Congratulations KPTK! WE GOT ED!

And Randi and Stephanie, and Thom
[4-24-07: loopy link inserted for reconstruction]

- -
[8-2-07: ADJUSTED THIS DATE -
GO LEFT TV
Air America Radio
Progressive Talk Radio KPTK AM1090 Seattle
FILTER OF SORTS]
- -

[adjusted this date 8-11-07: ifilm of Spike TV
The Colbert Report
The Daily Show ]

Five of the Heavy Hundred are on one local station: AM1090

The 100 most important radio talk show hosts in America!

NUMBER 5.
Ed Schultz www.wegoted.com

Number 13.
Randi Rhodes: The Randi Rhodes Show

Number 36.
Stephanie Miller: The Stephanie Miller Show

Number 51 Thom Hartmann: The Thom Hartmann Show

Rounding out the court. Maybe the center.
Number 27. Clark Howard.

OK! My progressive spin almost missed Clark, but the term "important" over "popular" was a factor in the "Heavy Hundred", and his 1 hr time-slot midnight to 1AM may hint at that and the progressive lean of the listeners or hourly demographics. Clark is both important and popular, just not labeled progressive.*

FLIP FLOP THE LIST!
Considering these personalities and their news value, entertainment and progressive intent,Rachel Maddow (while not even found in the top 250) must be on the bench.
What I am saying is that, rounded out to a balance of sort
but with progressive and informative and entertainment value, she may have topped a list with the numbers flipped. It would be hard to say that Thom, Stephanie, Randi and Ed have any particular strengths that would flip-flop the list, other than my feeling that being progressive, informative and entertaining should be considered in that order, rather than the method used for the Heavy Hundred.
On my scale Rachel Maddow plays well off the bench and deserve her own honors, not to mention her on-air teammate Kent Jones.

MY IDEAL PROGRESSIVE LIST[Reality Flip Flopped]
Or from spirited to spiritual. Going up?

[RACHEL MADDOW] A UNIQUE BALANCE OF INFO AND HUMOR
THOM HARTMANN
STEPHANIE MILLER
RANDI RHODES
ED SCHULTZ
MIKE MALLOY: REALITY BASED
[NOT BEST REPRESENTED IN LINEAR FORM]

[Apologies for not noting one of the top 250, Mike Malloy who is a spiritual warrior of sorts.
If there were a FOX NEWS of the left, Mike Malloy would fit the bill as the nightly lead,
but for me he is too much on a Reality Rant to make good bedtime stories.]
Now just to sort my own review, I love all these guys, for different reasons, but would put progress over money and fun, and that is what I wish for all.

* I don't relish labels, but then, it is a sorting. Long Story Short: (or in my usual way: Runting the Rant) Maybe the Heavy Hitter (Oops) Hundred list does reflect the order of "Agressive Progressives", but I would flip flop the list and call it Just Progressive! But the problem always is, coming from a perspective or getting somewhere.

Censorship or just Business?

A belated comment on the firing of Mike Malloy:

Dear Mike:

Here is a comment I sent Air America Radio.

"Listening to Mike Malloy's last broadcast (August 25th) on Air America Radio, I am trying to determine if it was anything he said that lost him his job, assuming that maybe he crossed a line: However having listened up to the point that he came up with the bumper sticker WWYD?, [What would you do?] I feel that he actually was mellower than I had expected not being a regular, just due to the time slot.

I don't know if he foresaw his fate, or it is just financial, but I can accept that you are not necessarily in this for anything more than financial reasons. I just hope that that is the case and not some sort of displeasure with his message. His most extreme words cannot compare to the reality of this world, that must be challenged with reason or it will only be for force."

Having finished listening your (hopefully not) last program, there may be many places where you crossed a line, but as I said above and to a friend, compared to reality "there is no line". Well that is not exactly what I said, but I progress (as opposed to digress).

Now I can send you my improved well wishes.

Roger Out.

P.S. the above format is such as I had already shared this issue with a friend from Canada. In the overall lineup of Air America, you were not (necessarily) my favorite, but it may have just been your time slot (or being too similar in "sentiment"). After all the fine talents, it was usually just too much, to get jacked up all over again so late in the day, not wanting to cross any lines myself. But I must say, I really enjoyed your "last program" and look forward to wherever you end up.[italic words added now]

P.P.S. Listening again I get to the point where Bush says "there is no point in having a philosophical discussion" ? Appointing justices it was all about philosophy. Did anyone ask what was the philosophy? Not the media or the politicians. But we have leapt to the answers.

Anachronism

1-21-14 (no text) (saved in doc)
1-22-14 * added
1-23-14 scroll down for edit(**) comments
1-24-14

Pop Four?

