Mike Malloy controversial comments

[TheBigA]

Yes. The job, the purpose is to make money for the people who own the stations.

I'm not disagreeing with that, and I'm sure there are hundreds or more posts from me where I've said that. But this thread is about the SHOW, not the station. I'd like to think that somewhere in the mind of a show host, that he has something more creative than attacking the President all day. I'd like to think someone at the staff of the radio station has more in his mind than just making money. So to that end, I've been talking about a program format that's a big more inclusive than it is right now. By doing that, it'll hopefully improve the ratings. But at the same time, it'll make the station a more pleasant thing to listen to. Maybe talk about things that don't involve politics, while still talking about news. Maybe bring some women in, or some women that actually sound like women. Maybe talk about things that more relate to the listeners' lives. Maybe lighten things up a little bit and laugh every now and then. Not AT someone, but with someone. Just some thoughts. Because if we stay where we are now, things aren't going to improve.

 

[flybynight]

I'm not disagreeing with that, and I'm sure there are hundreds or more posts from me where I've said that. But this thread is about the SHOW, not the station. I'd like to think that somewhere in the mind of a show host, that he has something more creative than attacking the President all day. I'd like to think someone at the staff of the radio station has more in his mind than just making money. So to that end, I've been talking about a program format that's a big more inclusive than it is right now. By doing that, it'll hopefully improve the ratings. But at the same time, it'll make the station a more pleasant thing to listen to. Maybe talk about things that don't involve politics, while still talking about news. Maybe bring some women in, or some women that actually sound like women. Maybe talk about things that more relate to the listeners' lives. Maybe lighten things up a little bit and laugh every now and then. Not AT someone, but with someone. Just some thoughts. Because if we stay where we are now, things aren't going to improve.

You're trying to explain that to some people here who have a one-track hyper-partisan mind. You're basically trying to get a dog to "meow".

 

[TheBigA]

You're trying to explain that to some people here who have a one-track hyper-partisan mind. You're basically trying to get a dog to "meow".

That's OK with me. I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything. The owners already know the situation, and they know what they have to do in order to improve the profitability of their stations. They will continue to suck the money out of their existing talk stations as long as they can, but there will be no more growth.

 

[Small Market Guy]

The KKK doesn't need to be on your show. Not when you can express their views for them and maybe even make those views seem respectable. From what you've posted, your views are very much in sync with the KKK (and their successors, the Birchers, McCarthyites and Tea Party).

You equate NAMBLA and the Brady Campaign? How Freudian. Well, maybe. Ronnie appointed Brady press secretary and Ronnie did statutory rape.

Coming from the only one here that has a proven record of racist posts on this board, I'd say you're the expert on racism.

But to discuss the pros and cons of Obamacare.... which is about the only thing Talk Radio tries to do apparently, is like sticking your big toe in the water, putting your shoe back on, walking home and saying: I went swimming. To talk only about Obamacare is to ignore Medicare, Medicaid, Women's health issues (Can you say Sandra Fluke?), long-term care for the elderly which Obamacare and Medicare basically don't do... Medicaid will take care of you once the nursing home has driven you into bankruptcy. For Talk Radio to discuss medical care, it has to talk about transportation issues of those who can no longer drive. Talk Radio needs to discuss how the people with extended illnesses get to the polls, and who is working with them to arrange for absentee ballots. Talk Radio needs to have guests who explain why medical care in
America costs more, maybe twice as much, as in other nations we consider to be our peers.... and guests to explain why that really isn't true after all.

I think this would be an interesting program... do it once a week for three or four weeks in a row: open up the phone lines, or simply give a Facebook location where listeners are invited to submit question and topics about medical care and its organization and its financing they would like to know more about. The first week will catch a lot of people off guard. The second, third and fourh week will probably produce suggestions and questions that were kind of subconscious in the beginning.

Buy a station and put that on the air. I dare you. See how long it lasts. Obviously what is considered "interesting" is subjective. But I can tell you one thing. What you're proposing would not only be a liability nightmare, but it would likely be responsible for several fatalities as people fall asleep behind the wheel listening to it.

