-
The Politicization Crusade
May 8, 2013 | 56 comments
-
Deceiver in Chief
March 20, 2013 | 204 comments
-
Chronicle of Liberal Disasters
February 25, 2013 | 70 comments
-
President Obama’s Minimum Wage Delusion
February 14, 2013 | 203 comments
-
The Democrats’ Rough Re-entry Into Reality
October 19, 2012 | 148 comments
Among the Intellectualoids
Progressive Rudeness
An encounter with “America’s number one progressive host.”
Life is full of interesting and educational experiences. My latest resulted from being a guest on Thom Hartmann’s radio show. I was invited on the show because of a recent American Spectator column I wrote entitled “Inequality in Perspective.” In an email, Hartmann’s producer relayed that he “found it to be very interesting and provocative.” Hartmann describes himself as “America’s number one progressive host.”
The interview got off to a bad start. After reading a couple of lines from my article Hartmann asked, “You don’t really believe that do you?” I responded that I never write anything I don’t believe. (I can’t imagine why I would.)
It was Hartmann’s idea to have me on his show. I was, in other words, his guest. We’ve never met. What is the point of starting a conversation with an insult? It violates basic rules of common courtesy. Before allowing me to say a word Hartmann resorted to personal attack and essentially accused me of being dishonest and insincere. Assuming that someone would say or write what they don’t believe says more about him than me.
For the interview that lasted about ten minutes I doubt that I was given more than two minutes to talk. Most of the time was spent with Hartmann reading statistics from articles correlating human happiness with income equality.
In her email inviting me to be a guest on the show, Hartmann’s producer wrote, “In the interest of full disclosure, our politics lean left, however, we promise a polite, respectful and above all a fair discussion of the issues only.” Their disclosure might have been full, but it was not particularly honest. Saying their politics “lean left” is a bit of an understatement. I think it would be more accurate to say they toppled into the left abyss long ago. Hartmann apparently makes promises with no intention of keeping them.
Based on how the interview was conducted, Hartmann was not the least bit interested in anything I might have to say. Frankly, I am still somewhat confused as to why he wanted me on his show. He could have taken issue with what I wrote in my article without having me on the phone.
One thing I will give Hartmann credit for — he is completely up-front about how high he wants tax rates to go. He says he wants the top federal income tax rate to be at least 70 percent. Very few Democrats will ever actually admit what their wishes really are in that regard. For purposes of public consumption, they usually say they only want rates on “millionaires and billionaires” to go up “a tiny bit.” (Repeal the Bush tax cuts, for example.) Robert Reich is the only other prominent liberal I have seen admit he wants rates to go to 70 percent.
Hartmann argues that virtually everything was much better in the 1950s when the top rate was 70 percent. Furthermore, he seems convinced that it was, in fact, those high rates that created an earthly paradise. I did get the opportunity to say, because of all the tax shelters and loopholes then, hardly anyone actually paid that rate on very much of their income.
My brief conservation with Hartmann convinced me more than ever of something I said in my “Inequality in Perspective” article — for many liberals economic equality is the Holy Grail, and the sine qua non.
At my age I am long past being naïve. I am never the least bit surprised by the insulting and disrespectful ways liberals relate to conservatives. Liberalism is intellectually bankrupt. It cannot be defended using logic and evidence. Personal attack and insults are all they’ve got.
Conservative talk shows are vastly more popular than liberal talk shows. There are many explanations why, but I’m convinced an important one is simply the difference in politeness and respect shown to callers and guests. Very few people enjoy listening to someone being rude and insulting. Irrelevant personal attack is not particularly interesting. Liberal talk show hosts seem to be tone deaf and are incapable of hearing how they sound to most people, not just conservatives. I’m not advising them to change. In fact, I hope they keep it up. I’ll probably continue to accept invitations to be on their shows. In a perverse sort of way, it’s kind of fun.
About the Author
Ron Ross Ph.D. is an economist who lives in Arcata, California. He is the author of The Unbeatable Market. Reach him at rossecon@gmail.com.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (106) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Ron Ross
More Articles From Among the Intellectualoids
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/12/20/progressive-rudeness
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Kitty| 12.20.11 @ 6:23AM
I recall hearing Julianne Malveaux's seething hatred for President Reagan and was amazed she had an audience. Boy was I naive!
The progressive host began by asking you if you really believe what you write, and that was my first question when I saw this facebook wall poster:
http://www.facebook.com/photo......e=1&ref=nf
Does the person who designed that poster really believe the GOP wants to "destroy" the nation? The comments about the poster are interesting as well.
JAWilson| 12.20.11 @ 7:24AM
I read the posts and I can't comprehend the mindset. People in front of their computers feel more self righteous than in person I guess, but this stuff is too much.
Timothy L. Pennell| 12.20.11 @ 10:27AM
What'd ya think was gonna happen? You sit in Sh*t, and you're gonna get some on ya. You're gonna stink.
People on the Right. STOP GOING ON THESE LIBERAL SHOWS. All of them. Meet The Press. Face The Nation. Whatever the one on ABC is called. STAY AWAY.
Let them talk to each other. Use your Heads. It's a TRAP. It's a SET UP. And, however bad you're treated, remember. You DESERVE it, for being so STUPID.
Purp| 12.20.11 @ 11:10AM
Yeah, that's smart - just what the Founders wanted - people to talk with each other. Do you really think that Conservatives and Liberals ever agreed with each other? No, they didn't and no, they don't. But the Founders demanded Free Speech, and this is why. It is important we talk with each other, regardless whether we agree. That is why we have Embassies and Ambassadors around the world - countries need to talk with each other. too.
To run to your corner and take your ball with you is childish, adolescent and not worthy of this great nation. Grow up and argue your side, vehemently if need be, but make your arguments and let the people decide. What are you afraid of? Can't your side defend it's views? Are they that weak, pansies, sissies?
VonMisesJr| 12.20.11 @ 2:11PM
Hey, look Perp is up, or perhaps just getting in from last night.
