Home


Dec 31, 1999

Prager contrasted today's editorials of the New York Times (calling for arms control, gun control) and the Wall Street Journal.

Prager read the last two paragraphs of the NY Times editorial:

The original American frontiers had to do with covering geographic distance -- from coast to coast, from farm to factory, from hamlet to city or suburb. But the nation finishes the century with many of its social frontiers uncrossed. Racial justice and decent medical care are not yet a guaranteed part of every citizen's birthright grant to "life, liberty and the
pursuit of happiness." Our people need arms controls that limit both nuclear weapons and the handguns on America's streets.

Indeed, on this New Year's Eve we still do not know if the invention of the silicon chip will surpass that of nuclear weapons as the signal technological event of the century. With visionary leadership, we may dare to hope that the ultimate engine of war will take second place in mankind's memory to a worldwide explosion of knowledge. Yet what can be known in these last hours of the year 1999 should be saluted by the glowing orb in Times Square and with toasts in living rooms across the land. It was a century in which freedom triumphed and generosity became a global ideal because of the most distinctive of all American
inventions, a society based on the values of political freedom, economic opportunity, individual worth and equal justice. It is that invention that must be preserved and celebrated above all others, for it is our national treasure and the world's.

Prager read approvingly from the WSJ's last two editorial paragraphs:

Though it sounds simple, history shows just how difficult it has been to strike this happy medium, ever threatened by competing dispositions: by those (generally on the left) whose belief in man's perfectibility begs the totalitarian rule we saw starting with the French Revolution and those (generally on the right) who see in man's tendency to sin a sign of his fundamental depravity. The genius of 1776 was to make room for both grace and sin, and to appreciate that in the use of his own freedom to improve the lot of himself and those around him, man was acting with his Creator.

We would be the last to confuse Augustine's City of God with the United States of America, now or in 1776. Surely, though, it is worth noting that as the freest people in the world Americans remain, against all reasonable predictions, the most religious. May it not have something to do with the understanding at the heart of the American founding: that the God who looked out upon the earth and pronounced it good designed us to glorify Him as free men and not as serfs.

Prager: The NY Times editorial does not mention God while half of the WSJ editorial focuses on God. And this is why the two papers almost never agree.

Dec 30

Prager talked about the parents who abandoned their severely handicapped ten year old boy at a hospital. The parents included a note outlining   the kid's needs and wants and explained that they could not look after him anymore.

Prager took exception to the media calling the parents rich and harping on their owning two BMWs. Prager noted that the parents home was only assessed at $183,000. P says that is nothing. Prager's home is assessed at one million dollars.

Prager said he cried for everyone concerned in the story. Prager believes the parents just broke down.

From the USA Today: ROCKLAND, Del. - A husband and wife allegedly abandoned their disabled
10-year-old son, Steven, in his wheelchair at a hospital, with a note saying they couldn't care for him anymore. Richard Kelso, 62, and his wife, Dawn, 45,
offered no explanation as they were arraigned on one count each of child abandonment and conspiracy. Prosecutors say money was clearly not the
reason, as Richard Kelso is the head of a $500 million-a-year chemical company, PQ, and Dawn Kelso is a member of a Pennsylvania state advisory
council on disability issues. Neighbors and colleagues described the couple as loving parents and suspected that they must have encountered problems after
their nursing staff left for vacation.

Prager says it is moral idiocy that the parents are no longer allowed to communicate with their abandoned son.

P: We have many advocates for the homeless, but hardly any for parents with disabled kids. Why? Because the homeless are public.

We have many advocates for AIDS, the most overfunded of all diseases and the only one that is totally preventable (don't have unprotected male-to-male anal intercourse and don't share intravenous needles).

Politicians respond to people who scream loudly, rather than to true crises.

In his third hour, P. discussed a letter he got from a male friend who was staying with his girlfriend at the home of parents with kids in the house. While the parents did not mind if the boyfriend and girlfriend slept in hte same room, Prager's friend thought it would set a bad example for the kids. Prager agreed. The boyfriend and girlfriend should sleep in separate parts of the house to set a good example.

Shannon writes: In the LA area, perhaps the most nauseating talk radio religionist has to be Dennis Prager, KABC. A Jewish scholar, Prager primarily uses his airtime to expound upon his oft stated view that increasing secularism is sending America to hell in a handbasket (he appears ignorant of stats that show large increases in both church attendance and religiosity in America). Prager also states that he cannot fathom how atheists can remain happy when they have no expectation of devine retribution for folks like Hitler and Stalin. I have had a few handicaped chats on air with him, all of which resulted in my being cut off. Rather than continuing to be exasperated and angry with his verbal diarrhoea I permanently tuned out his show about a year ago, and haven't needed Prozac since.

Dec 29

In his first hour, Prager interviewed John Stossell of ABC who just did an hour special the night before on incompetence in the LA Child Protective Services division. Prager mocked social workers who did not place children for adoption with parents of a different race.

In his second hour, Prager mourned the passing of actor Clayton Moore who played "The Lone Ranger." Prager praised the creed of the TV show and how Clayton comported himself offscreen in accordance with that ethic. Did not drink or smoke or swear.

In his third hour, Prager discussed Jenny Craig's selection of Monica Lewinksi as a spokesperson. Prager said it sent a bad message, that no matter what you do, as long as you get fame, you'll be rewarded. It sends a bad message to kids. If a kid asked you, after seeing Monica on a commercial, who's that, what would you say? Monica is only famous for her affair with Bill Clinton. Jenny Craig stock went up 33% on the announcement.

A female caller deplored how men are attracted on such a simple animalistic basis. Why not for a woman's mind?

Prager talked about a time as a single youth when he cried alone because he'd met a woman of good character who wanted a relationship with him. And Prager was not attracted enough to her, despite her goodness.

What struck me, Luke Ford, about the hour was the venom and anger of several female callers against Monica Lewinsky. I don't think I've ever met a man who hated Monica but many women seem to. I think women have a visceral hatred of temptresses, mistresses, porn stars, strippers, prostitutes and other sexually loose women who tempt men and reduce the housewife's sexual value.

BTW, Luke seeks generous woman open to discrete encounters.

Chris Bolton writes on the PRager List: As a spokesman for Jenny Craig, Monica's slogan should be "Stick to you diet - Don't blow it like I did". I wonder if she'll be promoting a high protein liquid diet. Hmmmmmm.

Dec 28

Prager had Lenny Miller on his show for an hour.

From www.dennisprager.com: On December 21, 1999 Dennis did two hours of radio discussing the
case in Wisconsin about a man who was burglarized three times within eight months. Finally, he set up a booby-trap to shoot the burglar in the leg. It happened, and now Lenny Miller is going to prison and is broke from legal fees. Here is the story and here is the fund for those wishing to contribute:

From the 10/16/99 Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

Town of Stanfold - For a few dollars, Lenny Miller bought himself peace of mind.

After his Barron County cabin was burglarized for the third time in eight months, Miller went to a hardware store and bought string, a couple of eye hooks, a small pulley and foam padding. He also purchased a sturdier lock for his shed door.

Cost? Less than $5.

The eventual price, though, was much higher. The shoe factory worker lost $14,000 in attorney
fees and jail expenses. And he lost his freedom.

Miller thought he was doing the right thing.

After each break-in, he contacted the Barron County
Sheriff's Department. Investigators took tire
impressions and dusted for fingerprints. There were no arrests.

Fed up, angry and scared after a burglar busted into his shed and tried to hot-wire his all-terrain vehicle, Miller rigged a single-shot 12-gauge shotgun underneath the ATV so that it would go off if someone broke open the shed door.

It worked.

In md-July, a burglar caught a load of buckshot in his leg.

And that's when Miller's life turned into a nightmare.

Dec 27

Prager dissed Time's selection of Albert Einstein as the man of the Century. Prager says Time's Walter Isaacson, a Rhodes Scholar who attended Harvard, made the safe choice. He chose brains.

In his third hour, Prager talked about Elizabeth Hurley's selection as babe of the Century. Her boyfriend (Hugh Grant who Prager would not name so as to not gossip) was arrested a few years while being orally serviced by a streetwalker on Sunset Blvd.

Prager said that if the boyfriend of the babe of the century sought sexual variety, then that largely explains men in general. They will instinctively seek release anywhere and anytime, no matter how beautiful and sexual their partner.

Prager is writing a book on male sexuality. P says men are insatiable for variety of sexual partners. Prager says a proof for his thesis is gay men and lesbian women. Gay men typically have 500 sex partners over a lifetime while an average lesbian will only have a dozen.

Two women called up and said the Liz Hurley - Hugh Grant thing showed that Liz may not have been into oral sex or sex in general. Prager felt morally uncomfortable with this direction of the conversation as it was too gossipy.

Dec 20

Prager praised Danny Ainge who just quit as coach of the Phoenix Suns to concentrate on his family.

Prager said he did the same thing four years ago, leaving WABC radio in New York to devote more time to his family. P says that almost nobody believes him, that he quit for his family, rather than was pushed out.

I have it on good authority that the primary reason Prager quit WABC was because of conflicts with rightist host Bob Grant.

Radio columnist Tomm Looney writes: Is Dennis Prager Next? It's no fun to write stories like this, but now that Dennis Prager is syndicated, KABC can dump him with less guilt.

"(KABC program director) Drew Hayes has to be allowed to put his stamp on the station, and this is rumored to be his next imprint," said somebody who knows his/her/transgender KABCs.

Will it be in the beginning of January, or the beginning of March? If this is true, and Mr. Morality Pants gets dumped, who would replace him? Could it be ... Joe
Crummey?

Dec 15

Prager based his first two hours on articles in People magazine. In hour one, he discussed an interview with the parents of murdered homosexual Mathew Shepherd who said they agreed to not ask for the death penalty for his killers if they promised not to appeal a sentence of life in prison without benefit of parole. Shepherd's parents did not want to be dragged through an endless appeal process.

In hour two, Prager discussed People magazine's support for the Miss AMerica who is dating the Lt. Governor of Kentucky and campaigning for the Democrat. The Miss America pageant want Miss America to abstain from political campaigning during her one year reign. Prager agrees. He deplores the politicization of the personal, how politics on the left seems to suffuse everything.

Prager said how obnoxious he found an appeal for AIDS by Bernadette Peters at the end of the Broadway musical "Annie Get your Gun." A caller said he's wary of attending arts events for fear of getting harangued about various PC causes.

In his third hour, Prager said he was 51-49% more pessimistic than optimistic about the new century. He feared the growth of technology without moral guardrails.

P. discussed his most disturbing calls. One was a woman who said she did not know if she'd miss her child or her dog more if they died. Another was a man who said that if he could have a clone of his dead son, he'd want one. Prager would not.

Prager favors banning human cloning though he does not mind organ cloning.

Prager also fears men and women going their own way, without needing the other for reproduction.

Gil writes on the Prager List: DP... lets his guests say dishonest things and use dishonest tactics for which he fails to take them to task. So there's nothing for him to do after the fact except, perhaps, mea culpas over neglecting to say what he should have said. It's
one thing for DP to chose not to go for the throat of his guests, quite another for him to turn timid, flat, and an unwitting accomplice.

