Could Suspending K O Be Part Of NBC'S Plan To Take MSNBC Right?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

I suspect Ed and Rachel will be gone soon too. IMHO, they have decided if they can't beat FOX they will join em... Look at talk radio and all the Rush clones for a precedent... Did those stations try to counterbalance Rush with someone from the left? No. They tried to find a clone and were quite successful. Hannity? , Beck ? Boortz? anyone...

The die is cast.

[Exilednight]

1. We tried Air America, but the problem with left wing radio hosts ...........

is that left wing supporters are not nearly as crazy as the right. Randi Rhodes tries to be the Limbaugh of the left, and that is the very reason that I hate her. Rachel and Franken were the voices of reason, but they had to share their designated frequency with the like of Rhodes.

As far as TV is concerned, MSNBC has done it half-assed. Sure, the evening is lined up with left wing hosts, but let's look at the rest of the day. You start out with Joe and Mika. Mika is a middle-of-the-roader who allows Joe and the gang to walk all over her.

That is followed by The Daily Rundown with Todd and Guthrie, both right of center.

In turn, they are followed by Andrea Mitchell. Not exactly a beacon of left wing liberalism.

Then you have Dylan Ratigan who is given credit for the "tea party rant".

Ed is next up, and to be honest, I've never been that big of an Ed fan. I agree with him about 70% of the time, but his stance on certain issues (guns is the first that comes to mind) are a bit too far to the right for my taste.

Then you get Tweety. Tweety is the guy who wrote for Carter, but has openly admitted that he voted against his own boss in the 1980 election.

After that, you finally get to what left wing television and radio should be. Keith and Rachel are the best voices that the left currently has on the air.

Where Fox is really smart is in the overnight time-slots. Red-Eye is a brilliant move on Fox's part. Obviously it's not for what the show stands for, but for the simple fact that they attempt to pull in the next generation of viewers.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

2. Tweety Admitted To Voting For Bush* In 00

Given the relationship he still has with President Carter it's hard for me to see him ever voting against him.

[Exilednight]

7. Tweety was doing a show about three or four years ago where ..........

he was railing against Bush for giving up on Reagan's principals about individual rights as it pertained to eavesdropping and the Patriot Act, when Tweety said something to the extent, and I paraphrase before the comma but the second half is dead on, "Reagan was a stalwart when it came to the right to privacy, and that is why Reagan Democrats like myself voted for him 1980".

[Fruittree]

3. How is Randi Rhodes like Limbaugh?

She has a bit of an annoying accent but she's been very supportive of President Obama and is overall very fact based. Sometimes I think she's condescending toward her callers - is that what you mean? Bill Press is generally good..

[Exilednight]

5. Not only is she condescending to her callers, but .........

she goes on these rants that over the top. I don't tune into left wing radio to hear the commentators sink to the lows of name-calling and low end pandering.

To be honest, I haven't listened to Rhodes in over 3 years. I listened to her show for about two months straight and tired of it. She doesn't draw passion and seems to lack compassion for others. Her attitude towards her listeners is "I'm right, you're wrong, shut the fuck up."

That's not how you win an argument unless you're pandering to the lowest common denominator of our society - Rush Limbaugh's audience.

In my opinion, she's comes across more as propaganda rather than informative.

[Fruittree]

11. I couldn't stand her for awhile either but

I think she's been better lately but I agree that I don't like the I'm right you're wrong attitude either. I have that problem with Thom Hartman and Big Ed is just such a screamer. Where do you go to just get straight information and not Obama bashing which I just find depressing.

[doc03]

6. Maybe it is just to give MSNBC credibility as a legitimate news

source as opposed to Faux and today's CNN. I am hoping they reinstate Oberman after a while, from what I understand he did break company policy. Everyone knows that Faux is a Republican propaganda machine, I think even the Teabaggers realize that. I think originally CNN was a fair news source but the last few years they have been trying to out Fox Fox. I remember a few years ago when the Rethugs called CNN the Clinton News Network. Maybe they want to fill that vacuum left by CNN. I would rather have a news source that is truly unbiased, the Democrats aren't right on every issue and the Republicans aren't always wrong, just tell both sides and let us decide like Faux (claims) to do.

[denimgirly]

4. KO is a Money Maker for MSNBC...Its impossible to replace him.

He is their highest ratings getter....remember, MSNBC is all about making money...they dont give a damn what is being spewed (as long as it isnt being fined) and makes a descent profit. As it stands MSNBC has been labeled as Left and it will be next to impossible to change that image if they try to veer Right (for their Prime time slots)....I just wish MSNBC would make the entire day Left based not just after 8.

[mucifer]

8. If the owners of comcast see their priority as propaganda they wont care if they lose money.

They have an insane amount of money. They don't need msnbc.

[JoePhilly]

9. That's why you can't get liberal radio everywhere ...

Once you buy up all the markets, you can play whatever right wing whack job you want because there is no competition.

[Doctor_J]

13. you can't get liberal radio ANYWHERE

is I think what you mean.

[66 dmhlt]

10. With Comcast set to buy NBC Universal? You bet!

Comcast leans far to the right.

[Doctor_J]

12. Does a bear shit in the woods?

Housecleaning time. Time to toe the right-wing company line