George Noory Sucks! - The Definitive Compendium

[robey1129]

After processing what I heard last night (C2C murdered) and after listening to it again today thanks to the posting (fantastic job), I could not help but wonder how and why the crew on C2C allowed it to air. It was pretty obvious where the caller was going after he started. We all know they have that delay as a defense mechanism.
Is it possible that there is an inside mutiny afoot?
Any theories?

[b_dubb]

i'm hoping they'll make noory walk the pink slip


speaking of pink slips ... i wonder if someone is catching hell for this today?

[James G.]

there's currently (1/8/11) a drawing of what looks like a leprechaun on the C2C site depicting what a listener insists is a little man that lives with him and his family in their home.  most would forward this guy to the appropriate mental health professionals.  C2C posts the drawing and description as if it were plausible. 

Exactly. No photos or films of the little guy? Only a drawing? Let me guess, the little guy is camera shy. Or, for some reason, cannot be captured on recording devices. For whatever reasons. And I bet he'll "run away and hide indefinitely" if any credible witnesses were to visit the home to confirm the story? And the existence of the little guy? That leprechaun story was darn near impossible to me to take.

It sounds like those callers who claim to have Bigfoot -- even tribes of them -- living all around their homes. And that some even visit them. But such creatures have an uncanny knack to escape even the most primitive of photography equipment? And, as with the leprechaun, no doubt escape any detection by credible investigators?

[b_dubb]

OMFG! you have bigfoot living in your neighborhood too!!! god i wish they'd pick up after themselves!! they leave their pooh everyone!!! jerks!!!!!

[DoYouThinkItWasAngels]

Hal, big ups, your edits are just too funny!

[b_dubb]

yes. excellent bumper music

[fabucat]

Was anyone else as offended as I was when Snoory had on pro-gun John Lott to discuss how The Government Was Going to Take Away All of Our Guns in the wake of the shooting last Saturday in Arizona??  How callous!  Here six people are dead and all Snoory and Co. are worried about is that their guns are going to be confiscated, instead of caring about the victims. 

I don't care for guns the way a lot of people don't care for abortions, but I don't think that it's my business to tell people how to live.  UNLESS you're a criminal or a raving maniac.  Then it becomes the business of my community and ME.  I also don't think that people should be allowed to own automatic or semi-automatic weapons, but what do I know?

The government can read our emails, listen into our phone calls, "touch our junk", and put us on a "no fly list" without explanation.  The government has suspended habeas corpus and posse comitatus.  Bank of America can securitize our mortgages without filing the necessary paperwork, and therefore can subvert HUNDREDS of years of Anglo-American property law.  But gosh darn dang it, we can have as many weapons as we want to, that's what makes us FREE!

The idea that one could defend oneself against the government with even the most deadly of guns is idiotic.  How many nuclear weapons and vials of deadly germs does our government possess? 

Anyway, I think that George was an effing heartless tasteless selfish pig when he aired a rabidly pro-gun program so soon after this tragedy. 

[b_dubb]

that's pretty insensitive.  nay ... disrespectful.  wait a week or two before you use a national tragedy to further your own political agenda

[b_dubb]

George is sounding so right wing ... so HAWKISH ... i'm wondering if he is in fact Paul Wolfowitz in disguise.  why does he always go to the ... "what happens if we use nukes?" question?  like ... oh ... george ... no big deal ... just vaporize a bunch of innocent people ... pollute the atmosphere with radiation ... possibly spark a nuclear holocaust ... no big whoop

what a dick

why am i listening?  seriously! something's wrong with me.  it's like going to the same restaurant over and over because you know it sucks. 

[James G.]

The pro-gun guest the other night was right in line with a lot of what I heard on Conservative radio. There was a lot of talk about gun rights. It went on-and-on. And Coast To Coast AM has that Conservative basis anyway (possibly because of Premiere Radio Networks outside of sports talk), such a discussion wouldn't surprise me one bit.

I'm not against any kind of gun ownership, but rather the intent and responsibility of the gun owners themselves. But, after tuning into Conservative talk radio in the past two days, to hear the reaction to the fallout, I've noted a sudden change in pro-gun rationale.