Today, while listening on Real Audio, I picked up the last 20 minutes of the first hour. DP did argue with his guest, the SoCal ACLU director, over their "playing" with the courts in trying to overturn CP. He asserted it was for what they saw as their moral stance. The director, though saying playing was not the word he'd use, agreed with DP's assessment. Once again DP didn't press deterence in the face of this one-sided self congratulation. In debates I've had with honest CP obstructionists, they admit they could care
less about deterence due to CP, as long as "their" society doesn't commit killings in the name of law. The most they will give me is that we should
strive for deterence by other means. As those of you who know me, I've seen these other means take the form of more restrictions put on the innocent, and
unacceptable. This circumstance lends to the most power-hungry the means whereby they twist our rightful request that government protect us from
killers into another way to deprive of us of liberty. A constant erosion not unlike chinese water torture.

Dec 14

Prager favors kids reciting sections of the Declaration of Independance every day, instead of school day. "...That all men are created equal, and are endowed by their Creator by certain inalienable rights..."

A few secularists phoned to say that would offend them. Prager pointed out that racists also would be offended by the notion that all men are created equal. Should we bend to accommodate anyone who'd be offended? What about kids offended by the explicit discussion of sex in seventh grade?

A couple of people who opposed prayer in school said they'd support reciting the Declaration of Independence.

Prager: This solution is good for everyone except for the radically secular who worry that kids might take God seriously.

Gil writes on the Prager List: Gayle Sheehy was interviewed at 6 tonight [by Michael Savage, San Francisco KSFO talkshow host]. Rerun scheduled for 5PM Wednesday. He kept her for 22 minutes before she hung up on him. He showed her to be an
open propagandist for Hillary. This is something DP never will accomplish because "I don't want to alienate my guests." As a result, we don't see
those guests who DP disagrees with shown up for WHY he disagrees with the guest -- we learn nothing but DP's own biases. His audience loses out.

How did Mike demonstrate that Sheehy was not a true biographer? For each item that he asked the "biographer" questions, she either claimed she didn't
know (lack of thoroughness) or found a way to turn a negative into a positive (a spinmeister, a propagandist). There was considerably more to learn than I need to report. If anyone on the list NEEDS tunes in for this, it is DP. He could listen and learn. He doesn't have to copy Savage, but he could see that turning a bit more aggressive keeps him from being used as a doormat, us from being poorly served by him, and sends notice to such "reporters" that talk
radio is not the Today program.

Dec 10

Prager now hosts a TV talkshow on raising boys on the Fox Family Channel. Thursdays at 11AM EST.

Dec 9

Gnobaro writes on the Prager List: I remember it was shortly after my highly successful IPO, that I realized that there was a dearth of meaning in my life...and I ended up converting to Orthodox Judaism. Still, I've never been able to find a Jewish woman who loved me for who I am, rather than for my money.

So I've called up the following TV gameshow and applied. I'm wondering if this is ethical, however? Might this possibly mock the sanctity of holy matrimony?

MILLIONAIRE SEEKS BRIDE By NY POST TV STAFF

Hey girls. Wanna marry a multi-millionaire -- on live TV in front of millions of viewers? In Las Vegas, yet? You'll get your chance, now that the search is on to find contestants for "Who Wants to Marry a
Multi-Millionaire?" a two-hour special being developed for Fox. The special has no airdate or host yet, but is hoping to cash in on the success of ABC's "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire." The big difference here: "Multi-Millionaire" includes a question mark in its title, unlike ABC's show. "Multi-Millionaire" producers put the word out yesterday that during the next month, they'll be searching for "any and all women" 18 and older to become "Mrs. Multi-Millionaire." A minimum of 50 candidates will be selected and flown to Las Vegas for an all-expenses-paid trip to snag the (monied) bachelor
of their dreams. Contestants need to submit a "brief and creative, if not outrageous" videotape explaining why they should be the next "Mrs. Multi-Millionaire." All tapes must include name, address, phone number and birthdate and should be sent to: I'm Your Bride c/o Next Entertainment 12333 W. Olympic Blvd. Suite 134 Los Angeles CA 90064. Videos will not be returned. And all male millionaires looking for a potential bride should call the show's producers at 310-207-3577, ext. 204. The show is being executive-produced by Mike Fleiss.

Socalldjew writes: the point you've omitted is that society condemns men for only caring about a
woman's looks, while accepting as "natural" women's pursuit of rich men...plus which, what's "inhuman" about valuing looks, since looks are a part of the
humanity of a person? Money, on the other hand, is not a part of a person's person. it is external...a person is, in part, their corporeal body...money is
nowhere to be found on the corporeal body of anyone. So, WOMEN are, in truth, the more INHUMAN of the species...

Chris Bolton writes on the Prager List: I was listening to Dennis' today during the 10:30 PST segment. His topic dealt with mens' responses to women's oft heard complaint that all the good men are taken (or are gay). Women often say that the few remaining good men are commitmentphobic. A number of men wrote to Dennis about this saying that they were NOT afraid of commitment but still had a hard time finding women to date. The first 2 letters talked about how hard it is for short guys to attract women.

Though I am 6'-3", I fully believe and understand
this. I remember John Stossell doing a show on this. He had 3 guys, similarly dressed with similar backgrounds. The only apparent difference was that one was short. These men were placed in a room with a 2 way mirror and groups of women were placed behind the mirror and asked whether they'd
want to go out with the short guy. Not one would. They had to change the guys printed bio to say that he was a surgeon at a prestigious NYC hosptial
with a summer home in the Hamptons before women would consider dating him.

This brings up the 2nd point that unless you make a lot of money, many women won't consider dating you. I had a female employee who made a lot of money. She was dating a guy who was a handyman and gave massages on the side. She found him attractive, charming, witty, etc...but dumped him because she couldn't stand the idea that she made (a lot) more money than he did.

