The more the merrierFollow

I got first vote.

Sounds good to me.

You forget one thing.

Bacon sounds good to everyone.

I love that sound, but it the smells is even better.

Probably just taking a nap in the office, since Putin still seems to be on his side of the border and what not.

Someone decided that my safety lecture at the beginning of the day wasn't important enough to follow so they had to be instructed accordingly.

Unless he was saying that conservatives shouldn't be allowed talk radio programs, I'm not seeing the humorous hypocrisy.

Because his argument went beyond just the specifics of the ruling and was a more broad "rich people shouldn't be allowed to spend money to influence people's votes". All the while not apparently realizing that his job is the result of a rich person (or group of rich people) spending money to influence people's votes. The icing on the cake was that he literally made this broad statement, not one minute after passionately telling his listeners how important it was to elect a Democrat to the White House in 2016.

Edited, Apr 2nd 2014 3:29pm by gbaji

Um... You do get that the outrage over this isn't about election reform or free speech, right? It's about the typical liberal "rich people are evil (and Republican)" screed. Of course it's freaking irrational as hell. Have you ever listened to liberal talk? Watched Rachel Maddow just once? Ever? It's not about talking about the ramifications of the issue at hand, but about putting as many key/loaded words and phrases in front of the audience as possible to scare them.

This particular case was particularly funny because the fellow on the radio was apparently banking on the fact that his audience wouldn't realize that he's engaging in exactly what he was complaining about. But because he's a liberal, I'm assuming that most of his audience just assumes that he's funded by a million individual hard working volunteers handing over a few bucks each in some sort of socialist utopian co-op or something. Cause it's all about the little people working together, right? Lol!



It was on Sirius. So not a local progressive station. Kinda nationwide, in fact.

Well, I wasn't listening to him so I have no idea what his "outrage" was about aside from what you said.


I don't watch Maddow (don't know if I ever have; not intentionally but maybe in passing) or listen to liberal talk. In my limited experience, liberal talk radio has always been exceptionally poor listening in regards to host talent. I don't know why that is but, again, maybe you have more listenable hosts in your neck of the woods. That said, conservative talk is pretty much the same as you describe.


Really? You said you were listening to the radio and I immediately assumed he was owned by Clear Channel, Cumulus, Citadel or one of the other massive media conglomerates. Why on earth would I assume anyone (aside from perhaps a small local public station) is funded by small donations? Radio doesn't work that way. But, again, I can't speak for his listening audience -- maybe they are all indeed fooled into thinking he's supported by nickles and dimes.


I don't listen to satellite radio so, again, I couldn't tell ya. I'd assume his primary purpose is to make his station profitable and any "influencing votes" is a happy secondary result of that.

Edited, Apr 2nd 2014 7:52pm by Jophiel

Interesting how that shouldn't matter unless you decide to dismiss the issue based on presumed audience size rather than address it directly.

Um... /whoosh?

Liberals love to portray their positions as being derived by "the people", in contrast to Conservative views, which are supposedly imposed on us all by a small number of rich and powerful people. Geez Joph. It's only like the whole point of this thread. Assuming you are intelligent enough to realize that both "sides" involve big rich interests using money to influence people, then you also should realize the absurdity of liberal outrage over this. Their "side" gains just as much from this as conservatives do.

They've just been fooled into thinking that "the rich" only side with conservatives. Heck. That's why liberals seem to think that finding some millionaire (or billionaire) who supports some liberal position is such a big deal. Every time someone says "Look. Even this millionaire agrees that taxes on the rich are too low", they are perpetuating this myth about the correlation between political alignment and wealth/power.

Some of us are just more aware of this than others, I guess.