Natl. Ledger: Malloy-Larouchie connection?

[evnlee]

Re: Oh, C'mon

Your high-minded essay about diversity of the airwaves is belied by your many other posts in here as well as in Off the Air. Your Brian Lamb impression in here doesn't mesh with your "Michael Savage" routine everywhere else.

Hey Lil Phil.

You always ask for 'proof' .

Please show me 5 of my 'many posts' from 'Off The Air'.

I'll make it easier, show me 3.

Well? :-*

 

[dampier]

I understand you used to have a talk show, too. Does that mean you are also a "failed radio talk show host" and therefore we should not believe anything you say either?

Wrong again. I produced and hosted a news program, not a talk show. Unlike the Unequalizer, the decision to leave was my own - I wasn't escorted out of the building after doing a lousy Rush impression that drove the listeners to other stations. Further, I don't claim to be an "industry analyst" or say "I've been involved in radio" (without mentioning it was a right wing talk show that failed) in an effort to claim some high position in punditry. I also don't just make things up and claim "inside sources" and then change the subject when the speculation turns out to be wrong.

You demand evidence (while providing none) but no source is good enough. John Mainelli. David Hinckley. Now, Corey Deitz. Everybody is biased but you.

Those who've been around here know that I happily provide links to sources. I also do so under my real name, not having to flip handles with the seasons in an effort to gain a credibility reset.

OK, have it your way. AAR is making money hand over fist. Despite flea bite stations, poor to terrible Arbitron numbers, huge start up costs, management turn-over and bottom-feeder advertisers, the money is rolling in too fast to count.

Yeah, fall back on the hyperbole and change the subject... again. Yup... we're due for another one of your handle changes.

 

[fred flintstone]

I believe talk about handles qualifies as changing the subject.
If you can't refute my logic, you start talking about handles. It's your version of a concession speech.
Getting fired in radio is like losing your virginity. If it hasn't happened, you haven't lived.
But I suppose you think we should also not believe anything Mike Malloy says now either since (1) He has a blog and (2) He's a failed talk show host. Or Jay Marvin (fired from WLS). Or Liz Winstead (fired from AAR). How about failed SNL writers: can we believe them?

I know, like many political groupies, you just like an argument.
Somebody says anything critical of AAR, you just have to argue (whether or not you agree).
You can't help it.
It's like fans booing the umpire even when they can see their runner was way out.
Never admit the other guy might have a point sometimes.
I wonder how much of what you post, you really believe.
I suppose it doesn't matter. You do spice things up.

I guess you never fail. Maybe that means you play it safe and only set small goals.
Maloney took a shot and failed. And you keep making him wrong for that. Very petty.

Malloy remains fired.
Franco remains dead.

 

[dampier]

I believe talk about handles qualifies as changing the subject.

The many positions of your various handles does cover the subject. You spent a summer making at least some sense, having finally broken free of your own personal obsession about Air America Radio, but the fall season is upon us and we get posts from you attacking Air America because of the business acumen of their third party traffic report provider! Is Ernesto Al Franken's fault too?

Everytime you get scrambly in the logic department, we get a handle change from you and a re-entry in the forum as some new guy until someone outs you. You run away from your own posts, so why shouldn't we?

Getting fired in radio is like losing your virginity. If it hasn't happened, you haven't lived.

I guess this is a point about something.

But I suppose you think we should also not believe anything Mike Malloy says now either since (1) He has a blog and (2) He's a failed talk show host. Or Jay Marvin (fired from WLS). Or Liz Winstead (fired from AAR). How about failed SNL writers: can we believe them?

Let's apply the litmus test. Do these fired people hide their past, reinvent themselves as a "fair and balanced independent media analyst" on their blogs and then make pious appearances on pundit shows on Fox News claiming to be above the fray and opine on the day-to-day business dealings of Air America, acting shocked, shocked to discover they have to report yet another negative story about Air America, mostly based on fake sources, speculation, and rumors?

I haven't seen The Malloy Equalizer, the Winstead Media Report, or the Marvin Independent Media Newsteam sites, so I guess your comparison fails.

Somebody says anything critical of AAR, you just have to argue (whether or not you agree).
You can't help it.

This from the guy who posted a message in here attacking Air America because a third party company they use for traffic reports has financial issues. Yeah, I'm the obsessed one.

Never admit the other guy might have a point sometimes.

Hmmm... I spent an entire summer essentially agreeing with you in most of the threads on here until your logic train derailed. I look forward to whatever therapy is appropriate to get you back to your earlier, more reasonable days.

