Matt Jones

[Jeeepcat]

Is sh!tting in his own nest, IMO

He is using KSRadio as a political platform and it's getting exposed. I don't care which whore you support - politics has no place in sports discussion and the brotherhood of fandom - other than creating divisiveness.

[anderwt]

These conversations never go anywhere, especially about Matt Jones. However, this is a big time race that changes the landscape of the country. He did two interviews. Mike and Mike, Colin Cowherd, they interviewed the presidential candiates when they were running. MSNBC had him on last night, obviously like myself thought Mconnell came across horrible and they were trying to get pub for Grimes. If Mconnell had come across better, Foxnews would have had Matt on probably. Grimes, as she always does, doesn't answer the question with any kind of clarity, so her interview wasn't any better.

The numbers show it was the most listened to interview out there, so he accomplished what he wanted, more pub for Matt Jones. Not trying to throw this at you JC, but when are folks going to realize that Matt Jones is a radio host, like a colin cowherd, that does this kind of stuff to get ratings. They all do their research, they know what the people will listen to....

[UKRxman93]

I'm tired of Mitch being in there, but certainly am no fan of a puppet being in there either. Mitch was very much on point though and gave Jones some of his own medicine in my view. I enjoyed it.

[UKHistory]

The Kentucky senate race is one of the biggest in the country. Senator McConnell is in my estimation one of the most if not the most significant Kentucky political figure in the Senate since Henry Clay.

So this race is big nationally. I enjoyed both interviews of the candidates. Grimes was friendlier to Matt and was less willing to take a stand on issues. She could not say one thing nice about McConnell personally or professionally and that made her look petty. McConnell, whether he committed and then backed out of initially appearing on the show is regardless, came out swinging and was very aggressive. Mitch came across especially early as an angry old man. He certainly demonstrated a greater command of the issues and took more of a stand on issues that I thought Grimes did--that could be my bias and certainly is my opinion.

McConnell took Matt to task even by mentioning the Senator's absences when UK was at the White House in 2012. That shows Mitch was well prepared to get on the show to go that far back to address a criticism.

Of course that was Oaks Day in Louisville so the timing was poor for the team to go to DC for a lot of Kentucky fans--including Matt who did not attend either. McConnell really seemed to want to emphasize that he rooted for UK and as evidence mentioned his work on having recognized as a leading research facility or some such. And Mitch also said he roots for both UofL and UK and doesn't take sides when the two teams play.

Whatever your politics, I do think Mitch was not that honest about his sports affiliation. Forget the embarrassing add that showed UofL and Duke winning titles. Everyone on the Hill knows Mitch roots for UofL. He we went to bat when the Cardinals were desperately trying to get into the Big 12. On the old David Brinkley show hosted by Stephanopolous congratulated Mitch in 2009 for UofL winning the Big East tournament. Mitch roots for UofL. That should not have any impact in how a person votes generally but I do think people should be honest about what they support, what they don't support and what they don't care about.

There is a time and place for everything. Matt shows discusses movies, successful bald people, guilty pleasure songs, and some issues that impact the Commonwealth that are not as much about sports.

The YUM Center deal is sports but it impacts the residents of Louisville. Same with the Rupp reonovation. Richie Farmer's disgraced tenure as Agriculture Secretary.

UK sports is a central part of Kentuckians' lives and that does get into political and economic issues as well on occassion.

[Bakert]

Whatever your politics, I do think Mitch was not that honest about his sports affiliation.

While I'm sure you don't fall into this category, let's all hope that no one would vote for someone based on their athletic allegiance.

[uk-4-the-win]

uh, there is division anyways. Its not like Democrats and Republicans go away and disappear if Jones doesn't talk about it.

Jones isn't going to do this political stuff often, just on rare occasions so there shouldn't be a big deal.

Also Im neither rep or dem. But If I lived in Kentucky still, I'd definitely vote for anyone other than Mitch. He came across as a petty and angry man who goes back on his word. Would of done wonders if he had just apologized for the delay in coming on the show but nope, he had to act like a jerk.