Perp, I am still waiting from yesterday for your informed explanation of the sub-prime crises. Are you avoiding me?
I spelled it out for you with facts and references and you ran away, or perhaps you decided to troll an easier target.
idalily| 12.20.11 @ 3:04PM
You expect Purp to answer questions? Dream on, my friend. He can't. He has no basis of principle, logic or facts from which to answer questions. All he has is what all liberals have, which is the point of this article. All liberals employ the same tactics: insults, denial, ridicule, sneering and bullying. Yet they NEVER actually answer questions or debate points with logic or critical thinking. Liberals are, emotionally speaking, ten year olds.
VonMisesJr| 12.20.11 @ 3:25PM
I don't expect "Perp Walk" to be able to answer intelligently. But I will match my knowledge of Austrian Economics against his babble any day. Perp needs to be asked "specific" questions just to illustrate how devoid of understanding he is. He has about three memorized skits that he runs through like a puppet. But he is doing a hell of a job undermining the credibility of liberalism. So if he wants to be a nuance, he can be our "useful idiot" for demonstrating blithering ignorance and the shallowness of the left.
I almost fee guilty making a jack(rabbit) out of him in public during the Holiday Season, but mosquitoes need to be swatted.
Purp| 12.20.11 @ 6:56PM
Unfortuntately, you're small mind can't absorb actual profound arguments and you revert to verbal attacks, which appear as hollow as the really are. In any case, where do you think those tactics originated you sneer at? Have you ever listened to Rush LoudMouth or Bill O' the Clown? How about Frank Luntz? Karl Rove? I know it's tough to take what you dish out, but that's tough, it's a free country.
VonMisesJr| 12.20.11 @ 7:36PM
Hey Burp,
Its a free country now, but if your type gets their way you would deliver us all to tyranny so you can get a free lunch. If you knew the first thing about economics, it is that there are no free lunches.
NMJr.
Wayne| 12.22.11 @ 1:48PM
And why would a conservative want to talk with you again?
Purp| 12.20.11 @ 6:52PM
Amazing as you might find it, I do not hang on every word you say, so whatever "facts" you presented have gone by the wayside, so you'll have to repeat them another time. If you really have the facts and truth, it won't be hard to do. But just bringing it up without repeating the questions is a misdirection technique that doesn't work on me, although some here might fall for it.
VonMisesJr| 12.20.11 @ 7:39PM
Hey Burp,
I don't hang on your words. I just find you to be a hoot. I would repeat it if I thought you would get it.
VMJr.
idalily| 12.21.11 @ 9:33PM
Von, it's so easy it sort of makes you wonder why the fish jump into the barrel, doesn't it?
Grzmlyk| 12.20.11 @ 11:32AM
I have to say, I listened to a segment on Laura Ingraham's radio show yesterday. She was "interviewing" an athiest (a former minister, no less) and a devout Christian together, who ostensibly were there to debate the role of religion in public life.
I have to say, Laura Ingraham was utterly obnoxious (as always). She did exactly what you accuse Hartmann of. She couldn't have cared less what the athiest had to say because she never listened to a single syllable. He'd get two words out and she would start ridiculing him, talking over him, uttering tendentious, fatuous inanities that would win no points in any high school debate.
Now, from what I could glean - and knowing quite a bit about the points these athiests always make - I think the man's positions are unsupportable and toxic - but nevertheless, worthy of DEBATE. However, Laura and the Christian essentially teamed up to bully and ridicule this guy. He was never, ever able to finish even the first half of a sentence.
She'd ask him a question and then answer it herself. She engaged in ad hominem attacks. She put words into his mouth. She baited him. She talked over him incessantly (again, I don't know that Laura Ingraham is capable of shutting up when someone else is talking; it seems to be an involuntary reflex).
I used to think Bill O'Reilly was the worst interviewer ever. Now I realize it's Laura Ingraham. Followed closely by Hannity.
Does anybody remember William F. Buckley? He gave people time to make their points and then he skewered them intellecutally. He was unfailingly polite. I do not believe conservatives have to be polite all the time, but if you're interviewing a liberal, you have to give them time to answer. THEN you have ammunition with which to respond.
If I were ever invited onto any of these shows - and I'm very conservative - my preparation would be a piece of cake. Why assemble facts and figures to bolster my positions? All I'd get to say in any of these interviews would be, "Well, Bill . . . " or, "Well, Laura . . ." or "Well, Sean . . ."
And the interruption, followed by pontificating and filibustering on the part of the blow-hard host for the rest of the segment, would invariably follow.
If you can't give a liberal enough rope to hang himself in an interview, then just forget the damned interview and bloviate by yourself, which is what you plan to do anyway.
I really, really can't stand Laura anymore - ditto O'Reilly and Hannity.
Grzmlyk| 12.20.11 @ 11:35AM
BTW, my fingers don't work so well - I know it's spelled "atheist."
Vern Crisler | 12.20.11 @ 1:48PM
The reason O'Reilly and Hannity and others are like that is because O'Reilly and radio talk shows are about entertainment. That's the only way they can stay on the air -- with knock-down drag out fights, or something close to it. Buckley's show was about intellectual discussion, and certainly not for the typical viewer who has a short attention span. Anyone who goes on a radio talk show or O'Reilly, etc., has to prepare for it, train for it, as if going to war. On the other hand, to go on a show like Buckley's, you just had to do a lot of study. The worst thing you could do there is not know what asymptotic meant.
So I think Dr. Ross and other conservatives who go on these shows have to prepare themselves in a different way than if they were going to a collegial debate. Different dynamics involved.
Grzmlyk| 12.20.11 @ 3:21PM
Again, why bother training for O'Reilly? The only words you'll ever get out are, "Well, Bill . . ."
See my note below - I made the point that these shows are, first and foremost, about entertainment.
However, if you'll notice, O'Reilly tends to be more patient with liberal hucksters (Mark Lamont Hill, Al Sharpton) than he is with the various conservative bimbos with great cleavage that he has on his show, and/or even with the credible voices from the right, whom he interrupts ferociously.
It is true that O'Reilly spends most of his interview time interrupting, though, regardless of the ideology of the victim at hand. I, for one, detest this development in political discourse. They should just fire a starting pistol at the beginning of his show and have everyone scream at once - or, more to the point, O'Reilly should just have everybody's microphone except his muted while he hectors them about why he's so superior to everyone else on earth. Ditto Laura Ingraham and Hannity.
But O'Reilly is NOT a conservative; he's a middle-of-the-road panderer plain and simple - he is a screaming moderate (lest we forget, O'Reilly LOVED Obama in the beginning, and still kisses Obama's ass).
THAT'S the key to O'Reilly's ratings; I'd say the pugnacity comes in second. The only time he ever seriously defends conservative ideals is when it comes to his own Catholocism.
I also do not believe that interrupting people is the "only way" O'Reilly can stay on the air. I think he LOVES interrupting people. He's not making concessions to the exigencies of television. the fact that so many people watch O'Reilly - whom, I believe, is still #1 in all of cable - is just another disappointing illustration of human nature at its inconsequential, insensate worst.
True, Buckley wasn't for the masses. But that's what's so wrong about Hannity and O'Reilly and Ingraham and all the others - it's all just like WWF wrestling to them. They all swim in the same fish bowl of celebrity.
W| 12.20.11 @ 4:53PM
Mr G
Absolutely correct about O'Reilly. My favorite part is when he says something then brings on guests to ask them what they think of what he said.
He gets invited to Obama's Christmas (Holiday) party so that should tell you all you need. Hannity does not get invited.
Merry Christmas.
Dave Williams| 12.20.11 @ 6:15PM
A Christian behaving snottily to an atheist....now THERE's a real shocker. Still, I suppose it's an improvement over the days when you christers murdered and tortured people who had the brains and the integrity not to believe the folk tales of a bunch of Bronze Age desert goatherds.
That said, a merry christmas and happy new year to one and all.
PolishKnight| 12.29.11 @ 2:14PM
Look up Josef Stalin sometime for an example of a tolerant atheistic communist...
scotchieguy| 12.20.11 @ 12:58PM
The ABC one is called "This Week." I gave up on it when that Christian Amanpour (sp) took over, but then for some reason watched it last sunday. It was great! They had George Will and Paul Ryan sitting on barstools facing a live crowd stage left, Christine in the center, and Barney Frank and Robert B. Reissssssssssssssh stage right. It was excellent point, counter-point. Ryan was basically snickering at Frank. He just couldn't believe what he was hearing. The best part is Frank had this gigantic cast on his left hand about the size of a watermelon. Must have gotten in a fight w/ his lover, missed, and smashed the toilet w/ his hand. Ouch!!!
Grzmlyk| 12.20.11 @ 1:08PM
I saw a brief clip from that, which was good.
It used to be "This Week With David Brinkley." I was young then and not as cynical as I am now, but, as I recall, Brinkley was the voice of craggy wisdom, and, more often than not, the targets of his barbs were liberal sacred cows. He was highly skeptical of the entrenched Washington culture and highly suspicious of government's benevolence.
When Stephanopolis took over, I stopped watching.
I wouldn't watch Amanpour if you paid me.
But I guess even a stopped clock is right twice a day, and they still have George Will - an establishment Republican, of course, but at least the guy has a brain.
Trish| 12.21.11 @ 2:16AM
Couldn't agree more Pennell. Ppl on the Right are the tar babies for the left to up their ratings amongst their little inbred tribe. They are used to up the interest ratio. Hartman is one nasty piece of work. I called his program to refute his claim that strippers actually represent womens' liberation. When I pointed out the totality of the value of the female stripper being purely physical , he went ballistic and began with the invectives barage. He may be worse than Fat Ed who was booted from MSNBC for his sexist bile.....well, a short suspension anyway.
BTW, my southern mama is a Pennell from Georgia. Matter of fact, my great uncle was one Thomas Pennell.
Mazzuchelli| 12.21.11 @ 3:49PM
Hahahaha. I agree.
joanne raymond| 12.22.11 @ 2:07PM
I would keep appearing on all these shows after all, we have a one sided media. Thom Hartman's TV show on RT starts off by spewing negative talking points to BULLDOZE the conversation right from the start while you continue to be respectful and courteous.
Lawrence D. Cannon| 12.20.11 @ 7:13AM
Sean Hannity can be pretty rude to liberal callers and guests. However, it's more of a case of one of the few Conservative Talk Show hosts who dish back what they're getting.
oldfart| 12.20.11 @ 7:38AM
I think Hartman is the south end of a north bound horse but I do agree that both Hannity and O'Reilly can be very rude to their quests. O'Reilly reminds me of Barney Frank - often never lets his quests finish a sentence.
squalis| 12.20.11 @ 9:16AM
You can throw Matthews in that group.
Dick Nome| 12.20.11 @ 8:35AM
The callers are rude as hell. Hannity is in fact is too nice. I like Mark Levin's approach, which goes back to the great Bob Grant. "Get off my phone, you big dope!"
Trish| 12.21.11 @ 2:17AM
Totally agree Dick.
scotchieguy| 12.20.11 @ 1:00PM
Sean is a total lightweight. He is tooooo nice. The only guy who is a total jerk, and I mean a total jerk to his callers is Mark Levin. Micheal Savage can be pretty savage to the lefties who call. I seriously wonder what can make someone so angry. I just don't see how one can get paid millions to have a nat'l radio show and have zero control on his temper. Unless it is all a bit. But how do you fake that?
Grzmlyk| 12.20.11 @ 1:17PM
I agree - Hannity is a lightweight in every conceivable way. If it weren't for his producers talking in his earpiece, he'd be lost out there (not unlike Obama with his teleprompter).
