A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF THE DEATH OF CRITICAL THINKING
I was absolutely disgusted with some callers yesterday as I discussed Catholic-bashing with Bill Donohue of the Catholic League. The issue was simple. Is there a double standard as to criticism and mockery of Catholicism? Mention Islam, apologize. Do a poor imitation of a Chinese person, apologize. Ridicule Catholics, that’s different. Different?! Why? It was a simple question that required critical thinking. And how I was let down. Some callers were absolutely stuck in a so-called, self-styled progressive/liberal posture that was neither and as inane as anything exhibited by the right. It seems they wanted to discuss the validity and legitimacy of Catholicism and/or the Church as opposed to the subject at hand.
I made it real simple. Even the Boeotian could decipher yesterday’s critical thinking exercise. Are Catholics being defamed or libeled disproportionately more than other faiths? Furthermore, Bill Donohue made it clear that he wasn’t a theologian, was not going to discuss theological issues (e.g. The Eucharist, The Trinity) and found it appropriate for others to disagree with the Vatican’s positions on political issues. Such was fair game.
We were discussing an ad that the Catholic League placed in The New York Times that listed a series of anti-Catholic statements uttered on TV’s cackle-fest “The View” that had not been apologized for, unlike the series of apologias delivered for other groups perceived to be defamed. Now how easy can this discussion be, I thought. Wrong!
One lamebrain after another wanted to discuss everything from the Crusades to pedophile and ephebophile priests. Time after time, Donohue made it clear that he deplored such and led the way in denouncing the priests and parishes who committed such and/or looked the other way. But, no. Some callers just kept it up, much to my chagrin, shock and horror. For it hit me, do I possess a disproportionate number of stupid callers or callers who lack the basic ability to critically think? To decipher the issues, apply facts, analyze and make conclusions. It seemed so yesterday. And what’s even funnier is that these analytically bereft few made Donohue’s very point. There is an almost organic anti-Catholic sentiment in some.
Nothing could be clearer, I thought. I’m a retired Catholic, I don’t agree with a lot if not all of the theological underpinnings. I disagree with Donohue’s contentions that sexuality is chosen. But those weren’t the issues. Repeat: THOSE WEREN’T THE ISSUES!
One nitwit caller called Donohue a conservative, thus missing the entire point, and is a perfect example of how “lefties” can be as insane as “righties.” As long as play book, bumper sticker labeling is used by either side, both sides lose the logical war.
I played a clip of Part Robertson claiming that Islam was not a religion. You betcha he’ll apologize. You bet your bottom dollar that he’ll issue an act of contrition and attempt expiation over that doozy. Had he slammed Catholicism – and he has – not a peep. Bet on it.
So to these callers – and note that I say callers, not listeners – please accept my contempt for you and concomitant pity. For if you are so unable to tackle this rudimentary discussion issue, what must your pathetic lives be? What quotidian frustration must you and your loved ones endure? For if you were unable to handle this very simple topic, what happens to you when life throws you a toughie?
This was Bill Donohue’s first appearance, I believe, on an Air America show. As you could tell, he’s unafraid of addressing any issue and his delivery can be nothing short of attack dog. He must have laughed his arse off after some of yesterday’s callers just failed to exhibit a scintilla of an ability to grasp the most basic aspects of the issue.
Jeez.
No, a perfect example of the death of "progressive" radio
Jeez yourself, Lionel. If you feel the need to discuss how we, the listeners, have missed the point of your welcoming bigoted Bill Donohue with open arms, please allow me to let you know how badly you did your job yesterday. I can't stress enough the insanity of the truly awe-inspiring Donohue claim - a claim unchallenged by you, Lionel - that he doesn't call for his targets' firings. Oh yeah? Here, for your reading pleasure (and I hope the reading pleasure of those asleep at the switch with Lionel's "show") are specific passages - quotes from Donohue himself - from four Catholic League press releases over an eight-day stretch earlier this year:
Lionel, there can't be a more textbook example of a blatant, hypocritical, gutless lie than that. And yet it was allowed to see the light of day today - on Air America and on more than one occasion. I repeat, on Air America. Don't your producers have Google? Don't you?
Let us all allow what happened yesterday settle in: On a show from a progressive radio network hosted by a "talent" apparently important enough to unseat true progressive and friend of the netroots Sam Seder, a known bigot and enemy of everything the network claims to stand for was given ample time to repeatedly lie, make racist and homophobic comments and avoid any and all scrutiny of his own sad record. What's more, by not doing his homework and instead insulting his audience for not getting it, Lionel did himself and his network a tremendous disservice. Tacitly endorsing disgusting bigotry is, in my mind, not a progressive ideal.
And everyone can spare me the expected replies that I must have a problem with airing all sides of an issue, a problem with the notion of equal time. Bull. I'm all for opposing opinion and for the idea of it being welcome on Air America. But what I'm not for is hosts uncritically allowing guests to repeatedly make easily-refuted claims. I'm also not for hosts allowing guests to make bigoted comments and then criticizing those who have the temerity to call them bigoted. Look no further than Thom Hartmann as an example of an Air America hosts who welcomes opposing viewpoints. Hartmann regularly spars with those holding contrary opinions, only he does his job and challenges them using intelligence and class, two concepts lacking in the host warming his chair each morning.
When new Air America president Mark Green trumpeted the new "Air America 2.0" in March, he wrote the following:
Boy, that sounds good in The Huffington Post, but it turns out a bit differently in practice, doesn't it? I'll cut through the self-congratulatory rhetoric and instead offer this: It's all about legitimacy. The legitimacy Air America seeks and the legitimacy the network grants its most vocal defenders and most frequent listeners. To achieve the former, it's not smart business to insult the latter. And yesterday, we were all insulted. I hope network officials are happy with their choice to replace Seder. In time, I suspect they'll be as pleased as those responsible for bringing Jerry Springer on-board. Is it too much to ask that the progressive radio network be, well, progressive? I sure hope not.
We're not lamebrains, Lionel, we're your audience. Treat us with respect, not contempt. Above all else, don't insult our intelligence. We were here before you got here; we'll be here after you're gone.
Visit Hughes for America today
Wishful thinking.....
.....we'll be here after you're gone.......Ummmmm..any chance of this in the immediately forseeable
future..like next week??
ROFL
This is hysterical! Lionel isn't going ANYWWHERE!
You don't like him but you continue to listen.........INTERESTING.
Lock'N Load L-Train!
