Today on Blogcritics
Home » Air America Radio Making Huge Gains In Colorado

Air America Radio Making Huge Gains In Colorado

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

The conservative echo-chamber believed Air America Radio would be dead quicker than George Bush’s Social Security privatization plan, but new recent data is proving otherwise. Barely a year after its formation, and contrary to conservative spin, Air America Radio is building an audience at a rate that any radio station would envy.

In the Colorado market, which encompasses Denver and Boulder, KKZN 760-AM reached a milestone in its young life, gathering a 2.0 share in the spring 2005 Arbitron rankings. A year ago, the station’s rating was a paltry 0.4. “The Al Franken / Ed Schultz duo in the middle of the day is kicking butt,” said Jerry Bell, the station’s program director. This marks yet another increase, in yet another market, for the newly formed and rapidly expanding liberal radio enterprise.

In the previous quarter, KKZN received a 1.6 rating. Thus, KKZN has shown an increase of 25% in just 3 months. By contrast, KOA, which broadcasts conservative talkers such as Rush Limbaugh has registered a drop in the last 6 months from a 6.9 rating to a 5.5 rating. Thus, while conservative talkers are still at a structural advantage, the station’s audience has dropped by over 20% in just 6 months.

It has been a pretty consistent trend throughout the country that conservative talk radio and conservative news, such as Fox News, are losing viewers in droves. Part of the loss is a credibility problem from the conservative side. Moral values czars such as Rush Limbaugh and Bill Bennet have been caught with drug addictions and gambling addicitions respectively. Bill O’Reilly was caught sexually harassing his employees. The pro-war, right wing cheerleaders like Sean Hannity have been exposed by and large for what they are, draft-dodging cowards who aside from talking tough in the safety of their studio, let others do their fighting for them.

Thus, advertisers should stand up and begin taking notice, the public is losing interest in the less and less credible right-wing talk network, while the rapidly expanding liberal talk network is an untapped resource to reach highly motivated, highly educated, and highly consumer conscious Americans.

By Balletshooz

Powered by

About Balletshooz

  • http://dumpsterbust.blogspot.com/ Eric Berlin

    Nice piece, Balletshooz. Let’s face facts, though: conservative news on TV and radio is still dominant. But it’s wildly encouraging to see these even modest in-roads in a medium where it was long thought that liberal radio could not gain a foothold.

    It’s vitally important to have a counter-balance out there, even if it’s to shout back against the shouting of the other side.

  • Balletshooz

    No doubt. With a 20 year head start, one would expect conservatie radio to still have the lead, but they are losing it quick as shown by the statistics. AAR is not only needed to “shout back against the shouting of the other side”, it is also needed for the commutes of half the country or more that are sick of pro-bush cheerleading from immoral people.

  • http://www.iamcorrect.com Lono

    As a Coloradan, and fan of Air America… I have an AM system for radio. I don’t listen to FM anymore, Clear Channel and Jack Johnson drove me away from that medium. In my truck I keep three AM stations active (and geograpically applicable)

    On the far left is 760 AM (Air America)
    in the middle is 1340 AM (NPR)
    on the right is 630 AM (local conservative gibberish, featuring Dr Laura at night)

    between the three, I feel I get a decent perspective on things. However, I spend most time listening to NPR because people on either far side of the political spectrum are annoying, pushy, and work too hard to make facts prove a certain point.

    that being said, I should also disclose I am a Dem and truly can not stand any aspect of the currect GOP ideology of pro-corporate and pro-church.

    One last thing, though a dash pushy – Randy Rhoads RULES. She is a great broadcaster. She is funny, intelligent, passionate, and generally dead on with my mindset on issues. That is why I don’t listen much. I already think most of this administration is a bunch of dicks… so no need to get all fired up. We’ll just wait our turn and watch this group unfold.

  • billy

    hillarious comment rob. that may help AAR’s ratings if anyone actually reads it. anyways the washington times reports there are wmd in iraq, saddam committed 9-11, and bush is the second coming of christ, so if they report it, its probably wrong.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    Isn’t this the third of these posts, each of which has been followed by definitive debunking of the claims of the post as being mathematically invalid. Is there any reason to take this one more seriously?

    Remember, a 400% increase from almost no listeners to very few listeners seems exciting as a percentage, but in terms of actual listenership it’s still insignificant.

    A 2.0 share is still enormously less than a 5.5 share and there’s no reason to think AAR will be able to continue their initial gains. I notice that you don’t mention what happened to the local NPR stations when AAR showed up. If the local conservative station lost .8, the other 1.2 must have come from somewhere and I’m guessing NPR. So good job – radical, extremist talk radio which is as bad as Limbaugh but from the other extreme – stole a good chunk of the listener base of good quality, educational liberal radio. What a coup.

    Dave

  • Balletshooz

    “definitive debunking of the claims of the post as being mathematically invalid”

    I would like to see that one, unless in your view arbitron are a bunch of liars.

  • Matt

    AA is at the bottom, with dropping ratings in most markets, with the exceptions of Portland and Denver. They have fallen off the charts in Philadelphia. In Cleveland, ratings are down by 60% since Springer replaced Beck. The network is DOA. It may have a niche in a few selected cities, but forget New York, DC, Philly, etc.

    In addition, AA has now dissembled, offering 3 different accounts of the use of $800,000 in money from the charity in New York, first saying it had no obligation, then saying it had agreed to pay it back, now saying they are in discussions with the charity.

    AA is not necessarily bad policy, but just bad radio and may soon be brought down by the activities of its owners.

  • http://sussfr.blogspot.com Matthew T. Sussman

    How have UPN’s ratings jumped lately, and should we be optimistic?

  • Balletshooz

    “WJMP AM/1520 made a big splash in May when it became the first Greater Cleveland affiliate of “Air America Radio,”

    To the person who posted AAR is going down since they dropped in Cleveland, are you kidding me? They have been in Cleveland for 60 days. how can you say their ratings are going down when they just opened there? desparation?

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    Ok, I did some research. Let’s set the record straight once again.

    First off, the losses for conservative talk radio KOA are non-existent. While they did have a surge of listeners in the winter season, raising their share to 6.6, they have traditionally had a 5.5 share prior to that and returned to 5.5 this spring when the Air America station took off. So they suffered no actual long-term loss of listeners.

    Second, there are THREE conservative talk radio stations in this market. In addition to KOA there are also KNUS and KHOW. KNUS also had a slight drop in share, but KHOW remained stable. In looking at conservative vs. liberal talk radio their share should be considered together. Here’s how it tracks.

    SU4 FA4 WI5 SP5
    KHOW 2.8 2.7 2.5 2.6
    KOA 5.5 6.9 5.5 5.5
    KNUS 1.9 2.6 1.9 1.5
    Total 10.2 12.2 9.9 9.6

    So it looks like conservative talk radio overall declined about 1.4 over the average for the previous 3 seasons, while at that same time KKZN’s AAR programming gained .4 share. Ok, sounds respectable.

    But what is not being mentioned at all here is that at the same time the conservative stations seemed to drop there was another entirely NEW station that debuted in the Spring, KLDC Christian talk. KLDC debuted with a .5 share, larger than the increase at KKZN. If you add KLDC into the Christian numbers then their total share is 10.1, about the same as it was a year ago – suggesting that AAR had no impact on their listenership at all.

    What also isn’t taken into consideration is NPR listenership. There are two NPR stations in the area, KCFR and KCFC. They don’t do Arbitron, so we don’t really know if they lost listeners, but it’s reasonable to assume that’s where some of the increases for KKZN came from.

    But wait, there’s yet another station in play. Hispanic talk radio KMXA has lost a total of .4 share during the time that Air America has been on the air in Denver.

