take your answer off the air...

  • HorsesAss.Org: the straight poop on WA politics & the press
    progressive brilliance from the guy who pointed out Tim Eyman's nascent horse's-assedness
  • Talker's Magazine
    The quirky talk radio trade mag. Check the Talk Radio Research Project- it's not very scientific, but places on the top 15 talkers list (scroll down to Talk Radio Audiences By Size)) are as hotly contested as Emmys (and mean just about as much).
  • The Advocate
    No, not THAT Advocate... it's the Northwest Progressive Institute's Official Blog.
  • Media Matters
    Documentation of right-wing media in video, audio and text.
  • Orcinus
    home of David Neiwert, freelance investigative journalist and author who writes extensively about far-right hate groups
  • Hominid Views
    "People, politics, science, and whatnot" Darryl is a statistician who fights imperialism with empiricism, gives good links and wry commentary.
  • Jesus' General
    An 11 on the Manly Scale of Absolute Gender, a 12 on the Heavenly Scale of the 10 Commandments and a 6 on the earthly scale of the Immaculately Groomed.
  • Howie in Seattle
    Howie Martin is the Abe Linkin' of progressive Seattle.
  • Streaming Radio Guide
    Hellishly long (5795!) list of radio streaming, steaming on the Internets.
  • The Naked Loon
    News satire -- The Onion in the Seattle petunia patch.
  • Irrational Public Radio
    "informs, challenges, soothes and/or berates, and does so with a pleasing vocal cadence and unmatched enunciation. When you listen to IPR, integrity washes over you like lava, with the pleasing familiarity of a medium-roast coffee and a sensible muffin."
  • The Maddow Blog
    Here's the hyper-interactive La Raych of MSNBC. daily show-vids, freakishly geeky research, and classy graphics.
  • Northwest Broadcasters
    The AM, FM, TV and digital broadcasters of Northwest Washington, USA and Southwest British Columbia, Canada. From Kelso, WA to the northern tip of Vancouver Island, BC - call letters, formats, slogans, networks, technical data, and transmitter maps. Plus "recent" news.
  • News Corpse
    The Internet's chronicle of media decay.
  • The Moderate Voice
    The voice of reason in the age of Obama, and the politics of the far-middle.
  • News Hounds
    Dogged dogging of Fox News by a team who seems to watch every minute of the cable channel so you don't have to.
  • HistoryLink
    Fun to read and free encyclopedia of Washington State history. Founded by the late Walt Crowley, it's an indispensable tool and entertainment source for history wonks and surfers alike.

right-wing blogs we like

  • The Reagan Wing
    Hearin lies the real heart of Washington State Republicans. Doug Parris runs this red-meat social conservative group site which bars no holds when it comes to saying who they are and who they're not; what they believe and what they don't; who their friends are and where the rest of the Republicans can go. Well-written, and flaming.
  • Orbusmax
    inexhaustible Drudgery of NW conservative news
  • The Radio Equalizer
    prolific former Seattle KVI, KIRO talk host speaks authoritatively about radio.
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 02/2005


« Will the mariners kill kvi? | Main | Tuesday oddems: vanishing penises; tiny tiny hot tiny; stefan and the hoi polloi; lickspittle bouquets; effervescent candidacies; perfidious pancakes; hulking hope; hot rachel wrapped in the glory; and nothing whatsoever about dori or luke! »

February 18, 2008



I know one of those retired officers Joanie. He gloats about socialism and welfare but also brags about his posh military housing. He also stated that the educated shouldn't have to go to war as it was not fair, the less fortunate should go as their options are limited. I guess we should privatize the military to even things out.


having a strong peacetime military serves as a deterrent to keep us safe. it's not a jobs program. you make it seem like serving is an easy thing. low pay and long hours. lots of missed holidays. i know you don't believe me, but the military is a dangerous place even in peace time.
heavy military equipment like tanks/planes and doing stuff that is inherently dangerous like jumping out of planes isn't stuff that is forgiving of a mistake.

sorry you think so little of your brother's service. i don't. of course, i've served and you haven't.


having a strong peacetime military serves as a deterrent to keep us safe.

Hey, stupid. Having full employment lowers the crime rate and keeps us safe.

You're just stupid on the fact of it, puts.

