Air America Evaporating
To almost no notice by the press, or anyone else, the liberal talk talk radio network Air America may be on the verge of going dark after first declaring a Chapter 11 bankruptcy two months ago.
Today, Friday, was the deadline (already twice-extended) for the failing network to come up with a buyer who will discharge its millions of dollars worth of debt. No word anywhere that I can find on how this panned out. Or didn't.
Meanwhile, there's a new report that AA heavyweight Al Franken might only have a few days more left on the air.
Another sign of the network's implosion is the loss of its affiliate in just about the most liberal city in America (after Berkeley), Madison, Wisconsin.
Air America also lost its outlet in Cincinnati. That city's former Mayor, panderer-in-chief, and former host of an Air America prime time show, Jerry Springer, has also abandoned his spot on the dial.
Here in the Los Angeles area Air America is on a channel so weak it can't be heard in more than half the city.
Perhaps now some or another liberal publication will step forward with a clear-eyed analysis of how this all went wrong. No dice so far. But liberals and lefties are owed some sort of post-mortem. In an election cycle dominated by Democrats, you can hardly blame the teetering of Air America on some Vast Right Wing Conspiracy.
How will the lessons of this failed experience be assimilated to not be repeated again if no one has the stomach to compile them?
December 8th, 2006 at 8:22 pm
The main gist of thier commentary was: Bush and the neocons are devils, the Clinton years were a ‘golden age’ of enlightenment, blah blah blah.
No great loss although the morning show had some funny moments.
December 8th, 2006 at 10:23 pm
Had you asked me two months ago what I thought of an impending Air America demise, I probably would have shrugged my shoulders. But by sheer accident I actually started listening to it over the past several weeks and was pleasantly surprised. After countless years of two stark choices (hyper-cautious centrist NPR vs. Amy Goodman, et al.) I found it refreshing to hear plain old unabashed Democratic radio–kind of like FOX/ Limbaugh, but less stupid. Call me unrefined, but hearing liberal talking points without all the Pacifica conspiratorial doom-and-gloom chatter was a shot in the arm. And like some of my Limbaugh-loving friends have known for years, I rediscovered the joy of gloating.
For now I guess I’m back to my old 60:30:10 ratio of NPR, community radio, and whatever-the-hell-else, but I hope something like another Air America can fill the gap in the near future.
Oh, and as to underlying lessons to be learned, according to a number of comments from the Radar online link, AOA’s fatal flaw was, um, not taking seriously enough the 911 conspiracy theories. Yeah, that’s probably it.
December 8th, 2006 at 10:31 pm
No less than three blogs are dedicated to the end of Air America. The rightie tricksters know that having ANY light shine on the wall of lies that is their radio disinformation empire, starts the whole edifice crumbling back into sand.
Air America speaks truth to power like no other force on the left and is hated for that reason. Cooper should come down from the ivory tower to the street where guys like me are tuned to Air America like a life soundtrack. I get more info in one day’s shows than from reading most of the liberal journals, blogs and columns - and it is a heck of a lot more entertaining.
We’ve always know that Clear Channel filling out the network with its low power/performing stations could be a dirty trick, given that it is a career sponsor of Bush and originally funded by the money they, as his investors in the Texas Rangers, bilked out of Arlington County taxpapers who built a stadium giving the team value.
Now that we read that Mitt Romney is behind the investor group buying Clear Channel, it will probably revert to right agitprop, dumping all but its most profitable AAR stations (and there are quite a few, believe it or not). AAR is not going anywhere, as top execs of Showtime are bringing in the capital and know-how to run a network.
However it is now up to Congress to protect the publically-owned airwaves by holding hearings to find out why most of the major radio networks, including leader ABC, turned over their entire station network 24/7 to anti-government radicals who were allowed to lie for 15 years without challenge, took over and wrecked the US Government. Just shining some light on this GOP agitprop snakepit should cause some rethinking so that the few stars of ProgTalk radio who have already risen (Ed Schultz, Randi Rhodes, Al Franken if he decides not to run for Senate, Bobby Kennedy, Jr.) will be put onto the older networks to provide balance on publically owned airwaves.
It’s also a good time to put Fox’s bully boys under oath and have them explain some of their more bald lies. Would be great to see if they can stop lying long enough to save themselves from Federal prison.
December 8th, 2006 at 10:35 pm
…and how could I forget Stephanie Miller, who causes me to spit up my morning coffee at least once a week! That libtalker is smart as a whip and just as funny, a child prodigy (Dad was Goldwater’s running mate) as is her sidekick Jim Ward who is the son of Bullwinkle’s voice. Her wit is sharpened with 15 years of being hounded off of the airwaves of KFI and KABC in Los Angeles by rightie hatemongers insistent that they own it all!
December 8th, 2006 at 10:36 pm
Sacramento’s Air America affiliate went dark a couple of weeks ago. Don’t know why, but it’s been replaced by some jazzy/hip-hop muzack station. My biggest problem with AA is that I don’t like blowhards — left, right, or center. We need less talk and more reporting. Tell me something I don’t know already. Yes, Cheney is Palpatine. We get it.
December 8th, 2006 at 11:53 pm
Guevera shows why left-wing talk radio is doomed to second-class status.
Most liberals are interested primarily in news. They are confident that the facts, presented as thoroughly as possible, support their case and therefore find satisfaction with the mostly balanced reporting of places like NPR and PBS.
Talkradio conservatives are more interested in sermons. Their belief system is more fundamentally based on faith and ideology, thus the far great tendency toward religion. This is a far more ideal talkradio audience.
Rush Limbaugh is a millionaire not just because millions of Americans agree with his worldview. He is rich because he slakes the still insatiable craving of these people for edification. These are people who trust Rush Limbaugh to tell them which washing machine to buy.
I love Al Franken. He’s funny, he’s smart, he’s creative and, while there is often a bitter edge to his humor, his heart is definitely in the right place. And, for the most part, he plays fair.
But I really don’t care even a little bit which brand of foot powder he recommends, or what life insurance he thinks I should buy. I think much of liberal America is with me on that point. Please tells us the jokes, Al, but let someone else do the selling.
That lack of commodifiable reverence and devotion on the left is what’s likely to kill Air America, not the fact that it gives air time to people who cross over into wing-nuttery too often.
To be sure, there are liberals who long for their own Rush Limbaugh and they, apparently, have been among Air America’s most dedicated supporters. But this type of liberal is in the minority on the left, which is why Limbaugh’s liberal counterparts have such small audiences.
But Air America is much more than a liberal counterpart to rightwing radioland. At it’s best, the network packages intellectual capital generated at liberal think-tanks into more entertaining pieces palatable to a general audience.
Taken on its own, rightwing talkradio is a liability to its own movement, as it is an intellectually stunting force. But as a third-leg to a wedge formed by right-wing think tanks and right wing media like the Wall Street Journal and Rupert Murdoch’s press empire/Fox News Channel, talk radio is an essential part of the big, bad noise machine.
That much, the left can and should imitate. For too long, liberals have been content to form a closed loop between think tanks, universities and the ideological simpatico parts of the press. Granted, the right-wing intellectual complex tends to have far greater funding, but that should not prevent liberals from getting more bang for their buck by adding a talk-radio element to their feedback loop.
December 9th, 2006 at 12:30 am
Names of the Dead
Published: December 9, 2006
The Department of Defense has identified 2,905 American service members who have died since the start of the Iraq war. It confirmed the deaths of the following Americans yesterday:
BEELER, Brent E., 22, Lance Cpl., Marines; Jackson, Mich.; Fourth Marine Division.
FARRIS, Billy B., 20, Cpl., Army; Bapchule, Ariz.; Second Infantry Division.
GAUTHREAUX, Jay R., 26, Sgt., Army; Thibodaux, La.; First Cavalry Division.
GIBBS, Nicholas R., 25, Specialist, Army; Stokesdale, N.C.; First Armored Division.
LIBBY, Dustin J., 22, Cpl., Marines; Presque Isle, Me.; First Marine Division.
December 9th, 2006 at 12:41 am
I think bunkerbuster makes some good points. Maybe not enough people on the left need to be told what to think to support a fulltime liberal station. I cancelled my subscription to The Nation a few years ago and miraculously I am just as well informed as I was before–maybe even better.
December 9th, 2006 at 7:16 am
I think that Air America failed as much due to the (bad) quality of its programming as to its cautiousness - Jimmy Carter has a bestseller about apartheid in Israel/Palestine; Air America was co-managed by Sheldon droby who wrote some disgusting posts during the Lebanon war at Huffpo and is a Likudnik in his Zionism, Al Franken was a centrist when the public loves leftists like Michael Moore. Established left-talk radio talent was ignored for the most part. Was there a weekly labor report, or daily for that matter? Debates between liberals and leftists? Debates between Trots and Maoists (why not?)
Most importantly though, they had very shady and incompetent business management.
December 9th, 2006 at 7:49 am
If the public love’s Michael Moore, why have all his television died after short runs, while Bill O’Reilly keeps right on laying those golden eggs for Rupert Murdoch?
Few liberals deny Moore’s genius, but many doubt his intellectual integrity. Were any of the right-wing blowhards as smart and talented as Moore, they’d be richer than Limbaugh, O’Reilly and Coulter put together. Because the the latter three’s audience concern themselves least of all with intellectual integrity and fact checking.
Moore isn’t likely to ever reach the kind of popularity the top right-wing blowhards enjoy, because he’s too much of an entertainer and not enough of a journalist for the audience he seeks.
December 9th, 2006 at 8:18 am
Moore’s (excelent) TV show died out because it was Pre-Bowling4columbine and F911. He is now beloved by probably 2/3 of Dem voters. I am not suggesting him on the radio, rather I’m suggesting his kind of politics - actual leftist (if not socialist) politics. Whatever you think of him (I think he’s a blowhard) George Galloway has a tremendously succesful radio programme in England/Scotland.
December 9th, 2006 at 12:40 pm
AA may be dying but since neither Stepanie Miller or Ed Schultz were part of them who cares? And I bet Rhandi Rhodes - who beat the Oxycontin man in their home market of South Florida - and Al Franken - who hits hit the Demographic - would be picked up.
Of course it does depend on station clearances and here is an interesting fact for you Marc. The Madison station was NUMBER ONE in its market with Miller the top rated show. Now why would a #1 station change its format (I believe to religious broadcasting which also occured in Phoenix where another AA affiliate with high ARBs switched)? Do you really think that “Market Forces” are involved here?
Or is it possible that progressive talk radio made a dent this last electoral cycle? That we now have evidence that the public gets what the Murdochs and Malones want and not what they want. Another evidence point. Armed Forces Radio carries O’Reilly and Rush. It would not carry Ed Schultz who beats O’Reilly and Hannity on a regular basis. And why is Schultz, whose ratings have soared, stalled out at around 100 stations?
What you really should be talking about is the media monopoly and the domination of the airwaves by the extreme right wing. Otherwise don’t talk to me about the plight of the poor immigrants since most people will get their view of them from Ken and John on stations like KFI. And don’t talk of getting out of Iraq - Rupert won’t hear of it!
Finally, if Al Franken doesn’t run for the Senate let him stay on the radio. For god sake don’t let him make another “Stuart saves His Family.”
December 9th, 2006 at 1:23 pm
The fact that Marc Cooper and his commenters are so clueless about Air America’s failure says so much about their disconnection from most right-thinking Americans. Other than you, who wants to listen to radical left-wing propagandist drivel from irrational people consumed with hate and a self-believed superiority? I guess you’re stuck with NPR.
Now, here’s what scary. Rather than understand and admit to the failure of left-wing radio or doing something to make it work, its supporters want to shut up conservative talk radio. If you folks are so concerned about freedom and liberty, why don’t the remarks from Greg above bother you?
Greg: However it is now up to Congress to protect the publically-owned airwaves by holding hearings to find out why most of the major radio networks, including leader ABC, turned over their entire station network 24/7 to anti-government radicals who were allowed to lie for 15 years without challenge, took over and wrecked the US Government. Just shining some light on this GOP agitprop snakepit should cause some rethinking so that the few stars of ProgTalk radio who have already risen (Ed Schultz, Randi Rhodes, Al Franken if he decides not to run for Senate, Bobby Kennedy, Jr.) will be put onto the older networks to provide balance on publically owned airwaves.
You guys have lost it.
December 9th, 2006 at 1:48 pm
irrational people consumed with hate and a self-believed superiority?
Talk about projection.
December 9th, 2006 at 1:52 pm
Woody poor O’Reilly and Hannity! I’m sure their ratings are down because the big bad liberals have decreed their banishment. Honestly when second raters like Niel Boortz and Mike Savage can get on stations but Ed Schultz is stuck that tells me all I want to know. Ken and John can ridicule Villaragosa and latinos but Dennis Prager and that loony on CNN Headline News can trash the first Muslim Congressman and no one says a thing!
December 9th, 2006 at 2:50 pm
Kevin, I don’t hate leftists. I laugh at them.
—–
rlc, this is direct from Neal Boortz
( http://boortz.com/nuze/200609/09142006.html ):
I want Air America to survive for two reasons:
First; I truly believe that all viewpoints need to be expressed in the talk radio forum. Talk radio is too much of a part of our national discourse to present only one side of the political spectrum. Having said that, whatever diversity of opinion we find in talk radio should come from the actions of the marketplace, not by government force or fiat. If it takes private donations to accomplish that goal by keeping Air America on the air … so be it.
Secondly; I promise you that if Air America fails, and if leftist talk show hosts disappear from the scene, the left is going to howl like a stuck pig and demand a resurrection of the infamous “Fairness Doctrine.” Richard Nixon used the Fairness Doctrine to shut down liberal thoughts on the radio. Democrats will not hesitate a heartbeat to do the same if and when they have the power to do so.
Still, no objections to Democrats acting like Richard Nixon?
December 9th, 2006 at 3:16 pm
Kevin nails it.
December 9th, 2006 at 3:57 pm
Randy, you don’t even know how and when to apply the psyhological term of “projection.” Stick to whatever you’re good at if you ever find such a thing. When I say that you’re psycho, there is plenty of evidence for that without making any implications for myself. It seems to me that you throw out these red herrings to avoid dealing with issues, which, by the way, is not me projecting. You’ve convinced me that Madison County schools must have been among the worst in the nation.
Now, maybe you can give us your brilliant ideas on why Air America failed.
December 9th, 2006 at 5:57 pm
Woody often likes to bash the left, even calling them “psychotic” etc. This sounds like Woody’s unconcious, undeniable hero - a kernel of freudian truth found in early and many subsequent anti- communists - Woody’s hero is Stalin. He was the one who put people he politically disagreed with in loony bins or sanitaria if you prefer. Later Soviet governments - and increasingly Western governments have pathologized political differences. Not the other day a friend who is a consulting psychologist with the toronto school board - a vey prog town - heard other colleagues wonder whether pre-teens who identify as anarchists have personality disorders.
I think that politically, a lot can be called evil, but pathologizing your interlocutor, as Woody does here, speaks more about Woody than it does about anything else. I’m sure he’s a pleasant guy, and not unintelligent. But this kind of statement is just fucked up.
December 9th, 2006 at 6:47 pm
Richard: Ed Shultz is on Armed Forces Radio, thanks, apparently, to many years of pressure that finally yielded results after Limbaugh insisted on portraying Abu Ghraib as a “fraternity prank” etc. I listen to Shultz occasionally, but only when I’m in my bedroom, where I don’t have Internet.
Shultz lacks Limbaugh’s flair for distortion and invention, but shares his one-track principle-free partisanship, so we can’t expect his appeal among liberals to widen much, no matter how many stations he picks up.
Whatever oligopoly anyone–including right-wing media moguls–has on radio is slipping fast as the Internet and satellite spread. As I mentioned, I hardly listen to the radio at all anymore and I’m a huge talkradio/newsradio fan.
Instead, I tune in to NPR’s “Left, Right and Center” (where Marc occasionally subs as the “center” guy), podcast interviews from Robert Scheer’s “Truthdig.com,” and, without fail, Harry Shearer’s “Le Show”–all on the Internet.
It is indeed a shame that rightwing buffoons like Limbaugh are given so much help from big money in spreading their views, but I find it very easy to forget about that, given that it hasn’t really affected my ability to stay informed. And I assume the average voter is at least as smart and curious and Internet-capable as I am. (And if they aren’t, there’s not much to be done, is there?)
The last thing liberals should do is lament that they don’t have “their” Rush Limbaugh or Bill O’Reilly. (Poor Lou Dobbs. A pudgy wannabe with a fake tan and an Elmer Fudd speech impediment doomed to eat O’Reilly’s dust in the ratings, all while trying so hard to anchor a slightly left-of-fascist version Mad Bill’s nightly circus of high-dugeon.)
I like to think liberals have their Limbaugh, on radio: Harry Shearer. Of course, Shearer takes shots at Clinton, OJ and, really, whoever deserves, whenever they deserve. But that’s why he’s funny in an intelligent way and that’s exactly what liberals want. We should be proud of that, not worried.
December 9th, 2006 at 7:01 pm
Don’t assume that Woody might even be a pleasant guy. RIght wingers are pathological liars and vicious hatemongers, able to condone a war based on lies as moral since the sexual morality of other people’s private lives concerns them. I immediately spotted who these people were when they started taking over the AM airwaves 15 years ago, since I had escaped from them years before. Yet while they demonized the word “liberal” to totality, they counted on the tolerance of liberals not to call them who they clearly are: REDNECKS!.
This is still taboo to discuss in this country, but go to Europe and they will gladly educate you as to the destruction of the U.S. by disgusting, fat, racist rednecks. One Brit dazzled me with facts I later verified that when you overlay the test results of the millions of internet IQ tests given, alongside the Surgeon General’s report on Morbid Obesity, both sorted by zip code, it demonstrates that the most ignorant, morbidly obese (not even a pig will eat itself to death, so they are dumber than pigs) Americans ALMOST ALL live in red states and voted in exact proportion for Bush to how stupid and grossly fat they are.
So you have disgusting, 700 pound bald men who no women would ever touch, driving around in cars with their driver’s seats removed so they can fit in, belching their prejudices on AM talk radio. And there are 20-50 million of em. Enough to take over a country and ruin it. Welcome to Woody’s world!
December 9th, 2006 at 7:17 pm
Not long ago, a list of companies starting with HP was released, all of which had instructed radio networks not to run their advertising on any Air America station. That’s probably what did them in. Americans should let these companies know how we feel about them supporting right wing propaganda that calls us liberals traitors.
December 9th, 2006 at 9:06 pm
I have no disagreement about right wingers, culturally, but the mistake is to blame them as individuals as opposed to analysing why the American system, dependent as it is on a war economy, creates their species.
December 10th, 2006 at 12:14 am
Woody, you better first define what leftist means before you continue with your lame-ass tirades against “them”. Who are “they”? What do “they” look like?
Are they rich, poor, educated, old, or young?
Aren’t Harvard, Stanford and Berkeley considered to be leftist? Do you also laugh at them?
Wouldn’t surprise me since conservatives tend to laugh at brilliance, and tend to mock the best of the best. They paint San Fransico, the place of Berkeley and Silicon Valley, as some hell. They even scare voters with it, in alerting them that if a candidate is from there they should be very wary of voting for them. That’s absurd. When you compare their words to the reality, it’s absurd.
But keep laughing, although I bet you’re not. It’s them who should be laughing at you, if anyone.
December 10th, 2006 at 12:17 am
Nowadays when a media outlet which depends on advertising revenue goes entirely defunct, it does so for one reason and one reason only: because it didn’t have a large enough audience to sustain it. If it’s a popular outlet that’s poorly managed, it’ll be bought up, and repurposed, perhaps even converted to a new medium, like Net radio or a podcast. If it’s a popular outlet that’s competently managed but for whatever reason, has a sudden shortfall of cash, the managers will easily find other investors or sponors, and other means to get it back on the air. Politics aside, there is always, always, always a market for a media outlet that’s popular. Politics aside, if the outlet is not consistently and substantially popular, it is doomed.
It’s interesting– and instructive– that Air America’s defenders here are unable to acknowledge even that simple economic fact. Or wonder why that is.
December 10th, 2006 at 12:52 am
Clarification for Bunkerbuster… I dont sit in on NPR’s Right, Left and Center as the “center.” I sit in as host, thank you very much.
Greg: plse refrain from such grotesque name calling.
I find it absolutely ridiculous and absurd to generalize about people because of their ideological position. There are some very strange conservatives out there, for sure.
On the other hand, ever been to a leftist meeting on a Friday nite? Talk about weird people.
December 10th, 2006 at 2:24 am
Since reg is not here–reg, where are you?–I will have to fill his shoes regarding Woody’s comments here. This is the same Woody who has told us for the last two years or so that everything was going fine in Iraq, that the news media was giving us distorted coverage that focused on bad news, that there really had been WMD in Iraq and that anyone who said differently was a liar, and a whole load of similar bullshit all of which has turned out to be wrong. After the midterms he went silent for a while, as did the equally shitbrained Jim R, but now they are back telling us again how clueless the left is. I submit that the current situation in Iraq, and the amazing spectacle of a president in the White House who still says that we are winning in Iraq and should plow on until victory, shows us exactly how turned in with the world rightwingers like Woody really are. Iraq, Woody, talk about Iraq and what we should be doing there, and talk sense, or take your head out of your ass long enough to get back over to your own blog and stay there.
December 10th, 2006 at 5:51 am
“Woody Says:
December 9th, 2006 at 1:23 pm
The fact that Marc Cooper and his commenters are so clueless about Air America’s failure says so much about their disconnection from most right-thinking Americans. Other than you, who wants to listen to radical left-wing propagandist drivel from irrational people consumed with hate and a self-believed superiority? I guess you’re stuck with NPR.”
———————————-
Indeed, what a circus. The term “propagandist” doesn’t apply to the “right-thinking”. What is this disease called? Insanity? When you accuse others of something that strongly applies to yourself? It’s probably plain stupidity.
Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter have no followers? Less than a few? Nope, but a huge amount of them. And they’re full of hate-mongering. They live off of it. All they do is spewing worthless hate mongering crap at anything that’s targetable from their narrow points of view. They don’t even refrain from mocking the diseased and the grieving, yet here comes Woody, lecturing the “left” about hate-mongering. It can’t be easy to live with such a disturbed judgement. It shows a lack of IQ in not being able to spot the extremely obvious.
