Since I've discovered WABC.com I listen to them all. No longer confined to the local yokels I can now hear Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham (where the hell IS she?), Mark Levin, Tammy Bruce, Curtis Sliwa, Don Imus, and Bruce Cunningham.
Rush is, of course, the greatest, but he has one big glaring issue as I see it and at times, it gets old.
Some of them have horrific lisps, some live decadent lifestyles, some have good reason to dislike McCain and one appears to have defected to Fox News.
With pics and opinions. Pic of the Day
Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity
We shall begin with the best, past, present and likely the future, forever and ever.
For there will never be a better talk show host than Rush Limbaugh, not ever, never, ever.
Even though I love the man and even though I almost cry should he not be on the air from time to time, Rush Limbaugh does have what I consider one flaw. While it annoys the hell out of me, I'd still agree with Rush's assessment that he is right 98.5% of the time. The other 1.5% is the Limbaugh irritant that must be considered should Rush divert to subject matters on which he is hardly an expert.
So I listen to them all and I ponder, for this missive, just why is Rush Limbaugh the best? What does Rush do different than his many emulators that keeps him, year after year, on the air and with an audience base that pales the rest?
First, Rush can speak his point and he does it well. Several of the radio talk show hosts covered in this post have to resort to callers for much of the show because they do not have the verbal fluidity, or the knowledge frankly, to engage in a mesmerizing 15 minute monologue on the subject at hand.
Rush has to struggle to get callers in once in a while and frankly I'd listen to Rush even if he had no callers at all. I tune in to listen to Rush, not those with the audacity to think they can top the guy.
Limbaugh also is the best of all the talk radio hosts in terms of listening closely to the callers. I can tell by the thought-filled silence by Rush that he is listening closely to the caller. Rush will give the caller time to state his or her piece, he asks thoughtful questions that are proof he listened closely and he will often, will verbal flair, effectively re-phrase the caller's thoughts and points way better than the less experienced callers and he does it with superb class.
Rush is the only radio talk show host that has a web cam that I know of. Thus one can click into the Rush web site and for a small annual fee actually watch Rush as he runs his radio show. I would never do this as to listen to Rush is quite enough for me but this fact sure shows his honesty. He's there, he smiles and waves at the web audience, we can see the papers whose rattle we could once only hear and somewhere in the background we might spot Snerdly and Rush's other employees once just a name said on the air.
For all of his perfection, Rush has serious issues with females. In fact I once received a genuine email response from Rush in response to an email I sent him over some matter or another he'd been discussing on air involving women.
Rush Limbaugh is one very smart man and he knows and studies his stuff. He is NOT an expert on the opposite sex, in his case, women. Rush has a spotty marital record, I don't know why and not sure I care. I'm already married and while I'd leave my husband in a second should Rush command me, that's not going to happen. So I'd rather not hear Rush launch into any monologue involving women because what is his claim to expertise? THREE failed marriages?
One example of Rush's verbal gaffe concerning women involved the infamous Valerie Plame. Plame is the wife of the worthless Joe Wilson, a former diplomat who, along with help from a left wing press and a runaway prosecutor, managed to get an innocent man convicted for a crime he did not commit. Everybody and their mother living in DC knew that Valerie Plame worked at the CIA. She was NOT a spy and Scooter Libby, Dick Cheney's chief of staff, had nothing to do with revealing her identity to the press. Scott Armitage at State revealed Plame's status but because ole Joe and Val wanted to write a book millions were spent on a stupid investigation that could have provided many Katrina victims new homes.
On air one day, Rush was reviewing Plame's live testimony in front of congress to better promote her and Joe's lying book. I swear I could hear certain parts of Rush's body hardening and it wasn't his arteries.
"Valerie Plame is a BABE," Rush said, his voice dropping an octave and filling with an audibly discernible lust.
Valerie Plame is an evil little tart that happens to be a good looking blonde. Her nastiness and lies should, as my female self sees it, be a real turn off over the blonde and the babe.
Sure, I know that's all men need because unlike Rush I DO understand my opposite sex. There's just a hopeful part of me that thinks Rush might be smarter than most men but with the women Rush is guided by pretty much the same part as most men. It doesn't make him bad, or any other men whose blood drained from one head to the other with nature's call either. It's nature, it's normal. Doesn't mean we should pay much attention when our male counterparts are in another land beyond the place of common sense. Women know this stuff.
It's just a warning that when Rush starts to talk about women, turn the dial down. It's not the head on his shoulders from which he speaks.