The man simply regurgitates conservative dogma because he's still trying to impress his long-dead father. He's a vain little boy, and he isn't thinker at all, and I have no idea why people watch or listen to him. I gave up on him about a year ago after several years of trying. Honestly.
I realize he's very popular among conservatives, and I'd rather have someone spouting conservative dogma than liberal dogma, but I really wish someone with as big an audience as he has were sharper and less annoying. I simply cannot stand him.
Bob Grant| 12.20.11 @ 1:42PM
I would generally agree but in his defense he HAS improved over the years if only by osmosis because of his close relationships with other, more substantial, talk radio hosts e.g. Rush, Mark Levin, and Neal Bortz.
The problem I have listening to him on the radio is the pitch of his voice which is extremely grating. His TV show is slightly more tolerable but I wish he would smile less due to the blinding glare of his teeth implants.
Overall I'll cut him slack because he seems to be sincere, a decent guy, and is a workhorse.
Grzmlyk| 12.20.11 @ 3:27PM
Sean hannity says "Anyway" about 1,000 times before his first commercial on his radio show. And he clearly doesn't know what the word "literally" means. I mean, he'll say things like, "John Boehner was literally boiled in oil by Harry Reid last night." Maybe he gets paid $0.10 each time he says "anyway" or "literally." If so, he's wealthier by now than Bill Gates.
The man is an idiot and I have no idea why Mark Levin seems to like him. Maybe it's because he likes puppy dogs.
I agree he's a workhorse, but I see a lot of diva-like vanity in him - constantly checking himself out in the monitor, that stupid crap with the football, his forever talking about himself and his humble beginnings and his cars, his painful efforts to sound like a sage to college students who call into his show.
No thank you.
Bob Grant| 12.20.11 @ 1:53PM
It's schtick...all radio personalities MUST have one.
It's, as John Lovitz calls it, " Actinnnnggggg"
Grzmlyk| 12.20.11 @ 3:29PM
Why MUST all radio peronalities have one? And why does it always have to be so obnoxious? Whatever happened to honest discourse? I'd find that far less grating than, say, Rush's "act," which I also find obnoxious - too bad, because Rush is indispensible on other ways.
Grzmlyk| 12.20.11 @ 3:49PM
BTW, I will admit that I listen to/watch many of these people a lot (well, not Hannity anymore). Because at least you will see conservatism respresented.
And I think Rush is actually a good interviewer - though he never interviews liberals. But at least he asks a question and then waits for an answer. Which Greta van Stusteren does, too, on her best days.
I also acknowledge that listening to anyone day after day can get on your nerves. And I guess being behind a microphone changes one's personality - it makes them think their mouths should always be open.
But there are guys out there, like Roger Hedgecock, who don't rely on schtick. The focus is on WHAT they're saying, not HOW they say it.
I guess I'm one of the very, very few who would like to see pundits just drop the "act," be themselves and be thoughtful. Fight when you have to, but don't be obnoxious.
But I get it. It's show biz and if you wanna sell gold coins or hearing aids or tea, you have to shout and scream and jump up and down. Although Rush did all of that when he was the only one on the conservative side, unchallenged in the ratings for years.
John Daniel| 12.20.11 @ 7:16AM
Who's Hartmann? Who listens? Who cares?
oldfart| 12.20.11 @ 7:35AM
Hartman = vapor ware
Mick Hawk| 12.20.11 @ 8:38AM
Indeed, never heard of him. Probably as appealing as the local Phluffya 'moderate' Michael Smerconish.
Crawler| 12.20.11 @ 1:30PM
I guess there's a reason why I've never heard of this small time ideologue, eh?
Sounds like he's just a flash in the progressive pan...
Anthony| 12.20.11 @ 3:19PM
Exactly, I never heard of this twit, until today. Where does he broadcast from, the Algore tinfoil radio network, on the same channel as Keith Obberman? Remember him?
Skippy| 12.20.11 @ 8:24PM
How many stations carry his show?
How much doe$ he make?
How many listeners does he have?
Just asking...
Trish| 12.21.11 @ 2:20AM
Isn't he on NPR now?
Doctor_X| 12.20.11 @ 7:52AM
Not to bash Dr. Ross, but I have to wonder why on earth he would agree to be on Hartmann’s show in the first place? Didn’t he listen to other shows to see how Hartmann treats guest with views that do not agree with his? Still this does not justify the treatment he received.
Second I would not ever consider being a guest on any Liberal talk program because:
“I refuse to have a battle of wits with an un-armed man”
Purp| 12.20.11 @ 11:21AM
In this case, Mr. Ross was the un-armed man. If he can't defend his position except in a cushy zone like this one, then he deserved what he got.
Aces and Eights| 12.20.11 @ 12:30PM
It is difficult to defend one's position when one is not allowed to speak. A GUEST has 2 minutes out of 10 to speak?! (Elementary politeness would mandate a deference to one's guest, not dominance, but elementary politeness is beyond the capability of Leftists.) Such a person is not a guest, he is a target. Mr. Ross should have known better. And by the way, guests are treated far better on Hannity's show and most conservative shows. Politeness is a conservative trait. Liberals are by nature confrontational and oppressive.
scotchieguy| 12.20.11 @ 1:03PM
Liberals are confrontational and oppressive because they have nothing to back up what they believe except pure emotion.
Riff Raff| 12.20.11 @ 1:39PM
It's even more basic than that. Liberals are by their very nature busy-bodies. They are confrontational and instinctively interfere in other people's affairs. They are natural gossips and fundamentally intolerant. This is what makes them liberals. They liberally shoot off their mouths and get in to other people's business, attempting to "correct" other people's so-called "bad behavior," like taking care of themselves, as conservatives are wont to do. Adults grow out of being essentially "liberal" while liberals remain childish all their lives.
Grzmlyk| 12.20.11 @ 2:01PM
Riff Raff, what you are describing is the paradox of liberalism: They pretend to care about the little guy and equality and abhor greed. They don't give a damn about the little guy. They lust after power so that they can force you to live the way they want you to live.