My theory is that nature/God has programmed men to seek physical beauty. Men like younger women with good figures. I think God/nature did this so
that men will seek women who are young and healthy enough to bare children. God gave men a constant sex drive to make them want to stay with the women/kids instead of only coming around during mating season like elk and deer. Women are programmed to go after men who would be good
providers/protectors. Men with business or political power are attractive to women. Men who make a lot of money. Men who are tall or muscular (protectors). Men who are dangerous (Hell's Angel's / the Fonz / James Dean, etc....) who exude an aura of power. Men with all of their hair. Women often view these things, sometimes subconsciously, as being signs of a
good provider who can take good care of them and their children. It seems God/nature wired us this way to promote family life.

I would like to hear from women who may be lurking regarding short/poor guys and also about my theory regarding our wiring.

Women say that men are shallow only interested in looks, but it seems men can also claim basically the same about women since they seem to interested
in the physical ($ and heigth) as well.

Steve Dietrich replies: Chris Bolton wrote:

> My theory is that nature/God has programmed men to seek physical beauty.

A very well established scientific theory, though standards of beauty do vary over time.

> Men like younger women with good figures.

I've heard it said that Dennis suggests that women should watch a porno film to see what men like. You don't have to watch a porno to know that men want hot looking young women with great bodies catering to their every sexual desire. I'm just not sure how this knowledge helps a middle-aged wife and mother who
can't possibly perform on that level.

Men want beauty, women want money. Although this a generalization with many exceptions and variations, for the most part, what we have is a sophisticated
form of prostitution.

Most men in a position to do so trade their first wives in for younger, better looking, more sexually desirable second and third wives when the first wives have too many miles on them. Others cheat. Many do both. Women are smart to trade their beauty for money: beauty fades. It's just too bad that that often needs to be the calculation. (But I'm sure God knew what he was doing when he made us this way.)

It kind of bothers me that strippers, prostitutes, and porno actresses are mostly in it for the money. In this mostly man's world, we've organized an economy where it's by far in a young woman's interest to cater to men's sexual desires for money because similar financial opportunities just don't exist to them elsewhere. I've got nothing against women choosing sex as a career or an art form, but when it's a purely financial decision (based on a lack of similarly lucrative alternatives) that seems a bit unfair.

> God gave men a constant sex drive to make them want to stay with the> women/kids instead of only coming around during mating season like elk and
> deer.

Now you're way off base. It's all about sperm competition. BTW, studies show that women cheat much more than we like to think they do, and are actually biologically more likely to conceive with their lover than with their mate. They choose to marry providers while choose better physical specimens as
lovers. It also seems that men produce more semen when they're unsure whether or not their mate has been faithful to them, (sperm competition). Hospital
records show that their are a lot more children who aren't fathered by their supposed father than most men believe.

> It seems> God/nature wired us this way to promote family life.

It appears that nature has wired us for some combination of monogamy and polygamy.

> I would like to hear from women who may be lurking regarding short/poor guys
> and also about my theory regarding our wiring.
>
> I look forward to watching the fur fly.

The internet is like the rest of the world: It's full of women, but you usually have to pay...

A friend of mine has a pretty good theory about how all technology is porn driven: printing press, movies, video, and now the internet.

Dec 3

In his first hour, Prager protested Mattel selling   see-through lingerie for Barbie dolls to kids aged five upwards. Prager protests the sexualizing of children. Callers said there was such lingerie 30 years ago and it did them no harm.

A caller said that the people who make this stuff do not have kids and are out of touch.

writes: Anyone hear today's show? Prager at one point was patting himself on the back (again) about what a great person he is and made the point that he
would grieve more for a stranger's death than the death of one of his own dogs. Anyone remember his first show after JFK Jr's disappearance??? He spent most of the show chastising people for being
sad and then, WHILE THEY WERE STILL SEARCHING FOR THE BODIES, he expressed his displeasure at the media people who refer to a "Kennedy dynasty"-------the Republican party's pom pom boy thought that the Bush family should be considered more of a dynasty(???)
Anyway, if that's the extent of the grief that Prager feels for a stranger, he must truly not give a rat's ass about his dogs.

Dec 2

Prager talked about the outpourings of grief for the panda Tsing Tsing. Prager believes that most of the fervent supporters of animal rights, and those grieving for this panda, are single women. Women long to nurture someone, and those women who aren't married and don't have kids, transfer their longings to animals.

Prager notes that when Columbine High School reopened, it did not even mention the deaths of students the previous school year. Yet there is all this grieving over a panda.

Prager: We grieve for what we value. Her brain tells her that animals are equal in value to people.

Nov 29

In his first hour, Prager discussed the televising of a two hour car chase which ended with the police shooting and killing the runaway male driver.

Prager opposes the televising of most chases because while they are dramatic, they are unimportant. Prager worried that the televising of a killing would desensitize people.

Prager began his second hour relaying an incident that took place at his shul. After giving the Saturday morning sermon, Prager got into a conversation with a teenage male who inquired about Prager's Tuesday night class at the University of Judaism. Then the boy's father interrupted by saying, 'Hey buddy. On Tuesday night you will be doing homework."

Prager says many parents push their kids too hard to achieve good grades.

Nov 26

In his first hour, Prager wondered if people would shop at malls anymore given the rise and convenience of the internet. Prager predicted that stores will have to make shopping more fun.

In his second hour, Prager talked how we significantly affect how people treat us. Thus, if we are unhappy with how people are treating us, we should change the way we present ourselves.

In his third hour, Prager talked about women who slim down and look great after a separation. He used Mrs. Gingrich as an example. She's lost 35 pounds since splitting from Newt, has changed her hair, and looks much better. Prager wondered if many of these divorces could've been prevented if the women had slimmed down and toned up while married. This drew an angry reaction from several female callers.

