I personally like listening to Neal Boortz the most.
Who do you listen to?
Who do you listen to?
Any news talk radio listeners?
- Thread starter ~~whimsy~~
- Start date
Facetious
Moderated
Dobbs ! 
:thumbsup:
Boortz is OK but sometimes he can piss me off with his pompous arrogance
Maybe it's all just play on his part, what do you think ?
The demokrats and their new "diversity CZAR" and civil rights activist extraordinare, Mark Lloyd are sure to take a crap on AM radio political discussions with their "fairness doctrine" nonsense, the communist bullies ! :thefinger
Invest in satellite radio. :thumbsup:
:thumbsup:Boortz is OK but sometimes he can piss me off with his pompous arrogance
Maybe it's all just play on his part, what do you think ?
The demokrats and their new "diversity CZAR" and civil rights activist extraordinare, Mark Lloyd are sure to take a crap on AM radio political discussions with their "fairness doctrine" nonsense, the communist bullies ! :thefinger
Invest in satellite radio. :thumbsup:
Rey C.
Racing is life... anything else is just waiting.
Years ago I listened to G. Gordon Liddy everyday - mainly because the woman in the next office hated him... and I hated her. :thefinger
Yeah, if I'm driving someplace, I'll listen to everything from Boss Limbaugh and Michael Savage to the various shows on NPR. I try not to listen to any of them long enough that they have a decent chance of brainwashing me.
At home, no... never. As I said in another thread, I generally like peace & quiet at home. Too many of these guys play it up to get an audience and at some point, all of them get on my nerves.
Yeah, if I'm driving someplace, I'll listen to everything from Boss Limbaugh and Michael Savage to the various shows on NPR. I try not to listen to any of them long enough that they have a decent chance of brainwashing me.
At home, no... never. As I said in another thread, I generally like peace & quiet at home. Too many of these guys play it up to get an audience and at some point, all of them get on my nerves.
Well, Boortz does have a playful manner about him and can have some hilarious days. Other days he can be grumpy or serious. That's what's awesome and makes a good radio show host! We all have our good and bad days. Listen to him long enough and you can tell when he is having fun or serious. Pompous, mmm, maybe rarely he is. But that is me. ^_^
I especially like how he talks about O'Reilly! Hilarious stuff when he is on a day like that.
Or when a caller talks about Sean Hannity and Boortz says in a irritated voice, why do people call MY show to talk about Hannity!? He has his own show, call him and talk about him!
It's funny.
I listen every now and again to Michael Savage. I know, I know, I can hear some tops blow at just the mention of his name here.
Anymore I find myself listening to Boortz when I can ^_^
I especially like how he talks about O'Reilly! Hilarious stuff when he is on a day like that.
Or when a caller talks about Sean Hannity and Boortz says in a irritated voice, why do people call MY show to talk about Hannity!? He has his own show, call him and talk about him!
It's funny.
I listen every now and again to Michael Savage. I know, I know, I can hear some tops blow at just the mention of his name here.
Anymore I find myself listening to Boortz when I can ^_^
Facetious
Moderated
^ Sometimes I think that "Royal" wants to kill him (N.B). :rofl:
I like that "hayseed" producer that Neil has :1orglaugh she fits the part just perfect.
All in all, there isn't shit to listen to anymore in my marketplace, Dobbs and Boortz no longer play here.
^^
.....then I walk around with a cranky disposition. :rofl:
I like that "hayseed" producer that Neil has :1orglaugh she fits the part just perfect.
All in all, there isn't shit to listen to anymore in my marketplace, Dobbs and Boortz no longer play here.
^^
When I have listened "long enough" in the past, they just piss me off all the more about the world in general.
.....then I walk around with a cranky disposition. :rofl:
Royal is hilarious. Especially when he makes cracks about Boortz being just another rich white guy haha
You can go to Boortz's website and listen live I do believe.
Yes. I found myself, when I would listen to a crap load of news a day, I would be irritable and cranky because all it tends to do is focus on the negative crap in the world. That will rub off on one! Thus making them negative, generally speaking. I know I found myself walking around pissed off and cranky. Not too bad, but it was there until I took a step back and listen to it every now and again
You can go to Boortz's website and listen live I do believe.
Yes. I found myself, when I would listen to a crap load of news a day, I would be irritable and cranky because all it tends to do is focus on the negative crap in the world. That will rub off on one! Thus making them negative, generally speaking. I know I found myself walking around pissed off and cranky. Not too bad, but it was there until I took a step back and listen to it every now and again
Mostly just NPR. Big on "At Issue".
Facetious
Moderated
I started listening to Rush in '91. He was funny as hell and pretty brilliant as a political entertainer....After awhile I got tired of his intellectual dishonesty....Larry Elder was interesting once, he's become a shrill shill. John and Ken were interesting at one time but have proven to be pretty clueless...tried to listen to Hannity one time but that mission was aborted after about 2 syllables (maybe 3).
When I found the inkling to resort to "Dr." Laura...that's when I called it quits.
But some things are. Some people are skilled in creating myths by mixing truth with untruth and/or conscientious omissions.
There those who deftly maneuver words to make a statement sound different from the fact that they're actually saying.
(e.g. Obama was legally required to give the order in the pirate situation. Either the host who uttered that (Hannity) is too dumb to understand the context or being blatantly misleading. The requirement is no action be taken in that situation without his approval....not as it was suggested...he was mandated to act.).
Facetious
Moderated
Isn't that an important ingredient in political debate ?
I mean, the best attorneys in the world resort to semantics and dialects in order to persuade a jury or crush their opposition etc..
In the end, what a radio talk show host does is take a news story, and discuss it. As one would do in their home with others, at the bar with others, at a social event with others. They take the news story, they make an opinion or remark about it, and discuss it. There are no facts being said aside from the story being discussed at hand.
Only difference between us and the people on radio talking about it is that the people on the radio have their own radio show to talk about it! People call in and discuss it with them, they will share their views, now if someone gets on and starts ranting and raving and making no intelligent or coherent point to the topic at hand, they will be cut off... maybe.
Boortz has been around for over 40 years. Savage 16 years. People obviously listen, whether they agree or not, to these radio shows. Or else they wouldn't be on. Just as most all liberal radio stations that try and fail. Hence the lust for the "fairness doctrine" or whatever it is called nowadays to be put into action.
People listen to the radio for news because it is the news ultimately and it is entertaining. Callers can call in live and be apart of the discussion.
I like what Boortz says: Don't believe anything I say until you look it up yourself.
That means, don't be a automaton taking in everything you hear until you check it out for yourself and come to your own conclusion.
Listen for entertaining and the news; inform yourself.
Only difference between us and the people on radio talking about it is that the people on the radio have their own radio show to talk about it! People call in and discuss it with them, they will share their views, now if someone gets on and starts ranting and raving and making no intelligent or coherent point to the topic at hand, they will be cut off... maybe.
Boortz has been around for over 40 years. Savage 16 years. People obviously listen, whether they agree or not, to these radio shows. Or else they wouldn't be on. Just as most all liberal radio stations that try and fail. Hence the lust for the "fairness doctrine" or whatever it is called nowadays to be put into action.
People listen to the radio for news because it is the news ultimately and it is entertaining. Callers can call in live and be apart of the discussion.
I like what Boortz says: Don't believe anything I say until you look it up yourself.
That means, don't be a automaton taking in everything you hear until you check it out for yourself and come to your own conclusion.
Listen for entertaining and the news; inform yourself.
No, not true. While the current measures employed in political dialog and debate nowadays are akin to the way lawyers argue their cases (i.e. no matter how ridiculous the assertion...as long as you get your "?pert" to counter an assertion to your jurors or audience it's a wash), I disagree with the notion of it being important to political debate.
At the end of the day, a lawyer's legal argument even if a misleading remains factually accurate. That is neither the case nor the criteria for current political discourse and debate.
I listen to the Savage Nation every once in a while.
Ace Boobtoucher
Founder and Captain of the Douchepatrol
I catch the tail end of Savage (but he annoys me) while waiting for Dennis Miller. Bob Valvano on ESPN and I flip between NPR and George Noory.
Jagger69
Three lullabies in an ancient tongue
As far as subjective talk radio goes, Neil Boortz is very well-informed and insightful but his condescending attitude gets old. Savage is a raving lunatic but fun to listen to (cannot take him seriously....sorry folks). Limbaugh is a waste of time (same old song no matter what and he'll continue that formula as long as his ratings are high. Most over-rated talk-show host ever....a pompous ass). The same goes for Sean Hannity.
On the liberal side (what little there is), I love Ed Schultz and Thom Hartman but they too have that "our side is right and their side is wrong on every issue" attitude that I find so tiresome in these shows. Stephanie Miller and Randi Rhodes are the same way (even worse in the case of Rhodes....as far as she is concerned, ANYTHING on the right is inherently evil and insidious, not just wrong!). Besides, her whiny voice just grates on me. I can only take her in small doses (like Limbaugh).
I also like to catch Phil Hendrie when (and where) I can. He's very clever.
I guess that's just the gig, huh? People tend to want to listen to those who validate their predisposed biases rather than those who might present an opposing viewpoint that would actually make them THINK for a change....God forbid possibly cause them to perhaps even change their mind and AGREE with the other side!
The explosion of subjective talk radio over the past 20 years is in no small way responsible for the extreme polarization of American society that exists today and continues to get worse, not better. A factual presentation of information is good as a general rule but biased propaganda generally IS NOT good (see "Nazi Germany" or "Joseph Goebbels" on Google), especially if that is one's primary or, in many cases, only source of information.
For hard news, NPR is very good but we also have a local station here in Houston (KTRH 740 AM) that has a great morning news program before all the talk shows start. I listen to it frequently as well (in addition to afternoon sports talk on another local station). I spend A LOT of time in my car so talk radio is a huge part of my life.
On the liberal side (what little there is), I love Ed Schultz and Thom Hartman but they too have that "our side is right and their side is wrong on every issue" attitude that I find so tiresome in these shows. Stephanie Miller and Randi Rhodes are the same way (even worse in the case of Rhodes....as far as she is concerned, ANYTHING on the right is inherently evil and insidious, not just wrong!). Besides, her whiny voice just grates on me. I can only take her in small doses (like Limbaugh).
I also like to catch Phil Hendrie when (and where) I can. He's very clever.
I guess that's just the gig, huh? People tend to want to listen to those who validate their predisposed biases rather than those who might present an opposing viewpoint that would actually make them THINK for a change....God forbid possibly cause them to perhaps even change their mind and AGREE with the other side!
The explosion of subjective talk radio over the past 20 years is in no small way responsible for the extreme polarization of American society that exists today and continues to get worse, not better. A factual presentation of information is good as a general rule but biased propaganda generally IS NOT good (see "Nazi Germany" or "Joseph Goebbels" on Google), especially if that is one's primary or, in many cases, only source of information.
For hard news, NPR is very good but we also have a local station here in Houston (KTRH 740 AM) that has a great morning news program before all the talk shows start. I listen to it frequently as well (in addition to afternoon sports talk on another local station). I spend A LOT of time in my car so talk radio is a huge part of my life.
Similar threads