And Limbaugh’s making fun out of Michael J. Fox’s sickness in front of millions of people. How the hell does that compare to some leftist who’s mad at some rightwinger for opposing universal health-care?
Would you tell you’re kids that it’s bad to care about your fellow man? Or that it’s ok to bullly your class mates? Welcome to Woody’s world of rightwing madness. According to its twisted beliefs it’s evil to care about the environment, and noble to not be caring about people who starve.
(He refered to the mentioning of starvation during Thanksgiving, as coming from a “sour crowd”, while emphasizing how he enjoyed his meal. (Almost like a caricature of a priviliged, overfed scum)).
December 10th, 2006 at 6:12 am
Balter, please research and tell me if you find any post in which I said things were going fine in Iraq. Who’s lying?
I have regularly stated that I was initially skeptical about the benefits of the invasion but that I would support our country in it, knowing full well that this administration had more information and more brain power than one of me or ten of you. Rather, I backed patience rather than defeat.
Regarding what we should be doing in Iraq: on one of Marc’s posts from several months ago, I challenged all of you to state what we should be doing rather than what we should have done. There was stunning silence, despite repeated requests from me for your ideas. Many of you are like the Democratic Party…full of criticism but no ideas. Where is this great Democratic Plan to deal with Iraq that they ran against the Republicans?
As usual, most of you destroy the discussion thread and get off topic, jumping around to attack me personally or go off on another topic like Iraq where you feel safe in your isolation. Ann Coulter is right about talking with liberals.
A primary reason that I quit commenting here for a while is that it was a total waste of my time. Apparently that hasn’t changed. Another prominent reason is that I wanted this site to take on the personality that Marc wanted without me being a distraction from the topics, which often occured as seen above. You can make your own judgement about the quality of the comments during that period of my silence, which often became the same five or ten of you agreeing with each other and becoming a mutual admiration society. So, if you want me to stay away from your “culture club,” that’s easy.
Up the Ante, I’m not going to go into long definitions of who comprises the left. But, one thing is sure, obtaining degrees doesn’t make one smart (see Ward Churchill) and working on a degree in journalism is an admission that you’re in the bottom quarter of your class. In any event, you’re right. I don’t always laugh at the left, although I do usually. Often, I just shake my head in disbelief.
Excuse me while I go back to working out to “Sweatin’ to the Oldies” while I work on my comb-over while cramped up in my double-wide. Yee-ha.
Oh, to remind everyone, this post is about Air America, and the comments, such as my initial one above, should focus on that.
December 10th, 2006 at 6:21 am
Note, as soon as I posted my comment, I saw that Up the Ante had made another attempt to reply to one of my statements; but, as usual, it fails to address the topic of Marc’s post and is a weak effort to turn the tables on me.
But, man, am I looking forward to enjoying the Christmas season along with a big Christmas dinner–no matter that some of you want to constantly wallow in guilt and finger pointing. Have a good one, whatever it is that you celebrate.
December 10th, 2006 at 6:55 am
“knowing full well that this administration had more information and more brain power than one of me or ten of you.”
More information than Thomas Ricks, George Packer, and other journalists who have written about Iraq? Not a chance. Even the Baker report makes clear how little intelligence the Bush administration has about what is going on outside the Green Zone. Only journalists have dared to go outside the Green Zone. As for brain power, they didn’t have enough to listen to all the experts who warned them what would happen. This was a predicated disaster, that only could have been carried out by people who didn’t know what they were doing.
December 10th, 2006 at 7:15 am
“How will the lessons of this failed experience be assimilated to not be repeated again if no one has the stomach to compile them?”
Didn’t you compile them in a blog of a few months ago. Why not move the list to print and the job is done.
I’ll miss Al Franken and Sam Seder, both of whom are informative, funny, willingly let smart guests speak their piece and aren’t so partisan as to be uninteresting (though Seder sometimes teeters on the edge of the boorisahness which is the standar fare of right wing radio). With Olberman hitting it big on TV I should think radio shows like these could succeed on their own. Some of the other hosts and show concepts were pretty loopy and came nowhere near this level. Was this due to lack of money or good sense?
I’m no big fan of Randi Rhodes but it seems she made a go of it financially before hopping onto the network platform. Is a network really necessary? Does focusing on it put the cart before the horse? Should the first order of business should be finding a few really talented hosts (on the order of the best of the crop at Air America), getting them started in a few hospitable markets and letting them build from there?
I’ve got to belive there plenty of Sam Seders out there, talented but not well-known enough yet to demand a big payday, who’d love to give this kind of show a shot.
December 10th, 2006 at 10:29 am
Woody, you’re the very definition of projection. I’m not the only one who sees it. There’s nothing wrong with it, it’s a common ego defense mechanism.
December 10th, 2006 at 10:38 am
I’ll happily be stuck with the thoughtful reporting from NPR, to scream packdog radio. The administration knew nothing and it shows. We could see it then and now: some of us anyway.
December 10th, 2006 at 10:49 am
Greg,
The origin of the term redneck is class-based and has its origins in stereotyping the poorest of the poor in the Deep South; those who had to work under the hot sun until their necks turned red.
I find it to be a very offensive term and do not use it. If you give it some serious thought, you probably wouldn’t want to use it either.
When I say that you’re psycho, there is plenty of evidence for that without making any implications for myself.
Woody,
I will acknowledge gladly that I am as neurotic as anyone is, but I have no symptoms of psychotic behavior. I am employed full-time and have been for 25 years with no breaks (except for two weeks last year), happily married, a regular churchgoer and have no criminal record. I take no medication for pscyhotic behavior as I have no psychotic behavior.
The American Heritage Dictionary defines psychosis as
I have none of these symptoms. Think about what your persistent labeling of me as psycho reveals about you.
December 10th, 2006 at 1:01 pm
It’s not about ideology, it’s about competence. Al Franken is not all that funny. He can’t keep up the pace of performing live for a couple hours, and he seems to have a problem knowing what listeners are thinking. The Oy-Vey segments, his O’Franken lawsuit bait things, and Limbaugh-Lie game went on way too long to be funny anymore. Often it seems like Franken just has nothing to say.
Air America talks about election fraud way too much. Regardless of what went on in Ohio, is it really all that interesting to hear the same complaining every 10 minutes? Randi’s new line is who counts the votes is more important than who votes. If you want AA to air that, try listening to 3 hours of it everyday yourself.
I’ve listened to Limbaugh and left radio, and there definitely is a market for a Limbaugh of the left with the right talent, a good research staff and writers, and a system of helpers to keep up the pace.
Who knows. Garofalo and Michael Medved are fun to listen to for totally mean reasons - to laugh at how bad they are. Garafolo does her, “uh, um, what was I talking about? whatever besides Kerry Did Win! uh, Diebold. Halliburton.” Medved has his supremely irritating way of degenerating every conversation into, “Answer The Question!!”
December 10th, 2006 at 3:21 pm
Woody,
I didn’t see your answer.
Simply said, you can’t really blame others for criticising you as long as you stand out as being against people who come here. For example by calling others ‘psycho’ (psycho is actually to trivialize starvation, mind you). You have to show your better side if you want to mitigate that criticism. So thanks for your reply, but note that I’m against much of what you say. That doesn’t mean I would be against you as a live person. We would meet at some supermarket and I could say hi without knowing who you were, since you may have good sides that you don’t show off here. This is about ideas, and ideas is what at least I’m getting at.
The way you bash the left demands a response more than the blog posts, as the blog posts often are simply observations or facts. If they were unfair or unfairly bashing in nature, I might’ve been getting at them too. Sometimes I just read them, until seeing some comment that radiates unfairness. Then I reply to that, although my intention was to just read the blog.
