If You Were a Billionaire for Five Hours

dimitrispearljam

unsung wrote:

Russian and Estonian ladies of the night

Ukranian is better choice..u will thank me later

BinGnarly

I would give both my parents roughly 10 million each. My siblings would get roughly 5 million (I have an older brother and an older sister.) I would buy my self a decent house. Nothing fancy somewhere in the range of 120,000. I would pay off all my debt (roughly 5 grand) and then I would keep about two million in my bank account and wouldn't touch it till I was ready to retire. I would live the rest of my life the same way I do now. I would still work as a server in a restaurant and just keep living life that way. I make pretty decent money and if all my debt was paid off I wouldn't have to worry about paying those bills so that would give me more then enough to live off. This is of course if I didn't have to give it back. If I had to give it back I wouldnt do anything with it. I would just let it sit there for five hours. Chances are I would be at work anyways. Unable to spend it.

keeponrockin

Buy a nice house, take care of my family and friends, go travelling for a while, and then go work in a guitar store or something, cause god knows I couldn't sit on my ass all the time.

WaveCameCrashin

Starfall wrote:

prfctlefts wrote:

It's nice to see starfall's true colors coming out. Silence those whom you disagree with. Spoken like a true leftist statist,I bet you hope to see the fairness doctrine get passed. Well keep dreaming cos it wil never happen.

Oh great, another wingnut bonehead. Aside from you obviously missing the humor in my post, you keep forgetting that:

1. The Fairness Doctrine is still in the books. It was never repealed.
2. What the Fairness Doctrine actually does is mandate that stations that broadcast on PUBLIC airwaves be made to serve the interests of the PUBLIC. Which means that you can't broadcast propaganda and make it look like news, among other things.
3. The only people who want to "silence" others are the idiots on your side of the fence, who gin up false controversy and outright lies to stir up fear and hate, and to saturate the airwaves with the propaganda YOU approve of and block out other points of view.

Then again, the more astute posters here recognize where I"m coming from.

Humor eh ? Yeah right.... :roll:

If you are so concerned about fairness on the air waves whether it be radio or tv shouldn't there be more stations like fox ? After all, all the other networks lean to the left. So lets be fair...


1.The fairness doctrine is not by any means fair. It does nothing but diminish FREE SPEEECH..
The Federal Communications Commission repealed the Fairness Doctrine in 1987 admitting the doctrine “had the net effect of reducing rather than enhancing the discussion of controversial issues of public importance.”

The reason left wing talk radio fails is because no one hardly listens to it. Air America is a prime example.

Do you have any proof of any conservative or right wing talk show host or tea party member trying to silence anyone?

Its your party that wants to silence those whom they dissagree with.

When informed that the Fairness Doctrine might take Limbaugh and Hannity off the air, the percentage of Democrat likely voters who support the Fairness Doctrine rose to 53 percent. The percentage of Obama supporters supporting the Doctrine rose four points to 53 percent. However, the percentage of Independents opposed to the Fairness Doctrine rose to 49 percent.

When Chicago radio station WGN scheduled journalist Stanley Kurtz to talk about Obama’s ties to Ayers, the Obama campaign recruited 100,000 supporters to act in a cult-like manner and besiege the station with protests.


When “Joe the plumber” questioned Obama about his plan to raise taxes on small businesses, Obama supporters sought to destroy Joe and publicly embarrass him by digging through his tax files, work history, and personal life. Was this a warning to average Americans not to ask questions?

Obama forces also tried to hush a national organization that ran TV and radio ads attacking the candidate’s position on an issue. In that instance, Obama’s general counsel fired off a letter threatening the licenses of stations that didn’t pull the ad “for the sake of FCC licensing and the public interest.”

http://newsmax.com/Politics/obama-fairn ... /id/326168

gimmesometruth27

prfctlefts wrote:

Starfall wrote:

prfctlefts wrote:

It's nice to see starfall's true colors coming out. Silence those whom you disagree with. Spoken like a true leftist statist,I bet you hope to see the fairness doctrine get passed. Well keep dreaming cos it wil never happen.

Oh great, another wingnut bonehead. Aside from you obviously missing the humor in my post, you keep forgetting that:

1. The Fairness Doctrine is still in the books. It was never repealed.
2. What the Fairness Doctrine actually does is mandate that stations that broadcast on PUBLIC airwaves be made to serve the interests of the PUBLIC. Which means that you can't broadcast propaganda and make it look like news, among other things.
3. The only people who want to "silence" others are the idiots on your side of the fence, who gin up false controversy and outright lies to stir up fear and hate, and to saturate the airwaves with the propaganda YOU approve of and block out other points of view.

Then again, the more astute posters here recognize where I"m coming from.