[Padukacat]

I have enjoyed the entire discussion and the two interviews, it was good entertainment and that's all. No issues w jones for doing it really. Wasn't grimes down 7 pts before she came on and McConnell down two points before the interview? If so that sounds like matt taking issue with the McConnell camp actually flipped the poles after a few weeks. I figured maybe that's why Mitch gave in and called. I don't know about any of that but looked that way at a quick glance?

[UKHistory]

This was my comment later in that same message that you are quoting me:

Mitch roots for UofL. That should not have any impact in how a person votes generally but I do think people should be honest about what they support, what they don't support and what they don't care about.

I used the word generally because like many a politician I couch things so there are few absolutes. I am not sure voting for the UK fan over voting for whatever Republican (I am a Republican by party and more of a moderate libertarian by my core beliefs) gets the nod is better than finding the best person or who you think is the least bad.

I think one's vote should be about more just sports fandom. But I would not and could not have a wife who loved a rival team like I love UK. That would not work and picking a spouse is as if not more important than electing a poltical representative.

I recall years ago our church was hiring a youth pastor who was asked the ridiculous question by youth church member if he rooted for UofL or UK. He answered Florida to the laughs of the congregation. His answer to me meant at face value he was against UK at least once a year in football and at least twice a year or more in men's basketball. I didn't mention this because my faith in God says the Lord is above all that. But it struck wrong as he dodged a question and was trying to be cute.

He thought he was being funny and politically safe. Not a big deal but he was more a UofL fan than he let on. He also was a very good youth pastor.

My point is this: if you smoke weed then don't say you did not inhale; if you wear boxers but say you prefer briefs--wear what you want. And if you are going to have carnal knowledge of an intern in the oval office--have a real good time. And admit it.

Tell me who you are and don't try and hide it. I am an American and a UK fan. There are times I will not agree with everything my country or the UK administration does. It does not make me unAmerican or a disloyal UK fan for being critical of either administration. It doesn't make someone more patriotic because they always find a way to justify the action of our nation or our beloved school.

With respecting others, say what you think and try and live honestly.


While I'm sure you don't fall into this category, let's all hope that no one would vote for someone based on their athletic allegiance.

[Terry Blue]

It's Matt Jones show, but he was really trying to get back to sports today. He can do what he wants but he's really walking a fine line. Listened when Grimes was on, not Mitch, but heard some of what was said. I think he should stick to sports myself, just like I think Bob Costas and other sports commentators should stick to it. I could care less what they think about gay marriage, global warming or climate chance (whatever suits for the moment), etc. Matt can vote however he wants, but it's no wonder Mitch was upset with the interview asking him all these Liberal agenda questions:Obamacare, Climate Change, Gay Marriage, etc. Were there any questions about the economy, National Defense, Labor Force participation rate, reduction in household income, etc. If you're going to talk about politics on your show then your bias is going to show and it's going to upset about half your listening audience either way

[dtalbersjr]

I turned it off when he had both of them on. I actually really enjoy politics and read about political races fairly extensively. But I don't want politics mixing in with my enjoyment of sports, so I didn't listen.

I love Matt's show. Listen every day. I greatly enjoy how he twists the knife in the UofL rivalry every chance he gets, and I actually think he does a pretty good job covering UK sports. I know that's not the majority opinion on here.

He has the right to have whoever he wants on as a guest, which is fine. But I have the right to not listen sometimes, so I didn't. I was back listening today at 11:00 when he finally quit talking about it.

[Bakert]

This was my comment later in that same message that you are quoting me:

Mitch roots for UofL. That should not have any impact in how a person votes generally but I do think people should be honest about what they support, what they don't support and what they don't care about.

With respecting others, say what you think and try and live honestly.

Definitely words to live by.

