AA-Think again.

Posted By: indie616
Posted on: Apr. 23, 2007 at 8:25 PM

51 Comments

3.0 / 5

Based on 5 ratings.

Email Friend

Add to Favorites Add to del.icio.us

del.icio.us

Digg It!

Slashdot It!

I debated about writing the article because the marquee is so full of this kind of stuff right now, but AA's comment to Leonard on the "Bullies and Taunts" article has compelled me to this article.
http://www.voiceofarizona.com/Bullies_and_Taunts-5031-2-3268.htm?mult=1#comments

Specifically, it is this line by AA;

Leonard,

Don't bother calling about the show. Your not going to be on.

May I remind you, AA, that the home page says this:

The VoiceOfArizona.com Radio Shows were developed to provide another great outlet for Arizonans to speak their minds through live interaction on the air.

We encourage VoiceOfArizona.com members to participate on both radio shows to discuss and debate the issues that matter to them. Whether the subject is politics, sports, business or health, we look forward to producing intelligent yet entertaining shows each week with the valued participation of our listeners.

And AA, may I remind you that the show is NOT actually yours? You serve at the pleasure (to repeat a phrase) of the VofAZ folks?

I listened to your show last night (the 60 Minutes Tenet interview was not on CBS).
I was pretty angry that you didn't take your first call until 6:42 pm. I mean you were throwing out some crap and then to have that little sycophant on with you was a real piece of work. Then I figured out that hell, that was the first call you got!

Ok, so you take MiC's call. It was a good debate about global warming. Suddenly MiC is cut off and you continue for a length of time, without anyone to refute or debate your points.

I tried to call late in the show and "no answer." Hummmmmmmm. So, am I blacklisted, just as Leonard is?

The point is AA. You can have your guests. But if you are going to pick and choose who is allowed to come on the show, or perhaps screen or cut off callers then you are violating the spirit of the VoAz.

Michelle and gang gave you a chance to come on their show, back when it was a fledgling enterprise. They lost members over the decision, but believed that all sides should be heard. They have taken heat over your other appearances.

They have courage AA.

Click here to view more articles by indie616

Rate This Article | Create Account

Anonymous commenting has been disabled, you must login to comment on articles.

Signup for an account

Comments:

1 2 3 4 5 6 Next »

	Cancelled Account Apr. 23, 2007 at 08:51:09 PM
This user has cancelled their account with Voice of North America.

www.MoronInCharge.com

Apr. 23, 2007 at 09:16:58 PM

View Profile

Rating for this article

Well Tom, ultimately AA does serve at the pleasure of Voice of Arizona. He is not paying for his radio show, nor is he reflecting the spirit of the Voice of Arizona. He is playing at other people's expense. That makes him a welfare queen.

Report Abuse

	Cancelled Account Apr. 23, 2007 at 09:24:14 PM
This user has cancelled their account with Voice of North America.

AZ Moderate

Apr. 23, 2007 at 11:24:50 PM

View Profile

Rating for this article

Whooosh! That went right over my head! When I read the comment by Double A I thought it meant Leonard Clark would not be featured as a guest on the show. I guess you got it right indi616.

Double A, did indi616 get it right? Did you mean that Leonard wouldn’t get through as a caller? If so, I think indie has a very good point.

I still have not tuned in to your show, or heard you on the radio in any capacity. Damn – I gotta do that. I hear you are quite articulate, and I would like to hear you.

I just happened to hear Leonard around noonish on Sunday. Leonard is quite fluent in the English language, although admittedly it is hard to get a word in edgewise. It seems to me that give and take between you two and others would boost the interest level of your show.

I would like to see you be successful Double A. My hat’s off to you for doing this. I think many others here do as well even though most probably disagree with your position on most issues.

That of course doesn’t mean I agree with Double A on every issue, indi, but I suspect you and many others here would like to see our old stalwart Double A succeed, if for no other reason than to have a good whetstone to sharpen your Liberal blade on.

We have to treasure Double A and help him to succeed. I think you have made a very good point here and it should be considered seriously for the success of the show. Let’s blaze a new trail for True Conservatism and take all calls w/o any screening.

Report Abuse

www.MoronInCharge.com

Apr. 24, 2007 at 12:26:51 AM

View Profile

Rating for this article

AZ Mod, when you finally do get a chance to tune in the unchallenged crap issuing from AA's lips, you might change your mind. Sean Hannity is articulate too, but I do not need more of his kind of whetstones.

When he unblocks his callers, when he stops cutting them off in mid-sentence for no good reason, and when the show is more about VofAZ and less about AA, then I will wish him well. Until then, I will not root for the very thing that has so cheapened the level of discourse in the U.S. media to such a dismal level. Just putting VofAZ banner on his brand of demagoguery doesn't automatically earn my loyalty.

But to clarify, AA is not warning Leonard to not call in. AA is telling Leonard to not bother communicating with him anymore about a future appearance on his show. It is, admittedly, within AA's right to refuse Leonard on as a guest, so I will not cry foul simply because of his change of heart. However, it does appear that AA is using his new-found "power" as a radio host to wield as a stick against those that would dare to offend him. Seems kind of petty, but not really a surprise.