For the longest time, all I heard the pro-gun, Conservative people (including hosts, guests and callers) ramble on about how The Second Amendment was adopted for citizens to protect themselves from a tyrannical government. Does that mean our own government?

But in the past two days, they're "singing a different tune." Now, it's all about protection from murderers, thugs, muggers, burglars, and assorted criminals. It appears as if the call to arms for protection against the "tyrannical government" is being shelved. For now.

Modern Conservatism: All About "The American Revolution" Negates The American Civil War
The focus of the modern Conservative and Tea Party Movement is "The Founding Fathers" and "The American Revolution." At that time, colonials had guns to rebel against a tyrannical rule under England, a foreign power. The Second Amendment, at the time of its drafting, may have had more to do with maintaining a militia in the event the United States was conquered and ruled again by a tyrannical government.

Remember, England never accepted the United States Of America's independence in the end. Perhaps its rulers felt the colonials would be too dumb to rule themselves, and would crawl back to the English government to be ruled again. In a short time. It must have stuck in England's craw when that didn't happen. So England and returned a few decades later, attempting to "take back what it believed was rightfully theirs." And I'm sure "The Founding Fathers" considered that possibility.

The modern Conservative Movement mentions nothing about the American Civil War. Ironic. It was basically an armed insurrection by a Confederation of southern states that felt the United States government had indeed become tyrannical. Justifying themselves by what they described as a fight for state rights, the Confederate states went as far as to succeed from the Union, and declare themselves an independent nation.

And how soon people forget the magnitude and damage of that war, and how we as Americans once harmed each other and destroyed on such a grand scale. How soon we forget.

I sense the same type of friction these days that mirrors the American Civil War closer, I feel, than the American Revolution. Yet, I hear nothing from either side these days about that trying time in our nation's history. Especially from the Conservatives.

An Armed Citizenry Not Always A Flawless Solution
I hear a lot of generalizations and "what if scenarios" from the gun-toting sector. I've been through dangerous, life-threatening situations in which I didn't need a firearm to survive. Remember the shooter the other day was taken down and disarmed without a firearm deployed against him. I would be concerned if some gun-toting person opened fire, and possibly harmed bystanders in some crossfire. It happens.

Even Mr. Noory told that story the other night of encountering what he considered a "strange person" in some public place. And how Mr. Noory was basically convinced that man "was going to do something." But he didn't. He didn't. Now, if such a person as Mr. Noory was in that situation, would they feel compelled to draw on -- and possibly fire upon -- such a person he or she "felt" was going to do "something." Consider that.

Learning and understanding hand-to-hand engaging can be just as effective as possessing a firearm. Your body is the only weapon that you always have. It goes everywhere that you go. It's the only weapon that can't be turned on yourself.

There's added dangers to both concealed and open-carry firearm methods. Especially when an assailant or some criminal doesn't have a gun -- but the firearm holder does. Think of open carry, for example. It takes little to ambush or blindside such a carrier, and then become armed that way. The same is true for concealed carriers as well.

Unless these gun carriers plan on having their weapons out at the ready at all times, and point them at every person they encounter, they'll never really be safe "out there." As I understood the tragedy the other day, even if the victims were armed at the time would have mattered not in stopping the attack. Was the assailant going to announce his intentions and challenge them to a fair gunfight? Hardly.

I know there are instances where firearms have indeed saved people from such criminal elements. But there's cases when firearms are used by supposed law-abiding persons who lacked any criminal record.

Listen to the news sometimes. Hear of cases of domestic disturbances, homicides or even suicides in which assailants employed firearms -- notably  handguns. Why did a number of them have those guns in the first place? For protection.  Something many would applaud.

Stricter Guns Laws May Be Adopted, But Such Can Also Be Bypassed
There's a lot of ironic to gun-sales laws. Sure, someone with a criminal record or verified history of a dangerous mental illness may not be able to get a gun that way. But what about private sales? How conscious of this fact are private sellers. Look in the local newspaper sometime. There they are.

When I had guns years ago, I always ran my own background check on prospective buyers through law enforcement before I visited with them. I required a person's name and address beforehand. And those who seemed hesitant after I explained my procedure -- and social responsibility -- may have had a reason to be hesitant. I always required a valid ID when meeting the prospective buyer, to verify my background check. And all my gun buyers passed the background check, so at least I held a clear conscious. What they did with those firearms after the sale was their responsibility.

Even if a person passes a background check, I would never sell them any ammunition with the firearm. Ever. Now, I had no way of knowing if someone thought ahead about what they were buying and "brought their own," but since they showed a clean record that was a chance I had to take.

A further measure of any Federal gun laws against dealers should address regulation of private sales as well. There's loopholes and workarounds people can exploit. But it's usually only when something bad happens that such measures are employed.

[ourobouros2k2]

Schwartz's borderline fellating of Noory's ego tonight was just too much to take. "You ask the most intelligent questions!". Threw up in my mouth a little. I couldn't hang any longer with that show so I threw on some old ghost to ghost and rode out the night.

Knowing Art is gone just makes this crap even harder to listen to anymore.

regards
Andy

[fabucat]

The pro-gun guest the other night was right in line with a lot of what I heard on Conservative radio. There was a lot of talk about gun rights. It went on-and-on. And Coast To Coast AM has that Conservative basis anyway (possibly because of Premiere Radio Networks outside of sports talk), such a discussion wouldn't surprise me one bit.

I'm not against any kind of gun ownership, but rather the intent and responsibility of the gun owners themselves. But, after tuning into Conservative talk radio in the past two days, to hear the reaction to the fallout, I've noted a sudden change in pro-gun rationale.

For the longest time, all I heard the pro-gun, Conservative people (including hosts, guests and callers) ramble on about how The Second Amendment was adopted for citizens to protect themselves from a tyrannical government. Does that mean our own government?

But in the past two days, they're "singing a different tune." Now, it's all about protection from murderers, thugs, muggers, burglars, and assorted criminals. It appears as if the call to arms for protection against the "tyrannical government" is being shelved. For now.

Modern Conservatism: All About "The American Revolution" Negates The American Civil War
The focus of the modern Conservative and Tea Party Movement is "The Founding Fathers" and "The American Revolution." At that time, colonials had guns to rebel against a tyrannical rule under England, a foreign power. The Second Amendment, at the time of its drafting, may have had more to do with maintaining a militia in the event the United States was conquered and ruled again by a tyrannical government.

Remember, England never accepted the United States Of America's independence in the end. Perhaps its rulers felt the colonials would be too dumb to rule themselves, and would crawl back to the English government to be ruled again. In a short time. It must have stuck in England's craw when that didn't happen. So England and returned a few decades later, attempting to "take back what it believed was rightfully theirs." And I'm sure "The Founding Fathers" considered that possibility.

The modern Conservative Movement mentions nothing about the American Civil War. Ironic. It was basically an armed insurrection by a Confederation of southern states that felt the United States government had indeed become tyrannical. Justifying themselves by what they described as a fight for state rights, the Confederate states went as far as to succeed from the Union, and declare themselves an independent nation.

And how soon people forget the magnitude and damage of that war, and how we as Americans once harmed each other and destroyed on such a grand scale. How soon we forget.

I sense the same type of friction these days that mirrors the American Civil War closer, I feel, than the American Revolution. Yet, I hear nothing from either side these days about that trying time in our nation's history. Especially from the Conservatives.

An Armed Citizenry Not Always A Flawless Solution
I hear a lot of generalizations and "what if scenarios" from the gun-toting sector. I've been through dangerous, life-threatening situations in which I didn't need a firearm to survive. Remember the shooter the other day was taken down and disarmed without a firearm deployed against him. I would be concerned if some gun-toting person opened fire, and possibly harmed bystanders in some crossfire. It happens.

