drnykterstein Posted October 21, 2010 Posted October 21, 2010 Again, you don't know: 1. The airwaves belong to the FCC, not NPR 2. The FCC can in fact censor whoever they want, however they want. 3. The fact that NPR gets its funding from the government, had hired Juan Williams specifically for his opinions, and has now SPECIFICALLY fired him for them, has put the government in the censorship business, like it or not, and in a way that is outside of the FCC's scope. 4. If NPR had fired Williams for showing up late to a meeting, none of this would be a problem. Liberals aren't known to be that smart however, as evidenced by you on a daily basis here. Keep talking conner, we will see who is ignorant and who is merely toying with you. In summary, OCinBuffalo thinks that NPR is the United States Government.
DC Tom Posted October 21, 2010 Posted October 21, 2010 DC Tom is the ultimate nit-picker. He nit-picks far too much. Often as a result he misses the point entirely as he sits there smugly thinking he right because he nit-picked an unimportant detail. The difference between "telling the truth" and "expressing an opinion" is not nitpicking, you retard. ****, you try (and fail) to make that distinction every single time you post your drivel about "science"...now suddenly it's not true?
drnykterstein Posted October 21, 2010 Posted October 21, 2010 The difference between "telling the truth" and "expressing an opinion" is not nitpicking, you retard. ****, you try (and fail) to make that distinction every single time you post your drivel about "science"...now suddenly it's not true? I didn't say you were wrong about that. It's a correct assertion on your part. I said the detail is negligible and unimportant to Magox's overall point (not that I even agree with Magox). But more than that I think you do this very frequently on all topics, you nit-pick unimportant details and miss the larger point.
OCinBuffalo Posted October 21, 2010 Posted October 21, 2010 In summary, OCinBuffalo thinks that NPR is the United States Government. NPR is funded by the US Government. IF they aren't responsible for NPR, then they also aren't responsible for what Blackwater does. So, you are now not allowed to complain if Blackwater kills civilians. That is logic conner, feel its sting.
Magox Posted October 21, 2010 Author Posted October 21, 2010 (edited) What are you talking about? Aren't you happy? After all, according to you Juan Williams is an Islamaphobe, and therefore his firing is a good thing. At least that's what you said last time. Feel free to change your mind though. Oh, and go ahead and fill up another post with BLAH! That will remind us all exactly how much weight we should give your opinions on this issue. The difference between "telling the truth" and "expressing an opinion" is not nitpicking, you retard. ****, you try (and fail) to make that distinction every single time you post your drivel about "science"...now suddenly it's not true? I know I'm in the right when Conner agrees with you, and what's worse is that I agree with Conner when he said you nit-pick unimportant details and miss the larger point. Which makes me Edited October 21, 2010 by Magox
OCinBuffalo Posted October 21, 2010 Posted October 21, 2010 Just busting balls. I was relating, poorly, what we were talking about in another thread, regarding the Islamic world's problems to this. But really, this is about liberal hypocrisy, Political Correctness, false premises and circular logic, not you.
Peace Posted October 21, 2010 Posted October 21, 2010 I know I'm in the right when Conner agrees with you, and what's worse is that I agree with Which makes me Conner is your knight in shining armor!
RkFast Posted October 21, 2010 Posted October 21, 2010 I didn't say you were wrong about that. It's a correct assertion on your part. I said the detail is negligible and unimportant to Magox's overall point (not that I even agree with Magox). But more than that I think you do this very frequently on all topics, you nit-pick unimportant details and miss the larger point. Not to defend Tom...but I think he "gets" the "larger point" that you should rent yourself out as a crash test dummy quite well.
drnykterstein Posted October 21, 2010 Posted October 21, 2010 I know I'm in the right when Conner agrees with you. I don't agree with him either. I think the two of your are crazy, and debating stupid ****. But really the true story of this thread is OC's post. Oh goodness, I am at a loss of how to mock that post to the full length that it deserves.
