April 14, 2008
Live Blogger Radio

10:47: Fun exchange. Goldy and I agree even less on Presidential politics than on the Governor's race.

10:38: Cato whining in the comments below. Regular readers are stunned.

10:34: News flash, Goldy and I don't agree on the Governor's race. Host Steve Scher asks an interesting question, and I paraphrase: "what is Christine Gregoire going to run on?"

Good question.

10:26: Blogger accountability? How do the people's journalists have their feet held to the fire? I'd say our readers and other bloggers.

10:20: Is Barack Obama an elitist? The fact we're discussing that is a problem for his campaign

10:15: Blazing Saddles references...unexpected goodness

Per the post below, at least I'm going to give it a whirl...at KUOW's request. I'm not sure how the live blogging and talking on the radio thing will work.

Comment away...and call in at (206) 543-KUOW or
(800) 289-KUOW. And of course you can listen online.

P.S. Goldy is not wearing a Che shirt.

P.P.S. How should I have dressed to meet the conservative stereotype?

Posted by Eric Earling at April 14, 2008 09:59 AM | Email This
Comments
1. Tuned in and all I got was a stupid pledge drive.

Posted by: Cato on April 14, 2008 10:30 AM
2. "How should I have dressed to meet the conservative stereotype?"

Don't worry about it, since it doesn't apply here. Heh.

Posted by: hinton on April 14, 2008 10:38 AM
3. O.K.: Went to the KUOW 10:00 slot at:
http://www.kuow.org/programs/weekday.asp#10
BUT:
Under ''On the Campaign! A Bloggers' Roundtable''
it sez:
''Audio available at 11:05 a.m.''

For those of us in deep mountain valleys in the far distant corners of the Inland Empire who do not receive KUOW directly but DO have excellent high-speed wireless connection to the net:
Having the audio file delayed by an hour makes it a bit difficult to ''coordinate'' the audio with the live blogging.... [_sigh_]....

In any case: Don't let Goldy get a free ride on anything....

Posted by: Methow Ken on April 14, 2008 10:47 AM
4. My impression: Pretty much a non-event!

Goldy obviously had the most 'on-air presence' with his ease and talk show host experience. [Sounded like host 'cringed' and lowered his voice whenever he had to idendify Goldy with 'Horsesass.Com'] Eric came across as a typical academic, very articulate and University-versed. The other blogger (from Whitman County) and lady who was a recent UW grad were almost indescernible. I would suggest KUOW invest more of their coffers in audio enhancement for phone-line guests. Bottom-line: I should have remained on the Dave Ross Show, and you probably wasted taking that time off from work, Eric. :)

Posted by: Duffman on April 14, 2008 11:01 AM
5. Finally: *13* minutes after 11:00, we got thru the solid ''call in and give us $$'' part of the KUOW audio, and into the meat of the blogger's roundtable. . . .

Posted by: Methow Ken on April 14, 2008 11:13 AM
6. Progressivism is de-facto elitism. You can't have Progressivism without elitism. That's the basis underlying the ideology. So yeah, Barack is an elitist like PB&J sandwiches contain peanut butter. Progressivism is elitist because it is presumptuous. Progressivism attempts to create a better outcome through control. But that is not possible.

Progressivism is like trying to calm a body of water by placing a float line around a portion of the water, and rigorously controlling the interior of the float line. And Progressives don't just pick swimming pools or a good size lakes to calm, they pick oceans.

Posted by: Jeff B. on April 14, 2008 11:22 AM
7. Progressivism is elitist because it is presumptuous.

The very essence of politics is presumption.

Progressivism attempts to create a better outcome through control. But that is not possible.

How does that work with Iraq and nation building? Does President Bush feel that we can archive a better outcome in Iraq by invading and installing a new Govt? Are we not attempting to create a better outcome in Basra by controlling the movements of people in and out of the city?

Posted by: Cato on April 14, 2008 11:34 AM
8. Finally, I got the podcast for my I-tunes. Had to give up from the KUOW website and went directly to powersearch in the Itunes store and punched in kuow. Got all the programs from the whole kuow website.

Posted by: swatter on April 14, 2008 12:29 PM
9. Hmmm... How about a $5,000 suit with non-matching socks?

Posted by: Brian Lutz on April 14, 2008 12:56 PM
10. Cato,

A classic strawman argument. Let alone the fact that what's going on Iraq is not nation building, and that radical Islam is an obvious threat, nor that there has been Progress in stabilizing Iraq, which in the long run will at least be one Island of sanity in the theocratic morass that is the middle east. No, you have to be content with trying to justify Progressivism, by finding fault with something that you perceive to be on the other side. Which is a logical fallacy.