Even Mr. Noory told that story the other night of encountering what he considered a "strange person" in some public place. And how Mr. Noory was basically convinced that man "was going to do something." But he didn't. He didn't. Now, if such a person as Mr. Noory was in that situation, would they feel compelled to draw on -- and possibly fire upon -- such a person he or she "felt" was going to do "something." Consider that.

Learning and understanding hand-to-hand engaging can be just as effective as possessing a firearm. Your body is the only weapon that you always have. It goes everywhere that you go. It's the only weapon that can't be turned on yourself.

There's added dangers to both concealed and open-carry firearm methods. Especially when an assailant or some criminal doesn't have a gun -- but the firearm holder does. Think of open carry, for example. It takes little to ambush or blindside such a carrier, and then become armed that way. The same is true for concealed carriers as well.

Unless these gun carriers plan on having their weapons out at the ready at all times, and point them at every person they encounter, they'll never really be safe "out there." As I understood the tragedy the other day, even if the victims were armed at the time would have mattered not in stopping the attack. Was the assailant going to announce his intentions and challenge them to a fair gunfight? Hardly.

I know there are instances where firearms have indeed saved people from such criminal elements. But there's cases when firearms are used by supposed law-abiding persons who lacked any criminal record.

Listen to the news sometimes. Hear of cases of domestic disturbances, homicides or even suicides in which assailants employed firearms -- notably  handguns. Why did a number of them have those guns in the first place? For protection.  Something many would applaud.

Stricter Guns Laws May Be Adopted, But Such Can Also Be Bypassed
There's a lot of ironic to gun-sales laws. Sure, someone with a criminal record or verified history of a dangerous mental illness may not be able to get a gun that way. But what about private sales? How conscious of this fact are private sellers. Look in the local newspaper sometime. There they are.

When I had guns years ago, I always ran my own background check on prospective buyers through law enforcement before I visited with them. I required a person's name and address beforehand. And those who seemed hesitant after I explained my procedure -- and social responsibility -- may have had a reason to be hesitant. I always required a valid ID when meeting the prospective buyer, to verify my background check. And all my gun buyers passed the background check, so at least I held a clear conscious. What they did with those firearms after the sale was their responsibility.

Even if a person passes a background check, I would never sell them any ammunition with the firearm. Ever. Now, I had no way of knowing if someone thought ahead about what they were buying and "brought their own," but since they showed a clean record that was a chance I had to take.

A further measure of any Federal gun laws against dealers should address regulation of private sales as well. There's loopholes and workarounds people can exploit. But it's usually only when something bad happens that such measures are employed.

What an excellent post!!!  I'm not against gun ownership, as I said before.  But do private citizens REALLY need automatic weapons???  Do they REALLY need 30 bullet magazine clips???  Are reasonable regulations regarding gun ownership an "infringement upon our rights?"  Do mentally unstable people really have the right to obtain guns?

George's statement last night that the suspect was a "wacko" who should be tried and executed quickly was really classless.  No doubt the defendant will be convicted and probably will be executed.  Despite my distaste for the death penalty, I probably won't object to the defendant's execution.  Yet George's support for absolutely unfettered gun ownership puts guns in the hands of the mentally disturbed.  Because of people like George, there's no doubt that such mass murder will become routine in this country.

[fabucat]

George is sounding so right wing ... so HAWKISH ... i'm wondering if he is in fact Paul Wolfowitz in disguise.  why does he always go to the ... "what happens if we use nukes?" question?  like ... oh ... george ... no big deal ... just vaporize a bunch of innocent people ... pollute the atmosphere with radiation ... possibly spark a nuclear holocaust ... no big whoop

what a dick

why am i listening?  seriously! something's wrong with me.  it's like going to the same restaurant over and over because you know it sucks.

Yeah, just about the only saving grace about George is that he breaks from right wing orthodoxy when he speaks up (however meekly) for Palestinian rights.  Oh yes, and he also supports Wikileaks. 

BTW, Premiere Radio Networks also has a LIBERAL talk radio host in Randi Rhodes, who is very good.  I don't think that Premiere cares about politics so much.  They just care about whether or not their product sells.   They've got the Ruler of the Universe with regard to right wing talk in Limbaugh.  Every other righty in the talk show biz is just talentless compared to Rush, whatever you think of his politics.  I really don't see the need for 2,000 other Rush wannabes on the radio.