BTW, haven't you heard? Firefighters go into burning buildings. BTW, haven't you heard? Nurses work in buildings where contagious diseases are routinely found. BTW, haven't you heard? Airline pilots fly those big airplanes quite frequently. BTW, haven't you heard? Some people work two jobs which means long hours, few holidays, and low pay everyday.

And some people jump out of airplanes for fun.

Oh, and BTW, noticed the crime rate at schools lately?

BTW, read Coiler above.

And Hey, you're still an idiot puts.

And I don't worry about what an idiot thinks of what I think of my brother. He appreciated what he had. He was a good liberal.


Yeah, Coiler. I know one,too. Talk about looking gift horses in the mouths. They have no appreciation for what we taxpayers do for them.

They are part of the elite.

Putsie must be a wannabe.


all of those things you listed above is true. of course, without a secure and safe America we wouldn't have much call for it, would we now Joanie.

For some reason you think this is a zero sum game. Praising those who serve in the military in no way denigrates firefighters, airline pilots, teachers, et al.

you really don't get it, now do you. again, praise to your brother. sorry that your life has turned out so bad for you. it must really suck to be you.


"For what it's worth, I'm firmly in the Obamagon camp now. Randi read a pretty long list of his accomplishments while a State senator and I was impressed...

Just had to share. :)

Posted by: joanie | February 21, 2008 at 03:02 AM"

Now I see your sudden conversion from Hillary over to Obama.
Got 'The Word' from drunk ass Randi, eh?
Talk about the loyal listener...staying up til 3 am listening to talk radio. YIKES. I doubt even Star Monson would wait around for Dori like that.
Joanie, do yourself a favor. Get Podcasts so you can download at your leisure and get some rest.
Some sleep would probably reduce the anger and bring some calm reflection into your life.

Waiting til 3 am to get 'The Word' is pretty damn scary. It must really suck to be you.


Ralph Nader is an ass. He's gone from crank to buffoon. Go to Hell, Ralph.


You're still an idiot, puts.

I agree, Tommy, Nader is the fool. He's becoming a caricature of himself. Too sad.


Some speculation on blogs that Ralph Nader is coming in on the behest of the Clintons. He is to the left of Hillary and more likely to take away from the Obama count. Hillary just needs to get to the convention fairly close in the Delegate count.
Obama hasn't been fully vetted. (and maybe there is nothing to really vette but no one really knows.)
Hillary is fairly well vetted. Maybe after seeing the 'potential' of the Times piece on McCain -which fizzled- she may be playing for the hail mary at this point and hoping that her campaign can come up with something...they spent a lot of money on the Chris Lehanes to go home empty handed.
So Duff, not all is lost.


"You're still an idiot, puts.

I agree, Tommy, Nader is the fool. He's becoming a caricature of himself. Too sad.

Posted by: joanie | February 24, 2008 at 11:03 AM"

Pot meets Kettle regarding Nader.
no analysis, just name calling. well within your skillset Joanie. poor thing.


I just saw your rejoinder on truman and after i got down dusting the 'straw' off my shoulder i had to laugh a bit. to be fair, before i point out a few of your errors let me tell you that truman is probably my favorite president. be that as it may, it doesn't blind me to certain truths.
first off, in 52 he didn't run and a factor in that was that he was damn unpopular at the time. it wasn't a one day poll, rather it was fairly consistent. even in 48 he wasn't considered the likely winner by dems especially when Democrat strom thurmond formed the Dixie Crats and threatened to hurt Truman in the south with his third party candidacy.
second, in 48 the repubs controlled congress. he ran against the 48 congress as the 'do nothing' congress. the dems didn't replace truman from within.
third, the truman administration was beset by a myriad of charges of corruption/soft on communism that didn't get cleared up in the publics mind until much later...hence, a reason for his low numbers THEN in the polls.
stay away from the wikipedia, might explain some of your earlier issues with misrepresentation such as calling the national journal the national review as means to prove a point. did you ever offer a correction on that? hmm.
if you want to really learn about truman you'll have to invest a little time in reading one of the many fine bios out there. unfortunately this will take more than a 15 minute scan on the 'puter.
my favorite is the pulitzer prize winning mccullough biography. i've read it a few times and enjoyed it every time.
i really hate to dice you up like that Cowpotpi3 aka


you seem like a nice fellow. and much smarter than joanie or that andrew fellow. But my earlier comparison stands on bedrock absent you doing a little more spade work. It's not an absolute I'll grant you, but you have some interesting parallels that historians will have fun in debating.