Prager said that it is important for married people to stay attractive to their spouses. For men to work hard and move ahead in the world, and for women to maintain a pleasing shape.

Nov 25

Prager devoted his Thanksgiving show to the topic of gratitude. P. says it is important to say thank you out loud, just as a husband should tell his wife out loud that he loves her.

A caller said he does not invoke God at his Thanksgiving meal, so as to not offend guests who may not share his religious faith. Prager got to the nub of the issue - the man was uncomfortable with public God talk.

If you're offended by sitting at a table where the host thanks God, you are too easily offended.

P: But there is a difference between thanking God and trying to recruit people at your table. Do you want to be inclusive? As a Christian, must you include Christ in your prayer if there are non-Christians present? Prager makes more universal prayers when at the table of a non-Jew.

Prager: If you saw two cars, one with a bumper sticker "S---- Happens" and another thanks God everyday for health, etc. And you had to choose which car to get a ride in?

The words we say affect us. If we speak gratefully, we become grateful. If we speak harshly, we become harsh.

Nov 23

Prager praised George Bush's appearance on "Meet The Press." Prager did disagree with Bush's stance on not meeting with a group of gay Republicans. Prager believes in meeting with almost any group, even the KKK.

Prager says the most impressive candidates vis-a-vis ideas is Forbes.

Lil Juan writes on alt.radio.talk: KABC's Dennis Prager promotes bigotry of the worst kind. He pretends not to be a racist by hiring uncle toms like Larry Elder, but only to preach the same racism as does Prager.

A few years ago, Prager received a call from a black caller who accused him of always cutting off black callers and said that Prager would therefore cut him off. Prager responded by cutting off the caller immediately. It seems that Prager does not like callers from blacks with views that differ from his own. Prager also treats women who disagree with him far more brutally than he treats men with the same disagreement. Whenever Prager has a women on the line who has him backed against the ropes, he'll often use the old "we're up against a commercial break, but we'll continue with you when we get back" trick, only to never hear from the caller again.

He also is very against women calling in on cell phones. I've heard from people who work at the station that a women calling in on a cell phone and disagreeing with him gets him so infuriated, that he'll use his engineering board to create fake static and say, "oh no... we that call." Incredibly, KABC allows this continue and lets him go national.

MG: Dennis Prager will hang up on anyone, not just blacks, who accuses him of cutting people off. I have heard Dennis do it consistantly throughout the years that I have been listening to him. He even warns people that it is the one sure way of getting kicked off of his program.

Chuck: In fact the funniest calls are: Caller: Dennis I know you're going to hang up on me but... CLICK

Nov 5

For twelve hours, KABC ran a "Battle of the Talkshow Hosts," keeping around six hosts at the mike at the same time battling it out.

Ken, from KABC's morning show, called Prager's show "Amish Talk Radio." The other hosts seemed to look at Prager as a father figure, someone to seek moral guidance from and rebel against.

Prager reitereated that he is the same type of person off the air. He talked about the time in his 20s when his friends baked marijuana into brownies and simply became Prager squared. Just like regular Dennis only more so, particularly very verbal.

Another host asked Prager if he ever got drunk and blew the shofar. No, that's Al Rantel, the gay conservative who follows Prager.

Amara writes: While the racial stuff is nonsense and DP doesn't strike me as a hater, let's not go too far in the other direction. I sometimes tell screeners
I'm on a cell phone as wired callers don't get a fair shake. On a couple of those calls to DP I had "cell phone problems", so I would take the last part of the post seriously. DP has also repeatedly violated his "disagreeing callers go to the head of the line" policy - he refused on several occasions to defend his slurs
against Gore - and remember when the caller had the last word?

The program has gone downhill since he started doing topics. DP is lazy - this is a case of it takes one to recognize one - and doesn't really prepare for most of his segments. He's coasting and the product shows it.
Do you have any doubt that had DP done the show he presently does when he started out he would have been long gone and forgotten?

Nov 2

Dennis Prager phoned in to Mr. KABC's show which ridiculed Uri Geller. Mr KABC had a magician in who bent spoons and did the stuff Uri did... Anyone hear this?

Fred writes:

 

Dennis Prager used to do an experiment when speaking before children. He would pose to them a theoretical dilemma: If their own dog and a total stranger (human) were drowning, and they could only save one, which would they save? As was to be expected, some chose the dog, others chose the person. What Prager found amazing, however, was that even among those children who chose to save the person, few were willing to condemn the choice of the others or opine that it was wrong to save a dog over a human being. Even those who, presumably, were able to absorb "good values" were conditioned to equate those values with the skewed values of the other group.

On his radio show this morning, Prager admitted he patronized a prostitute in Europe at age 20. Was this when Prager lost his virginity?

Better not gossip about this though. Dennis thinks the rich and powerful should be able to do whatever they want in their private lives, from using pornogrpahy to visiting prostitutes, so long as they "don't hurt anybody." And we shouldn't talk about it. They can flount social and Biblical and religious norms all they want, but we shouldn't gossip about it.

Prager passionately opposed Heidi Fleiss selling her little black book of customers. He thought that would be a far greater sin than the actual patronizing of prostitutes. Prager wants to save people from humiliation. He thinks the release of the black book would ruin lives, disrupt families and marriages.

Prager gives this personal information tremendous power.

On what basis does Prager claim that the release of the black book is a greater sin than using hookers? I don't think he has a Biblical or Judaic leg to stand on. Judaism and the Bible opposes using prostitues, in fact, all extra-marital sex, as well as gossip. Both are sins.

October 27, 1999

Magicweb: Listen to Dennis today, interviewing Uri Geller, fixing machinery over the air by the power of mind!

One thing I always appreciate about Dennis is his ability to supprise us with his unexpected untypical revelations. He is not afraid to change his mind,
or to reveal suddenly the results of incremental studies which he never hinted to his listeners.