Finally, to the extent that George becomes a Rush wannabe, he really sucks.

[KMKMKM]

Tonight, three separate guests discuss various health & medical issues. In the second hour, Dr. Leonard Coldwell (email) talks about heart disease, cancer cures, and how stress & anxiety contribute to medical problems. Ann Louise Gittleman, a weight loss/detox expert, appears in the third hour, with tips on how to eliminate toxins from your system. In the last hour, Jon Gabriel shares the mind-body connection he discovered that helped him to lose over 220 pounds.


awesome, just what I wanted to hear about on Coast to Coast AM...

can't believe how much this show has changed.

[b_dubb]

a show about coffee enemas and juicing.  wheeeeeeeeee

[fabucat]

Tonight, three separate guests discuss various health & medical issues. In the second hour, Dr. Leonard Coldwell (email) talks about heart disease, cancer cures, and how stress & anxiety contribute to medical problems. Ann Louise Gittleman, a weight loss/detox expert, appears in the third hour, with tips on how to eliminate toxins from your system. In the last hour, Jon Gabriel shares the mind-body connection he discovered that helped him to lose over 220 pounds.


Oh, gawd, that sounds like an episode of Oprah, minus the transvestites.

TRANSVESTITES!  Now there's an idea.  Sorta loses its punch on the radio.

Life in the Noory-zone:  Eat really boring healthy natural food (actually I do), lose a lot of weight, and then get blown away to bits by a psychotic madman with a Glock, because he's got a right to exercise his 2nd Amendment remedies.  Oh and if you're not shot to death, you can die due to floods and famine caused by the climate change that George and his friends are denying!

[fabucat]

Noory is Unamerican  Did I just say that?  I'm lefty liberal (or in Beckese a Nazi Communist) who has trashed the USA plenty.  My current pet peeve about Noory is this fraudulent gold commercial he does.  Noory quotes an alleged Bloomberg article in which supposedly states that by next year, the dollar is going to be rated THE LOWEST VALUED CURRENCY IN THE WORLD. 

That's TOTAL CRAP.  Do you know how many lowly valued currencies there are in the world?  I learned this when I found a bunch of bills in different denominations of different countries: Ethiopia, India, Iraq, Nigeria, etc.  Just for giggles, I looked at how much the exchange rate was for these currencies in relation to the dollar. I learned, for example, that 20,000 Ethiopian Watchmacallits are worth about .28 US. 

We know that our economy stinks, but do you know how LOW the dollar would have to get to be valued less than the Ethiopian denomination?  I tried to exchange these fine Ethiopian bills at the bank.  The teller, an Ethiopian immigrant, said that the bank didn't exchange Ethiopian money.  I then offered the teller the bills for free, and she said, "No thanks, but I'm staying here in the USA."

If this anecdote doesn't prove that what George says in the gold commercial is full of crap, I don't know what does.  Yes, I know that the gold company wrote the script, but if I were George, I'd REFUSE to say these anti-American lies.

If you're gonna dis my country, tell the damned truth George.  Tell 'em that we committed genocide against the First Nation, say we interned the Japanese during WWII, but I'll be damned if you dispense lies about the dollar!

 

[GuerrillaUnReal]

:facepalm: I fucking hate right-winger paranoia about the second amendment. I'm fiercely pro-2nd but I don't get where these idiots' fears come from. Especially since virtually every politician and pundit who had a microphone thrown in their face and asked whether the shooting will lead to any gun laws said unanimously "No". Whenever someone starts going off about how "DA GUBERMENT IS GONNA TAKE OUR GUNZZZ" my brain automatically goes into tune out the retard mode.

Also what exactly is a toxin? It's never been explained before and there's no reference to "toxins" in any sort of medical text but yet there's a whole industry that has sprung up around cleansing "toxins" from the body. My favorite product is the sticky pads you put on your feet that cleanse "toxins" from your body while you sleep.

