Open thread: why do we listen to these people?

Comments

[AuthenticAndrew]

Why do we listen to that guy? This info is more common knowledge than conspiracy theory. He looks like he enjoys the smell of his own farts.

[DT]

Basically what this guy is saying is that every talk radio host who he doesn't agree with, or who doesn't think like him, should be taken off the air. Only people who he agrees with should be allowed to have a talk radio show.

[nevets]

Is this guy the Mike Malloy on depressants.

[Sandy Schroeder]

Talk radio assholes like Reagan, and Savage, Limbaugh and Hannnity have helped lead the conservative movement down the path towards extinction. I don't expect the right-wing flamers on this blog site to acknowledge that, but they have fallen prey to the same bankrupt entertainers who the Republicans entrusted to carry their message. It was an error that is now backfiring. In the end, both the R's and the entertainers will lose.

[blathering michael]

Right on, Ms Schroeder (and nice to see you back) the preceding comments are precise examples of the level of discussion you're talking about, and this thread is about.

[joanie]

It is so satisfying to see this video. Finally, a succinct composite of what has been going on for sooooo long! If the guys on this blog don't see themselves in the mirror of this video, they'll never get it.

I recently stopped talking to a conservative friend who emails me constantly the garbage he gets in his mailbox. Most liberals don't have a clue how much hate-liberals (hate-everything!) mail they get. It is beyond propaganda and almost cultish.

It's disgusting and anybody with an ounce of intelligence should see it for what it is. It plays directly to brain-stem thinking.

Just unbelievable.

[FREMONT]

(You're back as Ms Schroeder...who were you here as before?)

[AuthenticAndrew]

Sandy Schroeder says "Talk radio assholes like Reagan, and Savage, Limbaugh and Hannnity have helped lead the conservative movement down the path towards extinction. I don't expect the right-wing flamers on this blog site to acknowledge that, but they have fallen prey to the same bankrupt entertainers who the Republicans entrusted to carry their message. It was an error that is now backfiring. In the end, both the R's and the entertainers will lose."

That sounds cool and all but it's vague and over simplified. Hitler used hate speach to inspire his country and create an awesome war machine. Why has conservative hate talk been less successful?

[joanie]

Has it been less successful, Andrew?

[joanie]

And Andrew, we know what Sandy Schroeder said. He said it two paragraphs above. Why do you guys have to re-paste everything.

[AuthenticAndrew]

Nobody is answering the simple question: where did those entertainers go wrong?

I don't know. Are you going to tell me they sold us a bill of goods? Doesn't that mean the buyer went wrong?

[AuthenticAndrew]

joanie says "And Andrew, we know what Sandy Schroeder said. He said it two paragraphs above. Why do you guys have to re-paste everything."

Context.

[chucks]

The whole point should not be about what they say. Good gawd, if what we say was an issue, both joanie and I as well as others here would be in prison.
Does anybody here want the culture police to shut us down for expressing our opinions? Such crap is going on in Canada, England, as well as other parts of Europe.
If joanie absolutely hates me and expresses it, she should not be censored by anybody ('cept maybe Bla'm, it is his blog). If she says I am a butt head because I am white, middle aged, straight, conservative, salesman, or just plain greedy bastard because I want to keep more of the $ I earn instead of giving it to her favorite charity's, that is her right.
Do not fuck with our rights and freedoms just because you don't like our opinions. Next week or year, it might be your speech or opinions that are on the pc police shit list.
Hate speech is free speech. Free speech is beautiful.
Muslims hate puppy's. I love puppy's.

[DT]

Joanie, would you like to live in a world where anyone, or any group, can have someone silenced or taken off the air because they have decreed that that person is committing hate speech?

[AuthenticAndrew]

Isn't the fact that Rush Limbaugh signed a $400,000,000 contract a testament to how succesful hate talk has been? That's a lucrative racket.

And once Obama is elected does anyone realy thing the hate talk will abate? Fuck no, get ready to hear all sorts of inuendo about how the shoe shine boy has siezed the ship's oar.

