Could Howard Stern Topple Bush?

NewsMax.com ^ | 3-18-04 | Carl Limbacher

[Mich0127]

Is "shock jock" Howard Stern's voice powerful enough to affect the upcoming presidential election to the extent of sending President Bush packing?

That's what the Boston Globe wants to know, explaining that the liberal talk show host the newspaper describes as a "stripper aficionado, champion of misfits everywhere, all-purpose radio provocateur," has turned his raunchy show into a Bush bashing marathon.

Writes the Globe's Matthew Gilbert, Stern has been devoting hours of his broadcast every weekday "to impassioned criticism of President Bush and support of Senator John Kerry."

Stern, he writes has been "Railing tirelessly against the president, attacking Bush's alleged yoking together of church and state, questioning the legitimacy of Bush's National Guard service, his use of images of Sept. 11 in his campaign ads, his stands on First Amendment rights, his handling of Iraq, and his stands against gay marriage and stem-cell research.

"Join me and friends of this show who are outraged," Stern said on the air last Friday. "Vote out every Republican you can find."

Moreover, Stern is also asking his listeners to send money to Kerry's campaign, calling the Massachusetts Senator "a good man" and praising both his record in Vietnam as well as his anti-Vietnamese war activities.

Stern's voice is powerful, as his ratings show. "With all the talk of liberal talk radio," Michael Harrison, the editor and publisher of Talkers magazine told the Globe. "... we're seeing emerging from the ranks of `shock jocks' one of the most potent and articulate liberal talkers we've seen in years."

Stern's recent crusade, he added, is "historic. Anytime you have somebody suddenly igniting political interest with an audience who has the kind of loyalty factor Stern has, it could turn an election."

Harrison explained that a large percentage of Stern's listeners -- some 8 1/2 million a week - were leaning in favor of Bush. "If Stern could turn several million supporters away from Bush, that has even more impact than Rush Limbaugh, who's preaching to the choir."

"On a national level, I don't know how much influence Stern could have," Chuck Todd, editor of The Hotline, a Washington-based daily briefing on politics told the Globe, adding that "we assume too little at our own peril when it comes to Stern and talk radio in general. . . . Does Bush really need to worry about him? If New York were a swing state, we definitely would take this more seriously. Is Stern's popularity as devoted outside of New York? We only know it is ratings-wise."

Stern's audience, Harrison said, is broader than most people realize. "They're not just 18-year-old, beer-drinking yahoos. They're 20- and 30- and 40-something professionals. They're mainstream American citizens who are well-educated and affluent and socially active and politically interested, though not politically active. But they're being motivated. Wouldn't that be amazing if millions of people vote who otherwise wouldn't, because of this issue?"

Adds Todd, "Some people will dismiss Stern not ... because they believe his listeners don't vote. I would argue that a swing voter is just that; they swing between not voting and voting, not between the two parties. So if he brings some nonvoters to the polls, then that's a big impact."

And, Todd pointed out, Stern has used his clout effectively in the past. Stern was briefly the 1994 New York Libertarian Party candidate in the governor's race, before withdrawing and endorsing Republican George Pataki. "One could argue that he had an effect on that New York governor's race, that he was an impact player," Todd says.

Stern's anti-Bush crusade began in earnest, the Globe reported, after the FCC crackdown on "indecency" had inspired Clear Channel - which he calls "Fear Channel" - to remove his show from six cities the week of Feb. 23.

Although Clear Channel's stations provide only a relatively small part of his audience, the action angered Stern.

Says the Globe, "his outrage has boiled to a head with news that Congress is currently considering a radical increase in the amount of FCC indecency fines (from a maximum of $27,500 to $500,000).

"It's over," Stern said on the air. "When the Senate passes that bill, it's over. The show is over. . . We can't do a radio program that's cutting edge . . . if the government keeps second-guessing everything we do."

Stern also insists that Clear Channel dropped him last month not because of indecency on his show but because of some of his Bush criticism earlier in the year. "There's a real good argument to be made that I stopped backing Bush and that's when I got kicked off Clear Channel," he told his listeners earlier this month.

"He is self-aggrandizing if he thinks he's being singled out here," Jeffrey Chester, executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy, a Washington-based advocacy organization told the Globe. "Congress is engaging in this kind of witch hunt generally. I don't think they're singling out Stern for his alleged critical comments against the Bush administration."