Humor eh ? Yeah right.... :roll:

If you are so concerned about fairness on the air waves whether it be radio or tv shouldn't there be more stations like fox ? After all, all the other networks lean to the left. So lets be fair...


1.The fairness doctrine is not by any means fair. It does nothing but diminish FREE SPEEECH..
The Federal Communications Commission repealed the Fairness Doctrine in 1987 admitting the doctrine “had the net effect of reducing rather than enhancing the discussion of controversial issues of public importance.”

The reason left wing talk radio fails is because no one hardly listens to it. Air America is a prime example.

Do you have any proof of any conservative or right wing talk show host or tea party member trying to silence anyone?

Its your party that wants to silence those whom they dissagree with.

When informed that the Fairness Doctrine might take Limbaugh and Hannity off the air, the percentage of Democrat likely voters who support the Fairness Doctrine rose to 53 percent. The percentage of Obama supporters supporting the Doctrine rose four points to 53 percent. However, the percentage of Independents opposed to the Fairness Doctrine rose to 49 percent.

When Chicago radio station WGN scheduled journalist Stanley Kurtz to talk about Obama’s ties to Ayers, the Obama campaign recruited 100,000 supporters to act in a cult-like manner and besiege the station with protests.


When “Joe the plumber” questioned Obama about his plan to raise taxes on small businesses, Obama supporters sought to destroy Joe and publicly embarrass him by digging through his tax files, work history, and personal life. Was this a warning to average Americans not to ask questions?

Obama forces also tried to hush a national organization that ran TV and radio ads attacking the candidate’s position on an issue. In that instance, Obama’s general counsel fired off a letter threatening the licenses of stations that didn’t pull the ad “for the sake of FCC licensing and the public interest.”

http://newsmax.com/Politics/obama-fairn ... /id/326168

hmmmm newsmax.com.....remember when you gave me shit about mediamatters? same type of source in my opinion...

liberal talk radio fails because it is on in only 14% of the markets, in som eplaces like oregon thom hartmann kills rush and beck by 35 points. so it can be succesful if it was in more markets.

i read tht talk left on xm has significantly higher ratings than its right wing counterpart.

Starfall

Yeah, well we all know that right wingers have a strange idea of reality.

prfctlefts wrote:

Humor eh ? Yeah right.... :roll:

If you are so concerned about fairness on the air waves whether it be radio or tv shouldn't there be more stations like fox ? After all, all the other networks lean to the left. So lets be fair...

More all right-wing stations? When there isn't even ONE all left-wing station?
And what station leans to the left? CNN, that recently hired that repulsive wingnut Erick Erickson, who called Justice David Souter a "goat fucking child molester"? ABC, whose parent company Disney owns the all right wing station KSFO in liberal San Francisco? MSNBC, who has a former Republican congressman hosting its morning show, and regularly calls on the likes of Pat Buchanan to appear on the air?
And unlike FOX, the other stations actually separate their opinion shows from their news shows.
Who's being fair again?

1.The fairness doctrine is not by any means fair. It does nothing but diminish FREE SPEEECH..
The Federal Communications Commission repealed the Fairness Doctrine in 1987 admitting the doctrine “had the net effect of reducing rather than enhancing the discussion of controversial issues of public importance.”

Wrong again, boyo:

In the Radio Act of 1927, Congress mandated the FCC's forerunner, the Federal Radio Commission (FRC), to grant broadcasting licenses in such a manner as to ensure that licensees served the public convenience, interest or necessity.

As former FCC commissioner Nicholas Johnson pointed out (California Lawyer, 8/88), it was in that spirit that the FRC, in 1928, first gave words to a policy formulation that would become known as the Fairness Doctrine, calling for broadcasters to show due regard for the opinions of others. In 1949, the FCC adopted the doctrine as a formal rule (FCC, Report on Editorializing by Broadcast Licensees, 1949).

In 1959 Congress amended the Communications Act of 1934 to enshrine the Fairness Doctrine into law, rewriting Chapter 315(a) to read: A broadcast licensee shall afford reasonable opportunity for discussion of conflicting views on matters of public importance.

It is the purpose of the First Amendment to preserve an uninhibited marketplace of ideas in which truth will ultimately prevail, rather than to countenance monopolization of that market, whether it be by the government itself or a private licensee. It is the right of the public to receive suitable access to social, political, esthetic, moral and other ideas and experiences which is crucial here. That right may not constitutionally be abridged either by Congress or by the FCC. - U.S. Supreme Court, Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. FCC, 1969.

A decade later the United States Supreme Court upheld the doctrine's constitutionality in Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. FCC (1969), foreshadowing a decade in which the FCC would view the Fairness Doctrine as a guiding principle, calling it the single most important requirement of operation in the public interest, the sine qua non for grant of a renewal of license. (FCC Fairness Report, 1974).

