Posted on 02/17/2005 1:15:24 PM PST by Jim Robinson
Keep up the good work Sean!
If you're taking flak, you're over the target!
Bombs away!
****
So did he apologize? I really have a hard time listening to him for any length of time. Sean is cute, and he's enthusiastic, but.... He sounds more like he's quoting lines someone told him than like he's actually thought through what he's saying, and he's more interested in what he has to say than in what his guests have to say.
Thank you so very much! You hit the nail on the head! In my opinion, that is Sean's biggest weakness (that and his self-righteousness). And it is a huge problem for conservatives, because as a result of his poor skills, the general public does not get to see and hear the depth of many of our conservative folks he interviews.
Before the election he would interview John O'Neill of the Swifties, he seldom allowed John to talk enough, and at that time in our history, it was very important that John be heard by America! Sean seemed constantly more interested in his own thought or his next question than hearing John. Sean is a very poor choice to be listening to if you want to learn what the other person has to say. Sean's poor skills and self-centeredness hurt the cause, if I may use that word.
Have you ever seen Brian Lamb on C-Span's 'Booknotes'? He interviews writers. That good man knows how to do an interview. That is something Sean should try to learn! It would be very helpful to all of us.
***********
Now, Great One, and I mean that in the most respectful way, is that an attack? Or is it an honest attempt to make Sean better, and consequently things may go better for all the good guys? All our conservative representatives should be as sharp and effective as possible, imo.
By the way, you are not only brilliant, you are one very funny man!
Be well, and please throw me an answer.
Thanks.
Ok, cyborg, it is the NEXT MORNING, I am at work, and that song, Women's Underwear, is STILL running in my head!
AAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!
(Did you ever see the movie Groundhog Day where Bill Murray awoke to "I Got You Babe" every day?)
LOL!!!! No but now that you said it, I have the song in my head :o)
I think he realizes that Freepers are and should be his partners.
Too many here sadly support Hannity over his politics not his radio talent (or lack thereof).
The other example was the shutting down of military bases and other defense downsizing. That has been going on for years including some during the Reagan administration. But it got new life with the elder Bush's term. It was phrased the Peace Dividend because due to Reagan's staring down the communists, there system of government and economy fell. We sure took credit for those base closures and downsizings. Much of the early Clinton administrations results were largely in place as part of Bush I's policies as a result of the Peace Dividend. Yet during that whole time, the Peace Dividend became Clinton's gutting of the military. And who is responsible for the miliarry budgets anywho. Congress. Controled by republicans during 6 of Clinton's 8 years.
In addition, how many times during the call for the Rule of Law can you remember Rush saying you must stand by the courage of your convictions. Never compromise the courage of your convictions. Yet when Republicans or the President caves in on something, suddenly the art of compromise becomes the thought of the day.
How often has he chastized those hooked on smoking to tough it out and "I was a former smoker and quit so how addictive can it be". You just have to pull yourself up by your boot straps and do it. Yet his own addiction needed to be in a high priced controlled environment with all the warm and fuzzies and self awareness mumbo jumbo he so often mocked and mimicked. BTW, how is he now controlling the pain?
I can do the same thing. My car is old. IT does require repairs, sometimes costly. Yet I could present my car as a junker or an economical alternative to the high cost of new car. Same car. Same set of circumstances. Different perception based on wording.
You know, if we're counting on talk show hosts and tv personalities and elected officials to clean up our societal mess, then we're barking up the wrong tree. It takes you, me and others who give a crap to one by one lead by example, live the above ground life, live to the cannons of our scripture if we are inclined to be faithful and make ourselves the ones to be emulated.
Like with too many other consevatives and for that matter people of faith, with Sean and Rush and many others, the "rules don't apply to them".
I would be more impressed reading about how he's Hannitized Alan. LOL THAT would be a book worth reading. :)
Sadly . . .'over his politics'?
Better he be a Liberal perhaps?
Really, the truth is. . .there is 'nothing sad' about anyone here, supporting Hannity. Though perhaps it brings tears to your eyes; but then maybe you are just having an allergic reaction. . .
Take Alfrancken. . .for most here; that would be sad and painful. . .listening to this one. . .try it. . .
Hannity might sound a whole lot better to you afterwards; or should, anyway.
It never stops, if your a law abiding gun owner you get lumped in with the criminals. If your a freeper, you get lumped in with the fringe's.