And as for Standford and Harvard. It’s just that they’re ranked as the best schools in the world, and that it’s annoying to constantly hear whining rightwingers ridiculing them for being “liberal”, as if there was nothing more to them. The Internet came out of UCLA, and Google came out of Stanford. What would those rightwing pundits who bash those schools be without them? The unfairness is what’s bothering me. That’s not same as stating that graduating equals being smart. However, in many cases it does, even if not in the majority of them. By bashing these schools, the implication is that they’re all a bunch of Marxist lunatics. But again, greatness come out of them, which is being ignored, then you look at rightwing institutions and notice that there are virtually none that rank high Internationally, which makes it even more bothering. It turns out that most of it is just plain meanness.
enjoy your dinner.
December 10th, 2006 at 5:36 pm
Randy, indeed the original def of redneck was poor dirt farmer (class), but sometime during the 70’s Archie Bunker period it became the popular definition of the preening ignoramus. I know because I grew up in Springfield, Missouri, surely the most redneck city in America. Home of the Baptist Bible College, Evangel College, the Assembly of God (Ashcroft) headquarters, etc. most denizens of my hometown are now on rapture watch as part of the 30% holding out for their hero Bush to bring on the armageddon. I like to refer to them as jesus freaks, which is also what we kids who grew up under them called them then. So “redneck” and “jesus freak” are authentic labels for the people who our democracy defaulted to, and any effort to scold someone who suffered under them and barely escaped to civilization, is denying our truth.
December 10th, 2006 at 5:45 pm
Greg,
I did my time in Alabama as well as Georgia and Tennessee, so I do know whereof I speak. Still gotta disagree with you. I’ll stick to calling them assholes.
As for calling them jesus freaks, why not beat them at their own game? All they really are the modern day version of the Pharisees.
December 10th, 2006 at 6:19 pm
“reg, where are you?”
Thanks for the Q, MB. Came home from a trip to Amsterdam/Paris and headed directly to Southwest Missouri for what turned out to be my mother’s final days.
My mind is truly elsewhere - but I can’t help butg note that the crazies in Woody’s corner have for years been accusing the “mainstream media” of solely focusing on the violence in Iraq and not reporting the “good news” - one of the staples of GM’s corner was the links to “Good News In Iraq”, etc. and Woody consistently told us that we were full of crap for suggesting that things were getting worse not better. In many instances the patriotism of anyone who dissented on Iraq was called into question, if not simply trashed as a matter of course. Now the Iraq Study Group tells us explicity that the problems were persistently and grossly UNDERREPORTED…that things have been far, far worse in Iraq than we were told - by the administration or the media. As an example, they cite instances of underreporting of the violence by as much as 1000%.
If I were Woody & Co. I’d go crawl in a goddam hole about now. There is no credibility in his corner and not a grain of honest patriotism left in the ranks of the knee-jerk war-bloggers. None. It’ll be all about explaining away their failures of judgement and analysis and attempting to find scapegoats - an ego-driven enterprise. Every one one of the opinion-mongers and geeks Woody most consistently cites as authorities in his comments and links have proven themselves to be nothing less than pathological and perverse in their contempt for anything resembling the truth as regards Iraq - and near-insane in their hysterical attempts to smear war critics over the last several years. At this point these blathering bigmouth warbloggers - and their sycophants - should just shut the fuck up for a reasonable interval. In the name of common decency - since any sense of shame, self-criticism or admission of error seems to totally elude them.
GOP Senator Gordon Smith’s recent comments, suggesting Bush’s conduct of the war is criminal, prove that this isn’t a partisan issue anymore. It’s between sane, decent people who have a grain of integrity and the wack jobs and right-wing hysterics with oversize egos and giant megaphones among the obviously useless trash who’ve made pro-war blogging and smearing Bush’s critics their primary obsession for years, while they’ve sunk ever deeper into the depths of denial.
December 10th, 2006 at 6:24 pm
UpTheAnte, I’m short on time, but greatness is subjective and there are few conservative universities period, as liberals take over institutions not expressly conservative. Harvard was established to train ministers, but I think it has gone astray from its foundings. Liberals do well in the field of education, where profit and productivity are not primarily measured as in businesses. You seem quite disturbed by the negative labeling of the left. Quit shooting the messenger and accept the reality.
Harvard’s Gift to America
and One More
Regarding the psycho comments, I think that is extremely mild to what your side has said about me and started over the past couple of years, and the label relates more to specific disagreements that I have had with Randy Paul, who always seems to be defending himself in wanting to appear as an intellectual. If you think it’s necessary, I can go back through the threads and show his outrageous comments, which are a window into his bizarre mind–and, I’m not the only one who holds that view.
And, still, no one but me knows why Air America failed.
December 10th, 2006 at 6:26 pm
Sorry about your mom, reg.
December 10th, 2006 at 6:40 pm
Regarding the psycho comments, I think that is extremely mild to what your side has said about me and started over the past couple of years, and the label relates more to specific disagreements that I have had with Randy Paul, who always seems to be defending himself in wanting to appear as an intellectual.If you think it’s necessary, I can go back through the threads and show his outrageous comments, which are a window into his bizarre mind–and, I’m not the only one who holds that view.
Grow up Woody.
Reg, very sorry for your loss.
December 10th, 2006 at 7:06 pm
reg -
You have my condolences.
December 10th, 2006 at 8:58 pm
Randy, whenever you make an asinine comment to me or about me, you may expect a response. My observations about you are shared by others. Under my breath, “What an idiot.”
To many commenters, not everything is about Iraq. I must refer again to Ann Coulter’s comment: “If you can somehow force a liberal into a point-counterpoint argument, his retorts will bear no relation to what you’ve said — unless you were in fact talking about your looks, your age, your weight, your personal obsessions, or whether you are a fascist. In the famous liberal two-step, they leap from one idiotic point to the next, so you can never nail them. It’s like arguing with someone with Attention Deficit Disorder.” I say why Air America failed. You reply with Iraq. Go figure.
reg, now tell me exactly why the Iraq Study Group should be considered the final word? They didn’t even have a representative from the military. There are way too many problems with their findings and recommendations. Anyway, why did we need it since the Democrats had a great plan to clear out and concede defeat?
At least Sen. Lieberman stuck with the President on Iraq, to “prove that this isn’t a partisan issue anymore.”
Regarding the major media’s reporting on Iraq, only a blind fool would consider it complete and objective. Here’s a sample: Boston residents got more than they bargained for this morning when their copy of the Globe came complete with graphic photographic images depicting U.S. troops gang-raping Iraqi women. Problem is the photos are fake.
Does anyone yet have any idea why Air America is such a failure and does everyone accept using Richard Nixon’s tactics to squelch conservative talk radio? Oh, I know what your answer will be…Iraq.
Balter, have you figured out the absolute maximum number of years for carbon dating, yet?
December 11th, 2006 at 5:08 am
reg, very sorry too about your Mom, but glad that you are still amongst us–and still blogging in your fiery and passionate way. And thanks for pointing out Woody’s lies about his past positions on Iraq. He and other pro-war dead enders, as Marc put it the other day, are becoming increasingly irrelevant. Instead, more and more Americans are looking at the casualty figures and concluding that the whole thing was a terrible mistake.
December 11th, 2006 at 5:51 am
Balter, please note above where I asked you to find past positions of mine on Iraq that track with your stereotyped composite of what you think that a “typical” conservative and, therefore, me believes about it. You may use reg to help you, who also follows the same faulty line of thought. If you’ve forgotten, I summarized my position above, which is different. You guys are really challenged in this area and need to quit repeating bad information as though it was true.
