Replies

I like a lot of your observations but my taste is a bit different.

Top Tier: Rush Limbaugh

Very Good: Laura Ingraham, Michael Medved, Michael Savage

Good: Bob Grant, Bill O'Reilly

Below Average: Sean Hannity, Mark Levin

* * * * *

Rush - the grandfather of the niche and is awesome - funny, nice, cogent and makes sense. Hsi reputation as mean, shrill, etc is almost totally unfounded. People who think ill of Rush have likely seldom or never heard him. I only listen maybe 1 or 2x a month these days, but always a treat.

Laura Ingraham - wonderful, and I actually largely just like the sound of her voice. Smart, funny, and blunt when she needs to be. Some good backup talent on her show also. she is VERY smart, probably 2nd only to Medved in the 'pure brains' department. The radio host I'd most like to share a night on the town with here in Las Vegas. I only listen maybe 1 or 2x a month these days, when I am up late and working on my PC.

Michael Medved - probably my favorite radio show these days, though I don't think he is on in NYC but I could be wrong. I think he is he fairest and smartest conservative spokesman on radio. He thinks through issues clearly & completely, and most importantly when liberals have a good point, he concedes it and parrys the argument very well rather than rely on cliches. Probably the most intelligent and well spoken conservative radio host - a pleasure to listen to. The radio host I'd most want to sit next to in 1st Class on a trans-continental flight, especially if he was particularly chatty. I listen daily since I work at my home office and he fills up 12noon-3pm.

Michael Savage - Probably the most interesting conservative spokesman on radio. Savage Nation is the only daily 'fix' of radio I never miss. While his style turns off some folks, the truth is he isn't that mean, and only really 'loses it' once or twice a show (to be fair, most commentators 'lose it' maybe only once every two years!). He had a wonderful career in health sciences before his run on radio, and has easily had the most fascinating life. He is an acquired taste but when the taste is developed, he is mesmerizing. His show often takes strange turns that to me are the show's strength: he will discuss wealthy midgets he knew and their ability to get lovely women, for example, and expound on the relationship between the sexes. He will bring up a metaphor (life is like a pinball machine) and expound on it for minutes. No matter where the conversation goes, he dovetails the topic back to one of the main issues of the day, in ways that are usually very smart but sometimes genuinely brilliant. Quick mind, quick wit, healthy ego - a good guy. I listen daily because he is on 4pm-7pm, right after I go out to run my errands at 3pm. I come back and do some more work, listen to Savage Nation, make some dinner, and enjoy the late afternoon with Dr Savage!

Bob Grant - an icon, though he suffers a bit for having been in the game so long. He has turned the corner and is quite bitter these days. To be fair, he has been bitter well over a decade. He makes a lot of sense. Great! I haven't heard his show in 2 years.

Bill O'Reilly - Bill is good and tries to be fair. He is repeatedly on the defensive since he is under flak for being 'conservative' and he strives to appear independent. He is more of a populist and not so much a conservative. His solution often involves 'bringing the feds in,' etc. That being said, clearly his instincts run 'conservative.' Also able to respectfully give liberals credit when they deserve it, which helps his credibility, not hinders it. Probably the most annoying thing about his show is how shamelessly he has his nose directly up Lis Wheil's rear end when she co-hosts his show, or when she is with him on tv. Actually, Bill flirts shamelessly with any attractive women under 45 it seems, especially if they are in their 20s and foxy, and is in top form when he has a model on the tv show for some 'hard hitting interview.' I'm nice on the ladies myself, but with Bill it's too distracting. If he did it once in a while, no problem. He tends to be all over any attractive woman on his show.

Sean Hannity - A good guy with his heart in the right place, but he suffers from over reliance on cliches, catch phrases, and slogans. "What about Pol Pot? What about Rwanda?" What about them, Sean? He wasn't a champion about Rwanda in the past, it's only important now because it suits him. He seems unwilling or unable to just say the truth: we are not in the business of freeing people but when their despots mess with us, a side benefit of the USA's wrath is that we free oppressed people. He too often uses slogans like this instead of dealing with the issue at hand. I don't mind his commercialism much: he should have a best-seller- he has 3 hours of national radio and 1 hour of international cable news programming to get the word out. My biggest problem with Sean is that he doesn't have a broad base of knowledge to draw from, like Medved or Savage, and doesn't have a very quick wit. That being said, he is a super and sincere guy. If he took time to get more on his game (read more, discuss these topics more off the air), he would be much better. I listen maybe 2 hours a week and watch H&C nightly. I can't listen much because he lets craftier liberals breeze fastballs by him and his bat is on his shoulder - he just isn't quick enough and doesn't have the tools to respond. Good guy, but a poor spokesman for the cause.

Mark Levin - Like fingers scratching a chalkboard. Awful. Just hideous. Nothing resembling a sense or humor or comic timing. Can't convince anybody of anything. Just a huge turnoff. In awful form when he calls into the Hannity show to make fun of a guest and his witticisms fall flat. The unfunniest kid in the 6th grade who fancies himself the funniest kid in the 6th grade. Just awful. I have listened on rare occasion while visiting nyc. Hideous.

Excellent observations!

I agree with nearly every word you wrote, except that I would rate O'Reilly lower. Too many of his positions seem to come from his personal instincts rather than from a well thought out understanding of political ideology or philosophy or whatever. He seems to believe X, Y, and Z because he was raised as an Irish Catholic and had his fingers smacked by nuns and had a stern father. In other words, I think he arrived at his political convictions more through his formative environment than through rigorous study and reflection. I get the feeling that if he'd been raised on the left coast by hippies he'd be a different animal altogether. This is why he is inconsistent on things sometimes. Even though a position may not line up with conservative reasoning, if it fits with his ingrained sense of what's right, he'll go with it. We're just lucky that his instincts are usually in line with conservative thought, because he can certainly be a forceful and engaging spokesmen for whatever position it is that has taken.

I wish I could pick up Michael Medved on my radio here, but I've scanned the whole dial and can't find a station that'll tune him in consistently. Occasionally, depending on the mood of the ionosphere, I'll be able to pick him up, but it'll fade in and out. On those occasions, though, he impresses me with his clear thinking and crisp arguments.