    So what we have is basically a situation where Conservative talk lost listeners to Christian radio and Hispanic talk and NPR lost listeners to AAR.

    Conservative talk, including Christian talk now has a total share of 10.1 compared to AAR’s share of 2.0 – that’s 5 times as many listeners. The new Christian station also debuted with a higher share than the AAR station had at its debut a year ago.

    So the real news isn’t that Air America is making gains – and those are modest at best – but that AAR is crushing Hispanic Talk Radio and that Christian Talk Radio has gained a good starting share on its debut in Denver. And of course, conservative talk as a whole continues to completely dominate all other formats.

    Dave

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    >>”definitive debunking of the claims of the post as being mathematically invalid”

    I would like to see that one, unless in your view arbitron are a bunch of liars.<<

    The arbitron figures aren’t in question, it’s what you do with them that’s flawed, as well as what you choose to overlook, as shown by my last comment. The fact is that overall liberal radio gained nothing in the Denver area – AAR just stole listeners from Hispanic talk radio. And at the same time Christian talk radio debuted and did far better than AAR, starting from zero.

    But keep spreading the manure of misinformation. Keep hope alive.

    Dave

  • http://www.livejournal.com/users/djradiohead DJRadiohead

    Who cares whose ratings are higher/gaining? Is somebody in need of some validation?

  • Chubbles

    Man, Dave is Desperate.

    Great rundown, Balletshooz.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    Yep, Chubbles. I’m desperate for a little truth from the fairycake factory where Balletshooz is one of the assembly line workers.

    Dave

  • Balletshooz

    “What also isn’t taken into consideration is NPR listenership. There are two NPR stations in the area, KCFR and KCFC. They don’t do Arbitron, so we don’t really know if they lost listeners”

    So Dave, you have debunked my claims how? Since you dont know NPR’s ratings, you assume they lost listeners, and conclude liberal radio didnt gain?

    Aren’t you assuming something you don’t know to support a conclusion you have no evidence for. Now who is spreading manure?

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    >>So Dave, you have debunked my claims how? Since you dont know NPR’s ratings, you assume they lost listeners, and conclude liberal radio didnt gain? < <

    I just pointed out that your interpretation of the gains is a bit off. I didn't conclude that NPR lost listeners, though they may have. The AAR gains seem to have been at the expense of Hispanic Talk.

    The point here is that there are no more liberal talk radio listeners, just that they switched from one source to another.

    This isn't some great victory as you make it out to be.

    >>Aren’t you assuming something you don’t know to support a conclusion you have no evidence for. Now who is spreading manure?<<

    Since you didn’t bother to actually read my conclusion, how would you know?

    Dave

  • http://none.com Bob A. Booey

    Dave Nalle … furiously fighting modernity, tooth and nail, since 1825. The industrial revolution was pathetic!

    I seriously doubt that the Hispanic talk market overlaps with liberal talk radio at all — usually Hispanic stations only overlap with music stations. I know that disproves race-baiting theories about how the only people who would listen to liberal talk radio are minorities, but it’s not correlated. The Hispanic station probably went up or down of its own accord.

    I don’t listen to political talk radio. It bores me. Pathetic! I’m furious!

    That is all.

  • http://www.billcostley.blog-city.com Bill Costley

    I’ve just come back to Santa Clara CA from listening to Air America in Ann Arbor MI on WLBY-AM 1290 AM. I was surprized to hear Jerry Springer and Bill O’Reilly on it. What’s with that?

  • billy

    how could that be, o’reilly and springer together? the end times must be near.

  • http://brainster.blogspot.com Brainster

    Who wrote these claims:

    “Denver’s KKZN AM was up 300%”

    “Thus, KKZN has shown an increase of 25% in just 3 months.”

    Why I believe it’s the same person!

  • Balletshooz

    “Denver’s KKZN AM was up 300%”

    they started out at 0.4, now at 2.0.

    That is more than 300% by my calculation. Whats your problem? Is 300% too low and therefore not accurate enough for you?

  • Jon

    Take at look at this article though before you celebrate… http://www.newsforreal.com/

  • billy

    that guy is real pessimistic. he thinks the gop winning the two closest elections in history to two marginal candidates signifies something more than it is.

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    I haven’t yet read all the comments. So perhaps someone else has already pointed this out.

    Let’s say I live in Anywhereville, Utah. There are 7 AM radio stations that I am able to pick up with decent reception. One of them is Christian (presumably LDS, in Utah…). Another is sports. One is NPR. Three more are right-wing talk show hosts. And the last is AAR.

    Now, let’s say AAR gets a “big” 3.0 share. And the three right-wing radio shows get a 4.0 share, a 2.5 share, and a 1.5 share.

    Sounds pretty good for AAR, right?

    Wrong!

    If you combine the shares of these hypothetical right-wing shows, you get a 8.0 to 3.0 advantage.

    IOW, those relatively few listeners out there who want to subject themselves to lame, leftist tripe have only ONE place to turn to. But right-wingers have THREE options.

    So, liberal talk radio actually has an ADVANTAGE of sorts, in this regard.

  • http://www.maskedmoviesnobs.com El Bicho

    RJ,

    in your post it does sound good for AAR because radio makes money off selling commercials which are sold based on the ratings of the station they are going to appear on.

  • http://www.gwbush.blogspot.com RJ

    Well, you’re correct in pointing out that higher ratings for AAR are obviously good for AAR.

    My point (which was probably rather muddled) was simply that right-wing radio has a vastly larger listenership than left-wing radio.

    But left-wing radio listeners only have one place to go. Right-wing radio listeners have several places to go, so their numbers are essentially diluted.

  • http://dumpsterbust.blogspot.com/ Eric Berlin

    The advantage of the right-wing (tripe…) is that they’ve been on the air for 5, 10, or 20 years.

    The left-wing (tripe…) is not catching up.

  • http://www.maskedmoviesnobs.com El Bicho

    “right-wing radio has a vastly larger listenership than left-wing radio.”

    So what? Advertisers don’t care about diluted ratings. Unless all three stations are owned by the same company and are they selling joint spots, it doesn’t matter how many combined listeners all the stations have.

  • Chabuka

    Thank Goodness…Americans are finally waking up and looking for answers…the truth, in other words…I am hopeful…and Colorado…(my home state)is starting to smell the coffee..life is good and getting better..the clouds are breaking up…next comes the full light of day and the sun…

  • http://brainster.blogspot.com Brainster

    Okay, I found an article that talks about a 0.5 rating as of the 2nd quarter 2005, so it looks like your 300% increase in a year number is accurate. I could quibble a bit and point out that was under the old format, but if we take the 0.9 for 3rd quarter they’ve still shown a solid increase.

    Of course, I could critique your obvious plagiarism of the Denver Post column on this today, but I’m sure that’s just an oversight?

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    >>I’ve just come back to Santa Clara CA from listening to Air America in Ann Arbor MI on WLBY-AM 1290 AM. I was surprized to hear Jerry Springer and Bill O’Reilly on it. What’s with that?<<

    Well, IMO O’Reilly is basically a liberal in many ways – usually on all the wrong issues. So he should fit right in.

    Actually, I’m not surprised you encountered this. It makes sense for a station that wants to reach a broad audience to pick up some AAR stuff to balance out some conservative talkers. I’d do that before I carried some of the more marginal right wingers. Or I’d do what our best local talk radio has done which is to cut the bad right wingers and replace them with non-partisan shows like Clark Howard.

    Dave

  • http://www.gwbush.blogspot.com RJ

    El Bicho:

    Again, you are correct. The advertisers will pay according to what the ratings tell them.

    But I’m not concerned about how much money a station is making via ads.

    I’m talking about right-wing vs. left-wing radio.

    And, right now, right-wing radio is still kicking left-wing radio in the teeth. And they almost certainly will for the foreseeable future, if not forever and ever, Amen. ;-/

  • Arlene Montemarano

    F Y I – LIBERAL TALK RADIO – EASY WAY TO LISTEN –

    There are some programs on Air America that are worth paying attention to. Here is a website for the archives of one of them (no commercials, and you can download and listen to any of her programs any time at all.)………Incredibly convenient:

    http://www.randirhodesarchives.com

    She is a very articulate, smart lady,(maybe the smartest in talk radio), with extraordinary common sense, who uses original documents as her source material most of the time. I would go so far as to say that she is by far the best Civics teacher this nation has had.

    It would be hard to listen to an entire program from these archives and not be impressed by her.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    I’ve only listened to Rhodes a couple of times, and she does at least seem to be articulate – unlike most of the other AAR hosts. But her content is so heavily slanted to the left that it’s hard to listen to. Her guests include the most virulent hatemongers and propagandists like Greg Palast, John Conyers and Paul Krugman. She does have more moderate folks on, but never, ever anyone from an opposing position. She basically makes the show a platform for preaching one point of view with no debate or discussion.

    I guess it’s a good show if you swallow everything the DNC and left wing extremists say with no critical thought at all. But if you’re at all familiar with the realities of some of the issues facing our country, it’s impossible to listen to without banging on the radio and shouting ‘no, no, no you’re wrong, how can any thinking person believe that’.

    Dave

  • PlacitasRoy

    If you want the story on how the Moony Times can create a pure bullshit story that someone with limited analytical skills will believe, read this: “How to Fake News: Intermediate Level” http://www.mahablog.com/2005.07.31_arch.html#1122894735460

    Anyone who would believe Foxhole news or the Mooney Times is going to be propagandized and remain willfully ignorant.

  • http://dumpsterbust.blogspot.com Eric Berlin

    Dave — You’re back at it with some classic opinion-as-fact ranting.

    Krugman and Conyers are not “virulent hatemongerers.” You may disagree with them, but you’re — to use language you might grasp — 1,000% wrong.

    So go monger somewhere else, okay?

  • PlacitasRoy

    “AA is at the bottom, with dropping ratings in most markets, with the exceptions of Portland and Denver”

    Obviously you are engaged in wishful thinking or are just willfully ignorant.

    Albuquerque market:
    KOBB-The big 50,000 Reich-wing boomer – Down 5% (9.2 to 8.7)
    Air Am Affiliate Up 10% (2.2 to 2.4)
    The new talker (since 4-1) anchored by the 25 year KOBB big boomer’s morning guy Down 37% (2.4 to 1.5)

    There was a pretty good analysis about “How is Air America Doing” at http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/7/8/92849/52300

    Liberal talk radio trends ahead of Limbaugh among 25-54 in Miami Raw Story
    Advance trend numbers for spring radio ratings in the Miami market, leaked to RAW STORY, reveal that liberal talk posted hefty gains against the once-indomitable Rush Limbaugh.
    IN PARTICULAR, THE ED SCHULTZ SHOW ACTUALLY PASSED LIMBAUGH AMONG THE 25-54 AGE RANGE IN THE NATION’S TWELFTH LARGEST RADIO MARKET. SCHULTZ SCORED A 3.4 RATING TO LIMBAUGH’S 3.2, CLIMBING 1.1 RATINGS POINTS FROM THE WINTER FIGURES.
    Al Franken, whose Air America program runs head-on with Rush in the noon to 3 p.m. slot, also made strides, posting 2.1 ratings among 25-64, up from 1.5 in the winter.

    WMAL (630). Reich-wing talk in DCD HAS LOST 41 PERCENT OF ITS CORE 25-TO-54-YEAR-OLD AUDIENCE IN THE PAST 12 MONTHS , dropping from 158,200 individual listeners per week to 116,600. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/25/AR2005072501649.html

  • http://www.gwbush.blogspot.com RJ

    Whistling in the dark… ;-/

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    >>Krugman and Conyers are not “virulent hatemongerers.” You may disagree with them, but you’re — to use language you might grasp — 1,000% wrong. <<

    Eric, I don’t just disagree with them, I object to them and their tactics. I call them hatemongers because they use a techniques of deception and misrepresentation to stir up partisan hatred. They manipulate emotions and promote fantasy as truth and gullible people believe them. They’re bad for the nation. And if you want an example, just do some research on Conyers campaign to prove that Bush ‘stole’ the 2004 election in Ohio.

    Dave

  • http://dumpsterbust.blogspot.com Eric Berlin

    So Conyers looked into possible voter fraud in Ohio — so what? There were a lot of suspicious circumstances involving voting in that state, yet there was no serious move to contend the election.

    Particularly with regard to economic issues, Paul Krugman is a voice of reason in a world gone mad. I think you’d even agree with him, Dave, when he runs through the damage Bush’s don’t tax-and-spend policies is inflicting on the nation’s future.

    I don’t know as much about Conyers, but from what I’ve heard, he’s an intelligent and articulate progressive voice in the United States Congress.

    So, you still haven’t convinved me that your “virulent hatemongering” comment was nothing more than virulent hyperbole.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    Ok, let’s look at Albuquerque. Here are the Arbitron numbers.

    2004 Avg W2005
    KKOB 10.0 9.9 Conservative
    KAGM 0 2.4 Conservative/Local
    KABQ 1.2 1.2 Air America
    KTBL 1.1 .6 Conservative

    Conservative stations total 12.9 Share with an increase of 1.8 over last year. This is largely due to the premier of KAGM with their local talk format which stole some Share from KTBL and Conservative talk giant KKOB, but also attracted new listeners.

    But here are the key facts.

    KKOB has stayed stable, matching last year’s average in the first quarter of this year.

    KAGM – which carries AAR – is also stable, at 1.2 share, matching last year’s average.

    Overall, conservative talk radio listenership in Albuquerque is up 40% more in the first quarter of this year than the total listener share of KAGM.

    So in short, AAR in Albuquerque is basically dead in Albuquerque and going nowhere.

    Oh, and BTW. Your share numbers of Albuquerque are all incorrect. Mine are straight from the Arbitron site. Go check them. Is that the only way you can make it look like AAR is doing well?

    Dave

  • RogerMDillion

    “AAR in Albuquerque is basically dead in Albuquerque and going nowhere.”

    Let me get this straight. The last quarter matched last year’s average, which by the way there was no AAR in the year’s first quarter, and you proclaim them as dead?

    Dave, I know you think you know about radio with your insightful comments like “A 2.0 share is still enormously less than a 5.5 share,” but what exactly is your background or are you basing this on talks you’ve had with friends in radio?

    With such amazing foresight, I’m sure Bezos was glad you didn’t advise him while Amazon was starting.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    >>Let me get this straight. The last quarter matched last year’s average, which by the way there was no AAR in the year’s first quarter, and you proclaim them as dead? < <

    I only averaged the 3 quarters in which they were operating. I do have some idea what I'm doing.

    >>Dave, I know you think you know about radio with your insightful comments like “A 2.0 share is still enormously less than a 5.5 share,” but what exactly is your background or are you basing this on talks you’ve had with friends in radio?< <

    I know enough about radio to know how the Arbitron ratings work and I know how to do basic math. My hands-on experience is mostly as a co-host on a call-in show in college which got me into a great deal of trouble and isn't at all relevant.

    So are you going to tell me that 5.5 isn't almost 3x 2.0? Do you really think a 1.2 is good in a market where conservative stations have almost 10x that share? Is the drop of .7 from the fall to the winter quarter a good sign for AAR in Albuquerque?

    >>With such amazing foresight, I’m sure Bezos was glad you didn’t advise him while Amazon was starting.<<

    I bought stock in Amazon. Does that count?

    Dave

  • Dan

    Thanks for the Randi Rhodes link Arlene.

    I listened to what I think is the most recent broadcast. She sounds like an angry emphatic drunken person.

    She’s actually making a claim that people have “died” because of Valerie Plame’s “outing”. She says: “Covert operaters were stuck in hostile territory, couldn’t get out, some of them were killed, some of them have been captured, some of them will just be executed”.

    If this is true, this would be a major story. If it’s not true, and Rush Limbaugh were lying about something of this magnitude, it would be a major story.

    This is what is so pathetic about “Error America”. (I’ve just coined that, so remember to give me proper credit) They don’t understand the appeal of Rush Limbaugh. They attempt to mimic a caricatural of him that is based on what they think his appeal is. They think he is in a perpetual state of rage; he’s not. They think he plays fast and loose with the truth; he doesn’t. They think that simple exposure to repetitive sloganeering will win the day.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    Rush seems to be in a perpetual state of amusement rather than rage, which makes him more attractive than he would be otherwise. He also occasionally finds something good to say about a liberal, much to their surprise. I still think he’s pretty tedious overall, and I don’t see how adopting the same tactics or coarsened versions of them is going to help ingratiate anyone to a listening audience.

    Dave

  • Calvin

    The only thing I get from this article is the author has a fear that Air America is about to lose its advertisement revenue due to poor ratings.

  • PC

    Man! You conservatives sure love bashing Air America. It just kills you that a station that just started just two years ago has managed to get this big this fast. I will give it to you it does not have the ratings of conservative radio, but it also does not have the 20 years of building those ratings either.

    Lets get to the meat of the matter. For 30 years the right has spent billions on radio, TV, organizations, and think tanks spreading your lies to get people to vote for your tired ineffective policies. You finally got your chance to run the country the way you think it should be run, but along the way to power something happened you hit reality.

    Reality number one your policies don’t work. Reality number two the majority of the American people don’t like your policies so what you had to do was use the fears and bigotry of middle class white America against gays, minorities, and the belief that liberals wanted to take away their bibles. It’s a strategy that has worked up until now. It took us on the left awhile to realize what you were doing under the radar with an added dose of questionable election practices.

    With all of the billions of dollars, lying, cheating and all the grand plans you manage to lose the popular vote in 2000 and only get %51 of the vote in 2004 against the worst possible candidate the democrats could put up against a sitting president during war time.

    Let me now put everything into perspective for you. Four decades ago when the left decided to take on the right wing cabal that ruled this country this country was very conservative and whites were about %80+ of the population. With those obstacles we still managed to get Civil rights, Women’s rights, Worker’s rights including a number of progressive laws passed e.g. abortion.

    Conservatives have been loosing this war of ideology since the 1960’s and you will continue to loose it. In 1972 Richard Nixon a sitting president during an unpopular war crushed George McGovern in the presidential race and now in 2004 another northeast liberal against a sitting president during a somewhat popular war was almost beaten the conservatives had to use every trick in the book to get a Bush win. The only reason that the right managed to get this far in the pass ten years is because we on the left fell a sleep because after all of our gains since the 1960s we figured that the country was moving naturally to the left which it did, but not enough.

    Well that sleep is over. We are back in the fight this time we have a greater portion of the population on our side. We are going to use every medium at our disposal, this time there will be no rest until every progressive agenda is the law of the land, and we won’t do it by lying and cheating. We are going to be honest in explaining are views and vision for this country and inspire the people of this country to reach for the greater good of all.

    See you in the trenches.

  • GOPHater

    Just another example of how the right is going down. Everyone should do their part, in every little way they can, to make sure the fall is particularly hard. The sooner the better.

  • Dave is all good

    I’d worry a little less about AA’s ratings and a little more about:

    The New York Post’s John Mainelli reports that Air America has issued a statement admitting its connection to The Gloria Wise Boys & Girls Clubs, which lost nearly $10 million in New York City contracts last month after investigators uncovered “significant inappropriate transaction and falsified documents.” One irregularity was the $480,000 transfer to Air America.

    “We are very disturbed that Air America’s good name could be associated with a reduction in services to young people, which is why we agreed months ago to fully compensate Gloria Wise,” the network said.

    Yeah…Air America is disturbed…now that they’ve been caught :^\ (bellyup)

  • billy

    so? a fews right wingers will have a spasm at their computers over it, big deal. do you think this is relevant at all? will this stop aar? no.

  • Dave is all good

    billy, billy, billy…I guess your real point is, AA never got started…now go sit in the corner…again

  • billy

    i guess you dont bother to read to blog before you comment, they are up 500% in one year in Colorado. i guess when you are a right winger and even when you are in control of the government cant really change a damn thing, whats up must be down to exist in your world.

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    >>this time there will be no rest until every progressive agenda is the law of the land, and we won’t do it by lying and cheating.<<

    “We will bury you.” – Nikita Kruschev
    “We have buried the putrid corpse of Liberty” – Benito Mussolini

    I wish you all the success that these, your ideological forebearers had.

    Dave

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    >>i guess you dont bother to read to blog before you comment, they are up 500% in one year in Colorado. <<

    I guess the government schools didn’t teach Billy much math. That’s ok, that’s what keeps people loyal to the left.

    Here’s a little test. Which is a larger increase, 500% of 1 or 2% of 500?

    Dave

  • http://jabbs.blogspot.com David R. Mark

    Isn’t it possible that AAR can bring listeners in who otherwise weren’t listening to the radio?

    As a result, AAR would increase its listenership, while conservative stations would go unchanged.

    It seems unlikely that AAR would draw heavy listenership from conservative stations. Maybe it steals some from NPR, but I think it’s more likely that it’s grabbing people who would otherwise not listen to any AM radio.

    … and before Dave Nalle starts blasting me personally, I don’t listen to AAR. I did occasionally listen to Rachel Maddow prior to the election, but not since. Those familiar with my blog know of my beef with the local AAR station in NYC, over their constant use of Wendy Friesen advertisements.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    >>Isn’t it possible that AAR can bring listeners in who otherwise weren’t listening to the radio?

    As a result, AAR would increase its listenership, while conservative stations would go unchanged.< <

    Sorry not to have mentioned that myself. It's perfectly possible. Though I think it's more likely that they are stealing listeners from NPR, which I think is unfortunate. NPR provides much better left-leaning programming and I would hate to see it hurt. NPR communicates a liberal message while being pleasant to listen to. AAR takes that message and couples it to a painful immitation of extreme right demagoguery and the result is even worse than right wing radio.

    Of course the real answer is that AAR probably gets some listeners from right wing stations who were listening because it's all there was to listen to, some from NPR and some new listeners as well.

    >>nd before Dave Nalle starts blasting me personally<<

    Why would I do that when you say something that makes sense and doesn’t reek of partisan bias?

    Despite your paranoia, I only have an issue with you when you say things which are blatantly distorded by ideological prejudice.

    Dave

  • http://www.gwbush.blogspot.com RJ

    “a number of progressive laws passed e.g. abortion.”

    That wasn’t a law. It was a laughable USSC ruling from justices who had been appointed many years before.

  • Steve

    Not surprising really. You can play Conservative radio talk show host at home. Just log onto the GOP website, and download your talking points for the day. Any question comes up, just repeat the appropriate talking point. No need to inject any intelligent commentary or original thinking, just repeat the party line verbatim.

    So it’s not surprising that people are getting tired of listening to Rush Limbaugh talk… he’s become a parody of his own self.

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    >>Not surprising really. You can play Conservative radio talk show host at home. Just log onto the GOP website, and download your talking points for the day.<<

    Can you tell me which GOP website those are on, because I can’t find them no matter how hard I try.

    Dave

  • John

    Air America’s rating’s booming? Hard to tell, the numbers in your source were for the station as a whole, not just for the Air America broadcasts. However, the Pioneer Press sees things differently, http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/entertainment/12277313.htm
    and by the way, they are one of the most liberal newspapers in the country who happen to cover Al Franken’s home state of Minnesota. And is Air America back on the air yet in Chicago and LA? Those are the number 2 and 3 markets in the country and last I heard you had to subscribe to satellite radio to get Air America.

  • Casey

    To Dave:

    First you really haven’t listened to randi Rhodes who you say: “but never, ever anyone from an opposing position. She basically makes the show a platform for preaching one point of view with no debate or discussion.” I seem to recall Oliver North, Hannity more than once and more that I can name right now. Now you name the opposition that Ruch Limbaugh allows on his show to debate.
    Which no one seems to want to mention Limbaugh Gave his show away free in the beginning to get on stations. Air America isn’t free and it isn’t a couple hour show. They are selling a 24/7 idea which makes it harder.

    And maybe YOU should do a little checking about:
    The New York Post’s John Mainelli reports that Air America has issued a statement admitting its connection to The Gloria Wise Boys & Girls Clubs, which lost nearly $10 million in New York City contracts last month after investigators uncovered “significant inappropriate transaction and falsified documents.” One irregularity was the $480,000 transfer to Air America.

    You’ll find that happened during Cohen’s stint which was very short at startup. Maybe you should do some checking about what AAR has done for
    this same outfit…

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    >>First you really haven’t listened to randi Rhodes who you say: “but never, ever anyone from an opposing position. She basically makes the show a platform for preaching one point of view with no debate or discussion.” I seem to recall Oliver North, Hannity more than once and more that I can name right now. < <

    I have only listened a few times on the web because it's not on the air here. But in those instances she never had an opposing viewpoint and if you look at the list of guests on her website none of the non-liberals you mention are listed, and it's a long list.

    >>Now you name the opposition that Ruch Limbaugh allows on his show to debate.< <

    I never said one word about the quality or nature of Libaugh's show.

    >>Which no one seems to want to mention Limbaugh Gave his show away free in the beginning to get on stations. Air America isn’t free and it isn’t a couple hour show. They are selling a 24/7 idea which makes it harder.<<

    Actually, you can pick up any of their individual shows to add to a station line-up which carries a mix of different shows.

    Dave

  • Casey

    I can’t really point to it right now but I have read where they stated they were a 24/7 deal. Now Randi Rhodes is on some Clear Channel stations because she had that in her agreement. XM has inserted some shows in the lineup but still carries all the AAR shows. I will try and see if I can find where they say they are 24/7 as it was just in passing. I do know it was said in relation to the ratings they received.

    I will tell you that she did interview Oliver North because I heard it and she brings it up a lot because he got so mad at her he got up and left the interview, she also has had Hannity plus the other GOP guy that has a TV show. I can’t think of his name right now.

  • casey

    Here is where I got that 24/7 from:

    In order for Air America programming to be heard on any radio station, that station must first take the significant step of changing its format. Getting more than 67 and counting radio stations to change everything they broadcast, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, for the opportunity to carry Air America’s programming is far more substantial an accomplishment than getting 124 right-wing radio stations to switch out one three-hour conservative talk show for another.

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    I wonder about that 24/7 commitment thing. I’ve seen stations which have Randi Rhodes and some of the other shows without having the full package. But as you said, it may be the result of prior commitments. I would imagine that if Clearchannel told them they wanted just one or two shows Air America would be insane not to cooperate, given the enormous market share Clearchannel has. I was on vacation recently in a town where 9 out of 11 stations were owned by Clearchannel.

    Dave

  • casey

    What other shows have you seen on other stations. I know about Randi Rhodes because she made a point of explaining about Clear Channel and AAR agreeing to the deal. I can’t think of any of the other shows that are on air. How about a little information…

  • james

    I guarantee that Air America will not even exist by the end of 2005. “America Coming Together” and George Soros other pet projects won’t work. Liberal radio can and does work, but it’s a grass roots effort, and anything with dirty money will fail. Franken and Garafolo will have to find another job for 2006. Mark my words.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    >>What other shows have you seen on other stations. I know about Randi Rhodes because she made a point of explaining about Clear Channel and AAR agreeing to the deal. I can’t think of any of the other shows that are on air. How about a little information…<<

    I went through about a billion stations the other day trying to figure out which were right wing and which were left wing. I ran into a couple which were a mix of both, and I know one of them was broadcasting the Rhodes show without the rest of Air America. To figure out what else was being broadcast I have to find the stations again, which may not be so easy, since I searched about a dozen different markets and maybe a total of 100 stations.

    Dave

  • http://www.maskedmoviesnobs.com El Bicho

    John,

    AAR is on in

    Chicago, IL – WCPT-AM 850 AM
    Los Angeles, CA – KTLK-AM 1150 AM

  • casey

    Since Randi spent a great deal of time explaining that Clear Channel and AAR agreed before AAR started to broadcast and I think I’ve explained it at least twice that isn’t exactly a revelation.

  • billy

    i am going to copy james’ post guaranteeing AAR will be gone by the end of 2005. i would venture to guess that he is wrong and merely is hoping they go away.

  • casey

    >>Franken and Garafolo will have to find another job for 2006. Mark my words.

    Franken is already writing another book and Garafolo is now in the new West Wing series.

    >>George Soros other pet projects won’t work. Liberal radio can and does work, but it’s a grass roots effort, and anything with dirty money will fail.

    I take it you have some evidence to back up these statements? These should be good…

  • billy

    these people are a joke. on a right wing blog i just visited people are saying aar is defunct, off the air, bankrupt, shut down by the police, etc.

    how out of touch and desparate are they? i just listened to aar 10 minutes ago and its coming in just fine?

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    >>i am going to copy james’ post guaranteeing AAR will be gone by the end of 2005. i would venture to guess that he is wrong and merely is hoping they go away.<<

    And then, when the network is gone, but Randi Rhodes and Springer still have syndicated shows you’ll claim he was wrong. Yay.

    Dave

  • casey

    Dave, When did Randi get syndicated?

  • casey

    I guess I spoke to soon as Randi is syndicated by Air America but if AAR is no longer on she wouldn’t be syndicated
    anymore…

    “…there are very few voices like mine, and that you know voices like mine don’t get syndicated on Clear Channel because of guys like Rush Limbaugh…I have actually heard that Rush has said that he would take his show elsewhere if they did anything with mine.”
    Randi Rhodes, in a WJNO Radio interview with Oliver North

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    My assumption is that if AAR went offline as a network a few of the more popular hosts would get picked up and syndicated. I doubt that Franken or Garofolo would because they are just too boring and propagandistic.

    Dave

  • casey

    Dave, You do assume a lot.

    >>>My assumption is that if AAR went offline as a network a few of the more popular hosts would get picked up and syndicated. I doubt that Franken or Garofolo would because they are just too boring and propagandistic.

    It seems that isn’t exactly what you said.

    >>>And then, when the network is gone, but Randi Rhodes and Springer ****still ****have syndicated shows you’ll claim he was wrong. Yay.

    >>>I doubt that Franken or Garofolo would because they are just too boring and propagandistic.

    First I don’t think either of them really need AAR to continue their careers but I doubt you have listened to either show very much..

