Member since Dec 20, 2007



  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

Re: “Atlanta promoters and players on piss-poor performance

"splurge on a case of PBR"... that's funny! I actually laughed out loud

Posted by Dale on 09/20/2012 at 5:17 PM

Re: “New Falcons stadium for chance to host Super Bowl? That's a gamble.

I am against public financing of sports arenas, but I am trying to figure out how Vine City or English Avenue can be damaged beyond what has been done to them over the last 30 years or so.

4 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Dale on 03/21/2012 at 11:31 AM

Re: “On-air hot air

(Originally posted on 6/28, pulled due to tech problems) Sugg - I can always tell a Liberal has a weak argument when they start comparing Conservatives to Nazis. Weak. To assume a talk show had to be hugely successful to offend a paranoid freak like Nixon is not necessarily valid logic. You say that two thirds of America was for the war (more in Congress), yet only half of them voted for Bush and less than a fourth of those watch Fox or listen to talk radio. Those numbers don’t add up. BTW, they don't ONLY listen to Fox and talk radio, so the numbers I gave are further diluted by the influence of other media outlets. Such as this one. General comments; Bottom line, stations air programming that people want to hear so the station can sell advertising and make money. After about 1970 or 75, no significant portions of our population listened to talk radio because they were not interested in the programming. Just look at NPR's ratings for evidence of that statement. NPR's broadcasts are a fairly clear illustration of pre-Rush programming, except they have well produced national programs where pre-Rush AM was the local yahoo gardening and garage sale shows. Right wing hosts are sought out because Rush brought people to AM by the millions and is still the King Daddy of AM (Talkers Magazine named him #1 talk host of all time). No one was, or is, as entertaining and interesting. People LIKED what they heard. Too bad they are too stupid to realize the government should mandate what they hear. Notice I said Rush is entertaining, I do not view him as my inspiration for policy, although he often makes valid points. Of course, no one addresses the impact of FM on the rise of AM talk. Music, by far the largest draw on radio, moved to FM and left AM a vast wasteland of preachers and boring hosts. Which brings another question, does the Fairness Doctrine apply to the lyrics of the songs that are played to vastly larger audiences? Here is a sample of the kind of lyrics that would require balance - http://www.lyricstop.com/g/georgia...bush-lilwayne.html Maybe they can play some Toby Keith after Lil Wayne. Fairness Doctrine - a way for people to spread their unpopular opinions. NPR - a way for people to spread their unpopular opinions and force me to pay for it. (This is the comment Ray was responding to about ripping on NPR)

Posted by Dale on 07/02/2007 at 10:21 PM

Re: “On-air hot air

"is not about having people decide what is fair...and then dictating the decision to a station" That is precisely what the Fairness Doctrine proposes. Without the power of the government, we will have to rely on Dan Rather not to use fake documents and Michael Savage to be civil and accurate. The fact that this is resurrected by the Dems and specifically aimed at conservative talk radio, indicates that it is a politcal tool designed to shut down opposition. It is that very expansion of Federal power that the Libertarian in me opposes. Will it also apply to FM radio? Will we force stations to follow Lil Waynes "Hurricane Georgia" with Toby Keiths "Courtesy of the red white and blue"? They are both political speech. howe about cable and broadcast news? he Internet is theoretically limited in bandwidth, too. I agree the pendulum swings both ways, I don't want the Fed to have this arbitrary power, no matter who is in charge. FCC violations and fines for decency should be the enforcement action.

Posted by Dale on 07/02/2007 at 10:16 PM

Re: “On-air hot air

Regarding Darrens post that GOP'ers are totally selfish assholes, interested in helping themselves and their rich friends only" who are destroying the middle class. How do you explain the fact that Conservative Republicans give more to charity, whether measured by total dollars, percentage of giving, per capita, percentage of income etc, than any other definable group? This is especially true for RELIGIOUS Conservatives. One link - please compare Red to Blue states, ranking them by wealth, how much they give, the disparity between the two and their Generosity Index ranking http://www.catalogueforphilanthropy.org/cfp/db/generosity.php?year=2004 Another - scroll down to "republicans more charitable" http://magicstatistics.com/2006/11/ It is easy to find more sources, these are just two quickies. How do you explain all those right wing ultra conservative Religious Right people who send huge sums of money and people to help people in Africa, Latin America, Asia, India, etc? Bush giving billions to AIDS in Africa? I am sure it is only to help his drug company buddies, it can't possibly be becasue he thinks it is right. Wonder why Clinton didn't do it? The middle class is evaporating because they have been taxed to death. The ultra rich, meaning the ones who own means of production and wealth, need the middle class for customers. Why destroy them? Are the ultra rich stupid? T GOP is the party of fear? The Dems have campaign commercials that say things like "every time you vote Republican, another black church burns"...or they use James Byrd's daughter invoke GOP racism because Bush wouldn't use hate crimes for the James Byrd murder (a Texas Death Penalty case), voting for a city council in Atlanta slot will remove the advances of Dr King, James Carville actual quotes "they're killing your babies", “GOP wants to starve old people”, etc The GOP is only playing catch up to the real pros at the fear game. All of this is part of the reason I am Libertarian. You also said "That comment is the smartest thing I've ever read about right wing talk radio." ....that speaks volumes regarding the intelligence of left wing critique of talk radio.

Posted by Dale on 07/02/2007 at 10:14 PM

Re: “On-air hot air

Thomas Duttons comments illustrate Liberal thinking better than I am able. Liberal approach - "We have failed miserably in competing for the attention of Americans in the only open market in communication. therefore, we will ask them to let us in or we will get the government to force us into the radio stations. It is okay becasue we know what the People need, no matter what the People think or want."

Posted by Dale on 07/01/2007 at 12:04 PM

Re: “On-air hot air

John - Air America failed becasue it did not appeal to enough listeners. Cox Communications is run by Cox Enterprises, which is owned and controlled by Anne Cox, daughter of James Cox the founder. James was A big time Democrat (Rep and Governor of Ohio, Dem candidate for President) while Anne bought an Ambassadorship to Belgium from Jimmy Carter. They put conservative talk on teir stations becasue of money, not politics. If Air America could have made them as much as Boortz and Hannity, Neil an dShaun would be looking for work next Monday. Yeah, all those dumb GOP voters don't think about things, they just get hearded like lemmings. Never mind that they are more educated (higher percentage of high school and college grads) than Dems. Their just idiots who toe the company line. Contradictory? I think so.

Posted by Dale on 07/01/2007 at 12:01 PM

All Comments »

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

© 2014 Creative Loafing Atlanta
Powered by Foundation