[Terry Blue]

I much prefer Tom Leach's show to Jones. If Matt has say Mark Stoops, Tim Couch, Neal Brown, etc on and I know about it in advance I'll try to listen. Just like his website is about 80% BS that's about what his radio show is also. Tom's show is basically made up of interviews with Knowledgeable guests. If you didn't know it, our own Larry Vaught is on most Tuesdays around 9:30 est. He also has recruiting specialists like Justin Rowland and Chris Fisher on a regular basis. I prefer sports guys to talk sports just like Preacher's to talk religion and not politics

[UKHistory]

Terry,

This is more of a discussion for the front porch or the barbershop but where does the line begin and end between faith/religion and legality.

Jesus was posed what amounted to not just political but potentially treasonous questions as he served his people. God asks us very fundamental questions about who is our brother and what is our responsibility to him.

With respect to the first amendment keeping church and state separate how we govern ourselves has very much to do with our relationship to God or lack there of.

If one wants to govern morally, religion is going to be a part of the discussion.


I much prefer Tom Leach's show to Jones. If Matt has say Mark Stoops, Tim Couch, Neal Brown, etc on and I know about it in advance I'll try to listen. Just like his website is about 80% BS that's about what his radio show is also. Tom's show is basically made up of interviews with Knowledgeable guests. If you didn't know it, our own Larry Vaught is on most Tuesdays around 9:30 est. He also has recruiting specialists like Justin Rowland and Chris Fisher on a regular basis. I prefer sports guys to talk sports just like Preacher's to talk religion and not politics

[MTcatfan]

I have to say that I disagree with the original post in this thread. I think the Grimes/McConnell interviews have been very interesting and very good radio. Heck I am living in Montana and I have no dog in this race, and I thought both were fascinating. Plus I think the premise that Matt is making a mistake is wrong, he mentioned yesterday that by the end of the McConnell interview he had the THIRD highest rating on IHeart in the history of the show. So the McConnell interview ranked only behind last years final four postgame show and the Twins announcing they are coming back show, so that tells me for every 1 listener that tuned out, he probably had 10 tuning in.


Now I would not want Matt to do this real often, but my personal likings for sports shows are to have "other" stuff mixed in with the sports. My favorite sports radio show is Dan Patrick, and what I love about his show is it is 85% sports, but the other 15% is about movies, his life, the Danettes lives, and other minutia, and I like that. I love sports, but 100% sports, 100% of the time gets bbbbbbboooooorrrrrrrriiiiiiiinnnnnnggggggg. I listen to 100% sports radio at work, 8 hours a day, but I want a little other stuff mixed in. I also listen to Mad Dog on Sirius, and I like his shows because of his rants, but I also like when he does his discussions about biographies of historical people, and I like when he talks about books, and/or interviews historical sports figures, and his occasional discussions of 1970s and 1980s music, and the discussions about Springsteen concerts. Back a couple years ago Mad Dog Sports Radio had a radio host named Bruce Murray, and I loved his show because it wasn't 100% about sports, and they replaced him with Adam Shine, who I like, but I can only listen to his show on occasion because it is 100% about sports and that gets boring to me(and from discussing issues that concern sports and politics, I can tell that Adam and I are kindred spirits, I still can't listen all the time because his show is 100% sports). So for me the fact that Matt has a show that is about 90% sports, and 10% other stuff, I like it, and the political stuff fits right in.


Also for some of us we are adult enough to be able to absolutely hate each other when it comes to our politics when we are on the Barber Shop posting, and absolutely love each other when we are on here posting. So politics causes divisiveness, but for the most part it has never made me think less of a person when discussing sports. I know for a fact there are a couple of people that I am diametrically opposed to politically, but heck when we post about sports I find myself agreeing with them most of the time. Heck there are only a few posters in my 16 years on here that I despise and refuse to read, and 0% of me despising them has anything to do with their politics and 100% due to their idiotic takes on UK sports(btw, those few are not around anymore, they didn't seem to follow us to this version of the site).

[CitizenBBN]

I stopped listening to what politicians say a long time ago. Pay attention to what they do and don't do, what they say rarely has any relation to either.

<start politics>

Mitch is crotchety and not even terribly likeable, but if he wins and the GOP wins the Senate this state will benefit greatly by having the Majority Leader, and this country won't have to endure 2 more years of Obama appointments and we'll have somewhat lessened impact of his executive orders and policies.