The FCC stopped enforcing it, but it's still in the books, since Congress wrote the actual doctrine into law and it was never repealed by Congress nor struck down by the Courts.

The reason left wing talk radio fails is because no one hardly listens to it. Air America is a prime example.

Air America failed because its management failed, like how most businesses fail. Of course you crazies never mention the numerous failed conservative talk show hosts like Alan Keyes and John Ziegler. Not to mention ClusterFOX's disastrous attempt to compete with Jon Stewart.
And as far as left wing radio failing - don't you people ever stop lying? Thom Hartmann, Ed Schultz, Bill Press, Stephanie Miller, and a bunch of other left wing radio people have huge successes in the market. In fact, they regularly trounce their right wing radio counterparts in a LOT of stations, especially Hartmann.

Do you have any proof of any conservative or right wing talk show host or tea party member trying to silence anyone?

Its your party that wants to silence those whom they dissagree with.

You mean like calling for people to be killed? Where do I start?
The way the market is set up is that a handful of media conglomerates - such as Rupert Murdoch's empire - buy a bunch of broadcast stations and newspapers to saturate any given market, and then force right wing programming on all the stations and papers they buy. The notorious attempt of Sinclair Broadcasting to force all their affiliates to air an anti-John Kerry movie in 2004 being the most obvious example. And of course, they refused to have any opposition broadcast. Had it not been for their stock tanking in the wake of public outcry, they would have followed through.

When informed that the Fairness Doctrine might take Limbaugh and Hannity off the air, the percentage of Democrat likely voters who support the Fairness Doctrine rose to 53 percent. The percentage of Obama supporters supporting the Doctrine rose four points to 53 percent. However, the percentage of Independents opposed to the Fairness Doctrine rose to 49 percent.

Hahaha, never fails, you right wing lunatics trying to scare your poor followers with fictitious accounts of morons like Limbaugh and Hannity being "forced off the air" and "silenced" when
a. The FCC has never applied the Fairness Doctrine to a talk radio host, nor does the regulation force stations to give equal time for every perspective, and
b. The Obama White House itself opposes reintroduction of the Fairness Doctrine, at least according to those notorious communists at ClusterFOX News.
Moreover, nobody in the established liberal circles seriously wants Hannity, Limbaugh, or even real incendiary types like Michael Savage off the air. Find me an example of such a person. ANY person.

When Chicago radio station WGN scheduled journalist Stanley Kurtz to talk about Obama’s ties to Ayers, the Obama campaign recruited 100,000 supporters to act in a cult-like manner and besiege the station with protests.

LOL, cult like manner? Democrats can't even agree on anything as a body, let alone "order" any group to do anything. Did you numbnuts consider the fact that when Ayers was in the Weather Underground, Obama was only 8 years old? Especially since:

Neither Ayers nor the Obama campaign would describe the relationship between the two men. Dr. Young described Obama and Ayers as “friends,” but there’s no evidence their relationship is more than the casual friendship of two men who occupy overlapping Chicago political circles and who served together on the board of a Chicago foundation.

But of course, the whole McCarthyite guilt-by-association schtick works for you guys, doesn't it? Has everyone you ever met been absolute saints? If not, should we throw you in prison for shaking hands with a child molester?

When “Joe the plumber” questioned Obama about his plan to raise taxes on small businesses, Obama supporters sought to destroy Joe and publicly embarrass him by digging through his tax files, work history, and personal life. Was this a warning to average Americans not to ask questions?

Ahahah...you think all that opposition research would have happened had this idiot not tried to pass himself off as a "plumber" when he was never a licensed plumber, a "concerned citizen" when he had ties to the Republican Party, and an "independent" when he actively participated in the McCain campaign?
So it's OK to trash Obama over a non-existent relationship with Bill Ayers but whine about the treatment Sam Wurzelbacher recieved when he was being actively partisan and involved with the McCain campaign?
I swear, you right wingers crack me up totally.

Obama forces also tried to hush a national organization that ran TV and radio ads attacking the candidate’s position on an issue. In that instance, Obama’s general counsel fired off a letter threatening the licenses of stations that didn’t pull the ad “for the sake of FCC licensing and the public interest.”

Are you talking about the NRA's false and misleading ads about Obama supposedly threatening to take away everyone's guns?
AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

http://newsmax.com/Politics/obama-fairness-doctrine/2008/10/28/id/326168

RIght, Newsmax is such an accurate source. Try fact checking your sources before you cite them, buddy. Unless you love the feel of egg on your face.

unsung

dimitrispearljam wrote:

unsung wrote:

Russian and Estonian ladies of the night

Ukranian is better choice..u will thank me later

I'm heading there in July after the Berlin show.

Byrnzie

dimitrispearljam wrote:

unsung wrote:

Russian and Estonian ladies of the night

Ukranian is better choice..u will thank me later

Thanks for the heads up!