Here's a perfect example of your lack of critical thinking
Do you not know the first thing about research, Lionel? Did you not know that Donohue is a right wing hit man whose only purpose is to create the illusion that the very people who support religious tolerance in this country---you know, the left---are somehow bigoted because of it? He never goes after Bible-thumping Protestants, who are probably the only group of people who harbor genuine anti-Catholic bigotry, defined as actual bigotry.
<a href="http://mediamatters.org/items/200412210001">You want to see a genuine bigot? Look at Bill Donohue, who has made comments about how Jews---the people, not the church---are trying to teach your kids how to butt-fuck.</a>
<i>William A. Donohue, president of the conservative Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, has made 23 guest appearances on TV news programs in 2004. Donohue uses his appearances primarily to attack gays and progressives. He has referred to the "gay death style," remarked, "God forbid we'd run out of little gay kids," claimed that Senator John Kerry "never found an abortion he couldn't justify," and claimed that "Hollywood is controlled by secular Jews who hate Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular ... Hollywood likes anal sex."</i>
It doesn't get more bigoted that slamming "secular Jews", seriously. That's going after people, not institutions, and he's specifically invoking the ethnic side of being Jewish with the "secular" stuff. But if you knew the first thing about critical thinking skills, you'd get that. And you'd get that there's a huge difference between criticizing an institution with power for oppressing women and slamming an entire group of people based on their common religion.
So who's your next guest? You gonna have on Rush Limbaugh to bitch about how the white man can't catch a break?
www.pandagon.net
Morning
Blog, people. Political.
.....and one more thing.....
..As long as play book, bumper sticker labeling is used by either side, both sides lose the logical war.
The fascist and racist War criminals who have subverted the Constitution are interested in and respond to only the logic of power, i.e. the cunning 'reason' displayed by bloodthirsty beasts who 'back off'
intended prey which outnumbers them or who are more feral..and are willing and able to provide
ripping and rending proof of same. Lionel seriously misapprehends the nature of the conflict if he
thinks the adoption of some 'Oxford/Cambridge' debate framework will work to promote (foment) any
real change.
Death Penalty
Does AAR talent ever talk about Mumia?
May I suggest........
that you should write these guys/gals....maybe they can give you some (jail) 'food for thought' and
help you to structure and refine your 'critical thinking' skills...you'll need them to comprehend Mumia.
[William Donahue's Board]: Members of the Catholic League's board of advisers include conservative author and media analyst L. Brent Bozell III; conservative radio host and syndicated columnist Linda Chavez; right-wing pundit and author Dinesh D'Souza; former Republican presidential and senatorial candidate Alan Keyes; and National Review Washington editor Kate O'Beirne. (Racist?..Fascist?...QED)
One more thing...I don't seek tips on developing 'clearer thinking' from talk show hosts...maybe
YOU need that 'sort of thing' ......
Jeez yourself, Lionel
Yes, Jeez indeed. Are you serious? You invite a notorious religous hatemonger onto this timeslot, one so recently filled by someone as admired as Sam Seder, and then proceed to enable his phony equivication of the legitimate criticism of right-wing catholic policy/practices with anti-catholic bigotry, hence advancing the big lie, and then you are shocked and insulted by your callers reactions?
Next, you add insult to injury by labeling the dissenters "lamebrains and nitwits," and express your "contempt" and "pity" for them. Well, right back at ya. I hope you educate yourself by reading Joseph Hughes post above and follow up by doing a little internet research into the Marcotte-McEwan travesty. Perhaps then you will gain some insight regarding the extent of anger invoked by Bill Donahue in your audience, an audience that was instrumental in making the netroots the force for change it has become in turning back the political tide against Bill Donahue and his ilk.
Hope springs eternal
Lionel does not know how to do research nor is he interested in doing a show that presents facts. He just spews his opinion about everything and God help you if you disagree.
Fall in line people!
Once again, you must agree with every last meaningless word lionel says or you are 1) not critically thinkling 2)stupid
Remember, lionel thinks he is God and his word is gospel. The dimwitted suits at AAR seem to agree.
lionel is the poor man's Bill O'Reilly. You will submit to his every word and not argue. If you do, you will be hung up on or insulted.
By the way, Lionel himself does not critically think, but that is besides the point.
Donohue
Just another pious bigot, Falwell wannabe. Do some research on his quotes, especially while on Scarborough Country. If the Catholic League wants to work on PR and put more asses into their pews they should fire this zealot. The more he spews the more non-believers he creates, and I can live with that!
By the way, Lionel, I lost all respect for you and won't be listening any longer. AAR needs a Freethinker!
Isn't it sad
when your average person on the street is more intelligent that the president. Isn't it sad when your average person on the street is more inteligent that a blow hard conceited radio show host.
I get it
...and I'm religion-free (a.k.a. an "atheist" to some). There needs to be consistency in the way bigotry is opposed and called out. You can't have double or multiple standards. That's the point. That was the issue. No biggie. Lionel wanted (and wanted people) to focus on the issue and not get distracted by the usual partisan histrionics.
Lionel doesn't want to waste time pandering by beating dead horses or counting 1288214th coup on a predictable target. If you want to be spoonfed the usual "preaching to the choir," tune in to someone else's show.
What's the big deal?
Catholics are the majority in this country and aren't subject to the same sensitivity granted to minority groups. Sort of like how celebrities should expect privacy invasion. What makes one group/person different than another? It could be argued that the same sort of dynamic presents itself everywhere (affirmative action, scholarships, etc). Sure, Donohue is a nut and Lionel probably could've done a better job of keeping the show on track had he wanted to, but I'm guessing he likes getting everyone worked up. I enjoyed it.
The issue is Bill, not his religion
When I was a kid, John Kennedy being elected president was a great event. First, because he was a democrat. Second, because he wa a Catholic, which would strike a blow against anti-Catholic bigotry.
Then there's Bill. My issue with Bill is that he's a dishonest, homophobic anti-Semite. If you want to discuss anti-Catholic bigotry, why don't you get someone who's not a bigot?
Air America is really going down the drain. I can't believe you replaced Sam Seder with Lionel.
Naked Protester Must Pay Attorney Fees
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10712524
All Things Considered, June 4, 2007 · The Supreme Court has ruled unanimously that a naked peace demonstrator must pay her own attorney fees. The plaintiff, T.A. Wyner, is a naturist and outdoorswoman who wanted to put on a nude peace protest at the park on Valentine's Day.
But the state of Florida told Wyner that she would have to abide by its bathing suit rule, which, as Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said in the court's opinion, requires that patrons wear, at minimum, a thong, and if female, a bikini top.