Also, if you know about the inner workings of politics in this state you probably know who Lundergan-Grimes father is and just how up to his eyeballs he is in the DNC and how she rose to this spot to run for Senate. This is not a vote for an independent thinker, or a vote for the crotchety man, these are two party line candidates who will both toe the party line and march in step, and thus this is a straight up and down vote on which party we want running the Senate the next two years. Obama is right, this is a vote about his vision, his agenda and whether we spend the next two years getting further down that road or two years trying to get on a different path. You choose which you want, but that is the vote in front of us, not Mitch versus Grimes. Though Mitch as ML will have a ton more say than Grimes would in the overall agenda. WAY more.

Well it's also a vote on whether we want to have a majority leader from our state, with all the funding that goes with having that position. I mean a LOT Of funding for this state. More than enough to cover the desires of UL and UK fans both. ;) Economically for this state it's insanity to turn down having the Majority Leader or House Speaker from your state. Has been since the first Congress.

<end politics - for good>

[UKHistory]

Citizen,

With fingers crossed, having Mitch as majority leader should help the Commonwealth. IF and SHOULD are two very important words in life and politics. There is no comparison in ability to navigate politically between the two candidates.

[CitizenBBN]

Citizen,

With fingers crossed, having Mitch as majority leader should help the Commonwealth. IF and SHOULD are two very important words in life and politics. There is no comparison in ability to navigate politically between the two candidates.

Very true. I will say that if he becomes ML, it will certainly help the state. If it doesn't it will be the first time in US history that it hasn't had an impact.

It's not corruption either, at least not per se. It's the structure of the political chip system. The ML gets the most tribute b/c of his control over every committee assignment as well as the patronage he hands out through the lobby system to more junior Senators. They OWE him, and the way to pay him is to sponsor and support legislation that benefits his constituents and thus his donors. It's pork barreling, and it's older than the Athenian republic.

Grimes would be a first term Senator, the political equivalent of cannon fodder, and Paul while politically high profile is still a junior member. Kentucky would go from first to near last in the political buffet line.

I hate almost all government funding, but it WILL be handed out, so I'd rather be in the front of the line rather than the end. It's basic pragmatism. Better to go to Kentucky than some other state, b/c it's not whether the funding happens, only where it ends up.

Of course it's not all money. It's also policy issues like coal and the EPA insanity that is likely to impact Kentucky harder and harder, as well as other issues that simply will give Kentuckians a bigger voice due to being the constituents of the ML. Kentucky is pretty strongly pro-gun, that will be reflected in Mitch's policies, and as ML he decides the policies.

I don't want Mitch to go nuts and try to move the Pentagon or CIA here, like Sen. Byrd did in West Virginia, but just the normal course of logrolling and pork barreling in DC we will receive billions in funding for research, transportation, etc.

[Terry Blue]

I didn't start the thread and it can be deleted for all I care. I am a strong believer but I don't think it's a Pastor's place to try to influence his congregation on how to vote. I've been in churches before an election and they may not say vote for X or Z, but they'll try to influence them by listing what "he" considers important attributes of each candidate. I don't believe in this, just like I don't believe in usually Dems going to Black Churches to try to get them to vote Dem. How could anyone forget Hillary Clinton reading something with a Black Dialect, which I thought was totally disgusting. Others may disagree but that's my opinion.

[Bakert]

Citizen,

With fingers crossed, having Mitch as majority leader should help the Commonwealth. IF and SHOULD are two very important words in life and politics. There is no comparison in ability to navigate politically between the two candidates.

I thought McConnell was on record as saying that him being speaker would not result in money flowing back to KY? Could be mistaken.

[UKHistory]

This might best be served for one of the other forums but not sure Mitch has been that effective in protecting Fort Knox for example. Maybe the political winds are such that he can't but we could lose a lot of jobs there and that is not good for the community I grew up in.

But generally having the majority leader in your state will help that state. Grimes' position in the Senate would be as you describe. She is close with the Clintons but still would be a very novice representative for the Bluegrass. I am sure I would not be great in my first year but boy I don't think she will be either based on the interviews I have seen.

Also really disappointed in the democrat who said McConnell's wife is not a Kentuckian. You can argue that all the long term-politicians are now Virginians but Secretary Chao is a brilliant woman and a great American success story who should be celebrated and all Kentuckians should be proud of her.

Conservatives and Republicans are so often universally viewed as sexist and racist. Those traits don't know racial, political or national bounderies.


Very true. I will say that if he becomes ML, it will certainly help the state. If it doesn't it will be the first time in US history that it hasn't had an impact.

It's not corruption either, at least not per se. It's the structure of the political chip system. The ML gets the most tribute b/c of his control over every committee assignment as well as the patronage he hands out through the lobby system to more junior Senators. They OWE him, and the way to pay him is to sponsor and support legislation that benefits his constituents and thus his donors. It's pork barreling, and it's older than the Athenian republic.

Grimes would be a first term Senator, the political equivalent of cannon fodder, and Paul while politically high profile is still a junior member. Kentucky would go from first to near last in the political buffet line.

I hate almost all government funding, but it WILL be handed out, so I'd rather be in the front of the line rather than the end. It's basic pragmatism. Better to go to Kentucky than some other state, b/c it's not whether the funding happens, only where it ends up.

Of course it's not all money. It's also policy issues like coal and the EPA insanity that is likely to impact Kentucky harder and harder, as well as other issues that simply will give Kentuckians a bigger voice due to being the constituents of the ML. Kentucky is pretty strongly pro-gun, that will be reflected in Mitch's policies, and as ML he decides the policies.

I don't want Mitch to go nuts and try to move the Pentagon or CIA here, like Sen. Byrd did in West Virginia, but just the normal course of logrolling and pork barreling in DC we will receive billions in funding for research, transportation, etc.

[MTcatfan]

It's Matt Jones show, but he was really trying to get back to sports today. He can do what he wants but he's really walking a fine line. Listened when Grimes was on, not Mitch, but heard some of what was said. I think he should stick to sports myself, just like I think Bob Costas and other sports commentators should stick to it. I could care less what they think about gay marriage, global warming or climate chance (whatever suits for the moment), etc. Matt can vote however he wants, but it's no wonder Mitch was upset with the interview asking him all these Liberal agenda questions:Obamacare, Climate Change, Gay Marriage, etc. Were there any questions about the economy, National Defense, Labor Force participation rate, reduction in household income, etc. If you're going to talk about politics on your show then your bias is going to show and it's going to upset about half your listening audience either way

BTW, McConnell was pissed BEFORE the interview even started, probably because he had to lower himself to being on Matt's show, plus he was combative from the start, and that was BEFORE he was asked any questions about politics, so your take doesn't really pan out. Plus Matt asked him about PERTIANENT political questions, and right now name me some more hot buttom issues than Affordable Care Act/Obamacare, Gay Marriage and Climate change? I mean the House of Representatives has voted about 1,232,393 times to repeal Obamacare, the House and Senate have had running 24/7/365 hearings on climate change, and hello have you had your head in the sand the last month or so when it comes to Gay Marriage? He also did ask him about the minimum wage, which is an economy questions. Plus Matt basically just asked Mitch the same questions he asked Grimes, so at least he was trying to be a bit unbiased by giving each a chance to answer the same questions.


Plus I find is hilarious there is all of this consternation about his show when he basically spent 1 20 minute segment interviewing Grimes, then 1 segment talking about it before making everyone go back to sports, and then spent 1 20 minute segment on McConnell, and then 1 segment talking about it before making everyone go back to sports. The only real difference is because McConnell acted like an ass, that interview had more legs than the Grimes one, so he appeared on a national talk show, so he had to spend 2 20 minute segments talking about the response to the McConnell interview. So Matt is on the radio, 10 hours a week, 40 hours a month, and in the past month he has spent maybe 2.5 hours talking politics(I added an extra half hour to cover those short times he discussed and whined about getting them on his show), which is 6.25% of the time he has been on air, big deal. Plus, as I said earlier, those shows have been some of his highest rated shows EVER, so I think he knows what he is doing. I mean McConnell was his 3rd highest IHeart streamed show ever, so his strategy worked for his show.