  • billy

    Breaking SCANDAL!! AAR’s janitor just picked a booger and threw it on the sidewalk. Why isnt the AAR under FBI investigation for littering? Why hasnt the “liberal” media reported this. this is a major scandal, AAR destroying the beauty of the city street. Action Alert: Call Michelle Malkin right away and tell her about this treachery.

  • http://toddyarling.com todd

    I think I heard AA in South Bend not long ago, it was actually pretty funny, if a bit thick on the propaganda and talking points.
    It was a little too “slick” if you know what I mean.

  • billy

    no doubt, even the most liberal of people, like me, will laugh and dismiss some of the things they say, but it certainly is a funny counterbalance to rush and o’reilly who truly believe that people who dont have a blind jingoistic support for bush are un-american.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    So you balance out bling, jingoistic support of Bush with blind, jingoistic hatred of Bush? And how does that improve the overall quality of discourse exactly?

    The problem with Air America is that they’re just like the people they oppose in their methods and their presentation. Only the ideology is different.

    Dave

  • Casey

    Let’s count the lies on each side….

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    If I did that I’d have to actually listen to crap like Limbaugh or Franken and it’s not worth my time.

    Just tell them both to screw themselves and listen to Neal Boortz.

    Dave

  • billy

    no doubt, but the same reason righties listen to rush applies to aar. it coarsens the discourse, but the libs need their fun too, its at the expense of conservatives, but that is life.

  • http://jabbs.blogspot.com David R. Mark

    Dave — I have to tell you, I agree with you 100%.

    Other than Al Franken, who has more of an interview format, almost like a liberal NPR show, AAR is filled with ranters. There is no excuse for Janeane Garofolo being on the air. Randy Rhodes is a left-wing Rush Limbaugh, harping on a few issues, and from what I can tell, frequently taking things out of context. Jerry Spring is just a long, breathless diatribe.

    AAR would be more successful, I think, if they brought aboard better journalists, rather than personalities, to host their shows. And, like NPR, they should be looking for a long list of potential stories and guests. To have five different hosts talking about the same three or four topics is boring radio. Conservative radio falls into that trap, too, of course.

    The other thing, which I have written about on my blog, is that AAR can’t simultaneously tell people they are shooting for a higher standard, then take bottom feeder advertisers who promise get-rich-quick schemes and ways to grow hair through hypnosis. It chepaens the overall product. AAR would do better to seek out local advertisers — car dealerships, local television promos, etc. — which may require more people hours, than to do what they are doing now, which is contract with a third-party agency that can fill advertising space all over the country. They aren’t making any more money doing it the current way, but they have no doubt lost listeners along the way as a result, myself included.

  • casey

    >>If I did that I’d have to actually listen to crap like Limbaugh or Franken and it’s not worth my time.

    You sure have a strong opinion of something you admit you don’t listen to.

  • casey

    >>Other than Al Franken, who has more of an interview format, almost like a liberal NPR show, AAR is filled with ranters. There is no excuse for Janeane Garofolo being on the air. Randy Rhodes is a left-wing Rush Limbaugh, harping on a few issues, and from what I can tell, frequently taking things out of context. Jerry Spring is just a long, breathless diatribe.

    I’ve only posting here for the last two days but I have found that there is very little evidence of what is said and when confronted the excuses are lame. How about making it interesting and showing us some evidence of “Randy Rhodes is a left-wing Rush Limbaugh, harping on a few issues, and from what I can tell, frequently taking things out of context.” I would venture to say this is only your opinion, which you are entitled to but some others may have a different opinion, which they are entitled to.

  • casey

    >>Let’s count the lies on each side….

    >>Comment 85 posted by Dave Nalle on August 4, 2005 04:56 PM:
    If I did that I’d have to actually listen to crap like Limbaugh or Franken and it’s not worth my time.

    I take that as a NO…

  • http://jabbs.blogspot.com David R. Mark

    casey — I’m speaking as someone who AAR is targeting, but I have a hard time listening to Randi Rhodes.

    I can’t provide you with a transcript, but I remember how after the election Rhodes went on and on, making declarative statements about fraud in Ohio and Florida on election day, even after the DNC backed off those charges. I had written on my blog that Blackwell didn’t make things easier by delaying the process and giving the appearance of being an obstacle to the Congressional hearings. But Rhodes essentially declared him guilty and the system fixed, in large part because she factored in a ground-swell among younger voters that statistically didn’t materialize, and she failed to factor in an off-setting ground-swell among the religious right.

    Was there fraud in Ohio and Florida? I don’t know. But when you only present half the story, and practice guilty until proven innocent, and repeat that day in day out, you lose listeners. I would flip on Rhodes for a minute or two, hear her start on the same path, and then turn off. After a few days, I stopped turning her on in the first place.

    AAR has since changed the format, but I like the show they had with Rachel Maddow, which was more interview-based in nature. I just can’t listen to someone drone on, only allowing sympatheic callers (or praising) to get on the air, and only on the topic of the day. Rush does it, too, which is a main reason I rarely listen to him. AAR has several of these hosts.

    Also, AAR lowers itself to the baseline conservative radio when it has hosts like Mike Malloy discussing the “Bush crime family,” or when Garofalo talks of Bush as a criminal and a drunk. Randi Rhodes on several occasions has made fun of Bush’s intelligence, and of the partying habits of Jenna Bush. It’s so juvenile. And as a listener, how can I say Rush is flawed when he does that, but not say the same when the AAR personalities do?

  • casey

    First are you saying that AAR is targeting you personally or as a group of people?

    I really can’t argue with anything you said because I know very little about OHIO but did follow the Florida in 2000
    pretty closely. Would you have preferred that Randi just ignored the
    stories as that was what everyone was talking about at the time. It has changed the whole direction of this country and if there was any fraud it had to be brought out into the open.
    I listened to her the whole time and like you I don’t know if there was fraud or not but she would have been remiss to have nopt reported on it and she does have strong views. That is what everyone likes about her.

    I like Rachel Maddow also but wasn’t inpressed with her old show. I think her new show should take over the Springer time slot but that’s my call.
    As for calling Bush a drunk, I believe he admitted that and for making fun ofhis intelligence, you must live in
    a bubble to not have heard the blunders he continues to make. They have books out that you can buy of the most ridiculous things he says.
    I just made put your blog on my favorites but haven’t been able to
    chek it out yet. I’ll let you know..

  • casey

    Nice site Dave, I must admit I was surprised at the content. We enjoy a lot of the same sites.

    I guess the only thing I can say in defense of AAR is if I have my choice of Randi Rhodes and Mike Malloy or Kinsley and Colmes, I’ll take Randi and Mike in a second. I guess they are my cup of tea because they fight back and don’t just sit and take it like some do.
    It’s a matter of what you are looking for in a host.

    >>>AAR would be more successful, I think, if they brought aboard better journalists, rather than personalities, to host their shows.

    I hope you were kidding here. Just look at the way our Media conceals things today and you want to give them AAR too. I read somewhere that most Journalist today are more worried about not burning their bridges then they are in reporting the news..

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    >>You sure have a strong opinion of something you admit you don’t listen to.<<

    I used to listen to Limbaugh because it was all there was on talk radio around here for a long time. I found it occasionally amusing, but bombastic and unimaginative politicially. I’ve listened to Franken recently through his TV broadcasts. He’s just awful. For a guy who used to be a comedy writer he couldn’t be less funny. I wouldn’t call either of them liars, but they both twist facts so serve their interests in very much the same way. And it’s quite transparent if you have any familiarity with current events. But on the up side, they’re both less crazy than Alex Jones. But then so is Charlie Manson.