And then they get to enjoy special status as members of the elite, for whom riches and wealth are their birthright.
It's like they say in Animal Farm: All pigs are equal - some are just more equal than others.
Purp| 12.20.11 @ 7:16PM
On the contrary - if you want to have an abortion, have one. If you want to marry same sex partner, do so - love is love. If you want to smoke pot - go ahead, it's up to you. If you want a gun, go buy one .. we don't care. Christian, Muslim, Jew, Mormon, Atheist - it's up to you and there is no pressure to convert.
Liberals and progressives will stay out of your bedroom, leave you to love whom you want, and smoke what you want, and worship as you wish, or not at all. - You cannot say that about Conservatives who talk about small government, but want the government to tell the rest of us how to live. The fact you pay taxes is your bill for taking care of this country - even people you don't like - to make a better society for all of us. If you don't have enough money, don't blame the government, "Blame Yo'self".
Animal Farm was about Communism btw, just to provide some truth about your poor analogy.
Skippy| 12.20.11 @ 8:26PM
"If you want a gun, go buy one .. we don't care. "
Since when?
Simon Templar| 12.22.11 @ 6:31PM
Wow, I did not know that about liberals!
Funny thing. Yes, they do stay out of your bedroom unless you a conservative running for office; yes, they do not pressure anyone to convert, just do not mention the name of God at your graduation or pray, you might offend someone. Sure, worship as you wish, just do it behind closed doors in a dark unlit room. Take down that nativity scene while you are at it. Yeah, smoke all the dope you want but put that GD cigarette out. Sure have an abortion and we will force everyone else to pay for it. But don't dare put a commercial on TV talking about how your mother did not have one and you are thankful for it (Tebow). Wow, talk about wanting the government not to tell you what to think, how to eat, or how to live...except if you like salt on your food, do not believe in homosexuality and would like to express that to your congregation, do not want to buy health insurance, do not want the government involved in health care, do not appreciate the 50 thousand restrictions and regulations on your business, and do not want to climb over a 6 month to a year wait and a ton of paperwork to purchase a firearm. Other than that, it is all cool. Oh, and if you are for virginity before marriage, believe in traditional values, and do not approve of homosexuality and are running in a beauty contest organized by Donald Trump, get lost, be censored, and shut up, you bitch. Oh, if you do not have an abortion and do have that retarded kid, well you really are sick.
LOL.
Trish| 12.21.11 @ 2:27AM
GRZM-you boiled it down to its essential truth. They HATE the little guy and wouldn't have a cup of coffee with one. I know, my sister is a major lefty who was in the SDS. She now teaches theater at a university, lives in a 1/2 million dollar brownstone, drives a prius from brownstone to university, to rallies against the Wisc. governor, and back home to her brownstone to listen to NPR. She HATES the little guy because she believes she is smarter and therefore entitled to call the shots. Pure elitist bullsh*t and she totally deluded.
Grzmlyk| 12.21.11 @ 1:00PM
Yeah, NPR is the opiate of the liberals. There is no doubt about that.
I'm a theater guy myself, and the only conservative I've ever met in theater.
All liberals hate the little guy; they think they're the elites. The little guy is merely kindling whose sole purpose is to stoke the fires of their massive egos.
Trish| 12.21.11 @ 4:54PM
Grz, I love the theater myself and have worked with my sister in the field of casting. My personal theory re actors/theater is that they are so immersed in 'pretend world' that they cannot process reality. I believe theater, literature, etc. is of great value and it is distressing that more conservatives aren't more of a force.
Grzmlyk| 12.20.11 @ 1:58PM
But they have no end of bogus facts and cooked statistics to back them up.
Paul Krugman is a great example - wrong 100% of the time, but has never, ever admitted it. Why? Because for every fact real economists present him with, he either twists it or comes up with a phony fact to combat it. Emprical evidence and common sense tell us he is wrong; but he's like the incompetent vet who thinks the problem isn't that we're giving doses of rat poison to the horse, the problem is that we haven't given the hourse ENOUGH poison to make him better.
He's an absolute fool - and yet he's a Princeton professor, a Nobel Prize winner, a celebrated author and one of the most widely-read columnists in America.
When I ponder America's chances for getting out of this mess, I look at Paul Krugman's enduring popularity and realize it ain't gonna happen.
DRed| 12.20.11 @ 2:17PM
http://www.hamilton.edu/docume.....-Media.pdf
100% of the time may be laying it on a bit thick, Grzmlyk.
Grzmlyk| 12.20.11 @ 3:00PM
And you make my point.
Folks, D Red is Exhibit A.
You may slither back under your rock, D Red.
CoastieCPO| 12.20.11 @ 4:55PM
DRed - Your study is missing the point. No one cares about their predictions. It's their statements of fact that should be analyzed. How often & how badly do they misrepresent facts or the statements of their opponents is the issue. Study that one.... Everybodys crystal ball needs recalibrating & I'd love to see if those "predictions" were cherry picked or not.
DRed| 12.20.11 @ 5:55PM
Coastie, Krugman is a biased leftist. I have no doubt that sometimes influences his statements. That study is only one study of a relatively short period of time. It's entirely possible that there are numerous examples of Krugman being wrong. Notice, though, how Grzy responds to me. He says Krugman is wrong 100% of the time. I say, no, look, here's some evidence of him being right. Grzy than does exactly what he accuses Krugman of doing. He completely ignores some empirical evidence that contradicts his worldview. If Krugman is wrong all the time because he's an idiot, wouldn't that study have shown that he was wrong all the time? Or at least most of the time?
Grzmlyk| 12.21.11 @ 1:02PM
Let's talk about the biased data that went into that study, and of the tendentious source materials that provided fodder. Well, suprise, surprise, the fix was in before the study was every typed up.
Garbage in, garbage out. Kinda like the global warming hoax.
Grzmlyk| 12.21.11 @ 1:03PM
BTW, you have no doubt that Krugman's leftism "sometimes" influences his statements?