[joanie]

No, I wouldn't be in prison.

I don't go around saying that muslims hate puppies. You do. I don't go around calling people shit weasels in sandals. You do. I don't go around advocating to kill groups of people. You do.

There's a difference. And that's what you "right-wing flamers" don't get. Either because you're too stupid or too self-important. You tell me.

[joanie]

Nobody is saying it isn't successful, Andrew. Nobody is saying the American public can't be seduced into hating.

You are the one who posted the example of Hitler. Although I would question your consideration that hate speech is inspiring?

I guess words don't have meanings anymore. Greed is good; hate is inspirational; gutter talk is free speech on public airwaves; America is synonymous with decency; the right equals family values.

I think we've finally gone through the looking glass with Alice.

[AuthenticAndrew]

It's very easy to understand how hate speech is inspiring. If someone else is worse, then you are consequently better, and being led to believe you are better is inspiring. That's the sole appeal of hate talk.

[Brian]

I wouldn't go around calling people "right wing flamers", you do.

[joanie]

DT, just saw your comment.

I have no problem with rules. Do you? We live by rules. Civilization relies on rules to function.

What do you think is meant by the terms "civil" and "decency" and "tolerance?" Shall we just throw those values out completely and live by the values of haters?

Just how long would someone like you be tolerated in a society filled with bullies?

[joanie]

Motivating, Andrew, not inspiring. You miss the point. Probably deliberately. But it reflects on your judgment and reasoning ability. And such a debate is boring.

Besides, a lot of Good Germans just stood by and let it happen. They weren't inspired, they were tolerant and enabling. Much to their later shame.

[joanie]

No, Brian, you dumb-shit, I quoted someone else.

And, yes, the fact that you don't know what quotes are is proof you are a dumb shit.

[joanie]

Now, Brian, I'm waiting for an answer. Are you too stupid or too self-important?

[joanie]

Same question, chucks.

[Brian]

And that's what you "right-wing flamers" don't get. Either because you're too stupid or too self-important. You tell me.

Joanie, you can clearly see that I was the one quoting you.

Borrowing someone else's term and using it in your own context gives you ownership.

Maybe you best stick to "Dumb Shit" or "Stupid" to avoid any future confusion.

[DT]

Ok then, Joanie, but you know that will work both ways. Anyone will be able to declare anyone guilty of hate speech. It won't just be a one way street. I will be able to declare any group I see fit guilty of hate speech, and have them taken off the air. Just as long as you are okay with that.

[AuthenticAndrew]

Woah joanie, zero to bitch in four seconds.

[joanie]

DT, where have you been living for the past however many years?

Rules work both ways. Do you think if we don't allow one extreme, by default we'll be allowing the other?

This tendency towards hate speech is fairly recent. Don't you think reasonable people can make rules that work for public institutions?

[joanie]

Well, when the message is too profound, shoot the messenger.

I'm used to that on this blog, Andrew.

[DT]

Ok, now we are getting somewhere, Joanie. Let's take it to the next step. Do you believe that reasonable people should make a list of rules; a list of approved speech and thoughts?

[joanie]

No, you were quoting Schroeder just as I was. You are still a dumb shit. If the shoe fits...

Andrew, Brian hasn't posted anything worth debating ever. He's a pistol. He rides shotgun.

If you have something to say besides taking pot shots, I'll listen and respond. Otherwise, I'm done with you.

DT, I've always thought reasonable people make the rules over time. Don't you? How do you think rules or "conventions" in most cases get made?

Weren't our Founding Fathers reasonable people? Haven't reasonable people over time refined societal rules? How do you think norms come about?

Tell me what you think.

[Carlos]

Joanie
You are killing this blog. One inane posting at a time. Stop boring us.

[joanie]

BTW, DT, you didn't respond to my question about extremism. Are you afraid that if we limit hate talk we're limiting all talk? I don't know how old you are, but I've never been limited in my speech and most people were pretty civilized and honest in public speech in my lifetime. I didn't feel threatened.

Do you really believe that your right to free speech will be taken away?