[CitizenBBN]

I thought McConnell was on record as saying that him being speaker would not result in money flowing back to KY? Could be mistaken.

Like I said, never listen to what they say, just what they do. :)

As a fiscal conservative it's bad form to tout the pork you bring to your constituents. Its even bad form to do it, but until the other 49 states agree to stop it's also the way of things.

Now I hope for a party, presumably the GOP, to stand up and reign in all of this spending across the board at the federal level on everything from cranberry research to equine research to free cell phones and disability fraud and everything in between. Get the federal government out of the funding business as much as possible.

But to the extent that will never fully be realized it will for certain mean more funding for Kentucky. Not even through a Robert Byrd type effort to pave the whole state or relocate the nation's capital, but just through the normal influence process of governing. I don't expect him to go hog wild, or try to build trains to nowhere like Reid has tried, but just normal everyday funding shifts will mean billions.

That grant to research X, Y or Z will be made no matter what and you just got a big donation from a speaking engagement doled out by the ML. Does it go to the University of Nevada or the University of Kentucky? You're a lobbyist and you want your bill brought up. Does your association generously donate to a cause in Reno or Lexington? Through no improper or audacious action of his own it will still funnel a lot of money and prestige (which is money once removed) to this state.

[CitizenBBN]

Plus Matt asked him about PERTIANENT political questions, and right now name me some more hot buttom issues than Affordable Care Act/Obamacare, Gay Marriage and Climate change? .

Terrorism, border security, the federal debt. :)

Let me do the interviews, I can make any candidate look good or bad with simple control of the topics and questions. Not saying Matt did it or didn't, like I said I didn't and wont' listen, but the interviewer definitely has a lot of control by having the power to set the agenda.

Matt will no doubt be fine from doing this, but interjecting politics is a dangerous fuel to put on the fire. It gets the ratings, but it can undermine your standing with a lot of people as well. Sounds like Matt's more liberal/Duke bent may have shown through based on the conversations I've heard, which is not exactly the core of the Kentucky radio market. He'd have done better to slant the other way intentionally, and this is after all a business.

PS - I have no doubt Mitch came off as crotchety and hacked. He's always crotchety and hacked. But in his defense if I was in Washington doing that job I'd be the most pissed off, sullen brooding person you ever met. lol.

[MTcatfan]

Matt is definitely a liberal, so he I am sure picked questions closer to his heart, and I think he was trying to pick questions that affected Kentuckians on a more day to day basis, but at least he gave both the same questions, and really Mitch would have been better prepared because he should have known the questions he was going to be asked. BTW, Matt gets a lot of grief about the dUKe law school thing, but after listening to him for awhile that is unfair, he doesn't like dUKe one bit, and he tells people this anytime someone tries to use it against him on air, and I believe him. The dUKe law school was just an ends to a means when he thought he wanted to be a lawyer, it was darn prestigious to get accepted so he went there. Also since Matt is a liberal, and that is not his target market, he hates to talk politics on air, and in the last year where I have been a daily listener, until the KY Senate race he has maybe talked politics total of an hour in a year. He has stated his whole purpose has been to give the candidates their largest audience to make their case, and typical with politicians they didn't really do it, he killed Grimes because she wouldn't give him a straight answer, and he killed McConnell for being unnecessarily angry.

[blueboss]

It's all up to the voters of the commonwealth ...and those that would sway their vote based on sports talk show are probably the same ones that are swayed by TV commercials


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Krank]

politics has no place in sports discussion and the brotherhood of fandom - other than creating divisiveness.

I give a f**k about what anyone says in this thread about Matt Jones or ANY politician. I just wanted to isolate this ONE PERFECT STATEMENT by Jeeep and CHALLENGE this board to PIN it and FOLLOW it as per the rules I THOUGHT I signed up for when I set up my initial payment for this, the only premie site I have EVER been a member of.