Both he and Bush had poor approval ratings -in the mid 20's- , both barely won reelection, both were held responsible for an unpopular war at home (this was even before he made the correct decision to can McArthur as the country was still weary coming off of ww2 and not anxious for people to be drafted to fight another war overseas), economic issues, and 'extreme' loyalty to administration officials to the point of charges of corruption. I forget to add that back in his day Truman was disdained as a fairly lightweight intellect and he was a strong supporter of Israel.


You are actually comparing Truman to Bush?
Mr. "The buck stops here" to Mr. "I don't care what you think" ?


instead of going with 'slogans' why don't you offer some insight. what i am saying is that we are way too close to bush to give it any real context or historical perspective. right now, it is pretty knee jerkian or emotional. i am not telling you that bush will be as favorably compared to truman. just that there are some interesting parallels that need time to flesh out.
it was a number of years before we saw the wisdom of truman. his stand against communism vis a vi the truman doctrine, the marshall plan, his civil rights initiatives, etc.
it will be interesting to see how history treats bush in the year 2038. many of us won't be here to see that.
sooo phil, go ahead dazzle us....


putsie, you don't wait thirty years to get "insight."

Insight is the ability to see into a situation-understanding intuitively.

You're the one who needs to learn to use insight.

Now, you do the work. interesting parallels

Like what?


Has time turned Hoover into a great President? Harding? Coolidge? Bush will be remembered as a great and wise President only if his mama writes his memoirs.


historical perspectives that by definition take time to develop.
i suggest you re-read the postings. i laid out a number of interesting parallels.
if you want to take issue with 'em, put up a counter to it.
word of advice, be coherent. otherwise you'll just end up looking silly. so go ahead, 'learn me' if you will.

and 'phil,' you miss the point. i would have a hard time comparing harding, coolidge, or hoover to bush. i made a direct comparison of bush to truman. go ahead, use reason to knock it down.
please, go ahead.


anyone want to lay odds that joanie won't take the coherency challenge and instead invoke the age old standby: the seattle skedaddle.
c'mon joanie, i know you don't read. but surely some google time is within your skillset.


And your comparison was in reference to making no judgements about Bush at this time because History was kind to Truman down the line. All I am saying is that time was not kind to Hoover or Coolidge, and I find it laughable that History will someday say that Bush was a brilliant President.


the ball was in your court - lay out the parallels. Maybe you can't think of any...?

BTW, at least I taught you a new word: insight

Dick Gregory

Bush is Truman? That is the stupidest thing since, since "Mission Accomplished"


i didn't say brilliant. nice try but straw is flammable.
funny, none of you can refute what i am saying. if it is such a stupid thing then delineate the reasons why. i am willing to listen.
i laid out the parallels. you are either being dense or in preparation for the skedaddle. but i'll give you another chance to flail away. oh yeah, lets avoid the obvious play i'll even define parallel for you per meriam.

"3: a comparison to show resemblance"

"Both he and Bush had poor approval ratings throughout their presidency and towards the end-in the mid 20's- , both barely won reelection, both were held responsible for an unpopular war at home (this was even before he made the correct decision to can McArthur as the country was still weary coming off of ww2 and not anxious for people to be drafted to fight another war overseas), both were beset by economic issues, and 'extreme' loyalty to administration officials to the point of charges of corruption. I forget to add that back in his day Truman was also disdained as a fairly lightweight intellect and like Bush he was a strong supporter of Israel."

Dick Gregory

and Nixon's was at 24%. Can't you de better?


All irrelevant (sort of like saying they were all men, white and over forty) except perhaps this one:

Truman was also disdained as a fairly lightweight intellect and like Bush he was a strong supporter of Israel.

So you think the weight of history may show Bush to be a heavyweight intellect and strong supporter of Israel?



that is odd, comparing Bush against someone else. Bush can be judged as the worst based on Iraq alone.


Well at least a few people understood the point I was making. We have refuted what you said. Just because Truman became beloved after the passing of years does not mean Bush will too. The idea of it is absolutely ridiculous. He's a privileged little shit who doesn't give a damp hell for the opinions of the people he was elected to govern. He buys into the toxic economic theories of unreconstructed capitalism, despite never having had to earn an honest living in his life, and he supports a worldview that cuts out anyone who hasn't had his good fortune. He's stupid in the truest sense of the word: willfully ignorant and determined to surround himself with people who keep him that way, not only resistant to different ideas but actively hostile towards them.

