42 Replies to “Self-righteous Smug Artist”

  1. Charles Adler is a self-righteous, arrogant windbag. I end up yelling at the radio whenever I listen to him.

  2. I am quite happy when Adler comes on each weekday. It gives me time to listen to AM.1060 Classic Country. Thanks Chuckie ya clown.

  3. When I occasionally listen to Adler and others I get the distinct impression that they take a position and tone to generate controversy. I don’t think they always firmly believe what they are saying. They are “Yanking everyone’s chain” so to speak, to get people listening, talking, reading etc. because its hard to get people fired up when your rhetoric is reasonable. On blogs people do it for fun. Radio/TV/Print journalists do it to make money. Politicians do it to keep power. People recognize when they are being manipulated and don’t like it (even if they can’t keep from reacting). It is one of the reasons people have low opinions of journalists and politicians. Spin, spin, spin.

  4. I quite like Chuck Adler. He riles people – that is why they listen to him- it is a formula to get listeners. But there are times amongst all of the “opinion” which these days try to pass itself off as “news” that some of his guests can actually get real facts on the air.
    That is the crux of the problem – too much opinion passing itself off as news. Maybe people like Adler still think that their opinion is more important that your or mine. But, these days I think people have smartened up and have access to more facts and have the smarts to form their own opinions.
    Adler may be sanctimonious; most of his press gallery pundits are too but he does get you thinking.
    If they are Liberal apologists just follow the dots – who owns the media outlet, who they are related to, etc. In my opinion NO Canadian can defend the past 13 years of Liberal crap without having a personal self serving interest.
    Do the research yourself on every pundit that preaches the Liberal mantras – …it will be quite eye opening.

  5. I’m listening to Adler less and less.
    I was thinking Friday about writing and asking for ‘QR to go back to a local show in his time slot.
    When Dave Taylor (now a Liberal MLA) had his show, I would disagree with about 90% of his positions. He was nowhere near the blowhard that Adler is.

  6. Adler is entertaining. He knows how to push peoples buttons and enjoys pushing them. He can occasionally have a serious moment but it is rare, rather like seeing a panda bear in a Canadian forest…it would have had to have escaped from a zoo.
    Adler holds himself out as “engaging and enraging” according to his “bull in the chinashop” ad.
    I think someone made a very valid point on a previous thread, I wish I could find it again, but made the point about investigative reporting having given way to columnist proliferation. Newspapers, radio and even political television shows are filled with columnists, those who offer up opinion and entertainment. It doesn’t have to be accurate or fact filled, it is after all… opinion! Many years ago newspapers and magazines found out that these kind of columns sold newspapers and magazines. Everyone had to keep up with the “tell all” gossip columns from Hollywood or New York. It really didn’t matter if it was the truth, it sold print. So it is today our media is filled with columnists, each of which offer a different entertaining spin on some fleeting shadow of the truth. If the truth isn’t available, a lie will do, after all in the cacaphony that has become modern media, what consumer can really perceive the difference? That is why the Blogosphere is so important. To be sure there are still many entertaining buffoons even in blogland, but at least we have the opportunity within a semi organized community to make progress on the discovering and sorting out of truth vs fiction. If something is posted that is inaccurate (Steve D being the latest shining example), there are those who will take him or her to task and bring links to factual sources to clear the matter up, often within minutes. Is it foolproof? No, unfortunately still too many fools! But it is better than the alternative…swallowing everything that the MSM trys to feed us. I am sure that there are some real jounalists among them who honestly and sincerely seek the truth and try to get it out there. I fear that they are going the way of the Dodo bird. In todays market of instant gratification, editors are not as likely to budget the amount of money and time it requires to investigate and flesh-out a news item thouroughly. It is far easier to wait for the instant story of “leaks”, “gossip” and “gotcha” journalism.
    Back to Adler, to say that he has no agenda would be to ignore the obvious. I remember after the Emmerson annoncement, we were subject to daily “Emmerson rants” and “Harper rants”. I finally exercized my ultimate right as a consumer and pushed the off button. I felt empowered!
    Daniel

  7. I was a big fan of Charles Adler when he was still on the morning show on CJOB in Winnipeg. He was informative, he asked the right questions, and he had some good phone-in guests. At that time he mostly looked at local news with some national/international stuff thrown in. He was what I would consider right-wing/conservative in his views, but, if someone on the right screwed-up, he still went after them. Then, somewhere along the way, I think his ego started getting a little too big for his head. This probably started when he started going on about his “Adler Nation.” It probably didn’t help that soon after he got his national radio show. He also got more bombastic. Now, being bombastic is not necessary a bad thing, just look at Muhammad Ali!. Another example, is Lowell Greene on CFRA in Ottawa who can be very loud in his own right, but he doesn’t let it go to his head.
    What really turned me off is that even though he started out as a conservative, he has for some reason started going after PM Stephan Harper on a regular basis. Now, no one should get a free ride, but when your arguments seem designed more to create publicity rather than being factual, I get a little chessed-off. Also, I find his website columns a bunch of ill-written absolute garbage! So, while I still turn-in to his show every now and again, I’ve done what Daniel above has done and moved on.

  8. I don’t find him to be that bright. Sort of like a modern day Dick Smyth who just blurts out the most controversial thing he can think of in a ‘screw you if you don’t like it’ tone. It get tired pretty fast. I find Paul Mott is working from the same script.
    Conversely, even though I never agree with him on anything, I find myself listening to John Moore (CFRB) because he’s principled and thoughtful.
    Mind you, no one compares to Michael Savage…

  10. Adler’s just another annoying Jewish Liberal, populating the airways with his hatred of the Conservative party. The only thing that distinguishes him from his colleagues is that he’s not broadcasting out of Toronto.

  11. Talk radio in Canada is a cesspool. Adler’s show is closest in format to the successful US hosts (Rush, Hannity, Ingraham, etc.) but as gwgm said above, he’s just not that bright, which makes him resort to demagoguery and blowhardism.
    (John Moore???? You must be kidding…only host on CFRB that’s any good is Peter Sherman, and he only pops up once in a while…)

  12. John Moore, CFRB Toronto, principled? He’s a liar. He’ll present hazy subjects as facts and have some poor, recent, naïve immigrant caller eating out of his hand.
    I heard him say recently “ it’s a proven fact that the media is right wing”. I was driving at the time and nearly hit a telephone pole.
    He is articulate, I grant you. But he’s wrong about most political subjects, very wrong.
    As mentioned above, the guy I really like is Lowell Green, CFRA Ottawa. Now why can’t CFRB simply offer him in Toronto too? He’s great, even though he’s 72, he can still think fast and he takes no prisoners.

  13. Our office enjoyed Adler, mmostly when he lost it on air prior to the election. Since then he’s gotten predictable bashing Harper.
    Rutherford has politicos of all stripes on his show.

  14. Dave Rutherford on QR77 in Calgary, Alberta wins hands down. Don’t always agree with him but he backs his arguments well. Roy Green on CHML Hamilton is good but a bit like Adler–only not as pompous. I do like Lowell Green too. He was kicked off the Puffy Duffy show years ago–that is a point in Lowell Green’s favour.
    Adler is a loud mouth who adores himself–has nothing to say and says it loudly. I don’t waste the electricity listening to him.

  15. You can count me in with the “Off Button” crowd.
    Adler is a pompous self-promoter who often reminds me of the kid that used to eat bugs on the playground just to get attention.
    Dave Taylor used to have his spot on QR77 in Calgary, before he went into politics, and even though I hardly agreed with his position he treated his guests and callers with respect. Adler would be hard pressed to treat ANYONE with respect and has enraged me so often I just tuned him out. Ditto to his Sun articles and web-retchings. How he could call himself a jounalist is beyond me.
    Rutherford is a class act all the way and should be awarded for the integrity and professionalism he brings to journalism.

  16. So, Adler has nothing to say and says it loudly, yet you don’t listen to him. So how do you know, George?

  17. Adler tries to fill the shoes that were left by our crusty Vancouver Jack Webster.
    Webster gained fame when he took risks in exposing corruption in the Vancouver police force. This success gave him unusual weight in the talk show game.
    Webster was often rude and abrupt but had some redeeming qualities.
    Adler, by contrast, is needlessly loud and abrupt, without any of the redeeming qualities that could get him off the hook.
    Adler, who is often more interested in the minute hand than the caller, tends to cut people off just as they are making a good point.
    Can*t stand that…. never listen to him.. TG

  18. I’ve tried soooo hard to give Adler a chance,apart from his huge,self-righteous ego he does have a knack for taking some guests where they’ve obviously never been in an interview before.However,it is this same approach that completely throws some other guests off,effectively alienating them and killing the bit.
    The turning point for me came when I realized he insisted on promoting Bourque and his useless”supposed news”site every week,which I have long boycotted out of principal!
    Whenever I hear the name Adler now,the word BUFFOON immediately and consistently comes to mind…But then,CKNW’s programming pretty much SUCKS across the board nowadays!

  19. I agree with whoever said that Adler was better when he was still doing the local morning show, because the national forum certainly went to his head.
    Now that being said, he’s capable of entertaining programing when he’s not doing national politics. It really depends on his guest. Occassionally it’ll be Coyne or Lorne Gunter, someone who doesn’t let Adler bulldog the conversation, and the segment will be informative.
    Jim Travers has his good or bad days with Adler. Ditto Adam Radwanski. But any time it’s Susan Delacourt or Greg Weston, the bit usually goes in the direction it did this past Thursday.
    Adler’s just not capable of thinking outside the box. Maybe that’s his schtick on the show, but as people are becoming more knowledgable of inside Ottawa ball, the easier it is to poke holes in Adler’s positions.
    Anyhow, I still listen and I’m kinda happy to see a national show based out of Winnipeg.
    (Oh yeah, whomever wrote that Adler’s just another Liberal Jew, clearly you have never met the man in person. Not that I’ve spent a lot of time in the same room as him, but close friends of mine have and he’s not the person who you are alluding to there.)

  20. I can’t say for sure as I only have listened to Adler few times on the web but he seemed to be more interested in listening to himself than anything.
    I agree though with several that stated Dave Rutherford was top notch. Dave Taylor always wore his Liberal strip proudly so a balanced interview was rare.
    Just my $0.02 worth.

  21. I actually found Adler amusing for awhile. He wore thin in record time.
    Blow-hard is an apt description.

  22. Here’s the talk radio shows that I (try) to listen to on a regular basis:
    – Lowell Green (580 CFRA Ottawa)
    – John Oakley (640AM Toronto) Every Wednesday morning Oakley has this left-wing lawyer come on to give his take recent events. Sure to get your blood boiling early in the morning.
    – “The Beat” with Ross MacLeod and Craig Bromell (640AM Toronto). Mostly local news with an emphasis on law & order issues. Bromell used to be the head of the Toronto Police Union.
    – Mike Stafford (640AM Toronto). I sometimes catch Stafford in the evenings.
    – Dave Rutherford (630 CHED). Very good host and interviewer.
    – Bill Good (CKNW Vancouver). Very good with an emphasis on B.C. issues. Haven’t listened to him in a while.
    – One person I have to check out is Aphrodite Sales on 940 AM in Montreal. Caught her show on CPAC during the election and she seemed to be good at her job. As good looking as her name implies!
    – One that I miss is Peter Warren who had a national weekend show, before he quit to spend his time investigating some on solved murders.

  23. That “left wing” lawyer is former lawyer and now “legal agent” Harry Kopyto, isn’t it?
    Let’s just say that Kopyto puts the loopy in Fruitloops.
    I remember when the doo-doo first hit the fan over Adscam, there was John Moore on CFRB defending the Liberals and liberalism (the left-wing variety) to the hilt. The guy is a scumbag – still supporting the Liberal party despite the damage they had done to Canada – and a classic metrosexual. Lately Michael Coren has been taking some pretty good runs at him when Moore is on his show.
    Remember how Dick Smyth became the most obnoxious anti-smoking bore after years of puffing on a pipe?

  24. Adler on street-racing?
    Charles Adler, an outspoken, highly opinionated and engaging broadcaster tells listeners what’s really going on by cutting to the heart of issues.(website)
    Chas. will tell you/us what to think about this.
    Harper said the proposed street-racing legislation is in the spirit of a private member’s bill tabled by late Independent MP Chuck Cadman after Thorpe’s … (canoenews)
    Couple die in street-racing-related crash
    Canada.com – 36 minutes ago
    TORONTO – A couple celebrating their wedding anniversary were a few minutes from home when they were killed in an apparent street-racing-related car crash. Robert Manchester, 46, and his wife Lisa, 43, of Richmond Hill, Ont. …

  25. I stopped listening a couple of months ago. I have read his columns. He’s one of the worst writers out there. I’m not talking about his content.

  26. Charles Adler is a buffoon of the highest order who thinks he is God’s gift to the talk show world. He is a Liberal hack who really wants to see the corrupt Liberals back in power.

  27. Mississauga Matt – You’re right Harry Kopyto is the guys name. The guy is so over the top that it almost borders on parody.

  28. Is Chas. a smoker? Is Chas. a plug tobacco chewer/spitter? Is Charles a Jewish smokers’ rights advocate? Is Chas. a patio interviewer?
    The world has a right to know. Tell us Charlie. Don’t be coy. Tell us what we must know; we are non-thinkers; our barains are addled, Chucky.
    Throw caution to the winds, Mr. Adler… tell us what you think. We wait with bated breath. …
    Why cigs? Why not beef?
    The Ontario-wide legislation expanded last month to include the great outdoors, making it one of the most aggressive anti-smoking laws in Canada.
    Smoking will be prohibited on patios with any sort of awning, any kind of built-in overhang (even when it is a permanent feature of the building), or even when patio umbrellas are deemed to be too close together.
    Bar owners, let me tell you, are sick and tired of this particular discussion.
    Let me relate their basic position, since they have a point:
    As the polar ice caps melt, as bird flu pandemic looms, as Canada just had its fifth case of mad cow disease, Ontario’s latest contribution to the safety of the world is to send inspectors around measuring spaces in between patio umbrellas to make sure that no tiny whiff of smoke might be momentarily trapped underneath an overlap, threatening the health of some innocent, pristine lung underneath.
    Has that whiff of smoke ever been proven to dart down, infiltrate the lung and cause untold damage? All the studies on passive smoking are inconclusive. It may well be bad for us. We just don’t know for sure.
    But smoking laws in Ontario have been designed in accordance with the “precautionary principle,” an up-and-coming legal doctrine that holds potentially harm-causing agents guilty before they are proven innocent.
    Scientific research takes time — an especially long time when it comes to proving harmful effects to human health. We can’t very well expose a lab full of toddlers to second-hand smoke 12 hours a day and see what happens to them when they hit adulthood. The precautionary principle is designed to expose the limits of science, and also to work around them.
    Typically, North American legislators are known for their contempt of the precautionary principle, since they are aligned with large corporations who teeter on the verge of absurdity by playing the “it’s-never-been-absolutely-proven-that-putting-formaldehyde-in-household-cleaning-products-is-harmful” game. Or that nobody has ever demonstrated, beyond a reasonable doubt, that antibiotics, hormones, and forcing cows to eat things other than grass are poisoning our beef supply and, in turn, ourselves.
    Here in North America, we like our food and cleaning products efficient, jumbo-sized and cheap, and so precaution be damned.
    Not so in Europe, a continent known for valuing food and objecting to dangerous livestock-raising practices, pesticides and genetically modified Monsanto products. They are currently banning Canadian beef based on the precautionary principle.
    But if you accept precaution when it comes to one area, shouldn’t you apply that same caution to all areas equally? One would think.
    But earlier this year, the Canadian-beef-banning French government backed down from a proposed smoking ban. Parisians can still smoke until they’re blue in the face on Rue Saint Germain.
    to star…. via http://www.aldaily.com/

  29. Buffoon fits Adler well. Listened to Adler berate some listener because he commented on Adlers style and lack of substance. He went on a rant with the result of telling him to cjange the channel listen to something else.
    In Vancouver for talk radio the choices are so limited. C\FUN, (ladies station), CBC, sports talk, chinese and punjabi language and CKNW. I always enjoy road trips in the US when there are many, many stations to choose from. The CRTC does Canada such a disservice. Be a priority in the majority government please.
    enough

  31. Suez, 1956, and Pearson and 1956, blah, blah, blah… the same old, same old from the left liberals at the TO Star.
    Let’s ask Charles what was going on in Hungary in 1956:Where was Lester “Mike” Pearson on Russia’s crushing of the Hungarian Revolution?
    Answer: Mike Pearson said nothing:
    Revolution Crushed – 4 to 10 November
    On 4 November,[1956] plans which had been in motion for a number of days reached their fruition. New Soviet troops, who shared no sympathy for the Hungarians, invaded. While the Soviet Union justified its second intervention on the basis of responsibility to a Warsaw Pact ally, in the form of the Kádár government formed on 3 November, the Soviet forces allocated came from national reserves, and other Warsaw Pact countries did not supply troops. answers.com
    UN marks 50 years of peacekeeping
    May 29, 2006. 01:00 AM
    KATHRYN WHITE
    Today is the UN declared International Peacekeepers Day. This year it is especially important for Canadians to mark, because peacekeeping is on our minds right now. It is also especially important because the ideal and idea of an international peacekeeping force is a Canadian innovation. This innovation was proposed by then secretary of state for external affairs, Lester B. Pearson. His proposal for the deployment of an international peacekeeping force to respond to the escalating violence in the Suez Canal has been universally acknowledged as a brilliant and necessary innovation. Pearson saw the Suez mission in particular, and the tool of UN peacekeeping more broadly, as a muscular aid to peace that should be a critical element of peacemaking. ..
    to star