Chester says it is unclear whether Kerry will indeed be Stern's "savior," adding "I'm no fan of Howard Stern or Rush Limbaugh... Congress is stampeding to censor a whole range of speech."

[Charles Martel]

He's smart and he's influential and he's courageous. That doesn't mean he's right. It means he's a formidable opponent.

Courageous? That's a stretch. He's objecting to broadcasting changes which threaten his particular niche in the market. If he wants to fight censorship, he'd be well-advised to organize and seek a Congressional hearing on the matter. Stern could become sort of the anti-Tipper, which would probably win him more friends than his current approach.

Ranting on the air and blaming the President for matters which are not decided in the Oval Office is plain old smear politics and is easily seen as such. He won't win many new fans with his agitprop - and his current fans are more interested in mindless, crude entertainment than they are political activism.

"Fartman the Formidable"

[liberallarry]

I just talked to a friend who likes Stern and listens to him regularly; he finds him to be the one bright spot in an otherwise arduous day. I think a lot of Stern fans are like that.

They will not be pleased to see him removed on obscenity charges and if, as seems likely, obscenity is used as an excuse to remove political opponents and critics, you can kiss the Bush administration good-bye.

[LisaMalia]

Stern's show is hard core porn. Try flipping the channels when his show is on E! He hides behind the 1st ammendment ala Larry Flint, like a little sissy boy, and he's finally been called on it.

Hes need to go where he will fit in and feel right at home, in the porn industry. Noone is trampling on his rights, most just don't want to see his trash on the mainstream airwaves. Put it on PPV where it belongs.

He probably does detest President Bush, I'm sure he finds anyone with morals and integrity unacceptable.

I'm with the poster above, become involved with you local Bush/Cheney campaign, and get the message out to anyone who will listen.

People like Stern can be dangerous, he does have a cult following. Time to fight fire with fire.

[liberallarry]

Stern's show is hard core porn.

Nah.

Porno fans know they'll not see anything or hear anything truly vulgar - it's all bleeped. They go elsewhere.

Howard's listeners want to see and hear people make fools of themselves, they like freak shows. And that's what they get - a slice of the raunchy side of life served up by a master.

He needs to go where he will fit in and feel right at home

He doesn't "need" to go anywhere and he certainly doesn't "need" to hear you telling him what he "needs". That's the point of the First Amendment, isn't it?

He probably does detest President Bush..

He didn't in the past. He does now. So what?

People like Stern can be dangerous

Now that's a truly dangerous remark. Perhaps you should be imprisoned.

[Jorge]

Do you think anyone who listens to Howard Stern regularly would vote for Bush? I can't stand Stern. I thought he was a filth bag 15 years ago. He still is.

Yes, it's hard for me to believe Howard Stern supporting Kerry will hurt Bush anymore than Larry Flynt the pornographer did in 2000.

When politicians have to worry about the opposition of trash peddlers like Stern, America doesn't deserve decent leadship.

[LisaMalia]

I'm not answering your childish nonsense point by point.

I'll just suggest a visit to your closest porn shop is in order. Or maybe your significant other won't allow that, so you use Stern as a substitute?

[liberallarry]

I don't like Stern and have listened to him only a few times. Never been able to watch him for more than a few minutes.

I'll just suggest a visit to your closest porn shop is in order.

You think you know what Stern "needs". Now you're implying you know what I need. Why don't you just mind your own business?

[LisaMalia]

Perhaps you should be imprisoned.
Why don't you just mind your own business?

When someone posts a comment such as this the one above to me, I will respond. Pretty ironic, but not surprising, that a so called liberal would actually state that I should be "imprisoned" for stating my opinion about Howard Stern on a message board.

Making such a statement about me MAKES it my business.You are making a very strong case for the fact that liberals are hypocrites.

[xp38]

In 2000 Howard backed Gore IIRC

[liberallarry]

Pretty ironic, but not surprising, that a so called liberal would actually state that I should be "imprisoned" for stating my opinion about Howard Stern on a message board.

What do you know about irony?

My "imprisoned" remark was a response to your suggestion that "people like Stern can be dangerous"...because what does one do with dangerous people if not imprison them. And if they seem dangerous but have not actually done anything perhaps they should be pre-emptively imprisoned. History is littered with examples of such "thinking".

Thus my ironic response.