Ed Schultz Cuts & Runs From AAR

I never signed up for Ed Schultz' email list, but it seems I'm on there. Today I got an email from Ed Schultz' producer, James Holm:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

October 13, 2006 Fargo, ND ... Ed Schultz, host of America's fastest growing progressive talk radio program The Ed Schultz Show, today assured his listeners and fans that his show is independently owned, operated and in no danger of bankruptcy or other financial obstacles...

Schultz' assurances that all is well at The Ed Schultz Show and at Schultz's partner and co-owner Product 1st, the programming company owned by long-time radio executives Randy Michaels and Stu Krane, were sparked by news of  bankruptcy filings at a liberal talk network in no way related to Schultz. (my emphasis)

Why I'm getting email from Schultz, and why this pisses me off so very much, is under the cut.

I don't care for Schultz. Never have. I don't like his style, which comes off like some blowhard buttonholing you from a barstool. I don't like the fact that I've heard conservatives argue circles around him. I don't like turning on his show to hear the likes of Richard Viguerie. I loathe the fact that he sided with Joe Lieberman over Ned Lamont. And I call him "Sleep Number Schultz," because I know more about his goddam Sleep Number Bed than I do about his ill-articulated position on most issues.

His opposition to gay marriage is one thing (big tent, yadda yadda), but I'm a true single-issue voter when it comes to abortion. Schultz is opposed to overturning Roe v. Wade, but he's on the record as being anti-abortion, and that (as Sleep Number might say) just sticks in my doggone craw.

On Oct. 5, I tuned into the show because Sleep Number was going to be interviewing John Laesch, and I wanted to hear what Laesch had to say. While I was waiting, though, Schultz went to commercial and played a promo bumper that I couldn't believe.

It was some kind of martial music, and then someone - I think Schultz - came on doing the most stupidly lisping parody of a flaming queen: "G.O.P.! It'th the GAY OLD PARTY!"

Jesus Christ. So I fired up the computer and dropped an email to Schultz' producer, James Holm:

Hi James -

I tuned in to KPOJ today to hear John Laesch's appearance on the show, but I only got as far as that promo with the lisping voice and the "Gay Old Party" crack. It sounded like something I'd hear on Hannity.

Take all the shots at Foley for being a pedophile that you want...but why insult your gay listeners with that?

Are you going to run it again?

Within five minutes, I had James' response:

No, I apologize if I offended you.

Offended? No. My first response was to write back to James to tell him that I wasn't offended, it just made his boss sound like a jackass; and that you don't have to be gay to groan at such a stupid attempt at humor. If Mark Foley had been black, would Sleep Number be shuckin' and jivin' in his promos?

But I didn't bother to respond. Bad breath in a fool's face and all of that.

Apparently I wasn't the only one who'd contacted the show, because before he got to Laesch, Sleep Number was on the air "clearing up something we said" in one of those not-really apologies that puts the onus on the apologee: "We try to have fun on this show! C'mon, loosen up! Geez!"

And that was the last I thought of Sleep Number (and the last time I listened to him) until I got this email this morning, in which Big Eddie couldn't run from Air America fast enough.

"A liberal talk network in no way related to Schultz"? Hey, Big Eddie, many of them are good enough to carry your show, but they're not good enough for you to defend them? Sure, Schultz' show is syndicated by the Jones Radio Network, but "in no way related"? Here in Portland, the AAR outlet, KPOJ bumps Air America programming to carry Sleep Number, as do a number of other Air America stations.

Millions of his listeners come to his show over Air America airwaves. Air America is in trouble. And his first response to AAR's bankruptcy filing is to cut and run from the network...to the point where he can't even mention its goddam name in a press release?

Just to be sure I wasn't missing some message of support, I checked his site in case I missed some statement of thanks, of support, of solidarity with Air America. Instead, all I found was this page, which repeats the AP story about AAR's bankruptcy filing and then links to The Smoking Gun's story about the filing.

Since Sleep Number obviously couldn't give a damn about Air America's problems, I'm wondering why Air America gives a damn about Sleep Number.

I'll be writing to my AAR station, KPOJ-AM, and asking them why they support a talk show host that doesn't support them when they're in trouble, and won't even mention their name.

You're a class act, Big Eddie. Triple dubya dot bye.

•  Gotta agree with you

  I have Sirius right near my computer and often listen and read. I can take about a half hour of Big Eddie. He is just so blow-hardy and his former Republican leanings shine through. I think Sleep Number is a heavy duty Red company (according to Buy BLue) and I wonder why they advertise so heavily on Sirius Left?

  by oakroyd on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 02:10:20 PM PDT

  •  They advertise heavily on Franken.

    Franken even does a spot for them personally.

    by tbetz on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 02:13:54 PM PDT

  •  I rarely get past

    Old Blowhard's endless sports and fishing stories.  "We've got a full plate today", and plutonium could decompose into chalkdust while waiting for him to get to that plate.

