. there is no law that mandates a background check for a PRIVATE sale. what you SHOULD be concerned about is why Bloomberg hasn't been charged with breaking federal law by trying to straw purchase weapons.

WHY aren't you?

Then THAT is a HUGE problem...anyone can go to a gun show and buy a semiautomatic weapon that can wipe out a shopping mall...WTF kind of 'freedom' do you believe in, the freedom to kill and maim citizens of this nation, because it's a PRIVATE sale...???

 

[zappasguitar]

so now you're changing your stance. this is good, you're almost ready to admit you're wrong. now its, they do in fact listen, not just to every word. you actually admit they are listening for the words fuck you.

thats all i was saying, is that someone will indeed be forced to listen. it doesn't matter if its every word, someone will in fact be forced to listen. you could have saved your self all this time and effort frothing at the mouth and just admitted in the first place instead of falsely relying howard stern like a blithering idiot and claim NO ONE will be forced to listen which you now admit is not true.

you should work on your anger problems because you just made a complete ass out yourself over nothing.

Just as I expected...I calmly explain the way things work and you completely ignore what I wrote to make up more bullshit you claim I said.

How is it possible for you to be wrong so many times about the same thing?

I haven't changed my stance...the board ops at every single station across this country that carry Rush's show are not "forced to listen".

How can I make it any clearer than that?

The ONLY person who HAS TO LISTEN is Rush Limbaugh's producer back at the EIB broadcast center.

I've explained to Yurt why no one is "forced to listen" to pre-recorded audio when your local station broadcasts it. I've explained the procedure which frees up employees at your local station from being "forced to listen" and instead allows them to multi-task during live broadcasts.

Obviously his hatred of me won't allow him to admit he's been shown the error of his ways once again...it's kinda sad really.

Stand back and watch Yurt put all that he learned during his tenure at some college station to work...it should be pretty funny!

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Let me end this ridiculous banter...

IF you think the government would use fighters, bombers, carriers, and nuclear weapons against the citizenry, then hell fucking GET OUT of this country.

does NO work for you also?

bottom line, the founders wanted us to be equally armed as a standing army. If government weapons would be brought to bear upon us, we the people, then we the people should have same access to arms. If you don't like that, you may get the fuck out of my country.

 

[zappasguitar]

...you could have saved your self all this time and effort frothing at the mouth and just admitted in the first place instead of falsely relying howard stern like a blithering idiot and claim NO ONE will be forced to listen which you now admit is not true.

Who's "blithering"?

Who's the idiot?

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Then THAT is a HUGE problem...anyone can go to a gun show and buy a semiautomatic weapon that can wipe out a shopping mall...WTF kind of 'freedom' do you believe in, the freedom to kill and maim citizens of this nation, because it's a PRIVATE sale...???

once again, learn some history before you spout and sputter.

the brady law made some changes to how gun sales operated in this country. It removed the 'kitchen table FFL', meaning that any joe schmoe could sell guns out of his home as a business so that any FFL sale could be centralized to do background checks. The compromise to that was that PRIVATE sales could not be touched, in homes, parking lots, OR GUN SHOWS. This is not a loophole because the private seller is NOT a dealer with an FFL.

Now, as far as the freedom I believe in......it's the same as the founders believed in. they knew you cant stop criminal behavior because evil people exist. they knew you couldn't legislate morality because people have free will to ignore the laws. what law ever PREVENTED a crime? The framers KNEW that these incidents would be the price of freedom. One that they paid for with their own blood. If you don't like that kind of freedom, there are several other countries around the world, one just to the north of us, where you can live without that price of freedom. But you also get to have guns pointed at you because you're smoking.

http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2011/02/13/17262821.html

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

so no one in the studio has to listen?

Nope...they don't.

above zappa claims no one has to listen, before this, he claimed absolutely no one anywhere has to listen....now....its only the producer at the broadcast center for "rush's show"....what is dishonest is that not all stations have producers off site....so...zappa has in fact lied

Just as I expected...I calmly explain the way things work and you completely ignore what I wrote to make up more bullshit you claim I said.

