Why Do Libs Fail At Talk Radio?

[JeffWartman]

There ideas are nothing but hate and rage

that is why they fall on their ass

Not true. What you have said is false.

BECAUSE they are successful in other forms of media, it has NOTHING to do with ideas. Get it?

 

[red states rule]

Not true. What you have said is false.

BECAUSE they are successful in other forms of media, it has NOTHING to do with ideas. Get it?

Fox News is killing the left on cable TV

and the liberal print media has been declining

There is a shift and talk radio is leading the way

Liberal bias is comon knowledge and it is catching up to them

 

[JeffWartman]

Fox News is killing the left on cable TV

and the liberal print media has been declining

There is a shift and talk radio is leading the way

Liberal bias is comon knowledge and it is catching up to them

Once again, you respond with incorrect grammar, spelling mistakes, and overall ignorance of the English language, with an idea that has little to do with my point.

Priceless.

 

[red states rule]

Once again, you respond with incorrect grammar, spelling mistakes, and overall ignorance of the English language, with an idea that has little to do with my point.

Priceless.

and your liberal like arrogrance is very telling

 

[JeffWartman]

and your liberal like arrogrance is very telling

I don't speak with arrogance most of the time. It sounds like arrogance when I speak to someone who is uneducated.

 

[actsnoblemartin]

care to tell me where they are successful. Ive heard liberal talk radio, and when they are yelling, ranting and raving about the "american taliban", saying how bad america is, and agreeing with those who want to free free palestine, err kill all the jews in israel. I fail to see how that is not hateful.

NOT are all liberal ideas hateful of course not, but liberal talk radio needs a huge kick in the ass, because their is barely anything moderate about it, it does not represent moderate democrats, and if it did, it would succeed.

Say what you want about some of the conservative radio talk show hosts, but they do schtick, and try to entertain, while, liberal talk radio is not funny, its offensive, and I prefer the less mean conservative hosts, who not only have a point, but dont have to be a dick about it.

So, please tell me where liberals are succeeding in those other places. I am not being sarcastic i am honesty curious.

No disrespect my friend.

BECAUSE they are successful in other forms of media, it has NOTHING to do with ideas. Get it?[/QUOTE]

 

[Larkinn]

Im talking about air america, and ive listened to it. So i can speak to what i call their anger, and their lack of being entertaining. Im not for anyone on this board, calling anyone names, and im not happy when i do it either. I am very critical of myself in every thing i do.

As opposed to conservative radio and talk shows, which aren't angry? They always involve someone talking in a fast, tense voice about some evil the left is perpetrating against America.

Oh, and let me be clear, I think their are two kinds of people in the democratic party, liberals, and democrats. Liberals, extreme, they hate anyone who disagrees with them, and america. And then their are democrats who love america but simply and passionately disagree with republicans and conservatives but are honest, hard working and good people, and I want those type of people running your party.

You don't understand what a liberal is.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/liberalism/#Pol

A little bit about it, and the recent history of the word. It does NOT mean "people in the democratic party you don't like". It has a specific connotation according to certain beliefs.

and I would never expect you to admit, lbs run 98% of the media - they are pissed they don't run the other 2%

Rupert Murdoch runs 39% of American media. Are you calling him a liberal?

 

[red states rule]

care to tell me where they are successful. Ive heard liberal talk radio, and when they are yelling, ranting and raving about the "american taliban", saying how bad america is, and agreeing with those who want to free free palestine, err kill all the jews in israel. I fail to see how that is not hateful.

Now are all liberal ideas hateful of course not, but liberal talk radio needs a huge kick in the ass, because their is barely anything moderate about it, it does not represent moderate democrats, and if it did, it would succeed.

Say what you want about some of the conservative radio talk show hosts, but they do schtick, and try to entertain, while, liberal talk radio is not funny, its offensive, and I prefer the less mean conservative hosts, who not only have a point, but dont have to be a dick about it.

So, please tell me where liberals are succeeding in those other places. I am not being sarcastic i am honesty curious.

No disrespect my friend.

BECAUSE they are successful in other forms of media, it has NOTHING to do with ideas. Get it?

[/QUOTE]

In very few instances are they "successful"

 

[JeffWartman]

care to tell me where they are successfull.

Newspaper
Internet
Network news
Books
Newsletters
Pamphlets

and on, and on, and on.

 

[red states rule]

Newspaper
Internet
Network news
Books
Newsletters
Pamphlets

and on, and on, and on.

the circulation and ratings for the liberal media has been going south

this is why libs want to regulate political speech on the radio - then they will come after chat rooms like this one

 

[JeffWartman]

the circulation and ratings for the liberal media has been going south

Which has nothing to do with their ideas.

then they will come after chat rooms like this one

Uhh, this is NOT a chat room.

 

[actsnoblemartin]

I will read about the definition of liberalism, but what i see on tv, mostly, is mean people...

Oh, and yes, id say about half of conservative shows are mean, but half are intellectuall, and dont have to name call, or be mean.

You're right, we should not demonize the other side, im guilty of it lol.

NO, im calling murdoch an asshole, because no one should own more then 5 percent of the media.

I appreciate the thought provoking points.

As opposed to conservative radio and talk shows, which aren't angry? They always involve someone talking in a fast, tense voice about some evil the left is perpetrating against America.



You don't understand what a liberal is.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/liberalism/#Pol

A little bit about it, and the recent history of the word. It does NOT mean "people in the democratic party you don't like". It has a specific connotation according to certain beliefs.



Rupert Murdoch runs 39% of American media. Are you calling him a liberal?

 

[Larkinn]

I will read about the definition of liberalism, but what i see on tv, mostly, is mean people...

Welcome to television.

Oh, and yes, id say about half of conservative shows are mean, but half are intellectuall, and dont have to name call, or be mean.

Very few of them are intellectual...and maybe they do name call, but you just find it "funny"...

I self identify as a liberal, but you can bet whenever rsr, or domino, or any of the other great minds of our generation have a sentence that involves "liberals think x" or "because all libs are y" or "libs do z" 100% of the time it will be incorrect. Some may have those traits (although they seem even to fail that criteria much of the time), but by and large, they do not.

 

[JeffWartman]

Oh, and yes, id say about half of conservative shows are mean, but half are intellectuall, and dont have to name call, or be mean.

There isn't much intellectual conservative media anymore. The intellectual conservatives are basically limited to National Review.

 

[Bullypulpit]

people dont hate liberal ideas, they hate the hatred spewed about america, and anyone who disagrees with them. Now some conservative shows, are very mean, but atleast they make a point. Hating america and conservatives is not a view point. Now somelike i just said, some conservatives are very mean, and name call, and say liberals (all kinds of things), but no american wants to hear how terrible their country is. And, I think most americans, like conservative radio because it has a point that people agree about, and there are some conservative hosts, agree or not, that make some good points.

To assert that most Americans like conservative talk radio "... because it has a point that people agree about..." is to belittle most Americans.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Wow, a whole 100 "whoppers" over about 20 years. That works out to about 5 slip ups per year. Can we say "human"? Critics have been after Rush Limbaugh for years trying to discredit him on a solid basis. However, nobody can prove that Limbaugh is deliberately lying to deceive anyone.

The same thing goes for Ann Coulter. She has been raked over the coals as much as Limbaugh but despite her being "out there" at times, nobody can prove her to be a liar either.

In her appearance on "<i>Hardball</i>" Anne Coulter <i>misrepresented</i> ( since you find "Lied" to be so distasteful) about Barck Obama's statements in a June 23 speech, stating Obama s"just gave this speech on evangelicals hijacking America." The text of Obama's speech said no such thing, and here's the relevant section:

<blockquote>...somehow, somewhere along the way, faith stopped being used to bring us together and started being used to drive us apart. It got hijacked. Part of it's because of the so-called leaders of the Christian Right, who've been all too eager to exploit what divides us. At every opportunity, they've told evangelical Christians that Democrats disrespect their values and dislike their Church, while suggesting to the rest of the country that religious Americans care only about issues like abortion and gay marriage; school prayer and intelligent design. - <a href=http://www.barackobama.com/2007/06/23/a_politics_of_conscience_1.php>Barack Obama</a></blockquote>

On the same show <i>Ms.</i> Coulter misrepresented the facts of 9/11, stating, contrary to the Senate Intelligence Committees report, that Saddam and Al Qaeda had a working relationship and Saddam was "working with Al Qaeda's top agents". A mistake? If so, one should think she would have long since corrected such an error, given that the intel committee's report was released some 10 months ago.

