I don't hate Dave, I just don't like his show. I don't hold Clear Channel in high regard, but that being said, I don't dislike them either. I've heard more horror stories from people in other markets that work for Cumulus than I have people who work for Clear Channel. I feel sorry for the people at Susq. when they take over. KIOL isn't a thorn in my side. I just dislike bad radio. I respect stations in this market that aren't for me because they seem to execute radio in a good way. KIOL hasn't done anything worthwhile since signing on. I poke fun at them because I am a sarcastic prick. I never worked for KLOL. Even before I was ever in Houston many years ago, I knew they were a good rock station. But, that was also in the late 80's early 90's that I am speaking of. Like I said, nothing they did in their final decade was worth listening to
> I just don't get it. If you are
> > going to try to recreate something that once was, why not
> > recreate it's best years? Can you explain that to me? My
> > guess is you can't. At it's best KLOL was one of the great
>
> > rock stations in the country.
>
>
> I agree with you on this. KIOL has copied the wrong KLOL,
> there is no argument there. It is baffling to me as well. I
> can understand that you don't personally care for his show.
> As a fellow listener I appreciate that, because there are
> several shows on the air currently that make my teeth grit
> when I scan across them, but why do you feel it necessary to
> continously speak so lowly of them, poke at them for the
> lack of a penetrating signal throughout the city, and simply
> put, hate them so? Are they that much of a thorn in your
> side?
>
> I don't mean to sound confrontational, if that's the way
> that it may be perceived by you, I simply wonder why you
> have such praise and high regard for Clear Channel and such
> disdain for a company and it's employees that are trying to
> recapture some of the past glory of, as you stated, one of
> the greatest rock stations in the country? This makes you
> seem biased and perhaps employed by the former.
>