Now, can we move off of Iraq and on to making the tax cuts permanent?
December 11th, 2006 at 8:09 am
“As for calling them jesus freaks, why not beat them at their own game? All they really are the modern day version of the Pharisees.”
As a spiritual and biological descendant of the Pharisees I take exception to that remark.
December 11th, 2006 at 8:11 am
If however, you want to say “All they really are is the modern day version of the distorted derogatory picture of the Pharisees given in parts of the New Testament”, I’m with you.
December 11th, 2006 at 8:53 am
Welcome back Reg. As you have read, the language and content of comments here has seriouly deteriorated in your absence…….but as you’ve noticed, not mine.
My condolences to you and your family on the loss of your Mom. Moms are always the hardest to lose.
December 11th, 2006 at 10:00 am
“reg, now tell me exactly why the Iraq Study Group should be considered the final word?”
I never said they should be the “final word” on anything. That exalted position should obviously be left to WorldNet Daily, Niel Boortz and Michelle Malkin.
(I’m sitting in a coffeeshop at a mall in Springfield MO, and can overhear two little ladies at the next table discussing - I swear to God - significant details of the report of the Iraq Study Group, the need to educate oneself about world affairs “by going to the source” and the merits of Barack Obama. Now they’re off to WalMart, of course. Gotta love ‘em…don’t sell “Red America” short.)
December 11th, 2006 at 10:39 am
History will be the final word…not reg, not the little ladies going to WalMart, not the NY Times, and not the Democrats. History takes a while to absorb what happened and measure it against subsequent outcomes. I have to remember that the same crowd that constantly attacked Ronald Reagan are the same ones who criticize this administration and our military. They have a history themselves–of being wrong…and taking sides against this nation.
Again, reg and the left leaning crowd here see Iraq as the only issue under a post about Air America’s failures. At least Boortz & Malkin can stay on topic.
December 11th, 2006 at 10:59 am
“They have a history themselves–of being wrong…and taking sides against this nation.”
Is there some point at which you’d admit to being wrong?
December 11th, 2006 at 11:24 am
evets: Is there some point at which you’d admit to being wrong?
evets, without giving you a smart answer, we may frequently and ultimately come to the same conclusions on issues, which may mean that I am wrong sometimes; but, I am more patient and willing to give someone a chance before yanking the rug out from under him. Changing course often does more harm than staying the course. And, changing course frequently erodes trust. A solution to Iraq would be better served with a united and consistent team than with the public sniping against our leadership.
December 11th, 2006 at 11:43 am
Bush hasn’t changed course frequently, or at all on Iraq, though he’s frequently changed the reason for and description of an unchanging course of action. It’s been 5 years without a serious reassessment on his part; the public was very patient for 4 of those years, long enough to fight WW2 or the American Civil War. There seems to be no ground for concern that his administration lacks stick-to-it-iveness on Iraq. There’s plenty of reason to believe that Bush would never arrive at the idea that he needs to change course without any public dissent. Did you oppose such ’sniping’ when Clinton was President?
December 11th, 2006 at 12:37 pm
Marc, are you sure you’re talking about the correct LA station? I get KTLK’s signal when I’m out in Riverside, and I’ve never had a problem getting it anywhere in LA County. The original station that AAR leased out here was a tiny radio station, but KTLK is a 50k watt station.
BTW, Al Franken was off the air locally this morning, replaced by Thom Hartman.
December 11th, 2006 at 1:26 pm
Al Franken is currently doing a USO tour in Iraq.
December 11th, 2006 at 2:25 pm
“At least Boortz & Malkin can stay on topic.”
Of course, since they’ve only got one…spreading hatred for anything they associate with liberals.
Woody, since day one that I’ve read you on this blog your analysis of Iraq has been “Sit down and shut up because Bush knows more than you do.” When the Iraqi elections ratified the country’s sectarian divisions - which some of us pointed out in the midst of triumphalist din from the war-bloggers - all you had to offer was “Hooray for the Purple Fingers of Fate.” Nothing that was ever offered here that dealt with the complexities beyond mindless and dishonest BushCo rhetoric was met with less than jeers and often ugly assertions as to people’s motives. The media were the bad guys for reporting the problems. There was “Good News From Iraq” that Democrats refused to hear. We were winning if only we stayed the course. Blah, blah, blah.
The elemental motive of Bushniks - endless choruses of “We are the Champions” - were always in evidence. The truth is that the overwhelming majority of the American people have quit listening to your tired bullshit because they know it’s a crock and has been from day one. If you’re looking for enemies - someone to blame for “losing Iraq” - and can’t handle the truth of who has been to blame for this bad decision further bungled by incredible hubris - your only option is to blame the American people for not being willing to sacrifice ever more for this Administration’s failures. The Hate America Right is now showing it’s true colors - contempt for everything that doesn’t conform to their delusional little corner of the universe, from France to “San Francisco” Democrats to, ultimately, the little old ladies in Des Moines who’ve simply had it with the right-wing’s over-heated, self-serving blather.
You’re not doing battle with a Kofi Annan/Jacques Chirac/Michael Moore/Air America cabal, pal - you’ve been reduced to shouting ridiculous insults at a large and growing chunk of the hitherto more-or-less Silent Majority who’ve come to consider Big Nance from Faggy SF far less of a danger to America and their family values than your GOPer heroes and the bloggers who loved them. As Marc noted, The New York Post’s “Surrender Monkeys” headline said everything one needs to know about the FOX end of the “journalism” spectrum and their ability to provide reasoned analysis or intelligent discourse. And they’ve simply adopted the tone of your Malkins and Coulters rather than look their own failures in the face.
The hard-core right-wing is getting more insane and hysterical with each passing day. Now it’s down to Jim Baker, their very own Fixer in Florida, who’s selling out America. They’ll keep drawing a line in the sand closer and closer to their own twisted little toes. From my perspective, I love it. It’s reminiscent of the manias of the sectarian left - never in doubt, circle the wagons around your belief system. And remain oblivious to the fact that the door is hitting you hard on the ass as you exit the realm of reality.
On Topic - As for why Air America is likely to go off the air - well, a big part of it IMHO is inconsistent programming and marginally competent management, but in the context of national media start-ups, one big strike against this particular enterprise is undercapitalization and the fact that they don’t have a deep-pockets mogul behind them like Rupert Murdoch who’s willing to lose as much money for as long as he did with FOX News before finally developing a successful business model, growing an audience and only recently turning a profit. It’s a tough business…tougher than many. (From a 1999 Newshour report on cable news: “Does this operation make money? BRIT HUME: No. This operation loses money. It doesn’t lose nearly as much as it did at first, and it’s — well, it’s hit all its projections in terms of, you know, turning a profit, but it’s - it will lose money now, and we expect for a couple more years. TERENCE SMITH: What does it lose in a year? BRIT HUME: I think it’s losing about $80 million to $90 million a year.” Nuff said…)
December 11th, 2006 at 3:09 pm
The proof is in the ratings and Al Franken had them. He may not be back since there is a question of salary and also whether or not he will run for the Senate in 2008. But if AAR goes belly up someone would pick him and Rhandi Rhodes up for the simple fact that attract audiences. Or don’t market forces apply to the left?
I’ve been to some crazy Lefty parlays Marc. Like KPFK station meetings. I’ve also been to UROC meetings and Dittohead gatherings. Guess what? There are a lot of Looneys out there.
Best wishes Reg.
December 11th, 2006 at 3:24 pm
The carping here about Franken, “not funny enough” and Air America in general “not deep enough/newsy enough/balanced enough” demonstrates why liberals will never have a Rush Limbaugh in their corner.