How is it possible for you to be wrong so many times about the same thing?

I haven't changed my stance...the board ops at every single station across this country that carry Rush's show are not "forced to listen".

How can I make it any clearer than that?

The ONLY person who HAS TO LISTEN is Rush Limbaugh's producer back at the EIB broadcast center.

I've explained to Yurt why no one is "forced to listen" to pre-recorded audio when your local station broadcasts it. I've explained the procedure which frees up employees at your local station from being "forced to listen" and instead allows them to multi-task during live broadcasts.

Obviously his hatred of me won't allow him to admit he's been shown the error of his ways once again...it's kinda sad really.

Stand back and watch Yurt put all that he learned during his tenure at some college station to work...it should be pretty funny!

this is zappa's trail of deciet....

zappa - no one has to listen to anything
zappa - no one at the station has to listen to anything
zappa - well, the only person who has to listen is the producer, who isn't at the actual station

see how he has caved at every turn and done his best to weasel out of his original claim? so....we now have zappa admitting that a producer does in fact listen, unfortunately for zappa, many, many radio stations have the producer at the station, not some offsite location. further, it is disengious to split hairs because they are not "physically" at the station, the entire point is.........someone is forced to listen and zappa has finally admitted this......though oddly, he still thinks he is right.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Stats do show, SF, that the rich do not give according to their means in most cases. There are those, like Buffet, whom I greatly admire, he is a perfect example of a generous person.

I saw a stat the other day that the rich are giving 33% less than in the past, even though they have seen a sharp rise in their wealth. This is what I was talking about, having more doesn't necessarily translate into giving more.

Again Rana...

1) We are not talking about JUST the rich. Or are you suggesting that middle income people don't donate to charity?

2) Again... if you release money currently going towards the government programs and let people choose how to allocate them, it is naive to think that they won't have more to give to charity. That is simply a line used by the left to justify the government FORCING people to do what the politicians think is 'best for society'.

Take a look at the breakdown of our budget. Look how much is allocated to the Social Services and debt.

 

[Bfgrn]

once again, learn some history before you spout and sputter.

the brady law made some changes to how gun sales operated in this country. It removed the 'kitchen table FFL', meaning that any joe schmoe could sell guns out of his home as a business so that any FFL sale could be centralized to do background checks. The compromise to that was that PRIVATE sales could not be touched, in homes, parking lots, OR GUN SHOWS. This is not a loophole because the private seller is NOT a dealer with an FFL.

Now, as far as the freedom I believe in......it's the same as the founders believed in. they knew you cant stop criminal behavior because evil people exist. they knew you couldn't legislate morality because people have free will to ignore the laws. what law ever PREVENTED a crime? The framers KNEW that these incidents would be the price of freedom. One that they paid for with their own blood. If you don't like that kind of freedom, there are several other countries around the world, one just to the north of us, where you can live without that price of freedom. But you also get to have guns pointed at you because you're smoking.

http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2011/02/13/17262821.html

I already said 'I don't have a problem with citizens owning firearms for their protection.

BUT...I do have a problem with nut-bags who believe the 2nd amendment is a license to have the same weaponry as the US Army, or is against any restrictions on killing power.

Our founding fathers could have never imagined the weapons of mass destruction that exists today.

Honestly, it is 2nd amendment radical nut jobs like you that could make me retract my support for the 2nd amendment. I don't want any citizen within a thousand miles of me possessing a rocket launcher, much less a thermonuclear device. You are an extreme extremist...

 

[Bonestorm]

Again Rana...

1) We are not talking about JUST the rich. Or are you suggesting that middle income people don't donate to charity?

They don't contribute enough to satisfy demand for services of charitable organizations, particularly in a world where the government does not provide assistance for low income folks.

2) Again... if you release money currently going towards the government programs and let people choose how to allocate them, it is naive to think that they won't have more to give to charity. That is simply a line used by the left to justify the government FORCING people to do what the politicians think is 'best for society'.