Like so many other right wing talking heads, <i>Ms.</i> Coulter sprinkles her comments with just enough truth to give them an air of plausibility, with the rest simply pure crap.

 

[red states rule]

Which has nothing to do with their ideas.



Uhh, this is NOT a chat room.

It was all to do with their one sides liberal bias

This is an open arena where people can express their views - like talk radio. That is what the left wants to silence

At least the conservative voices

 

[red states rule]

To assert that most Americans like conservative talk radio "... because it has a point that people agree about..." is to belittle most Americans.

Then why do liberals fall on their asses when they try to compete with conservatives on talk radio?

 

[red states rule]

One reason why MSNBC is dead last in the ratings


Chris Matthews Continues Coulter Pile-On
Posted by Geoffrey Dickens on June 27, 2007 - 17:58.
Chris Matthews followed-up his, now infamous, staging of the Ann Coulter vs. Elizabeth Edwards throwdown by inviting on John Edwards to join his wife in the pile-on of the conservative columnist. On tonight's Hardball, Edwards condemned Coulter's "hate-mongering" but Matthews never brought up the fact that Edwards' own staffers spewed some pretty hateful things, or that Matthews on the very same show compared conservative students to violent inbred hicks. While Matthews did mention Edwards campaign has used Coulter to raise money, most of the interview was full of softballs.

The following is a sampling of some of the, not-so-quite hardball, questions from Matthews to Edwards that occurred on the June 27th Hardball:

Chris Matthews: "Elizabeth had one, I think Elizabeth may have made one strategic error last night. That's assuming that she could get Ann Coulter to express shame."

...

Matthews: "Well how do you explain the fact, that, you, you see people with good educations walking around the streets of New York and Wall Street, people with big business jobs in equity firms, hedge fund people, all buying books by Ann Coulter? How do you explain the fact, that even last night's fight involving your wife Elizabeth and Ann Coulter, probably helped her sell some books to these kind of guys?"

John Edwards: "Because I think there is a segment of the population that responds to this sort of hateful craziness. It's always been true, Chris. When I, when I was young, growing up in the South, people were very responsive to name-calling of African-Americans, prejudice and discrimination against African-Americans. And people would say the most outrageous, demeaning things about good human beings and there would be a response. And so there's always been hateful, hateful language. Hate, hate-mongering in this country. It's been true for as long as I've been alive and it's still true today but that doesn't mean we have to tolerate it. We have to speak out about it. We have to stand up."

for the complete article

http://newsbusters.org/node/13783

 

[red states rule]

or how libs want talk radio to operate

ABC Edits Out Coulter Zingers in Debate With Edwards
Posted by Scott Whitlock on June 27, 2007 - 11:56.
On Wednesday’s "Good Morning America," co-anchor Chris Cuomo portrayed the previous day’s on-air debate between Elizabeth Edwards and Ann Coulter as a one sided lecture from the ‘08 contender’s wife. The ABC program edited out or didn’t play either of Coulter’s best verbal barbs.

The conservative author’s zinger, that John Edwards’ use of her name to raise money is better "than giving $50,000 speeches to the poor," was bluntly cut out. And although GMA found time to play Mrs. Edwards’ denunciation of the conservative commentator as hateful, the program skipped over a retort by Coulter that described Mr. Edwards’ law practice as "bankrupting doctors by giving a shyster, Las Vegas routine."

In a related note, MSNBC’s "First Read" page now admits that the ambush by a 2008 candidate’s wife was a preplanned event between the network and the John Edwards campaign:

According to an Edwards campaign aide, Elizabeth Edwards wanted to call into the show when she heard that Coulter would be taking questions, and she called a Hardball producer to get the phone number needed to dial into the show.

And now, with MSNBC’s help, the Edwards ‘08 website is using the incident to promote the North Carolina Democrat.


for the complete article
http://newsbusters.org/node/13773