Sequitur: Some terrorists were going to blow up some airplanes, therefore: the war in Iraq makes us safer.
Sequitur: Some terrorists were going to blow up some airplanes, therefore: the Democrats are wimps, weenies and wusses.
Sequitur: Some terrorists were going to blow up some airplanes, therefore: Ned Lamont is an extremist.
Sequitur: Some terrorists were going to blow up some airplanes, therefore: Mike!© McGavick now more that ever!
Sequitur: Some terrorists were going to blow up some airplanes, therefore: Democrats favor premarital teenage sex.
Sequitur: Some terrorists were going to blow up some airplanes, therefore: the US should send troops into Lebanon to help Israel.
Sequitur: Some terrorists were going to blow up some airplanes, therefore: Howard Dean should be locked up.
Sequitur: Some terrorists were going to blow up some airplanes, therefore: George W. Bush is competent.
Non!
How bout' Dave Ross today?
"Terrorists were planning on blowing up planes, therefore: surveillance is effective."
Posted by: Scrilla | August 10, 2006 at 11:32 AM
Dave Ross is not a right-wing talk host.
Posted by: blathering michael | August 10, 2006 at 11:37 AM
He is today.
Posted by: Scrilla | August 10, 2006 at 11:39 AM
No- he's a typical level-headed progressive Democrat today. And we're proud of him, and would trust him any time with the lives of our children.
Posted by: blathering michael | August 10, 2006 at 11:42 AM
But he called Hezbollah a TERRORIST organization!!?? What if they get provoked (between cashing Iranian checks and building hospitals)?
He should temper his language!
Terrorists indeed!
Posted by: Scrilla | August 10, 2006 at 11:57 AM
You forgot a few:
Sequitur: Some terrorists were going to blow up some airplanes, therefore: we need to privatize social security
Sequitur: Some terrorists were going to blow up some airplanes, therefore: We need to give Bush total and absolute power and be the Head Decider.
Sequitur: Some terrorists were going to blow up some airplanes, therefore: we absolutely cannot have a livable minimum wage.
If gas didnt cost so freakin much, I would drive to SeaTac and hold up a sign that said " How's that 2004 election workin' for ya???"
Posted by: sparky | August 10, 2006 at 12:11 PM
Lieberman loses, Iraq War support plummets, therefore, some terrorists were going to blow up airplanes.
Terrorists were going to blow up some airplanes, therefore,
"we must fight the Islamo-fascists" (Bush today.)
Posted by: Fremont | August 10, 2006 at 12:12 PM
Dave's show today was superb! He's got great contacts and I always appreciate hearing their comments. Gagliardi - or whatever his name is - is obviously very pro what we are doing and it would be nice to hear another point of view. But, I think he made his points well and I was impressed.
I wish the Muslim callers had had more time. Esp. the last one who got cut off . . . I don't think we always get the truth about Israel's - well maybe anybody's - actions and provocations.
Dave did point out that surveillance is effective. I was wondering why no one points out that it is Britain that seems to have done the work here . . . Nobody was on alert about liquids in our airports till today. So, what does that say about Bush and company and keeping us safer?
Now back to Reagan!
Posted by: joanie | August 10, 2006 at 12:17 PM
Michael:"No- he's a typical level-headed progressive Democrat today."
That is EXACTLY what makes liberals or dems if you prefer different. We are not locked into some kind of ideological purity . . . we can reason, shift, and we make the effort to look at all sides of issues. We look for understanding and truth. Anybody who continues to call Dave a far-leaning leftie is just as ignorant as it is possible to be ignorant!
And Scrilla, what you are now calling right is so left - it is that ability to think and reason and not be pigeonholed. Don't you wish you had it?
Posted by: joanie | August 10, 2006 at 12:29 PM
Excellent post.
And, while not quite the same, this is flowing through the talk radio ether:
Ned Lamont won, therefor the terrorist were ready to strike because we showed we are weak.
Posted by: JDB | August 10, 2006 at 04:07 PM
Right Wing Talk Radio Logic basically summed up The Idiot's 3 hour show in 8 statements. Talk about a waste of air time. Will KIRO ever expand RR to a full show? Let Dori do traffic checks, or empty the office trashcans, but please, please, please, someone, anyone, at KIRO, jerk that jerk off the air. Maybe he will take his 'tude, his 8th grade critical thinking skills, his whiny, nasaly voice, and jump out of another airplane sans parachute. Well, one can hope.
Posted by: seattlepete | August 10, 2006 at 05:01 PM
It was the U.S. that picked up the info through our, thank goodness, surveillance...and we notified the U.K. At least give credit where it's due.
Posted by: J. C. | August 10, 2006 at 05:19 PM
Hey, JC . . . I heard earlier today that it was Pakistan than clued in the British about the conspiracy . . . so where did you get your information that it was due to US surveillance that nailed it?
I'm curious because I'd like to know the truth . . . Thanks.
Posted by: joanie | August 10, 2006 at 06:50 PM
Which right-wing talk hosts are each of the quotes attributed to ? Rush Limbaugh could be the author of several of them, but have yet to see a name associated with them. Until then, they are generalizations - some that sound like scare tactics. Anyone who does not heed the foiling of this terrorist plot by the UK is a fool ! Granted there are some ridiculous statements of this ilk coming from talk show hosts about this topic from both liberal (like Bush is still the biggest terrorist and worse than Hitler) and conservative (as shown above) - most are posturing for the November elections.
The undertone here sounds somewhat like sour grapes from the left, who is not in power on the National level at this time. So, what solutions to stem this disturbing tide are the Dems proposing ? Something substantive from them for a change could help their election hopes - I'll believe it when I see it.
Posted by: KS | August 10, 2006 at 07:03 PM
Yeah, KS. Us hard lefties gotta case of the grapes 'cause we don't have a potential disaster to hang our political hat on. We're praying for another Katrina, of course, to get back on the right side of the catastrophe gap.
Posted by: blathering michael | August 10, 2006 at 07:11 PM
Randi is sure on her game tonight. She's been playing bites from Larry King where she appeared with Neal Boortz (I don't know him) and even George Miller returned to dispute something Neal said. Really good radio!
Check it out "here"
Posted by: joanie | August 10, 2006 at 07:21 PM
I hope that a third party emerges in the very near future. I feel your pain.
It has been offered that Bush ordered that we overthrow Saddam, but as it is turning out, we ended fighting the war for the wrong side - which is now helping Iran and we would have been better off had we not gone there in the first place, which seems like a correct assessment.
Posted by: KS | August 10, 2006 at 07:23 PM
How about some terrorists were going to blow up planes... So stay off planes... Damn silly way to get around, anyway.
Posted by: Playin' Possum | August 10, 2006 at 07:26 PM
Klueless, can you untangle that for me . . . I want to be sure I understand exactly what you are saying?
We shouldn't have invaded Iraq? The Decider was wrong?
Posted by: joanie | August 10, 2006 at 07:33 PM
Both sides are wrong - the Repubs and the Dems by their actions. There really needs to be a third party.
I know that it is tough to be objective about politics, but it can be done. The Decider was wrong about going into Iraq like we did ? No sh*t !
Posted by: KS | August 10, 2006 at 07:48 PM
I should be gracious here . . . but some of us knew we shouldn't be there before we went there.
And, just what this new party look like?
Posted by: joanie | August 10, 2006 at 07:53 PM
JCeeeeeee . . . where are you . . . still waiting for that confirmation of your source that it was US intelligence that nailed this plot. . .
Posted by: joanie | August 10, 2006 at 07:55 PM
The video clip of Boortz vs. Rhodes was entertaining. Larry King kept calling her on interrupting - just short of telling her to shut up. Her comment about why we cut we cut and run from Afghanistan was mocked by Boortz - a Libertarian, who I have heard before - by her attitude about negotiating with radical Islamists - he did not address that comment (Actually we still are there and recently added more troops). What blew me away is that she is naive enough to believe that you can negotiate with terrorists and talk with them and they will honor any peace agreement. To them, that is a sign of weakness - why doesn't she get that ? With that said, it would be good if we exercised more diplomacy with other nations, even Iran when the opportunity presents itself. Mike Wallace interviewed the President of Iran, which will be interesting to watch.