Take a look at the breakdown of our budget. Look how much is allocated to the Social Services and debt.

If you got rid of the tax deduction for charitable organizations people would contribute a whole hell of a lot less than they do now. There are lots and lots of studies on this subject. Pretending otherwise is silly.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

I already said 'I don't have a problem with citizens owning firearms for their protection.

BUT...I do have a problem with nut-bags who believe the 2nd amendment is a license to have the same weaponry as the US Army, or is against any restrictions on killing power.

Our founding fathers could have never imagined the weapons of mass destruction that exists today.

This is a stupid argument for the simple fact that the framers had just removed themselves from a government/standing army that was trying to disarm them to make it easier to control them. 'shall not be infringed' was to ensure that what they had just fought for would never happen again. Therefore, it's irrelevant to the founders 'imagination' of weapons, because they believed that the people should always have the ability to deter a standing army, should it ever get oppressive.

Honestly, it is 2nd amendment radical nut jobs like you that could make me retract my support for the 2nd amendment. I don't want any citizen within a thousand miles of me possessing a rocket launcher, much less a thermonuclear device. You are an extreme extremist...

it is idiots like you that make arguing the 2nd Amendment a task. Answer a simple question. Would the government ever use a nuclear weapon against it's own citizenry on it's own soil?

 

[zappasguitar]

above zappa claims no one has to listen, before this, he claimed absolutely no one anywhere has to listen....now....its only the producer at the broadcast center for "rush's show"....what is dishonest is that not all stations have producers off site....so...zappa has in fact lied



this is zappa's trail of deciet....

zappa - no one has to listen to anything
zappa - no one at the station has to listen to anything
zappa - well, the only person who has to listen is the producer, who isn't at the actual station

see how he has caved at every turn and done his best to weasel out of his original claim? so....we now have zappa admitting that a producer does in fact listen, unfortunately for zappa, many, many radio stations have the producer at the station, not some offsite location. further, it is disengious to split hairs because they are not "physically" at the station, the entire point is.........someone is forced to listen and zappa has finally admitted this......though oddly, he still thinks he is right.

ZOMG...I should have realized anyone as hate-filled as you would resort to outright lying once he'd been shown to be wrong.

I never said "no one has to listen to anything..."

I never said "no one at the station has to listen to anything..."

But why should that stop you from making up more bullshit?

You've changed the "debate" from "do station employees listen" to "has to listen" to " forced to listen"...if you weren't such a petulant little whiner, you'd be able to admit you'e tried since the beginning of this discussion to change the details.

One last thing then we're done...If a station carries a syndicated show like Rush's or Sean's or ANYONE's, then NO LOCAL STATION EMPLOYEE is forced to listen...it's that simple...be a grownup and call a station. Ask them. Back up your bullshit with some action for a change.

Rush's producer isn't "forced" to listen...he does it because the pay is great...so you see...NO ONE IS FORCED TO LISTEN.

Game...set...and match to ZAPPA!!!

 

[zappasguitar]

You realize, don't you, that he's a radio wannabee? He's obviously jealous of your better experience.

Gee...how did Yurtard just put it?

Oh yeah...DY "is upset because I am right, so he bags on my experience. it all he has, because he is wrong, he has to mock to make himself feel superior."

 

[Bfgrn]

This is a stupid argument for the simple fact that the framers had just removed themselves from a government/standing army that was trying to disarm them to make it easier to control them. 'shall not be infringed' was to ensure that what they had just fought for would never happen again. Therefore, it's irrelevant to the founders 'imagination' of weapons, because they believed that the people should always have the ability to deter a standing army, should it ever get oppressive.



it is idiots like you that make arguing the 2nd Amendment a task. Answer a simple question. Would the government ever use a nuclear weapon against it's own citizenry on it's own soil?

If they ever would, I would paint a target on the top of my house. I want to be vaporized, not suffer a death of agony.

IF you really believe our founding fathers would sanction citizens possessing weapons that could take down a commercial airliner, or an armored tank, then THESE are YOUR founding fathers...

