Cynical Nation

:p

This has to be the 10th time neocons have declared Air America dead.

Really, are neocons so obsessed with absolute power that even a small dissenting voice is that threatening?

I have listened to Air America, and their problem is that they don't understand Americans. Liberals want to be nice and reasonable. That is boring.

I want to be entertained. I want to hear Bush being bashed with the same reckless disregard for facts or even sanity that is shown on Limbaugh, Hannity, and O'Reilly.

They just don't get it. Unlike neocon radio, they allow wingnuts to call in and scream over them, while they try to calmly reason with them.

This is war. You don't play chess in a knife fight.

I think Rove is probably right. The other side doesn't even know how to fight anymore.

I'm never happy to see a voice, however tedious and pedantic, silenced, so I'm not going to cheer this event.

Why did anyone think AAR would do any better than its predecessor I.E. America? That network lasted for eight years only because the UAW pumped a bunch of money into and folded (interestingly, one month before AAR went on the air) when it became painfully obvious that no amount of artifical respiration was going to keep that dead horse alive.

Amazing! Even Bailey can be right once in a while.

I'm happy just listen to the Stingray Network -- All stingray, all the time.

This has to be the 10th time neocons have declared Air America dead.

Really, are neocons so obsessed with absolute power that even a small dissenting voice is that threatening? (BH)
"Primary Problem" is that they cater to those who always and reflexively blame America for all the world's ills....those folks are relatively few and far between and they don't tend fit any strong advertising demographic - in other words, "they don't buy all that much."

Big problem.

1600 AM is very near 1610AM and sometimes I get them confused, as 1610AM is the Highway road conditions which usually has to do with car wrecks....and I hate it when people stop to look at car wrecks...but we all do don't we?

You are right, JMK. You have convinced me. I am happier living in your world now. Liberalism is too depressing.

They do get a little giddy when our troops get killed en masse and the war turns against us. They are happy that bin Laden is still free. Honestly, it's kinda sick.

Bush still sucks 100% though, that hasn't changed.

AA was brought forth to mitigate the impact of the Limbaughs and Hannitys on talk radio.

I tried listening to their bellwether, Randi Rhodes several times. She was angry and humorless the two times I heard her. But what struck me most was she didn't seem to care about her fellow hosts. She never mentioned them as if AA went off the air when she was not on.

I found that strange. She came across as a hired gun rather than a team player.

Anger only appeals to a small minority.

AA has just proved that.

The problem isn't with AAR's politics as much as it's with their delivery, BH.

They are depressing, negative and monotonous, with personalities, from the whiney Stewart (Al Franken) Smalley, to the droning monotone of Jeanene Garafollo to the nasal Rhandi Rhodes.

I've heard them out and it's a snore-fest.

That's their BIG problem - they're just not entertaining, that and they're catering to a very non-commecial demographic.

I agree. They take themselves too seriously, and it is boring. It's funny how once conservative were considered stuffy puffed up toads, but now it's the liberals.

Maybe it's just hard to have fun when you have no power.

I disagree with your analysis BH, though I commend you for being cogent, rational and interesting in this post.

The reason I disagree is that the likes of Limbaugh, Grant and Hannity were all at their very best when Clinton was in office. They've actually suffered greatly over the last six years.

No, the problems that the AAR-styled Liberals have is that they (1) tend to blame America for all the world's evils, (2) routinely laud tyrannical Third World (mostly Socialistic) dictators, while espousing "democracy" (an odd combination, unless you consider rigged elections and One Party Rule by force "democracy") and (3) espouse everything most traditionalist Americans oppose, from blaming "society" for the behavior of violent predators, to higher taxes to fund ever more social spending, to race & gender based preferences (race and gender based discrimination) to cure perceived (gulp!) race and gender based discrimination.

Their hosts also tend to be excruciatingly pedantic, but I can't see how you can manage to avoid that while thumping for the above ideology.

I thought Rush & Co. started sliding during Clinton's second term. With a roaring economy and worldwide respect, they had nothing to bash him on except the fact that he was a horny guy. Oh, he LIED about his personal affairs when he should have simply refused to answer. OK. I guess if he had lied us into losing 2,600+ lives, $300 billion+ dollars, worldwide repect, and our civil rights that would have been JUST FINE with the wingnuts.

Now they are sycophants to the Bush corruption machine, so they are not even taken seriously by anyone with an IQ above room temperature.

In the beginning, Rush was really funny, because at the time Political Correctness was running rampant and even starting to be legislated. Nobody had ever dared to just openly mock morons like drunken parade-float Ted Kennedy or expose the criminal nature of that family. Nobody dared mock feminists or racecard Jesse and Al. Rush exposed what was actually being taught in our colleges, and he wasn't exaggerating because I had some of those crazy profs, who did seem to quite simple HATE America.

However, Rush's keen eye was blinded once Bush took over, and now only his hypocrisy is hilarious as he seriously and solemnly speaks of protecting the dignity of the office of the President! Hey Rush, does the term "Slick Willy" ring a bell? LOL!

It's all there for the taking. If Air America can find someone who will simply point out the obvious and bash away at those in power, they will have a hit. How can they not mock the price of gas dropping as the election nears? How can they not run down the list of indicted Republicans on a daily basis?

They have even more material than Rush did in the beginning, but instead they want to be "serious" ... dolts.

Once again, your BDS-fueled opinions over-ride the issue for you.

Suffice to say Conservative Talk Radio had their best material when Clinton was in power - the the Lewinsky affair, the ill-fated military action in the Balkans, our ignoring Iraq and international terrorism, the "economic mirage" that was the "Tech Bubble" - and the inevitable "Tech Bubble BUST of 2000."

The singular quality that Conservative Talk Radio's hosts all share is a cock-eyed optimism about Americanism (Capitalism, individualism, low-tax government, strong military & police powers), peppered with appealing sloganeering like "You're a great American."

Hokey and corny as that may be, it comes off as decidedly pro (if unquestionably)-American and optimistic about Americanism (individualism and Capitalism).

The Left's pundits and talkers come off as decidedly more skeptical about the fruits of Capitalism and low-tax government and decidedly wary of increased military and police powers...and thus they appear less optimistic, and less pro-American.

You can't advance that Leftist agenda without coming off pedantic, besides that, how many birkenstock sandals can you sell?

You know, there's a limited market in their target audience for....STUFF, and companies love to sell STUFF.

"ignoring Iraq and international terrorism"

Sorry JMK, but I was listening during those years and if anything Clinton was accused of "wagging the dog" when he took military action anywhere, including Iraq.

Not once was terrorism mentioned as a major threat that was being ignored by Clinton. At the time, neocons were pushing CHINA as the big threat, so they were claiming that Clinton was selling sensitive computer and missile technology to China, which was a lie, of course.

You don't hear much about that anymore, because Terrorists are now the bogeyman the neocons needed to trump up to scare people into giving them extraordinary powers to abuse.

Don't pretend that terrorism was on radar, or that conservatives would have backed Clinton taking more military action in Iraq.

"the "economic mirage" that was the "Tech Bubble" - and the inevitable "Tech Bubble BUST of 2000"

Inevitable, except that it wasn't mentioned, and not one conservative saw it coming. Very conservative financial institutions had tech stocks at a Strong Buy right up until the end. It's funny how you on the one hand say that Robber Baron style executive compensation is not the government's business, but apparently CLINTON was responsible for the Tech Boom, well, at least the bad part of it, you never talk about how he drove America to the pinnacle of technological dominance, you know, the dominance we have lost under Bush's anti-business wingnut stem cell policies, etc ...

Terrorism was a huge issue dating back to 1983.

It became HUGE in the 1990s with the continual drum beat of the 1993 WTC bombing ("When are we going to do something?!"), the two African embassy bombings ("When are we going to do something?!"), the USS Cole attack ("When are we going to do something?!"), the Khobar Towers bombing ("When are we going to do something?!"), Mogadishu ("When are we going to do something?!")....YES, after every one of those acts of "unconventional warfare," the American people shouted - When are we going to do something?!"

You probably just didn't hear it.

The Tech Bubble Bust was predicted by many, many financial analysts.

The P/E ratios of 1998 were absurd! Anyone with any sense looked at the technicals in that sector and began shorting techs (the NASDAQ) in 1998.

I didn't hear it, because nobody was saying it. You conveniently forgot to go back to the original terrorist act, the one Reagan ignored, doing nothing, after our marines were murdered by terrorists. He did worse than nothing, he ran away.

Reagan set the policy for how to deal with terrorism. Clinton tried to take military action against them, but wingnuts went crazy with "WAG THE DOG!" and accused him of bombing an aspirin factory.

Imagine that, unpatriotic Republicans came to the defense of terrorists and blamed America for bombing an aspirin factory!

Republicans were in power for 8 years Nixon/Ford, then 4 years for Carter, 12 years of Reagan/Bush I, then 8 years for Clinton, and now 6 years of Chimpboy.

Any indictment falls on Republicans, who have also owned Congress for quite some time.

It is all the fault of the Republicans.

Nope, the reason you didn't "hear it," was because you obviously weren't paying much, if any attention.

The WTC bombing in 1993 was an incredible attack on America, killing six people and injuring at least another 1,040 people.

The Khobar Towers, the two U.S. Embassies in Africa, the USS Cole attack, the incident in Mogadishu, Somalia...they were just some of the events that were part of a relentless war against America and American interests waged from 1993 to 2001.

The important thing for us is that we're finally in this war now and hopefully we're in it to stay, probably for the better part of the next two decades, sad to say.

It took a lot to make America take terrorism seriously. Unfortunately there are still some Americans, a small but vocal minority that still don't see why we can't simply negotiate this problem away.

In 1983 we weren't "occupying" Lebanon. Our Marines were there as part of a multi-national peace-keeping mission to protect Lebanon after Israel invaded that country in 1982.

That "peace-keeping mission" was aborted by the UN.
"The 1983 Beirut barracks bombing was a major incident during the Lebanese Civil War. Two truck bombs struck buildings in Beirut housing U.S. and French members of the Multinational Force in Lebanon, killing hundreds of soldiers, the majority being U.S. Marines. The October 23, 1983, blasts led to the withdrawal of the international peacekeeping force from Lebanon, where they had been stationed since the Israeli invasion in 1982, and it is considered one of the first instances of suicide bombing."

President Reagan assembled his national security team and planned to target the Sheik Abdullah barracks in Baalbek, Lebanon, which housed Iranian Revolutionary Guards believed to be training Hezbollah fighters. But Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger aborted the mission, reportedly because of his concerns that it would harm U.S. relations with other Arab nations.

Besides a few shellings, there was no serious retaliation for the Beirut bombing from the Americans. In December 1983, U.S. aircraft attacked Syrian targets in Lebanon, but this was in response to Syrian missile attacks on planes, not the barracks bombing.

The Marines were moved offshore where they could not be targeted. On February 7, 1984, President Reagan ordered the Marines to begin withdrawal from Lebanon. This was completed on February 26; the rest of the MNF was withdrawn by April.

In his book "By Way of Deception: The Making and Unmaking of a Mossad Officer, Victor Ostrovsky claims that Mossad knew in advance of the attack, but did not warn the United States. There have been claims that Israel wanted US and French troops to leave Lebanon so it could freely operate in Lebanon without restriction."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_Beirut_barracks_bombing

Heh, good job using an anti-semetic source. It was da Jooooz!

Whoa!

Victor Ostrovsky, a former Massad Officer, is not at all "anti-Semitic. His book, "By Way of Deception: The Making and Unmaking of a Mossad Officer is an excellentand well documented source of information on that particular era.

The sad facts of the Marine Corps Barracks bombing in 1983 were; "In 1983 we weren't "occupying" Lebanon. Our Marines were there as part of a multi-national peace-keeping mission to protect Lebanon after Israel invaded that country in 1982.

That "peace-keeping mission" was aborted by the UN.

"The 1983 Beirut barracks bombing was a major incident during the Lebanese Civil War. Two truck bombs struck buildings in Beirut housing U.S. and French members of the Multinational Force in Lebanon, killing hundreds of soldiers, the majority being U.S. Marines. The October 23, 1983, blasts led to the withdrawal of the international peacekeeping force from Lebanon, where they had been stationed since the Israeli invasion in 1982, and it is considered one of the first instances of suicide bombing."

President Reagan assembled his national security team and planned to target the Sheik Abdullah barracks in Baalbek, Lebanon, which housed Iranian Revolutionary Guards believed to be training Hezbollah fighters. But Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger aborted the mission, reportedly because of his concerns that it would harm U.S. relations with other Arab nations."