    Oh, and he sounds just like Rush.

    by corvo on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 02:29:28 PM PDT

  •  I'd guess they are red

    I only think they are because they seem to have one advertising method- talk show hosts.  Count em up.  

    by otto on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 02:35:45 PM PDT

    •  I can take or leave Ed Schultz, but

      I have to defend Select Comfort. After 10+ years of chronic low back pain, I bought a Select Comfort bed in 2000, and have had NO problems. I really love it, so much so that I hardly ever post, but will to defend their

      by chococat on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 02:46:12 PM PDT

      •  product.

        Sorry.

        by chococat on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 02:47:08 PM PDT

      •  You gotta get on the air with that story

        I bet they'd play it.  

        "Me and my liberal back had pains for all those years, but when I finally bought a select comfort bed, my back troubles eased up.  Now, I'm finally able to battle the vast right wing conspiracy in comfort!"

        by otto on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 02:55:42 PM PDT

•  KPOJ is not Air America either.

  KPOJ is one of many Clear Channel stations that carry progressive talkers from a number of sources including Jones Network, WOR Syndication, and Air America Radio.  

  Dumping on Air America isn't dumping on KPOJ.  KPOJ probably won't care much about what you wrote.

  by tbetz on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 02:13:18 PM PDT

  •  They're not?

    KPOJ is one of many Clear Channel stations that carry progressive talkers from a number of sources including Jones Network, WOR Syndication, and Air America Radio.

    They're listed on AAR's station page, so I don't get it. Are there various levels of affiliates or something?

    by Gutterboy on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 02:16:18 PM PDT

    •  that's a list of radio stations...

      that carry AAR programming, not stations that they own.  MANY MANY of them are owned by Clear Channel, which I see as a potential problem if they wanted to do away with AAR.

      by billlaurelMD on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 02:35:57 PM PDT

    •  Bingo

      KPOJ syndicates AAR content; they are not an AAR affiliate. If AAR folds, KPOJ will probably just take up whatever syndication deals they can from individual players. Worst case is that they lose Randi and have to replace her with Thom Hartmann -- which, IMO, would not at all suck.

      by maxomai on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 02:38:35 PM PDT

      •  OK, thanks for the explanation

        Wish that KPOJ would carry Stephanie Miller; I'd certainly be listening in the afternoons if that were the case.

        by Gutterboy on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 02:43:27 PM PDT

    •  fwiw

      I don't much like Shultz, but I was delighted when I moved to Syracuse, that at the very least the local clear channel (WSYR) had Shultz on in the early evening, in between all the crap they have like Hannity, Glenn Beck and so on.
      I flipped it on one night when I was out and about and no Shultz. And gone from the lineup on their site. Its really too bad too, this town could use some liberal programming! We're JUST out of range of the Ithaca AAR signal, I can't pick it up until I get down around Cortland on I81.

      With that said, I REALLY miss The Mic  92.1 (FM!) in Madison Wisconsin. So much so that I stream AAR through them on my computer when I want to listen to AAR (who fwiw also carry Shultz and Stephanie Miller, as well as some great local programming)

      by mytribe on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 03:22:17 PM PDT

    •  Jones Radio Network

      Ed Schlutz and Stephanie Miller work for the "Jones Radio Network" which is a different company than Air America Radio. So yes, this won't affect him. Also, Air America Radio and the Jones Radio Network both own NO radio stations, they just produce the shows and syndicate them out. A lot of the stations (maybe half) that play them are owned by Clear Channel, the same company that broadcasts Rush Limpballs. Clear Channel doesn't care who they make their money off of. BTW, I don't care much for Ed either. He brags that he's "a former Republican" so "he knows how to talk to those people". I think he knows how to talk to those people just a little to well.

      by William Domingo on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 05:27:39 PM PDT

•  Right on

  The station that carries AAR here has Thom Hartmann (blech) followed by Eddie (double blech).  Soooo, the good hosts are on only early in the morning or in the late afternoon (when you've had it up to here with everyone and their opinions).  Bummer.  

  by newhorizon on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 02:23:37 PM PDT

  •  Curious about Hartmann

    WHat is it you don't like about Hartmann?  

    I like his show.  

    by otto on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 02:25:43 PM PDT

    •  Yeah, I agree

      with you...If not for Thom Hartmann, hmm, not much else to compare with...Randi Rhodes is AAR and I like her show, but in order to listen to it here, I have to podcast or listen in the delay broadcast at like 11 PM time slot.

      It never made sense to me what our local "progressive talk" station does: They pre-empt Thom H. live show for Ed Shultz, and then play the last hour of Thom after Ed later in the day..

      by Rumour95 on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 03:01:41 PM PDT

    •  I Think Hartman's Terrific!!! n/t

      by serrano on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 03:22:57 PM PDT

  •  ???

    What's so "blech" about Thom Hartmann? He's one of the smartest and best-informed talk-show hosts on the radio.  

    by Renaldo Migaldi on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 02:30:12 PM PDT

    •  Matter of taste, that's all... :) n/t

      by newhorizon on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 03:59:19 PM PDT

      •  Too cerebral? n/t

        by kestrel9000 on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 05:10:37 PM PDT

        •  Hardly...

          just not a show I enjoy.  That's all...

          by newhorizon on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 05:16:25 PM PDT

•  I Get The BIG TENT BS from time to time also

  here on DKOS. Looky...I ain't a big Ed Shultz fan at all. It's like listening to Rush Limbaugh with a lefty lean. And I truly believe ole Ed will sell us out and down the river whenever it's convenient for him to do so. He's a radio celebrity first and foremost and lets us all know that every day.