Let's say I grant you that Iraq is a total failure. That would still not justify Progressive failures, nor future plans that can already be demonstrated (by Canada and the UK) as failures, such as Nationalized Healthcare.

To the extent that conservatives have failed, or that Republicans do wrong does not justify the overarching philosophical inferiority of Progressivism as compared with Individualism.

Progressives have a general distrust of mankind, and seek an authoritarian solution to any given problem. When the so called Progressive solution is actually deployed, it almost leads to an even worse problem. With respect to your dislike of "nation building" in Iraq, you have only Progressives to blame. Were it not for Progressive appeasement of Islam, particularly under Carter and Clinton, it's likely we never would have got to the place where we did with Iraq. Now we are at a similar crossroads with Iran. Progressives visa vis Obama believe that diplomacy is the solution. But there is zero evidence that Islam under Ahmadinejad is any more likely to back down now, than it was when Carter first opened the door. If anything with talk of nukes and eradication of Israel it is worse.

But like everything Progressive, the ponzi scheme mentality ignores any potential future collapse, for the immediate gratification here and now. It sure feels good when Carter and Clinton buddy up to Palestinian terror, but are they any closer to peace?

Posted by: Jeff B. on April 14, 2008 01:13 PM
11. Does President Bush feel that we can archive [Don't you mean "achieve"? - Ed. Hey, don't embarrass a lefty, it's bad for his self-esteem] a better outcome in Iraq by invading and installing a new Govt?

Talk about short memory, that was a concept agreed on by the Clinton Administration and Congress. Just lower yourself to watch the speeches by Clinton, John Kerry, Mrs. Clinton, Madeline Allbright, Nancy Pelosi, old Uncle Tom Cobbleigh and all, on that very subject.

Or would that move, if made by Clinton, have been 'justice' as opposed to Bush's bomb-dropping, Predator-swarming, oil-sucking, UN-ignoring, Humvee-roaring, Iran-offending, Zarkawi-obliterating, imperialist unilateral environment-traumatazing (oh, sorry, that was Saddam draining the marshes) regime-changing defeat of Amerikka?

Oh, dang, that last defeat only counts if you read the Nation or the NYT. But I know that you Sons of Duranty are still on your feet cheering for the party line.

Posted by: Insufficiently Sensitive on April 14, 2008 01:13 PM
12. There needs to be a Godwin's Law about the Iraq War. If you read any political thread on the P-I website, inevitably there will be an argument like, 'we're spending a trillion dollars on the Iraq war, why not give everyone free healthcare?'

Posted by: Palouse on April 14, 2008 02:17 PM
13. Agree with Palouse, except the argument spreads far beyond the P-I. The New Yorker has it pretty well rehearsed too. You hear it first as a parent when your three-year-old runs in a grocery store from item to item demanding that you spend your budget on sweets and shiny gimmicks - since you're going to spend the money anyway.

The P-I could care less about civilization and regional stability in the Middle East in coming decades, as long as it can hyperventilate about NANNY-STATE GOODIES NOW!!

It's a pretty short jump from infant to P-I editorial board.

Posted by: Insufficiently Sensitive on April 14, 2008 02:46 PM
14. I had no Idea that Goldy hates older Americans so much. He want them to vote Democrat, but he doesn't think that they have the mental capability to lead and apparently he doesn't trust his own mothers driving. Tell us again why an unemployed blogger like Goldy should be listened too? Who else is as old as McCain and still functioning in the Democrat party?

Posted by: Smokie on April 14, 2008 03:46 PM
15. Enjoyed being on the air with you today, Eric. You speak as eloquently as you write. As for Goldy, well, let's just say the AARP won't be hiring him as a spokesperson anytime soon!

SP was the inspiration for my blog Palousitics, so it was nice to meet one of the contributors, even if was only over the phone.

Posted by: Tom Forbes on April 14, 2008 03:51 PM
16. I like your blog, Palousitics. Keep up the good work.

Signed,
Dog Face

Posted by: swatter on April 15, 2008 06:58 AM
17. Eric, no doubt you have a 'full plate', but IMO should you ever have a desire to enter radio as a talk show host, my guess is that you would do well. I could see you 'reviving' stale KVI; that would be interesting. :)

Posted by: Duffman on April 15, 2008 08:13 AM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?