 

[fred flintstone]

Dear Phil,

To refresh your memory, here is the first post in this thread. As the Subject line suggests, it is not about AAR's traffic provider on WWRL.

http://www.nationalledger.com/artman/publish/article_27268094.shtml

"...The network is failing but there could be another factor behind the Malloy debacle. There is still fallout from Malloy’s recent decision to turn over two-and-a-half hours of his three hour show to a former associate of ex-con Lyndon LaRouche...The former high-level LaRouche associate, Webster Griffin Tarpley, was on the Malloy show to promote his view that unnamed U.S. officials carried out the attacks on 9/11 and blamed Muslims for the terrorist acts. But Tarpley went beyond this to suggest that leftist Noam Chomsky, a supporter of the Hezbollah terrorist group that attacked Israel, is a rich puppet of the U.S. military industrial complex and a tool of the Zionists. The hapless Malloy seemed to gobble it all up."

Apparently Tarpley's book is not too kind to AAR funder George Soros. The article goes on to say, "that Air America would air an interview with Tarpley at a time when it is angling for major cash from Soros was strange indeed. One has to conclude that it was a factor in Malloy’s ouster."

Maybe this is more suited for the Off the Air board given the political implications, but it does wonder
if this situation was the reason for Malloy's ouster.

One post on Demo. Underground about Malloy's firing: "The Tarpley interview was
good radio. Mike kept Tarpley reined in pretty well. I find it hard to believe Soros would be pissed about something like that, let alone even know about it."

Here is what I replied. Please let me know if you disagree. If was nice when you were posting about something I wrote in the current thread - not some other thread from several months ago.

Right wing blogs have been trying to associate Soros with AAR for some time now. Maybe they've asked him for money. Maybe they've asked a lot of people for money. Besides these blogs, do you have any hard evidence Soros is significant backer of AAR?

If he is, so what? I don't understand the RW hard on for Soros backing liberal causes given the number of conservative fat cats backing right wing causes.

The LaRouche thing has been going around for some time, too. Given LaRouche's philosophy is entirely inconsistent with the causes Soros has supported, this seems unlikely.

 

[evnlee]

Let's apply the litmus test. Do these fired people hide their past, reinvent themselves as a "fair and balanced independent media analyst" on their blogs and then make pious appearances on pundit shows on Fox News claiming to be above the fray and opine on the day-to-day business dealings of Air America, acting shocked, shocked to discover they have to report yet another negative story about Air America, mostly based on fake sources, speculation, and rumors?

I haven't seen The Malloy Equalizer, the Winstead Media Report, or the Marvin Independent Media Newsteam sites, so I guess your comparison fails.

So. Lil Phil, are you saying Corey Deitz and About.Com is a right wing 'blog' , and that he has some ulterior motive in wondering if AAR pledge drive, uh, I mean 'premium membership' seems 'cheesy'?

because here's what you posted:

"A columnist on a website that has no direct involvement in AAR in any way.. This guy knows as much about AAR as anyone else in here, except he writes it on a website bloated with pop-up ads and other screen clutter."

AND~

" It takes a guy who is ideologically opposed to the politics of the programs on AAR to look for morsels or tidbits to back up his own desire to see liberal talk fail as a concept. "

Even though, the site is non-political ( it's called 'aboutdotcom' for chrissakes), and in the past he has lauded AAR when they made initial ratings successes, when he speculates on the soundness of thier financial situation, you got a beef wid it.

(If you want to know how to buy a boat, or fix your toilet, you go to the same 'right wing blog site'? Pul-eeze. You are embarrasing yourself. :

Nor do you mention that AAR has a history of shaky finances. Losing 2 major market affiliates in thier first book, the Gloria Wise scandal, Evan Cohen, all this contributes to an 'analysis' of the current status. The guy is a radio 'analyst', and he begins his statment with ' I don't know the finances of AAR, but the pledge drive certainly looks cheesy ' to which you take great offense. Somehow, if the guy was analyzing 'Haliburton', and used the same logic, methinks you would not protest too much.

When all logic is against you, you go to the obvious attack mode. "The site has pop-ups!!" " He's a right winger!!" Sad, indeed.

Then you lose all credibility when your left with " You must be Fred Flintsone under another name " or "you high minded essays on 'Off The Air'.." of which you cannot provide any of the proof you so desperately crave.

(If any of my posts are on 'Off the Air' it was because the thread was MOVED', if that at all. I don't post there. You are the sad little creature that posts his politcal diatribes there, not me. Show me my 'many posts' as you put it, or admit you spoke out of ignorance.)

Phil, it's okay to be a fired left wing talk show host ( or news /talk 'reporter', whatever..)that defends AAR. Just don't try to accuse those that may look objectively on the matter at hand as being 'biased' becuase you are.

 

[dampier]

To refresh your memory, here is the first post in this thread. As the Subject line suggests, it is not about AAR's traffic provider on WWRL.

Please... I am not limiting our discussion to simply this particular thread, and neither have you.

So. Lil Phil, are you saying Corey Deitz and About.Com is a right wing 'blog' , and that he has some ulterior motive in wondering if AAR pledge drive, uh, I mean 'premium membership' seems 'cheesy'?

Hmmm... if I meant about.com was a right wing blog, I would have said so. You are debating yourself again. About.com has as much inside info on Air America as you do.

Even though, the site is non-political ( it's called 'aboutdotcom' for chrissakes), and in the past he has lauded AAR when they made initial ratings successes, when he speculates on the soundness of thier financial situation, you got a beef wid it.

Thank you for confirming my original point. You used the word "speculates."

Nor do you mention that AAR has a history of shaky finances. Losing 2 major market affiliates in thier first book, the Gloria Wise scandal, Evan Cohen, all this contributes to an 'analysis' of the current status. The guy is a radio 'analyst', and he begins his statment with ' I don't know the finances of AAR, but the pledge drive certainly looks cheesy ' to which you take great offense. Somehow, if the guy was analyzing 'Haliburton', and used the same logic, methinks you would not protest too much.

And there it is. Right off the Unequalizer blog... all the golden oldie talking points that we dealt with two years ago and ever since. The two major market "affiliates" were actually leased time. Stop paying and your program goes away. But read the right wing blogs and we get statements about the format being "repudiated" in Chicago and LA. That mess (which we discussed in full right here at the time) was borne of the sleazy Evan Cohen, who was gone by month two anyway. The "Gloria Wise scandal" was a loan payment that certain folks on the right tried to claim was on the verge of criminal indictments against Air America executives. Only that turned out to be a complete fabrication. That loan was arranged by Cohen. Air America repaid the loan even though Cohen was supposed to be on the hook for it. End of drama. You may be confusing many of the statements I am making about Brian Maloney/The Unequalizer as directed to the about.com guy. I don't have a problem with the latter - just people who want to imply he has some insider-knowledge when, in fact, he knows about as much as the rest of us in here.

Then you lose all credibility when your left with " You must be Fred Flintsone under another name "

You are confusing me with someone else. I have never suggested you are Fred Flintstone.

Phil, it's okay to be a fired left wing talk show host ( or news /talk 'reporter', whatever..)that defends AAR. Just don't try to accuse those that may look objectively on the matter at hand as being 'biased' becuase you are.

Wow... one more wrong-on-the-facts statement like this and you'll qualify for the Super Bonus Round where the stakes get really high! I have never been a left wing talk show host, I've never been fired, and I do not always defend AAR. But you'd have to read the posts to understand that.

 

[evnlee]

Wow... one more wrong-on-the-facts statement like this and you'll qualify for the Super Bonus Round where the stakes get really high! I have never been a left wing talk show host, I've never been fired, and I do not always defend AAR. But you'd have to read the posts to understand that.

Hey Phil. Where are my 'many posts' from 'Off The Air'? ???

"Your high-minded essay about diversity of the airwaves is belied by your many other posts in here as well as in Off the Air. "
Quote from: Phillip Dampier on Yesterday at 04:01:22 pm


That makes 3 times I asked you for 'proof'. If you can't provide said 'posts', shouldn't you 'fess up and admit you said something that was untrue?

For the record, Lil Phil, the loss of the affiliates ( or as you put it, the 'unpayment' of leased time.. ) was reported in Radio and Records,All Access, and the AP, as well as the Gloria Wise affair, et al. The point that you seem to miss is: the first reports were that AAR had millions in the bank~ not true. Gloria Wise? True. Even if you wan't to make Evan Cohen your fall guy, that wont stop radio analysts from speculating later on that a call for 'funds' ( or 'premium memberships' as you call them ) looks 'cheesy'. He claims he has no 'insider knowledge' of AAR, but given thier shaky past, he does not give them the benefit of the doubt you obviously always extend to AAR.