[James G.]

One thing I've learned about Mr. George Noory is that he's not a journalist. I do my best to forgive him for some of the conclusions he draws, because his experience in that area is as limited as many common people's are. I understand that.

Fairly, I admit I lack experience in radio broadcasting. It wasn't my profession, and I feel I couldn't do what he does.

I've heard him jump to some such conclusion without realizing that certain things must be examined further and critically before such a conclusion is presented as some fact, trend or "lack of coincidence."

One recent example just perturbs me. He gets stuck on concluding about a common aspect of assassins and some sordid, notorious criminals: They all have three names, as they're listed with first, middle and last names.

What Mr. Noory fails to consider is why these figures are listed with three names. I can tell he wasn't involved in print journalism at a major daily newspaper, as I was. I can tell he wasn't a police reporter or a court reporter.

It's not unusual in the law for a three-name listing to be used when a person is either charged or convicted of a wrongdoing. And it's common for court defendants to be listed and addressed by their full names. It's done to further differentiate between, or save a bit of mistaken identity of, persons with the accused or convicted person's same first and last name.

It's not uncommon for people to have the same first and last name. But it can be much rarer for people to have the same first, middle and last name. As once portrayed in a fictional film, "Saving Private Ryan," such an identification "foul up" occurs. The two men share the same first name, middle initial and last name. But, as others find out to their embarrassment, each man has a different middle name. The same middle initial wasn't enough of a differential.

When I was a police reporter, I always had to take caution in identifying arrested and charged individuals by their address. And age listing. Why? What if you share the same name as someone in your city or town who's charged with a crime? But the accused person's address isn't listed. People could read in the newspaper about such a case or incident, and possibly assume it's you. And you could feel defamed if someone does think it's you.

Notice this currently with the Arizona-shooting suspect. He goes by the name Jared Loughner. Now, he's addressed in court or cited in the media and reports as Jared Lee Loughner or Jared L. Loughner.

"Three-Names" Also Used In Cases Of Historical, Social Infamy
The "three-name bit" is also often used when certain names live in historical or criminal infamy. One example is Lee Harvey Oswald. At the time -- and in subsequent time -- there was no doubt guys named Lee Oswald. And went by that name. How do you feel many in society would immediately perceive them unjustly, if the middle name wasn't used when referencing the infamous assassin?

There's also Mark David Chapman. No doubt, most guys named Mark Chapman go by the name Mark Chapman. Now, do you see how that both names sound and read differently when a middle name is used, or not used? And how it decreases the same-name, association? I do.

I always resent what Mr. Noory and others say in this matter. Why? Because I use a three-name scheme for two reasons: It sounds better for my line of writing work, and it further distinguishes me from others having the same first and last names. Therefore going further in identifying myself more accurately.

"Three-Names" Can Add Appeal, Further Differentiation Among Varied Creators, Artists
Doesn't a name like "Edgar Allan Poe" sound better and more identifying than the name "Edgar Poe"? I think so.

In addition, from what I've understood, there's also naming requirements for those registering with The Screen Actors Guild. Names have to be unique, from what I gathered. It's not uncommon for a performer to have to modify -- or change -- his or her name to avoid duplicating one already registered. You'll see them use middle names, middle initials, with some even using a first initial and their full middle name and last name.

Mr. Noory needs to realize that many listeners may be ignorant enough to believe the "three-name conclusion." I don't need people who don't know better judging and labeling me impulsively and blindly as some bad guy or as a danger because of some misinformed, inexperienced theory. One forwarded by persons lacking either the experience or wits to figure out why the "three-name bit" is often employed.

Look out for that guy, these ignorant people may think of me. He's got to be a danger because he uses three names!

And it's quite unfair. And it's baloney, as well.

If Mr. Noory got online with those people searches, he'd find out there's other guys named George Noory in the United States. Now, how would he feel if someone with his name did something wrong, and people thought it was him? He'd see the light then, I feel.

