Liberal Talkradio Network To Launch March 31

[Avatar4321]

Actually thats not true at all. If most talk radio listeners were "hard-core right wing conservatives who won't listen to anyone they disagree with" then the Democrats wouldnt care what Limbaugh or Hannity do. They are worried because there are alot of liberals listening to them who are getting swayed by their arguments. Its sort of like howard stern. people who disliked what he said listened more than those who liked what he said because they wanted to know what he would do next.

Talk radio offers listeners something the rest of the news doesnt. A conservative viewpoint (I know fox news has been approaching this method now as well). Unlike what some Democrats seem to think, people are stupid. (why they think their supporters are stupid for not voting for them is beyond me but then im willing to bet there are conservatives who think people are stupid for not voting for them as well) Americans will look at the arguments and see which side presents a better case, which liberals are failing to do. Calling the President stupid and a liar may make you feel like your big, but it doesnt defeat the issues he stands for. It doesnt make terrorism go away, it doesnt make our education system fail less. Democrats have no real agenda. They have been complaining about the same issues for the last fifty years or so despite having control of Congress and the Presidency plenty of times in which they could have passed their agenda. And the last to Democrat Presidencies have been a joke. I think if the liberals want to attract listeners to the radio, they need to find some key issues, develop plans on how to impliment them so that they will work logically and then share them. But they wont they continue to attack Bush offering no alternative. This is why they will fail.

As for them putting it up agianst Orielly i could care less. I dont think he is very indicative of the Conservative movement. He is one of the few ones Conservative talk show hosts ive listened to who i think really is full of himself. This may be why they picked orielly to go up against. But then since im usually getting ready for bed that late at the night i doubt id listen to either anyway.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Avatar4321, :clap1: :clap1: :clap1: :clap1:

 

[Bern80]

Originally posted by acludem
I can't wait to listen, that is some top notch talent they have. Did you notice they are putting "The O'Franken Factor" right up against Bill O'Reilly's "Radio Factor" (or at least part of it in my area)? It will be nice to have an alternative to Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage and the rest of the far right talk radio shows. What's their slogan? "Need an answer? Blame Clinton!"

Talented? Maybe. Know the first damn thing about politics, econimcs, gov't and how the real world works in general. As far as I can see it's pretty much all Hollywood types. Where did we ever come up w/ this notion that these people somehow have a better idea of how to run the gov't then the next guy. As someone said earlier this is probably just going to turn into a venting venue for the Hollywood elite. Again a group of people that doesn't know dick about much of anything in the real world let alone gov't. Oh and conservativs blame all liberals not just Clinton.

I hope this lasts, but it will be difficult for Liberals to be successful on talk radio simply because most listeners of talk radio are hard-core right wing conservatives who won't listen to anyone they disagree with. That's the nature of conservatism. I can just about 100% guarantee you that if conservatives listen and call in they will be treated with far greater respect than liberal callers on conservative shows, who are usually shouted down by the host (I do have to say that Sean Hannity is better about respecting differences of opinion than most of his conservative colleagues).

Again you assume that people who disagree w/ you must not be listening. It may mean you're still wrong. I highly dought conservative callers would receive any respect, (if they they let callers on at all, becasue going w/ your premise most would have to be conservatives). I foresee a lot of "I am personally offended" and "how can you say that" remarks from these hosts. Your averagre liberal can't differentiate b/t debate and personal attacks that well.

 

[MtnBiker]

Originally posted by Avatar4321
Listen to Glenn? I know the guy. He is alot more fun in person than on the radio.

Hey cool, his show is fairly new in my area. Great show. I've all but stopped listening to the other stations during his time slot (I believe it on a delay airing here).

 

[MtnBiker]

Originally posted by acludem
I hope this lasts, but it will be difficult for Liberals to be successful on talk radio simply because most listeners of talk radio are hard-core right wing conservatives who won't listen to anyone they disagree with.

Conservative talk radio does well with ratings because there is a market for it. Liberal talk radio will do well if there is a market for that as well. I disagree that the only listeners are hard-core right wing. There may be a populas of liberal minded people who want to listen to liberal talk radio that will be the bases for a market for liberal radio.

 

[CrazyLiberal]

Ha conservative radio hosts don't insult liberals who call and call them stupid etc?

"Oh, you're one of the sodomites! You should get aids and die, you pig! How's that?! Why don't you go see if you can sue me, you pig! You got nothing better to do than put me down, you piece of garbage! Go eat a sausage and choke on it!"

Michael Savage responding to a polite homosexual caller who shot down one of his points

"You're a bunch of gutless, spineless cowards!"

Sean Hannity responding to a liberal who was beating him in an arguement over Iraq

Other quotes that should discredit what these crazy conservative radio hosts and personalties say:

"We need to execute people like Jown Walker in order to physically intimidate liberals, by making them realize that they can be killed, too!"

Ann Coulter

"When Michael Moore says that this President is an illegitame President he crosses the line, he crosses the line into anarchy all right!"

Bill O' Reilly

"Feminism was established so as to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream of society!"

Rush Limbaugh

"It has not been proven that nicotine is addictive, the same with cigarettes causing emphysema and other diseases."

Rush Limbaugh

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by CrazyLiberal
Michael Savage responding to a polite homosexual caller who shot down one of his points...

Sean Hannity responding to a liberal who was beating him in an arguement over Iraq

Do you have links to the conversations? I'd like to see for myself how they were being shot down and beaten.

 

[CrazyLiberal]

No I don't have links, these are quotes from a book. I have no way of finding proof that they were being beaten but either way they are pretty stupid things to say you must admit? Here is another interesting one:

"We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity!"

