Next Show: ...loading...

Election Tuesday

October 26, 2004

(archived broadcast )
Mark debates Alan Nathan, nationally syndicated talk-show host and self-proclaimed “militant moderate,” who has declared his support for Bush.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

  • 464 October 28, 2004 2:56 pm

    Dave, you’ve double-blogged us on this–we get it–I still think a dictionary will help your cause–or perhaps a ghostwriter (I am available–I think you have a story inside you just wanting to bust out)

  • Dave G October 28, 2004 12:10 pm

    WTDY Talk. Madison Ws. just had Bob Dornin on and it was ugley. Sent following:
    This loud mouth is attempting to do a grate disservice to our country. We have a White House crew of Psychopaths and they’re about to wipe out the country that they are raping.
    It is deliberate. It began w/ the PNAC plots. They want to brake the middle class. They want have an abundance of low wage earners competing for low wages jobs w/ no power to negotiate w/ the owner classes.
    This crew is on schedule to ruin the country. Destroy the unions – the environment – etc etc. This is an evil group that have somehow sold an image of superior morals and Christian values.
    You might want to view the small part this crew played in the events of 9-11 David Griffin – THE NEW PEARL HARBOR, OR Jim Marrs INSIDE JOB.
    They shouldn’t just be defeated – They should be taken out in handcuffs. Dave – Eureka, Ca.

  • Mark Levine October 28, 2004 12:59 am

    P.S. Skip, your point on the U.N is well taken. That’s why you have to listen live. So I can read your good arguments on air! ;-D

  • Mark Levine October 28, 2004 12:58 am

    I completely agree with you, and I thought long and hard about it after it occurred. I like to think I’m different from the right-wing talk show hosts in that I give folks I disagree with a chance to speak. But while I didn’t interrupt him, he interrupted me repeatedly and went on and on repeating the same tired things. One of the nice things about having Tom Robins as a guest is that, while we disagree, he is not rude and he does not filibuster. Alan Nathan didn’t take a breath. One time in the hour I turned his mike down to speak over him. And when I turned it up again after a minute or so, he was still in mid-sentence! He had talked continuously over me the entire time!
    That’s obviously how right-wingers work. They don’t want debate or an exchange of ideas. They just want to repeat their talking points over and over again.
    Skip, let me assure you and future listeners that I will be much tougher on the volume control in the future for filibusterers. I hate to use the “nuclear option,” but responses should be limited to a minute or two. It’s a dialogue — a debate — not a monologue, particularly with someone with whom I disagree. If a guest interrupts me and won’t let me finish, I may have to turn his mike down and finish anyway. I hate to do it, but with some, it is an unfortunate necessity.
    Rest assured, Skip, I have made note of the problem and promise to do better for the future. Mea Culpa. And thanks for the constructive criticism.

  • Skip October 27, 2004 6:18 pm

    The UN was corrupted by Iraq’s money? That argument was the basis of most of today’s guest’s arguements, and it’s completely idiotic. If he had so much contol over the UN, then the UN embargo and the resulting starvation of a half million Iraqi children over the last 10 years must have been part of Saddam’s plan also, along with all that UN bombing that went on then. If he had all this power, then he must have also forced the US to sell him all those chemical warfare munitions back in the 80s. It’s simply amazing how these neocons can create a new reality on a moments notice and how ridiculous it can be, and people will swallow it without blinking.