You never hear “conservatives” whinging about Rush Limbaugh’s retrograde blather, do you? Even conservatives who recognize Limbaugh–the most popular conservative commentator on the planet!–as a low-watt, monumentally boring exponent of their ideology nonetheless feel it is their place to defend his battered reputation, come what may.
What mainstream liberals really want is NPR, or a radio version of the New York Times with more, a lot more, perhaps, Paul Krugman and Frank Rich.
But the NY Times would never work as talkradio, a format uniquely suited to monomaniacal, sermonizing demagogues. Talkradio, ideally, is something people listen to while they are doing other things.
Part of Limbaugh’s formula for success is that you can step into the pantry to get a can of potted meat, miss 2 or 3 minutes of his program, and return to listening without losing the thread of his monotonous harangue.
His patter is merely a reassuring hum to the many conservatives who don’t read a newspaper, or at least read no more than the headlines and find themselves with an insatiable craving for reassurance that they aren’t as dumb and/or mean as the newspaper makes them feel.
Liberals have an entirely different set of insecurities and a successful commercial media formula to soothe them remains uninvented.
December 12th, 2006 at 8:21 am
reg: Woody, since day one that I’ve read you on this blog your analysis of Iraq has been “Sit down and shut up because Bush knows more than you do.â€
reg, so now you’re backing up with that comment, twisted as it is, and admitting that you and Balter have mistated my personal views on Iraq with your other remarks.
But, it’s not unreasonable to claim that people are not in position to evaluate a decision for which they do not have complete information nor allowed enough time to see the results of that decision. But, I read here where many commenters proudly proclaim that they were agains the Iraq war from the very beginning? Why? On what basis? With what information? Using emotions or logic? Rather, these people are against whatever the President of the United States decides before they even understand. It all goes back to the 2000 election and Florida, and they just can’t get over losing–even after multiple re-counts. It’s a shame that such inappropriate bitterness puts them on the side of our enemies against our own nation.
Might I suggest that results in Iraq would be better if the Democrats and the Left had stayed behind our country and exhibited the same patience that conservatives gave the United Nations over twelve years of delay and corruption–twelve years of failure, yet you want to return to that and welcome defeat.
Overall, your response to me is an emotion laden, irrational screed, so I’ll pass on even trying to reason with you on Iraq beyond what I just said.
Regarding Air America, good management and sufficient capitalization are essential for business success. Rather than blame those who launched and ran the network, you attack those who didn’t support it or gave up on it–all for good reasons…people on the left are terrible businessmen. Why would someone other than Soros waste his money on people who waste and mismanage money? It’s big government and union mentality that want others to pay for poor productivity.
Yet, Americans are expected to trust those who can’t manage their own houses to manage their nation. We’ve been down that road before with bad results, and here we go again. My memory is longer than that of most people, so they will have to learn old lessons all over again.
December 12th, 2006 at 2:50 pm
AA’s programming was vapid and politically lukewarm. It died because it sucked. Listeners tuned in looking for oppositional ideas, but these are impossible to express on commercial, advertising-supported radio stations; I can’t believe this is not obvious. Lenin was wrong; the capitalists do have more sense than to sell us the rope we use to hang them.
Now let’s get back to talking about how to improve Pacifica. At Pacifica there is room for radical ideas and the problems that make most of the programming so mediocre are part of the general intellectual confusion that reigns on the left. There is not a fundamental problem that the project is impossible in the medium. At least at KPFK, if we dump the infomercials for homeopathic patent medicines, move the narrowcasting shows on transgender rights and RCP politics to non-drive slots, give Suzie Weisman and Jon Wiener more time, and we’d have a great station.
December 12th, 2006 at 9:14 pm
“reg, so now you’re backing up with that comment, twisted as it is, and admitting that you and Balter have mistated my personal views on Iraq with your other remarks.”
Sorry, but I can’t figure out what the hell you’re talking about. I’ve written extensively on Iraq here over a long time and, frankly, while claiming no particular expertise other than reading as widely from as many sources as I could find, have so consistently been better informed and raised far more serious questions about the course of the war than the crap you’ve served up that, at this point, you pretty much put me to sleep when you rattle on with your pathetic rationalizations. Your assertion that the “results” in Iraq would be better, but for the Democrats, et. al., is beyond childish. You’re increasingly ridiculous in your whining on this issue. Talk about emotional…and bitter. Your “team” of warbloggers and blathersphere bullshitters are officially a fucking joke with zero credibility. Mostly just a gang of nasty people who have proven themselves useless, dishonest and driven primarily by their own inner pathologies.
December 12th, 2006 at 9:16 pm
Incidentally, your response to me on Air America doesn’t make any sense either. Apparently you didn’t even read my comments.
December 13th, 2006 at 3:33 am
“Woody Says:
December 10th, 2006 at 6:24 pm
UpTheAnte, I’m short on time, but greatness is subjective and there are few conservative universities period, as liberals take over institutions not expressly conservative. Harvard was established to train ministers, but I think it has gone astray from its founding. Liberals do well in the field of education, where profit and productivity are not primarily measured as in businesses. You seem quite disturbed by the negative labeling of the left. Quit shooting the messenger and accept the reality.”
You keep talking of liberals like they were some species. “They do good”, “they do bad”. I mean common, is that how clever you are? No wonder you guys hate the schools, you must have failed totally.
“Liberals” now don’t do good in the area of business? Ok. Here we go. The world’s two richest men, are highly liberal minded. 1 is Bill Gates, 2 is Warren Buffet. Then add Oprah Winfrey, Donald Trump. Do you think Donald Trump gives a damn about gay marriage? Well, maybe, but your notion simply doesn’t hold up regardless.
The entire dot.com boom was probably driven by “liberals”. Silicon Valley, Hollywood, we’re talking major industries, so there you go, thinking that these ‘liberals’ didn’t do well in business.
To me, it seems they are just the regular people, it’s wrong with you.
As for Harvard. Did you know they’re ranked the number 1 University in the world? Do you believe that’s possible feat to accomplish via premeditated, cynical political agendas? Or by focusing on providing excellent education?
The reason there are no conservative universities is that conservatism is generally not conducive to education. You’d outlaw half existing science classes if you had things your way. Ethnic studies and the humanism would be shaved off the curriculum’s and probably replaced with war propaganda. Sex education would be eliminated. What else? International students would probably be limited to 2 per year. Geography classes might’ve been limited to US geography exclusively (possibly Brittish). If you map common conservative thinking to education, that’s probably similar to what it would become like. Self-defeating.
As opposed to, the liberals came in and “took over”. Quit the victim mindset.
December 13th, 2006 at 4:08 am
Woody
Also your only purpose of “discussing” the blog topics, seems to be about sniping at the “left”. You’re not ‘discussing’ as much as bullying. You just seem to eagerly set in at that sniping as soon as a blog topic appears that deals with something concerning the left, directly or indirectly.
for example:
“Yet, Americans are expected to trust those who can’t manage their own houses to manage their nation. We’ve been down that road before with bad results, and here we go again. My memory is longer than that of most people, so they will have to learn old lessons all over again.”
Only the Democrats fail in leadership, sure. Americans elected the Democrats because they are “less” smart than you. Right, not that the conservative leadership that was failed at management as well. You think people’s woes come out of the blue, probably by way of that “liberal conspiracy” again. And again.
And over again.
You’re simply conceited, and stubborn. An old hound with rigidly engraved thought patterns, that either can’t change, or can only do so with great friction, therefore, blaming others is easier.