  Now...lets learn something while were at it. THAT BIG TENT that gets pulled outta all your asses whenever you find a Dem that dosen't like gays, abortion...or whatever. The BIG tent includes them who reserve the right to believe differently. You don't make the people the tent...the tent is the place you pull us all into. Get that part right and you can solve many of the fits and crud that takes place in liberal blogs when one of us says soemthing like the gay issue isn't my battle...they have that right...ya know....we bring them into our tent.

  by JellyPuddin on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 02:25:04 PM PDT

  •  About Ed

    He's a radio celebrity first and foremost and lets us all know that every day.

    Absolutely. And, IMO that's a good thing. We need radio pros on our side. Look at Rush and Hannity. They may be right wing thugs, but they are also radio personalities first and foremost. That's why they have so many listeners. Yeah, Ed could be a little better, okay, a lot better, on some of the issues. But on the whole he is touting the Dem/Progressive line, and if he draws listeners as a radio celebrity, then that's a good thing. I'll bet that Ed will be able to persuade a lot of indies and not crazy repubs to give some credit to the Dems side of things, and maybe get us a few votes or two, more than a Janine Garofolo, whom we may love and agree with, but who has no credibility with the audience that Ed is trying to reach. And that is an audiencee we need if we want to become an electoral majority.

    by mjshep on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 02:38:13 PM PDT

    •  Totally agree.

      If we're going to win congress we need the support of the middle of the roaders. Ed has a much better chance to appeal to them than say Randi Rhodes or Mike Malloy, IMO.

      I like the show and I think a lot of the criticisms in this thread are unwarranted.

      by Tuttle on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 03:04:54 PM PDT

•  Count me out

  when it comes to Ed Schultz.  Agree with you, jelly!  And, I also agree that we are entitled to say, the particulars of your battle don't interest me, but I defend your right to them.

  That is the big tent.

  by nolalily on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 02:30:45 PM PDT

•  I love Ed Schultz

  and I think there are a lot of Democrats who are against overturning Roe vs. Wade, and yet personally do not approve of abortions.  The point, my friend, is not whether or not you are in favor of abortions, the point is whether you want to use the law to ram your personal choices down the throats of other people.  

  Ed Schultz was just taking care of business when he made it clear that he is not AAR.  I think that is important for him to do.  And there is nothing wrong with it.

  If you don't like listening to him, then take your grubby little fingers and depress the button marked "OFF" on your radio.  You won't be hurting my feelings.  I appreciate that Ed is a little blow-hardy.  I know.  It's like I love Al Franken and really admire him, but just cannot listen to him for more than five minutes.  When it takes someone two minutes to get out one sentence, I just can't stand it, I get fidgety, and I gotta go!

  I strongly disapprove of your overall tone against Ed Schultz.  Ed does not do anything to engender such visceral anger, and we need to fucking stop eating our young, and we need you to direct your energy at productive things for all of us Democrats, rather than trying to get some radio station to boycott a fellow Democrat.  Write a letter to the editor telling the world why you will vote Democratic this year, and get it out of your system, for Chrisssake.

  by Dustbowl Observer on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 02:30:55 PM PDT

  •  I don't like him either...

    but I'm pretty sure he reaches people that many other left-leaning talkshow hosts would not reach.  By reach, I mean listen to.

    by billlaurelMD on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 02:38:07 PM PDT

  •  I don't listen

    If you don't like listening to him, then take your grubby little fingers and depress the button marked "OFF" on your radio.  You won't be hurting my feelings.

    Trust me, I don't listen.

    I strongly disapprove of your overall tone against Ed Schultz.  Ed does not do anything to engender such visceral anger, and we need to fucking stop eating our young, and we need you to direct your energy at productive things for all of us Democrats, rather than trying to get some radio station to boycott a fellow Democrat.

    Man, if you thought that was "visceral anger," we're really on different pages here.

    I want AAR to succeed, and if that means carrying Schultz on AAR-affiliated stations because so many people like him, that's jake with me. I have no desire to boycott him. I just can't figure out why someone who's been exposed to so many listeners who tune in for the AAR lineup felt the need not just to separate himself from AAR's troubles, but to give AAR the back of his hand in the process.

    by Gutterboy on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 03:15:07 PM PDT

    •  That is the standard disclaimer he gives

      Every time he gets an email or a call from people that confuse Ed with AAR. I do not see in it what you seem to be seeing.

      Thom Hartmann is also his own company and Stephani Miller probably is too.

      Here in Blue Seattle which already had local lefty programming on much more powerful stations, the Non AAR programming seems to be doing better than the AAR. This is also a pick and choose station owned by another conglomerate I can't remember the name of at the moment.