I hope that our esteemed Atheist, Fundamentalist Athiest contingents of this forum are not too uncomfortable. I hope they all turned in! Take three deep breaths, and a big omm. It willl lower your blood pressure.

There is only one mind in this Spiritual Universe!

Jason: You're joking, right? That show alone proves that Dennis has sold out for ratings.

Shannon: Not to embarrass you more than your above post already has old bean, but did you happen to hear Al Rantel's postscript to Prager's show? If not you missed a beauty...Rantel, for whom I formerly thought of as little more than another rant radio Prager shill, exposed Uri Geller for the devious liar that he is. Uri Geller on Prager's show made much of lawsuit he filled against American magician and professional debunker, James Randi. They way Uri presented the scenario one was left with the impression that it was Randi who lost the suit...Rantel was able to extract from Geller that in fact the opposite was true...Uri Geller paid out not James Randi.

Prager is a Buffoon folks... A grade A sucker... A first class schmuck...To hear him fawning, oohing and aahing over this confidence trickster and then
to hear Prager assume these conjuring tricks are emanations of God's influence was absolutely hysterical. I wish I had heard the whole show, the
little I did hear, left me laughing so hard I cried.
Thank goodness for Rantel..I completely misread him. It was almost as funny hearing Prager justify his belief that he had just witnessed the psychic phenomena as it was hearing Geller being exposed by Rantel as a liar. Still, it goes to show Dennis "Erotically In Love With Truth" Prager keeps very good company.

James Randi Educational Foundation homepage at http://www.randi.org.

The above is James Randi's website...Read about Randi's offer of $1.1 million for any lab controlled demonstration of the supernatural or paranormal...You'd think old Uri would snap this easy money up in a heartbeat, but so far he has avoided Randi's challenge like a dose of
gonorrhea.

Magic:  I have listened to Dennis for years off and on. Listened to him religiously on Religion on the Line. I don't agree with his politics but I enjoy hearing him expound on religion. I critized him on this forum and was answered by his admirers, but when I hear something pleasing to me I can complement him as well.

My main complaint has been that his view boxes are too restricted. In religion especially, he has ignored about all religious belief other than the main traditional religions. Perhaps it is just the fast format of radio. So when he invites, out of the blue, someone like Uri Geller to be his guest, I am thrilled! If that makes Shannon think that I have embarrassed
myself, well I don't give a rat's ass!

Is Uri Geller is genuine? I don't really know. He sounds genuine to me, more genuine than Ranting Randi for example, who appears to believe in
nothing other than protecting us from the evil thoughts of those who are out to trick us, which seems to include anyone who believes or investigates with
an open mind anything untraditional.

Ranting Randi on his website claims that Transcendental Meditation teaches levitation. This is just not true. Randi is wrong. Or Randi is lying.
Perhaps just mistaken. Professional skeptics like randi are so biased and full of their own ego that they don't really investigate anything impartially. They just look for spots, flaws and errors, losing sight of
wholeness of any kind.

Raving Randi is on the same low level as the Christian Fundamentalist preacher who wrote a book about Cults and included every religion and denomination but his own..

I am more concerned with principles than arguing about facts . According to universal principles, which I know to be true, Uri Geller's feats are possible. But I don't know or really care if he is a trickster or not.
Perhaps he is part trickster and part genuine. That would make him sort of human wouldn't it?

As for Al Rantel. He couldn't stand up to Michael Jackson's toenails. For ABC to replace Michael Jackson with Al Rantel, simply proves that insanity
can exist in high places. Al Rantel, as a talk show host, is obsessed with peeking into bedrooms, gossiping and running people down.

Rather than skepticism or believing everything, suspension of disbelief is the rule I attempt to follow in my life.

Once again I cheer Dennis Prager for daring to so something different and unexpected on his show.

Karl writes on the Prager List: I noticed a number of cases where Prager displays a pronounced double
standard. For example, Prager let pass without comment Geller's statement that an American Jury found in his favor in a lawsuit against James Randi. An American jury also found OJ not guilty of murder, and American juries award obscenely high punitive damages over trivial cases. Why Prager would accept
the verdict of an American jury in Uri Geller's case is beyond me.

Prager's repeated statement that people who are upset over Uri Geller feel the way they do because they're afraid there might be something beyond the world our five senses see is also interesting. Isn't this the same person who never judges motives?

Finally, Dennis Prager is a lot less skeptical about possible untruths that are congenial with his beliefs than those which conflict with them.

He hammered one guest over a statement that there may very well be differences in IQ due to race, even though he professes a belief that IQ doesn't matter.
He swallows whole Michael Behe's assertions about intelligent design, even though Behe has been quite unable to define the traits that identify intelligently designed systems. Uri Geller can bend keys, and Dennis is perfectly willing to accept that it's equally likely that Geller has supernatural powers, or that he used a trick.

Dennis Prager is apparently only "passionately in love with" truth that conforms with his beliefs. Indeed, it would appear that he is "passionately in love" with his own beliefs.

Yesterday, Chuck Ungar made the following post to alt.radio.talk:

Talk show host Dennis Prager who fancies himself an intelligent thinker, was duped by so called psychic (ie magician) Uri Gellar on his show yesterday!!! Prager was gushing all over Gellar's ability to "bend spoons" and start up dead cell phones over the air. Though this magician has been debunked since he started pulling this shtick in the 70's, Prager was played like a fiddle by the con man. Luckily, Al Rantell was able to put Gellar in his place when he lied about winning
a law suit of an author who debunked his act.

Dennis, stick with politics. At least then you won't look like a complete fool.