Conservatism is very dependent on maintaining various myths and fantasies within its ranks. The biggest fantasy of all is that America will look back on the Bush years and see them as anything but a huge disaster that harmed the country.


Nice litany of name calling. Now that you have that out of your system give me some substance.


Should we call the Skedddale now or do you want to dither awhile longer?

I gave both you and Phil some parallels and it is interesting neither of you can rise above some name calling. If it was so easy to knockdown I would think you both would be all over it and citing facts to show me wrong. Like I said, I am open to being wrong about it. And I am not saying Bush will necessarily be termed a great president 30 years hence. That is unknowable at this point.
I am saying that the parallels have substance and the fact that you're not able to knock 'em down gives credence to it.


but, putsie, you didn't my parallels: age, gender and ethnicity. All three factual. So, why should I answer yours?


"Nice litany of name calling. Now that you have that out of your system give me some substance."

I think he just did. 'Course you'll do the Elliot Bay two step and dodge the bullet.


Puts, are you going to turn this into another marathon post like the Shark one, where we have to guess the magic word to sound credible? I hope not!

I count at least 7 points that Phil made regarding Bush's integrity and intelligence. And as far as name calling goes, compared to others on here, his were sort of mild, dontcha think? Take out the names "little shit" and "stupid" if you must, but overall, he has pointed out how Bush is different not only from Truman, but from all the other Presidents as well. You said you don't like Bush, so Im not sure why you are attempting to put him in even the faintest of a good light.


Phil had seven rants toward Bush. That's all he did. He never made any substantive headway on the premise.
But I guess that counts for substance around here.
What was of interest is the fact that I posted something that most of you instinctively reacted to in a negative fashion. Yet the best that could be mustered up was a little name calling and a few rants. Hmmm, no wonder many of you never venture forth where your opinions may get challenged.

We'll just have to let time pass.

You all have a nice week.


step one two three
turn one two three


Are you kidding? My opinions are challenged every day at school by short people! So I choose to keep arguments to a minimum on the weekends when Im off the clock.


I plead guilty. Puts, sometimes you can't see the forest for the trees. You put up arguments that are so merit-less that it is hard to take you seriously.

Read the Chalmers Johnson trilogy. Then I'll listen to what you have to say. That would be interesting to me.

Dick Cheney

Putz, go fuck yourself

The comments to this entry are closed.

April 2013

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30        

Tip Jar

Change is good

Tip Jar

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter

    pacific nw talk stations

    • KIRO 710ESPN Seattle 710 KHz
      Games and sports-blabber
    • KIROFM 97.3
      Multi-format: news and nearly all local talk. This is where classic KIRO AM news talk radio went... hopefully, not to die. The home of Dave Ross & Luke Burbank, Dori Monson, Ron & Don, Frank Shiers, Bill Radke, Linda Thomas, Tony Miner and George Noory.
    • KUOW FM 94.9
      Seattle's foremost public radio news and talk.
    • KVI am 570 KHz
      Visit the burnt-out husk of one of the seminal right-wing talkers in all the land. Here's where once trilled the reactionary tones of Rush Limbaugh, John Carlson, Kirby Wilbur, Mike Siegel, Peter Weissbach, Floyd Brown, Dinky Donkey, and Bryan Suits. Now it's Top 40 hits from the '60's & '70's aimed at that diminishing crowd who still remembers them and can still hear.
    • KTTH am 770 KHz
      Right wing home of local, and a whole bunch of syndicated righties such as Glennn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Michael Medved, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Lars Larsony, and for an hour a day: live & local David Boze.
    • KPTK am 1090 KHz
      Syndicated liberal talk. Stephanie Miller, Thom Hartmann, Ed Schultz, Randi Rhodes, Norman Goldman fill in the large hole to the left on Northwest radio dial.
    • KLFE AM 1590 kHz
      Syndicated right-wing 2nd stringers like Mark Levin, Bill Bennett, Mike Gallagher, Dennis Prager, Dennis Miller and Hugh Hewitt inhabit this timid-voiced neighbor honker for your radio enjoyment (unless you're behind something large like Costco).
    • KOMOAM
      News, traffic, Ken Schram and John Carlson.
    • Washington State Radio Stations
      Comprehensive list of every danged AM & FM station on the dial.
    • KKOL am 1300 KHz
      Once a rabid right-wing talker, except for Lou Dobbs, it's all business....