I exchanged e-mails with the fine people at KPOJ, and they say the programming is evolving.

With the availability of Mike Malloy (this is a hint) and the popularity of Sam, the schedule will change, albeit slower than we like.

I think I got that right.

I may be in the minority, but I'd much prefer for KPOJ to bump their afternoon programming back 3 hours and make Schultz and Rhodes air live instead of delayed. There's just no reason not to at this point.

</j>

I'd like to echo ferris above: I think the possiblity is very high that KPOJ is getting ready to either slot Mike Malloy into the 6-9 pm slot (which I personally prefer) or the 9-Midnight slot (which is the way it was before AAR fired him).

I'd go as far as to say that I think what will happen is that Mike will be back on in the 6-9pm slot–which would be sweet, as Portland Mike fans will finally get the chance to listen and phone in live.

While not everyone who's left feedback on the KPOJ feedback page has been for Mike, I'd say the preponderance have been for him. It's encouraging.

There's a story about Thom today in the Washington Post (Entertainment section).

LINK

Thom would make a great Senate candidate - great Senator.

As long as Thom can keep up that (grueling) schedule I have no fears for the morning show. I just keep asking myself, "how do he do it?" :) That's a LOT of radio for one person to do.

What bothers me is that we get double doses of both Thom and Sam, and much as I like them, that's a lot of Thom and Sam and very little of it live. With Al gone, there's no reason not to take Big Ed live at 9 am. Not doing so is just plain dumb. One of Eddie's selling points is that he was live.

What I wanna know is, why no Rachel Maddow except in the middle of the night?? She's perfect for Portland--frighteningly smart, razor sharp and hilariously funny. Before AAR podcasts went behind the paywall I listened to her every single day.

"make Schultz and Rhodes air live instead of delayed"

Live or on delay, Schultz just doesn't fit. I'm not a fan of his, and I'd hate to see something worthwhile bumped around for "big eddie's" show.

-Craig

I'd like to echo what Lynn says about Rachel Maddow. I would sure prefer listening to Rachel then Hartman & Tauber in the morning. The Young Turks are a bore.

Thom would make an excellent Senator. Run Thom Run!

Air America couldn't have made a better choice. Thom is a class act, bringing real substance to talk radio whenever he talks about progressive values in the context of the Constitution and the Founding Fathers, which is almost all the time. He's a joy to listen to.

I'm also glad that Al Franken is moving on. He had gotten a little too predictable and the routine was getting stale. I hope Thom doesn't burn himself out and end up in the same place. Somehow I doubt it, though...he's got too much intellectual curiosity to get stale.

Yeah! Put Randi Rhodes on live from 12-3pm. Then she can go head to head with Lars Larson and kick his rear.

Hartmann really doesn't come across as what I'd call a true progressive or liberal, no matter how much he labels himself as such, and he panders to relatively clueless Portlanders who aren't nearly as progressive as they pridefully believe.

The WAPO has a quote by Brook of the goofball Ayn Rand Institute, who Hartmann at best battles to a pathetic draw in almost every confrontation, that is pregnant with far more meaning than even Brooks probably intended: He's "definitely well-informed _ though selectively." After all, this is a guy purportedly writing a book on air about political spin who, on his local show a few weeks ago, said he didn't know who Bernays was. While his candor is appreciated, he is just a bit too sure of himself, and yet seemingly unaware of his big knowledge gaps otherwise, to take that supposed candor without a healthy dose of skepticism.

There really hasn't been a top drawer liberal/progressive talker since Bob Lassiter in his prime. Sam Seder has obvious potential. Malloy is in a league of his own that makes him a worthy peer of talkers like Lassiter. That's no doubt in part because Malloy's career as a talker spanned the same era as Lassiter's. In this regard, NovaM Radio, founded by the original folks behind Air America, seems to have a lot of promise. Lately, I found the Pheonix, Az flagship affiliate station to be more interesting in the morning that Hartmann by a long shot. The cartoonishness of Hartmann's progressivism on his local show really stands out when one listens to someone even as mild as Dr. Mike Newcomb defending the progressive cause in a conservative community where one has to really stand up and fight. That's what has made Malloy's speaking out from Georgia, like Lassiter's guts in speaking out in St. Petersburg, FL. in that earlier time, so compelling.

Hartmann just isn't in the same league. Although, I'm not sure that being in that league is his real career goal. Hartmann is a creation of the era of reaching easy audiences through national syndication, with all the damage that has done to the on-the-air product and the country. That is a very different thing than being a serious, damn the torpedoes, liberal talker before deregulation and consolidation. It's hard to argue that his local show doesn't strongly reflect that difference. (Hartmann was in liberal Vermont before coming to this west coast mirror of that environment, so he doesn't get any props for that local work in friendly territory. Air America really is nothing more than a syndicator for a slate of talkers, rather than just a lone syndicator like Rush Dimbulb, because they don't own any FCC broadcasting licenses.)

For those of you who never heard a liberal/progressive talker in the days before syndication when local talk radio with true guts ruled, do yourself a favor. First, read the Wikipedia entry for Bob Lassiter:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Lassiter

"Lassiter had no use for callers who agreed with him, often rushing them off the line so he could find someone with whom he could have a compelling fight. In fact, after his monologue and topic setup he would often tell people who agreed with him not to call, that he was only interested in opposing viewpoints that day; if he received callers who agreed with him anyway, he would immediately hang up on them."

which, for those of us who had the privilege of hearing him in his prime in the late 80's and early 90's, rings very true.

