Howard Stern Suddenly Loves Federal Regulators

[Meh_Gerbil]

Ya know, life can be a beautiful thing.
As it turns out, Howard Stern now needs federal regulators to help him make $500,000,000.00:

Just as the rock band Metallica experienced when it first came out against illegal downloads of its music, Stern risks sparking a backlash. After all, this is the man who built his in-your-face persona around flogging federal regulators, who he claimed were the enemies of creative expression.

See: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-f...home-headlines

That is your dose of crow for the day.

[Rubia Warren]

Ha.


Do you think maybe we will come to a time when there will be so much piracy due to technological ease that entertainers will revert back to literally being a dime a dozen instead of filthy stinking rich like they are now? A day when the musical artist really is kinda starving?

[Ryokan]

I am not a stern fan, but I don't see the connection. Stern didn't say "No government!" Just "No censorship". Piracy isn't a free speech issue. Its a property issue.

[Ryokan]

Ha.


Do you think maybe we will come to a time when there will be so much piracy due to technological ease that entertainers will revert back to literally being a dime a dozen instead of filthy stinking rich like they are now? A day when the musical artist really is kinda starving?

Unfortunately, I-tunes has basically crushed that hope.

[Meh_Gerbil]

I am not a stern fan, but I don't see the connection. Stern didn't say "No government!" Just "No censorship". Piracy isn't a free speech issue. Its a property issue.

I just find it humorous that the 'bad guys' have to roll in and save this guy's bacon.

[Ryokan]

I just find it humorous that the 'bad guys' have to roll in and save this guy's bacon.

[technomage]

Ha.


Do you think maybe we will come to a time when there will be so much piracy due to technological ease that entertainers will revert back to literally being a dime a dozen instead of filthy stinking rich like they are now? A day when the musical artist really is kinda starving?

Meh. I wouldn't listen to him if Sirius payed me.

[Pilgrim]

Stern: Stupid is and stupid does.

[Meh_Gerbil]

Meh. I wouldn't listen to him if Sirius payed me.

This, of course, is the truth of the matter.

[BeHereNow]

Well, Michin Gerbil, I realize you will simply ignore all opposition to your opinion as you did with your last Stern thread, and your recent thread about scary realities of the world, but here goes, anyway.

If you weren't so dishonest, you would've noted that it's SIRIUS making the fuss, and you would've quoted the paragraph directly above the one you did quote.

Here it is.

Stern referred requests for an interview to Sirius on Wednesday. But he has raised the piracy issue on his show with a subtlety that is not his usual forte. Walking a very fine line, Stern has praised the renegade spirit that drives some fans to refuse to pay for what they used to get for free and he has pleaded with folks to just pay "42 cents a day."

So, let's see..

1. Stern defers interview requests to COMPANY (not personal) lawyers.
2. He was unusually subtle about the issue.
3. He praised the renegade spirit.
4. He plugged Sirius.

Here we see that Stern may or may not care about people pirating, but he is certainly obliged contractually to at least urge people not to do so. If he had a personal dissatisfaction with the scenario, he'd make a stink bigger than your foot odor when the sweaty shoe comes off.

Your whole premise of him whining about the FCC and then running to them when he needs them is 100% amiss. I would tell you to learn how to read, but I know you can read. The problem is your intellectual dishonesty.

[BeHereNow]

The birds are chirping, the crickets are singing...


Will Gerbil retract his fallacious libel? Is this another instance of hating to be wrong? What kind of Christian can't admit when he's made a mistake?

[Meh_Gerbil]

The birds are chirping, the crickets are singing...


Will Gerbil retract his fallacious libel? Is this another instance of hating to be wrong? What kind of Christian can't admit when he's made a mistake?

Hmmm...

I'll try to state my perspective on this as clearly as possible.

*ahem*

I feel no need to answer your gross mischaracterizations of what I write.

In the future when you see that I'm not answering your posts you can assume I've placed you, yet again, into the "Clueless" folder. While I have no doubt that you are intelligent I simply don't have time to mess around with a person who work so hard at twisting everything I write into the worst possible contortions.

I do provide you with these quotes for entertainment purposes:

1: You are correct BHN, thanks for bringing that to my attention.
2: Good heavens, caught in another lie. I need to stop doing that.
3: If I wasn't such a brainwashed cultist I would have seen the truth on that one.
4: Right again BHN, dang.. you are running intellectual circles around me.

The next time you want an answer from me on a post I've written - and I am seemingly running away from the issue, feel free to cut and paste any one (or all) of those 4 statements in there as a quote. If one of those doesn't work, make something up and attach my name to it.

That way you get the confessions you want and I don't have to deal with your ridiculous whining anymore.

[BeHereNow]

Hmmm...

I'll try to state my perspective on this as clearly as possible.

*ahem*

I feel no need to answer your gross mischaracterizations of what I write.

Funny, this is our 2nd consecutive correspondence in which you've cried out that I mischaracterized your beliefs. I say funny because you're the only one I get that from. Sounds more like a lame cop-out from Mr. I Hate To Lose than anything else.

In the future when you see that I'm not answering your posts you can assume I've placed you, yet again, into the "Clueless" folder. While I have no doubt that you are intelligent I simply don't have time to mess around with a person who work so hard at twisting everything I write into the worst possible contortions.

And, again, you're the only person who accuses me of this. No one else seems to have a problem directly addressing me. With your "shocking realities" thread, you made the claim several times of me distorting your opinion, but failed to explain exactly how I'd done so. I'm still just assuming you went with that as an alternative to a real discussion, which is all I ever seek.

To my knowledge, I'm the most intellectually honest person on this site. I care nothing of ego, will instantly retract an opinion demonstrated to be fallacious, and desire nothing more than a good laugh and perhaps some mental stimulation. Unlike you, I don't have an ego that I must prop up. I get my ego-blast from women, money, education, etc., without relying on what strangers on some web site say to me. So, it's easy for me to admit to you if I was wrong; I couldnt' care less. You, on the other hand... can't even back up anything you say at all, from OPs to logic fallacy claims. All you want is to huff and puff. Sorry, that doesn't work on me.

As far as you simply not having time... yeah. I don't think time is the problem. Compare your start date and post count with mine. Tonight being an exception, I really don't usually have time for TWeb anymore. But, lucky you, here I am!

I do provide you with these quotes for entertainment purposes:

I'm sorry to be such a post-parser, but.. what quotes? No quotes follow, excluding the quotes I'm about to catalyze. Did you mean "statements", "comments", or perhaps "flatulations"?

1: You are correct BHN, thanks for bringing that to my attention.
2: Good heavens, caught in another lie. I need to stop doing that.
3: If I wasn't such a brainwashed cultist I would have seen the truth on that one.
4: Right again BHN, dang.. you are running intellectual circles around me.

What on Earth was that? More dodging, apparently. (no quotes, btw)

The fact is, you made this claim in your OP:

As it turns out, Howard Stern now needs federal regulators to help him make $500,000,000.00:

followed by

I just find it humorous that the 'bad guys' have to roll in and save this guy's bacon.


You utterly failed to prove that either a) Stern was personally desirous of FCC assistance or b) Sirius is in danger of not being able to fulfill their contract with Stern.

It's time for you to come clean and admit the truth here: you intended to make it seem like this rebel, FCC-fighting badboy is now turning to the same organisation when it suits his needs. You aren't fooling me with your large fonts, sarcastic responses, and inappropriate vocabularic selections.

The next time you want an answer from me on a post I've written - and I am seemingly running away from the issue, feel free to cut and paste any one (or all) of those 4 statements in there as a quote. If one of those doesn't work, make something up and attach my name to it.

That way you get the confessions you want and I don't have to deal with your ridiculous whining anymore.

As I said, I'm not looking for "confessions". I'm looking for an honest discussion, where I'm not the only person willing to concede a point well made.

But, whatever helps you to maintain your personal feeling of superiority. To the rest of the thinking world, you are generally making about as much sense as we'd expect a retarded rat to make, which means you are good for a couple laughs, but not much beyond that.

When you care to either address the points I made or detail explicitly how they were a twisting of what you said, feel free. Until then, please continue to amuse me with your "mad" nonsense. It's funny, at least.

[Conductor42]

I think BHN has a point here...

[Meh_Gerbil]

Well as Teh Hobbit is actually a poster I respect I'll have to dive in here and deal with this idiotic drivel.

If you weren't so dishonest, you would've noted that it's SIRIUS making the fuss, and you would've quoted the paragraph directly above the one you did quote.

I didn't claim Howard was making a fuss - anywhere.
However, despite the fact I never claim Howard was making a fuss I'm called dishonest because BHN never misses an opportunity to mischaracterize what I write and blow it out of proportion.

You'll note that I posted a link to the actual article - because I wanted people to go read it for themselves - which is the opposite of wanting to deceive anyone. I expressed my take on the article, you disagree, however that doesn't make me dishonest.

So, let's see..

1. Stern defers interview requests to COMPANY (not personal) lawyers.
2. He was unusually subtle about the issue.
3. He praised the renegade spirit.
4. He plugged Sirius.

That is a nice summary of what I got from the article as well.
Care to point out where I contradict any of that?

Your whole premise of him whining about the FCC and then running to them when he needs them is 100% amiss. I would tell you to learn how to read, but I know you can read. The problem is your intellectual dishonesty.

I never claimed he whined to the FCC - I never even claim that he personally ran to them. However, the FCC is going to go in and save his bacon anyways, whether he asks for it directly or not.

Now it isn't my problem that you care to throw around accusations like 'dishonest' while crowing about your own stellar intellectual honesty; however, it isn't something I care to participate in anymore.

You built a strawman in your head: "Meh_Gerbil is claiming that Howard Stern is kissing FCC buttock because he is in desperate need". You then went on to refute that statement and call me a liar.

That is why I don't have any interest in speaking with you, your sort of 'intellectual honesty' isn't something I'm interested in.