Jumpin' Joanie - what would a third party look like ? Less contributions from corporation and union lobbyists - more of a grass roots base, where the people really have a voice, more than the lobbyists unlike the two major parties, more for common sense and lesser government and pro-environment. Just a few thoughts...Ross Perot made a significant dent in the Presidential race in '92 - it could happen again.
Posted by: KS | August 10, 2006 at 08:16 PM
KS . . . leave it to you to notice the unimportant and misinterpret the important! (LOL)
She kept interrupting to set the record straight when Boortz mangled it.
Also, you said earlier we shouldn't have gone into Iraq. Well, that's what she is saying. We should have stayed in Afghanistan and finished the job . . . and we would probably have gotten Bin Laden and we wouldn't have to be going back now. . .
As far as negotiating, she made a good case for it. If you don't want war, whatcha gonna do, sweetheart? Negotiating has kept us in pretty good stead over the years, hasn't it? Isn't that what diplomacy is all about?
9-11 wasn't the result of a lack of negotiation so don't respond with that kinard, please.
You are so funny. First you argue, then you say "it would be good if we exercised more diplomacy with other nations, even Iran " so I guess you are learning. That's a sign of hope.
Regardng your third party, I find some light in your post. Environment - yes! Finance reform - absolutely! Ross Perot - wrong man. Too bad. More power to the people . . . of course.
I might actually stop calling you "Klueless" if you keep moving towards enlightenment :)
Posted by: joanie | August 10, 2006 at 08:47 PM
Sparky, John Dean is on Author's Hour, TVW channel 23 on my TV.
Also, is anyone else having problems getting their posts to take? It takes one full minute for minute to finally post.
Posted by: joanie | August 10, 2006 at 08:50 PM
Sorry . . . "one full minute for mine to finally post."
Posted by: joanie | August 10, 2006 at 08:51 PM
yes mine have been slow too
I watched Mr. Boortz and Randi live last night and it was interesting watching him desperately try to drag the conversation away from the quotes he made that Randi repeated. Of course he denied them all, but today on her show, she played the audio clips of him saying all the things he denied saying. Why do the cons forget we have video and audio tape to record what they say, and bring it all back to bite them in the ass.
Posted by: sparky | August 10, 2006 at 09:39 PM
I feel like a teenager again cause it was super exciting!
Ah, these small political victories feel good!
Posted by: joanie | August 10, 2006 at 09:46 PM
" If you don't want war, whatcha gonna do, sweetheart? Negotiating has kept us in pretty good stead over the years, hasn't it? Isn't that what diplomacy is all about?"
What you fail to realize, the "Islamic Jihadists are unlike any other enemy we have faced in modern times - they don't represent any country, just a extreme totalitarian theocracy and have an agenda to make the infidel submit to Islam or be killed. Iran is a country, so there is some benefit in being diplomatic with them, when the time is right.
It seems like Randi Rhodes kept interrupting to change the topic specifically to contradict Boortz.
What was Boortz mangling that had to do with the topic at hand - Israel vs. Hizbollah ? One thing that wasn't said by either was that Hizbollah pretty much took over the military in Lebanon and overpowered the Lebanese back in the 80's, so they both mangled that.
Can you cite an example that negotiating with terrorists has reaped positive results ?
Until you can, I have to go with the conservatives and Boortz on this issue. (He probably did refer to once Moslem figure, possibly Mohammed as a raghead, but did not refer to all Moslems as that, like she implied - and if you listen to him carefully, that is all he denied -its called word parsing, something that Bill Clinton made popular.) BTW - we are still in Afghanistan, and Bin Laden has been hiding in Pakistan, which has made it clear that they don't want us to send troops into that country, so I don't buy her statement.