In case you missed my account of what happened last night, I will repost it here . . .

__________________________________________________________________

Well I must retract my offer to appear with Leonard. I made the effort of borrowing a radio strong enough to pick up KFNX at my home, and tuned in. Big mistake.

First off, I should say that AA's delivery is smooth and professional, even more impressive given his recent start in the business and his lack of any formal training in broadcasting.

But unfortunately going off on unchallenged monologues of unsubstantiated opinion and rehashed talking points does not a broadcast journalist make. AA's comments ranged from the innocuous to the inane to the insulting. In other words, this show is nothing more than the radio version of the AA we have come to know from his writings. I don't need another radio show to prove to me that it is pointless to argue with a closed mind. AA has the audacity of believing that merely repeating things forcibly enough, or ignoring any opposing argument, will trump reality.

The intellectual dishonesty is stunning. I know he reads this site. I know we've been through the Reagan tax cuts before. I know it was pointed out to him that Reagan signed into law (without veto attempt) the budgets coming out of the democratically controlled Congress. So why, when revisiting so called failed liberal ideas like opposing further tax cuts for the wealthy, would AA say (paraphrasing):

Liberals want to disincentivise success.

Reagan almost made it all work.

He cut taxes on the wealthy, and that increased tax revenues.

The only problem was that you have to decrease spending at the same time, and the democratically controlled House and Senate went on a spending spree, and that ruined Reaganomics.

In other words, Reagan knew he was cutting taxes and increasing spending at the same time -- he signed the spending bills. In fact, the Democrats didn't actually increase spending. They held the line against cutting entitlement programs while Reagan was pushing through huge military spending increases, and the Democrats vehemently opposed cutting tax revenues on the wealthy while placing this massive increase in military spending on the backs of the poor.

And on it went. So called "partial birth" abortions, global warming, gun control, a veritable slander-fest of AA-style one-sided and soft thinking. Thoroughly unpleasant, but hey, I'm listening for the sake of the Voice of Arizona. Then AA gets to the pretense issue of global-warming on Mars. Using the theory of a vast minority of astronomers (basically one Russian scientist) that the recent shrinkage of Mars' southern polar ice cap is due to increased solar luminescence, and that would account for Earth's global warming too, AA goes off on a smarmy clunky attack of the global warming "conspiracy." So I called in and had it out with him.

The actual exchange is the typical AA style evasion: "Did you watch the Global Warming Conspiracy movie I told you to watch Mike." "Are you talking Earth years or Mars years Mike, because we know you're a stickler for accuracy and you need to get your own facts straight." What REALLY PISSED ME OFF however, is that in the middle of this debate, I was once again hung up on by (I assume) the screener. It damn well better had been the screener, because if it was you AA, I would have to say you are nothing more than a coward (there's that word again). I don't know what the excuse will be this time, because you didn't go into a commercial, and I seemed to be the only caller you had tonight. Maybe your screener has a trigger finger? So, once I was cut off literally in mind sentence, you were able to smugly wrap up the debate in typical patronizing fashion, summarizing that liberals like Mike fail to recognize that the Sun is a big hot ball of gas (so is a certain radio host).

I called the station a few minutes later to speak to your screener. No answer. I called on my cell phone and he answered right away. I asked him, "So is your policy to hang up on your callers in the middle of a debate so that your host will aways look good?" He said, "Have a nice day," and hung up on me again. As I recall, two weeks ago, Indie and I both called into your show, and we were both hung up upon. Coincidence?

You have a problem here AA. This is suppose to be The Voice of Arizona, but where is the voice of anyone but yourself? If you paid for this show yourself, then more power to you. But The Voice of Arizona foots the bill, and you are betraying the fundamental format. Forget for a moment that Michelle is a liberal and you are conservative, because the whole reason you are on the air is to attract conservative listeners to this site, so have at it with your feeding the uneducated masses what they want to hear. But when you shut down the dialogue, you are no longer The Voice of Arizona. That name should no longer be associated with what you bring to the table, unless you put your screener in line fast. Failing that, I propose you pay for the show yourself, and retitle it

My Big Fat Neocon Mouth.

Report Abuse

indie616

Apr. 24, 2007 at 08:03:22 AM

View Profile

I have wished AA well on his show-written here at VofAZ. I do want AA to succeed because despite our opposing views, I like him. I think he might be misguided but believe he is a good person. My other reason is that his show can reach a different audience, and AA does a good job of promoting this site. I would like to see new contributors here, especially those from the right (well, at least reasonable righties).

But, it just fries my ass that while AA holds the record (at least I think) for appearances on the Saturday show, he tells Leonard Clark to bug off on an appearance on 'his' show. Why? Well it appears that Leonard hurt AA's delicate feelings.

Not a fan of the screener either.

The content of AA's show is his. Not a fan of running off all kinds of things at the beginning and he has your head spinning from everything from (A)bortion to (W)arming.

But, to keep my BP down, I think I will take some of AA's advice. To paraphase what AA said about the Saturday show:

"I don't listen....it's boring when I'm not on."