Magox Posted October 21, 2010 Author Posted October 21, 2010 Conner is your knight in shining armor! Take that back!
drnykterstein Posted October 21, 2010 Posted October 21, 2010 Not to defend Tom...but I think he "gets" the "larger point" that you should rent yourself out as a crash test dummy quite well. Ok Wackaenrythread3rdling, whatever you say.
erynthered Posted October 21, 2010 Posted October 21, 2010 Oh goodness, I am at a loss of how to mock that post to the full length that it deserves. Oh Goodness?? Who says that **** anymore? Hey fellas. Conner's a 70 year old woman. :lol:
OCinBuffalo Posted October 21, 2010 Posted October 21, 2010 I don't agree with him either. I think the two of your are crazy, and debating stupid ****. But really the true story of this thread is OC's post. Oh goodness, I am at a loss of how to mock that post to the full length that it deserves. No you simply lack the critical thinking skills, and understanding of logic that you would have gotten had you passed Course II, to be able to mock it properly. It can be mocked, but not by you. As I said, I'm toying with you.
DC Tom Posted October 21, 2010 Posted October 21, 2010 I don't agree with him either. Of course you don't. If you accepted opinions and facts were two different things, you'd have to admit you're full of ****. I think the two of your are crazy, and debating stupid ****. But really the true story of this thread is OC's post. Oh goodness, I am at a loss of how to mock that post to the full length that it deserves. Talk about missing the !@#$ing point. How you got "NPR is the federal government" from OC's post is absolutely mind-boggling...and you somehow think THAT'S the point of the thread? I know I'm in the right when Conner agrees with you, and what's worse is that I agree with Conner when he said [i nitpick details]. Generally, there's two reasons for that: 1) I agree with the larger point, and hence see no point in discussing it. 2) The details do actually matter. For example: the detail of whether or not Williams expressed a personal opinion or a fact is kind-of an important one.
OCinBuffalo Posted October 21, 2010 Posted October 21, 2010 Talk about missing the !@#$ing point. How you got "NPR is the federal government" from OC's post is absolutely mind-boggling...and you somehow think THAT'S the point of the thread? You are coming awfully close to ruining my fun, now cut it out. Generally, there's two reasons for that: 1) I agree with the larger point, and hence see no point in discussing it. 2) The details do actually matter. For example: the detail of whether or not Williams expressed a personal opinion or a fact is kind-of an important one. Especially when one considers Williams was hired specifically to provide personal opinions, both by Fox and NPR. There is nothing libelous, obscene, or intentionally distressing about what Williams said, so there's no way he should have been fired. I would love to be the "wrongful termination" lawyers on this one = easy money. Oh, and let's remember: Imus picked up SERIOUS ratings over his firing/re-hiring. So, Williams is sure to be rolling in cash and 10x more relevant when all is said and done. Williams' opinions will now receive even more national attention than they would ever have had he not been fired. Once again, liberals will get the EXACT OPPOSITE of what they intend. Hysterical. When will they learn? If conner is a sound representative of liberals? Never.
Adam Posted October 21, 2010 Posted October 21, 2010 I think the guy's statement in the article is ludicrous. If they were terrorists and wanted to do something, wouldn't they try to be inconspicuous, particularly in such an Islamophobic country?
RkFast Posted October 21, 2010 Posted October 21, 2010 I think the guy's statement in the article is ludicrous. If they were terrorists and wanted to do something, wouldn't they try to be inconspicuous, particularly in such an Islamophobic country? Thats true. Williams' statement make little sense, taken on its face.
OCinBuffalo Posted October 21, 2010 Posted October 21, 2010 I think the guy's statement in the article is ludicrous. If they were terrorists and wanted to do something, wouldn't they try to be inconspicuous, particularly in such an Islamophobic country? Even if I agreed with your premise, which I don't, are we supposed to turn a blind eye every time we see most of 1st class occupied by middle-eastern types? That's only going to happen when the Islamic terror threat is gone. That's not our job, that's Muslim's job. Until they handle their business, we have to handle ours. I can tell you, however ridiculous I think it is, I still get the "nod" from other people when we see that on a plane, and, for now, I am obliged to return it. I agree that the whole thing is silly, but, what if that one time, it isn't? And besides, what am I supposed to do, give the "nodder" the bird? Tell him/her how intolerant they are?
Chef Jim Posted October 21, 2010 Posted October 21, 2010 Thats true. Williams' statement make little sense, taken on its face. Nevertheless it's how he feels. Whether or not it makes sense to you, and it may not even make sense to him, it is no reason to lose your job. Hell if that were the case none of us would have a job based on the nonsense we spout here. And besides, what am I supposed to do, give the "nodder" the bird? Tell him/her how intolerant they are? Nah, then you'd be confused as a hypocrite liberal.
Recommended Posts