      Sometimes Ed is annoying but it is not because he mixes sports, hunting and fishing into his show (though I am not personally interested in doing any of them)since that keeps listeners in rural areas that otherwise would be flipping the dial.

      Ya use the bait that works. There are millions of middle of the roaders and indys that we need to vote democratic if we are ever going to win a national election. And if Ed is all we have to get to them then I say go for it.

      by NCrefugee on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 04:05:28 PM PDT

      •  Jones Radio Network

        Stephani Miller and Ed Schlutz work on the "Jones Radio Network", a different company than Air America Radio.

        google

        by William Domingo on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 06:40:13 PM PDT

        •  They are syndicated by jones

          They produce independantly via their own production companies.

          by NCrefugee on Sun Oct 15, 2006 at 06:44:19 AM PDT

  •  is Ed maybe a relative of yours?

    cause that's about the only thing that would explain this kind of crap:

    grubby little fingers

    and even then it wouldn't excuse it.

    I strongly disapprove of your overall tone against Ed Schultz.

    so go read another diary. "strongly disapprove of your overall tone"?.... how very Broderian of you.

    Ed does not do anything to engender such visceral anger

    Like supporting Joe Lieberman? or maybe doing a little homophobic skit in a lispy voice? If Limbaugh or Savage did that, we'd be all over it.

    and we need to fucking stop eating our young,

    Like by supporting Joe Lieberman (CFL) over Ned Lamont (D)?

    I kind of like Schultz myself, but it seems to me before you start telling people to get things out of their system, you need to get a few things out of your own.

    by BlueinColorado on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 03:51:07 PM PDT

    •  Great point

      Like supporting Joe Lieberman? or maybe doing a little homophobic skit in a lispy voice? If Limbaugh or Savage did that, we'd be all over it.

      Thanks. Again, someone else has put this better than I could.

      You're right - if a "wingnut" had done any of that, no one would question a hue and cry.

      I can't imagine any other self-described progressive radio host doing those things, but that's what makes Schultz Schultz.

      I don't want to change his mind; I don't want to boycott him; I don't want any of those things. I just don't listen to him.

      by Gutterboy on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 04:03:14 PM PDT

  •  Ed is spot on

    as far as im concerned

    by redandfred on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 04:47:26 PM PDT

•  Blowhard

  I've always wondered how long it will take before Ed shows up in the dictionary next to Blowhard.  Beyond that I can't say it breaks my heart that AAR isn't thriving.  I've always thought that the Barnum & Bailey media model the right uses is something the left should avoid. I can usually only last five minutes with Al or Ed or Randi before I need a palate cleanser.

  by word player on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 02:32:12 PM PDT

•  Ed Schultz isn't part of Air America

  He wanted to assure his listeners he wasn't leaving the air.

  They have different OWNERSHIP groups. Why is that so hard to understand.

  by Use Common Sense on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 02:32:22 PM PDT

  •  No kidding ...

    ... it's just as simple as that!

    by dobie on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 02:55:24 PM PDT

•  I don't understand...

  ...the contention here.

  Ed Shultz is not and has never been part of AAR.  Many AAR stations also carry Ed Shultz but that doesn't not mean there is an association.

  With AAR filing chapter 11, Shultz probably just wanted to make sure his listeners know that his show is not part of that organization.  So what?

  I don't care much for him either.  He sounds entirely too much like Rush Limbaugh for me.  But I don't understand being angry with him for saying he's not with AAR when he is not in fact professionaly affiliated with AAR.  

  We have a local radio host (Jay Marvin) who is on the local AAR affiliate who is ALSO not part of AAR.  So what?  AAR was the first but now there are several liberal radio shows that are not AAR.  Is that a bad thing?

  by DawnG on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 02:34:24 PM PDT

  •  What AAR has done correctly

    They primed a market that wouldn't have existed otherwise.  They spent a lot of money getting names out on the air, getting other big names on their 90 or so stations, and generally developing liberal radio talent and possibilities.  

    Many of those names will spread.  If AAR folds, which I doubt it will, those stations where it was successful will remain on the air with a similar format.

    by otto on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 02:41:00 PM PDT

  •  If by ...

    ... "He sounds entirely too much like Rush Limbaugh for me" you mean simply the voice and the loud factor (they are both big guys with booming personas), then I'd agree.  But, are they alike in any other way?

    by dobie on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 03:05:45 PM PDT

    •  well...

      ...both have a very exaggerated sense of the value of their own opinion.  But Big Eddie isn't in any way insulting or deroggetory as the dittomaster.

      by DawnG on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 06:37:04 PM PDT

•  Not a Schultz fan

  Schultz has never been part of AAR.  He is a big beneficiary of the network, so I'm kind of surprised that he would take time on his show to mention they're problems, other than to clear up his affiliation.

  Schultz really is an interesting case.  I don't know that he is a liberal, so much as an ant-stupidity guy.  RIght now, the stupidity is being held firmly by the Republicans.

  I think he represents a good portion of the US that should consider themselves liberal, or at least who should consider themelves, as well as most liberals, part of the mainstream.