Doesn't she also claim Bush is a terrorist ? He is a very mediocre president, but not that. She is too out there - her emotions consume her arguments and tends to make them sound irrational.
Posted by: KS | August 10, 2006 at 10:18 PM
Rummy negotiated with Saddam back in 1983 on behalf of Reagan, up til 1990 James Baker, Sec of State to Bushler I said that the US had no claim on Iraq and Kuwait border disagreement, so what part of history did you forget?
Posted by: chris | August 10, 2006 at 10:30 PM
Klueless: (sorry, you've regressed. . . )
"What you fail to realize, the "Islamic Jihadists are unlike any other enemy we have faced in modern time. . . "
If you listened to Dave Ross this morning (and many other experts over the long haul) you would know that "jihad" means submission and it is not referring to submit to the faith or be killed. It was originally a submission of the self to the faith. It was a spiritual journey of the self to a faith. Somebody gave you a talking point and you a believer!
The terrorism we experience is a result of failed foreign policy and too much interference for many, many years in the Middle East. Can you imagine why we've interfered? Could it have anything to do with American arrogance and oil?
Yes, currently terrorism and jihadism seem to be connected because we've connected them. But, KS, the terrorists do not represent the vast majority of those who practice the Islamic faith.
We get so judgmental in this country cause we are used to thinking we know everything! Why can't we just learn to mind our own business!
I'm not saying all is well. I'm saying that you don't know what you are talking about.
More later . . . but if you don't quit with the Clinton obsession, I'm going to quit responding to you. Geez, you righties dwell on the past until it is almost suffocating.
BTW, how do you "change the topic" to "contradict" someone? I don't get that.
Posted by: joanie | August 10, 2006 at 10:42 PM
OK...it really is time for Bob Van Dyne to go. I am trying to listen...it sounds like a high school broadcast. Please go back to spinning records, we need intelligent talk.
How long must we put up with these amateurs...Don and Ron, Van Dyne, NY Vinnie, Monson, Shiers...
Let's go KIRO!
Posted by: The Anti Kiro | August 10, 2006 at 11:02 PM
Gonzales is on Charlie Rose trying his darndest to sound like he knows something about this conspiracy. . . he knows nothing. He knows nothing!
I've never heard such dancing around a subject and saying nothing in my life!
Posted by: joanie | August 10, 2006 at 11:08 PM
Radio Logic 101:
We have not suffered a terrorist attack in 5 years which proves that the "Bush War on Terra" is working.
The fact that the Brits uncovered a terra plot proves that the "Bush War on Terra "is working.
If we suffer another terra attack it will prove that the "Bush War on Terra" is working.
As for the Iraq War (really an Iraq-upation) the administration that was stupid enough to get us into it is smart enough to figure out how to get us out of it.
Posted by: Arkay | August 11, 2006 at 08:29 AM
Radio Logic 101:
We have not suffered a terrorist attack in 5 years which proves that the "Bush War on Terra" is working.
The fact that the Brits uncovered a terra plot proves that the "Bush War on Terra "is working.
If we suffer another terra attack it will prove that the "Bush War on Terra" is working.
As for the Iraq War (really an Iraq-upation) the administration that was stupid enough to get us into it is smart enough to figure out how to get us out of it.
Posted by: Arkay | August 11, 2006 at 08:34 AM
If mixing liquids on planes is a viable threat...why did it take this long to ban liquids on planes??? Shouldn't they have figured that out a long time ago?
Posted by: shadow | August 11, 2006 at 09:30 AM
Thank Pakistan, Arkay. :) Gee, maybe Pakistan will figure a way out of Iraq . . .
Posted by: joanie | August 11, 2006 at 10:03 AM
Yes, Joanie, we might have a better chance of getting out of Iraq with Pakistan as a guide. Bush will never find the way.
Posted by: Arkay | August 11, 2006 at 11:41 AM
I've heard two "experts" say that using bomb components in a liquid base is "impossible" or relatively simple. The current is now running toward "entirely possible" and probable. The only absolute here is that this event will be spun with political artistry...let the show begin!