[toxicmop]

Tonight, three separate guests discuss various health & medical issues. In the second hour, Dr. Leonard Coldwell (email) talks about heart disease, cancer cures, and how stress & anxiety contribute to medical problems. Ann Louise Gittleman, a weight loss/detox expert, appears in the third hour, with tips on how to eliminate toxins from your system. In the last hour, Jon Gabriel shares the mind-body connection he discovered that helped him to lose over 220 pounds.


awesome, just what I wanted to hear about on Coast to Coast AM...

can't believe how much this show has changed.

This is ABSOLUTELY the worst Coast show I've ever heard. This is a Sunday morning infomercial goddamn it. Pardon my French, but fuck this show. This is my breaking point. I could hear this same garbage on TV right now if I flipped around to some infomercials.

[HumanBeing]

As soon as  I seen tonight's show go from "TBA" to "Health Special"... I knew I should have guessed. It is Noory's little lovejoy. It really sends a tingle through his loins when he talks about health and alternative medicine.
Well I took the time to send him a fastblast.. but I guess Tommy sorts through them.. but this is what I sent... arghhhhhhhhhhh!   


"Hi, is Coast To Coast AM on tonight? I tuned in but an infomercial is on.
C2C is about covering strange & paranormal topics. There is a ground swell of folks who know how C2C is suppose to be & are witnessing it become absolute garbage.
A Real shame."



F**K Noory!!  :

[James G.]

To be honest about tonight's show, I got up to have some coffee, returned to my computer and its internet radio stream, heard the mental-imagery stirring words "Sagging And Bagging" in reference to people's skin...

...and thought...Yuck!

Nothing like the proverbial "Sagging And Bagging" to hold my attention.

I hope it doesn't progress get into discussing some supplement that specifically targets the colon. I can just hear it now:

"It's Like A Sharpshooter For The Human Colon!"

[KMKMKM]

As soon as  I seen tonight's show go from "TBA" to "Health Special"... I knew I should have guessed. It is Noory's little lovejoy. It really sends a tingle through his loins when he talks about health and alternative medicine.
Well I took the time to send him a fastblast.. but I guess Tommy sorts through them.. but this is what I sent... arghhhhhhhhhhh!   


"Hi, is Coast To Coast AM on tonight? I tuned in but an infomercial is on.
C2C is about covering strange & paranormal topics. There is a ground swell of folks who know how C2C is suppose to be & are witnessing it become absolute garbage.
A Real shame."



F**K Noory!!  :

I emailed George essentially the same thing, I'm sure he doesn't bother reading emails or probably even care enough about our opinion but it felt good to get it off my chest.

[tmock00]

This is ABSOLUTELY the worst Coast show I've ever heard. This is a Sunday morning infomercial goddamn it. Pardon my French, but fuck this show. This is my breaking point. I could hear this same garbage on TV right now if I flipped around to some infomercials.

Totally agree - and if I wanted to hear this stuff, I'd listen to Dr. Dean Edell.

[Stevenqbosell]

Totally agree - and if I wanted to hear this stuff, I'd listen to Dr. Dean Edell.

And Dr. Dean would be MUCH better.

I can still picture his curly hair as kid when I used to to watch him locally on KABC 7 in the 80's / early 90's.

[fabucat]

To be honest about tonight's show, I got up to have some coffee, returned to my computer and its internet radio stream, heard the mental-imagery stirring words "Sagging And Bagging" in reference to people's skin...

...and thought...Yuck!

Nothing like the proverbial "Sagging And Bagging" to hold my attention.

I hope it doesn't progress get into discussing some supplement that specifically targets the colon. I can just hear it now:

"It's Like A Sharpshooter For The Human Colon!"

Thank Gawd I found some intelligent life here....I couldn't bear to listen to last night's show.  I guess that I used to like George better than most of you here, but this past week, his ignorance and insensitivity have been unforgivable.  What's even worse is that a lot of the audience is right there with him.  A lot of other folk on other C2C sites have suggested that the Tucson Murderer was taking anti-psychotic meds and that the meds are to blame!  Other folks are suggesting that LIBERALS mind-controlled Loughner and made him murder, so that they would have an excuse to take our guns and our freedom of speech away! 