  He is one of the few people on the radio who actively promotes unions.  

  by otto on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 02:34:46 PM PDT

  •  the recommend is for...

    your mention of his support for unions.  REALLY important.

    by billlaurelMD on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 02:39:21 PM PDT

    •  Nobody else does

      The anti-union shit really gets to me. I haven't been a member of a union in about 10 years, but I'll return to union membership in September.  I plan to be really active in union politics.  

      Having unions, which are very democratic, is one additional tool in fighting a lot of serious problems we see today.  We only have about 9% of our private workforce unionized anymore.  

      by otto on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 02:44:00 PM PDT

•  I like Schultz. Compared to Lynn Samuels

  he is a freakin' genius. And frankly, I get disgusted with the Young Turks' anecdotes about getting blowjobs in Vegas, or Jill's confessionals about things she's done with boyfriends. Granted, my sense of humor can be incredibly earthy, but not in front of hundreds of thousands of listeners who may be looking for a credible reason to turn to the Democratic party. What I like about Schultz is partly that he is so disarming to the other side. He DOESN'T have dogmatic positions on a lot of things, which means conservatives call in and actually express some agreement with him from time to time, and when they don't, I've heard Schultz chew them up before. And by the way, I like Randi Rhoades and have listened to her when Sirius used to carry AAR, but I've heard Randi get whipped by callers, so Schultz isn't exactly alone on that score.

  by steve davis on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 02:35:16 PM PDT

•  Not Too Cool.

  I don't see anything wrong with Shultz assuring people that he's not in bankruptcy.

  The real issue is that Eddie should recognize that he couldn't be where he is without Air America.  Up until AAR there were no stations with a full slate of liberal talk.  Guys like Shultz were around, but sandwiched between a bunch of wingnuts so it was hard to build an audience.

  What AAR did was supply a full slate of programming so that a station could flip its entire format to liberal talk.  Once they did that then of course stations could mix and match AAR shows with local talent and other syndicated shows like Ed's and Stephanie Miller.  Point is, there wouldn't be almost 100 stations doing full time progressive talk to even think about syndicating Ed without AAR to jumpstart the process.

  by Tod on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 02:43:41 PM PDT

  •  Yeah, like I said

    That's what I'm talking about, but Schultz has never gotten over himself to realize that he wouldn't be there without them.  

    by otto on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 02:44:53 PM PDT

    •  He was there before AAR, he's bigger than AAR ...

      ... and he'll still be there if and when AAR is not there.

      by RonK Seattle on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 03:05:27 PM PDT

      •  ummm.

        I don't know.  

        It could be snark.  

        Um.  It looks like snark.  

        It smells like snark.  

        Tastes like snark.  

        Careful, don't step in it.  

        by otto on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 03:12:13 PM PDT

        •  No, plain fact - and well known to anyone ...

          ... who's been paying any attention to the AAR saga.

          by RonK Seattle on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 03:19:07 PM PDT

          •  Ron is Right!

            I can say that I do not agree with everything that Ed Schultz says but he is a down to earth guy.  The problem here at KOS is the high intense need for purity.  And I am speaking more than just the big tent.  We ask voters to vote for the left (Democrats) but get and we dont care if they are right of cetner if they vote for us.  But we get riled if our media types are not completely pure. Go figure.

            Thus we see attacks against AAR when they fired Maron or made other unpopular decisions.  Frankly we are just goddamn lucky that anyone would say something positive at all about liberals, progressives, unions or anyone else we can relate to.  

            Ed may not be your cup of tea but he is invited regularly to address the union converntions because he gets the lunchbox issues that the effite 52nd keyboard brigade sometimes just does not get.  I dont hunt of fish, but I live int he west and know that it is a significant part of many middle class families.  They can relate to Big Ed's stories about hunting and fishing.  BTW the obvious linkage about the environment and sportsman should not be discounted so quickly either.

            If you cannot tolerate the Eddie show then turn the station to Hannity and get your blood to boil for a good reason and not the neverending search for purity oin your own side.  Got news for you - it just does not exist.

            by Brother Dave on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 03:44:20 PM PDT

            •  Do you not see the irony here?

              If you cannot tolerate the Eddie show then turn the station to Hannity and get your blood to boil for a good reason and not the neverending search for purity oin your own side.

              If I don't like Schultz, tune into Hannity?

              And you say that the problem at Kos is "the high intense need for purity"?

              Do you not see the irony?

              by Gutterboy on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 03:49:04 PM PDT

              •  No irony here

                I think it was a polite way to tell ya to just turn it off if you don't like it.

                It's your diary and you can whine all you want about what you don't like. But don't act like everyone who disagrees with you is attacking you.

                I listen about 10 hours a day but sometimes I have to turn it off when a host or more often a guest says something that raises my blood pressure.

                Thats what that little knob is for.

                by NCrefugee on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 04:16:02 PM PDT

            •  Franken and Seder

              both support organized labor. I'm sure Randi Rhodes does too. They may not talk the talk as well as Schultz, but they're not DLC'ers, not even Franken.

              by BlueinColorado on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 03:59:46 PM PDT

          •  BUT

            How many stations was Ed on before Air America?