Steve Gross writes on the Prager List: Dear Dennis,
As one of your fans, I am also quite disappointed in you regarding having Uri Geller on your show, plus your subsequent follow-up the next day. Let
me explain why. You stand for rationality, for the triumph of reason over blind faith. In fact, I am currently listening to your Torah tapes and with regard to Creation and Evolution, you categorically state that Science is Truth and Torah is Truth and therefore the two cannot be in conflict. I could not
agree more.

To take that a little deeper, what does it mean that Science is Truth? It means that God set up the world according to fundamental laws; that these laws continue to operate; that these laws are observable by man and can in turn be used to derive other laws. That is how Science works. We make observations, then form a hypothesis, then test that hypothesis by making further observations. In this way, scientific truth is refined. If they didn't work that way, life would be chaos. Things could happen for no reason (not moral reason, but physical reason). For example, if we lit a flame, put a pot of water over it and all of the sudden the water froze. An analogy would be a murder mystery where the author, on the last
page, identified the murderer as someone who had not even appeared in the story! Things that go against the norm are always possible, but less and
less probable.

In fact, one of the most powerful refutations of ESP, mind-reading and psychokinesis is that they apparently don't follow the Inverse Square law. Most forces that we know about in nature follow the rule that the power of the force diminishes as the square of the distance from that force. ESP does not. Could there be a force that doesn't work that way? Certainly, there can. In fact, several subatomic forces do. However, these forces operate over unimaginably tiny distances, like the width of an atom. We
know of no large-scale force in all of nature that fails to obey this law.

What does all this have to do with Uri Geller? Uri Geller basically claims that he can controvert all the known laws of science. All the hundreds and thousands of years of exploring and trying to understand and explain the world are suddenly brought to naught. That's what is at stake
here.

You talked of belief and open-mindedness. Science (which I remind you, is God's Truth) gives us a way to approach and evaluate such claims. One of
them is that the party that makes extraordinary claims has to provide extraordinary proof. If I tell you that the lobby of your radio station is suddenly filled with huge pink mice, are you more "open-minded" than me if you accept that claim? (One is reminded of Bloom's "The Closing of the American Mind" where he makes the point that being too open-minded is essentially being close-minded.)

No, you obviously are not. Mice are not normally huge or pink or in your radio station. Thus, if I make such a claim, it is your obligation as a rationalist to challenge me. I am the one that has to provide proof. Uri Geller falls under the same category. He is making claims that although not impossible, are certainly contrary to accumulated human knowledge.
Moreover, he is actually worse off since 1) he used to be a magician, 2) you can buy a key-bender in a magic store for a few dollars and 3) he has been
thoroughly investigated and debunked (by James Randi, which is why so many people brought up his name).

In fact, I believe this is why the Torah has so many admonitions against witchcraft, sorcery, astrology, etc. (something that unfortunately even most
Orthodox Jews do not take very seriously). A person who accepts one of these is really saying to God, "I am disputing that you set up the world in a rational way. It really seems to operate in a random, chaotic fashion that shows no evidence of design and therefore doesn't need you." I believe that such statements are on par with Idol Worship, which in the end also serve to deny God's hand in creation and the world. That is why the Torah (not mention Maimonides) so strongly oppose such beliefs. That is why it is one of the 613 commandments that you must kill a witch. 

Remember several years ago when you were upset with Cardinal O'Connor because he visited the Central Park rapists, even though you generally
admired him? Now I hope you can understand that that is exactly how many of your listeners feel about you.

Finally, I think your treatment of your listeners was unworthy of you. You did something to them that you have repeatedly spoken out against - namely, you imputed motive to them. To wit, you said that they were all afraid of a non-physical reality. You chanted "scaredy cat" and were quite sarcastic. I think you were being overly sensitive to the justifiable
criticism of your show. I think you owe your listeners an apology.

Shannon replies: Steve I personally feel you are far to generous to Prager, I believe and have always believed, that he is a man in love with his personal beliefs not with truth. I find him intractable, arrogant, vain and wholly disingenuous. Not a man deserving of the slavish adoration that he evidently attracts.
When we are asked to take seriously an outrageous claim, we can justifiably and reasonably expect to be presented with outrageous evidence. When attempting to discern a truth or ascertain facts, reasonable minds will initially accept the explanation that requires the fewest assumptions. For example when a sock is missing after the laundry has been done, we (hopefully) presume a natural explaination for the loss, and not that the sock gnome has run away with yet another trophy. This simple principal is why I reject the claim made by many that our complex universe exists due to an even more complex sentient creator.

Geller has had ample opportunity to have an impartial scientific evaluation performed on his wizardry and to win $1.1 million into the bargain... To date he has refused. He is a charlatan of the first order...He is an illusionist who lies about the causes of his illusions and deceives simple and gullible minds like Prager's for profit.

Incidentally, you mentioned that the Torah commands that witches burn...Do you feel the slightest moral pang when you consider that multitudes of
innocent women burned at the stake for this vile call to savagery?

Steve: Shannon - Sorry, I don't share your animosity towards Prager. I generally agree with him to a great degree. In this particular case, I feel he has badly
missed the mark and should acknowledge it; however, that doesn't negate all the good things that he has said and done. (In fact, this is one of the
Dennis principles that I have incorporated into my life. Everyone gets a bank account with good deeds like deposits and bad deeds like withdrawals. When the balance goes below zero, it may be time to close the account. Dennis is still way in the plus).
With regards to witches, I do not have the slightest pang of guilt. There are many things in the Bible that exist for the sake of making a moral point and this is one of them (in my interpretation). Like the law of the
rebellious son, the rabbis of the Talmud say it never happened and never will. As a Jew I am proud that to the best of my knowledge, my ancestors never used this law to burn anyone.

