Feb 14, 2014

Bombastic Bill O'Reilly: Bashed by his Favorite Paper The New York Times

The Opinion Pages|CONTRIBUTING OP-ED WRITER

Bill O’Reilly’s Gift for the Ages

FEB. 13, 2014

It’s been nearly two weeks now since Bill O’Reilly’s interview with President Obama on Super Bowl Sunday, and in the No Spin Zone of the host’s pretend world he’s still spinning the chat as the greatest conversation since Winston Churchill dined alone.

His sit-down with the president, he said, “is going to go down in journalistic history as what should be done.” And in case historians are late to the same conclusion, O’Reilly is auctioning off the notes of his questions — “they are obviously one of a kind,” he says.

Let us now praise the Bombastic One’s gift to posterity. His interview, his notes, all the ephemera should be preserved and studied. The sickness that infects news and politics, and its commensurate cynicism, can be directly traced to the creation of Fox News — “a political operation that employs journalists,” in the words of Gabriel Sherman, author of the new book on Roger Ailes, “The Loudest Voice in the Room.” There is no bigger media story in the last 50 years than the creation of a news network run by political hacks, says Sherman. I’m inclined to agree.

But just as important, civility itself took a dive with the rise of Fox, and has never recovered. The shouters, the boasters, the haters who show up at town hall meetings or pollute the Web with dark fantasies get their behavioral cues from Fox. O’Reilly is famous for telling guests to “shut up,” for cutting off people he disagrees with, for smugly praising his own performances and bringing on sycophants to do the same. By comparison, Ron Burgundy is a model of humility.

A congress where members can shout “You lie” at a president, or tweet “socialist dictator” and “Kommandant-in-chef” (sic), is another result of the vulgar forces unleashed by Fox.

Imagine Walter Cronkite, Diane Sawyer, Terry Gross or Tim Russert devoting entire shows to praising their own work. A good interview makes news, or reveals something fresh about the subject.

So, the first point for historians sniffing the odor of O’Reilly’s time capsule in 2114 is that the interview made no news. No ground was broken. It was a journalistic dud. O’Reilly himself spoke for about 40 percent of the time, and devoted 90 percent of the interview to “the full Fox scandal grab bag,” as Jon Stewart called it.

O’Reilly, in four days of talking about himself after the interview, said his role is to hold politicians accountable. If only. Remember how accountable he held George W. Bush when the president took the country to war on a lie, bankrupting the nation in the process? You don’t? Here’s a sample, from a 2004 interview with Bush, then in a heated election contest with John Kerry. That September, a series of incendiary ads, questioning the military service of Kerry in Vietnam, was a hot topic.

O’Reilly: “You didn’t know anything about the Swift Boat ads before they went on the air, did you?”

Bush: “No, I didn’t.”

O’Reilly: “Did Karl Rove know anything about it?”

Bush: “I don’t think so.”

In fact, records show that the bulk of the funding for those smears came from two men with close ties to Bush — one a longtime associate of Karl Rove’s, something that was easily found by a document search.

O’Reilly then dismissed as “propaganda” questions about whether the combination of massive tax cuts and two costly wars might leave the country broke. But he did drill Bush on why there are so many liberal college professors and “pinheads” at Harvard and Yale.

The biggest issue at the time was how the United States could be fooled into going to war over nonexistence weapons of mass destruction.

O’Reilly: “What happened to Saddam’s chemical arsenal? Do you know?”

Bush: “No, I don’t.”

O’Reilly: “He hasn’t given us much, has he?”

Other news organizations, The New York Times among them, were less watchdog than lapdog at times as well. But from beginning of this debacle to the mission-accomplished end, Fox worked closely with the White House. Ailes offered strategic advice in the run-up to the war, and Fox was the lead cheerleader. The same Fox host who says his job is to hold politicians accountable actually warned his fellow citizens not to raise questions or protest.

“Americans, and indeed our allies who actively work against our military once the war is underway, will be considered enemies of the state by me,” said O’Reilly. “Just fair warning to you, Barbra Streisand, and others who see the world as you do.”

Since Benghazi dominated O’Reilly’s interview with Obama, it’s fair to check how many times O’Reilly asked Bush about at least six attacks on United States embassies and consulates during his first term. Zero. It never came up in three long interviews, according to the transcripts Fox posted.

Little wonder that Bush felt right at home with O’Reilly. “I really enjoy how you interview people and I appreciate you giving me a chance to come on and have, what we say in Texas, ‘just a visit.'”

Just a visit for one president, a trip to the scandal trough for another. Should O’Reilly ever sit for an interview on his own past, on terms he applies to Fox’s enemies, it would include questions about the lawsuit from a former subordinate who complained of “constant and relentless sexual harassment.” No spin there. No questions either. After a reported $10 million settlement was paid to keep the details inside Fox, O’Reilly said, “This brutal ordeal is now officially over, and I will never speak of it again.”

We could ask O’Reilly about the softball interview he did with former Governor Mike Huckabee concerning the felon he let out of prison early in Arkansas who went on to murder four police officers. This kind of politician should be a punching bag for O’Reilly, Willie Horton-ized to a pulp. Unless, of course, he worked for Fox. O’Reilly praised his colleague as “a stand-up guy.”

From the War on Christmas to the Frankenstein monster of the Tea Party, Fox’s creations have been uniformly bad for American life. Regular viewers of Fox are less-well-informed than people who are exposed to no media. So yes, future generations should study O’Reilly’s interview. Learn from it, as with all mistakes of history, lest it be repeated.

Al Franken: He's Doing a Good Job in Washington and Everything but is he Still Funny?

STAR TRIBUNE: WHO’S THE REAL AL FRANKEN? A LOOK AT A SENATOR’S TRANSFORMATION

Al Franken’s transformation from spicy comic to wonkish senator has been nothing short of breathtaking. Five years ago, the risk of encountering Franken was that he’d tell a funny story of the sort that would make your mother blush. Now the risk is that he’d make your eyes glaze over with the inside dope on Washington legislation. Franken has become, with no irony intended, a serious man.

“Is it as much fun being a senator as it was working on ‘Saturday Night Live,’?” he asks, reciting a question he often gets. “The answer is no.” But he goes on to say that people’s careers often take new turns. “This is the best job I’ve ever had,” he says, “because its purpose is to improve other people’s lives, and when that happens everything else is worth it.”

“Everything else” is the endless partisan bickering and systematic dysfunction that have led many ordinary people to give up on government and some scholars to conclude that the Constitution no longer works. But Franken, a Democrat, who’s rated among the half-dozen most liberal senators, insists that there’s another Washington hiding in the nooks and crannies, one that’s fully functional and brimming with bipartisan cooperation, even bipartisan friendship. “That’s really what the job is about,” he says.

Take, for example, the new restrictions on large-scale pharmaceutical compounding that Franken and Republican Pat Roberts of Kansas pushed through the Senate last year. Federal investigators had traced contaminated drugs that caused 750 cases of fungal meningitis and 64 deaths to a careless drug compounding operation in Massachusetts. Its tainted drugs were shipped to 18 states. At a tearful meeting last month in Franken’s St. Paul office, two Minnesota survivors dropped by to thank Franken and to describe the painful illness that continues to threaten their lives. It was a heartbreaking scene. And it showed an emotional side of Franken that most voters haven’t imagined.

But it also prompts a question as Franken braces for a re-election challenge this year: Who is this new Al Franken? His opponents tend to see him wearing a kind of disguise, beneath which lurks the same old prankster who wrote books like “Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot” and “Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them,” wickedly funny essays with a streak of mean running through them. In short, they doubt the genuineness of the new Franken.

Friends, on the other hand, see common threads running through Franken’s career, from comic to satirist to senator — namely, his intense interest in public affairs, his appetite for detail, and his strong sense of populist outrage, now tempered by age and position. For them, Franken has emerged as a mature version of his former self, or, in political terms, a buttoned-down version of Paul Wellstone, without the fizz.

Franken, himself, traces his political awareness to his father, who grew up a Jacob Javits Republican in New York and eventually moved his young family west, first to Albert Lea, then to the Twin Cities suburbs. Father and son would pull out the TV trays at dinnertime and watch the news together, most memorably the civil-rights drama of the early 1960s, and most vividly the scenes of white police officers attacking and beating black demonstrators. “No Jew can be for that,” Franken recalls his dad telling him.

In 1964, when Republican presidential nominee Barry Goldwater failed to support the Civil Rights Act, Joe Franken switched parties. And his son began sipping St. Louis Park’s extraordinary brew of politics and art, a mixture that would produce journalist Tom Friedman, satirist Tom Davis, filmmakers Joel and Ethan Coen, and musicians Sharon Isbin and Peter Himmelman, among others. The Blake School, Harvard University and Dudley Riggs’ Brave New Workshop sharpened Franken’s sense of irreverence and launched him toward a brand of politically edged comedy, eventually as a writer and occasional performer on “SNL” and as a talk-radio host who tried to challenge the conservatives’ domination of the air waves.

But Franken’s experience as a public figure did not prepare him for elective office. Early in his Senate campaign, he struggled to find the proper persona between comic and serious candidate. Speaking from the bimah (pulpit) at Temple Israel in Minneapolis, Franken told a graphic Buddy Hackett joke about male genitals. The response was shock and embarrassment. It may have been a moment of clarity for Franken: What works on the Borscht Belt or in Las Vegas is way, way out of bounds for a politician in the American heartland, especially in a sacred setting.

Later, during the momentous recount that followed the 2008 election, Hillary Rodham Clinton’s chief of staff in the Senate, Tamera Luzzatto, hammered home a similar point. Don’t take advantage of your celebrity, she told him. Avoid the national spotlight. Keep your head down. Work hard. Take care of constituents. Build a loyal staff. Earn the respect of your colleagues in both parties.

Not the Ted Cruz of the left

It’s advice that Franken has followed almost too faithfully. “No one ever thought that Al Franken would be boring, but he’s taught himself a whole new skill set,” said University of Minnesota political scientist Larry Jacobs. “There’s nothing in his past to suggest that he could be this disciplined and this effective. He has greatly exceeded expectations.”

“He could have been the Ted Cruz of the left, but that has clearly not happened,” said Carleton College’s Steven Schier. “Turns out that the court jester was really an accountant.”

Actually, Franken has employed some of his satirist skills in the Senate, namely his talent for scanning the news and selecting his targets — not for comedy sketches but for legislation. “I don’t know of any first-term senator who has had such a broad sweep of accomplishments,” said Norman Ornstein, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and one of the nation’s foremost experts on Congress. (Ornstein, by the way, grew up in St. Louis Park, a few blocks from Franken, and considers him a personal friend.)

Perhaps the best example of Franken’s sharp eye was noticing that Dodd-Frank, the law aimed at a preventing another 2008-type financial meltdown, had failed to discourage what Franken saw as a too-cozy relationship between the credit rating agencies and the Wall Street investment banks. Franken’s clear impression was that the agencies gave AAA ratings to “junk” in exchange for continued business from the banks. “That was the cause of all this in the first place,” he said. “This is a conflict of interest, clear as day.”

While he’s still working to amend that law — “I’m on it like a dog with a bone” — many of his other initiatives have been passed, nearly all of them with the help of Republican partners. Among Franken’s main interests: privacy, technology, workforce development, veterans, health care, renewable energy and agriculture. Perhaps the best way to summarize his legislative work is to ask some of the questions he asked over the last five years:

Should insurance companies under Obamacare be required to spend 80 percent of premiums on actual care rather than on administrative expenses? Should the developers of smartphones and mobile apps be required to get customers’ consent before tracking their locations? Should the federal government decline to do business with companies that require employees to give up the right to sue for sexual harassment or rape at work?

Should partnerships between private-sector employers and community/technical colleges be strengthened? Should veterans have better health care options in rural areas? Might service dogs help wounded veterans adjust to civilian life? Should diabetes prevention be a higher priority in health care? Should landlords be prohibited from evicting women from federally supported housing because they were beat up or sexually assaulted? Should spy agencies be required to release more details about their surveillance programs?

He believes that the answer to each of those questions is yes. Franken owes much of his success so far to his ability to forge alliances, even friendships, with Republican senators. A sense of humor on both sides can break down a lot of barriers, he said. “They figured out pretty quickly that I laugh a lot.”

At the same time, he has emerged as perhaps the Senate’s toughest critic of corporate power, especially in the wake of the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United decision, allowing unlimited corporate contributions to politicians. “They gave corporations a blank check to utterly destroy our political system,” he told his colleagues in 2012.

copied from alfranken.com

Feb 13, 2014

Blogging the newsbusters by chloe louise...this is a tough group

only a minute to argue before Perry Mason but I will do my best......

talking about Bill O'Reilly.........he is a bully

Like BO and his recent word of the day all of you busters are so obtuse.

Talking about the civil rights movement of the 60's and the Reverend Al Sharpton.

Agree with him or not, this individual really has something to be happy about now, but there is still work to do. Why can't Bill acknowledge his happiness for once for a job well done...no BO continually marginalizes this idea by calling Al Sharpton a thug when he attended the state dinner for the President of France--the name of which Bill could not even pronounce---the H is silent.

Bill is jealous and spiteful because he has been left out and the Rev has been included.

Let him be happy for the reverend instead of calling him names and laughing at him...constantly. There is the devil at work right there if you want to go into it--trying to steal some one's happiness.

Let Bill grow up......Eddie needs to be counseled again by Wally--again, he has the mentality of a teenager

Now, I will be taking Ronald to the dog park after Perry and I do not want anyone to say anything mean about my group.....me, ronnie, Al, Geraldo, Pres. Obama, Hillary, the cats,the dems....until I can get back and defend myself.

Click here to take survey

Pattern Cutting Tutorial: How To Fit Elasticated Waistband And Elastic C...

Bill O'Reilly: Word of the day--Grace--you have none.

Writing to Erik Wemple of the Washington Post trying to attract attention.......

I'm really writing about O'Reilly.

What did you think of Geraldo last Fri calling out O'Reilly on disrespect during his interview with the President.

I thought it needed to be said. I watched that interview and I felt like Bill was baiting our President for a gang brawl.

Something about it really made me sick.

Last evening talking abut the state dinner he referred to Rev Al Sharpton as a thug.

Word of the day...grace....Bill has none.

He is constantly poking a stick in the eye of black America.

I thought Geraldo hit the nail on the head when he said he is the first African-American President and this is a huge deal.

Just wondering if you will write about it because people will pay attention to what you say.

It hurts my feelings.

Right, I do write about it but you might have a few more readers.

--
chloelouise

Feb 12, 2014

The Dangerous Self-Love of Bill O'Reilly

Bill O'Reilly is an extremely dangerous individual and here is why.

He acts as if he is trying to enlighten people with information, no spin and fair and balanced, as he often likes to say.

It does not take long after listening to him to see his real views.

He is really not that skillful in cloaking his actual thoughts in trying to shout about how he was respectful to the President in his recent interview.

Where he could give listeners information he uses those chances to create ill-will and a atmosphere of hate against our President.

Just as an example--health care--now people actually have access to health care like all of the other advanced nations of our world--he says he wants health care but we certainly cannot give the credit to President Obama.

He said one day the government just can't do it.

But, in fact, our system for providing medical services to the citizens was in an expensive state of failure.

While the ACA may not have all of the bugs ironed out it is certainly a step in the right direction.

As his buddy Charles Krauthammer tried to say--we have the best health care system in the world--actually that is not true. It would be interesting to see where he is getting his facts.

The right tries to always insist that we are the only great country and we have to be the best--our health care in the current state is not the best.

We did not even have access for all of the citizens for preventative health care.

Instead of giving information to those who may be unfamiliar with Barack Obama Mr. O'Reilly uses it as a means to instill fear.

He is bogus, at best.

He is the fox news personification of Eddie Haskell.......an arrogant teenager.

Instead of giving facts and info as he claims he uses semi-facts to instill fear in the citizens of the United States who mistakenly think they are being enlightened. Instead they are just being used for his sick agenda.

Sewing a cute, casual jacket

Create a Good Narrative Short Film Step 8.jpg

sewing a cute casual jacket......and flattering, too.

this pic is copied from a wikihow on internet marketing.

finding the cute, casual jacket to wear every day.

comfortable and easy fabric that maintains its shape.

Feb 11, 2014

Geraldo Rivera tries to talk to Eddie Haskell, I mean Bill O'Reilly

Watching Geraldo on the radio--streaming WABC.

Geraldo's caller Elanor makes a good point--Geraldo Radio, WABC this morning from New York.....

O'Reilly scrutinized President Obama and had a love fest with Ted Nugent, he did no push back at all.

Still talking about the interview of Fox News television host Bill O'Reilly with President Obama right before the Superbowl.

Geraldo Rivera, Fox News Host, WABC Radio Host and Fox News Lationo contributor guested on O'Reilly this past Frday evening to try an school the arrogant one on his misdeeds during the interview.

There was a disgusting element to it when Bill leaned in towards our President as if he was baiting him for back street brawl.

The President, as usual kept his cool and did not take the bait.

Simple Simon O'Reilly really thought he was going to show President Obama the tough questions the rest of the media refuse to ask Barack Obama.

Geraldo told Bill he was plain disrespectful.

A black caller said we have been here for over 200 years and only white people are in the presidential office......only white people and we are tired of it.

Eddie Haskell-esque Bill O'Reilly refused to understand--refuses to even try and understand he was not just offensive to President Obama but he is also poking a stick in the eye of every African-American, every person of color--every person that appreciates President Obama and the hard road he has traveled to become President. It's fine to do a hard interview but Bill was disrespectful to the office.

Bill will not admit there are a great many people in America, like Geraldo's caller said that are simply finally represented.

There is a giant group of people in the United States that have never really had the focus on them and now they are. These people are proud and happy.

Bill cannot understand this concept, Bill only sees old white rich men--Barack Obama is the President of every citizen of the United states.

Geraldo did a good job on Friday evening with O'Reilly--it should have been said. As Elenor pointed out, fair and balanced does not come into play between O'Reilly, Ted Nugent and President Obama.

Geraldo says he is Puerto Rican and Jewish--I am not for open borders but I am a compassionate person and I want people to be treated fairly.

One day a New York teacher called in to say--in the 70's her Hispanic school children were so happy and proud to see Geraldo on the television and hear a name that sounded like theirs.

Geraldo is also for health care for everyone--is he the saving grace of Fox news, or what?

Bill O'Reilly runs round the country on his gig with Dennis Miller. The tickets here in San Diego were about a hun for reg seats and 500 dollars for the meet and greet portion. Bill always says I am the only one representing the folks of America--the average working folks. I can't help but think--Bill are these your folks you're talking about--because this is certainly not a true representation of our country.

here is Geraldo and his mom copied from facebook.......

Photo: With Mama at Whispering Sands Florida! xxx

Photo: With Mama at Whispering Sands Florida! xxx

Feb 10, 2014

Why Doesn't My Life Work? Adult Children of Alcoholics

How Narcissists Catch Their Victims!

Dave Hodges Talks John B. Wells and How the Radio Actually Works

John B. Wells Fired for Being Too Popular and Truthful: An Exclusive Interview

February 6, 2014 - Activism, Featured, Main - Tagged: caravan to midnight, censorship, clear channel communications, coast to coast, crony capitalism,dave hodges, george noory, John B. Wells, premier network, the common sense show

Dave Hodges

February 6, 2014

The Common Sense Show

John B. Wells has one of the most recognized voices in America, but unfortunately a million Americans will no longer get to hear his melodious voice on Saturday nights on what was his popular Coast to Coast radio broadcast.

The following is an exclusive print interview I conducted with John B. Wells on the evening of February 5, 2014. Why was this ever-so-popular host let go by some unidentified powers that be in the corporate structure at Coast to Coast?

On the surface, the firing of John B. Wells made no sense. However, as we peel back the public veneer that is Coast to Coast, the firing of John B. Wells was inevitable.

The Glory Days of Coast to Coast Are Gone

In days gone by, Coast to Coast was once the flag ship of the alternative media, which captured 500 stations in late night radio when the show was hosted by Art Bell. Bell blazed a trail that nobody had ever traveled before, as he brought subjects to the mainstream airwaves that was unprecedented in both its subject areas and its depth of coverage.

Bell’s meteoric rise to unprecedented popularity in late night radio continued unabated until Premier purchased control of the show for $8 million dollars. That is when the trouble began for Bell in terms of retaining editorial control of his show. When Art Bell relinquished control of his program to corporate interests, Premier and ultimately Clear Channel, Coast to Coast was never the same as the show took a turn and became reflective of “the corporate message”.

The Corporate Structure of Coast to Coast

One cannot fully appreciate the termination of host John B. Wells as the “Saturday night guy” on Coast without having some understanding of the corporate structure which came to dominate the show when Art Bell relinquished control of the show.

Premiere distributes Coast to Coast for its parent company Clear Channel Communications. Clear Channel has a long and well-known history of censorship and extreme retaliation for those who do not abide by the corporate line.

Clear Channel was once a major supporter of the George W. Bush candidacy for President and they tolerated no dissension within the ranks. They were responsible for the dramatic fall of the Dixie Chicks for espousing their anti-war views with regard to the war in Iraq. And in a case of extreme censorship, with regard to a case that I have some firsthand and personal knowledge of, a popular Phoenix talk show host, Charles Goyette was blackballed by Clear Channel for similar anti-war views. Charles was actually dismissed from KFYI radio when he was the number one radio personality in Arizona and the entire Southwest. When it comes to these corporate entities, having great ratings does not insulate one from being fired. Popular talk show hosts are expected to be the guardian of the corporate gate and as you will soon read, Wells is an oracle who quotes Voltaire and tells the truth, but he was a poor night watchman of the corporate controlled gate. Wells discovered that deviating from the company line (i.e. telling the truth) shortens the professional life expectancy of its top entertainers.

The Numbers Do Not Lie

After a period of prolonged instability following the departure of Art Bell as the primary host of Coast to Coast, George Noory entered the scene in 2003 where he has since remained. However, Noory’s listening numbers are nothing to write home about. Once upon a time, some estimated that Art Bell had somewhere around 6-12 million listeners on any given night. In contrast, Noory’s numbers are a paltry 275,000 to 300,000 listeners per night. However, George Noory is the perfect front man and his numbers take on a secondary level of importance because he is very good at protecting the corporate turf and is very careful to only take risks on subjects which the corporate sponsors do not care about (e.g. crystal skulls, near death experiences, psychic mediums, etc.). Gone are the former days of Art Bell’s hard hitting journalism which made the spooks inside of the alphabet soup agencies very uncomfortable.

Coast to Coast became a “vanilla broadcast” with occasional forays into controversy with guests such Jim Marrs. However, much of Coast to Coast today is what I call disguised controversy which presents the illusion of objective journalism.

John B. Wells temporarily bridged the gap of Art Bell’s former independent style that made him so popular to the present day version of Coast to Coast. John B. Wells was clearly the shining jewel of the Coast to Coast empire.

A Disturbance In the Force

John B. Wells is a self-confessed independent maverick with a streak of independence which makes him so very likely to convey the truth on his broadcasts. Wells had actually been hosting shows on Coast to Coast since 2005 as a fill-in until he was hired as the permanent host for Saturday nights in 2011.

John B. Wells’ numbers were anywhere between 750,000 to 1.2 million listeners for any given Saturday night. This ratings disparity could not have resonated well with George Noory who is not known for being humble.

There were some who were in favor of making Wells the permanent host of the show during the week. This idea was met with draconian repression in an effort to preserve the status quo. George Noory is a great protector of the corporate interest and that is first and foremost in importance to management. This speaks to the clear message of what Coast to Coast has become. Noory’s show is the quintessential guardian of the corporate gate instead of being what it purports to be, a news dissemination source.

In his role as the Saturday night host on Coast to Coast, John B. Wells became a man trapped between his desire to expose the truth and the requirement that he walk the company line. John lamented, both publicly and privately that Coast to Coast was not his show, he was just an employee. Wells expressed the desire to do something more meaningful because there just was not enough substance on Coast to Coast. This is a statement that I wholeheartedly agree with as I found the show, under Noory’s tenure, to have slipped to the level of a typical corporate controlled media outlet.

The Beginning of the End

I first heard that John was going to begin his own independent show back in the late fall/early winter of 2013. The new show was going to be called Caravan to Midnight. I was told that he was going to try to simultaneously do both shows. I was also told that his new show would be a “no holds barred” show. It was at that time that I told my News Director, Annie De Riso, that Coast to Coast would never permit both shows to exist simultaneously. Can you imagine what the listening public would say if Wells were to interview former CIA operative Jim Garrow on his new Caravan to Midnight show and that interview was much more revealing than anything ever heard on Coast to Coast from the same guest? It would have been obvious for even the most blind to see, that Coast to Coast practices censorship. Therefore, Wells could not be allowed to broadcast on both venues.

My predictive words were to be proven true. On January 25, 2014, Wells formally announced the launch of his new show, Caravan to Midnight, which would debut on February 3, 2014. Subsequently, John was unceremoniously fired by Julie Talbot on January 28, 2014. By that evening, I noticed that every reference to John B. Wells was scrubbed from the Coast to Coast website. Please allow me to speak clearly to one key point, the firing of John B. Wells was prima fascia evidence that the corporate structure (i.e. Clear Channel) of Coast to Coast still practices the same extreme censorship as we saw with the Dixie Chicks and Charles Goyette in a case of the same song, different verse.

Censorship was already being practiced on Wells’ show as all too often, his show would experience technical failures and be taken down in large local markets by such things as Amber alerts or just plain old dead air. In contrast, Noory’s show rarely experiences the same issues. Wells said that the technical failures happened most often when he was interviewing a controversial guest in this first hour. Coincidentally, this past Sunday, my network reran the October 6, 2013 interview I did with John and the interview went silent. The commercials still played, but the dialogue between myself and John went black.

The decision to let Wells go must have been an agonizing one as Wells’s ratings were so good. However, there can be no question that Noory was instrumental in the decision to fire Wells. There can also be no doubt that George Noory’s ego was certainly a factor in dismissal of Wells. Noory’s penchant for complete control and intolerance towards dissenting opinion is well-known to many and it was only a matter of time until either Noory or Wells had to go and the corporate golden-haired boy won out over the truth teller. Interestingly, Wells never looked at his situation as a competition, as he said, “I simply focused on doing my job”. Adding fuel to the fire, I had long heard reports which stated that Noory attempted to garner key guests before Wells could interview them in an obvious attempt to close the ratings gap between he and Wells.

A Most Insincere Farewell

After I heard the news that John B. Wells was fired from Coast to Coast, I tuned into the show to hear what Noory would say about the event. The announcement by Noory that Wells was no longer a part of the show and the network was “going in a different direction”, absolutely lacked sincerity. Based on my observation of Noory’s demeanor on the night following the Well’s dismissal, it was my personal observation that Noory was pleased to have the major threat to his status as the King of late night radio banished from the scene. In addition, the corporate controlled message was preserved and everybody won when Wells was fired, except for the listening audience. Personally, I am saddened by John’s departure, however, I am relieved because I can now catch up on my sleep because there is not much worth listening to on Coast to Coast in my humble opinion.

A Victory For the Truth Movement

Never before has the alternative media seen such a seismic shift. The departure of John B. Wells from Coast to Coast represents a major shift in the demographics which will soon be flooding the truth movement. It is often said that a rising tide lifts all boats and this is the effect that Wells’ departure from Coast will have on our industry. Tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of people will defect to John’s new endeavor, Caravan to Midnight (airing Monday through Thursday from 10am-1pm CST). What command central at Coast failed to anticipate is that people largely tuned in on Saturday night to listen to John. Most do not listen to the show because of the name Coast to Coast. The people follow a specific person.

As John’s listening audience follows him to his new endeavor, many will soon discover other quality alternative programming, heretofore unknown to them. Move over people, we are about to get some more company over the next several months. History will show that the corporate structure of Coast would have been wise to follow a policy of making Wells the “controlled opposition” by presenting the illusion of media choice.

A New Beginning

John told me that many of his passions include stopping immigration so that more Americans can find work, to getting elected officials to follow the Constitution.

John’s new show, Caravan to Midnight, is totally listener supported. Subscriptions can be purchased at the website for $60 for 12 months.