            It wasn't 100.

            Ed was apparently just starting his national show when AAR went on the air.  As near as I can tell he was on XM Radio but he wasn't in any major media markets.  He may not have even been on the air in North Dakota.

            No question Ed has done well, but he couldn't be on 100 stations if there weren't 100 stations programming progressive talk.  What AAR did is provide a complete slate of programming so stations could make the format change.  That helped Ed a lot.

            by Tod on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 04:01:27 PM PDT

            •  How many stations was AAR on before AAR?

              Was AAR ever bigger than Ed?

              Ed understands radio, he takes calls, and he has an audience. AAR could learn something.

              And what's all this "cut and run" bullcrap?

              by RonK Seattle on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 04:15:40 PM PDT

              •  Didn't Exactly Answer the Question.

                One of the problems with AAR is that in order to fill out a full day of liberal talk they brought in a lot of people who were not radio pros, and it showed.  Rachel Maddow is a pro, and it also shows.  Randi Rhodes is a pro and it shows, even if her style isn't exactly my taste.

                I'm not sure how Ed's audiences compare with Franken or some of the others.

                Still, however good Ed is, he wouldn't be where he is without a bunch of other shows to fill out a full day of liberal talk.  AAR did that for him and it would be nice if Ed, and you, could at least give them credit for that.

                by Tod on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 05:28:33 PM PDT

                •  Ed made his bones on mixed-format stations

                  And Ed never dissed AAR.

                  What's the beef? You don't like him? Don't listen.

                  by RonK Seattle on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 06:00:08 PM PDT

                  •  Still Didn't Answer the Question.

                    HOW MANY stations did Ed make his bones on before AAR?

                    Randi Roades made her bones before AAR too.

                    How many of the stations Ed is on today are really mixed format and how many are liberal talk?

                    Geeze, it's hard to get a straight answer.

                    by Tod on Sat Oct 14, 2006 at 12:34:08 AM PDT

                    •  It's a stupid question in a malformed argument

                      My rsponse was intended only to make that clear.

                      No wonder AAR does better at making enemies than building communities.

                      by RonK Seattle on Sat Oct 14, 2006 at 06:34:37 AM PDT

                      •  No

                        Not stupid, just one you don't want to answer, because we both know the answer.

                        by Tod on Sun Oct 15, 2006 at 11:19:55 PM PDT

                        •  Is it hotter in summer than it is in the South?

                          Sheesh.

                          by RonK Seattle on Mon Oct 16, 2006 at 08:42:38 AM PDT

            •  gotta agree with Ron

              Ed's been doing his thing for a long, long time.  Just because there hasn't been a "progressive talk network" doesn't mean that there hasn't been progressive talk.

              by kineticdissent on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 06:45:36 PM PDT

        •  No, it's simply a fact

          that Schultz got started well before AAR, and that he now has more stations and listeners than does anyone on AAR. He's popular.

          by Renaldo Migaldi on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 03:29:25 PM PDT

  •  You put it better than I did...

    I don't see anything wrong with Shultz assuring people that he's not in bankruptcy.

    The real issue is that Eddie should recognize that he couldn't be where he is without Air America.

    Yeah, that was what got me too - you'd think that he'd recognize that and stick by those that brung him to the dance, but he couldn't wait to separate himself fast enough.

    Nothing wrong with saying "Hey, we're doing fine," but this just seemed an incredible diss of Air America - its hosts and its listeners.

    by Gutterboy on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 02:46:39 PM PDT

•  Such vitriol is just stunning....

  ...I'm simply floored by all this excoriation of the most successful progressive radio host in America.

  First of all, he's NOT AAR, never was, and never will be.  So your title is completly bogus and false.  Completely.  "Cut and Run" from an entity he doesn't even work for??  WTF?  Why would you expect support or solidarity for a company he has no connection to?

  And your angry because they offended you, then apologized for it?  Do you think Hannity would have apologized?  Boortz?  Are you angry at the apology, or unable to accept it?  I don't get the point of that story.

  A hat tip to those of you who can tolerate 3 straight hours of pure politics, with no side stories, no tangents.  Y'all who enjoy three full hours, 5 days a week with nothing but D vs. R, all the time, period.  Me...I LIKE the occasional segways into sports, hunting, fishing, N. Dakota, etc.  Maybe I'm just not rabid enough...not a good enough progressive.

  by topicalstorm on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 02:48:45 PM PDT

  •  And Shultz actually takes calls ...

    .... and let's them TALK.  Now, sometimes that makes me crazy, because he lets callers who are saying something I don't want to hear, go on and on.  But really, if you're going to take calls, what do you want, a screener who you have to "game" or lie to, to get on, only to have the host push the kill button on you as soon as you say something he doesn't like?  Or, a guy who doesn't screen and hears you out?  I'll take Ed.  (And, the union thing is significant.)

    by dobie on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 03:00:39 PM PDT

    •  BUt...

      He is also somewhat uninformed on the subjects.  He'll let people talk.  I have always thought that he gets some personal benefit out of his show format which is that he doesn't have to prepare as much as some other hosts.  

      It's easier to allow the callers to make the show.  

      by otto on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 03:11:12 PM PDT

      •  that's misleading...

        ...yes, he takes lots of calls.  But to imply that's the backbone of his show is not true.  He has some of the most relevant Democratic politicians on.  Kerry...Reid...Dorgan...

        Diff styles for diff people, I guess.  I like him b/c I don't want 3 straight hours of pure politics.  This is why I also enjoy Boortz.  5-10 minute stories about aviation, recreation, and vacations are just fine with me.  

        by topicalstorm on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 03:17:24 PM PDT

        •  He does, from time to time

          Not very often, really.  He does get some good guests on.  That doesn't add to his knoweledge, though.  He's still pretty uninformed on many topics.  

          I used to listen to him much more, but now... not so much.  

          by otto on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 03:21:03 PM PDT

  •  Not angry. Not offended.

    First of all, he's NOT AAR, never was, and never will be.  So your title is completly bogus and false.  Completely.  "Cut and Run" from an entity he doesn't even work for??  WTF?  Why would you expect support or solidarity for a company he has no connection to?

    Because his show is broadcast over many of those AAR-affiliated stations.

    And your angry because they offended you, then apologized for it?  Do you think Hannity would have apologized?  Boortz?  Are you angry at the apology, or unable to accept it?  I don't get the point of that story.

    Neither did he, or his producer, I guess. I did appreciate the email.

    Y'all who enjoy three full hours, 5 days a week with nothing but D vs. R, all the time, period.  Me...I LIKE the occasional segways into sports, hunting, fishing, N. Dakota, etc.  Maybe I'm just not rabid enough...not a good enough progressive.

    I'm not rabid, topicalstorm. I also don't like D vs. R or any of that stuff.

    I just don't like the Schultz show, and you do. All right?

    by Gutterboy on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 03:40:51 PM PDT

•  Shultz has never been affiliated with AAR

  I'm not sure why but Ed has always been independent and NEVER affiliated with AAR. And, it used to piss him off when people thought he was. I suspect that is why they sent this out.

  Look, like him or hate him, it is his livelyhood and if I worked at Microsoft I wouldn't want to be mistaken for working at Apple.

  I really think it is that simple.

  by TekBoss on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 03:04:42 PM PDT

•  Just today on his show

  I heard Ed Schultz say that he likes Air America Radio, supports them, and hopes they emerge intact from their current bankruptcy. But it only makes sense that he would want to reassure his listeners that he's not part of Air America (which is simply a true fact), and that his show will not be affected by AAR's fortunes. I see nothing wrong with that.

  Yes, Schultz can be rather strident and bombastic, but that's an issue of style, not content. Air America's Randi Rhodes and Sam Seder can also be rather strident and bombastic. So can many other talk-show radio hosts, political and otherwise. Nothing unusual about it - it's just a characteristic of the medium. The much-noted "similarity" between Schultz and Rush Limbaugh is superficial. It has to do with the texture of Schultz's voice and delivery, not his content.

  I've heard that "Gay Old Party" promo bumper of which you speak, and I don't care for it either. But just now I also heard a caller come on Schultz's show and tell him that he was gay and not offended by it. The promo bumper is intended not as anti-gay, but anti-GOP hypocrisy: the political party that bashes gays now turns out to have more closeted gay members in it than anyone thought. Again, I find the promo bumper kind of crude and it makes me uncomfortable, but others apparently feel differently.

  I'm not one of those who doubt the sincerity of Schultz's political conversion. Some people refer to his status as a "red-meat-eatin', gun-totin' liberal" as if it were some sort of anomaly. But the reality is that here in the Midwest, there are tons of people like that. They may hold some socially conservative beliefs - but they also prefer to live and let live, they're strongly pro-union and pro-universal health care, and they think the current White House occupant is a goddamn idiot.

  I suspect that Ed Schultz will always be most popular here in the Midwest. Folks on the east and west coasts just don't seem to "get" him. But in the Midwest he's playing an important role in reaching out to radio listeners in the political center and destroying the stupid popular stereotype of liberals as effete, weak-voiced, brie-eating, Volvo-driving wusses. Schultz presents himself as a regular beer-drinking Midwestern guy who likes football and hunting - and in doing so, he reassures "Joe and Jane Beercan" that opening one's mind to liberal politcal ideas does not make you a wimp. Sure, it's just a superficial radio persona - but these things have an effect on people, and Schultz understands his medium.  

  Schultz certainly has his faults (for instance, I always wish he'd research his topics more), but I'll say this for him: of all the liberal talk shows, he's the one who gives the best sense of what's happening in Washington from hour to hour on a busy news day. Senators and Congress members are always popping in to grant quick little interviews during breaks in the floor proceedings.      

  Anyway...anyone who's willing to go on CNN (I think it was the Larry King show) and yell that "George W. Bush is the worst president in American history," as Schultz did, gets an "O.K." sign from me.  

  by Renaldo Migaldi on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 03:11:51 PM PDT

  •  Always been my opinion

    There are a lot of people on the coasts who want it to be their liberal attitudes or nothing.  I live on the coast.  

    I know that being a liberal in the center is far different.  He reaches those listeners in a way that others can't.  

    It will be interesting to see what it's like for him if this election gets won by Dems.

    by otto on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 03:16:52 PM PDT

    •  I am damn near a socialist

      But not "pure" enough for some of my vegan neighbors.

      But when I look around at the Party meetings I see plenty of fishermen and hardhats mixed in with the lawyers and retired schoolteachers staying late to vote on endorsements and campaign contributions.

      by NCrefugee on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 04:33:25 PM PDT

      •  i know what you mean

        im damn near socialist too on some public issues..but im not liberal enough for the liberals

        by redandfred on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 04:54:08 PM PDT

      •  Meh, purity vegans

        They can go fuck themselves.  

        I've been a vegetarian for more than a decade.  I have good acquaintaces who I've known for a couple years and they don't know I'm that way.  I taught my kid to not say anything about it.  It's part of life.  If they think they need to condemn you, they can go jump in pile of pig poo.

        by otto on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 06:14:24 PM PDT

  •  Bingo

    But the reality is that here in the Midwest, there are tons of people like that. They may hold some socially conservative beliefs - but they also prefer to live and let live, they're strongly pro-union and pro-universal health care, and they think the current White House occupant is a goddamn idiot.

     

    The construction workers that come into the store I work at are a rough bunch.  But they ALL have their union stickers on their hat and they don't vote against their own best interests.  I'd hate to lose these guys.

    by Dawgbro on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 04:01:08 PM PDT

    •  Also want to mention

      that Schultz's constant hunting-and-fishing references give him a credibility advantage with that crowd when it's time to talk about environmental issues.

      by Renaldo Migaldi on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 04:15:16 PM PDT

    •  There are also plenty of people like that

      in the interior western states as well: live-and let-live types who may have a strong social-traditionalist streak, but who are also open-minded toward liberal politics and who care about the common good, not just themselves. The kind of folks who elected Brian Schweitzer governor in Montana.  

      by Renaldo Migaldi on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 05:07:33 PM PDT

  •  yep

    I eat red meat, have a gun and am a hard core Dem and PCO. I don't hunt anymore and I buy my fish and have not watched a sporting event in decades.

    But Ed is reaching some of those who never picked up anything but Rush on their radio before.

    I have fired off and email when he has gotten some detail wrong and heard the correction the same hour.

    Some times I wish I could do the same for Al Franken.

    by NCrefugee on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 04:25:55 PM PDT

    •  Franken

      is a little snobby for my likes...acutally i like him the least on AAR

      by redandfred on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 04:55:21 PM PDT

•  Another had mentioned, but ...

  Seems a whole lot of folks mis-understand the business model that AAR and Jones and a whole slew of semi-independent radio stations (i.e., 3rd-party-ownership) have.

  AAR provides programming, which they deliver in syndication, preferring to sell in a full block (i.e., buy 'em all, or get none) ... their initial business model involved buying/leasing radio time from local ownership, but that model failed ... recall the Chicago fiasco ... they have since shown a willingness to allow some of their affiliated stations to include non-AAR programming (like Stephanie Miller, Big Ed, and others) ... one of their two big selling points is Al Franken (RR is the other), who will retire from broadcasting if he does challenge Norm Coleman in 2008; that'd leave AAR with only Randi Rhodes as a "demand" talent, as the rest of their shows are underperformers ... they've been unable to develop and expand talent ... Rhodes, and possibly Springer, could manage to succeed as single syndications ...

  Jones is a syndication network that organizes and places shows nationally with local radio stations ... they handle Schultz, Miller, Bill Press, Neil Boortz (yuck!), and a few others, hustling to contract their talent into markets wherever there is interest, whether the feed is live or delayed ... if AAR bankruptcy converts to chapter7 hell, it's conceivable that the talent there would look to Jones for placement on local stations that want to retain lib-news-talk format ...

  one guy i've enjoyed listening to occassionally is Lionel (syndicated, WOR networks) ... first ran across his shtick in Tampa ca. 1992 ... real hoot!

  by wystler on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 03:22:38 PM PDT

•  I like Ed

  He is pro-union, pro-increasing the minimum wage, anti-outsourcing, anti-big oil, and anti-rethug talkers like Pillbaugh (he calls them "slant heads")

  by bluestatedude on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 04:02:43 PM PDT

•  Me too

  I've gone through some phases when I could stomach Ed, and even found him enjoyable on occasion - when I could successfully tune out all his gun-promoting let's-kill-animals-with-firearms-cause-it's-a-grand-ol-American tradition crap. Btw, I've heard that people should NOT be freaking about AA's bankruptcy filing, that it's a reflection of their relationship with one of several investors, and it will all work out fine. I certainly hope that's good info. The gay-bashing audio clip was so offensive it was bizarre. I could hardly believe my ears.

  by tankej on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 04:49:53 PM PDT