    Dave

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    >>Was there fraud in Ohio and Florida? I don’t know. But when you only present half the story, and practice guilty until proven innocent, and repeat that day in day out, you lose listeners. I would flip on Rhodes for a minute or two, hear her start on the same path, and then turn off. After a few days, I stopped turning her on in the first place. <<

    This is exactly the reaction I have to Limbaugh. What does it say about this kind of show when intelligent people who are politically somewhat sympathetic to the perspective of the show can’t stand to listen to it for a prolonged period?

    Have you ever listened to Neal Boortz? I’d be interested to hear your take on his show.

    Dave

  • casey

    >>>I wouldn’t call either of them liars, but they both twist facts so serve their interests in very much the same way.

    I listened to LImbaugh for over 15 years and I can say for sure he is a liar. Unless you say that someone that broadcasts over the radio that Vince Foster was killed in an apartment rented by Hillary Clinton and then moved to the park where he was found isn’t lying. That’s just one of many times I have caught him in lies. Now I have been listening to Franken since AAR came on and would gladly listen to anything you have where he distorts or twists the facts.. When I say lies I just don’t mean Limbaugh. The whole administration has done nothing but lie since they were sworn in. That to me is the difference in the ideology between the Parties. I’m not saying Democrats never lie but the Reps. seem to make a living at it.

  • Dan

    “Was there fraud in Ohio and Florida?”

    No, there were allegations of fraud that have been thouroughly investigated and proven unfounded. In Florida, every subsequent count of votes showed Bush’s margin increase. In Ohio the voter to machine ratio was actually skewed slightly in Kerry’s favor.

    Still, people doggedly pretend that the issue is inconclusive. They are aided in their ignorance by a disgraceful mainstream media that deliberately obscures truth.

    Next election cycle, there will be conspiratorial intonations of past election fraud “allegations”. As if.

    I can’t speak for all conservative talk radio, but Rush Limbaugh deals in truth. If he alleges, for example, that a democratic senator is a hypocrite, he’ll play un-tampered with, in-context recordings of the senator that make his point. Rush has his feet held to the fire by the main stream media.

    Not so with ‘error America’. As I noted in comment #45, Randi Rhodes is deliberately making false statements from an apparantly alternative universe that have no basis in reality.

    It’s a double standard.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    >>Unless you say that someone that broadcasts over the radio that Vince Foster was killed in an apartment rented by Hillary Clinton and then moved to the park where he was found isn’t lying. That’s just one of many times I have caught him in lies.<<

    There’s where we differ, on the definition of a lie. In many cases the lie is in the eye of the beholder. I was still listening during his hammering on the Vince Foster issue, and I know for a fact that he did not present any of the things you refer to as fact. He very carefully put the ideas about the Vince Foster case forward in the form of speculation with some evidence, but much more hypothetical theorizing. He definitely never crossed the line into saying that Hillary Clinton had Foster murdered, he just implied it. That’s not a lie as such, it’s a classic example of propagandistic spinmerchandising.

    Dave

  • casey

    Dave,

    I hate to tell you this but he did broadcast over the radio for over two hours that Vince Foster waskilled in an apartment rented by Hillary Clinton and then moved to the Park where his body was found. He then came back and said that the apartment was rented by white house people from Arkansas. Now you can tell me it never happened all you want but I worked second shift so I would listen to Limbaugh while in the bathroom and on my way to work and this day stands out because as soon as I heard it I turned on the TV to see what was happening and there was nothing on.

  • casey

    Here’s just a few:

    The absolutely false rumors that Vince Foster was killed were all over the place.
    Rush Limbaugh even lied and said that he had a fax that had evidence that …

    Rush Limbaugh has been guilty of a lot of the falsehoods, whether it’s claiming
    … before Columbus or that Vince Foster was killed in an apartment owned by …

    To deny that Vince Foster committed suicide becomes, then, … The apartment was
    supposed to be just across the Potomac River from Washington, …

    I confronted Rush Limbaugh about his lies during the 2000 election season. …
    that claims that Vince Foster was murdered in an apartment owned by Hillary …

  • casey

    In fact, as Media Matters for America noted on June 23 and June 30, the University of Chicago’s National Opinion Research Center (NORC) studied Florida’s disputed ballots and concluded that Gore emerged the winner in at least four recount scenarios. The NORC study was sponsored by news organizations including The Associated Press, The New York Times, and CNN, as well as The Wall Street Journal, Washington Post Co., and Tribune Publishing (which owns the Chicago Tribune, the Orlando Sentinel, and the South Florida Sun-Sentinel). According to a November 12, 2001, Washington Post article on the NORC’s findings, “[I]f Gore had found a way to trigger a statewide recount of all disputed ballots, or if the courts had required it, the result likely would have been different. An examination of uncounted ballots throughout Florida found enough where voter intent was clear to give Gore the narrowest of margins.”

  • casey

    Approved by the Commissioners on June 8, 2001
    Extracted in its entirety from GPOAccess website, April 30, 2002.
    Contains: Executive Summary, Introduction, 9 Chapters, Epilogue, Dissenting Opinion, Appendices and a Report on the Racial Impact of the Rejection of Ballots Cast in Florida.
    View Pages: Report with Table of Contents
    Abstract: Following the extremely controversial 2000 presidential election, The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights released this report on voting irregularities in Florida. The Commission held three days of hearings in each of Miami and Tallahassee and heard testimony from over 100 witnesses. The Commission found that, “Potential voters confronted inexperienced poll workers, antiquated machinery, inaccessible polling locations, and other barriers to being able to exercise their right to vote.” The Commission also determined that Florida had violated sections of the Voting Rights Act and Secretary of State Katherine Harris failed to provide leadership in adequately preparing Florida precincts for a large voter turnout. Problems with voter lists used at various precincts caused significant voter disenfranchisement, particularly among African-Americans. An estimated 14.4% of black voters in Florida cast ballots that were rejected, compared to only 1.6% for non-black voters. One Miami-Dade poll worker lamented, “By far this was the worst election I have ever experienced. After that election, I decided I didn’t want to work as a clerk anymore.” Appendices include photographic images of a Miami-Dade polling place described as a “medieval labyrinth” of “standing water, orange cones, barriers, deep pits, [and] broken concrete”; and the now infamous Palm Beach County “butterfly ballot.”
    Superintendent of Documents Number: CR 1.2:20010395

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    Casey, where are all those unattributed quotes from? Maybe I didn’t hear the series of Limbaugh shows you did. The ones I heard just suggested rather than outright saying that Hillary was involved in the Foster death. Perhaps I missed the sequence of shows where he outright lied. I’d love to see transcripts of his ‘lies’ rather than your quotes which appear to be of other people saying he lied.

    Dave

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    Casey, your characterization of the NORC results is just a tiny bit innacurate. First off, the NORC study did not determine ANY possible outcomes of the election. It’s a study of methodology and does not draw conclusions.

    However, from the data analysts have subsequently drawn up 8 scenarios, 4 of which would have Gore winning and 4 of which would have Bush winning – one of the secnarios under which Bush wins is the specific recount type requested by Gore. The inevitable conclusion from the data in the report is that if there had been a full recount in Florida Bush would definitely have won.

    The quote you give from WaPo is interesting, but in fact the comment they made is incorrect. According to the actual data in the report, the result of that full recount would have been a Bush victory.

    This is all well documented. Take a look at Florida Election 2000.

    Dave

  • Casey

    This is as far as I go. This give you the date.I remember listening for over two hours because of the nature of the broadcast. I then had to go into work and could not listen anymore…

    >>>Remarkably, this outspoken critic of “shoddy reporting” is the same man who, on March 10, 1994, urgently warned his audience, “Brace yourselves,” and then shared a report “that claims that Vince Foster was murdered in an apartment owned by Hillary Clinton…”

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    Right there, in your own words is an indication that Limbaugh did not make the outright claims you originally said he did. You say that he ‘shared a report’. That means that he has plausible deniability. He didn’t say it, he was merely repeating what someone else had said, which might or might not be true. That’s how you do it if you want to smear someone and not take responsibility for it.