Byrnzie

If I could keep the $7.3 million I'd not change my short term plans. I.e, I'd stay at my current job until next year, and then go to Tibet for two or three weeks next March before taking the train from Beijing to London, via Mongolia, Russia, Poland, Berlin, and Paris. Then I'd go traveling for a year.
Though with the extra money maybe I'd turn the planned one year of travel into a lifetime of travel.
Basically, traveling's all I wanna do. I wanna go everywhere and see everything.

Also, having $7.3 million would enable me to buy a house somewhere to store all my books and records....and Ukrainian ladies of the night :P

_

unsung wrote:

Yes, typical of a lib. Silence those that don't agree with you, screw that 1st Amendment.

prfctlefts wrote:

It's nice to see starfall's true colors coming out. Silence those whom you disagree with. Spoken like a true leftist statist,I bet you hope to see the fairness doctrine get passed. Well keep dreaming cos it wil never happen.

Are you two fucking serious?? You can't even let people have a lighthearted thread without using it as an opportunity to start shit? Please, take it outside.... and go get laid or something, will ya? :roll:

g under p

scb wrote:

unsung wrote:

Yes, typical of a lib. Silence those that don't agree with you, screw that 1st Amendment.

prfctlefts wrote:

It's nice to see starfall's true colors coming out. Silence those whom you disagree with. Spoken like a true leftist statist,I bet you hope to see the fairness doctrine get passed. Well keep dreaming cos it wil never happen.

Are you two fucking serious?? You can't even let people have a lighthearted thread without using it as an opportunity to start shit? Please, take it outside.... and go get laid or something, will ya? :roll:

This was the point of this thread to get away from our everyday bickering laugh alittle. Throw some fantasy thoughts together for only alittle while. They must really have something stuck somewhere. Geeez, Lightin Up Francis!

Peace

know1

I can honestly say that I would work to give the vast majority of it - >90% away to charities. I would likely pay off my current house and probably just go back to college or get into teaching.

pandora

I don't really get the 5 hour thing so mine is a week. I would close the biz for a week and go to Hawaii as a family.
I would arrange for a trusted dog/house sitter to come stay here for all 6 and they would have unlimited treats and assorted grilled meats during our absence. They would have as many chew bones as they want and lots of petting.
I would rent a little beach house for each of us in Hawaii. One for my daughter, one for my son and one for my hubby and I a short boardwalk from each other.
We would go see waterfalls, enjoy an endless black sky with the most stars ever, a volcano, a rain forest, a little snow on a mountain. We would drink pretty colorful drinks at tiki bars and eat seafood. We would wear lais and get sun tanned and laugh a lot.
I would listen to Pearl Jam in the dark alone late at night while the waves lapped up on a black sand beach.
Then I guess I would come home and be poor again but still rich in the stuff that matters.

dimitrispearljam

unsung wrote:

dimitrispearljam wrote:

unsung wrote:

Russian and Estonian ladies of the night

Ukranian is better choice..u will thank me later

I'm heading there in July after the Berlin show.

nice

dimitrispearljam

Byrnzie wrote:

dimitrispearljam wrote:

unsung wrote:

Russian and Estonian ladies of the night

Ukranian is better choice..u will thank me later

Thanks for the heads up!

Kel Varnsen

It costs about 25 million to book a ride on a Russian rocket to the international space station. If I had 88 billion, I would totally do that.

mikepegg44

i would give it to congress, obviously they are know how to spend it best!!!

but seriously I would make it rain from the empire state building...

WaveCameCrashin

scb wrote:

unsung wrote:

Yes, typical of a lib. Silence those that don't agree with you, screw that 1st Amendment.

prfctlefts wrote:

It's nice to see starfall's true colors coming out. Silence those whom you disagree with. Spoken like a true leftist statist,I bet you hope to see the fairness doctrine get passed. Well keep dreaming cos it wil never happen.

Are you two fucking serious?? You can't even let people have a lighthearted thread without using it as an opportunity to start shit? Please, take it outside.... and go get laid or something, will ya? :roll:

Hey I was playing along untill Starfall had to say what he said.
Well what the hell did you think was going to happen when he said that ?
What If I would have said " That I wanted to buy up all the other networks and replace them with stations like Fox news ? What if I would have said" that I would buy up all the abortion clinics and close them down. That would have probably started a riot on here. You get my point.
For what it's worth I apologize. :oops:

unsung

Yeah funny how we weren't the ones who instigated it but are the ones chastised. No surprise really.

_

unsung wrote:

Yeah funny how we weren't the ones who instigated it but are the ones chastised. No surprise really.

Was Starfall: A) Talking shit about you, or Answering the question of the thread?

(Answer:

Edit to add: I cannot believe you actually just replied with: "But...but.... HE STARTED IT!! " :roll: