SoHum Parlance

No comment.
 

This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
 

Will you share with us the latest gallup polls on the second district race?
 

Pompous racist ass pontificates on KMUD and slips in support for Liberman. He's too busy talking so he can't delete this..yet.
 

Maybe with the Supreme Court decision today Eric can fulfill his heart's desire and marry Mike Thompson.
 

He did not endorse Lieberman Stephen. You completely missed his point.
 

For the record I did not endorse Lieberman. I was explaining that my primary concern in this presidential election is the make-up of the Supreme Court and that I would choose any Democrat over McCain, including Lieberman - the point being that he would be the last Democrat I would support.

But Stephen listens for only what he wants to hear.
 

I think that it is the love hate thing Eric. He certainly is obsessed.
 

I feel a big man hug coming on.
 

Gore listed ten reasons why he lost the election, including Clinton's failure to campaign in Arkansas, Byrd's failure to campaign in West Virginia, his own failure to carry his home state of Tennessee, etc. Notably, Nader didn't appear on the list, since you might as well list Gloria La Riva if speaking of the fake results from Florida.

But Gore did miss #11, which was putting Lieberman on the ticket. He was a complete loser as a "balance" on the ticket - as if Dems were in fear of losing Connecticut or of losing the Jewish vote. Had he nominated Graham, he would have taken Florida by a cheat-proof margin, same with Richardson and New Mexico.
 

Eric, the more I read your comments, the more I hear you on the air, the more I think you are one of the biggest dangers to progressive politics in Humboldt County because you are pushing the Zionist racist point of view into local Progressive politics where it does not belong.

Zionism is racism and I am not alone by far in this assessment. It is common knowledge in most all Progressive activists circles OUTSIDE of Humboldt County. Humboldt County sits alone in having criticism of Israel silenced in Progressive blogs and media.

Last night, a fellow who was a Green and telling about hearing McKinney speak caught himself before he started mentioning McKinney's anti-Zionist stance because he knew what a can of worms he would draw onto himself if he broached the topic on KMUD in SoHum.

It wouldn't be so bad if Eric's racism was confined to Palestinian and Muslim Arabs in general (remember Eric and Andy shows here on his blog and on KMUD) but now Eric's joined Hank Sims in carrying racism into the local community by ridiculing Bear River tribal efforts to regain their ancestral lands and by blocking in Hank's case, any news of Bear River's efforts for the past 2 years.

Eric is getting a pass from all of you because he is slick as a weasel at public relations and you all are falling for his ambition to direct your political thinking for you. It's as if you all forget so easily how Eric goofed all the way through the Obama/Clinton race never knowing which way the political ball was going but pretending he did by cut-and-paste observations of other political pundit pretenders.

If you allow Eric and the Zionist Progs in SoHum and Humboldt County to dominate local Progressive politics, you will find yourselves out of sync with the rest of the Progressive movement throughout the U.S.A. which condemns Zionisms wholeheartedly at this point. Eric and fellow Zionists are keeping SoHum and Humboldt activists in the moral Stone Age of racist European colonialism's last vestige on earth, Israel.
 

Does this mean that he still loves you?
Man hug!!!
 

I agree with Stephen that Eric came off sounding like a pompous ass. Very off-putting. Christina was her usual boring uptight self with no valid points to make. I give the show a two on a 1-10 scale.
 

Everybody's a critic!
 

Wow, I'm boring and uptight. As per usual, though, I have no idea who thinks that, or why. Guess I'll move on.
 

Blogger Cristina said... As per usual, though, I have no idea

Boring and uptight as you are, I have to admit that sometimes your cute little sound-bites make some sense when taken out of context.
 

I'll trade you for pompous ass Cristina. And I'll throw in the anonymous "pot smoking Gallegos clone" comment.
 

2:02, you're a jackass.
 