 

[SmarterthanYou]

If they ever would, I would paint a target on the top of my house. I want to be vaporized, not suffer a death of agony.

better to live on your knees than die on your feet, right?

IF you really believe our founding fathers would sanction citizens possessing weapons that could take down a commercial airliner, or an armored tank, then THESE are YOUR founding fathers...

seriously?

that is some seriously screwed up logic. how can you possibly equate a group of people that believed that the ultimate power should reside within the hands of the people to a group of people who felt that arms in the hands of civilians was intolerable?

 

[Bfgrn]

better to live on your knees than die on your feet, right?



seriously?

that is some seriously screwed up logic. how can you possibly equate a group of people that believed that the ultimate power should reside within the hands of the people to a group of people who felt that arms in the hands of civilians was intolerable?

I would rather die with courage than live in fear... because folks like you that are in that state of fear have already stopped living.

You have already acknowledged a criminal element exists in society. WHAT would stop those same evil people you acknowledge from taking down a commercial airliner with your family on board? If anyone can possess the same firepower as the government, then THOSE same people you want to protect your family from will be your demise.

You really should limit your 2nd amendment argument to the right to protect your family and property from burglars etc. But you carry it to the level of the absolute absurd.

 

[Bfgrn]

Once again you show your ignorance. You try to misconstrue what I wrote and then label all libertarians by what you imagined was said.

There is nothing wrong at all with having those programs. Provided we limit them to those that truly need them and don't simply provide blanket coverage to everyone.



tell me genius... if the founders truly intended such things for our government.... why is it they didn't implement such programs?

You again spout off nonsense about Libertarians. Libertarians are ALL about personal responsibility you fucking moron. We have no problem with paying taxes for those things the government does need to do.

You have a very odd idea of what it means to live in a 'civil' society.

Yea, George Washington's doctors should have sent him for an MRI and CAT scan before they began his bloodletting, placing a preparation of dried beetles on his throat and administering calomel (a mercury-based emetic) and tartar rectally. Too bad Medicare wasn't invented yet.

You have a very odd idea of 'living'...it requires a pulse and breathing, something you will leave your brother to others to keep.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

ZOMG...I should have realized anyone as hate-filled as you would resort to outright lying once he'd been shown to be wrong.

I never said "no one has to listen to anything..."

I never said "no one at the station has to listen to anything..."

But why should that stop you from making up more bullshit?

You've changed the "debate" from "do station employees listen" to "has to listen" to " forced to listen"...if you weren't such a petulant little whiner, you'd be able to admit you'e tried since the beginning of this discussion to change the details.

One last thing then we're done...If a station carries a syndicated show like Rush's or Sean's or ANYONE's, then NO LOCAL STATION EMPLOYEE is forced to listen...it's that simple...be a grownup and call a station. Ask them. Back up your bullshit with some action for a change.

Rush's producer isn't "forced" to listen...he does it because the pay is great...so you see...NO ONE IS FORCED TO LISTEN.

Game...set...and match to ZAPPA!!!

NOWHERE did it force anyone to listen to anything they didn't want to...the "off" button on your TV and radio always worked, even while the "Fairness Doctrine" was law.

i haven't changed anything and i don't hate you...its a pity you feel that when someone proves your lies and that you're wrong that hate you, that just shows how full of hate and anger you are, you can't handle criticism....and you just got busted in the same lie again, which is weird because i posted the links to the posts in the post you just responded to

Originally Posted by Yurt
so no one in the studio has to listen?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZappasGuitar
Nope...they don't.

and you also said earlier, no one is forced to listen to anything....another lie...that is why i asked the above question and then you responded to with "nope...they don't"....and now you're claiming the producer doesn't have to listen, but he does because the pay is great....that is such a dishonest argument. its actually quite pathetic. and so are your lies.

and yet you have the temerity to deny saying no one has to listen to anything? and then proclaim yourself a winner?

debating is near futile because you frequently lie about what you said. like when you claimed i plagiarized, then two hours later claimed you never claimed i plagairized. i don't get why you have to lie to win a point.