I'm still waiting for you to convince me, demonstrate to me, that you are more talented at it than a cigar box.

Don't hold your breath. I don't give a crap what you think about me or my talents. My bosses like what I do, my guests like what I do, the advertisers like what I do, and the listeners like what I do. I don't need someone who hasn't done radio since Carter was president to lecture me on what makes good radio.

 

[Small Market Guy]

Maybe talk about things that don't involve politics, while still talking about news. Maybe bring some women in, or some women that actually sound like women. Maybe talk about things that more relate to the listeners' lives. Maybe lighten things up a little bit and laugh every now and then. Not AT someone, but with someone. Just some thoughts. Because if we stay where we are now, things aren't going to improve.

I don't disagree with this part of what you have to say. Things are quite stale. I don't even mind hosts that have "irresponsible" topics and guests, but then that isn't news talk anymore. Case in point: Alex Jones. I don't consider what he does "news talk". He's a political shock jock. It works for him, so good for him. I would never do what he does.

 

[FredLeonard]

Coming from the only one here that has a proven record of racist posts on this board, I'd say you're the expert on racism.

I criticize a nasty, ignorant and untalented small-time talk show host, who happens to be Black, and you call it "racism." And you obsess and harp about it for months. Either in your world, minorities are immune from any kind of criticism or people you used to work with are immune from any criticism and you are petty enough to play the racism card instead of saying what your real issue is.

For the record, your small time hero, called your fat, drug-addled big time hero down in West Palm Beach a racist, too. Why? Because El Rushbo, who should have stuck with sportscasting, dared to point out that Donovan McNabb, likewise, was treated by the sports media as beyond criticism because they were so enraptured with the idea of a Black quarterback. Who is the racist? Reverse discrimination is just as "racist" as any other kind. And this was even before the political media gave fawning coverage to Obama in the 2008 primaries because they were enraptured with the idea of an "historic" first Black president (until SNL made them look ridiculous for it).

Be careful with that racism card. It could be used against you.

Is self-righteous arrogance a job requirement for small market talk show hosts?

 

[Small Market Guy]

I criticize a nasty, ignorant and untalented small-time talk show host, who happens to be Black, and you call it "racism."

You said the guy got his job because of affirmative action. And doubled down when called out on it.

The only reason I keep bringing it up is that you're quick to call various people racist or members of the KKK, where YOU are the only one here that has said anything racist. In fact, pretty much every post of yours is a vile, hate filled diatribe. Try not calling people names for once and maybe, just maybe, we'll forget your history of posting vile racist rants.

 

[FredLeonard]

You said the guy got his job because of affirmative action. And doubled down when called out on it.

The only reason I keep bringing it up is that you're quick to call various people racist or members of the KKK, where YOU are the only one here that has said anything racist. In fact, pretty much every post of yours is a vile, hate filled diatribe. Try not calling people names for once and maybe, just maybe, we'll forget your history of posting vile racist rants.

Yes, he got his job because of affirmative action. He's not the only one. Your hero Rush hates affirmative action, so I guess we should be relieved you are willing to hold a different opinion on at least one issue and not let him do all your thinking for you.

As I said, one of these days you will express an opinion which some minority doesn't like and then they will call you a "vile racist," or sexist or something-phobe. If it's an organized group, then your boss will start getting letters. He may decide it's easier just throw you under the bus because there's still no shortage of people coming out of six week broadcasting schools and willing to work in small market radio for just over minimum wage and the illusion of celebrity. Don't think it can't happen to you because it's happened before. Even to members of minority groups. Ask Juan Williams.

And just as you are not the grand arbiter of what opinions people should be allowed to hear, you are not the arbiter of what is vile and hate-filled or even a "diatribe." Look it up. The word fits many of your posts. Look to the beam in your own eye, Dude.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

My bosses like what I do, my guests like what I do, the advertisers like what I do, and the listeners like what I do. I don't need someone who hasn't done radio since Carter was president to lecture me on what makes good radio.

But, does what you do on the air come anywhere close to matching the charade you act out here in the forum? Yes, my on-air experience is a bit dated, and I understand that, and I am quick to acknowledge that, both on the forum but particularly in one-on-one conversation.

Yes, it would be presumptuous for me to try and tell you how to do your program over in Timbuktu or where ever. For all I know Timbuktu is a "prison colony" where all the social outcasts have been sent so they don't molest the rest of us. Knock yourself out on the air.

But you don't. I just listened to someone's latest Podcast and a discussion of Ann Coulter and her views on soccer. It was damn good radio. I'm sure management liked that broadcast, just like you are telling us your management likes what you do.

But the character you play when you come to the forums might be up for discussion. After getting out of radio, I guess you could say I have spent my life attending meetings and chairing meetings where we had a room full of participants who needed to become coherent in their message if they were going to achieve their goal, if they were "going to win." That may be better training of one's skills to analyze Talk Radio than being a prisoner to the system who has to survive inside the system every day, every year.

I don't go curl up in bed and cry because someone in a forum tries to convince me that I am a worthless person. You see, though you are opposed to "back channel" private messages and e-mail, many people are very open too such communications. When participants in this forum or other forum sites and participants in forms on other topics send me pats-on-the-back and well-placed kicks-in-my-rump, I look upon those communications as having a bit more value than what someone says... not so much TO me, but to the audience following the forum.

When I go to a seminar or a group assignment and some one comes over to me at break-time and quietly say: "Would you like to join me and a couple of people for dinner tonight...... " I'm paying attention to what that person offers me in the way of comments, compliments and criticisms.

Oh, along that line, maybe you and I could get together sometime and discuss what a great president Carter was. If would give you something to talk about on your broadcast.

 

[FredLeonard]

Don't hold your breath. I don't give a crap what you think about me or my talents. My bosses like what I do, my guests like what I do, the advertisers like what I do, and the listeners like what I do. I don't need someone who hasn't done radio since Carter was president to lecture me on what makes good radio.

Really? But you don't provide your real name or air name in your profile, or the call letters of your station. Provide a link so we all can listen to you. Who knows, maybe we will be impressed with your "talents" and "like what you do."

How do you know all those people like what you do? Your boss hasn't fired you yet but maybe you fill the time, work cheap and there's not much competition in small markets any way, so who cares? Advertisers like the sales rep. Guests will put up with a lot to get on the radio and maybe they don't find you so intimidating. And listeners, how many do you have? What other options do they have? And what about all those non-listeners. Right, you don't care what they think either. Only people who matter are people who like what you do and hold opinions of which you approve.

 

[boombox4]

A doctor in his office examining a patient in that same office is not engaged in "interstate commerce". Even if the doctor's tools and instruments were purchased in interstate commerce, or the medication the doctor prescribes might be shipped across state lines, the act of a doctor examining and/or treating a patient doesn't have a damn thing to do with interstate commerce.
.

You are correct in referring to the doctor's examination as not being interstate commerce.

And that is one reason why it is the States themselves that license the doctors.

And if you find a doctor that will take cash, you can get treatment, and it probably won't be interstate commerce.

But health insurance -- the means of paying for the doctor's examination for the majority of Americans -- is interstate commerce.

 

[Avid Listener]

You are correct in referring to the doctor's examination as not being interstate commerce.

And that is one reason why it is the States themselves that license the doctors.

And if you find a doctor that will take cash, you can get treatment, and it probably won't be interstate commerce.

But health insurance -- the means of paying for the doctor's examination for the majority of Americans -- is interstate commerce.

Actually, most insurance is also state regulated. Many insurance companies have discrete subsidiaries in each state where they do business.

In any case, it is still a major stretch of the original intent of the Interstate Commerce Clause to come up with loopholes which enable the Federal government to stick its nose into aspects of our lives that were never intended to be totally controlled from Washington, DC.

 

[frankberry]

The insurance companies may be engaged in interstate commerce. The Doctor is not.

 

[boombox4]

Actually, most insurance is also state regulated. Many insurance companies have discrete subsidiaries in each state where they do business.

In any case, it is still a major stretch of the original intent of the Interstate Commerce Clause to come up with loopholes which enable the Federal government to stick its nose into aspects of our lives that were never intended to be totally controlled from Washington, DC.

You're right about insurance being state regulated -- my state has an insurance commissioner, probably most do.

But my point was that because most insurance is interstate commerce (most of the companies are interstate), Congress has the powers to regulate, as we've seen with the Affordable Care Act.

I agree with you that the interstate commerce clause has given more power to Congress than was probably envisioned by the writers of the Constitution.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

You are correct in referring to the doctor's examination as not being interstate commerce.

And that is one reason why it is the States themselves that license the doctors.

But, as Grouch Marx used to say..... "Close... but no cigar!"

If your doctor can prescribe a medicine for you that includes "controlled substances".... then your doctor is required to have an up-to-date DEA Registration. TRANSLATION: Your doctor may be primarily licensed by your state, but for him/her to provide much medical care he/she will end up for a form of "licensure" by the Federal Government.

Depending on what agencies are known to be auditing physician's offices and pharmacies in my community, I regularly get jerked around on what prescriptions can be sent to the pharmacy electronically (and MUST be sent electronically), what prescriptions MUST be picked up in person and carried by hand to the pharmacy, and what renewals of prescriptions (one month at a time) can ONLY be extended if the patient (not the caregiver) comes to the office to be examined and then hand carry the prescription written on paper much like protected paper checks are printed on. The Federal Government is in the middle of that!

So maybe medical care is an item of Interstate Commerce after all.

I've sat near the pharmacy counter while waiting for prescriptions to be filled and watch the sharp folks come in trying to pull a fast one, and watched the pharmacist come down from the podium and had a paper back to a "customer" and point to him where the entrance/exit is and suggest that the "customer" make use of the opening pronto, fast, as in RIGHT NOW. And my doctor tells me that he regularly gets calls from that pharmacist making sure that the paper the pharmacist is looking at is legitimate.

If you get to know the owner of your pharmacy on a first name basis, and the family has been doing business on that corner for 50 years now, he can tell you some interesting stories.

 

[TheBigA]

In any case, it is still a major stretch of the original intent of the Interstate Commerce Clause to come up with loopholes which enable the Federal government to stick its nose into aspects of our lives that were never intended to be totally controlled from Washington, DC.

So instead, the Supreme Court chose the 16th amendment. And it worked.

 

[Small Market Guy]

Really? But you don't provide your real name or air name in your profile, or the call letters of your station. Provide a link so we all can listen to you. Who knows, maybe we will be impressed with your "talents" and "like what you do."

It would take anyone with the most rudimentary Internet skills exactly 30 seconds to find out who I am. It's not my fault you can't figure it out.

I don't make a big deal about who I am because I'm not a big deal. That and I don't want my name showing up in Google searches all over the place. This is a place to discuss radio industry stuff and I don't mix my personal life and opinions with work.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

Actually, most insurance is also state regulated. Many insurance companies have discrete subsidiaries in each state where they do business.

In any case, it is still a major stretch of the original intent of the Interstate Commerce Clause to come up with loopholes which enable the Federal government to stick its nose into aspects of our lives that were never intended to be totally controlled from Washington, DC.

BUT.... you and I live in a state where the state is basically refusing to deal with the health issues faced by so many of our citizens.

Into that vacuum steps a Federal Government and finally our state gets busy and does something about health issues: surrounding them by roadblocks in an effort to make sure certain citizens still don't get meaningful healthcare.

What we need is a hero to step forward... like in the movies. Maybe Talk Radio would like to be a hero for a change.

 

[Small Market Guy]

So instead, the Supreme Court chose the 16th amendment. And it worked.

Well they were certainly right about the ACA being a new tax. Or more specifically, dozens of new taxes.

 

[Small Market Guy]

What we need is a hero to step forward... like in the movies. Maybe Talk Radio would like to be a hero for a change.

How about we as a society stop looking for a "hero" to save us and take care of ourselves?

Stop expecting the government (or even worse talk radio) to do what we used to do on our own. Anyone expecting either government or talk radio to "save" them is in for a dire disappointment.