-------------------------------
http://www.law.fsu.edu/library/databases/BarExams/FEB94.html
MORNING SESSION
Tuesday, February 22, 1994
QUESTION NUMBER 1
An Ocean Municipal Ordinance on vending provides in relevant part:
(a) All licensed vendors shall be appropriately attired. The
wearing of thong bikini bathing suits that expose the buttocks to
public view is absolutely prohibited.
(b) Violation of this ordinance is a misdemeanor that may be punished by a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars ($500) and/or a definite term of imprisonment not exceeding sixty (60) days.
--------------------------------------
Here's your bloody congressional oversight ...
http://www.airamerica.com/node/4021/206073#comment-206073
The Paris Hilton thing
I think what Lionel overlooked was WHY some convicts under similar circumstances get out early and others serve their full sentence. I'm sure those proportions aren't just random. Perhaps Paris serving her full sentence IS the norm for defendants who share certain characteristics, such as level of apparent remorse, the attitude and deference (as perceived by the judge) shown toward the court and the charges, etc. Who knows?
To be Fair to the Unfair
I don't think that BD said that he NEVER called for the firing of ANY catholic bashers-- he said that he didn't call for the firing of people on The View. He said that he was appeased when O&A were fired, didn't he?
But I don't really see how calling for someone's firing or not is a "progressive" or "conservative" stance. So what? Even if my hair-splitting is inaccurate, does that change the basic message about catholic bashing? Hypocrites can still be right, you know. If you have a friend who does heroin and says that taking H is a bad idea and that you shouldn't do it and that people who do it make poor decisions, yeah, he's a hypocrite, but he's also right. Bill can be a hypocrite or a liar, but that doesn't change his message that it's okay to attack Catholics.
I have to say that I'm not one who feels particularly bad for them, but I do think it's unfair and that he is right that there ought to be equal protection, so to speak.
And to people who invoke the Crusades-- let it go. I strongly doubt that the people responsible for the Crusades are still around. There are still former Nazis alive, the companies that enslaved Jews are still around, the country of Germany continues to prosper, yet we don't bring the Holocaust up whenever Germany is mentioned.
"Catholics are the majority
"Catholics are the majority in this country"
Which country are you in?
"Then there's Bill. My issue
"Then there's Bill. My issue with Bill is that he's a dishonest, homophobic anti-Semite."
The issue, Joe, is NOT Bill; he wasn't brought on to discuss himself. He's a hypocrite and a hateful person, we'll take that as granted, but that doesn't make the topic of the discussion wrong.
How is your hate (a broad, plural "you") different than people who attack anything that Sen. Kennedy does by bringing up the Chapaquitic (sp?) incident? Yes! He did that, he did those things, but does that make him wrong about whatever he's talking about? Not at all. Clinton got a BJ in the Oval Office, does that make him wrong about anything?
I don't like BD at all, he's a piece of crap IMHO, but he can say things that are correct that are entirely independent of his hate/bigotry/racism/blah/blahblah/lablah. It's possible, for real. Attacking him personally doesn't change facts.
Bill Donohue
Is there a double standard as to mockery and criticism of Catholicism as Donohue claims?
Perhaps, but I do know this: In my opinion, NO ONE BASHES CATHOLICS MORE THAN BILL DONOHUE. If you are a Catholic who disagrees with the Catholic League's version of Catholic orthodoxy, you are in for an unrelenting torrent of insults and, well, BASHING.
Sinead O'Connor, Kevin Smith, Denis Leary, Frances Kissling, all Catholics, and any "liberal" Catholic politician, are all targets of the Catholic League. Catholics who convert, such as Al Roker, are also targets.
To their credit, most Catholics are appalled by Donohue and the Catholic League and disagree with Catholic League orthodoxy; most Catholics do not think the Pope is infallible; most Catholics think divorce should be legal; most think birth control should be legal; most think women should be able to be priests; most are not homophobes; most think gays are not immoral. The Catholic League represent the fringe only. The Catholic League believes most Catholics are going to hell and deserve it.
And here is the other thing about Donohue and the Catholic League: If you question Catholic dogma or beliefs, he equates it with bashing, yet what nice thing has Donohue or the Catholic Church, from the Pope on down, said about, say, atheism?
Nothing.
Whats has Donohue said about actual classes of PERSONS, completely apart from a theology or philosophy.
Plenty, such as, "Hollywood is controlled by secular Jews who hate Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular. It's not a secret, okay? And I'm not afraid to say it. ... Hollywood likes anal sex. They like to see the public square without nativity scenes. I like families. I like children. They like abortions. I believe in traditional values and restraint. They believe in libertinism."
The truth is that Catholic persons, who make up most of my family, are good persons; maybe better than average in their attitudes about poverty, science and the world in general. Catholicism itself, however, is indefensible, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with saying that if you can back it up.
Bill Donohue
Is there a double standard as to mockery and criticism of Catholicism as Donohue claims?
Perhaps, but I do know this: In my opinion, NO ONE BASHES CATHOLICS MORE THAN BILL DONOHUE. If you are a Catholic who disagrees with the Catholic League's version of Catholic orthodoxy, you are in for an unrelenting torrent of insults and, well, BASHING.
Sinead O'Connor, Kevin Smith, Denis Leary, Frances Kissling, all Catholics, and any "liberal" Catholic politician, are all targets of the Catholic League. Catholics who convert, such as Al Roker, are also targets.
To their credit, most Catholics are appalled by Donohue and the Catholic League and disagree with Catholic League orthodoxy; most Catholics do not think the Pope is infallible; most Catholics think divorce should be legal; most think birth control should be legal; most think women should be able to be priests; most are not homophobes; most think gays are not immoral. The Catholic League represents the fringe only. The Catholic League believes most Catholics are going to hell and deserve it.
And here is the other thing about Donohue and the Catholic League: If you question Catholic dogma or beliefs, he equates it with bashing, yet what nice thing has Donohue or the Catholic Church, from the Pope on down, said about, say, atheism?
Nothing.
Whats has Donohue said about actual classes of PERSONS, completely apart from a theology or philosophy.
Plenty, such as, "Hollywood is controlled by secular Jews who hate Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular. It's not a secret, okay? And I'm not afraid to say it. ... Hollywood likes anal sex. They like to see the public square without nativity scenes. I like families. I like children. They like abortions. I believe in traditional values and restraint. They believe in libertinism."
The truth is that Catholic persons, who make up most of my family, are good persons; maybe better than average in their attitudes about poverty, science and the world in general. Catholicism itself, however, is indefensible, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with saying that if you can back it up.
Mocking or Criticism vs. denial of Civil Rights
I think BD confuses Mocking (Parody, Satire, or general derision) or specific criticism of his or anyone's religious views as a violation of their right to freedom of religous expression. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Lionel's question on whether Catholics are taking the brunt of abuse? I don't know the answer to that. Anyway so what if they are mocked more than some other religion? BD is there to defend the faith! Fine that is his right.
Beliefs do have consequences -- AIDs in Africa, the fantastic fortunes of major churches that are not used to help the poor, but just build more buildings and recruit more people to give more money. Birth Control, Abortion, Gays these beliefs have real effects on real people. If you are going to claim that God is talking to you or has revealed truth to you -- prepare to be challenged.
Lionel, glad you had him on -- too bad you didn't challenge him a bit more.
Donohue
When I see Glenn Beck on my screen, I turn it off immediately. Same for Hannity, O'Reilly, Colter, Morris, and yes, Donohue. I don't appreciate the media giving these propagandists a platform. So I don't select Fox, or Headline News, and now, it's Lionel. He says he's disgusted because we don't accept his premise about his topic. He says he doesn't care how angry we are - what used to be a great show (Sam Seder) is now used as a platform for a right wing propagandist. Oh well, times change, and I don't have to re-up my membership to this network.
Why choose such a fool to represent the Church?
I agree with your listeners who posted comments asking why you had Bill Donohue on as a guest to begin with. Even a cursory search on Google reveals that this is a biased, bigoted and largely divisive personality. For just one example of this, check out this article on MediaMatters.org http://mediamatters.org/items/200412210001
Perhaps the reason folks tend to not pay deference to Catholic institutions is the loss of the wall between church and state, the stranglehold religion has had on the White House under Bush-Cheney and the often far-Right bias that comes hand in hand with 'old time religion'. In most Western countries (i.e.: UK, Canada, most of Europe, etc.) it is considered poor form to bring up one's personal religious beliefs during political discussions. If nothing else, the disasterous Bush-Cheney administration should teach America to leave God out of public debate - it does no good and obviously results in great harm. Who cares who believes in what God?
RE: Catholics are the majority
"Which country are you in?"
I suppose I should've said Christians are the majority, with Catholics being the largest denomination therein. I think Catholics do make up about a quarter of the population though. I was just saying that it seems like, for whatever reason, the most prevalent groups/people in our society get the least amount of sympathy when it comes to matters like this.
I think
I think that catholics represent about a quarter of the christian denominations (which, themselves, are representative of about 80 - 85%) which make them 20 - 21% of the US population on the whole.
I think your assessment of "least amount of sympathy" is correct, but Catholics are not a majority of the population. I don't want to put words in your mouth, so I really really want to ask (and not making a snarky accusation in the form of a question) if you think that that makes it better/worse/no different than making untoward comments about any other group. Okay, that's technically not a question but a statement of what I would like to ask... but you get it ;)
I really don't know. I see what people say about catholics holding power (though not necessarily in this country) for so long, but that really doesn't mean that the neighbor boy who goes to catholic school has any power or wields it in any meaningful way. I donno... it's hard to feel bad for catholics, but at the same time, I don't know why it's okay to make fun of them (or do whatever it is that BD says that we do). I think that as long as no one is calling for their extermination, denial of rights, etc., we're doing okay :)
I believe that during the Imus mess, Lionel made the point that things become "bad" because the public is no longer willing to accept the previously acceptable. Well... The public, on the whole, seems to be okay with Catholic cracks but not with cracking on many other faiths... well... what can you do? It must not be "bad" yet.
RE: I think
To answer your question, I think it’s equally wrong to make untoward comments about any group, regardless of that group’s prevalence in a society. After rereading my first post below, it seems that one could think I was defending Catholic bashing, which wasn’t my intent. I was just trying to demonstrate that I thought the show was about the state of society, not Bill Donohue the personality.
I also don’t know why Catholic bashing seems to be OK. I like to think I have some ideas, but I really don’t know. At their simplest, I'm sure the reasons are too complicated to be done justice on any radio show blog. “It must not be ‘bad’ yet,” sounds good to me :)
Bill Donohue????
Wow!! I love Air America very much and was excited about getting to know your show as I listen over the Internet every day. But after hearing you sympathize with Bill Donohue I have lost all respect for you and your show. I do not have issue so much with having him on your show, just as I would not have an issue with having a member of the KKK on. However, you should have exposed him for the bigot he is, as I expect you would with the second group. I will not be tuning into your show again!
Wow
I've had to take a break from the Lionel BLOGsphere the last couple days because I'm so turned off by the seemingly moronic, closed-minded, "Progressive and Liberal" STOOGES who seem to WANT to be controlled like a robot, who NEED a playbook, who LIVE for a bumpersticker ideology.
Yesterday's first hour was intriguing. Kudos to Lionel and his Staff on Crack for bringing on Bill and attempting to, I don't know, ask the audience to think and come up with a resonable and well-thought out response.
I honestly don't understand how your callers and bloggers (not "listeners") are missing the point. Yesterday's show was not about Bill Donahue the person. He was simply the tool in which we were asked the question: Why is it OKAY to bash Catholicism when it is NOT okay to bash, belittle, or insult other religions?
Bill exposed himself a few times when he went after callers for who he really was. Yet, that does not discount the message and the questions Lionel was asking. The Liberals and the Progressives and the Democrats say that want equal rights, equal playing fields, and equal status for everyone. Unless it's a group you don't like, in this case, the Catholic Church.
It was so absurd for caller after caller to get into Priest Bashing. That wasn't the point and it was just an easy way to avoid admitting the truth...that Donahue, behind what his own personal beliefs are, just might have a point. Don't hate the playa...hate the game, my friends. I don't know what that means. Lionel stops callers when they just aren't making sense. And almost none of them were in yesterday's first hour.
Lionel's show is not hard. He asks questions and expects the callers to attempt to answer them, whether they agree or not, Lionel only asks that you try to bring up a decent attempt at an answer. And so many callers fall into the trap of either avoiding the actual question and talking about something different, or failing to produce coherent thoughts. There are plently of well-spoken and thought provoking callers whom Lionel lets talk, and sometimes even concede they have a point. I don't see the Bill O'Reily's of the world doing that. And what Lionel stands for, again, is an equal playing field. Sometimes that goes against the Liberal's own brand of self-righteous hate--and bravo for him for having the pair to stand up something.
Far-off Liberals and far-off Conservatives are the SAME people, just different sides. Each refuse to yeild to common sense. Common sense usually puts someone right in the middle. Which is where I usually float to and why I find his show amazing and the best radio show going right now. I didn't agree with his views on To Catch a Predator, but I gave it a lot of thought. His show on Gays the other day really put a lot of things in perspective. The UN show was also great for it's mix of enetertainment and education.
Refusing to even LISTEN to the opposing view point is such a stubborn, knee-jerk, disappointing trait for people who claim to be liberal and progressive. And we should and DO pity you.
The best caller, however, was the man who said that the issue shouldn't be about who apologizes for what, but that anyone has to apologize for anything they say regarding a religion. That in itself rang the most truth.
While I'm sure I wrote this for nothing, it certainly made me feel better.
I can't wait for tomorrow's show...Ventilation Friday's are the best!
"You always have to be willing to take that high-flying risk!"
Bill Donohue doesn't need more airplay:
He's a loudmouth, bullying media hog who gets WAY more attention than he deserves. He practically lives at FOX news. Air America used to be a breath of fresh air from the same boring talking heads that the corporate media airs ad nauseam. Has LeBron no more imagination and creativity? Or is no one of integrity willing to talk with him (that's my bet). He's too used to doing the overnight shift where people are so desperate for company that they'll listen to any crap you shovel at them. LeBron is in the big leagues now and his show is amateurish. If he can't stand the heat, he should get out of the kitchen. Personally, I'm counting the days 'til his contract is up. If he lasts that long.
You're actually Lionel, aren't you?
--graz
Oh puh-leez. . .
If Lionel had wanted to have a serious discussion about Catholic bashing, he could have brought on any number of people who are not as controversial as Donohue. This was akin to having David Duke on to discuss affirmative action or inviting Louis Farrakhan to talk about race relations. I'm sure that Lionel thinks this is pushing the envelope or something, but it comes off as a giant insult to the intelligence of AAR listeners, right down to the Barry Champlain-like condescension to his "stupid" callers--can you say "pedagoguery", Mr Erudition?--who from what I heard were pretty thoughtful and measured in their comments. Now, I know this is just a part of dude's schtick or whatever--and to be honest I actually find Lionel's show to be rather witty and entertaining when he's not in his "teach-the-listeners-a-lesson" mode--but there is no way in hell he and his brand of talk radio should be occupying such a prime spot on AAR. I mean it's devastating to hear Sam Seder's beautiful progressive passion relegated to once a week on Sundays, and to see the fiery true believer Laura Flanders reduced to a one hour taped show and occasional spots on Riley's program in favor of what amounts to the traditional talk show fare that people like Lionel and Riley offer up. Bottom line is that maybe the Greens' attempt to garner more ratings by moving AAR to the center will ultimately prove successful, but you have to wonder what the price to that success will be.
Aquaturd
Man, that was beautiful. You summed up what I had been wanting to say, but couldn't quite find the words. You can know that you didn't write it for nothing, because I was damn impressed by it.
Yes, I'm Lionel.
No, not really. But keep these accusations coming, I consider them to be tremendous compliments.
If that's what you aspire to...
then please accept my contempt and concomitant pity.
AAR
After the '04 debacle I was morose like most folks that visit this site. I arrived to work that Wednesday morning feeling very alone living in this red state. I turned on my PC and up came AAR like usual. At the top of the page read “Don’t worry, we're here for you!". (Does anyone remember this?) "I felt comforted!" From that point on I've considered AAR my refuge, my sanctuary, if you will. A place where I'm free from the right-wing garbage regurgitated throughout the media. The F'ing media that let us down!
Then comes along Mr. L. who brings into our domain one of the dregs that permeates the media. The vile bunk, the pious bigotry that we find so offensive. As progressives we expect critical thinking, but that’s not the forum I heard. In my opinion I felt as if I were listening to the O'Reilly Show or the insipid Brit Hume spouting off his bombastic diktats.
This prick, Donohue has made statements similar to all the other self-righteous Christians running about pointing their Jesus fingers at anyone who doesn't succumb to their fantastical book of childish certainties, the Holy Book?, God loves us all as he instructs the slaughter of women and children. Why be concerned about the environment when Jesus is coming back? Into the circular file with that!
Your League deserves ridicule. Not more than anyone else slinging your social neanderthal views, but just as much. Maybe you’re getting more of it right now, but you're getting your just desserts none the less.
Maybe you should quit crying about the negative response you're getting and think about evolving along with the rest of our progressive citizens.
Oh yea, screw you Mr. L. for letting the virus grow.
Let Me Get This Straight...
You put a lightning rod on your roof, and now you're complaining that you're attracting lightning...
Enough is enough: Sign the petition to bring back Sam!
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/bringbacksam/
Dear Air America,
In his short time at Air America, Michael LeBron -- a.k.a. Lionel -- has consistently demonstrated that he has neither the talent, temperment nor intellectual rigor to merit a spot in the Air America lineup. The quality of his shows range from annoying to unlistenable, his muddled arguments are cobbled together from right-wing talking points and he has shown nothing but contempt for loyal Air America listeners and their progressive values.
The final straw came this week when Mr. LeBron invited his friend Bill Donohue on for a friendly chat about alleged Catholic-bashing in the media. When callers objected to giving a homophobic, anti-semitic fascist a platform to spout his hate, Mr. LeBron responded with a blog post stating that his callers were "stupid", "pathetic" and reiterating his "contempt ... and concomitant pity" for them.
This is something that would never happen on a Sam Seder radio show. First, Sam has done enough research to know that Bill Donohue is a hateful demagogue who has had more than enough opportunity to spout his views on other media outlets. Also Sam, being one of the most accessible and considerate radio hosts in the business, would never have responded to listeners' objections with anything but respect and a genuine desire to address their concerns. Finally, Sam has enough self-awareness to know that a post like Mr. LeBron's does nothing but reveal the author to be an insecure pedant and desperate intellectual poser.
We therefore respectfully request that you restore Air America's commitment to progressive values by dropping The Lionel Show from your lineup and reinstating Sam Seder as your weekday morning host.
Sincerely,
The Undersigned
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/bringbacksam/
No, because I didn't like
No, because I didn't like sam's show very much.
You reap what you sew
Lionel, why do you think it is that you have a lot of problems with your callers while other hosts have very few? Perhaps it's because you have forgotten how a host is supposed to interact with their guests. As it is, you are a condescending, know it all asshole. Truthfully, some of your positions are so misguided I think you are smoking crack sometimes.
Most of us intellegent enough to debate you are forward thinking enough to know calling in would be fruitless. As soon as your veiw is verifiably challenged, you will end the call and bash the caller and their veiw while they are silent and defensless. You are little more than a bully with your insecurities in plain veiw.
You are rude, arrogant and a poor host. Listen to Thom Hartmann after your show is over, then you will see how a real host and his callers interact. Maybe you will realize that you don't know it all and that you can learn from others. Maybe you will learn how to attract people that want to have a conversation.
Edited for correctness
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/dreamersofairamerica /
Dear Air America, In his short time at Air America, Michael LeBron -- a.k.a. Lionel -- has consistently demonstrated that he has the talent, temperment and intellectual rigor to merit a spot in the Air America lineup. The quality of his shows range from good to outstanding, his concise arguments are cobbled together from independent talking points and he has shown nothing but contempt for obnoxious Air America listeners and their mindless left-wing playbook "opinions." The created some controversy this week when Mr. LeBron invited his friend Bill Donohue on for a friendly chat about alleged Catholic-bashing in the media, a concept that has none of the callers seemed to understand. When callers ignored the issue and question at hand and instead picked fights with Donohue by bringing up arguments that had nothing to do with the discussion, Mr. LeBron responded with a blog post stating that his callers were "stupid", "pathetic" and reiterating his "contempt ... and concomitant pity" for them.
This is something that would never happen on a Sam Seder radio show, and now it's a Sunday only affair. First, Sam would not have Donohue on because his listeners think that Bill Donohue is a hateful demagogue who has had more than enough opportunity to spout his views on other media outlets. However, these listeners have had a month now to realize that Lionel is not Sam Seder and keep tuning in for some reason, not to mention are dragging down Lionel's blog with their insanity. Also Sam, being one of the most accessible and considerate radio hosts in the business, would never have responded to listeners' objections with anything but respect and a genuine desire to address their concerns, regardless of how much they needed to be put in their self-rightious places and how much they dragged his low rated show down. We therefore respectfully request that you continue Air America's commitment to progressive values and critical thinking that does not follow a playbook by keeping The Lionel Show on your lineup and reinstating Sam Seder at another time if circumstances allow it.
Sincerely, The Undersigned
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/thesepetitionsarejokesandneverwork /
ooh spank me some more mr bad lionel -- ooh!
Sadly, this is a great example of the pathetic drivel that passes for cleverness on the Lionel show. Is this really the kind of idiot fanbase we want for AAR? Hell, we might as well give up now and start running Dr. Phil.
BTW, why don't you actually put up your lame attempt at humor as a real petition? Lets see how many people leap to Lionel's defense.
Your online petition is
Your online petition is serious business, I know, and it should not be mocked. Look, Sam's show was bad. It was not a good show unless you felt like you were on the inside with him. Listen to all of the times that he started yelling at callers and wouldn't listen to them at all. Hell, he would let callers through JUST to yell at them and not listen to what they had to say. Take your delusional memories of that show and head over to his blog where I'm sure your petition will be greeted with love. I actually like Sam and thought he did a pretty decent job-- but that's only because I agree with him. Then he'd lose his mind over something or start stammering up a storm and I'd turn him off.
Just not good radio. Sorry. I know that you think that AAR is an ideological society and not a money-making venture, I'm sorry that they tricked you like that.
I'd say this is just your opinion, but you also include lies
You don't like Sam? Fine, not everyone is into intelligent, thoughtful poltical humor. However, you should try to refrain from spouting lies about his show, specifically the BS about Sam "yelling" at callers.
You're perfectly welcome to shove your nose as far up Lionel's ass as you like. But if you want to criticize someone, at least have the courage and class to be honest about it.
I have to disagree about online petitions.
They are a joke and mean absolutely nothing. Real, hand-written petitions mean something because people actually have to go out and look for signatures. With online petitions, you can take them with the click of a mouse. It takes about as much effort to participate as it does to click on an interesting looking porn link. There's online petitions with thousands of "signatures" for people wanting Paris Hilton to not have to serve her sentence. See what I mean?
Oh, so I'm the idiot?
"Sadly, this is a great example of the pathetic drivel that passes for cleverness on the Lionel show. Is this really the kind of idiot fanbase we want for AAR? Hell, we might as well give up now and start running Dr. Phil.
BTW, why don't you actually put up your lame attempt at humor as a real petition? Lets see how many people leap to Lionel's defense."
I'm not going to waste my time with a petition, because frankly I don't need it. Imagine you run AAR and you get a petition of people signing to keep Lionel on the air. I'd think "What makes them think he's leaving?"
You think I was trying to be funny? I'm sorry, but nothing I could think of would ever top the unintentional hilarity of that real petition.
Funny thing about idiots
Most of them don't realize they're idiots. If you're unsure, ask some friends and coworkers. I'm sure they'll be more than happy to help you out.
Yo Graz
"Most of them don't realize they're idiots. If you're unsure, ask some friends and coworkers. I'm sure they'll be more than happy to help you out."
That's a really stupid thing to say, and if you're playing this card then you really are out of ammo.
And hey, we'd be more than happy to stop talking about Sam Seder if you trolls would STOP TURNING EVERY SINGLE BLOG THREAD INTO A CONVERSATION/DEBATE ABOUT HIM!
...
"That's a really stupid thing to say..."
Actually, I thought it was pretty funny, and appropriate.
Why do you keep mentioning Sam Seder in all your posts, SamoaRowe?
Thanks for another example of the typical LeBron listener
No irony, no subtlety, i.e., no intelligence. Just assert that the other person is "stupid" and hope that ends the conversation. Next you can throw out a few big words and some freshman-level logic terms like "critical thinking" to try to fool the other maroons into believing that you have something of substance to say.
And while we're at it, you should learn the difference between "out of ammo" and "not bothering to waste the good stuff on morons". Hint: try comparing your posts to anyone who responds to you.
Will wonders never cease...?
I thought Lionel was a whiney little girl on the air, but that's nothing compared to this blog post.
What the hell was AAR thinking when they replaced Sam Seder with this clown?
When you build your show on straw man arguments in favor of a biggoted hatemonger, then insult your listeners that don't give a shit about Donohue or his ridiculousness, expect to be treated like the moron you are.
Thanks Lionel
You've just validated my decision not to bother listening to your show.
Hammerhead
I don't mention Sam Seder in all my posts, if you actually read it for meaning, my point was that I don't want to talk about Seder, but the anti-Lionel posters keep turning every discussion into him. If it weren't for those clowns, Seder would have NEVER been a subject on this blog.