Yeah, your party is a minority in the House, so you attempt murder on one of your own in a highly contested district, so that 1st Amendment and 2nd Amendment rights can be extinguished.  That's the stupidest theory I've ever heard of!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 

Getting back to Noory the only GOOD thing I can say about the guy is that he doesn't yell and scream.  I noticed that a lot of stations have been truncating, at 3 AM, C2C with a loudmouth hate show called Midnight Truckers.  I don't know whether these guys are worse than your usual reactionary talkers, but I sure can tell you that it hurts more being called an anti-American treasonous liberal Nazi Commie at 3 AM than it does during the day.  Especially when said loudmouths wake you up in a cold sweat.

I'm REALLY tempted to subscribe to Whitley Streiber's podcast, so help me G-d.  Whitley's a much worse announcer than Nooron, but he at least appears to have a more forward-thinking outlook on all aspects of life. 

There's so much more that one could do with the Paranormal Radio format.  A forward thinking host could explore spirituality and paranormal aspects of other cultures.  A lot of C2C's callers sound as if they are Latino (maybe because the caller is named Diego and he's from LA?).  I honestly don't know a lot about Latino cultures, but these C2C callers appear to have very vivid and surreal dreams, which they recount in telephone conversations. 

So what does Nooron do?  He has an immigration round table in which old white guys sit around and talk about how we should build an deadly fence with sharpshooters along the border and also how the North American Union is a threat.  WAY TO DIVERSIFY YOUR AUDIENCE, GEORGE!  Yeah, totally alienate the fastest growing minority in the US, Latinos   

[b_dubb]

"It's Like A Sharpshooter For The Human Colon!"

TAKE THAT YOU DAMN DIRTY POLYP!!!!

[robey1129]

Snoory is simply a moron! It is obvious he has no journalistic training and moreover, has no meaningful life experience to bring to the table. He is a time card puncher. I wish I had a nickel for every time I heard Snoory overlook the next obvious question for someone he has had on. Most times, he is not even present. How he got the job in the first place is mind-boggling. The show is definitely on a downward spiral. The only thing that enables it's continued existence is the fact that the show has some type of appeal to many people out there. Most long time Art Bell listeners are gone and have been replaced with a whole new audience. I suspect that old C2C people tune in from time to time to see what's happenin' or for a good laugh. If they are anything like me....they can only take so much of the Noron before they get pissed and have to turn it off.  I remember the good old days when I looked forward to hearing Art mesmerize, educate and entertain me into the wee hours. Those days are sadly gone. They have been replaced with a man (I use that term losely) who hosts a show that might have a special hotline for people's "most embarrasing moment" or "my scariest experience".
I do have hope that someday things will change.
Until then...I have successfully vented.

[b_dubb]

i'm not even going to give the show about channeling a chance.  i had an ex girlfriend who was into that.  she asked me if i would be up for going to a channelling.  i said ... "sure".  we got to the channelling.  it was $35 / person.  HOLY SHIT THE BALLS ON THIS 'CHANNELLER'!  my ex gf paid for both of us because she knew i was going to be like "THIS IS BULLSHIT".  we go in.  we sit down.  the CHANNELLER comes in ... does some deep breathing ... and then suddenly starts talking in this weird voice and making odd gestures with her hands.  total circus bullshit.  i was amazed at how seemingly intelligent adults went right along with this act. 

afterwards i discussed the event with my ex gf.  she clarified that she REALLY BELIEVED what we saw was a channelled spirit and not just an act.  of course ... she was out $70. 

shortly after that ... i broke up with her.  i just couldn't be in a relationship with someone that was so easily manipulated or deluded. 

so ... bottom line ... the channelling was a success.  they channelled a lot of money from a room full of people into their fancy new age pockets.  i still can't believe i was able to keep a straight face

[MV/Liberace!]

so ... bottom line ... the channelling was a success.  they channelled a lot of money from a room full of people into their fancy new age pockets.

haha... classic.