I may be on NPR’s “Morning Edition” tomorrow morning.
Or I may not. You never know how these things might go . . .
If I am, I’ll be railing about John McCain — but admitting that, in the end, I’ll vote for him in the general election if he is the nominee.
UPDATE: Jeff Goldstein will be on too. Cool. He has a great excuse for any incoherence. I wish I did.
Pronounced "Patter-EE-koh"
E-mail: Just use my moniker Patterico, followed by the @ symbol, followed by gmail.com
Disclaimer: Simpsons avatar may resemble a younger Patterico...
The statements made on this web site reflect the personal opinions of the author. They are not made in any official capacity, and do not represent the opinions of the author's employer.
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | ||||
| 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 |
| 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 |
| 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | ||
Powered by WordPress.
Why do you think they are inviting you on? I suspect that they think you’ll be an acquiescing conservative on one particular aspect that interests them.
j curtis (133b4a) — 2/6/2008 @ 6:47 pmMaybe don’t rail on him so hard then?
The primary season is over. It’s time to mend wounds and start preparing to take on the Democratic nominee in November
Railing on him gains us nothing.
Have fun on the show.
wt (ca1cea) — 2/6/2008 @ 6:48 pmExcellent.
DRJ (517d26) — 2/6/2008 @ 6:50 pmNever let your position get in the way of your best interest.
steve (39d7d3) — 2/6/2008 @ 6:51 pmI’ll need a time…
I don’t want to be listening to NPR any longer than I have to… 🙂
Scott Jacobs (a1de9d) — 2/6/2008 @ 7:15 pmNow this is something to look forward to – sound, rational political thought on NPR!
Dana (ef3c78) — 2/6/2008 @ 7:26 pmNancy Pelosi Radio must be cherry-picking the weaklings. Cross them up by saying you don’t think you’ll vote for Mr. Open Borders. Still leaves the question open without waving the white flag so it snaps.
Banjo (b5278d) — 2/6/2008 @ 7:41 pmAs I noted before, it matters little whether you vote McCain or stay home in November. CA will go democratic in any event. So freely vote your conscience.
Your writing, of course, may influence voters in other states, so freely voice your conscience, as well!
ManlyDad (d62cf6) — 2/6/2008 @ 7:45 pmWith David Folkenflik? Along with Goldstein then. I might just have to listen to NPR. Never thought I’d be saying that.
Pablo (99243e) — 2/7/2008 @ 2:10 amYep, you’re on there. It’s online here.
Pablo (99243e) — 2/7/2008 @ 6:26 amGood voice. Deep, sonorous. Maybe a touch more nasality(?) or roof of the mouth(?) for that Raymond Burr rumble of thunder quality?
nk (4ebdf4) — 2/7/2008 @ 10:00 amHm. How bad is it? And what part did they use? (I’m at lunch and Treo-bound and can’t listen until this evening.) I had basically no time to prepare and didn’t feel very articulate. But depending on how they edited me, they could have made it better or worse . . .
Patterico (66bc67) — 2/7/2008 @ 12:10 pmHey! What’s the skinny on this swat shooting? They are saying 6 people were in the house. Sounds gang related.
tired (dde076) — 2/7/2008 @ 12:15 pmWell done. You had the first 3 soundbites in the interview, followed by Jeff Goldstein, Andy McCarthy, and an Ann Coulter excerpt.
On a superficial level, your voice was the best of the 3 – even better than the interviewer’s because you enunciate well, choose your words carefully, and have a deeper voice. (By the way, I don’t think Patrick’s voice is nasal, NK, but he does have the barely-there remnants of a Texas accent.)
However, you were most compelling on substance – especially now that Mitt has quit. Frankly, it sounds silly to rail against McCain now that Mitt has dropped out based on principle. There was clearly no love lost between Mitt and McCain so if Mitt thinks it’s important to end the battle, the rest of us ought to rethink where we stand, too. Your comments accepted the reality that McCain is the man and you offered a principled way for Republicans to deal with that fact.
As I said, well done.
DRJ (517d26) — 2/7/2008 @ 12:38 pmIt does seem strange to me to hear you described as a conservative blogger. Your opinions trend conservative but you aren’t reflexively conservative or partisan. That’s one of the reasons I like your website.
DRJ (517d26) — 2/7/2008 @ 12:40 pmYou were great. You made the points you said here you wanted to make.
And DRJ, no, no, no! I did not say Patterico is nasal. I meant that maybe he should try for a little bit more nasal or roof of the mouth (what do I know, I’m no voice coach), to achieve a little bit higher register and a more piercing, peremptory tone. Like I said, Raymond Burr’s rumble of thunder (with the crack of thunder always in readiness).
nk (4ebdf4) — 2/7/2008 @ 1:01 pmThanks for the report, guys. It sounds like they must have been kind to me in the editing process.
Patterico (d987d1) — 2/7/2008 @ 1:20 pmSorry, I did misunderstand. I think that’s called vocal variety when you vary the pitch and tone to capture the listener’s attention. Evangelists have terrific vocal variety.
Patrick probably uses vocal variety in court and we all use it in everyday conversation, but IMHO his quotes were better as is. The serious tone indicated he was giving great thought to the topic, and the excerpts were so short that too much vocal variety would detract from what he said. However, I agree that vocal variety is a good habit. Otherwise, everything starts to sound like blah blah blah blah.
DRJ (517d26) — 2/7/2008 @ 1:22 pmDRJ,
I self-described as a conservative blogger to Folkenflik. I said I’m not doctrinaire — pro-gay marriage, environmentalist, etc. — but I’m basically a conservative blogger and that’s what I told him.
Patterico (fc10d5) — 2/7/2008 @ 1:24 pmActually, changing up the sound of my voice is something I need to work on.
Patterico (51450f) — 2/7/2008 @ 1:25 pmJuries been nodding off on ya? 🙂
Scott Jacobs (3c07ad) — 2/7/2008 @ 1:33 pmHopefully it’s not that bad.
Patterico (4bda0b) — 2/7/2008 @ 6:25 pm