Eric wants to be popular and does his best to appear reasonable so people will like him. Unfortunately, here and there he will meet hard cases like me who are not at all impressed with showmanship learned in courtrooms. I'm even less impressed with political activists coming in from the Bay Area or back East like big frogs looking for little ponds to rule by ganging together to oust the local political competition.

People like slick and easy over the rough and grainy so people like Eric will always be popular. And people like Roger come along far more rarely who stand for something for its own merits and don't always look to see which way the political wind is blowing.

My concern is that Cristina has compromised her ethics by teaming up with someone who supports modern colonial racism against Semitic peoples in the Middle East.
 

Well, Stephen, all I can say is: I'm not in bed with Eric. (Sorry if some of you are offended by my, er, bluntness.)

Eric asked me to co-host his show, which I did; I had no idea what he was going to say, and I'm pretty sure he didn't know where I was heading with my comments, either. My only regret is that, with the volume of calls we received (one hour just isn't long enough to make cogent points AND take callers), I wasn't able to go into a lot more of what's happening locally.

Since I'm in Mendocino County, I would have liked to discuss what's going on with Measure B, Sheriff Allman, and 215 abuse, and a little bit about my interview with supervisor candidate Paula Deeter. I also would have liked to get a word in about Measure D - which I started to, but then we got a caller and it was lost - a $1.75 million bond proposal for Leggett Valley schools. It would have been nice, in that vein, to touch upon the Wednesday "Day of the Teacher" statewide protest, Arnie's backing off a bit on education cuts, and what's going on with SoHum schools.

That's just for starters.

Frankly, I'm a bit talked out on the national front. And although I think it's pretty safe to say I'm backing Obama (obviously, I'm not saying a WORD in public regarding my opinions on local elections), I'm beyond tired of the toxicity in the Democratic Party right now. And I don't know that I can say anything that hasn't already been said, and said again, and written a thousand times.

Long response. Sorry.
 

It's not that you're a bad person Cristina. I actually happen to think you've really turned KMUD News around, and you're 10 times better than Estelle in terms of interesting news and ethical standards of reporting.

But the anon earlier was right, it was a boring show with two Dems who agree with each other on practically everything. Would it kill KMUD if a real Nader campaigner had a show on there once a month? And no, Paul Encimer does not count, since he's backing McKinney.
 

No, it wouldn't kill KMUD. I do think Marianne Knorzer (the Program Director) is looking for a lot more input and ideas, but I have no idea how many people have approached the station recently with show proposals. Anyone have any ideas to fill the Monday-morning 7 to 9 spot, since Michael and Joan will be "retiring" after Memorial Day weekend?

I agree that when you have two people with many similar viewpoints, it might not make for great radio. That's why my main disappointment was in not having time to discuss the issues Eric, living in HumCo, might not be as familiar with as I am, living in MenCo (and vice versa).

In that vein, that was my biggest disappointment with the show I did solo about Richardson Grove (when Eric was on vacation). The callers were all great (not a single wingnut among them!), but they were ALL against the proposal. There wasn't a single caller who was FOR the realignment, so we wound up with just one viewpoint repeatedly expressed in different ways.

Some people might argue that that's reflective of the community, but I know that it isn't. There are a lot of people who have either different views, or more nuanced views, of the project.
 

I'll take the bait, Cristina, and call your friend Marianne on Monday morning. Then we'll see how open KMUD really is to a young person with new ideas getting a show. After my previous experience getting the run-around from Jacinto and getting nowhere trying to bring some fresh perspectives in, I'm pretty jaded, but I'm wiling to give the idea a second chance. Thanks for the encouragement, and thanks again for doing such a good job with KMUD News.
 

I, for one, think "a young person with new ideas" is precisely what KMUD needs. A lot more of you, actually.

Nothing against the people who've been doing a great job for years. There are a lot of them, and I would miss them if they decided to leave. But it's become calcified.
 

Voting for Nader isn't a "new idea." This is his fifth presidential run if you include the 92 write-in campaign. I don't believe McKinney would make a good president, but at least she represents a break from the white male orthodoxy of the Green Party.