    Dave

  • casey

    >>>Right there, in your own words is an indication that Limbaugh did not make the outright claims you originally said he did. You say that he ‘shared a report’. That means that he has plausible deniability. He didn’t say it, he was merely repeating what someone else had said, which might or might not be true. That’s how you do it if you want to smear someone and not take responsibility for it.

    The only thing Dave was that if I would have continued on the article it said:

    As recounted at fair.org (Extra!, July/August 1994), “Limbaugh took this baseless rumor from a small insiders’ newsletter and broadcast it to his radio audience of millions, adding his own new inaccuracies: *****The newsletter did not report—as Limbaugh claimed—that Foster was murdered, or that the apartment was owned by Hillary Rodham Clinton.***** Limbaugh’s repetition of an unfounded rumor has been credited (Chicago Tribune, 3/11/94; Newsweek, 3/21/94) with contributing to a plunge in the stock market on the day it was aired.”

    I guess its okay if he changes it to say what he wants.. You guys are unbelievable..

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    So, Limbaugh was passing on rumor and speculation. That’s what I said in the first place. I still don’t believe he presented them as fact. From what I recall from listening to it he very clearly couched his statements in language which unambiguously presented the material as hypothetical, not fact.

    >>I guess its okay if he changes it to say what he wants.. You guys are unbelievable..<<

    Who are ‘you guys’? Got a little paranoid fantasy going have you?

    Dave

  • casey

    By the way Dave, I have a 1/2 inch stack of papers here that give some of the falsehoods that Limbaugh has said over the years before I stopped listening to him…

    Since you listened so close do you remember the one about Chelsea Clinton’s Sidewall Friends school where he said they assigned eight graders to write a paper on “Why I feel guilty being white’. His source was suppose to be CBS news which said they never reported such a story. Sidewell Friend said it would never do that as one-quarted of their students are non-white.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    >>By the way Dave, I have a 1/2 inch stack of papers here that give some of the falsehoods that Limbaugh has said over the years before I stopped listening to him…< <

    I don't doubt it. You seem to have a real obsession here. But I bet if you go through that stack objectively you'd find that most of the 'falsehoods' are not so much lies as supposition and innuendo with very few instances where he comes out and says something clearly and unequivocally false.

    I'm not arguing that Rush isn't a propagandizing scumbag, but he is at least somewhat careful about not saying anything blatantly libelous. Notice that he hasn't been successfully sued over anything he's said.

    >>Since you listened so close< <

    I listened occasionally years and years ago. I just happen to remember the Vince Foster shows.

    >> do you remember the one about Chelsea Clinton’s Sidewall Friends school < <

    It's Sidwell Friends, not Sidewall.

    >>where he said they assigned eight graders to write a paper on “Why I feel guilty being white’. His source was suppose to be CBS news which said they never reported such a story. Sidewell Friend said it would never do that as one-quarted of their students are non-white.<<

    Never heard that story. Sidwell is extremely liberal – run by Quakers – so it’s a believable story. And in fact, from what I’ve read Limbaugh got the story from a journalist (not with CBS) who had been told that such an assignment was given out by a parent of a kid at the school. So it was a third hand rumor which Limbaugh repeated. Not a lie, but at the same time an example of poor judgement and absolute lack of discrimination when something he heard matched his expectations.

    That kind of thing is characteristic of Limbaugh. He doesn’t lie, he just repeats stuff he hears from other sources which he likes without making any effort to confirm if they are actually true. That way he can pass the blame to the original source and make the point he wants to make without actually, technically lying.

    Dave

  • Jeff b

    hey you guys, stop the jibber-jabber, and get back to work

  • casey

    So, Limbaugh was passing on rumor and speculation. That’s what I said in the first place. I still don’t believe he presented them as fact. From what I recall from listening to it he very clearly couched his statements in language which unambiguously presented the material as hypothetical, not fact.

    I’m sitting here laughing because I just found out that Limbaugh can’t lie.
    First you tell me you remember his programs on Vice Fosterm then you say maybe you missed that one, then you want a transcript of the program, then he was just sharing a report, which gives him plausable deniability and finally when I show you he changed the report you say:So, Limbaugh was passing on rumor and speculation. That’s what I said in the first place. I still don’t believe he presented them as fact. From what I recall from listening to it he very clearly couched his statements in language which unambiguously presented the material as hypothetical, not fact.

    I would be ashamed to have to change so many things in such a short time…

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    I said maybe I missed a show, because what you were saying didn’t match my recollection of that sequence of shows. Then you changed what you had said to show that Limbaugh did not actually make a direct lie, confirming my original belief. It was not I who changed position, but you.

    >>I would be ashamed to have to change so many things in such a short time…<<

    Are you blushing?

    Dave

  • casey

    Not in the least and anyone that reads what transpired will understand what I said.

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    You said that Limbaugh had lied, then you described the situation in more detail and it was obvious that it wasn’t a lie, but repetition of speculation from another source. The difference between those two is pretty clear to anyone except you.

    Dave

  • casey

    Definitions of liar on the Web:

    a person who has lied or who lies repeatedly
    wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

    A lie is a statement made by someone who believes or suspects it to be false, in the expectation that the hearers may believe it.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    The first definition is self referential and therefore useless. The second one is much better, but as should be clear it relies on intent. To prove someone is a liar you have to prove that they knew what they were saying was untrue and said it anyway. So long as there is a reasonable possibility that it might be true in their mind when they say it then it’s not a lie.

    Dave

  • casey

    person who has lied or who lies repeatedly
    wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

    A lie is a statement made by someone who believes or suspects it to be false, in the expectation that the hearers may believe it. Thus a true statement may be a lie if the speaker thinks it is false; and novels, though false, are not lies. Depending on definitions, a lie can be a genuine falsehood or a selective truth, a lie by omission, or even the truth if the intention is to deceive or to cause an action not in the listener’s interests. To lie is to tell a lie. A person who tells a lie, a
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liar

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    Again, intent. You have to prove Limbaugh knew what he was repeating was false. Good luck.

    Dave

  • CASEY

    *****The newsletter did not report—as Limbaugh claimed—that Foster was murdered, or that the apartment was owned by Hillary Rodham Clinton.*****

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    Yes, but as I recall Limbaugh just put those ideas out as speculations of things that MIGHT have happened based on the newsletter. He didn’t say that he had any evidence that they had, just presented ‘what if’ scenarios. It’s a bit slimy and certainly partisan, but it’s not lying.

    Dave

  • B. Samuel Davis

    As for Air America, I don’t see how you get around the 1 share in New York City. The .02 less than when it was just WLIB, which, by the way wasn’t just Caribbean music – it had an evening political talk show which in some ways is remarkably similar to Air America. What I find distinctly odd about Air America, however, is not its anti-Republican rants, but rather its pro-Democratic slant. That distinguishes Air America from the radical WBAI, although sometimes it seems that Air America is even more radical than BAI. As a side note, I was surprised to learn that BAI accepts government funding – how does that square with Republican efforts to have public broadcasting – which is supported by tax payer dollars – be “fair and balanced”?

  • Robert Hill

    Being one of the Coloradians that affected the radio… I listen to 760 AM to get a laugh and find out what’s going to be put through the ringer next. The only reason that I don’t listen to 630 AM as much is that 710 KNUS is a fantastic place to also get information. Bill Bennett, Laura Ingraham, Dennis Prager, Sean Hannity, Hugh Hewitt, Michael Medved… Great lineup. There is almost too much good conservative talk radio to choose from out here.