We have a long road a head of us to make sure that b!t(h hillary doesn't become prez in 2008 and we need all the people we can get to come here and help us. We did not need Sean trying to pull people away and discouraging others from coming here and that is another reason I am so disappointed in him.
Unfortunately, in many cases in many peoples eyes, yes.
I think something we are overlooking here is Sean simply doesn't show up to his shows and shoot entirely from the hip. He's coached, given taling points, given show debriefings after various shows and on and on and on. I'm sure he's given lots of leeway, but he too answers to someone and those interruptions may be as much a part of the producers and syndicators belief it's part of the success of the show as it is a shortcoming of Sean's true interview technic. Also remember, especially with the tv show, the shows want to assure certain things are presented and said. And the time clock is much less forgiving with tv shows. There's only so much time for segments.
The thing is, you may not like his radio personality, but the fact that he's second only to Rush indicates that a great many people do like his radio personality and that he has talent.
I think it just shows a difference people: some people really like Glenn Beck's style. I don't really. I get his humor and it makes me laugh but it's not my cup of tea. I get tired of it pretty quickly and turn him off. But I realize he's one of the good guys and he's on our side and I would never question his intelligence or talent just because I don't like his style.
"Too many here sadly support Hannity over his politics not his radio talent (or lack thereof)."
I think you're assuming here. I support Hannity over both his politics and his talent. His success is evidence that many others do also, or they wouldn't be listening "three hours a day every day," plus watching him for another hour every night.
Of all the conservative talk show hosts, Hannity is one of my favorites if not my favorite. He and Rush have two different styles and I like them both. Rush analyzes things in a way that Sean doesn't, but Sean uses a variety of approaches in his show that keeps it interesting, and I really like the fact that he brings others onto the show for interviews, etc.
I also really appreciate the fact that his personal life reflects conservative values, and that his language is clean and that for the most part he keeps sleazy topics off his show. Sometimes Rush reports on things in the news that I'd not be comfortable having a child listen to, but rarely is that the case with Sean, and I really appreciate that a lot.
I could go on and on, but the point is that these guys are being themselves, and therefore are going to appeal to different groups of people. They all have talent or they wouldn't be as successful as they are.
FYI
From the leftwing feverswamp
Hannity trashes Freerepublic , freepers going wild.
Posted by bowens43
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=homepage_archives&page=1
Added to homepage Wed Feb 16th 2005, 03:30 PM ET
Hannity calls freerepublic a childish fringe site.
Freepers respond with childish fringe remarks.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1344622/posts
Discuss this topic (231 responses)
B) Every other word from his mouth in 'unbelievable'
C) The rest of his words are 'buy my pretentious book' and 'Hanitization'.
D) He is a horrible interviewer.
E) He is not knowledgable about things and he reads from a list of talking points.
G) Ok so his politics are correct - but his radio talent sucks.
think you're assuming here. I support Hannity over both his politics and his talent. His success is evidence that many others do also, or they wouldn't be listening "three hours a day every day," plus watching him for another hour every night.
Of all the conservative talk show hosts, Hannity is one of my favorites if not my favorite. He and Rush have two different styles and I like them both. Rush analyzes things in a way that Sean doesn't, but Sean uses a variety of approaches in his show that keeps it interesting, and I really like the fact that he brings others onto the show for interviews, etc.
Now STOP THAT! You're ruining a perfectly good rant thread for all of us.
Look, during Clinton we were all important. Now that Bush is president and we have a republican congress, suddenly there are classes of "anti-liberals". Some are more acceptable that others. Well, if we are the wrinkled and warted crazy aunt of the party now, we were back then too. But for some reason we were all loved as being great American Patriots.
If only I could be a failure on the radio like Sean. Nevermind, I wouldn't know what to do with 20 million a year.
B) Every other word from his mouth in 'unbelievable'
C) The rest of his words are 'buy my pretentious book' and 'Hanitization'.
D) He is a horrible interviewer.
E) He is not knowledgable about things and he reads from a list of talking points.
G) Ok so his politics are correct - but his radio talent sucks.
Audience does not necessarily equal greatness. Ergo, Al Franken and his network is growing instead of going away. Anything great there? Look at some of the trash on tv. Even at his worst, Rathers ratings slay Sean's tv ratings. Jerry Springer has one of the most popular tv shows. Howard Stern likewise with radio in 3rd place. So ratings success does not always equal greatness of show or quality of content.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.