I'm not aware of any KMUD litmus test in terms of presidential contenders, but for Nader supporters you could check with some of the talk show programmers. Where does Jim Kaiser stand? Bud Rogers? Jimmy Dershlag? The Brenans?

It's true that Cristina and I agree with much in national politics, but we had plenty of callers with different viewpoints. And I thought we had very respectful discussions about them.

As for Measure B, Ed Denson had planned a show for last month about it, but Roger R. died that night and his show pretty much became a spontaneous wake. He may cover it this Thursday evening. Check with him.
 

Now that Michael Jacinto is no longer program manager, I wonder if I can have my Steve Lewis show back on the air? Any idea, Cristina? Free speech for all except critics of KMUD! That will keep the old guard in place and show those uppity youngin' a thing or two about passe politics and hypocrites in the hills!
 

Eric, despite your typical sell-out Dem cynicism, there is a growing segment of the independent left which is abandoning the corrupted Green Party organization in favor of a more populist approach represented by the Nader/Gonzalez ticket. Have you noticed that over 25% of local Greens have de-registered in the last two years in Humboldt? It would be a new idea for KMUD, or any local radio, to treat these people like they actually exist. It's too bad Eric is so hostile to a little diversity of opinion, especially since I haven't even made it to Monday morning yet to ask Marianne for a show.

Eric, listen to my first show (if there ever is one), then judge me. What you're doing now is just being prejudicial.
 

I don't have the time or the energy to get into the political conversation right now (deadline to meet!), so I'll only say, in response to Stephen, that I don't know what the situation is with getting shows back on the air. I've never done anything outside of the newsroom, with the exception of three or four of Eric's shows; I do have what I think is a great programming idea, but it'll be at least a few months (post-high school graduation, post-screwing head back on tightly) before I'm ready to take it on.
 

...you're 10 times better than Estelle...Cristina...it was a boring show...Would it kill KMUD if a real Nader campaigner had a show...?

Nader? Your judgement of Estelle is suspect too.
 

Hey, I'm not hostile to the idea of voting for Nader. I did it myself twice.

But it's certainly nothing "new" or fresh.

It reminds me of a story my father once told me about a young "radical" back in the anti-Vietnam war days. The guy was a Trotskyist. He was trying to copy off a leaflet, but the machine just kept producing a solid black copy. Something was obviously wrong with the machine. But the guy didn't consult the manual. He didn't open it up to see if he could figure out what was happening. He didn't ask for any help. He just kept hitting the button and swearing at the results, wondering why it wouldn't work. The Nader campaigns are like that: "Maybe this time it'll work - so let's do it exactly the way we did it last time!"

Frankly, I don't think Nader would make a good president. He's an excellent consumer rights advocate. He should stick to what he does best.

And there are reasons majority of black, Hispanic, union, environmentalist, and social activists operate within the Democratic Party. It's not because they're brainwashed. It's because they actually accomplish something.

But I have no objection to a show dedicated to Nader runs. I wouldn't listen to it that often, but maybe there's an audience out there.
 

For me, kmud is a hypocrisy until pb comes back.
 

Okay. There seems to me a logic disconnect there. Or maybe it's post-modern? Because I don't even know what that means.
 

It means, that which comes after modern --duh. The prefix 'post' means 'after'. I think maybe you should go back to junior high Eric.
 

I was referencing the "hypocrite" comment. How will KMUD be freed of their hypocrisy if PB returns.
 

How will KMUD be freed of their hypocrisy if PB returns.

If that's a question you need to place a question mark at the end of the sentence. If it' a statement then you need to study sentence syntax.
Did you mean. "Oh, how kmud will be freed..."
It's impossible to tell where you stand on the issue because you are being ambivalent. Which I have observed is one of your methods of avoidance while you back-peddle and try to find out what the popular opinion is on a topic.