And just how the hell was what Graz said funny or appropriate? Why am I the idiot when I stick up for Lionel ON HIS OWN BLOG! How is that more idiotic then constantly visiting the blog of the host you don't like, derailing every thread into an argument over Seder, and promoting a useless petition to remove Lionel? And then to call the person who disagrees with you an idiot? That is pretty damn pretentious, if you ask me.
Hmmm...
"What the hell was AAR thinking when they replaced Sam Seder with this clown?"
They were thinking, "We should hire somebody who will actually get ratings!"
Then they should just have switched over to Limbaugh
The point is not to hire anybody to get ratings (the absentee manager approach), but to appreciate the real talent you have and market them properly (the intelligent, hands-on approach).
The fact is that Air America had a brand and a perfectly marketable mission statement. A right-wing idiot like LeBron trashes that brand a dilutes the message. Apparently Mark Green is too interested in having his kaffee klatch with Arianna to bother with little details like solid management skills.
Right-wing idiot?
You're not actually listening, are you?
Sorry, I stopped after he deep-throated the religious fascist
and then called his listeners lamebrains and nitwits. Did he take a sudden left turn after that? If so, I apologize.
And he didn't call his listeners lamebrains and nitwits
He called that day's CALLERS lamebrains and nitwits. Which
(1) has nothing whatsoever to do with being right-wing or left-wing.
(2) was true.
Thanks for reminding me
And...he thinks his CALLLERS are somehow different from his LISTENERS. Ok, he's not a right-winger, he's just a dumbass. Happy?
His callers ARE different from his listeners.
The vast majority of Lionel's listeners are not callers. I, for example, am a listener and not a caller. The people who call his show are not representative of the people who listen; it's not as though they're a mathematically derived cross-section of his listeners like an Arbitron focus group.
You know, jgraz, for someone who thinks Lionel is acting like a right-wing radio host, you are certainly acting like a typical right-wing radio listener: somebody who prefers to sling mud and make blanket, unsubstantiated statements while ignoring the actual challenges to your line of reasoning.
Excuse me, Graz
Do you even read what you write? YOU are the one who called ME an idiot for DISAGREEING with you. The things you say I am supposedly doing are apparent in YOUR posts. I do not think you are a moron because you disagree with me, I don't even think you're a moron to begin with. And yes, you are out of ammo when you're argument turns into posts calling your opponent an idiot.
And anyone who calls Lionel a right-winger just isn't listening. It's as simple as that.
I absolutely did not call you an idiot for disagreeing with me
I called you an idiot for disagreeing with me in an idiotic manner. I think it was you calling loyal AAR listeners insane and suggesting that "they needed to be put in their self-rightious places" that kinda sealed the deal for me.
Oh, and just because LeBron is too dumb to realize he's a right-winger, that doesn't mean he's suddenly a liberal.
Just because you call him "right-winger" doesn't make him one
Unless, of course, you can actually provide evidence that he's a right-winger. Which you haven't so far.
Wow
Graz, you just don't get it. Was that the first and only time you have ever listened to Lionel? It is not a "right wing" position to discuss percieved Catholic bashing. Lionel has done show after show after show putting over the progressive movement and knocking conservatives and right-wing culture, but he does ONE show that MIGHT be taken as a right-wing position, and suddenly he is a right-winger.
Right now, he has a media matters guest on discussing how the progressives are in the majority. You sound like a bigger "idiot" than I ever could.
Have to let you in on a secret. Being moderate on some issues does not equal "right wing." Not basing every opinion on the progressive playbook does not equal "right wing." If you have to ask yourself "What's the progressive way to think about this" on every issue, than you are out of your mind.
I call Lionel a right-winger because he behaves like one
He doesn't do his homework, he accepts all the establishment talking points and then heaps abuse on anyone who disagrees with him.
That's something I expect from Hannity or O'Reilly, but not an Air America host.
He accepts all the establishment talking points?
The guy is a 9/11 Truth Seeker, for God's sake!
As for him not doing his homework, I presume you can provide an example of that?
Um...how about the example we're all talking about?
He either did not know about Donohue's bigotry, or he knew and he had him on anyway -- without calling him on it. Which is worse? You tell me.
Or, perhaps he considered it irrelevant to the subject at hand?
It would be worse if he didn't know about Donohue's bigotry, but there's no reason to suppose that he didn't.
The fact that he invited Donohue on to discuss anti-Catholic bias was a perfectly good reason NOT to call him on his bigotry. You don't invite somebody on to talk about one thing, and then steer the conversation into something else. That doesn't make you a left-winger, it makes you an asshole.
And now I'm becoming curious as well, jgraz: HAVE you ever actually heard more than the one episode of the Lionel Show? Surely you can come up with more than one (not very good) example.
How about his Fox-worthy position on the attorney firings?
Didn't he say that Gonzo and Chimpy should have just fired them and given no reason? That they'd have no problem if they'd done that?
Or was that another radio host that I don't listen to?
Or how about when he keeps insisting that his show is "not about ideology"? Is that a progressive position?
Of course, I don't listen to his show as much as you do...because I think it sucks.
What about it?
"Didn't he say that Gonzo and Chimpy should have just fired them and given no reason? That they'd have no problem if they'd done that?"
How is that Fox-worthy? He didn't say HE'd have no problem with them if they'd done that. He said GONZO would have no problem. And it's true. The whole problem started because they gave shoddy, obviously bullshit reasons for firing them. If they'd fired them and said "We have no comment" when asked why, that would be that and there'd be no further discussion.
"Or how about when he keeps insisting that his show is 'not about ideology'? Is that a progressive position?"
Well, since he considers the term "progressive" to be meaningless, he'd say no. But if you're asking me my opinion--I'd say that transcending ideology is pretty much as progressive as you can get.
"Of course, I don't listen to his show as much as you do...because I think it sucks."
I know. So far you've not given any evidence that you've listened to it more than once.
Apparently, you never listened to him before that, or since
Lionel spends huge chunks of his show trashing Bush, Cheney, Libby, O'Reilly, Savage, Beck, and Fox News; he scorns the idea that homosexuality is a choice; he insists that it's time to withdraw our troops from Iraq; endorses Media Matters; and demands that his listeners actually think about the issues he's bringing up.
But because he asks Bill Donohue on his show to address a particular issue, and gets annoyed at callers who refuse to address Donohue on that issue, Lionel is a right-winger?