Now watch everyone!~ Phil will not respond to a direct request for proof of his claims ( 4 times now ), instead focusing on the last paragraph :

 

[evnlee]

Now watch everyone!~ Phil will not respond to a direct request for proof of his claims ( 4 times now ), instead focusing on the last paragraph :

because Phil cant.

I've never posted directly on 'Off the Air'.

Once, a thread from the 'Atlanta' radio board was MOVED there( I think ), but I've never posted there.

Look around, and see how many threads in 'Off the Air' were started by Mr Dampier. Now who has been issuing 'high minded essays' on 'Off The Air'?

But, hey, why let some actual facts get in the way?

Thanks for playing Phil :

 

[dampier]

"Your high-minded essay about diversity of the airwaves is belied by your many other posts in here as well as in Off the Air. "
Quote from: Phillip Dampier on Yesterday at 04:01:22 pm

That makes 3 times I asked you for 'proof'. If you can't provide said 'posts', shouldn't you 'fess up and admit you said something that was untrue?

Anyone can click on your name and discover where your posts have been made. You have posted many political diatribes in several different forums. All people need to do is visit your profile and they can see every post you've made. A speech at the UN Conference for Bipartisanship they are not. You yourself admitted at least one of them was apparently moved into Off the Air because it had absolutely nothing to do with radio. This became a dead issue after you admitted that. We've since moved on. Try and keep up.

that wont stop radio analysts from speculating later on that a call for 'funds' ( or 'premium memberships' as you call them ) looks 'cheesy'. He claims he has no 'insider knowledge' of AAR, but given thier shaky past, he does not give them the benefit of the doubt you obviously always extend to AAR.

You just proved my point again. I don't even need to argue with you because you keep arguing with your own straw men arguments. You used the word "speculating." There is my entire point. People are SPECULATING about things taking place at AAR all the time. They are free to do so. But the moment they suggest they have insider knowledge (or someone here uses them as a factual authority without declaring it is speculation), they need to either back it up or fold. Baloney in the Unequalizer report uses fake/unnamed sources for his reports which have been more wrong than right, which is to be expected when you simply make guesses. But he claims "insider knowledge" and that he is an "independent media analyst" and he's neither. When you say he claims he has "no insider knowledge" that gets him off the hook with me straight away. But when people use his statements in here as fact and conveniently forget to include that "no insider knowledge" or "speculation" part, you will hear from me.

I've consistently said I have no problem with people giving their views about AAR, pro or con. But if you claim you KNOW something is true or make a declarative statement and then use a columnist for a source, expect the "facts" to be examined.

 

[dampier]

Once, a thread from the 'Atlanta' radio board was MOVED there( I think ), but I've never posted there.

Look around, and see how many threads in 'Off the Air' were started by Mr Dampier. Now who has been issuing 'high minded essays' on 'Off The Air'?

But, hey, why let some actual facts get in the way?

Agreed... those pesky actual facts are a nuisance, especially when we consider the context of where this part of thread came from. Your convenient discovery of and appreciation for diversity in media and the opposing view. That lasted all of one post, and sampling your others tells a different story. Since I have never represented myself as being the paragon of diversity you did, comparing my posts to yours is apples and oranges.

 

[evnlee]

Once, a thread from the 'Atlanta' radio board was MOVED there( I think ), but I've never posted there.

Look around, and see how many threads in 'Off the Air' were started by Mr Dampier. Now who has been issuing 'high minded essays' on 'Off The Air'?

But, hey, why let some actual facts get in the way?

Agreed... those pesky actual facts are a nuisance, especially when we consider the context of where this part of thread came from. Your convenient discovery of and appreciation for diversity in media and the opposing view. That lasted all of one post, and sampling your others tells a different story. Since I have never represented myself as being the paragon of diversity you did, comparing my posts to yours is apples and oranges.

Class, observe.

Phil is showcasing his 'tolerance of objectivity' :

If I praise an entertaining 'liberal' N/T host ( Stephanie Miller ) but express my disdain of the hosts or management at Air America, it doesn't make sense to Mr Dampier. So he must make false claims, and try to 'attack the messenger'.

Typical.

In Phil's world, everything is black and white, right and wrong, left and right, with no room in the middle.

But he puts his narrow mindedness on display for all to see.

 

[kaufcom]

Will you two either take it outside or get a private room.

Enough already!

 

[Ultimajock]

...for whatever it's worth, Malloy would have hung up on the argument by the end of page one ;-) ...