Puts, quit posting as carlos. Guess he really got to you, didn't he?

[blathering michael]

What I'm talking about is that the so-called political debate on talk radio by the hosts mentioned is not truth-based but based rather on pissing people off enough to call in and thereby generate ratings.
Mike Reagan, who is at the nadir of his career says stuff like shooting babies hoping to get an MSM headline. Entertainment? I suppose -- but responsible debate?
I don't want censorship, but this anger-mongering and sensationalizing by a relatively few for purely self-promotional motives has fucked up the political discourse in this country. Bush and Rove made hay with that derisiveness using the so-called 51% strategy to ransack and rile up the niches of their base to squeak by elections. They got the votes despite their obvious abandonment of professed conservative principles.
People have caught on and are sick of it. It astounds me that intelligent people such as the conservative commenters here, still buy it. Many conservatives don't. Evangelicals in my own family tell me they feel used. They're taking a leap of faith and voting for Obama. (this is a fucking miracle, believe me).
As always, it's hard to take any one of you brave defenders of the First Amendment seriously when you don't even sign your name to your outrageous comments. If you're such staunch principled Americans so quick to shame others for being unpatriotic and disloyal, why don't you grow a pair, stick your neck out and sign your name to your principles and opinions like I and many others in the blogosphere do day after day?

[joanie]

When you say it is not truth-based, the right on this blog comes back and says it is.

That's hard to argue because when you provide proof - which they generally don't - they find a way to distort it.

Al Gore wrote a book about it. Reasoning is absent these days. And truth depends on the ability to reason. Unreasonable people turn truth on its head.

And these radio jerks profit off it. I guess you could say that chucks is right. They are just the messengers. And people like him suck it up.

What's the answer?

[AuthenticAndrew]

I'm confused as to how shock jocks disrupt political communication. The issue of evangelicals feeling used by the Bush regime is a seperate issue independant of shock talk.

Your making a mistake if you believe people are rebuking shock talk as they will be embracing it warmly in the very near future. Rush's 10 year $400mil contract is a bet, a very very safe bet.

[mercifurious]

Central Problem:
All audio-visual news media(s) - specifically talk radio, cable news, alphabet news - are advertisement-dependent. This is a "big-duh" no-brainer, but the side-affects are not:

1.) With limited talk-time, WPM must be maximized. The best way to do this is with quick sound-bites, and without sufficient research & lengthy informative discussions.

2.) Put simply, right wing radio thrives in this environment. Their whole schtick is sound-bites, "dittos", one-liners, and ad-hominems.

3.) Throw in ratings & advert revenue, and the right wing radio provides the true bread-n-butter: shock sound-bites.

Stop, Rewind, Repeat as necessary.

Did I miss something there?

[DT]

I am worried that hate speech is being defined in such a way as to target one political party. In other words, I think Democrats use the term hate speech as a tactic to silence and demonize opposing and non-PC thought.

[AuthenticAndrew]

Are you trying to defend Don Imus' or Michael Reagan's utterances? Be my guest. Dig yourself a hole.

[mercifurious]

DT: Scroll up.

No one is specifically targeting or demonizing right-wing talk-radio. The caustic shoe is shotgun, soundbite, brainless shock journalism.

Right wing talk radio fits this caustic shoe - perfectly. Don't blame us because the truth hurts.

[DT]

I'm talking about the whole "hate speech" movement as a whole. I think it's a charge leveled mostly by democrats at those who don't think "correctly." I think it's a charge that's meant to demonize and silence the opposition. If someone questions affirmative action, they are guilty of hate speech. If someone wants illegal immigrants deported, they are guilty of hate speech. It's a movement designed to eliminate opposing viewpoints.

[AuthenticAndrew]

What Michael Reagan says was hateful. That much is not disputed.

