wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote:

N2EY wrote:

Mike Coslo wrote:


I don't think I've ever heard Dr Laura ever ask anyone to
show her their boobs!!


No, but we she does/has done is worse. Her show basically
consists of
her lecturing people about how they have to adopt her
values in order for their lives to work.

I see where you are going. I don't quite equate the two
things as equal,
but agree that the show and here are something else. Some of
what she says is correct, but her delivery and sanctimony make you
achingly want to disagree with her always.


Agreed - but some of what she says is dead wrong too.

Of course! Just in case you didn't see the "letter to Dr. Laura, I'll
post it he

Dear Dr. Laura,

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's law. I
have learned a great deal from you, and I try to share that knowledge
with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the
homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind him that Leviticus
18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate. I do need
some advice from you, however, regarding some of the specific laws and
how to best follow them.

When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a
pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev. 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They
claim the odor is not pleasing to them. How should I deal with this?

I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as it suggests in Exodus
21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her
period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev. 15:19-24). The problem is, how
do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

Lev. 25:44 states that I may buy slaves from the nations that are around
us. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans but not
Canadians. Can you clarify?

I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2
clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill
him myself?

A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an
abomination (Lev. 10:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality.
I don't agree. Can you settle this?

Lev. 20:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a
defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my
vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you
can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal
and unchanging.


Hey! Why can't we own Canadians? ;^)


Heh, sounds like a friend of ours!


In many ways!!

What I find interesting about "Dr." Laura is that she
doesn't/hasn't lived
up to the very values she preaches to others. For example,
sheinsists on being called "Doctor" - but she's not an MD,
Psy. D or even Ed.D.

She's got a Ph.D, but not in human psychology or therapy.


Phil Kane, K2ASP, informs us in another post that her degree
is in physiology. That's a fur piece from what she does.

When a person wants to have strong unshakable conviction, it is very
important that they don't know a lot about the subject.

I asked a colleague who is a psychologist about Dr Laura,
and what he thought of that sort of thing. He replied "A good rule of
thumb is that if a person is called "Dr and their first name" they
probably aren't the best person to listen to. Dr. Laura, Dr. Phil, Dr. Nick...


Dr. No...


The woman has a checkered past for sure, by here present
standards, she also appears to have occasional "episodes", after which she
feels the need to get a little more shrill in her approach.


That's just one aspect. Consider the whole "I am my kid's mom"
nonsense, compared to how she raises *her* kid...

She wasn't very respectful of her mother either, as it turns out.


The strange thing is that she has not learned the lesson that
you can improve your morals and values, but *you* have to do it, and
someone virtually screaming at you probably *won't* get you to do
it. Oddly enough, the early Dr. Laura probably knew that already


The sad part is that she has created such a following of
people who need *real* help. For all his blather, no one
really takes HS that seriously.

Masochists have to turn to someone?

Lots of other examples.


some snippage


Now you have me reminiscing. WRSC FM in the late 60's,
early 70's was a
State College sation that was very progressive. They did the albums,
theme nights, and real music all the time. I tuned in to this as a
freshman in high school, and was hooked immediately. While my
classmates
were listening to the Grass Roots, 1910 Fruitgum Company, and Gary
Puckett and the Union Gap, I was doing Hendrix, Led Zappelin,
Cream and other non teeny stuff.


In my time it was WMMR, but the same basic story.

Point is, over time the experimental/progressive elements disappeared
and were replaced by a formula. Homogenized just like Top 40 radio was.

And of course, it becomes bland and boring. CLever paradigm they had.
Problem is, it is a bad paradigm.

Both the technical quality and the programming quality of FM in
those days pulled a lot of people away from AM.



If you want to hear some of Michael Savage's compassionate
conservatism, go to:

http://tinyurl.com/5ywcw

and check out the Michael Savage, Tsunami no tragedy clip.


I'll take a listen.

FM around here is not a lot better



Deregulation has homogenized both of them. Neither is a big
moneymaker nor job-creator, because the markets are saturated and
there's a limit to advertising revenue. The receiver technology is
mature and there are no ongoing user fees. BC TV is in a similar state,
compounded by the limping move to HDTV.

You left out an important part, Jim. Let us take AM for example. It is
now the purveyor of Cranky talk radio. While the people who want to
listen to that sort of thing are simply wild about their shows, most
people are not. So while the marketing drove itself in the new
direction, a lot of people simply stopped tuning in at all. Less
listeners. Bad idea to turn off half of your listener base, but there
you go!

It is the same thing as the reality based TV show craze. That was the
final straw in my shift away from network TV. Those who like REality
shows just LOVE them. Many of the rest of us find it odd that people
would want to sit around and watch shows glorifying "average".

But now even these shows are wearing thin. The trend of less people
watching network TV will probably accelerate.

Hey, I have an idea! How about some quality programming? Put on a few
science shows. Maybe some shows glorifying real heroes instead of crack
smoking entertainers. Don't show the same ten movies over and over again
- how many times do we need to see Kindergarten Cop, She-Devil, or Dirty
Dancing? Those movies are often on multiple channels at the same time on
any given weekend. My XYL is content to watch Dirty dancing over and
over, but I think she has a thing for Patrick Swayze. 8^)

The audience is there, all they have to do is attract them with dome
decent programming.

Remember the "21st Century" show with Walter Cronkite? That commercial
with putting the baby chick in the insulating container, then dropping
it into the boiling water, after which it was retrieved unharmed,
entranced me as a child.


Into this mess comes satellite radio, internet and cable TV, BPL,
etc. All promise lots of new jobs and revenue sources. Plus the FCC
doesn't have the headaches of trying to regulate them.

Ah, the unintended consequences! Who is going to satisfy the Prigs need
for getting the trash off the airways?

some more snippage

All as a result of short-term focus and diversion by hot-button
red-herring issues.




73 de Jim, N2EY

"Kokava aro, kokava tua, te igoa o te akuaku, erua"

I'll bite... What is?


Do you know who Thor Heyerdahl was?

Yeah, he was the Kon-Tiki guy. I'm not up on my Norwegian tho! 8^)

- Mike KB3EIA -