Posted by: Fremont | August 11, 2006 at 12:20 PM
"Litterman" Michael Medved is trying to make a big deal out of something Brian Williams said on Chris Mathews last night, deliberately misconstrueing his remarks as being some sort of praise for the Heathrow Plotters. Of course he said/meant nothing of the kind. Medved, you ass, why not quit your silly little show, which is dwarfed by Savage's station count, and become Litterman fulltime. You could have your own superhero outfit made up(tights,cape, big L on your chest) and fight the evil litterers fulltime, as you troll the mean streets of Mercer Island and Bellevue, picking up litter, and mailing your stern letters of parental reprimand to the hapless disposers of it.
Posted by: Tommy008 | August 11, 2006 at 12:28 PM
Also, is anyone else having problems getting their posts to take?
Damn, Joans, I just traded my foodstamps for a new IMac, thinking my antique OS had age-related sluggishness and memory loss! Maybe I can find that guy on the street again and get my foodstamps back....
Posted by: Fremont | August 11, 2006 at 12:37 PM
yes it is very slow.
Posted by: Tommy008 | August 11, 2006 at 12:41 PM
The liquid explosives have already been used, partially sucessfully on, I think, Thai Airlines...anyway, it was a flight to Asia and someone tried detonating the same kind of device..one passenger was killed but the plane made it down ok and there were no other injuries.
So, yes, since we knew this worked, why wasnt something done??? ( that question is asked tongue-in-cheek)...
Instead of getting all upset over hair gel, why not worry about airline cargo never being checked? Or the containers in Ports????
Posted by: sparky | August 11, 2006 at 12:41 PM
I feel so much safer with Captain Beady Eyes in charge. Are there more oversights in our future?
Posted by: shadow | August 11, 2006 at 01:04 PM
another thing...now no carry on luggage is allowed..everything has to be checked in the cargo area...and since the cargo area is not x-rayed extensively, anything could be put in the hold and they could do their dirty work from there...
I have not flown for years and dont plan on doing it anytime soon...
Posted by: sparky | August 11, 2006 at 01:37 PM
Listened to Dori with McDonald of transporation and actually agree with his take on public money in that arena . . . (not entirely, just some of his points) so was still tuned in when I returned to the car and listened to him diss all liberals because of their lack of support for the surveillance stuff. My lack of support was in that the adm didn't do it legally. . .
They get so full of themselves . . . and I'm with you Fremont. It seems that with this administration, you don't find out the full story for months and even years sometimes. Dori is so puffed up right now he'll probably have trouble leaving his studio at the end of the show. . .
Posted by: joanie | August 11, 2006 at 02:36 PM
Did anyone else listen to C2C last night (Thursday). Goerge had Walid Shoebat for three hours. This guy is an ex-PLO member. I learned more about the conflicts in the Middle East in three hours then the last five years.
It was some of the best radio I've heard in quite some time. Best statement...
"When will Islam have it's Martin Luther King?"
Posted by: Charpy | August 11, 2006 at 03:39 PM
I'm one of these horribly loyal sorts to radio and I never hardly ever know what's on the other channels . . . how do you pick up coast to coast? I'd like to have heard that.
Posted by: joanie | August 11, 2006 at 04:08 PM
I figured out the coast to coast you guys.
Fremont: The only absolute here is that this event will be spun with political artistry...let the show begin!
Check out "If you can't see that they are traitors in the White House, then you are risking your own lives and the lives of your families." Buzzflash editorial.
Posted by: joanie | August 13, 2006 at 02:58 PM
Dori Monson believes he should, if he feels like it, have the right to legally open a diner where only white people are allowed service. I heard him say this , this summer, on the air, with my own ears. This is part of his "libertarian" philosophy. These are the remarks of a rightwing wackjob, whose job description should not be talking on a big deal radio station in Seattle for three hours every day. With these comments alone,he has proven himself suited for stacking greasebombs into a paper sack at Dick's, while wearing an orange and white paper hat. He could join Luke Burbank, who also belongs there.
Posted by: Tommy008 | September 16, 2008 at 09:24 PM