  32. I have to agree with most everone here. Adler is swimming in the shallow end of the talk radio gene pool. I assume that’s just his schtick.
    I seem to recall a remark that Kate made some time ago. Something to the effect that she found Adler to be slightly south of stupid. I have to admit I’ve used that one since.
    For those interested, I recommend The World Tonight with Rob Breckenridge on CHQR. 7-9 p.m. MDT. Decidedly right bias, excellent guests and decent commentary if a little long winded.
    Syncro

  33. John Moore, are you kidding me?
    His liberal boosterism and Trudeaupian take is pathetic.
    He’s a flat out bald faced liberal appologist, with a vocabulary.
    He would have us back in Chreten/Martin hell in seconds if it were up to him.
    I do enjoy listening to intelligent people beat him about the head with his own absurd arguments however.

  34. I also find Adler to be pompous, abrupt [and what is the word for someone who shows off their “vocabulary” in an effort to impress people?]
    As I write this, the image of the old music hall emcees who used to string really long words together to introduce the next act.
    I also find the topics to be weak.
    I keep listening because I have a higher expectation of the radio station CHED, however I am changing the channel after about 30 seconds.

  35. Adler reminds me a bit of Foghorn Leghorn, one of the Bugs Bunny characters. I am reminded of the time when the little chicken hawk comes along and calls Foghorn a “Loud Mouthed Shnook” First of all Adler reminds me of the bombastic blowhard that Foghorn was and I would think that the “Loud Mouthed Shnook” tag fits rather appropriately as well.
    Daniel

  36. I wonder if it is worth listening to Fog Horn Adler today to see if he has anything to say about SDA and these comments. I would think that he has someone that reads these blogs to him.

  37. Has anyone above mentioned Alder’s annoying accent? I understand he’s Canadian born so where does he get it?
    He’s a blowhard whose first priority is stir up his audience thinking that that will improve ratings. It might, but only for the short-term (have you heard much of DR. Laura lately).
    Rutherford is very good although he abuses callers who disagree with him a bit too much at times. Rob Breakenridge who does the “The World Tonight” evening show on QR 77 Calgary is the thinking man’s “Rutherford” even if he does drone on a bit.

  38. Good lord, Adler is bimboing on today about how conservatives don’t want a national daycare program largely because they worry about NDP-style indoctrination of the kiddies minds! Then Adler went on to say that the people who use conservative blogs are the extremist ideologoues, not a small-c conservative like himself. Nope for Adler, it’s not about family values or about reducing the number of costly government programs, is about conservative paranoia of a commie national daycare plan.

  39. Mike Duffy brought up the “point” of NDP indoctrination as the reason Conservatives do not want a National Daycare program on Adler – of course, Adler took it as a possible fact instead of outright saying how stupid that idea is.
    Obviously Mike got this “indoctrination” idea from somewhere and ~ is this the new “talking points” the press uses as to why the CPC do not want a national day care?
    Perhaps Mike should explain where he got the idea from as it is the stupidest reason I have ever heard of, but is makes the press’ case that conservatives are paranoid, right?
    I am sending Mike an e-mail to ask him to explain.

  40. Having worked with two well known talk show hosts, I know of what I speak. I sure miss listening to Peter Warren and Rutherford is consistently good. He always seemed to have interesting guests on. What I would really like is more variety in terms of hosts. It always seems to be the slightly overweight, balding, middle age white men who want to be heard. Yawn.
    Peter Gzowski is an exception–he was one of a kind.

  41. Booooooooriiiiiiiiing.
    That pretentious windbag loves the sound of his own phony voice. I listened in for a week–never again.
    Further proof that talk radio is an American invention–and Canada has no conservative popular culture. Great Leader and Teacher Trudeau made sure of that–right CBC and CRTC?

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation