By MARC McDONALD
With his fury and righteous anger, Mike Malloy is a bit like right-wing talkers such as Michael Savage and Mark Levin.
Except Malloy is a progressive.
And he doesn't tell lies.
And he is well-informed.
And he tells the truth (unlike the right-wing talk radio hate-spewers).
Actually, come to think of it, Malloy is nothing like fascist nutbag sleazeballs like Levin and Savage. But he does get angry. And Malloy's rage has been a beacon of truth and sanity for many of us since the darkest years of the Bush era.
Malloy continues to speak Truth To Power today (even though he's had a devil of a time finding a permanent home on the radio dial).
First he was unceremoniously booted by Air America (which left a big black mark on that network in the eyes of many of us progressives). Then he lost his subsequent gig, when the progressive network Nova M folded.
In the spirit of "if you wanna get something done, you've got to do it yourself," Malloy bravely set up shop on his own a couple of years ago and is now self-syndicated.
I suppose some timid listeners will find Malloy too abrasive. But I think Malloy's hard-hitting, take-no-prisoners style is exactly what we need to counter the likes of Limbaugh and Levin. It's time we Democrats grew a pair. It's time we started fighting fire with fire. And last, but not least, it's time we started getting angry. Why, I've always wondered, is it that the Right-Wing talkers are the ones who're always angry. We on the Left have a lot more to be angry about, for Chrissakes!
And if you're a progressive, please consider signing up and supporting Malloy's program, which currently exists solely through the subscriptions of its listeners. It only costs 25 cents a day. I call that a great investment to keep Malloy on the air, spreading the truth that you will never hear elsewhere (certainly not in the corporate mainstream media).
Posts
Trump Is Becoming More Vulnerable
4 hours ago
11 comments:
Thanks for the rec!
Mike Malloy is either a mentally ill delusional kook, or he is playing one on the radio. I have off-and-on listened to this guy for 5 years, and the guy is simply not operating with a full deck.
Hi, MW Harman, thanks for the comment.
re:
>>Mike Malloy is either a mentally
>>ill delusional kook, or he is
>>playing one on the radio.
That's a pretty heavy charge to lay on someone. I notice you provide no examples to back up your assertion.
If Malloy is a "kook," then I'd be interested to know your opinion of the wingnut talkers who are Nazis AND insane, like the Pig-Man Rush, or Mark Levin.
The Pig-Man's lies are well-documented at sites like Media Matters.
And as for Levin: Wow. What a f*cking, evil Nazi. I recall listening to this sack-of-sh*t back during the dark days of the Bush regime. He was not only supporting torture, but he was enthusiastically doing so. I mean, that's just sick. If Levin stands for "American values," then I'm no f*cking American. And if "the troops" really do support this evil little turd (as Levin claims), then I'm no supporter of the troops.
Malloy may show some white-hot anger from time to time, at the sorry state of our sinking nation. But he doesn't lie through his teeth day after day, unlike the Pig-Man and Levin and other GOP Nazis.
First, thanks for allowing a dissenting point of view.
Examples? How much room will you allow me? This past week, he has called for the assassination of George W. Bush and said it's okay to take a machete to wealthy in this country. He has, on his show, wished for the deaths of Rush Limbaugh and Dick Cheney. (Limbaugh would be off the air tomorrow if he said that stuff.) He sets himself up as the arbiter of who is a worthy human being, deserving of life, and who is not, deserving of death. He truly hates his "enemies" and wouldn't hesitate to kill them if he could get away with it - as demonstrated by his words time and time again. As for delusions, how about these beauts: "This Democratic whore, Bill Clinton - all of a sudden, I can't stand him anymore. To me, he is as corrupt and degenerate as the Bushes." "Republicans are vile. All Republicans are liars, cheats, sneaks; they are deceivers. They are immoral, and they have no ethical structure whatsoever." (ALL Republicans have NO ethical structure? Uh, okay Mike.) "In the run-up to World War II, they (Bush family) helped Hitler build the death camps to take the Jews and kill them." (This last statement is blatantly FALSE. Prescott Bush was one of seven directors and held one share - one share - and had very little involvement in a bank's activities in Germany that financed a German industrialist who was an early Hitler backer. At the time of Bush's "involvement," little was known as to the extent of Hitler's atrocities. Funny how Mike never brings up "the rest of the story.")
His rants against corporate America and capitalism are comedy at its best. No, neither is perfect, but listening to his delusional musings about them do cause me to laugh out loud.
I will stop now. I could go on. I roll my eyes at the stuff Levin and Savage say. I'm not defending them. But Malloy is simply in a different stratosphere. If he's not truly mentally ill, he does a good job of faking it on the radio.
Hi, thanks for the comment.
re:
>>This past week, he has called for the assassination of George W. Bush...
He really said that? I didn't get a chance to hear him this week, but I have my doubts. You are paraphrasing what he said and you are reading things into his words that I don't believe are there in the original wording.
If, in fact, Malloy literally called for the "called for the assassination of Bush," his program would be yanked off the air and he would face charges.
re:
>>He has, on his show, wished for the deaths of Rush Limbaugh...
Well, count me along with Malloy in wishing for this. I'm a peaceful
person and I normally wouldn't wish harm on my enemies. But Limbaugh is a truly evil person. If Hitler were around today, I would wish him dead and it's the same with Limbaugh. Incidentally, there's no doubt that likes of Limbaugh and his Nazi followers wish death upon me. I'm not
just speculating, either...I've talked to a number of these Nazis and they truly want progressives like me to die.
re:
>>>"Republicans are vile. All Republicans are liars, cheats, sneaks; they are deceivers.
>>>They are immoral, and they have no ethical structure whatsoever."
Malloy does get carried away from time to time. He is bitter is what
the modern-day GOP has done to this country. But all right-wing talkers I've ever heard say the exact same thing about Democrats every day. I guess the difference
is that modern-day Republicans REALLY HAVE destroyed this nation. What, exactly, has been the Democrats' "crime" that has earned them the vicious venom they get from Limbaugh?
re:
>>Funny how Mike never brings up "the rest of the story."
Speaking of which: I don't know if what you say about Prescott is
all true. But I DO know that Prescott had a grandson who LIED America into a pointless, illegal, unnecessary, immoral war that slaughtered 1.4 million Iraqi men, women and children. And you're directing your anger at a nickel-dime radio talk show host who has a tiny audience.
Who has REALLY done the most damage to America---and the world?
(read next comment for a continuation of my response).
re:
>>His rants against corporate
>>America and capitalism are
>>comedy at its best. No, neither
>>is perfect, but listening to his
>>delusional musings about them do
>>cause me to laugh out loud.
Granted, he does go overboard from time to time. But he also speaks a great deal of Truth to Power about the evils of corporate capitalism that you NEVER hear elsewhere on the radio dial.
There IS a great deal of truth and wisdom in his rantings.
But contrast, people like Limbaugh are lying sacks of sh*t who NEVER
say ANYTHING that is factual. All the likes of Limbaugh do are spew out lies, venom, hate on a scale vastly greater than anything Malloy
ever does. And unlike Malloy, Limbaugh NEVER tells the truth.
re:
>>I will stop now. I could go on. I roll my eyes at the stuff Levin and Savage say.
Oh, so the venom and poison and violent rhetoric spewed out by Levin and Savage prompt nothing more than a "rolling of the eyes" from you, while you turn around and accuse Malloy of being a "mentally ill delusional kook."
Malloy is attacking people who are true monsters. George W. Bush is a war criminal and he has the blood of over a million people on his hands. THAT IS A FACT.
Meanwhile, compare that to the extreme hatred and venom that Limbaugh and Levin spew out daily about President Obama.
What, exactly, did Obama ever do wrong to deserve this venom? He was duly elected President by the American people. He's trying to the best with the incredibly
sh*tty hand he was dealt. He is presiding over a nation that was essentially destroyed by the likes of Reagan and GWB.
I can FULLY understand hatred and venom directed at a monster like Bush. I guess I simply don't fathom what prompts ANY venom directed at a bland corporate moderate like Obama.
The hate-filled charges directed at Obama by right-wing talkers ("He's a socialist!" "He raised your taxes!" "He is going to come confiscate your guns!" "He is a Muslim!" "His health-care plan is socialism!" "He isn't really an American!" "He has no valid birth certificate!") are ALL A BUNCH OF F*CKING LIES.
By contrast, when Malloy calls Bush a war criminal, he is stating a FACT.
To compare that "venom" to the REAL poisonous venom spewed out by Rush is apples and oranges.
I thank you for the debate. Many on the left actively work to silence those on the right (stealing campus newspapers, trying to get shows cancelled, shouting down campus speakers, etc.)
As to Malloy, he said this past week that Seal Team 6 should have taken out Bush along with Bin Laden. The reason Malloy is not off the air is twofold: 1) his show has virtually no listeners and he is really not very nationally prominent, and 2) he is from the left. Now, onto Limbaugh. If you really wish for his death and equate him with Hitler, you are as unreasonable as Malloy. I truly question whether you even listen to Limbaugh's show at all. Saying he "never" tells the truth"? Not even once? In fact, all he does is give facts and then draws opinions from them. Just because you think his opinions are wrong does not mean he is "lying." As to Republicans "destroying" the country, yes, I do have my issues with Republicans. The economic mess we're in boils down to one thing: too much of our wealth is in the hands of too few people. So yes, wealthy people can stand to have a tax increase. However, the Democrats have a strong part in our malaise, primarily by passing legislation (led by Barney Frank) forcing banks to make bad loans. Although our economy is ailing and both parties are responsible, I would hardly say the country is "destroyed." Finally, as to Bush. He did not lie us into war. If he lied, so did dozens of intelligence analysts from 16 intelligence agencies who reported in an NIE on October 1, 2002, with a "high degree of confidence" that Iraq possessed WMD. On February 3, 2004, USA TODAY printed a well-researched lengthy article, complete with interviews with some of the analysts, detailing how the intelligence was simply wrong. Here is the link for your perusal: http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2004-02-03-iraq-misjudge-usat_x.htm To date, you might be interested to note that NOT ONE intelligence analyst has come forward to say Bush lied. In fact, here's another link from factcheck.org, hardly a right-wing bunch of people. http://www.factcheck.org/article358.html The link clearly refutes your assertion Bush lied. Two congressional BI-PARTISAN investigations refutes your assertions. Your assertion he is a war criminal is simply not founded in fact or evidence. Your assertion 1.4 million Iraqis died in the conflict was garnered from long-ago discredited methodology. You state you are big on the truth, but ironically (I hate to be impolite and use "hypocritically") you don't mind bending it or ignoring it to make your points. I'm sure you are sincere in your beliefs, and I respect that, but you might want to consider that those with whom you disagree are not necessarily the ogres you think they are.
Hi MW Harman, thanks for the reply.
re:
>>Many on the left actively work
>>to silence those on the right
I don't know about that. But I do know that while the Left often uses "weapons" like sarcasm, wit and humor, the Right uses violent rhetoric (and, indeed, violence itself).
The recent massacre in Norway is a good example. A right-winger who was fed up with his nation's progressive policies went on a shooting/bombing rampage and killed over 90 people, including members of a Liberal party gathering.
Then there was the gunman who shot up the Liberal Tennessee Church in 2008, killing 2. A police affidavit said the gunman, "targeted the church because of its liberal teachings and his belief that all liberals should be killed because they were ruining the country."
Where, exactly, do you see examples of Lefties killing their opponents?
re:
>>Saying he "never" tells the >>truth"?
Well, I gave you a number of examples of outright lies that right-wing talkers like Limbaugh not only told, but told repeatedly---so much so, that I'd bet money that most of his listeners still believe them. I talk to Righties all the time who are convinced that Obama is a Muslim; that his health-care plan is "socialist," and that he has raised taxes. All of which, are, of course, lies spewed DAILY by the likes of Limbaugh.
On the other hand, I'd like you to name a outright factual lie that Malloy has told. Something that he has stated as fact that is a demonstrable lie.
re:
>>I would hardly say the country
>>is "destroyed."
I have to disagree. Yes, life goes on. But the Great American Superpower that dominated the world from around the 1940s to the 1980s is clearly extinct. The only reason our collapse isn't more noticeable is that the East Asians (for now) have been willing to fund our titanic deficits.
re:
>>Finally, as to Bush. He did not
>>lie us into war.
I personally recall many speeches and news conference in which Bush repeated, over and over, that "we know for a fact" that Saddam has WMDs. That is a lie. We didn't, in fact, "know" this for a "fact."
You know, if Bush had simply said, "we're really pretty sure" Saddam had WMDs, that would have been a different story. But to categorically state "we know this to be a FACT," was clearly a LIE.
And it was a lie that Bush and his allies used as a club to bash his opponents in the lead-up to the war.
Frankly, I think you've been listening to the likes of Rush too much. I notice one problem when "debating" Rush listeners is that, too often, I find myself "debating" facts. I'm interested in debating politics. But I have no interest in "debating" facts.
re:
>>Your assertion 1.4 million
>>Iraqis died in the conflict was
>>garnered from long-ago
>>discredited methodology.
"Discredited" by who? Limbaugh?
Incidentally, since Malloy's program has such a small audience, it's real easy to call in and actually get on the show. I suggest you call in some night and challenge Malloy one-on-one. He's always up for a good debate (although he, like myself, is only interested in debating politics, not facts).
Look, if you wish to defend Republicans, that's one thing. There are Republicans who I've admired and would vote for today (Eisenhower, for example). But when you defend human filth like Limbaugh after all the venom, hate speech, and lies he has spewed over the years, you are seriously weakening your credibility.
Oh, it's true. The left does indeed have a long and storied history of trying to shut down dissenting opinions, and it's easily searchable on Google. As for violent lefties, I admit I could find no examples of lone liberals engaged in shooting sprees (although the Holocaust museum shooter, James Von Brunn, acted in part because of his hatred for Bush and Cheney and the "neo-cons.") However, violent liberals abound everywhere, starting with ELF and ALF, and let's not forget those uber-violent ever-present G8 protesters. After the Jared Loughner/Gabrielle Giffords shooting, the left was quick to blame Sarah Palin and her target map; yet, a simple Google search reveals countless examples of liberals engaging in hate-filled violent rhetoric themselves, far worse than a picture of a map with targets on it. As to the fact that you continue to insist "Bush lied," I gave you two sources, plus two congressional bi-partisan investigations, that all said Bush did not lie. If you want to continue to insist he did lie, in the fact of contrary evidence, it's your right to do so, but such an opinion doesn't square with what we know. As to Limbaugh "lying" - fair.org tried years ago to point out 43 Limbaugh "lies," to which he deftly parried all 43 of them. So, when Limbaugh says Obama is a "socialist," to you that's a lie; most people would consider it an opinion. I Googled "limbaugh lies" and the list of supposed lies is simply through context. As for Malloy lies, I'm not prepared to say he does (although the Bush-Nazi thing is more lie than truth). My issue with Malloy is the conclusions and opinions he holds. For example, when he says "corporatists" want to end democracy, well, that's ludicrous. Why would then want to end the very system that allows them to prosper? It makes no sense, but that's Malloy's delusions at work. And, suppose I give Malloy everything he says that is bad and corrupt about corporate America and capitalism. Even so, the good it produces far outweighs all of Malloy's arguments. As a side note, one of my biggest pet peeves about the left is that too many of you guys think that people are stuck in their socio-economic status and can do nothing to change it. The problem is that too many Americans believe such tripe and don't make any meaningful changes in their lives. It's not corporate America's fault that someone had 5 kids by 3 different dads by the time they were 23, for example. Finally, as to the 1.4 million Iraqis killed, it is indeed discredited from many mainstream (not right-wing) sources. I invite you to view www.iraqbodycount.org, whose methodology is far sounder (and by the way, you will find that this is run by anti-war kindred spirits). I also invite you to stop using the 1.4 million Iraqi dead in the name of intellectual honesty. After all, you purport that the truth is important, so I'm sure you don't want to continue to use a figure that has been proven to be unsound.
I notice you did not post my last comment. It's your blog and I understand if you want to have the last word. But my question is, if you really think Mark Levin and Rush Limbaugh are basically the equivalent of Hitler, don't you have a moral obligation to eliminate them? After all, you can hardly find someone from either the right or left who would say it was incorrect to eliminate Hitler. So, since you believe that, failure to eliminate them shows you don't really believe they're that bad, after all.
Hello, MW Harman, thanks for your comment.
I have to admit, your attempt to try to make progressives sound (and act) as violent as the Right-Wingers in this country is laughable.
Yes, Malloy has made a few controversial comments. But he regularly adds, "I was only joking," after making such comments.
By contrast, the Right routinely makes violent threats. Go to sites like Media Matters for scores of examples by nationally broadcast wingnuts, who spew their venom daily on the nation's airwaves. And unlike Malloy, many of these people have tens of millions of listeners.
Take (please) Glenn Beck, for example.
On May 17, 2005, Beck said the following on his radio show:
"I'm thinking about killing Michael Moore, and I'm wondering if I could kill him myself, or if I would need to hire somebody to do it."
Beck made this chilling statement and never said a word about it being made in jest, or as a joke.
And bear in mind, Beck is the nation's No. 2 Right-Wing commentator, after Limbaugh. By contrast, Malloy is extremely obscure. I know dozens of progressives who've never heard of him. And those few that have have strongly condemned any controversial comments he made. By contrast, I've never heard a wingnut condemn Beck's creepy, violent rhetoric.
Wingnuts not only have a history of using the public airwaves to spew their hate speech and their violent threats. But they also have a history of going around shooting unarmed people who don't agree with their Nazi views. Take the right-wing asshole who police arrested for shooting up a Tennessee church, killing two. The Knoxville Police Chief said the gunman was motivated by his joblessness and his "stated hatred for the liberal movement."
Where, exactly, are there examples of Liberals shooting people, simply because they disagree with their politics?
I think you'll find that Liberals, in general, don't really even care much for guns. We're not dickless cowards who need guns to prove our "manhood."
Post a Comment