*Any trolling or otherwise boneheaded comments will be happily deleted*
PM, I wasn't miffed at Eva's information she presented, it was the manner in which she presented it that irked me.
Screw you and the camel you rode in on.
*That is excellent discourse Leo! Perhaps if you did as much digging as Eva, you wouldn't have your facts straight and wouldn't have to get so angry at others presenting you with contradictory information. 
Barbara Walters - never thought of that - lol. I don't think I'm anything like her. It's just that for this story, I did take the time to try to confirm your claims with a number of sources.
Eva-- first of all, you haven't read my update that I wrote oh, say, a few hours ago, have you?
Second of all, don't come on my blog and presume to tell me what I need to do or not to do to be a "credible blogger," and then come on with that smarmy, "Lloydletta's news has confirmed.." self aggrandizing, self-promoting crap.
Who the hell do you think you are, Barbara Walters?
I clearly posted that I was waiting on confirmation, and stated that if Langsjoen in fact didn't complain to Sowada, I would apologize.
Sowada says she didn't; Barnett up to this time claimed she did.
Don't EVER come on this blog again and spew your self-righteous platitudinous and pompous drivel, Eva.
Screw you and the camel you rode in on.
Leo - John Sowada denies Barnett's claims on the record. I encourage you to issue a correction. That's the responsible thing to do for your credibility as a blogger.
Lloydletta's Nooz has confirmed that Karen Langsjoen did NOT complain to John Sowada, President of Leighton Broadcasting (KNSI):
From: JSowada@aol.com
Date: Nov 5, 2007 4:49 PM
Subject: Re: Andy Barnett Question
To: lloydletta@gmail.com
The candidate did not complain to me. We are posting the entire interview on the KNSI web site.
www.1450knsi.com
John J. Sowada
President
Leighton Enterprises, Inc.
PO Box 1458
619 West St. Germain Street
St. Cloud MN 56302
Eva Young
Lloydletta's Nooz
Edited By Siteowner
Edited By Siteowner
The level of fact checking is laughable. Only one person's vantage point is sought, the position taken is a double standard purely rooted in partisanship and portraying Andy's dismissal as though Friday's show was the only thing possibly considered when he was let go is like seeing only the snap of a football game and reporting on the play-by-play dynamics.
Just a thought on the whole Langsjoen-complained-angle...has anyone tried to reconstruct the timeline of events to see if it is even plausible? What time did she leave the sight of any witnesses? What time was it decided that Andy would be dismissed?
Because, PM, if she didn't have a cow over the situation (which she clearly didn't need to do) it wouldn't have been an issue. It shouldn't have been an issue. It is emblematic of a society filled with ne'erdowells and chronically-disdainful people who are just sitting around and waiting to be offended.
And Andy said that he didn't talk to just one person, but several people who saw Lansjoen talking to KNSI management.
*I don't buy your arguments, as you have been OUTRAGED over a variety of things and then turned around and done the same thing. From reading your blog, you are the king of outrage about democratic foibles but love it when Republicans use those same tactics. The problem is, you are going on Andy hearing from "several" people who didn't hear the conversation but rather just saw Langsjoen talking.
Langsjoen answered my email asking for more information. She wrote much more than this, but this is what is relevant:
"I did NOT make an official complaint to anyone. The only comment I made afterward was to an intern who works there that I know, and who came out to apologize for the interview. I told him that this kind of interview is one of the reasons I belong to the League of Women Voters. Andy can claim anything he wants to, and many people will believe him. So be it. I
stand by my right to refuse to answer questions that I do not believe pertain to the office I am running for."
So there it is, there's not clear evidence - beyond Andy's second hand - that supports your post.
It's interesting that the edited version of the interview that Andy put up doesn't include all the stuff you describe. Specifically it doesn't include any questions about gays - and references to domestic partner benefits - and your post mentioned that.
Because, PM, if she didn't have a cow over the situation (which she clearly didn't need to do) it wouldn't have been an issue. It shouldn't have been an issue. It is emblematic of a society filled with ne'erdowells and chronically-disdainful people who are just sitting around and waiting to be offended.
And Andy said that he didn't talk to just one person, but several people who saw Lansjoen talking to KNSI management.
Leo, don't you think its a bit of a stretch to claim it was this woman's fault when you yourself admit that you heard it from Andy who heard it from "someone" who "saw" her talking to the station manager.
I wrote Langsjoen to ask for comment. Do you know any other Leighton sources who would be willing to talk with you on background? Andy should be able to help you with those. When Nick Coleman left/was fired from Air America - Nick gave me names and numbers of others who would back up his story on background. This was when it came out that station owner had a "no guns, gays or abortion" discussion memo on that station.
"What is the significance of a city council candidate's opinion on illegal immigration and sancuary cities? Nothing."
C'mon, rudy... the City Council approves city policy, which could include a "don't ask, don't tell" mandate for law enforcement.
City councils and mayors set up sanctuary cities.
Leo - what is your source for this:
My source was Barnett.
People are fired and hired in radio every day. This is non-story, unimportant in every way. It only means something to a small circle of close-knit right wingers who have nothing else to talk about.
What is the significance of a city council candidate's opinion on illegal immigration and sancuary cities? Nothing.
yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwn.
Leo - Disregard the question. I saw that you heard this from Andy Barnett. Karen Langsjoen disputes the story in a post on the St Cloud Times Story Chat:
Karen Langsjoen from St. Cloud
Comment Posted: 11/3/2007 7:41:46 AM
For the Record:
I did NOT go to anyone at KNSI or Leighton Broadcasting after the interview. I went directly home. I did not call them to complain. I did NOT get anyone fired! And no where in the article did it say I did these things.
I have never posted here before because I believe if someone has something to say, they should be willing to sign their name. And I seldom read them, but have started to do so since I began this campaign.
I have gone door to door for two months, talking to people, asking them if they have concerns or questions. I have never been asked any of the "social issue" questions that were asked during the KNSI interview. People care about neighborhood safety, they care about taxes, they care about cars speeding past their homes, endangering their children. These are issues the city council can and should address.
The headline in the Times was misleading. The abortion question came very early in the interview. It did NOT end it. We were asked several more questions, most of which were irrelevant. The interview was not cut short, and we were given 2 minutes each to wrap up. I left immediately and had no idea what happened after that.
One last thought. This is why I dislike anonymous postings. People can make accusations and say whatever they like, regardless of the truth. I didn't bother to read all the postings, and I will not respond again. I will be busy going door to door all weekend, talking to voters about issues that REALLY matter.
Please vote on Nov. 6.
Karen Langsjoen
******
So this appears to be a he said, she said thing.
Leo - what is your source for this:
"Immediately following the interview, Langsjoen apparently stormed into the offices and threw what could be described as a whiny hissy fit to Leighton Broadcasting 's general manager John Sawada, who, after reportedly apologizing to Langsjoen up and down, fired Barnett."
Was your source Andy Barnett - another source at the station or what?
You've got quite the story here.
Leo,
I agree that it was wrong for Barnett to be fired over this.
I was reading the Story Chat comments over at the Times, and I agree with one poster who says that Andy never really connected with the audience. I am a fan of the show, but don't care one way or the other for Andy Barnett.
But he shouldn't be fired for asking a stupid question. (And we can agree or not about if it was stupid.) I don't think he handled it very well either, when it became obvious that he took a misstep.
It's a mistake to fire him. But I think that this shows that Andy has a long way to go as a broadcast professional.
Leo, I disagree with your assertion that this line of questioning was in any way relevant to a city council race. However, I do agree that it should NOT be a fireable offense. A reprimand or apology seems far more reasonable.
Andy did not answer my last email and you seem to be in fairly close contact with him so if you could let him know that despite being on opposite ends of the spectrum, I am on his side on this one.
Commenting by HaloScan