Did I tell you that you all sound the same? You accuse the “left” of being anti-American. How naive, and inane. Wasn’t it Bruce Springsteen who sang “Born in the USA”? Who the hell are you to tell others whether they like America or not? Just because they don’t agree with your flawed simpleton theories.
“Liberals” also, or even more so, love America, but in a more responsible way.
December 13th, 2006 at 12:39 pm
reg, you’re like the football fans who criticize the coach for going for it on fourth down and coming up short. You had a better play than the one he called. You said that he should have kicked instead. He should have made it on third down to avoid fourth down. He shouldn’t have wasted a time out ten minutes ago that was needed now. Whatever. One thing is clear, it’s easy to take cover when your weak and after-the-fact proposals were never subjected to a real world test and you never had to be accountable for them. There are lots of drunks in bars who have all the answers. You must have already joined them. Oh, if you didn’t understand my earlier response to you, don’t blame me. Logic impairment is not a trait of conservatives.
UptheAnte, your counter points to me are totally worthless.
Finding isolated successful businessmen who are liberal does not prove a rule. Suppose I gave you a list of failures in business who are liberals. Do you think that I might have a longer list–muchhhhhhh longer?
And, saying that conservatism is not conducive to education simply ignores the business departments in most colleges, which turn out successful people–despite the rest of the college going to hell…even at Harvard.
On “victim mindset,” if you don’t think that liberals have taken over colleges (which they have beginning in the 1960’s) and taken over public education (beginning with Dewey), then you have a very short frame of reference.
I’m sorry that you and people like you can’t take criticism or admit to mistakes. That’s why the Democrats keep repeating the same mistakes. They get degrees but they can’t learn.
On thing I wish you would learn is to really learn to love America. Acts of love don’t include the acts of always taking sides against the one you to whom you profess love.
To a degree, I’ll admit to being conceited and stubborn, but I have a good reason for developing those attitudes–being right most of the time. Liberals have an elitist attitude that they never earned and don’t deserve.
December 13th, 2006 at 1:16 pm
Blather…pointless…unrelated to any substance of questions I’ve raised over the years…and typical. Anyone who takes cover in run-on football metaphors to dismiss other people’s informed opinions is obviously hell-bent on proving just how mindless they are. You’re an embarrassment, even by the standards of the Right Blathersphere….
The “real-world test” you seek to subject me to has, in fact, outed you and your buddies as morons who’ve put blind partisanship above concern for what’s their country has been subjected to by the worst, most incompetent and patently dishonest leadership team in memory. Your line about “history will absolve Bush” is straight out of the little creep’s mouth. That’s all he and you’ve got left…and it’s nothing. That history will judge is glaringly obvious…but to defer any responsibility for massive failures - and not just in Iraq - to some abstraction decades down the road is pure cowardice. The guy’s never been up to the job. And he seems pretty far along on the Weird Nixon path of talking to the White House walls in a desperate search for some respect. Pathetic…
Thanks, pal, for all you’ve done for the country these last six years vocalizing that unfailing Right-Wing wisdom.
December 13th, 2006 at 6:24 pm
Woody said:
“UptheAnte, your counter points to me are totally worthless.”
That’s because your thinking is worthless.
Your own counter points are vague or void. You provide nothing but conspiracy theories and bashings, all centering around the “leftist” boogeyman, like with every oher smug, self-righteous conservative ideologue.
I gave you examples. But, merely by admitting that you’re stubborn and conceited explains why you can’t do much better yourself.
Where’s your proof of the liberal “coup” at U.S Universities? Start by example, by following your own advice, and show substance behind your arguments.
Sillicon Valley and Hollwood are not “exceptions”. They are two major American industries, having huge influence on the future and around the world. Anyhow, business skills are not rooted in ideology, fool, but that’s exactly what you’re implying.
Regarding liberals who’ve failed in business. What an inane statement. Do you have proof that they were actually “liberals”? Where’s your statistics, or interviews? But even if so, did not just as many conservative people fail in business? You sound stupider and stupider with each iteration.
And the statement:
“On thing I wish you would learn is to really learn to love America. Acts of love don’t include the acts of always taking sides against the one you to whom you profess love.”
That’s just sad. Woody is telling me, not to take sides… And for heaven’s sake, Ann Coulter called liberalism a disease.
How about you start to actually live up to it? You sure know how to give sound advise, but don’t live up to even 1 of them yourself. But not just that, but that and in a mighty, obvious way.
December 14th, 2006 at 9:37 am
reg & UpTheAnte…you’re proof that a lot of reading doesn’t make one smart, correct, or sane. You can criticize me all that you like, but as long as I’m far to the right of the Daily Kos and you’re in the middle of it, then I’m much more confident of my positions over yours. I’m certain that nothing that I say and any proof that I provide would ever be accepted by you, so to prove that I’m actually smarter than you, I’m not going to waste any more of my time trying to convince you, and that time can be much more valuably to make money. You can keep dreaming and live in denial.
December 14th, 2006 at 2:50 pm
It’s you that are living in denial and dogma. You’re full with dogma.
Frankly you’re one of the stupidest people I’ve ever had a conversation with. The things you claim are inane. Like that only Democrats fail, is stupid, not just flawed.
The fact what you say to others show that your assessment of where they stand is nowhere near reality.
December 14th, 2006 at 5:59 pm
…and, a higher percentage of people who smoke are Democrats.
December 14th, 2006 at 7:59 pm
Randy, whenever you make an asinine comment to me or about me, you may expect a response. My observations about you are shared by others.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
December 14th, 2006 at 8:16 pm
Clearly you guys have a lot of time on your hands. Enjoy you vacation from life. It is coming to and end sooner than you think.
December 15th, 2006 at 5:44 am
Randy: zzzz
Randy offeres strong evidence that those on the left have absolutely no sense of humor, and reg backs it up with his rant on Ernest Angely on another post. What losers to take everything seriously.
Jim Ward, you’re right. This isn’t worth it and it’s not right to mess up Marc Cooper’s site with further responses to people who are analytically challenged, close minded, and with an extreme idiological agenda–a view shared by many others who aren’t projecting.
December 15th, 2006 at 11:59 pm
The free market works, and so— with Al Franken still fiddling with the flush handle to stop the leaking, we bid adieu to another double-standard-dealing mass of meatbags. Al: you’ve failed at comedy; you’ve failed at political punditry; you’ve failed as a radio commentator; so— can you sweep floors?
December 20th, 2006 at 9:01 am
Special Christmas Tree! GO TO http://tiranozaur.cabanova.ro -you will find a Special Christmas Tree! DO NOT MISS IT TOO!
December 29th, 2006 at 11:18 pm
The entire exercise was just a way of laundering campaign contributions. The campaign is over. Poof! Air America shuts down. Quelle surprise.
March 4th, 2007 at 7:00 pm
Amazingly enough, here are some statistics available through the government for anyone willing to actually do research.
The majority of murderers have been liberals.
The majority of abusive parents have been liberals/moderates.
The majority of drug users have been liberals.
More than 85% of gangsters are liberals.
The majority of drunks are liberals.
The majority of smokers are liberals.
The majority of rapists have been liberals.
The majority of major thefts were committed by liberals.
Amazingly enough, when you actually research the statistics behind the worst crimes, you find that the liberals make up the vast majority of culprits.
Now, we take those individuals who were wrongly accused of crimes and released after further evidence proved them innocent. Almost all of them were conservatives.
Statistically, liberals lead the numbers when it comes to committing the worst crimes. Statistically, conservatives are more often falsely accused than liberals or moderates.
heh…ain’t it funny what a little research can prove?
Show a man where to find the answers, and he will soon forget and return to his former state of foolishness. Make a man find the answers, and he will be all the wiser for it.