[blathering michael]

I just don't think voters will be swayed so much by talk radio this time. This crap ground out daily used to be bought wholesale by ditto-brains sold that it's a way to be informed. That's what's changing. There's so much more information out now besides the msm, and talk radio. Only thiose who already believe it buy it -- more and more have learned to consider the credibility of the messenger after The Fat Guy unswervingly supported Bush and his failings or says "Hussein is a traitor." Rush can make all the money in the world telling lies in his charming way, but that doesn't make it true. Do you buy George Clooney's politics because he makes as much money for one movie as Rush makes in a year? didn't think so. You righties are falling for the entertaining tricks of paid clowns only because you wish what they say is true...
And the right does as much patriotic correctness and labeling everything as hate speech as the lefties. Patriotic correctness is worse because people get dead.

[sparky]

Hate Speech ( Wikipedia )

Hate speech is a term for speech intended to degrade, intimidate, or incite violence or prejudicial action against a person or group of people based on their race, gender, age, ethnicity, nationality, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, language ability, moral or political views, socioeconomic class, occupation or appearance (such as height, weight, and hair color), mental capacity and any other distinction-liability. The term covers written as well as oral communication and some forms of behaviors in a public setting.

[chucks]

But doing anything to impede free speech is un-American and un-Constitutional. The right-wing and left-wing flamers are doing what we want them to do. We want to piss people off and inspire thought and dialog. Shit, I do that here just to get something going.
Some (many) of you think of right-wing politics as hate because we do not agree with you on the left. Sometimes I listen to that idiotic station on the far right side of my dial that spews left-wing hate. Has made me want to blow chunks. All I heard out of Goldstein was hate talk. I do not think he likes conservatives. But his show was pretty good in moderation.
Joanie, Muslims do in fact hate puppy's. Mo and the Koran teaches that dogs, like pigs are filthy animals to be killed.
Shit-weasels in sandals is not a race or ethnic group. It is a group of asshats in Cuba who kill or maim American soldiers as well as commit other crimes against humanity. Enemy combatants not subject to the protections afforded soldiers by the Geneva Conventions.
"right wing flamers", "too stupid", too self-important"
Sounds like the kind of hate talk for which you should be in prison. You hurt our sensitive lil' right-wing feelings.

[Puget Sound]

Nate
Would you tell me the difference between the nutty or attention seeking utterences of Mike Reagan and those of Randi or Mike Malloy?
Do you want me to pull a list of their outrageous comments?
I am asking this because I know you are willing to take a more reasoned look. I am going by your willingness to acknowledge conservatives such as Milton Friedman or William F Buckley. People you may not agree with politically but who you respect.

In regards to radio in general, if I want reasoned and nuanced discussion of the issues on radio I look to people like Ronn Owens of KGO.

[Puget Sound]

Sparky
The trick isn't the definition of what PC is rather it is the application of it.
Too many times it was used to silence debate or opinions we just didn't want to hear.

[Puget Sound]

Joanie
You seem to be going nuts and see me in every posting. Stop it. I have never had a problem with illustrating your shortcomings by posting under my handle. So unless you have some proof, I'll assume that you're just drunk given the paucity of evidence in your posts.
Oh yeah, say hello to Edmonds Dan and AudioSlave. Two old friends from the past who have come back to say hi. Lets make them welcome, eh?

[AuthenticAndrew]

I remember last year BW posted some commentary by an old radio guy who was saying that AM was suffering because the hosts never made reference to one another and were like islands unto themselves. A few months later it seemed like KIRO started having lots of spots where the hosts would plug eahother's show. There's at least one spot with Burbank plugging each of the other host's shows. They also started the "Big Story @ 6" which features sound clips from earlier shows and they ask listeners to leave a short opinion voice mail for that show during the two shows that preceed it. I wonder if that's all coincidence.

Prior to the management changeover the talent seemed pretty icy to one another, save for Dori Monson (allegedly) playing tapes of Mike Webb for management.

[chucks]

WHY WE WIN!!!!
Tomorrow, July 4, 1157 soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines are re-enlisting at Camp Victory in Baghdad, Iraq.
While we sit on our asses here at home, these heroes carry the load.
The reasons to re-up run from "I am doing what I signed up for" and "We are so close to victory, I just have to see it through" to"I just think these people deserve the same liberty we enjoy".
You gotta admire their character.