Ann Coulter on the Middle East

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by CrazyLiberal
No I don't have links, these are quotes from a book. I have no way of finding proof that they were being beaten but either way they are pretty stupid things to say you must admit? Here is another interesting one:

"We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity!"

Ann Coulter on the Middle East

I do agree that the comments appear to be a bit over the edge. You also must admit that people have a tendency to take things out of context and report humor as fact. I really don't know why these comments were made or in what context, which is why I would have liked to have read the text or heard the audio.

Sort of like how so many liberals claim "Bush claimed Iraq was an imminent threat". When called on it no one can produce any proof, but rather they produce other comments and words by others that have been twisted and taken out of context. I wouldn't get my facts from Rush or Ann Coulter no more than I would from moveon.org or commondreams.

 

[CrazyLiberal]

Proof Bush said Iraq was imminent threat? How about a speach from his own website along with other links

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021007-8.html

http://www.ph.ucla.edu/epi/bioter/iraqimminent/html

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/1/29/17733/6012

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by CrazyLiberal
Proof Bush said Iraq was imminent threat? How about a speach from his own website along with other links

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021007-8.html

http://www.ph.ucla.edu/epi/bioter/iraqimminent/html

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/1/29/17733/6012

2nd link doesn't work.

Neither of the other 2 links show anywhere that Bush claimed Iraq was an imminent threat. Did you even read these first?

 

[jimnyc]

Nice avatar, crazy. Did you get that one from Snopes where it shows that picture to be a hoax?

 

[CrazyLiberal]

Can't make 2nd link work

Just becuase George Bush doesn't the exact wording imminent doesn't mean that you can't understand that is what he is generally saying

quotes of GWB taken from 3rd link:

"The dictator of Iraq and his weapons of mass destruction are a threat to the security of free nations."

"The Iraqi regime is a threat to any American. They not only have weapons of mass destruction, they used weapons of mass destruction...That's why I say Iraq is a threat, a real threat."

"The world is also uniting to answer the unique and urgent threat posed by Iraq whose dictator has already used weapons of mass destruction to kill thousands." (note urgent threat)

"Saddam Hussein is a threat to America."

"I see a significant threat to the security of the United States in Iraq."

"There is real threat, in my judgment, a real and dangerous threat to American in Iraq in the form of Saddam Hussein."

"The Iraqi regime is a threat of unique urgency."

"There's a grave threat in Iraq. There just is."

"This man poses a much graver threat than anybody could have possibly imagined."

He calls Iraq an urgent threat twice in these quotes, and if you look in a thesarus (sp) you will most likely find urgent and imminent next to eachother.

No I don't even know what Snopes is Jimny, enlighten me please






Seems pretty real to me I don't know how it could be faked

Well if you can provide proof that it is I'll use the picture with GWB reading a book to a classroom-where he is holding the book upside down.

 

[jimnyc]

He said no more and no less than what John Kerry and other democrats did. You're trying to put words in someone's mouth. I've noticed that disturbing trend and twisitng of the words by many liberals.

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

"The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation." -- John Kerry, 10/9/02

"(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. ...And now he is miscalculating America�s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War." -- John Kerry, 1/23/03

"Iraq may not be the war on terror itself, but it is critical to the outcome of the war on terror, and therefore any advance in Iraq is an advance forward in that..." -- John Kerry 12/15/03

 

[CrazyLiberal]

More reasons for me to not like Kerry! There are still bigger and worse reasons to not like Bush but the Democrats are almost making me vote for Nader! What shall I do? No I'm not putting words in anyone's mouth almost anyone could figure out "urgent threat" is almost exactly = "imminent threat"

 

[jimnyc]

Here's the real picture of GW, with the lens cap actually off. You don't really fall for everything you find on the internet, do you?

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by CrazyLiberal
Well if you can provide proof that it is I'll use the picture with GWB reading a book to a classroom-where he is holding the book upside down.

I guess you really do believe everything you read. How sad.

http://www.snopes.com/photos/bushbook.asp

 

[CrazyLiberal]

I fall for everything I see on the internet, cause like TV and radio everything you hear and see on the media has to be right. Also no I do not read my links before I post them I am illiterate. Sorry

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by CrazyLiberal
I fall for everything I see on the internet, cause like TV and radio everything you hear and see on the media has to be right. Also no I do not read my links before I post them I am illiterate. Sorry

How do you think we prove these things wrong so quickly? Because every liberal that comes here has fallen for the same crap. Liberals like to debate with cartoons and articles from the least reputable sites on the internet. When they get cornered with bogus data or no sources to backup their claims, they then resort to sarcasm or outright nastiness. It's really rather funny!

 

[CrazyLiberal]

Originally posted by jimnyc
How do you think we prove these things wrong so quickly? Because every liberal that comes here has fallen for the same crap. Liberals like to debate with cartoons and articles from the least reputable sites on the internet. When they get cornered with bogus data or no sources to backup their claims, they then resort to sarcasm or outright nastiness. It's really rather funny!

I have not resorted to nastiness, and I'm not resorting to sarcasism to "save" my ass.. I'm being sarcastic because when I give you the quotes that anyone with a thesarus would easily read to be "imminent threats" you say I'm putting words in peoples mouth etc.. Who really cares if he uses the EXACT wording imminent or not? Urgent threat=imminent threat. How am I putting words in his mouth? How am I wrong? I am far from being backed into a corner from lack of sources or bogus info you just refuse to acknowlege them and say I'm putting words in his mouth. Sorry that I don't look on sites that search the internet for doctored political photos and have profiles on them and what evidence they have to show that they were doctored before I post a funny avatar.... I will change back to the monkey one unless you think that they distorted GWB's face to look uncannily like the monkey too?