This just in…
Rumors of the fate of Feedback have been circulating for months. Today, a Facebook message from a fan seems to make things look like they’re moving in that direction:
“Dear Pat Snyder fans:
I have received word that Pat Snyder’s 9-11am daily Feedback program on WSAU is going to be replaced in October with the Jerry Bader program out of Green Bay…”
Me again… Of course, I’m no particular fan of Jerry Bader, either, but you only have to go as far as the preceding post on my blog to see what I think are the problems with Pat Snyder’s show (and why I’ve called it an infomercial.) Said one Wausau area observer of the speculative development: “Don’t put away that tin foil hat just yet.”
* * *
Speaking of people who are sometimes inclined to allow their partisanship to get in the way of the facts, here’s something interesting from yesterday’s Sean Hannity TV program (and Sean is also a syndicated part of 550’s radio lineup). This from Media Matters:
“Even for Sean Hannity (who previously has gone so far as to edit video to fit a pre-determined narrative), this was a bit of a stretch.
At 9:25 p.m. tonight, as “Live” flashed on the screen, Hannity claimed that Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) “doesn’t wan’t to be seen with the president.”
Me again: The problem is that Feingold appeared in front of tens of thousands with President Obama hours before Hannity said that on his show last night. I know because I saw him. But it was also all over the news, including national media — for anyone who was bothering to pay attention. Included in that stream of coverage was an announcement beforehand that Feingold would be at the Obama rally on the Library Mall on the University of Wisconsin campus in Madison. I’ll bet even Fox News carried it — but then again, maybe not. Here’s a story they carried in advance:
“The president is headed to Madison as part of a series of rallies in swing states leading up to the election. But where he drew a crowd of 17,000 at the University of Wisconsin in 2008 during the presidential race, crowds are expected to be significantly smaller this time around…”
Me again: Ummm… No, it didn’t exactly work out that way. There were way more than 17,000 yesterday and estimates had more than that inside the security area, with many thousands more outside. And as I pointed out elsewhere, nobody was expected to sign or take a “loyalty oath” like the RNC was foisting on people in the 2004 campaign. So, just who was it that ‘expected crowds to be significantly smaller’ anyway?