Right wing talk radio is so yesterday after today.
?????????????
I like the food at the Right Wing restaurant, but they won't serve you anything but chicken. I will go back there today and ask what radio station they played yesterday.
They opened the gates and flooded the airwaves with pro Romney, viciously anti McCain rhetoric. They believe that neither Huck or McCain are real conservatives. Their opening efforts seem only to have worked out West where the underground bunker cults came out to vote. Huck took their deep southern base. But I disagree as to their impotence. They are just heating up.
I wouldn't say they are "yesterday" but I believe guys like Hannity and Limbaugh have got to see they are viewed more as entertainment than information these days.
Conservative talk radio had cachet for a good 10-12 years convincing people they were better, more balanced, and more honest than the "liberal" media. Limbaugh was a great launch-pad for the "Contract For America" and the GOP revolution in 1994. If the GOP had nominated someone more charismatic than "Dull" in '96, Clinton might have been a one-termer.
After seeing 12 years of "conservative" control of Congress and 7 years of "conservative" control of the WH I believe more people, who used to identify closer w/ talk radio, are feeling let down and are starting to form their political opinions from a variety of places instead of simply listening to one or two talk show hosts to make their voting decisions.
The last thing I believe for myself is that I should vote soley based on what Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly, or even Olbermann has to say about a candidate.
I don't have a clue where any of those guys stand in the national Arbitrons these days, so I don't have a clue what their listenership is from a scientific aspect. I don't really focus that much on one news or commentary source than another and really don't listen to all that much talk radio anymore unless it's on when I'm driving somewhere.
Conan, you seem to be mellowing somewhat since you're off the smokes! Try O'reilly, Ingraham, Beck, and company on KFAQ 1170. I'm not sure of the strength of that lineup as far as Arbitron, but it is a good source of conservative or at least ultra-right wing thinking. Its hard to keep from laughing sometimes about their basic assumptions but good to see how they think. O'Reilly called Edwards a "pin head" and an idiot. Real deep thinker that no spin guy. Coulter is considered mainstream and enlightening. I heard them defend Romney's flip flopping as a strong indication of flexible intelligent learning. Where was that attitude when Kerry was running?!
Its fun for a couple of days then you find yourself suspicious of everyone you meet and willing to argue over everything. After listening for awhile turn back to NPR for a laugh. I admire their power to persuade and dissuade. It seems they are not fading away.
the right wing talk show hosts are now representative of the "angry and adrift 'Republican' Party"
Other than FOTD's nearly incomprehensible start of this thread (although not worse than "it's a tragedy to call it a tragedy" comment a few days ago), there are some interesting discussions going on here.
It's hilarious to see the "conservative" elites tie themselves in knots. A few months ago, they would've sooner stuck needles through their eyeballs than vote for Romney because he was a fairly liberal governor in Massachusetts and because he's a flip-flopper. Now they're throwing their weight behind him because he's the only hope of stopping the McCain Express.
And a few weeks ago, the conservative elites were having a freakout because of Huckabee's strong early showing. Apparently some people in the GOP like having evangelicals on their side, but God forbid (pun intended) if a real, live evangelical actually become a contender for president. I also heard a few of them call Huckabee "liberal," which is laughable when you look at his social stances.
The unhinged vibe grew when their only real hope, Fred Thompson, ran a campaign so lackadaisical, it was like he could barely bother getting up in the morning. "I don't think I have the fire in the belly" to campaign for the job, he said. Well, no sh*t, Sherlock. Your two only moods on the campaign trail -- dour and drowsy -- made that abundantly clear.
And now they're freaking out over McCain (literally freaking out, like Glenn Beck did today), even though he's boasted a pretty conservative record in his years in office, he's pretty darned electable and he's very popular with members of the GOP, with polls showing very high positives and very low negatives. But, no, he's just not PERFECT enough for them.
I'd swear they'd b*tch even if Jesus H. Christ himself came down to run for office. "Naw, can't have that 'meek shall inherit the earth' sh*t; the millionaires won't go for that."
quote:
Originally posted by rwarn17588
Other than FOTD's nearly incomprehensible start of this thread (although not worse than "it's a tragedy to call it a tragedy" comment a few days ago), there are some interesting discussions going on here.
It's hilarious to see the "conservative" elites tie themselves in knots. A few months ago, they would've sooner stuck needles through their eyeballs than vote for Romney because he was a fairly liberal governor in Massachusetts and because he's a flip-flopper. Now they're throwing their weight behind him because he's the only hope of stopping the McCain Express.
And a few weeks ago, the conservative elites were having a freakout because of Huckabee's strong early showing. Apparently some people in the GOP like having evangelicals on their side, but God forbid (pun intended) if a real, live evangelical actually become a contender for president. I also heard a few of them call Huckabee "liberal," which is laughable when you look at his social stances.
