August 09, 2007
Liberals unlabelled

From today's Seattle Times article on a programming shake-up at radio station KIRO:

The shuffle, an attempt by KIRO to retake its once-dominant position, means listeners will hear the conservative [Dori] Monson immediately after Dave Ross, whose show airs 9 a.m.- noon weekdays.
So Monson is a conservative, but Ross isn't labelled.

Why bother to label someone's views when they're middle-of-the-road (to a liberal reporter, anyway)?

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at August 09, 2007 09:32 AM | Email This
Comments
1. I'm not sure I consider Dori Monson to be a conservative. He's a great guy and I think he speaks to the outrage of the average middle class voter in Seattle well, but that doesn't mean he's got a political agenda.

Ross, on the other hand, seems to spend 100% of his radio program in total spin mode for democrats and local government.

His familiar refrain is "If you want that, you have to pay for it, and that means taxes." When you try to call him and point out that the taxes we're currently paying should already cover the expenses, he always totally sidesteps the point. It's like he's a cheerleader for any new tax the city or county tries to send our way.

I often wonder if Ross isn't actually on a city payroll either directly or through a special ad arrangement. (There sure seems to be a lot of public service announcements and Sound Transit ads on KIRO.) The fact that he's leaving his radio show in the hands of the Horses Pattute and Nickels speaks volumes.

Posted by: johnny on August 9, 2007 10:13 AM
2. Newspaper bias BUSTED once again!

Posted by: Michele on August 9, 2007 10:46 AM
3. "With Dave and Dori you get one individual who leans a little bit left and another who is willing to go for the attack, and that makes for a winning combination," said Rod Arquette, program director for KIRO-AM and KTTH-AM.

Sounds like the PD's got a little bit of bias in him as well.

Posted by: jimg on August 9, 2007 10:51 AM
4. The newspaper is blinded by their bias - so what else is new ?
Ross is a liberal, but not a progressive. Goldstein is a progressive. Monson is probably more libertarian than conservative but is anti-progressive, which is fine by me.

The two most disliked radio pesonalities by the usual suspects that frequent Blatherwatch - of a progressive persuasion are Dori Monson and Bill O'Reilly because they dare be critical of the leftwingnuts (aka Secular Progressives or Progressives/Regressives).

Posted by: KS on August 9, 2007 10:54 AM
5. The newspaper is blinded by their bias - so what else is new ?
Ross is a liberal, but not a progressive. Goldstein is a progressive. Monson is probably more libertarian than conservative but is anti-progressive.

The two most disliked radio pesonalities by the usual suspects that frequent Blatherwatch - of a progressive persuasion are Dori Monson and Bill O'Reilly because they dare be critical of the leftwingnuts (aka Secular Progressives or Progressives/Regressives).

Posted by: KS on August 9, 2007 10:55 AM
6. The newspaper is blinded by their bias - so what else is new ? They are seldom held accountable for concealing their bias.
Ross is a liberal, but not a progressive. Goldstein is a progressive. Monson is probably more libertarian than conservative but is anti-progressive.

The two most disliked radio pesonalities by the usual suspects that frequent Blatherwatch - of a progressive persuasion are Dori Monson and Bill O'Reilly because they dare be critical of the leftwingnuts (aka Secular Progressives or Progressives/Regressives).

Posted by: KS on August 9, 2007 10:57 AM
7. Sorry about the multiple post - server difficulties (?)

Posted by: KS on August 9, 2007 10:59 AM
8. Maybe the KIRO staff and there advertisers have realized how many people turn on and listen to balanced programing and turn off left wing cheerleaders

Posted by: Don Boyd on August 9, 2007 11:15 AM
9. What is worse is when the local "Paper of Record" is nothing more than a "house organ" for those in power. Case in point, after the recent Minesota bridge collapse I read about how the recently renovated bridge on N Proctor in America's #1 Weird City is one of the bridges in this State listed as being structurally deficient but no mention is made that something like $3.5 million was spent on this very same bridge to do such things as upgrade the ornamental lighting fixtures. An honest newspaper would look into how the Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax revenues the City receives have been prioritized before jumping on the "more gassoline taxes are needed to maintain our neglected infrastructure" bandwagon.

Posted by: JDH on August 9, 2007 12:37 PM
10. Did anyone see the terrible ratings Air America got in the Seattle market in the important 25-54 demographic? Blatherwatch has the numbers, he could get in trouble for publishing them.

KS: The words "liberal" and "progressive" are synonyms in most political observers'lexicons these days.

Posted by: murtz on August 9, 2007 01:59 PM
11. This is all part of a trend which worries me.

Where are the liberal press, pundits, radio programs and the like? There are many labeled so that Conservatives can know where to go (three Conservative Radio stations in the Seattle area alone), but no Liberal ones. Or at least, none willing to be called such.
Liberals should be proud of their beliefs, and not have to hide behind code phrases, such as "progressive" or "right minded".

Come one Seattle, say it loud "I'm Liberal and I'm Proud."

Posted by: pyotr on August 9, 2007 02:16 PM
12. That'll be the day pyotr. With great reluctance I recently engaged in an e-mail political debate with an old friend . Knowing his liberal bent I knew what I was in for. I foolishly used the phrase "those of you on the left" and got the expected response, "don't pigeon hole me", "I'm offended", etc., etc.. I wonder if lefties get out of bed in the morning wondering, "who am I today?" A "progressive?" a "liberal?" someone in the "mainstream?" a "Democrat?" a "socialist?", maybe even a "communist".

You're dead right. If they really admitted their beliefs they would never win another election outside of Seattle and San Francisco.

Posted by: Bill Cruchon on August 9, 2007 03:40 PM
13. BZZZZZZZT.
Immediately after the part you quote the article says Dave is "left" as follows:

"With Dave and Dori you get one individual who leans a little bit left and another who is willing to go for the attack, and that makes for a winning combination," said Rod Arquette"

Liberals would have a more valid point complaining of bias because it says Dori is "conservative" while Dave is "left."

Thus it takes up the right wing notion that anyone on the liberal side is "left."

"Left" used to mean wanting to nationalize the railroads and banks and the largest companies, something us liberals don't want to do. (Except the health care finance gambling industry of course).

Anyway though I'd point out the facts. Yopu're complaining Dave is not identified politically when in fact he was. You say he is viewede as middle of the road by this part of themedia when in fact the article says he is left. And they used a more extreme term (left) for him than they did for Dori. They didn't say Dori was "rightist," only conservative.

Take a deep and breath and calm down everyone....this time it just wasn't so. Better luck next time.

Posted by: Seattle Democrat on August 9, 2007 03:42 PM
14. Seattle Democrat (13)
The passenger railroads have been quasi-nationalized (Amtrak), similar to the US Postal Service.
Hillary, as 1st lady, and perhaps as President, wanted to nationalize the entire medical care delivery system, not just medical insurance. Under her scheme, all physicians would have received all payments from the federal government and the federal government only (similar to Canadian system). Private relationships among doctors and patients had no place in the Dem scheme. That is nationalization by any definition.
By the way, health care financing is not gambling, but insurance. The difference is that insurance spreads a risk that cannot be avoided (risk of illness, flood, house fire, death, etc.) while gambling creates a risk that need not exist if it were not for gamblers (risk of an Ace on the river, risk of a bullet in the chamber in Russian Roulette).

Posted by: Steve on August 9, 2007 03:55 PM
15. I wonder if lefties get out of bed in the morning wondering, "who am I today?" A "progressive?" a "liberal?" someone in the "mainstream?" a "Democrat?" a "socialist?", maybe even a "communist". -Bill Cruchon

You answered your own question (or your pal did) earlier in your post: "I'm offended"

That pretty much sums up the left. Perhaps we should coin a new phrase ...
Victimocrat?
Offendedicon?
The Injured Party?
Affrontedocrats?
The Perpertually Piqued Party?

Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on August 9, 2007 04:17 PM
16. Ragnar I think you've got it! These people are "Offendicons".

Perfect.

