QandOQuestions and Observations |
||
|
||
| Comments | ||
|
What, you mean you don't get a kick out of Al Franken ragging on Limbaugh and Coulter for hours on end? Posted by: shark at March 31, 2004 04:44 PM |
||
|
She actually just said that Alan Colmes is the only liberal on television. This is not going to last long. Posted by: JasonM at March 31, 2004 05:11 PM |
||
|
i never even thought about advertisers. Posted by: l.j. at March 31, 2004 10:41 PM |
||
|
Why were you bored? You never explained. How can "these people" cause any more "trouble" than any other "people"...? Why do you have these opinions? Sounds like baseless blather to me. Not a single one of you explained your opinion. Bad, bad form. Posted by: Becky at April 1, 2004 01:58 AM |
||
|
Actually I did say why I was bored, Becky. I said the show consisted of "ancient history and disproven "facts"". IOW, old news that for some reason the hosts feel just "hasn't gotten out there". The "stolen Florida election", the "outing of a CIA agent", the "president hid in the classroom on 9/11 using the kids as human shields ala Saddam", etc. Boring crap, Becky ... boring crap. Nothing new, no discussion of anything, at least when I listened, which was new or had a different spin than what's been out there for three years, for heaven sake. As for Garafalo, I don't know what it was but I kept zoning out. No callers, just them talking. The biggest problem is it just was not entertaining. Entertainment is a big key to success in talk radio. Its how you hold the audience's interest. I found none in the latter show. Just my opinion. Posted by: McQ at April 1, 2004 08:15 AM |
||
|
Oh, c'mon...you had to love the Randi v. Nader smackdown, no? ;-) Seriously, Randi's good (remember, this is entertainment, not NPR Part Deux) -- and though I really, really hate to agree with you, the others are a bit of a snore. But, in no way am I writing AAR off -- I'm hoping they'll improve with a little experience (other than Randi, none have any talk radio experience). And since I'm being so agreeable, I'll concede that those of us here, reading Q&O heard nothing new yesterday...but, please don't make the unforgiveable mistake of taking the elitist high road here. Sure, we read the blogs, the RSS feeds and search Technorati. Yeah, we've seen these stories over and over again -- nothing to see here, move along. But, that's *us* -- NOT the entire U.S. You cannot dismiss that AA's purpose is to bring this information to the rest of the country -- until now, the only voice heard on talk radio was the conservative voice. Now we've got discourse! And discourse makes things happen. Look at the blogs -- have you ever seen such activity? People are becoming ENGAGED. This is what we need. Agree or not...be bored or apathetic -- this is a good thing: connect, argue, debate, explain, learn. Okay, I'll admit...I was trolling with my initial post. (Oh fine, flame me, ban me, stick pins in your Becky voodoo doll...I probably deserve it). But, I didn't give you guys a fair shake. And I took a closer look tonight and I sorta like what I see...aside from the fact there's no friggin' RSS feed. :p Maybe I'll hang around a bit...just to keep you in line.
Posted by: Becky at April 1, 2004 10:34 PM |
||
|
Do that, Becky ... we certainly need to be kept in line. Your points about a dialog don't quite ring true with me. Its more two sides talking past each other. It was interesting yesterday. I tuned into the Frankin show (because I'd missed it the day before) and I simply had to leave because I was BORED. Like I said in a later post, it just wasn't good talk radio. Maybe they'll get better. Maybe they'll get the anger out and move on to more current things. But it hasn't happened yet. Rani Rhodes IS entertaining. She's also a moonbat. She seems to be the queen of conspiracy theories. And yes, I suppose to someone screaming at a guest until he hangs up may be entertaining to some. It wasn't to me. It was appalling. Not that it doesn't happen as well on the right side of the dial. Regardless, I find it to be behavior I can't condone. I'm an information junkie, not a theatrics junkie. Anyway ... hope you come through on your threat to stick around. Love dissenting voices like yours, especially civil dissenting voices with a hint of humor. Posted by: McQ at April 2, 2004 10:56 AM |
||
|
I find it funny that you dismiss the topics that Randi mentions as conspiracy theories....all are documentable facts. The fact is that Bush sat in a classroom while two planes crashed into the WTC, killing thousands. That's a documentable, verifiable FACT. And that's atrocious, awful leadership, for a president of the United States to sit on his duff during a national crisis. The best thing about Randi is that she actually takes the time to document her sources. This is unlike conservative hosts, who throw out their opinion without giving any documentable basis for where its coming from. They tell you not to bother to read or watch the news; just believe them and that's all you'll need. Randi tells the audience not to believe her for her own words, but to go out there and research it for yourself. And 9 times out of 10, everything that Randi cites will be EXACTLY what she says. But, I guess it's good you're listening. Love her or hate her, she's entertaining (and I believe informative to boot). Posted by: Pete at April 6, 2004 10:28 AM |
||
|
Pete ... thanks for your comments. I'm not listening any more. She's not THAT entertaining. Seems, per reports, not many others are listening either. 9 out of 10? LOL. BTW, what I objected too wasn't the FACT that he was in a classroom ... it was the OPINION that he was doing so to use the kids as human shields. Now you may find that compelling info. I find it a sick opinion. To each his own. Posted by: McQ at April 6, 2004 10:39 AM |
||