Mae made the following post to alt.radio.talk:

Anyone else out there notice how much hate Dennis Prager feels for women? Few subjects can be discussed without him going on a rant against women. Current examples: his discussion about a female coach wanting to coach a male team and his discussin about a female boxer. I won't go into the details but in the coach's case he strongly implied  the women's quest for equality is the cause for boys in crisis and that a female boxer is evidence of some "primal" envy of men by women. The usual illogical drivel. I could stand his Shtick if he didn't obviously take himself so d*mn serious. He obviously considers himself one of the greatest minds of the decades. He makes me want to retch!!

He so obviously driven by a need to put down women to make his bloated self feel superior.

JJWHITEJR responds:
There are no other channels on your radio ?????

Mae replies:
Yeah there are other channels on my radio and I make liberal use of them when Dennis Prager is spewing the mysogyny but sometimes I feel
compelled to keep track of and respond to his drivel. He immediately gets angry and cuts off anyone who disagrees or plays mind games where he tries to deflect their objections by making slight adjustments to his messages of hate.

If you listen to Dennis Prager on a regular basis and don't hear the mysogyny your mind is as closed at his is. I refer to the day he went into one of his mindless, hateful rants about a woman coach wanting to coach a high school boys team. As usual he used the topic to blame women for all of the ills of the world. Face it Dennis Prager is a big fat, waddling ball of hate. He talks about happiness but his happiness depends on second class citizenship for women. He advocates second class citizenship for women in the home, society and religion. Insecure, sexist pornloving jerk!

Dennis Prager has obviously convinced himself that he's not a woman hater as he SPEWS hate 3 hours a day. Hetero male can and do express extreme hostility towards women all the time. Note how much time the pornmeister spends defending porn for males. How he advocates patriarchy. How often he picks a news item and uses it as a launching board to express hostility towards women. The guy is sick and needs therapy.

Alice: I have also noticed that when a MAN disagrees with Dennis Prager, he is far more respectful than when a woman disagrees with him. He also seems to have a contempt for people who care about animals. Sadly, in L.A., the main talk radio rival (on KFI) is pretty awful, too. If I MUST be out driving during that time of day, I usually end up either listening to tapes, or a music station.

Hilda: Isn't it funny, Mae but I do not hear that. I happen to like Dennis. My husband thinks he is too in love with himself. If you think this about Dennis, what must you think of Tom Leykus? Now there is a real piece of crapola. He only thinks of women as sex objects to be used and tossed in the trash heap.

October 26, 1999

Singlemom writes: Perhaps KABC management has told the Prager to quit his incessant, dark, negative whining or perhaps Luke whispered the same request in His ear at Temple...

For whatever reason, the Prager is now hosting a "Happy Hour" on his sour, bleak, "America is going to hell in a hand basket and I predicted it a long
time ago" show.

Pragerites - Measure the time that DP remains "happy" in his "Happy Hour." Start when he announces the "Happy Hour". Measure the time it takes him to drag his listeners into the negative with his condemnations and kvetching.

Happy is sad. Happy is kvetching and whining. Mr. Orwell would approve.

September 28, 1999

H David Burstein wrote:

I do not know how many of you are golf fans. But at the end of the Ryder Cup, Justin Leonard, an American, sunk a 50 foot putt that won the Cup for the Americans. It was an incredible shot. Other American golfers, their wives and cameramen rushed across the green to join the celebration.
The only problem was that his competition still had to putt that would have nullified the shot. J. M. Olazabol had to wait a long time, and then
missed. And there were other instances of unruly fans during the tournament.

In their description of the event and the lack to consideration, columnist Matthew Norman in the London Evening Standard wrote "Yes, they are
replusive people,charmless, rude, cocky, mercenary, humourless (English spelling), ugly, full of nauseatingly fake religiosity, and as odious in
victory as they are unsporting in defeat."

"The only good thing to be said in favour of the American golfers, in fact, is that, at golf if nothing else, they are better than the Europeans."

I thought some members would appreciate this description. Thank God the Americans know how to fight wars.

This all reminds me of one of my favorite Pragerisms: "That which makes an individual or society great is also it's Achilles' heel."

Jason: This is truly funny, as it comes from the same people who bring us multiple soccer riots each and every year.

Amara writes on Prager List: Yesterday we had another moral mis-adventure. Just as the point of the NY Times article on DDT was missed; thirty years of first world neglect of tropical diseases taking its toll of third world children was morphed into an unprincipled attack on our avian friends and those who would protect them.

So yesterday morning we heard the rationalization of criminal behavior. Seems a church planted trees in memory of those who died in one of the high
school shootings. The two shooters, who also died in the incident, were also remembered with two trees. One of the fathers of the victims chopped
down the trees planted for the shooters.

Seems we have three problems here:

1. The trees were not the property of the person who destroyed them. We have trespassing and vandalism - both criminal acts..

2. The trees existed in their own right, independent of those they symbolized. The father's beef was with those who planted them. Taking it
out on the trees was depraved behavior.

3. "Liberals" are criticized for taking positions based on feelings and emotions, but here we have a conservative condoning a criminal act based on
feelings while waxing emotional on the air.

There is a difference between offense and harm. Likewise there is a difference between immoral behavior on the one hand and poor taste and bad
judgement on the other. Perhaps DP has yet to learn the difference.

Orange County Register 7/4/99: John Kobylt: "At one point, there was the feeling of a true variety show going on. Weekenders Leo Terrell and Gloria Allred wished them well and brought gifts. John tried to get the O.J. Simpson controversy stirred up. Dennis Prager brought his accordion and played 'Havah Nagilah. ' 'My parents wouldn't let me watch TV on school nights but said I could learn a musical instrument,' Prager said. 'I literally went to the Yellow Pages and started with A,' to which Ken quipped, 'Too bad you didn't start at G for a cool instrument to get the girls. ' Elder sang a mean impression of Louis Armstrong's 'Hello Dolly.'"