OMG. He can't say "good morning" without adding "Keynes is my Lord and Savior.!"
Purp| 12.20.11 @ 7:09PM
Such as?
Purp| 12.20.11 @ 7:09PM
You're only a target if you're a pansy and let it happen. Is that what your saying - the pansy couldn't stand up for himself? BTW - I have quite often watched Hannity talk over guests, so that's not true and on the radio he's worse, by just cutting the line. Conservatives on not polite - Hannity, O'Reilly, Rush are all rude, loud and talk over their guests to make their points. Sometimes they are down right nasty. If you don't see that you aren't listening. And, since Conservative Radio came first - who do you think created the tactics?
Ret. Marine| 12.20.11 @ 7:56AM
and just what kind of fool are you Mr. Ross, going on a "far left" program and expecting to have common courtsey alloted to you. Are you that desperate for some face time in front of the very problem with this Country, far left wing of the socialist party is not your or my friends, they are in fact enemies of this Republic, is this news to you, and you expected them to be fair, good Lord, words fail me for you even having the nerve to think We the Patriots are this stupid as to not being able to name our enemies. Yeah, all that wishful thinking is the very type of attitude that's going to lead you diretly to the penality pen, under the far left's goals, need I say more?
Grzmlyk| 12.20.11 @ 12:24PM
Yeah, Retired Marine, but look at how every single Republican who runs for public office at one point or another chases the approval of ABC, NBC, CBS the NY Times, NPR, PBS, CNN, Jon Stewart, etc.
Hell, look at the laughable schedule of debates the potential GOP nominees have engaged in - "pant, pant, pant, PLEASE LIKE me, MR. LIBERAL NETWORK!"
And, no matter what, they always remain reviled by the mainstream media.
That's the way it works in America. The only Republicans/conservatives that are accepted in polite society are castrated, declawed and defanged little pets - little symbols of reality whose only function is to remind liberals just how far they've gone over the edge into phony Utopian thinking.
What kills me is that they volunteer to be pets. Mitt Romney's already made his appointment to be neutered - not that it's necessary, but just in case an actual conservative conviction might be rolling around somewhere in his head.
Ret. Marine| 12.21.11 @ 6:41AM
I have always believed that one should keep their enemies even closer, that being said, it is not hard to believe that most R-candidates believe everyone has their opinion, some have their agenda's and some are just hunting whores for the RINO party. It is sad to think the author of this piece needs to make a point of telling us what we already know, and even more sad to think he "thought he could" somehow change the genetic makeup of a TRAITOR of this Republic and pass it off as news.
R-'s like everyone else, have their own personal opinions, just as we do, I only point out the differences to those around myself and my belief system, not to compare but to give a choice. Reason does not always figure into the conversation but it stands to think, if you expect respect, you must first display it, so again why did this author of this piece even think the far left, i.e. enemies of this Republic would ever consider respecting the opinion of their, they openly admit us as their enemies too, guest only to prove time after time their disrespect for our opinion, and yet again, they keep on going on these programs to prove what exactly? This is a fools recipe for disaster waiting for a place to happen. IMHO. Semper Fi.
Trebuchet| 12.20.11 @ 7:57AM
And yet it was a Liberal Saint, John F. Kennedy, that cut the tax rate from 70%.
Michael the Smerc| 12.20.11 @ 8:20AM
Hartmann?? Who is he? I am am the #1 progressive radio host. I am friends with the great Arlen Specter. I love me and that's what I think.
Bob K.| 12.20.11 @ 8:25AM
So! Why didn't you give it back to him in kind! Why didn't you interrupt him? And if he complained why didn't you tell him to "cut to a commercial until he could organize his thoughts?" Why didn't you remind him that you were his guest and you expected to be treated like one?
Why didn't you tell him if he didn't start being Civil you were going to tell him to "Stuff It!" and walk off the show?
Why didn't you show him, for a change, that ALL Conservatives aren't wimps who want to "just get along?"
Bob K.| 12.20.11 @ 9:36AM
To be a "Talk Show Host" you have to be able, to paraphrase Orwell, "think in slogans and talk in sound bytes." That is why people like Newt Gingrich are successful in these situations. They understand this and have mastered the technique in their responses to the hostile questions.
Reagan understood it because of his vast experience in all kinds of media communications. His famous New Hampshire response that "I paid for this microphone!" was a masterful example of a memorable sound byte.
Next time you go on one of these shows understand that, and if you are successful you will become a popular guest!
Grzmlyk| 12.20.11 @ 1:38PM
Where have you seen such behavior work? I've rarely seen it occur, let alone work. A couple of times I've seen a conservative walk off the set. They invariably appear to be sore losers, and the moment tends to haunt them forever.
So, if he had walked off the show, the host would have had all the opportunity in the world to shape the audience's interpretation - particularly since I'm sure his audience is a mass of like-minded liberals who aren't tuning in to be persuaded that conservative principles might be worthwhile. They're listening to enjoy the Christian being thrown to the lions.
There are two truths about political shows and talk radio:
First, they are, above all else, entertainment. That's why advertisers keep them on the air. Fair discourse is valuable only as far as it keeps ratings up - and fair discourse rarely keeps ratings up with shows like that.
Second, the guy who controls the mute button on the microphone controls the interview. End of story.
I do NOT disagree with your ire, however. I'm tired of conservatives seeking out punishment at the hands of liberals.
But my advice would be, if you don't want to get eaten alive by a school of ravenous sharks, don't get in the tank.
I don't know what the answer is - we live in a leftist country with a leftist culture, despite what so many conservative pundits say. As such, conservatives are always going to be pariahs.
Bob K.| 12.20.11 @ 9:45PM
No one who goes on Hartman's show is going to change his mind or the minds of his listeners. There is never an issue about shaping the audiences interpretations here. The audience is predictable. Anyone who is too timid to assert himself and his beliefs should stay away from these bullies and cowards who own microphones.
