Next Show: ...loading...

Mark Takes on Dubya

May 4, 2005

(broadcast stream) (.mp3 download)
Mark continues the job he began on Sunday, responding point by point to the Bush press conference.
Social Security. Oil Prices. Iraq. The Budget. Bolton. The Religious Right. And more. All the information you need to respond to your right-wing colleagues at work.
A show that makes listening to Dubya almost tolerable!

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

  • Dr. Freud October 21, 2006 10:49 am

    Joe–you are a headbanger–perhaps having banged your head once too often–the Universe seeks to sooth your pain–but old habits are hard to break–that the cracks in your skull testify to–a grim roadmap for a run-amok ego–and an ugly reminder that your brain can no longer comprehend beyond the the short-terms of milli-second to milli-second–God has a special place for you–gentle padded bed–rest your throbbing head–filled with such disturbing thoughts–cordoned away from those who can only love you from a distance–surveying your actions from remote-control cameras

  • Mark Levine October 21, 2006 1:28 am

    I’d forgotten who you were, but I looked you up and we did debate May 3, 2005. I don’t understand why you’re complaining now a year and a half later and making personal attacks. But if you want to attack me, at least explain to me what the heck you’re talking about.
    What exactly was I “too chicken” to say to your face? And specifically how did I “get upset”? And who’s your friend that my producer supposedly grilled for personal info? What personal info? And what does this have to do with the comments written on my blog?
    In order to remind myself who you were and what might cause you to be so upset a year and a half later, I reread the blog comments on May 3 and May 4, 2005. And then I began to understand.
    Most of my listeners simply agree with me and not you, although, Ben, a staunch Republican, supported your point of view. That’s not unusual or unfair. Many raise good points. And my radio producer did not publish anything. (My television producer, who listens to the radio show occasionally but does not produce it, apparently added a comment or two on his own. I assure you this was done without my knowledge, and although I don’t mind it, it’s extremely rare for him to comment on my radio show. All of the other comments were made by listeners who have zero working relationship with me but enjoy my show.)
    But what most struck me, as I reviewed the comments, is those listeners who felt that you weren’t debating fairly, that you were constantly interrupting and talking over me whenever I was making a point you didn’t want to hear.
    RM writes to me “Yell if I have to” Wow. Yelling shouldn’t be necessary.
    Others threatened to stop listening. They hated your rudeness that much.
    Steve2 wrote, “After yesterdays show I think you’ll avoid your Tuesday shows from now on. For these people [he’s talking about you, Joe], politics is a game. Life and death are consequences meted out to brown people far, far away.” Steve2 wants me to take a poll of listeners to see if I want people like you with “lying talking points rammed down their throats on an otherwise excellent program.” Pretty harsh.
    Dave G. writes (arguing I shouldn’t have guests like you on) that inviting you to debate “extends a level of credibility that is totally unmerited”
    Rolling Thunder said the “‘debate’ was a gruesome display more akin to a street fight–it was difficult to distinguish anything through the shouting” That’s not good at all. No one wants to listen to a street fight. All heat. No light.
    I wrote back that I agreed with Steve and Dave that my debate with you, Joe was one of the worst ones I’d ever had because of constant interruptions and your lack of knowledge of basic facts, such as your not realizing that we never found WMDs. If I said it was one of the worst ever than it must have been really bad, though actually, as I said, a year and a half later, I had forgotten all about it. I’ve done almost 600 shows now.
    But in the blog, I defended having right-wingers on my show and said while I preferred opponents “who at least accept basic norms of truth and fact,” I could accept those that don’t know any facts as long as they “respect me enough to let me finish a sentence” which apparently you didn’t do.
    Steve (a different listener from Steve2) then recommended several of my shows where I debate OTHER Republicans (Republicans other than yourself) who Steve says are better debaters than you. Again, it’s not their point of view he’s praising. Steve definitely disagrees with them. But the WAY these Republicans debate, i.e. without yelling, screaming, too-frequent interruptions, that he defends.
    Vicky (a conservative who might well agree with you) would not even download the show and listen to it because of the complaints about the shouting and interruptions, but she listens to most of my other shows. And she often passionately criticizes my views but does so with respect. And I value her input.
    I responded on the blog a year and a half ago that I have no problem with GOPers trying to convince listeners and that reamins true today. I did respond to the astoundingly large number of listener complaints by apologizing for the “street fight” that was all heat and little light. (When that many listeners complain, I have to take notice.)
    Apparently, Joe, you were so unusually disrespectful and unwilling to let me finish a sentence that I even had to have a long talk with my producer about how to deal with the situation. I really hate to cut off people’s microphones and I have done it less than five times the 3 1/2 years and more than 500 radio shows I have done. But in your case, apparently, it was necessary because you wouldn’t let me get a word in edgewise on my own show.
    I even discuss on the blog what to do when this level of rudeness happens! Should I interrupt back? Shout? I finally decide that the only thing to do for those who cannot debate reasonably is not to invite them back. Not for their ideas, mind you, but for their debating style.
    SHOUTING is not a debate. Not allowing the other side to finish a sentence is not a debate. I also disagree with anyone who stands up and interrupts a speaker, no matter what their views. That’s not freedom of speech. It’s suppression of speech. And when Leftists do it to Donald Rumsfeld, I condemn them, even though I think Rumsfeld is a liar and one of the worst Defense Secretaries in American history. Still, he has a right to speak.
    In sum, I invite Republicans I disagree with on my show all the time. I never fear a strong debate. You and all my listeners know this. But I must admit, until I saw your post, I had completely forgotten about our debate. I still don’t remember it very well–though I could reactivate the audio archive if you want me to–but judging by the comments of others and myself, you must have been exceptionally rude, one of the rudest guests I have ever had, to have gotten this many complaints.
    It would be that reason — your refusal to let me speak — rather than your political views that would keep me from inviting you back…unless that is, your microphone were muted every time I spoke or a moderator forced you to strict time limits where, say, you spoke for 2 minutes and then I spoke for 2 minutes, etc.
    That’s not necessary for 99%+ of my guests, but apparently it was necessary for you. At least that’s how I read the comments of my listeners and myself a year and a half after the debate.

  • Joe Paternoster October 20, 2006 7:07 pm

    You are sad and funny at the same time. I just found this because you were too chicken to say this on the air to my face. Because I don’t toe the Republican line and actually debated you with ideas outside of talking points you could respond to, you get upset. Then you have your producer grill my friend for personal info and have him write in on your blog during the show as though his statements are genuine, from a listener.
    Great way to get the “truth” out Mark. No wonder you won’t have me back. Got your brains beat in by someone who knows something and is willing to speak his mind. But then, I expect nothing less from your side.

  • Hanging on the cross with nuthin' to do May 10, 2005 9:34 am

    So Be It
    In the transition of quasi-land
    the muses have left me
    in a familiar place,
    alone, again
    without a song.
    The ego fills the void
    with cat-calls,
    mocking dreams,
    shocking screams.
    Crucifixion is nigh
    and is no stranger
    than years ago, stifling youth,
    now, suffocating what life is left.
    A dance without music,
    stoic stance still
    with humble pride,
    my heart beats the tempo
    for vanquished melody,
    a memory
    of intent that remains
    in recited psalms,
    saved for these moments of tribulation.