The unhinged vibe grew when their only real hope, Fred Thompson, ran a campaign so lackadaisical, it was like he could barely bother getting up in the morning. "I don't think I have the fire in the belly" to campaign for the job, he said. Well, no sh*t, Sherlock. Your two only moods on the campaign trail -- dour and drowsy -- made that abundantly clear.
And now they're freaking out over McCain (literally freaking out, like Glenn Beck did today), even though he's boasted a pretty conservative record in his years in office, he's pretty darned electable and he's very popular with members of the GOP, with polls showing very high positives and very low negatives. But, no, he's just not PERFECT enough for them.
I'd swear they'd b*tch even if Jesus H. Christ himself came down to run for office. "Naw, can't have that 'meek shall inherit the earth' sh*t; the millionaires won't go for that."
Republican polling in OK is a mess. Looks like a kid got hold of the white board markers.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/poll-tracker.htm
Rwarn,
Something came to me as I was reading your post. It's almost as if the Republicans have not focused any futher than the convention. They are concerned who the nominee will be, not who best will keep the GOP in the White House.
I feel like the Democrats have slowly shifted focus from "who to nominate" to who will best compete against the GOP.
I hope that makes sense. I'm trying to say the GOP is focused on August, while the Democrats seem to be more focused on November.
McCain's surge has been stunning to say the least, considering how he was written off about the time Thompson announced. Huckabee's rise has been stunning as well.
Meanwhile the Democrat front-runners are still the front-runners they've been since late last summer.
I believe this could be indicative of more chaos in the GOP right now and perhaps a surge from the voters, not the RNC to re-brand the party.
Even though Iowa and New Hampshire are irrelevant as far as delegate counts, the PR gained from fairing well in those two states has provided great momentum for McCain and Huckabee for voters with a monkey-see mentality. FWIW, I voted for neither of those gentlemen yesterday.
The talking heads are using as Mac as their punching bag because they also missed the importance of immigration, the debt, the Rumsfeld strategy, and GOP arrogance. He is being scapegoated because when they were high on their horse about how great the GOP was and how awful the Dems were they were not in touch with the GOP queda.
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
Conan, you seem to be mellowing somewhat since you're off the smokes! Try O'reilly, Ingraham, Beck, and company on KTRT. I'm not sure of the strength of that lineup as far as Arbitron, but it is a good source of conservative or at least ultra-right wing thinking. Its hard to keep from laughing sometimes about their basic assumptions but good to see how they think. O'Reilly called Edwards a "pin head" and an idiot. Real deep thinker that no spin guy. Coulter is considered mainstream and enlightening. I heard them defend Romney's flip flopping as a strong indication of flexible intelligent learning. Where was that attitude when Kerry was running?!
Its fun for a couple of days then you find yourself suspicious of everyone you meet and willing to argue over everything. After listening for awhile turn back to NPR for a laugh. I admire their power to persuade and dissuade. It seems they are not fading away.
Don't let it shock you. I'm really pretty moderate. Even before I quit the nicotine (five weeks & counting!)
I'm a staunch fiscal conservative, smaller, less intrusive government, somewhat socially liberal, don't believe government should legislate morality, strong on national security, including protecting our borders and pro-active on terrorism.
I'm probably more Libertarian than Republican.
My final disappointment with Bush was his $3T budget.
I'm a channel flipper, I tend to bounce around and watch different shows and news and not get hooked on one commentary show over another.
Careful channel surfing, Cman.
Karl Rove has joined Faux News.....you might be getting more lies.
quote:
Originally posted by FOTD
Careful channel surfing, Cman.
Karl Rove has joined Faux News.....you might be getting more lies.
MC Rove getting his own show or as a correspondent?
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
quote:
Originally posted by FOTD
Careful channel surfing, Cman.
Karl Rove has joined Faux News.....you might be getting more lies.
MC Rove getting his own show or as a correspondent?
I think more of a "contributer" than either of the two you mentioned. He will just be another talking head they can bring in to put his spin on whatever subject it is they are discussing. Basically the same thing Bill Kristol does on Fox.
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
Try O'reilly, Ingraham, Beck, and company on KFAQ 1170. I'm not sure of the strength of that lineup as far as Arbitron, but it is a good source of conservative or at least ultra-right wing thinking.
I'd listened to some of the offerings on KFAQ; not bad, not stellar. Have not heard Beck (I assume you're referring to Glen Beck?), but I must say that the Bill O'Reilly on radio seems different from the Billy O I've seen on Fox News-and much more palatable. Laura Ingraham is just tacky.
Someone, might have been Huntzinger, who said Laura Ingraham sounds like an orgasm gone bad. If it wasn't you Tim, I apologize.
I really don't mind Beck all that much, he's pretty common sense and at least doesn't seem to be reading the daily RNC teletype line for line like Hannity or Limbaugh.
My Mom has said if she's got to hear how Hannity is a "Reagan Conservative" one more time she's going to yank him through the radio and beat the **** out of him. She says: "Hannity was still smoking pot out on Long Island when Reagan was in office, he hasn't got the brain cells to even remember who Reagan WAS!"
Yeah, go Mom!!
I caught a brief part of his radio schtick today. Just wait, by October Hannnity will find some way to say that McCain's 65% conservative voting record is close enough in these liberal times to qualify as a Reagan Conservative.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
Someone, might have been Huntzinger, who said Laura Ingraham sounds like an orgasm gone bad. If it wasn't you Tim, I apologize.
Ingraham is out of her element doing her schtick on talk radio. She should go back to her former legal career and leave the political commentary to people who know what they're doing.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
Just wait, by October Hannnity will find some way to say that McCain's 65% conservative voting record is close enough in these liberal times to qualify as a Reagan Conservative.
Hannity is a goob.
It's pretty obvious who gets their material from right wing yack a.m. radio here...yacks and hacks are so passe.
The Last DJ (T.Petty)
Well you can't turn him into a company man
You can't turn him into a whore
And the boys upstairs just don't understand anymore
Well the top brass don't like him talking so much,
And he won't play what they say to play
And he don't want to change what don't need to change
There goes the last DJ
Who plays what he wants to play
And says what he wants to say, hey hey hey...
And there goes your freedom of choice
There goes the last human voice
There goes the last DJ
Well some folks say they're gonna hang him so high
รข'Cause you just can't do what he did
There're some things you just can't put in the minds of those kids
As we celebrate mediocrity all the boys upstairs want to see
How much you'll pay for what you used to get for free
There goes the last DJ
Who plays what he wants to play
And says what he wants to say, hey hey hey...
And there goes your freedom of choice
There goes the last human voice
And there goes the last DJ
Well he got him a station down in Mexico
And sometimes it'll kind of come in
And I'll bust a move and remember how it was back then
And there goes the last DJ
Who plays what he wants to play
And says what he wants to say, hey hey hey...
And there goes your freedom of choice
There goes the last human voice.
And there goes the last DJ
Although I'd be considered liberal on many issues, I'd have to say that if I were conservative, I could think of better sources in the conservative media to get my information from, and most of the people on right-wing talk radio ain't it!
To qualify my previous posting, Hannity does not project an opinion but rather cop an attitude; he emotes rather than offer a well-considered analysis. I would not put him in a league with more considered conservatives such as William F. Buckley.
Rush Limbaugh (Hannity's demigod) is and has been for a long time, a common buffoon. Laura Ingraham is obviously 45 going on 14, and ought not to be pontificating on the issues of the day. As for ann coulter, someone get her a strait jacket.
The jury is still out on Mike Gallagher....
quote:
Originally posted by mr.jaynes
Although I'd be considered liberal on many issues, I'd have to say that if I were conservative, I could think of better sources in the conservative media to get my information from, and most of the people on right-wing talk radio ain't it!
To qualify my previous posting, Hannity does not project an opinion but rather cop an attitude; he emotes rather than offer a well-considered analysis. I would not put him in a league with more considered conservatives such as William F. Buckley.
Rush Limbaugh (Hannity's demigod) is and has been for a long time, a common buffoon. Laura Ingraham is obviously 45 going on 14, and ought not to be pontificating on the issues of the day. As for ann coulter, someone get her a strait jacket.
The jury is still out on Mike Gallagher....
Very good analysis. Buckley was smart and entertaining.
Someone get Ann Coulter a cheeseburger, that gal is anorexic.
Hannity = Blah
Rush = Blah
I'll take Gallagher, Dennis Prager, and Hugh Hewitt anyday over the above.
Oh, and Laura Ingram. Yuck. I can't stand that crap she tries to put out.
BTW, did Laura get a facelift or something; she looks ENTIRELY different than she did a year or two ago.
quote:
Originally posted by TulsaFan-inTexas
Someone get Ann Coulter a cheeseburger, that gal is anorexic.
Hannity = Blah
Rush = Blah
I'll take Gallagher, Dennis Prager, and Hugh Hewitt anyday over the above.
Coulter is obviously deranged. That's the only way I can classify her. No reasonable person could ever reach the same conclusions she does without being a little tetched. Someone more reasonable would base their commentaries in regards to politics and the nation strictly on the facts, rather than conjecture and attitude.
Hannity and Limbaugh are buffoons, pure and simple.
Gallagher seems a little more reasonable and down to earth, but hey, he's only on for an hour, and not three like he is in other parts of the country: he could be completely different as the show progresses, I don't know.
Don't know Prager or Hewitt.
quote:
Originally posted by TulsaFan-inTexas
Oh, and Laura Ingram. Yuck. I can't stand that crap she tries to put out.
BTW, did Laura get a facelift or something; she looks ENTIRELY different than she did a year or two ago.
I've read her books, I've heard her show, and it is in poor taste, even worse than Hannity or
Limbaugh, by my lights. Her show is sophomoric, and her lame attempts at political satire only appeals to an ideological lowest common denominator. Clearly, her arguments are not based on facts.
This could dovetail into an interesting side discussion ...
You, Mr. Jaynes, are a self-described conservative. Have you become repelled by the rather, ahem, energetic discussions and stances by right-wing talk show radio hosts in recent years?
Have many of the popular one radio hosts jumped the shark?
And, finally, are many conservatives voting for John McCain because they feel the GOP has become way too fringe-y for its own good?
quote:
Originally posted by rwarn17588
This could dovetail into an interesting side discussion ...
You, Mr. Jaynes, are a self-described conservative. Have you become repelled by the rather, ahem, energetic discussions and stances by right-wing talk show radio hosts in recent years?
You're almost right on the money: actually, I'm a self-described liberal, though I've nothing against conservatism- well-thought-out and fact-based conservativism.
But yes, I am indeed repelled by the current crop of right-wing talk radio. There is indeed a difference between the musings of William F. Buckley or someone equally studious, and then there's the partisan-hack rantings of Hannity or Ingraham on one extreme, or the fevered babblings of Coulter. I've also listened to Brian and the Judge, John Gibson and Michael Savage. Gibson is ok in small doses, Savage needs a valium or some other depressant, Brian Kilmeade should stick with sports.
I'm equally repelled by the misnomer of
pundit when describing these people.
Demagogue or
propogandist seems more fitting. Judge Andrew Napolitano is about the only one out there with a good brain in his head.
I'm with Mr. Jaynes. I get totally turned off by party hacks and have seen more and more of this, especially from the likes of Hannity and Ingram. It doesn't matter what the Republicans do, it's really all good. McCain? I'll vote for Obama before I vote for McCain, and I'm a lifelong conservative. I'd rather vote for someone that is up front than a RINO like McCain.
Besides, I like Obama more than I do any of the other candidates. Not exactly A SINGLE reason to vote for someone, but I know it will be a Democrat in office next, and I prefer Obama over Clinton or McCain.
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
quote:
Originally posted by mr.jaynes
Although I'd be considered liberal on many issues, I'd have to say that if I were conservative, I could think of better sources in the conservative media to get my information from, and most of the people on right-wing talk radio ain't it!
To qualify my previous posting, Hannity does not project an opinion but rather cop an attitude; he emotes rather than offer a well-considered analysis. I would not put him in a league with more considered conservatives such as William F. Buckley.
Rush Limbaugh (Hannity's demigod) is and has been for a long time, a common buffoon. Laura Ingraham is obviously 45 going on 14, and ought not to be pontificating on the issues of the day. As for ann coulter, someone get her a strait jacket.
The jury is still out on Mike Gallagher....
Very good analysis. Buckley was smart and entertaining.
Yes, Buckley is smart and entertaining. Just his vocabulary and phrasings set him apart from the rest of the pack. He may be a conservative, but he's an independent conservative, meaning that his opinions are just that, and not gleaned by partisan talking points.
quote:
Originally posted by TulsaFan-inTexas
I'm with Mr. Jaynes. I get totally turned off by party hacks and have seen more and more of this, especially from the likes of Hannity and Ingram. It doesn't matter what the Republicans do, it's really all good.
Looking at other stars of talk radio, it becomes obvious that the message is the same, only the players are interchangeable.
I've also listened to
Brian and the Judge, both here and in Biloxi on the Internet and I have to wonder who were the programming wizards that put that team together, they are so mismatched; the title alone sounds like a dumb 1980s sitcom. One one hand, you have Judge Andrew Napolitano, obviously an intelligent and educated man who puts forth his take on things in a legal context; while he's obviously conservative, he still believes in the Constitution and the System. Still, it seems like such a misappropriation of talent, relegating him to talk radio, when you just know he's capable of better things.
His partner Brian Kilmeade, on the other hand, should have stayed in the sports realm (I understand he also had a stint doing stand-up in his background, though given Kilmeade's lame attempts at humor on
Fox and Friends, I've found Andrew "Dice" Clay to be more amusing, which is really saying something). If there is a fact-based analysis on his part in regard to the days' events, I've not picked up on it.
John Gibson, I'll concede, can make some good points here and there. Though very much a conservative, he does come off as reasonable and at least open to hear what everyone has to say whether they agree with him or not.