Guests who know they are to be targets should dare the host to use his mute button and cut to a commercial so he can get his mind straight after they make a point. They should scoff at his idiocies!
Dave | 12.20.11 @ 8:29AM
If Mr. Ross were sitting here now, I'd tell him the same thing my wise ol' momma once schooled into me many decades ago: "Son, you playing around in a garbage dump, you're gonna end-up with stink on 'ya." So, I ask Dr. Ross and the conservatives who make decisions to go on programs like Hartmann's, and left wing shows like Today, Meet The Press, and major political debates moderated by socialist anchors who gear their interrogation questions to make you look dumb and foolish, why do you do it?. These guys know full well that most conservatives are confrontational sissies and will generally back-off rather than doing what I'd prefer to do: Spit in David Gregory's face.
When all is said and done, why do you people continually subject yourselves to such treatment? All you're gonna come out of those garbage pits with is ... a world of stink. And for what? So they can edit your soundbites later, and run them over and over and over and ...
I say, boycott the bas-ards. But that's just me. I'm considering the spittle thing, too.
VonMisesJr| 12.20.11 @ 8:51AM
In an attempt to better understand socialism and the mindset, I have been reading many books about theories of socialism and history of revolutions.
Coulter's "Demonic" led me to Gustav Le Bon's "The Psychology of Revolution." It compares the French Revolution, one fought for equality (from Nobles to peasants) that tunrned into a ten year anarchy with Two "Reigns of Terror." Le Bon, a doctor and socialogist wrote in 1913 that the French mob was the equivalent of a religious "mystic" revolution the likes of the Crusades and Reformation. The Reformation in Europe led to religious sects attacking neighboring villages killing women, children and old men in the name of faith. He concluded that socialism was the new French religion. Talk to a leftist at Holiday parties, and you can conclude nothing else.
The second great book is Von Mises "Socialism." He explodes Marxism on many levels, but most importantly on the inability to calculate prices in their Utopia "One World Government." The concept of "material productive forces" is myth, and other problems with capital formation and innovation arise even leaving aside the psychological issues of collective societies failing to result in men working for other men's wife and children. But the history of this work exposes that Marx himself could never refute his critics in the mid-1800's. So he created a campaign of ad hominem attacks. It is still thier only defense a century-and-a-half later. It is failing again, and they are on the offensive being offensive.
Vern Crisler | 12.20.11 @ 1:56PM
It would be a great book if it weren't for Mises's vicious anti-Christianity expressed in that book. Plus it's way too long, and Mises (like Hayek) sometimes has a tendency to write English in a Germanic manner, making it hard to read. The essence of his argument, however, that socialism and rational economic calculation are mutually exclusive, cannot be stated enough.
VonMisesJr| 12.20.11 @ 2:06PM
I agree it is hard to read, but it not intended to be light entertainment. Von Mises and Hayek fled the Nazis for their lives. As top economic scholars of Continental Europe, I am willing to struggle through it. That is why I take the time to comment, since then everyone else does not have to fight through the economic theories.
I didn't pick up anti-Christian sentiments and I am Catholic. In fact, he is refuting the Enlightenment Philosophers that were anti-religion. He espouses today's conservative principles that are for tradition and morals, and rejects the "Age of Reason" idea that the "Supermen" can out think history.
Thanks for your comments and Merry Christmas.
Vern Crisler | 12.20.11 @ 2:22PM
Hello VonMisesJr. I finally managed to finish the whole book a couple of weeks ago. Up to that time I was only interested in the first part of the book where he discusses economic calculation. However, the anti-Christianity comes in the last part of the book. He sounds almost like Ayn Rand there, and I cannot now remember whether he ever mellowed and took a less narrow view of Christianity after *Socialism*. Maybe so but can't follow up as I'm trying to finish *Theory of Money & Credit* and it's a hard slog most of the way.
Merry Christmas as well!
Greg| 12.20.11 @ 8:51AM
Excellent article. It's true that the left rarely discusses policy. They rely on personal attacks almost exclusively.
Regarding the original article "Inequality in Perspective", Sen. Bernie Sanders was on Thom Hartmann's show the other day on a left talk show channel on Sirius. (sometimes I listen to see what they talk about even thought the envy, deception & hatefulness always leaves me feeling somehow dirty) They kept talking about how the top one percent makes as much as the bottom 50%combined, but never explained why this is bad or matters at all. It seems to be commonly understood on the left that if someone works hard & is successful, then it is their fault that someone else makes less money.
Truth to Power| 12.20.11 @ 9:14AM
"Hartmann argues that virtually everything was much better in the 1950s when the top rate was 70 percent. "
Are you sure you weren't talking to Ben Stein?
rhoetus| 12.20.11 @ 3:07PM
Some things were better in the 1950's, but it wasn't the income tax. We had stable two-parent families and manufacturing jobs. The lefties in congress hadn't discovered out how to destroy our economy.
Trish| 12.21.11 @ 4:56PM
Neither was dentistry, hehehehe!
Cromulent| 12.20.11 @ 9:40AM
It might have been pointed out to Thom that lefties like himself often accuse the Right of wanting to turn back the social calendar back to the '50s.
Peppermint Tea| 12.20.11 @ 9:59AM
Mr. Ross,
I enjoyed your article...but you didn't really believe what you wrote, did you?
heh-heh
gearjammer| 12.20.11 @ 10:10AM
this is like going on a talk show hosted by the little nut from Iran. I am sure this clown will be on the panel of quesrioners for the 2012 presidential debate. The League of Women Voters will assure us everything will be fair.
Purp| 12.20.11 @ 10:33AM
Why doesn't AS have an article today on the Payroll tax cut extension? Is it because the Republicants are all tied up in knots over whether to even have a vote on the bill? The Republican House Speaker was for the Senate version of the bill before he was against it. Is he an idiot? In the meantime, every worker in this country is going to get a TAX INCREASE Jan 1st because of the dithering of the Speaker of the House and his Republicant minions. Why are they so out of touch with Americans? Their big excuse is because employers with have to do some arithmetic, which is most likely by computer, because the Senate bill extends the TAX CUT for 2 months so more negotiation can occur for the full year extension. But, no, the House Republicans want all of us to have a TAX INCREASE Jan 1, for some d* political reason. Through them all out in 2012 !
Dick Nome| 12.20.11 @ 11:08AM
Your stupidity is boundless.
Purp| 12.20.11 @ 8:12PM
Can you explain or you just like to drop bombs?
JimBob7| 12.20.11 @ 10:33AM
Hartmann is an idiot (a redundant term for a regressive) if he thinks that taxes on the top income bracket was 70 % in the 1950s. It wasn't until 1964 when Lyndon Johson got Pres Kennedy's proposal to cut taxes from 91 % to 70 % passed that taxes had been that low in over 31 years
Jack Rail| 12.20.11 @ 12:03PM
Rudeness to guests is simply another form Lefty rudeness takes. They accuse us thoughtful folks on the Right of being angry, but it's they who evince anger regularly in their actions and words. I think their major beef with Rush Limbaugh is his politeness; they can't pull that off because they're always hopping mad about something.
LarryK| 12.20.11 @ 12:27PM
So you got treated rudely. What else would you expect from a Liberal ButtHole.
Bob Grant| 12.20.11 @ 1:31PM
Mr. Ross -
Hindsight will always be 20/20 but, DUH, what did you expect?
....or is this what you expected? Which begs the question why did you choose to be a guest?
The only people who would listen to such a thoroughly unentertaining, intellectually vapid show are hard-core lefties whose opinions we shouldn't care one wit about. Did you think you could win hearts and minds? ...really?
By appearing on the show you provided fodder for the rabid listeners and nothing more.
Rockerbabe| 12.20.11 @ 2:41PM
Boohoohoo! Your poor thing! The host of the talk show got the better of you, did he? We, at least he didn't tell you to shut up or call some filthy name, like O'Reilly or Limbaugh would do. And, that Hannity guy is just off the charts as with the Erickson person. They are far more disrespectful and ugly to their guest than Hartmann would or could be with you. Grow up!
If you cannot take the aggressive questioning, then stop writing books that espouse your beliefs.
Bob Grant| 12.20.11 @ 3:12PM
Be honest (maybe for once in your life),
How much time do you spend listening to or watching those shows you so freely denigrate?
It seems to me not much because if you do would have discovered they treat callers and guests with differing views generally with respect.
O'Reilly is rough with ALL of his guests and prevents them from finishing thoughts, but this is not exclusive to where one stands on an opinion. Limbaugh rarely, if at all, has guests with differing opinions, and Hannity treats them with the minimal respect, which is all they deserve, in my book.
If you wanted to list conservative talk show hosts who don't treat their guests well, you mentioned the wrong ones. But is sounds to me you are parroting thoughts from some other source.
Shame on you for not having an original thought or any sort of clue!!
Jamie| 3.12.12 @ 1:43AM
So you agree that none of them treat their guests well, and then say that the post picked the wrong ones to list to say that they don't treat their guests well. WHAT!?
BDS| 12.20.11 @ 2:47PM
Ron.....I listened and actually watched your interview and you came on with this guy completely unprepared for what was about to happen. Yes he filibustered...but when you were given a chance to respond to his points....you did not attack with concise, clear and well forumlated points. Some people are better at the written word and not so great at the spoken word. My suggestion is if you cannot verbally articulate your view-point and back-up your written word.....stay off these shows....
rhoetus| 12.20.11 @ 3:01PM
Hartman is desperate to become important.
Megalass| 12.20.11 @ 5:07PM
I have a lib relative who uses that "You don't really believe that?" schtick on me all the time. I think they must learn it in their little re-education camps. It always annoyed me until I realized it was a deliberate tactic. Now I use it on him.
Skippy| 12.20.11 @ 8:34PM
As far as radio goes, Rush is the sharpest, most entertaining and enlightening host ever.
I have tired of Laura, Levin, Hannity and the rest because they just don't have very good radio shows.
I do have some experience and insight into radio, and that's how I see it.
Small wonder that liberal radio is merely a rumor.
Skippy| 12.20.11 @ 8:37PM
As an aside, Arcata is well behind the Redwood Curtain.
Mr. Ross is both brave and blessed to call Humboldt Co. his home.
Next time you pass through Cloverdale, honk your car horn exuberantly.
I'll hear it and invite you to stop and set a spell!
Ward Bond| 12.21.11 @ 10:26AM
As long as we're talking about rude talk show hosts let's not forget Ed Schultz. Ed used to be a Repulican you know. Back in Fargo N.D. I think Ed figured there was only room for one Rush Limbaugh and became a ''Progressive"talk snow host.One thing about Rush,he has never changed his core beliefs.More than I can say for Schultz.
Tenn Slim| 12.22.11 @ 10:09AM
Liberl Intellectualism is in fact, Opinioism. I am right, always, you are wrong, always....
One cannot discuss facts, stats, etc with Liberals. When confronted with adverse facts, stats, the subject is always," but this is really the question..." statement.
So. Read your history. The Liberals have nudged, cajoled and misled the US electorate for years. The old Chinese water torture method. DRIP DRIP DRIP... the Nation rose up in 2010 via the election process, let us hope we will have another chance in 2012.
Semper FI
Wayne| 12.22.11 @ 1:55PM
Any one hear Ben Stein say that 90 percent of the Rich voted for Obama. Don't know where he got those stats, but if true, then let them pay the millionaire tax. Its karma.
Jamie| 3.12.12 @ 1:41AM
Conservative talk shows are vastly more popular than liberal talk shows"
That is nonsense. Conservative talk show hosts are just as rude. Progressive and Conservative talk show hosts use the exact same tactics, they just use them for different sides.
Jamie| 3.12.12 @ 1:49AM
Oops, obviously I quoted the wrong part of the article. Conservative talk radio IS more popular but it is not more polite.