Before ANYONE blah blah blahs about "well, it's sports related, therefore an exception", I would like to respectfully suggest that such excuses, even if legit, simply give folks excuses to POLLUTE this SPORTS forum with WAAAAYYYY too much of their specific politics, which some of us DESPISE ever reading about in any way shape or form. I am not saying that I have never violated this ever in my posting life, but if I have, shame on me.

Sorry for the rant, which is not meant to be personal to anyone here or to overly criticize the mods, whom I like and respect a great deal, but it does not get stated often enough here IMO that there are MANY folks (IMO) who would post more and provide more traffic to the site overall if there were not so much (well beyond obvious sports/politics "hybrid" threads like these) casual dropping of personal politics in places it has NO place being in beyond IMAGINING that we are all on the same political page.

We are here for sports. I hear enough ridiculously rancorous bullspit about politics every damn where I turn in this depressing day and age. PLEASE just shut up already. Thanks.

[CitizenBBN]

Matt gets a lot of grief about the dUKe law school thing, but after listening to him for awhile that is unfair, he doesn't like dUKe one bit, and he tells people this anytime someone tries to use it against him on air, and I believe him. The dUKe law school was just an ends to a means when he thought he wanted to be a lawyer, it was darn prestigious to get accepted so he went there. Also since Matt is a liberal,

i don't grieve him for being a closet Duke fan or anything, but he definitely has the demeanor befitting the label of Dookie, politically and otherwise. My issue isn't with Duke basketball and never has been, it has to do with the self-absorbed condescension that I have experienced first hand from Duke's and similar school's graduates, Matt included. Duke is uniquely bad IMO, I have met maybe two Duke grads who aren't completely full of themselves.

Re Grimes and McConnell, that's kinda funny. Grimes can't afford to give a straight answer or she'd never win this election, and Mitch I'm pretty sure was born unnecessarily angry or at least was infected decades ago. So I guess Matt did a good job showing them to be who they are. lol.

The thing is I'm no fan of Mitch. He's an institutional guy through and through, and the institution, both of the GOP and the government in general, desperately needs an enema through it's ear, but the alternative is far worse IMO, so I'll do as most of us do in every election, hold my nose and pull the lever. :)

[CitizenBBN]

Don't worry Krank, I'm moving it. The Barber shop was created to be a place to move these things and keep politics, religion, etc. away from the discussion of most of our members who want to avoid it. That's where such things need to stay.

[Jeeepcat]

Wow. Well krank got it. I never intended for this to go where it went, I can't even read it.

I hate politics and what is does to people. My point was keep it where it belongs (ironically) :p

[jazyd]

He only hates duke on his show because that gets him more UK listeners and now with ul in the acc it will help with that segment also.
He is just as uppity as any dukey, period. He plays to the audience that brings him the most listeners and money which is UK, but he needs to watch it on the politics end.
I don't listen to him, won't listen to him, have no need to listen to him.



Terrorism, border security, the federal debt. :)

Let me do the interviews, I can make any candidate look good or bad with simple control of the topics and questions. Not saying Matt did it or didn't, like I said I didn't and wont' listen, but the interviewer definitely has a lot of control by having the power to set the agenda.

Matt will no doubt be fine from doing this, but interjecting politics is a dangerous fuel to put on the fire. It gets the ratings, but it can undermine your standing with a lot of people as well. Sounds like Matt's more liberal/Duke bent may have shown through based on the conversations I've heard, which is not exactly the core of the Kentucky radio market. He'd have done better to slant the other way intentionally, and this is after all a business.

PS - I have no doubt Mitch came off as crotchety and hacked. He's always crotchety and hacked. But in his defense if I was in Washington doing that job I'd be the most pissed off, sullen brooding person you ever met. lol.

[MickintheHam]

While I'm sure you don't fall into this category, let's all hope that no one would vote for someone based on their athletic allegiance.

You haven't been in alaBama too long, have you?