Posted by: Bill Cruchon on August 9, 2007 04:30 PM
17. Or as you more properly put it, "Offendedicons"

Posted by: Bill Cruchon on August 9, 2007 04:41 PM
18. I just assumed Dave was the one that was "willing to attack" because clearly Dori is the one who "leans a little to the left". Dori is "conservative" !?!? It truly is a matter of perspective, and once again the paper reveals its own. It doesn't really matter though because how many of us actually listen to that station anyways? Not I.

Posted by: chris on August 9, 2007 05:44 PM
19. pyotr @18,

What about NPR? That's taxpayer-supported liberalism spewed forth in practically every large market in the country.

Where's my federally subsidized conservative FM station in this area?

Posted by: Smoley on August 9, 2007 05:55 PM
20. Dori is not a conservative.
He's a pro-war libertarian.
He's only a fiscal conservative.
He is NOT a social conservative.
He is a foreign policy hawk, but as Ron Paul points out, being a foreign policy hawk is NOT a traditional conservative position. It's a big-government, interventionist position. It's Wilsonian.

Dave Ross is pretty centrist, for Seattle, which is to say, lefty.

Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on August 9, 2007 09:55 PM
21.
I think this whole "Seattle Liberals" is another bubble that's ready to burst, like housing, oil prices and AAPL stock.

The "ins" float around thinking there's all this support for every crackpot money wasting scheme, but guess what -- people in King County have come to their senses and started deciding that the politicos on the left are out of control and wasting too much money.

What I'm saying is the scaffolding is coming down from under Sims, Gregoire and Nichols...

Posted by: John Bailo on August 10, 2007 06:03 AM
22. John Bailo -

From your mouth to gods ears, but the simple fact is that the Washington state GOP is dumber than a sack of bricks. I think everyone in the state recognizes the rapidly rising anger of the ordinary taxpayer in this state, but it takes an opposition oriented political party organization to make "make hay" out of this anger and turn it into a force for change.

I was glad to see that we had a change of leadership at the top in the GOP, but unfortunately, it seems that the new boss is the same as the old boss. Completely toothless and without a fight.

Posted by: johnny on August 10, 2007 09:27 AM
23. Liberals would have a more valid point complaining of bias because it says Dori is "conservative" while Dave is "left." Seattle Dem

And without recognizing it, you have illustrated precisely the problem and why you don't see bias.

Nowhere does the program director state Dori is a conservative, but you took the word 'attack' and immediately labeled it as conservative.

Which was my entire point.

How can you spot bias in others when you refuse to recognize it with yourself?

Posted by: jimg on August 10, 2007 10:45 AM
24. I would not call Monson a conservative and Ross is hardly a hard core democrat (or at least his show is not that way).

I enjoy listening to both but find Ross show the best on the air. I often disagree with him but never get to the point of being pissed off at him for either being ignorant or just plain wrong like I do many of the more traditional conservatives.

One guy yesterday (a fill in for Glenn Beck) actually was talking about a "master plan" for america to keep it white! He was asking if this was okay or is it wrong to talk about? I could not beleive my ears!!!

But back to the Kiro guys... Ross is able to always explain his position in a calm rational way that does not make you get angry like so many others do even when you disagree. He always treats his guests and callers with more respect than any other host I have ever listened to. And he is not a toe the line liberal. He will often mention how americans do not want government health care and will ask his callers for other solutions when they try to suggest it. he will often talk about people not wanting to pay more taxes and ask for other solutions than raise taxes.

Travis

Posted by: Travis Pahl on August 10, 2007 07:47 PM
25. Dave Ross is not a hard core Democrat? That would explain his run for Congress as a Democrat in the 8th District in '04 right? Let's see Dave Ross is for Nationalized Health Care, Restricting personal property rights (CAO), Extending civil rights protections to enemy combatants, Giving citzenship and voting rights for felons and illegal aliens, Pricing petroleum products to reflect their entire cost to "society" example the entire cost of the war, pollution mitigation and developement of alternative fuels it should be about $12.00 a gallon before the State of Washington jumps on board. The man is collectivist Democrat HACK!

Posted by: Smokie on August 11, 2007 07:03 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?