So then, back to the issue at hand, why did you use the term post-modern? That seems odd. Trying to build a straw-man?
 

If you're going to zealously correct Eric's usage of the English language, then I'm going to correct yours.

It's "back-pedal," not "back-peddle." Which has interesting implications in itself!
 

Apparently I have to explain everything. It was meant as a question, and the post-modern reference is a joke.

The statement "KMUD is hypocrisy until PB returns" or whatever makes no sense. What would PB's return have to do with KMUD's alleged hypocrisy? Nobody forced him off the show. Whether he returns or not has more to do with him than them.

So since the statement made no sense, and post-modernism makes no sense as evidenced by the Sokal hoax, I was employing irony which perhaps was a bit too high brow for this discussion.
 

post-modernism makes no sense

Eric, again you need to go back to junior high. Yes, I understand your lame attempt at irony, very weak and piddling. (A tip of the hat to 2:42.)

Eric, what you are shrugging off as nonsense is a very valuable concept. A concept that, when understood, is very useful in critiquing contemporary culture. Try to study a little. Being a wanna-be highbrow won't get you too far. In the meantime enjoy the quiche and the kitsch. BTW it's one word no hyphen. So is highbrow.
 

Sorry, but postmodernism, with or without a hyphen (my undeconstructed spell checker is not accepting your spelling) died in one fell stroke.
 

Excuse me, one article in one journal does not mean anything next to thousands of articles and hundreds of books!!! It may have served to temper some of postmodernism's pretentiousness but it certainly did NOT kill a whole cultural phenomenon with one fell stroke.
You are grasping at straws to make a straw-man to attack so that you can make a show of defending (what?).
You are ignorant and lazy. You barely even have a grasp on irony, but you seem to like to try and use it to sound (highbrow?). If you would try to get to understand the subtleties of a movement who's very cornerstone is irony, perhaps then you'd learn something. But you take the low road and pose as a highbrow. Ironic isn't it.

BTW what is 'one fell stroke'? Does that go good with quiche?
 

Temperamental are we?

Well, it was more than just an article. The point is, the premier "postmodern" journal accepted and published an article that said absolutely nothing, but used all the right buzz words.

A friend and I did something very similar when I lived in SF. We attended a workshop about Deleuze's Anti-Oedipus. We were both educated and we didn't know what anybody was talking about. So we started tossing out BS, and it was accepted handily. I kept going back to the text and dissecting each sentence, subject to predicate. I concluded that DeLeuze was saying absolutely nothing. Sokal merely confirmed my conclusions.

During the 1980s A friend of mine was interviewed for a post-degree program at UC Santa Cruz in the "History of Consciousness" department and ran into a similar issue when she actually attempted to shore up her argument with actual illustrations - something very much frowned upon in the postmodern movement. She was accused of "reducing her thesis to praxis" - exact words.

Illustrations are in bad form because you would actually have to tie your BS prose into some foundation based upon reality.

Sorry, but postmodernism isn't just pretentious. It's fraud.
 

Well there you are, Eric Kirk waving his sword at a strawman he created so that he could spout nonsense from a theme paper that he wrote that a professor of his liked.

I am sorry to have to inform you Eric that your Sokal affair was nothing but a tempest in a teapot. I am surprised to hear that anyone even refers to it anymore. It's was a schoolboy prank that is quite
meaningless against thousands of articles, books, projects, a whole
era of cultural phenomena. PM is movement that is very much alive
and will be long after the Sokal affair is nothing but a footnote.

By clinging to modernism like a neurotic clings to a security
blanket you appear as stiff as a corpse. Except that the corpse
has a device to type out absurdities to the world over the internet based on a paper he wrote for a class when he was a sophomore in college. Sad how some people never mature beyond the student rebellious faze. It's as though you are saying that because one prank phone call was made by a someone posing as a teenager, that
proves that all teenager's phone calls are a fraud. I didn't
realize until now just how narrow-minded you are. Sorry, time to move on.