The historical significance of this event cannot be overstated. John B. Wells will largely be responsible for the “true” waking up of millions of Americans. On that note, I am glad to welcome John to the alternative media, as both a friend and a colleague. I also pray for John’s well-being because the power shift that is about to occur will certainly draw the unhappy attention of the self-proclaimed power elite in this country.

copied from the commonsenseshow.com

Thanks Dave for telling how the radio works and your take on the John B. Well radio show.

Funny Lady--Alexis from Tx

‏@Mad_Humor

You took 20 minutes to text me back? Bitch I’ll take 21.

Art Bell Talks John B. Wells

Art Bell Tolls for John B. Wells!

POSTED ON FEBRUARY 7, 2014 IN MEDIA COVERAGE | 1 VIEW | LEAVE A RESPONSE

Art Bell has taken to Facebook and BELLGAB to express what some may consider support for John B. Wells ..

He wrote this on BELLGAB:

As I have posted on Facebook and as I promised on this Forum, as soon as I am released from the Sirius/XM NC I will begin streaming my own show. The article so well written about JBW only confirms what I have felt for YEARS. I might have better luck asking Julie for a release of my NC…….I say this because while I was trying to talk to Sirius/XM two days after I left, I simply could not understand why they were not responding to my offer to return if they would only allow streaming until Sirius fixed their problems, when I finally did get a response it was to inform me that Coast would be taking my spot on channel 104. It is my feeling that “they” want me kept off the air, ho hum, I will fool them by staying healthy and kicking their ass as soon as I can get free.

The article Bell is referring to is the same article that the HORROR REPORT wrote about earlier tonight.

Wells has publicly said that he never met Art Bell, but expressed the sentiment that many long time Coast listeners have had about his program: Their appreciation of a show done right..

Thanks to the Horror Report.

copied from artbell.com

Feb 8, 2014

Bill O'Reilly: A Scary Joke featuring Ellen from Newshounds

Ellen, you are right on that point.

I have praised Geraldo for standing up to O'Reilly and even O'Reilly for accepting the criticism but his interview was extremely disgusting to me.

It was as if he was really trying to hurt President Obama--he did not mention any of his accomplishmnets--it is a good thing that people now have health care thanks to him.

o'reilly has let his popularity go to his head--he is not fair and balanced--and as far as women--what woman would want to stay married to someone who doesn't let them talk, refers to them by their last name and gets in their face.

This man is scary--in same ways he is a joke but he is a scary joke.

here is Ellen from Newshounds.......

Geraldo Rivera Calls O’Reilly ‘President Of Most Of The White Guys In America

POSTED BY -1033.20PC ON FEBRUARY 08, 2014 · FLAG

Geraldo Rivera accused Bill O’Reilly of not being respectful enough to President Obama during his Super Bowl interview. The two hosts had an impassioned argument over the matter last night. But at the same time, Rivera suggested that O’Reilly was Obama’s equal on the national stage.
For the record, I agree with O’Reilly here. I do not think O’Reilly’s demeanor was in any way disrespectful to President Obama. It did not appear to me that the president was offended, either. I do think, as Jon Stewart magnificently pointed out, that the questions were little more than a chance to play GOP gotcha. And that, in my view, was disrespectful.
But here’s the part that jumped out at me from O'Reilly's discussion with Rivera last night. Rivera said, starting at about 1:49 in the video below:

This was not a classic interview. What you had here with you and President Obama was a culture clash. It is almost as if you were two equals with opposite worldviews, coming together for a confrontation. It was the president of most of the white guys in America – that’s you – and Barack Obama, the president of almost everybody else.

If by “most of the white guys in America,” Rivera means 59% of the voters, that would be technically correct. But it would be more correct to say that O’Reilly represented old, white guys in America. As The Nation wrote, “White men of course were more likely to support Romney than white women, and old white men the most likely of all.” In his recent New Yorker profile of Obama, David Remnick wrote, “The popular opposition to the Administration comes largely from older whites who feel threatened, underemployed, overlooked, and disdained in a globalized economy and in an increasingly diverse country.”
So for Rivera to suggest that O’Reilly speaks for white America doesn’t just overlook the many white guys and gals who voted for Obama. I believe it’s a disrespectful way of looking at Obama’s role in the interview.