Discussing or Being - Talk Radio

[TheBigA]

So Bret had a talk show host that gave herself credit for the election on his show and it's his doing?

I didn't say that. I was just answering your question. Read post #11.

 

[Small Market Guy]

I didn't say that. I was just answering your question. Read post #11.

That's not reporting "talk radio is responsible for the loss" as "fact". It's letting a largely irrelevant radio host gloat over her perceived importance.

 

[TheBigA]

That's not reporting "talk radio is responsible for the loss" as "fact". It's letting a largely irrelevant radio host gloat over her perceived importance.

So you're saying Fox News doesn't report facts?

 

[flybynight]

You make some valid points, but I don't think conservative talk radio has quite as much power as some people think it does.

Rush Limbaugh had a huge audience in the 1990's (I think at his peak they said around 20 million listeners) -- yet he couldn't keep Bill Clinton from being re-elected. He couldn't stop us from going into Bosnia, or getting involved in Kosovo (two things I recall Limbaugh was against, as I used to listen to the guy back then).

President Obama was not only elected, but re-elected -- both times, by decent margins. Conservative talk radio couldn't keep that from happening. Conservative talk radio couldn't keep the Democrats from taking Congress in 2006.

The ACA was passed into Federal law in March, 2010, and even though conservative talk radio was referring to it in terms of "socialism" and "death panels" -- they couldn't stop that from happening.

It's possible that the Republicans taking the House in 2010 would have happened anyway, conservative talk radio or no conservative talk radio.

Obviously, conservative talk radio galvanises the right wing, but are they really as effective in the big picture as they are often made out to be?

You look at elections, there are a lot more voters than conservative talk listeners.

Does conservative talk radio have 47% of the American voting public (the percentage who voted against President Obama last election) listening to them every day? From what you guys in the know say about the conservative talk ratings numbers, it doesn't seem that conservative talk radio has 47% of the listeners.

The big difference is that after Obama was elected, far right wingers, particularly the P1's of talkradio, became completely unglued like I've never seen. They believe the wildest nonsense about the guy. Unlike when other Dems were in office, the conservative talk listeners during THIS Presidency are incapable of being reasoned with on anything to do with him.

Having sat behind a talkradio mic through Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush and now Obama, I can honestly tell you that the core audience's reaction to this President is unlike any reaction I've seen before. It's downright disturbing how demonized Barack HUSSEIN Obama has been---and he's not all that different from many other Presidents, except for one obvious feature----and those on the right get soooo angry if you insinuate that this may be because of race, meanwhile, considering Obama isn't governing much differently than most President's, we don't have that many other options to consider in understanding why there's such a vitriolic reaction to the guy! They can't even explain it themselves, other than to throw out more misinformation and rhetoric about him to explain why it's because of his "policies" and not his race. Seriously, what are we supposed to think?

I even linked to an article about a guy who was the tea party candidate for Gov. of NY, a guy who had sent many sexist and racist e-mails to friends. They were uncovered and published. You think the tea party or talk listeners cared? Nope. Even after posting that here, the resident talkradio tea party contingent didn't even acknowledge it...mainly because it was so blatant and they couldn't just poo-poo it, so they just ignore it.

Talk hosts insist that what they do is just entertainment, as they spew fire on-air at what their listeners perceive as a NEWStalk station, and the bigger the fire gets, the more gasoline they throw on it.

I'd love to know the listening habits of those two scumbags who killed those cops in Las Vegas. They did lay the Gadsden flag on them ("Don't tread on me") and scream something about a "revolution" if that's any indication. Why do I smell Alex Jones?

 

[boombox4]

Having sat behind a talkradio mic through Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush and now Obama, I can honestly tell you that the core audience's reaction to this President is unlike any reaction I've seen before. It's downright disturbing how demonized Barack HUSSEIN Obama has been---and he's not all that different from many other Presidents, except for one obvious feature----and those on the right get soooo angry if you insinuate that this may be because of race, meanwhile, considering Obama isn't governing much differently than most President's, we don't have that many other options to consider in understanding why there's such a vitriolic reaction to the guy! They can't even explain it themselves, other than to throw out more misinformation and rhetoric about him to explain why it's because of his "policies" and not his race. Seriously, what are we supposed to think?

Have you taken the abysmal economy and non-recovery into consideration? There is a lot of anger out there. Look at the occupy movement. Look at the employment statistics. People losing jobs, people losing their businesses. Wages going down or stagnant while the costs of necessities goes up. There is a lot of dissatisfaction in the population that wasn't there to the same extent during earlier recessions and earlier presidencies. Some of this anger over the economy is bound to spill over into the opinions and rhetoric of extremists.

I'd love to know the listening habits of those two scumbags who killed those cops in Las Vegas. They did lay the Gadsden flag on them ("Don't tread on me") and scream something about a "revolution" if that's any indication. Why do I smell Alex Jones?

I would guess they got most of their ideology from the internet, which is a treasure trove of all things conspiracy-related.

 

[TheBigA]

Have you taken the abysmal economy and non-recovery into consideration?

But if you're a supporter of smaller government, the economy should not be viewed as a government problem.

 

[flybynight]

Have you taken the abysmal economy and non-recovery into consideration? There is a lot of anger out there. Look at the occupy movement. Look at the employment statistics. People losing jobs, people losing their businesses. Wages going down or stagnant while the costs of necessities goes up. There is a lot of dissatisfaction in the population that wasn't there to the same extent during earlier recessions and earlier presidencies. Some of this anger over the economy is bound to spill over into the opinions and rhetoric of extremists.

Then I guess only the far right wing experienced the bad economy, because that's where all the outrageous rhetoric about Obama was coming from. And for some reason, while they were already wailing about Obama before he was even elected, they didn't direct that same vitriol toward the guy who was STILL in office at the time the economy really started to unravel.

Funny, that.

Yup, musta been the economy.

 

[Silkie]

Cloward and Piven?

 

[TheBigA]

Cloward and Piven?

Seems like a quaint idea. However, conservatives have all but eliminated welfare, and at the same time they've enlarged the definition of the 2nd amendment, creating the perfect storm: Wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, and guns available for everyone. I'm reminded of Mary Antoinette.

 

[Avid Listener]

Have you taken the abysmal economy and non-recovery into consideration? There is a lot of anger out there. Look at the occupy movement. Look at the employment statistics. People losing jobs, people losing their businesses. Wages going down or stagnant while the costs of necessities goes up. There is a lot of dissatisfaction in the population that wasn't there to the same extent during earlier recessions and earlier presidencies. Some of this anger over the economy is bound to spill over into the opinions and rhetoric of extremists.

Hell, the abysmal state of the economy is what is turning people into extremists! Too many of us can see through the bullshit of the unemployment statistics, where someone whose unemployment insurance has run out is no longer counted as unemployed, or when people who used to have full-time jobs paying a decent salary are now working at one or two part-time jobs for half the money or less, and no benefits. And Obama continues to lie through his teeth about every topic he addresses. That is what is turning ordinary centrists and moderates into extremists. If people accuse us of being "angry", you're damn right we're angry. We have a lot to be angry about.

In all my reading about history, this is the closest I've ever seen to the United States experiencing the kind of regime change that happened in France in the 1790's, or throughout Latin America on a regular basis. All it would take is one slightly bigger than usual scandal, like evidence of massive voter fraud in the November mid-term elections, and the fecal matter is going to hit the rotary air circulation device.

 

[TheBigA]

If people accuse us of being "angry", you're damn right we're angry. We have a lot to be angry about.

But government shouldn't be the solution to people's problems. Right?

If it was, we'd have job programs and welfare. The history of the last 30 years has been getting away from that.

This may be why only boomers listen to talk radio. Anyone born in the last 30 years knows that they can't count on the government for anything, and they're responsible for their own careers. There are no entitlements. If people are angry about being unemployed, they need to start their own companies, and build their own empire. That's what we hear every day. That's what Dave Ramsey says.

 

[flybynight]

Hell, the abysmal state of the economy is what is turning people into extremists!

Is that what's turning you into more overt racists as well? Just curious.

Too many of us can see through the bullshit of the unemployment statistics, where someone whose unemployment insurance has run out is no longer counted as unemployed,

Except for the fact that unemployment numbers have ALWAYS been figured that way. I became aware of this in the mid 1980's. Where were YOU?

or when people who used to have full-time jobs paying a decent salary are now working at one or two part-time jobs for half the money or less, and no benefits.

I first noticed companies pulling that BS trick during the REAGAN administration. I worked for a company in the late 80's that kept several employees literally one-hour-a-week under the threshold for full-time. But let's pretend this a new thing because you never heard of it before.

And Obama continues to lie through his teeth about every topic he addresses.

Ding, ding, ding! We have a winner for idiotic hyper-partisan comment of the week!

Congratulations sir, you've erased any shred of credibility with that one statement.

That is what is turning ordinary centrists and moderates into extremists. If people accuse us of being "angry", you're damn right we're angry. We have a lot to be angry about.

No, the election of a scary man with a strange name has turned the usual xenophobic Archie Bunker types into raving, drooling, forthing-at-the-mouth chicken-littles.

In all my reading about history, this is the closest I've ever seen to the United States experiencing the kind of regime change that happened in France in the 1790's, or throughout Latin America on a regular basis. All it would take is one slightly bigger than usual scandal, like evidence of massive voter fraud in the November mid-term elections, and the fecal matter is going to hit the rotary air circulation device.

Helpful Tip: Try to leave out all the Limbaugh buzz-words next time, so you can at least appear to think for yourself.

 

[boombox4]

Then I guess only the far right wing experienced the bad economy, because that's where all the outrageous rhetoric about Obama was coming from. And for some reason, while they were already wailing about Obama before he was even elected, they didn't direct that same vitriol toward the guy who was STILL in office at the time the economy really started to unravel.

Funny, that.

Yup, musta been the economy.

The left is angry too, in case you forgot.

You ever heard about the Occupy movement? They are and were pretty angry.

If you've ever read posts on the internet by people who are left wing, or listened to progressive talkers like Mike Malloy, there is a lot of anger there also.

The left isn't as angry about the President as the right is, because many of those on the left believed in him when they elected him into office.

The reason the right didn't put the blame on the guy in the White House when the economy started to unravel is because many of them elected him into office.

People don't want to blame a guy they voted for and believed in for negative things that are happening, because then they'll have to put the blame on themselves.

 

[boombox4]

But if you're a supporter of smaller government, the economy should not be viewed as a government problem.

Not if you believe that government is the problem with the economy ("too much regulation", "taxes are too high", etc. etc.), or you believe government is a large part of the problem. Like most of the right seem to believe.

 

[TheBigA]

Not if you believe that government is the problem with the economy ("too much regulation", "taxes are too high", etc. etc.), or you believe government is a large part of the problem. Like most of the right seem to believe.

But Congress is the part of the government that sets taxes and creates regulation. Not the President. For the past 6 years, taxes have been stable and interest rates low. My conservative friends all warned me that if the President got a second term, he'd raise cap gains taxes. No such thing has been proposed, and cap gains are exactly where they've been. And the stock market is going through the roof. I know people who might be considered long-term unemployed, because they haven't actually worked for over ten years. Instead they've been internet stock traders, and they're making a ton of money.

 

[flybynight]

The left is angry too, in case you forgot.

You ever heard about the Occupy movement? They are and were pretty angry.

If you've ever read posts on the internet by people who are left wing, or listened to progressive talkers like Mike Malloy, there is a lot of anger there also.

The left isn't as angry about the President as the right is, because many of those on the left believed in him when they elected him into office.

The reason the right didn't put the blame on the guy in the White House when the economy started to unravel is because many of them elected him into office.

People don't want to blame a guy they voted for and believed in for negative things that are happening, because then they'll have to put the blame on themselves.

OWS was a hippie-fest. They accomplished nothing and didn't intimidate ONE single politician, whereas the tea party and all their reckless rhetoric has pols afraid to cooperate at all with the Kenyan President---or even hold town hall meetings. They are a nasty crowd. Believe me, I've talked to many of them on the air. These are the same clowns who are walking into restaurants with weapons slung over their shoulder, daring anyone to "tread on them".

Also, I have a hard time believing even half of the OWS crowd even voted.

 

[TheBigA]

Also, I have a hard time believing even half of the OWS crowd even voted.

They key thing is they haven't done a thing since the 2012 election. Nothing.

 

[boombox4]

But government shouldn't be the solution to people's problems. Right?

If it was, we'd have job programs and welfare. The history of the last 30 years has been getting away from that.

This may be why only boomers listen to talk radio. Anyone born in the last 30 years knows that they can't count on the government for anything, and they're responsible for their own careers. There are no entitlements. If people are angry about being unemployed, they need to start their own companies, and build their own empire. That's what we hear every day. That's what Dave Ramsey says.

Government can do good things, and government can muck things up for a lot of people.

Free trade? Government policy. Tax incentives for companies to move factories to Mexico and China, which eliminate millions of American jobs? Government policy. Increased regulations and higher taxes on companies during a recession, giving them the incentive to shed jobs? Government policy.

On the other hand, we have a decent social safety net in place, courtesy of the Government. It provides food for somewhere around 40% of the population, provides health care for people earning under $15K a year as well a children, provides unemployment compensation, a certain amount of re-training funding, keeps old folks from starving to death and provides them a certain amount of healthcare through Social Security and Medicare, and numerous other things that help the population.

 

[TheBigA]

Government can do good things, and government can muck things up for a lot of people.

But nothing has changed with regards to free trade or incentives. The people complaining the loudest are those who want to eliminate the safety net. But once again, they're mainly baby boomers who remember LBJ's Great Society. Ask anyone who grew up in the last 30 years, and they're not counting on the government for anything. A lot of them live at home with their parents. For Gen Y, parents are the new government.

 

[boombox4]

But Congress is the part of the government that sets taxes and creates regulation. Not the President. For the past 6 years, taxes have been stable and interest rates low. My conservative friends all warned me that if the President got a second term, he'd raise cap gains taxes. No such thing has been proposed, and cap gains are exactly where they've been. And the stock market is going through the roof. I know people who might be considered long-term unemployed, because they haven't actually worked for over ten years. Instead they've been internet stock traders, and they're making a ton of money.

True, except the reason that there has been such "stability" is because the Republicans in the House would vote down any such capital gains tax increase. When they compromised on the one-to-two percent tax increase on the rich, that was considered a big deal by them, like they really went the extra mile or something.

RE: "government": The right wingers I hear seem to have a distaste for parts of all three branches of government. The President is just the most convenient one to blame. I hear blame put on all Democrats, "RINOs", "activist judges", whatever.