Randi Rhodes:  Defender and Explainer of Obamanomics?
Norman Goldman:  Radical Middle?
Ed Schultz: Ed Head of the People?
Mike Malloy: Contrary Brin

The Poverty of Popperism, **

The Less Than Pentagonal File

A mature Log [.]

4 word [.]
 

Meta More Phosis?
Not Exactly!
 

==============================================

Randi Rhodes

No apologies (*) to Mike Malloy, nor insult to Contrary Brin*, but maybe the mechanics(or dimanics) of the parallel points. Akin to Newton’s orbit(**). i.e. 3-body problem. And even deeper Hegelian remarks to Terral, in regard to not getting there yet.  i.e. accidental reference under Post-Doc Terral nature of the point. Parallels do not tangent.

Further ow[!]

parallels-meet-religion-and-nationalism-in-the-early
when-the-parallels-meet-and-talk
where-parallels-meet.html

1-22-14

 * Nor less regard for Thom(:) Hartmann or Rachel(:) Maddow:

Time is a funny thing.  The fourth dimension?  What about perpendicular to the 3?  But then there is the parallel of not having time to follow every tangent let alone parallels. 

**1-23-14   links titled and morphed, lines 4 and 6 added. Link(or line)5 actually read or rubric's fit ?

 

IGOPOGO

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[.] = lame punctuashuns[!]
i.e. prologue / foreword (^)
 

(:) more to insert and POGO [!] ~[foot note]
 

(*) the sequal? WaPo Slate?

(^)1-24-14  i.e. prologue / foreword
Also 4 links added for 4 original personalities.(Andrea Mitchell /

"or nuanced"[P.M. Update]

[Morning after moved and continued in new post]
[Subtitle: "Mass a Choose Its Dilemma" (*)]
P.M. Update: Just a note on Mike Malloy (self-described of the "Real Left"[***])had a good rant for people tonight. Actually, I wish I could be more detailed or nuanced*, but I hope it will come back to me. Now that's the story. But it just might be...come on, give Obama a shot.
*I wonder if sarcastic irony comes out even?
P.S. heard on way home from hearing two "progressive"(uncertain if really so-described[**]) Congressional candidates for the WA 8th, but they will fight for the Dem nod.]

[**]1-27-10 Hint: see which is which,the Left or Democrat.]
[***]link added 1-27-10

(*) Washington State is undergoing a simultaneous electoral evolution and court fight over the Top Two Primary. Hence(apparently)the difficulty in finding out how the ballot will look with or with out labels of D and R selected by the parties or just preferences by the candidate at their choosing. It is not a direct correlation to the other state, but how the masses choose to party.

[Speaking of Mass a Choose Its, Obama won, not Obama-one: How do you know you are Right? If you find anything wrong with this(**).]
(**) place holder for Hardball/Game Change

Enough

We Got Ed?
Simmer down now.
But first hand experience,
what about Mike Malloy?
Eating our Own?
[I hesitate to link or post this,
but will pause to reflect on links.]

Local Media

AM1090 Seattle Weekday Schedule

Stephanie Miller 6 AM to 9 AM LIVE
Thom Hartmann 9 AM to Noon LIVE
Ed Schultz 12 PM to 3 PM Call 9 AM to Noon
Rachell Maddow 3 PM to 6 PM LIVE
Randi Rhodes 6 PM to 9 PM Call Noon to 3 PM
Mike Malloy 9 PM to 11 PM Call 6 PM to 9 PM

Air America Radio

CBS AM 1090 Seattle: Get it while you can.

CBS drops talk for sports.
[CBS's AM1090 Converting to Sports Talk]**



This very disappointing** news came to me via the Norman Goldman Show.
Others who will need relocation:
* Randi Rhodes(6-9pm)  
Mike Malloy(9pm-12am)
Stephanie Miller(6-9am)
Thom Hartmann(9am-12pm) KBCS(91.3)FM
Ed Schultz(12-3pm)

*(presented in order from time of this news)
(Norman is 3-6pm)
**[12-20-12(dual use asterisk/edit)sadness, panic, (add)embarrassment to have missed it. But nail' d, This.]

Eating Their Own?

Perfect Presidents, or Perfect Politicians?
The Forum Part A, and Part B.
To be broadcast on the Seattle Channel.

It has been complained that Democrats have a problem of eating their own, meaning beating each other up in the political races, but compared to Mike Malloy who sometimes wants to eat his own arm, it is all relative. I call it dialogue and debate and impassioned perspectives, and just what politics needs. Not that anyone should be eating anyone, for Republicans who view things as "Us and Them", there is probably no problem with eating others. But if one just looks at the Democrats and the amount of "dialogue", who needs Republicans? [One always needs loyal opposition, but loyal followers? That was just answering a rhetorical with a rhetorical.]

Underwhelmed?

[Updated 6-23-11 on two fronts: below and here.]
Fairly Helmed(text)

Underwhelmed* is the lede some might choose for their take on
President Obama on the Way Forward in Afghanistan(video)

Yet tonight, we take comfort in knowing that the tide of war is receding. Fewer of our sons and daughters are serving in harm’s way. We’ve ended our combat mission in Iraq, with 100,000 American troops already out of that country. And even as there will be dark days ahead in Afghanistan, the light of a secure peace can be seen in the distance. These long wars will come to a responsible end.

As they do, we must learn their lessons. Already this decade of war has caused many to question the nature of America’s engagement around the world. Some would have America retreat from our responsibility as an anchor of global security, and embrace an isolation that ignores the very real threats that we face. Others would have America over-extended, confronting every evil that can be found abroad.

We must chart a more centered course. Like generations before, we must embrace America’s singular role in the course of human events. But we must be as pragmatic as we are passionate; as strategic as we are resolute. When threatened, we must respond with force -- but when that force can be targeted, we need not deploy large armies overseas. When innocents are being slaughtered and global security endangered, we don’t have to choose between standing idly by or acting on our own. Instead, we must rally international action, which we’re doing in Libya, where we do not have a single soldier on the ground, but are supporting allies in protecting the Libyan people and giving them the chance to determine their own destiny.

In all that we do, we must remember that what sets America apart is not solely our power -- it is the principles upon which our union was founded.

* Norman Goldman and Mike Malloy

[6-23-11 Selected quotes from remarks extended.]

America, it is time to focus on nation building here at home.

(...)

That’s a lesson worth remembering -- that we are all a part of one American family. Though we have known disagreement and division, we are bound together by the creed that is written into our founding documents, and a conviction that the United States of America is a country that can achieve whatever it sets out to accomplish. Now, let us finish the work at hand. Let us responsibly end these wars, and reclaim the American Dream that is at the center of our story. With confidence in our cause, with faith in our fellow citizens, and with hope in our hearts, let us go about the work of extending the promise of America -- for this generation, and the next.

May God bless our troops. And may God bless the United States of America.

Bully for Obama, no Bully, no Teddy,more pulpit.

The Real B. S. of the F. C.

Balanced Solutions(Bernie Sanders) of the Fiscal Crypt(or FulCrum):

Anyone who believes that we have a spending problem not a revenue problem is unqualified to make decisions that will help the economy.  That is my summary, not that he* might not agree. 
Spending as a percent of GDP is the lowest in 60 years and the tax rates are the lowest in living memory.**


** Bernie Sanders (12-7-12) Need to update.
**I forget how many years that is.
(i.e. bu dump ump = Thom Hartmann, Norman Goldman***, and Randi Rhodes.)
*** Ctrl F "sound" (no dump but wedge between Thom and Randi on AM1090.)

Over and Under Planes. 
Stephanie Miller
Mike Malloy
Rachel Maddow
Ed Schultz.

[Meanwhile the real c. c.  Boehner blames the President for congresses own fiscal cliff march. Bush Tax cuts had expiration date.  The Republican congress refused to extend middle class tax cuts, and led country to credit downgrade and budget sequester deal over raising debt limit.  The President said he would not play those games.  The House is not likely to pass a deal that will pass the Senate and Presidential veto.]

Perfect Presidents or Perfect Politicians?

Perfect Hosts?
No such thing, they might agree.
The host of this panel of talk show hosts aside, the rest are the closest to what this country needs and were all at Seattle Town Hall this last evening. (This is a flip-flopped if not awkward complement to the host.)

As introduced:
The Young Turks
Mike Malloy
Ed Schultz
Stephanie Miller
And the moderator/host Thom Hartmann

One thing it reminded me of, is that with all the ideas and great personalities, not to mention candidates, who needs Republicans. That is especially represented in the sometimes heated discussions. Seriously, who needs Republicans?

Especially when it comes to leadership and unity, who needs Republicans? The American voter should remember that as well as the so-called base of either party. The idea of divided government is not about pitting parties against each other, but each branch doing its job. But if congress is not going to do its job, it may be best to have divided Democrats. And still, who needs Republicans.

OK, this was just a quick rant, to make a point. One I am not sure hit its mark. I think it's that Congress should do its job, and Democrats will get elected. And if there are some Democrats that upset some of the people, who needs Republicans?

Well I will close with this. It was a really hot show.