Then listen to some of his air checks:

http://www.boblassiterairchecks.com/

The second hour of this monologue from 1996 told what was coming in radio:

http://www.boblassiterairchecks.com/wfla/ellen.mp3

including, unfortunately, folks like Hartmann who really just aren't in the same league. The difference between Lassiter and Hartmann is that Hartmann's shtick is to affirm his whimpy, whiny local and national progressive base, rather than to challenge that base to be more worthy adversaries of the lunatic right wing destroying our country.

This air check, also from near the end of his broadcast career, also addresses this well:

http://www.boblassiterairchecks.com/monologues/wflafriendly96.mp3

By the way, although I'm not a fan of his, Lionel got his start as a caller on Lassiter mid-80s WPLP show and his first WFLA show.

More live shows, drop Ed and Randi (too grating, too harsh), put Malloy at 9-12 (just harsh enough, once the kids are asleep), move Maddow into a primo spot.

I guess the problem is nobody wants 6 straight hours of anyone, even Hartmann, and that, coupled with his local show, makes it impossible to have a live show from 9-12, the primo spot.

Solution? Move Thom's live local show to 3-6pm, drop Randi or bump her back to Ed's slot, drop Ed, have Sam on 6-9am and Thom 9-12am, Maddow on 6-9pm, Malloy 9-12pm.

Any questions? This is my dream line-up, now that "big" Ed has brought my dislike for him out of my subconscious and into the fore.

And for the above poster railing against Thom: you're cracked, Thom's a wonderful balance of informed, tasteful, enraged, humble and inspired.

Personaly, I wouldn't mind listening to Thom Hartmann for 6 strait daily(In fact I do via streaming broadcast). And I must agree with the idea of moving Randi Rhodes to a live time slot. We listen to get informed and educated perspective on the issues. Who cares about Fat Eddie's hunting, fishing, baseball teams, or his dog? And how much longer do we have to wait for Mike Malloy?

Hartmann is always spewing some quasi-historical "fact," Ed Shultz sees military power as a virtue, Randy Rhodes is a shrill New York "know-it-all;" thankfully Franken with his off-color and bizarre humor can finally use his (alleged) intelligence somewhere other than AA. All that aside, I listen and I evaluate the content that all these guys present but Sam Seder is the most poignant. Plus he has the best "bumper" music on radio.

Hey Kari, heard you on the show this morning, always nice to hear your updates and your upbeat attitude.

Back on subject- why do you say "you're not likely going to get Thom on the air 9-12, and then a three-hour break, and then 3-6. Just won't work from a day-to-day standpoint."? I'll be the first to admit I don't know anything about radio scheduling protocols but KPOJ doesn't really seem to be a bastion of smart programming, slots-wise. They've got Seder at 6 when all the news of yesterday is being presented in our PM, they've got Thom's mid-morning show from 9-midnight, which is a travesty in my book and then the midday stuff is venomous tripe. As far as I can tell, breaking a few rules might be their best bet; if having a 3 hour Seder slab of meat sandwiched between a Hartmann hoagie is wrong then I don't wanna be right.

Just calling it like I see it.

I wonder if all this pontificating can really make a difference at KPOJ. I just see a lot more potential at that station, and it's already made a huge difference in my life. I just know something's wrong when my otherwise open-minded liberal partner starts cringing and trembling when Randi and Ed come on.

Thanks for the thoughts.

Ed Shutlz and Thom Hartmann are the only shows i like on KPOJ.

Ed is great because he is closer to what most Americans are like - most Americans are not extremely Liberal or Conservative - but rather a better mix.

I am a meat eating, gun owning, football watching Liberal who supports and believes in the American armed forces (just not their current Commander in Cheif).

I would imagine that Ed brings in some more moderate listeners than many who read Blue Oregon would expect. And Thom has a great show (local).

I say dump Randi Rhodes all together. She is a Rush Limbaugh for the Left. She is rude and full of herself. Does the Left no good in my opinion.

Here's my ideal lineup:

6 AM-9 AM: Thom & Heidi (live) 9 AM-noon: Ed Schultz (live) Noon-3 PM: Randi Rhodes (live) 3 PM-6 PM: ? 6 PM-9 PM: Mike Malloy (live) 9 PM-midnight: Thom Hartmann nationwide

The reason I have the 3 PM-6 PM slot a question mark is that I can't decide between Rachel Maddow/Politically Direct, or Peter B. Collins (an independently syndicated progressive talk host, based in San Francisco, who is on a few West Coast stations, live from 3 PM-6 PM Pacific)

6-9am, Thom Hartmann/Heidi Tauber 9-noon, Ed Schultz noon-3, Randi Rhodes 3-6 pm, Rachel Maddow (she's good for evening drive, but I can't listen to her at midnight, she's too energetic...) 6-9 pm, Sam Seder 9-midnight, Thom Hartmann nationwide midnight-3, ? (Groom some local talent, maybe?)

I can't stand Mike Malloy and his ranting. If I wanted someone truly nasty and offensive, I'd rather have Neil Rogers, who's more aggressive than whiny.

<h2>As a night person, having Ed Schultz on from 9-noon would work for me, since I don't usually get up 'til noon...These days, my house is blissfully quiet from noon to 3, since I can't stand Schultz, but I will concede that he has his audience, and I respect that. In my opinion, Thom Hartmann was the only person worthy of replacing Mike Malloy, but having Mike back would be fantastic icing on the cake...And I'm glad Rachel is on so late- I never miss her show!</h2>