If that's the kind of crap you learned from Sam Seder, replacing him was the smartest thing AAR ever did.
Sheesh
About Lionel being a supposed right-winger, I think msclguru has more than put you in your place on that front.
And those comments I made in the fake petition about "loyal AAR callers" that was hardly directed at you personally (which I assume you understand) and let's face it, those callers in question WERE being rediculous. They WERE NOT discussing the issue at hand. It does not matter if they thought this issue had been addressed enough on other programs or not, the point was is that it was being addressed on Lionel's show regardless, and they were disrupting it. Imagine if Barry Bonds was on Lionel's show to discuss the rivalry of the Red Sox and the Yankees, and I called up and called him out on steroids. Lionel would be right to tear me a new one on the air. That is what the callers were doing.
You are out of your mind, Graz.
1) I disagree with you on those claims about Lionel, which seem even less relevent coming from you since you have displayed no evidence of ever having listened to him outside of the Donohue show, even then it seems like you heard about it second hand and just read his blog reaction.
2) Those aren't traits of Right Wingers, those are the traits of jerks in general. Left Wingers are just as capable of being assholes too, don't ever start thinking that a person's political idealogy is what determines the quality of their character. My father is a republican and the nicest person I have ever met.
GRAZ!
You still don't get it! The show was not about Donohue's bigotry or theology, it was about CATHOLIC BASHING IN THE MEDIA! How is that an example of not doing his homework!
Then why Donohue?
If Catholic bashing is a real problem -- and not just something made up by an attention-seeking sociopath -- how come Lionel couldn't find any other catholic to interview? Why did he have to soil the airwaves with someone who thinks "Hollywood is controlled by secular Jews who hate Christianity"?
Why Donohue?
I don't know, maybe because he wanted a high profile guest?
I don't like Donohue either, but he was pretty well behaved (for the most part) when he was on the show.
Or perhaps it's because no one else cares about the issue
Most progressives are smart enough to know that this "Catholic-bashing" is a made-up issue designed to get Bill Donohue more airtime. Lionel played right into his hands.
He bought the lie, he didn't bother to research it and he gave a platform to a bigot. Then, instead of admitting his mistake, he called his listeners "stupid". Hence the "right-wing" epithet, well-earned in this case.
Where do you get this "he didn't bother to research it"?
You have presented absolutely no evidence to that effect! (And no, the fact that he had Donohue on, is NOT evidence that he didn't do his research. It's not evidence of anything, other than that he wanted to hear what Donohue had to say about the subject.)
You, of course, are doing a great job of earning the "right-wing" epithet yourself, since you're behaving on this thread like Sean Hannity, refusing to deal substantively with arguments to your points and responding only by repeating the same things endlessly.
If he DID actually research it...
then he knowingly promulgated a right-wing lie that Donohue uses to beat up on Jews, gays and anyone who doesn't share his twisted view of reality.
I was giving Lionel the benefit of the doubt. Apparently you think he's much more of a right-winger than I do.
That's ridiculous.
Of course, it's absolutely out of the question that Lionel himself perceives an anti-Catholic bias in America.
You're not being rational.
Again, a right-wing position with no evidence to back it up
Aside from Donohue's rantings, that is.
Huh?
What, exactly, are you referring to as "a right-wing position"?
Dude, you really need to start listening to some other AAR hosts
Then maybe I wouldn't have to spell this out for you.
Check the media matters site, which Lionel should know about considering his guest list. On there, you'll see Donohue compare criticism of the church's pedophelia coverup or reasonable separations of church and state with saying that ""Blacks are natural-born killers, ... gays are naturally born to be moral slugs, or Jews are taking over the world." (All of which he's said or implied at some point)
The "nitwit" callers to the show called Donohue on this -- effectively doing LeBron's job for him -- and he turns around and insults them. This is one example of LeBron not only promoting right-wing talking points, but using right-wing attack methods when people object.
These questions answer themselves.
"If Catholic bashing is a real problem -- and not just something made up by an attention-seeking sociopath -- how come Lionel couldn't find any other catholic to interview?"
Gee, it's just UNBELIEVABLE that Lionel would bring on the President of an organization whose stated purpose is to fight Catholic-bashing. The reason he couldn't find any other Catholic to interview is because it would have been ludicrous to actually LOOK for another one.
"Why did he have to soil the airwaves with someone who thinks "Hollywood is controlled by secular Jews who hate Christianity"?"
He didn't. It would only have been soiling the airwaves if he'd brought him on to talk about how "Hollywood is controlled by secular Jews who hate Christianity." But that's not what he brought him on to talk about. If anything, the people who called up and ignored the topic to drill into Donohue on unrelated issues were the ones who soiled the airwaves.
Name one other person in Donohue's organization
And don't use Google -- that's cheating. The fact is that Donohue is the ONLY person spewing about this issue. Perhaps next Lionel could have on the Grand Wizard of the KKK to talk about discrimination against whites. After all, he's the head of the biggest organization talking about the issue. That whole pro-lynching stand is irrelevant to the topic -- especially if Lionel carefully avoids mentioning it.
My doubts.
Not only has Graz shown no evidence of having listened to Lionel more than once, I don't think he's even shown proper evidence that he even listened to the show he's been complaining about. I brought it up in an earlier post and he didn't refute it, so what's the story?
Another idiotic point
I've listened to this guy both before and after he joined AAR, but since I'm clearly not a fan anyone with near-average intelligence would infer that I'm not a regular listener. I started checking him out after he called Rachel Maddow a thick-necked lesbian.
I know that he and I have many views in common (9/11 being on of them), and although he calls himself a "bright" (ugh) I liked the fact that he seemed to have no use for religion (until last week, that is).
What I don't like is that he's arrogant and not nearly as smart as he seems to think he is. He shows no respect to his callers and clearly never bothered to listen to the show he was replacing. If he had, he'd know that many of the callers he pulls his bullshit tricks on are regular AAR listeners who deserve better.
Callers don't earn respect just by being callers.
"He shows no respect to his callers and clearly never bothered to listen to the show he was replacing. If he had, he'd know that many of the callers he pulls his bullshit tricks on are regular AAR listeners who deserve better."
He doesn't show respect to ALL his callers, that's true. On the other hand, some of them call and immediately say stupid, ignorant, irrelevant things, and are therefore not terribly worthy of respect. That includes some of the regular AAR callers--the fact that they are regular AAR listeners does not mean they should be treated with kid gloves. If they call and make a stupid point, they should be told that it is a stupid point, just like anyone else.