2
   

Conservative Radio host loses it on air, enjoy the meltdown

Forums: Politics, Ethics, Beginning Of Life
Email this Topic • Print this Page
 
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Mar, 2006 10:43 pm
...and everyone may certainly hate what idiots they will.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Mar, 2006 10:55 pm
slkshock7 wrote:
You may think differently, but I'm pretty sure I still have a right to ask questions (fair or unfair). However, I'm very sure that you (or the talk show host in this posting) has a right not to answer.

Who was talking about "rights?" It's the purest nonsense to bring up "rights" in this situation: no one questions either your right or the talk show host's right to refuse to answer questions. I didn't ask if you had the right to ask an unfair question, I just asked why you did it if it was unfair.
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Sat 11 Mar, 2006 05:23 am
Snood wrote:
And it also may be, my presumptuous friend, that I understand what Phoenix said, and we simply disagree. She seems to be okay with that. Maybe that's a point you don't "get".


I think that there is something that YOU don't get, Snood. I refuse to get into an argument with you. Reread your posts, and get a sense of the "button pushing" that you are attempting to do. It won't work with me!
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Sat 11 Mar, 2006 05:27 am
JustanObserver- I think that you got my point, exactly. If a person truly believes that a fertilized egg is as human as a child, there are no conflicts, no Catch 22s.

The fact that someone called the scenario into a radio show, and took the host by surprise, has absolutely no relevence as far as the concept is concerned.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 11 Mar, 2006 07:25 am
The correct answer to the question is..."neither one,I would be to busy trying to save myself"
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Sat 11 Mar, 2006 07:37 am
mysteryman wrote:
The correct answer to the question is..."neither one,I would be to busy trying to save myself"


Now, there's a real American hero...... Laughing

Make's me proud you were guarding Reagan. Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 11 Mar, 2006 07:41 am
parados wrote:
mysteryman wrote:
The correct answer to the question is..."neither one,I would be to busy trying to save myself"


Now, there's a real American hero...... Laughing

Make's me proud you were guarding Reagan. Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing


The radio host should have recognized the questio for what it was,and answered it with all the seriousness it deserved,hence the answer I gave.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Sat 11 Mar, 2006 07:58 am
Phoenix32890 wrote:
Snood wrote:
And it also may be, my presumptuous friend, that I understand what Phoenix said, and we simply disagree. She seems to be okay with that. Maybe that's a point you don't "get".


I think that there is something that YOU don't get, Snood. I refuse to get into an argument with you. Reread your posts, and get a sense of the "button pushing" that you are attempting to do. It won't work with me!


I re-read my posts, and I will try to admit when I see I am clearly in the wrong about something. As I honestly see it, I simply felt strongly that this was a stupid, contrived question. I also think that there are 'Catch-22's in life, and contradictions. There are people on this forum who disgree in a much more disagreeable way than I, that you seem to give a pass to. You say I am pushing buttons, and that you refuse to argue with me - if that's the way you see it, fine. I have no interest in arguing with you, and if you feel your buttons being pushed, maybe its because you take yourself so damn seriously. I talk the way I talk.
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Sat 11 Mar, 2006 08:20 am
Quote:
As I honestly see it, I simply felt strongly that this was a stupid, contrived question.


Snood. I agree. In a way I am not happy that I posted what I did on this particular thread. My remarks really had nothing to do with the call to the radio station. I was attempting to make a point. I think though that my thesis is something that people who are so hell bent against abortion need to consider.

Let's take the whole issue away from the radio station scenario, and look it it, stripped away, and down to its basic essence.

If a fertilized egg is a human being, it deserves the same rights as a living child. If there is a choice between saving one human being or five,
sacrificing one human being in order to save five human beings is a moral thing to do.

What do YOU think?

Snood wrote:
There are people on this forum who disgree in a much more disagreeable way than I, that you seem to give a pass to.


I appear to be having a deja vu. I seem to remember some time ago, where you accused me of the same thing, and I showed you that that was not so. It seemed to involve a question of a "pissing contest". Remember?
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Sat 11 Mar, 2006 10:02 am
Phoenix32890 wrote:
Quote:
As I honestly see it, I simply felt strongly that this was a stupid, contrived question.


Snood. I agree. In a way I am not happy that I posted what I did on this particular thread. My remarks really had nothing to do with the call to the radio station. I was attempting to make a point. I think though that my thesis is something that people who are so hell bent against abortion need to consider.

Let's take the whole issue away from the radio station scenario, and look it it, stripped away, and down to its basic essence.

If a fertilized egg is a human being, it deserves the same rights as a living child. If there is a choice between saving one human being or five,
sacrificing one human being in order to save five human beings is a moral thing to do.

What do YOU think?

Snood wrote:
There are people on this forum who disgree in a much more disagreeable way than I, that you seem to give a pass to.


I appear to be having a deja vu. I seem to remember some time ago, where you accused me of the same thing, and I showed you that that was not so. It seemed to involve a question of a "pissing contest". Remember?


I am satisfied to leave the part of the discussion that we moved to PM, there.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Sat 11 Mar, 2006 11:06 am
The hypothetical question does not create an unacceptable choice. The host's position creates an unacceptable choice: the question merely highlights it.
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Sat 11 Mar, 2006 11:11 am
One cannot utilize the rantings of a talk show host as an example of anything. Remember, political talk show hosts are not reporters. They are blatant editorialists, and play to a particular crowd. They do not want even handed discussion, they want to propagandize.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 11 Mar, 2006 12:13 pm
dagmaraka wrote:
laptop!!!! my whole life is in that thing. laptop over a family of twenty! laptop over a rare breed of a baby yetti that will never again be possible to reproduce.

ok, i might be exaggerating a smidget. but laptop is pretty darn important.

You dont do back-ups, huh? Razz
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sat 11 Mar, 2006 04:03 pm
joefromchicago wrote:
The hypothetical question does not create an unacceptable choice. The host's position creates an unacceptable choice: the question merely highlights it.


And, anyone with a usable brain, rather than a tendency to idiotic hysterical outbursts when caught out by a simple illustration of our natural tendencies, could perfectly turn the question into an interesting exegesis of the factors operating in such a decision, and our natural, as opposed to necessarily logical, (in said burster out's world view) tendencies in the scenario.


Good grief, if I got caught out by, and reacted thusly to, that kind of question when in the witness box, I would be a laughing stock, and probably fired.
0 Replies
 
mele42846
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Mar, 2006 02:53 am
What's all the furor about? Most radio talk show hosts either on the right or on the left don't have much going for themselves. I never listen to any of them. Of course, it was a stupid reaction. He may be a stupid reactor.

My great wonder is why the politicians worry so much about the alleged influence the talk show hosts have on the public's perceptions.

I don't think they influence anybody!!!
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND - Discussion by Foxfyre
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Fellow Bostonians: How many of us wished we had an assault weapon last night? - Question by maxdancona
What should be first on the agenda of the winner in November? - Discussion by Frank Apisa
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Conservative Radio host loses it on air, enjoy the meltdown
  3. » Page 3
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 6.14 seconds on 12/26/2024 at 05:19:53
▲ ▼