And now we have Rush's latest assault on women. For it would seem that it is the girlfriends and wives of what Rush calls "Rockefeller" Republicans who are causing the GOP party of conservative hope to go wildly astray. Goodness knows we wouldn't blame the ones ELECTED to represent us. Oh no. Blame their women! For they are but helpless men according to Rush.
Of course Rush would blame the women. We sure can't expect the men, all cruelly attached to the testicles that make them lose their mind, to actually figure out right and wrong. It's their women who cause them to scorn religious zealots and favor abortion.
Rush has what I think a sort of cruel line on his web site that the Equal Rights Ammendment was designed so that ugly women have a voice.
Rush needs to take a very long look in the mirror.
Not that I have any special affection for that group Rush refers to as "nags". In fact I totally agree with Rush that the women who consider it their job to speak for me are not who I'd choose as my voice and don't have my best interest at heart. The way the National Organization of Women defended Bill Clinton over the Monica Lewinsky matter made me ill, the hypocrites.
And I don't mean to infer that Rush is less than, well average looking comes to mind. But he's not the handsomest stud in the stable and he gets no younger. To go casting aspersions on female looks shows a lack of class or perhaps, just throwing it out there, the anger of one who has, as of yet, managed to settle in to a permanent happy relationship.
For sure there are thousands, maybe millions of women who'd take Rush in a heartbeat, including me. But most of them are looking at Rush's wallet and not his fine form and figure and this is a truth that should be included on Rush's web site alongside that bit about being ugly.
In that email I wrote to Rush:
Someone please tell Rush that he best serves this hungry public out here by staying away from the subject of women. I am a female, yes, and a devoted Rush listener. But when that man gets started talking about females he is positively insulting. Today, Wednesday 9/26/07, he really went over the top. So pretty women do not need to be smart? So smart women are, thusly, UGLY? If I didn't already love Rush he'd be on my long list of men whose IQ is measured by the size of their gonads. Whoever's in charge of Rush's content, please keep off the subject of women. On this matter the public would be better served without his input. I am, Pat Fish Georgetown, Delaware
Yes, above is what I wrote.
Rush's answer:
Pat,
Sorry you are offended. I just like stereotypical humor is all. And this is ME replying.
All the best,
Rush
But like I said in the email, I love the guy. I hope that Rush finds a woman who will love him exclusively for his humor and talent. I don't know what happened to Rush's other marriages but I know that Rush was nothing but a gentleman about it, never lambasting his wife in public, never ranting or railing about the evil done him.
At times, alas, Rush's hurt is handled by a certain off-handed meanness to ALL women.
Still and so, there is none better than Rush. Rush has, at times, mentioned my posts on the air although he's never mentioned my name. I know his employees search the net for mentions of his name. I hope, should this article get a search hit that Rush Limbaugh takes my compliments for the positive mentions and know that he will always be my hero.
I'd tell him, however, that Valerie Plame is no babe. Unless you like evil, vapid women.
Say it ain't so, Rush!
Rush Limbaugh is on daily on WABC.com from noon to 3:00 pm EST.
Now about Sean Hannity.
He's cute, personable, likeable and conservative. I can't stand to listen to his show more than an hour at a time.
Sean is a lucky fellow who happened to start a radio show right when the medium was taking off. He got himself established and accepted as part of the right wing talk show pack. If Sean Hannity were to launch a radio talk show today, now that the competition is tough and young upstarts across the fruited plains dream of being the next Limbaugh, Sean would not have a chance.
First, Sean cannot do decent monologues, no he cannot.
Perhaps Rush has spoiled me. To add further insult to Hannity's reputation, he does a lousy job with callers. And oftentimes, let me add, Sean's entire show is filled with nothing but callers.
If a liberal should be on the line, Sean likes to show the world what a big mean man he is. What he does, that he evidently THINKS is effective and causing us fools out here in la-la land to admire him for such verbal acumen, he will repeat his same point over and over, not allowing the caller to respond with anything BUT a short direct answer to the question Sean is asking.
For example, a caller phones in with a point that the Supreme Court got it wrong with the DC gun law. The caller is wrong, of course, as I and most conservatives would see it. But here's a self-professed liberal phoning into the Sean Hannity show to discuss an opposing point of view.
Silly me, I really want to hear what this liberal has to say. Because if there's some special reason we should willy-nilly ignore the constitution as we've all lived by peaceably for over 200 years, I want to hear it.
Sean, however, will get all stern and a bit nasty and will respond something like "Tell me Sir, do you think Americans have a right to protect themselves?"
Which is a fine question, don't misunderstand. But it IS a question designed to take all the fire out of the debate. For everyone should, and will, defend themselves whenever possible but Sean, he wants to show us what a big verbal he-man he is. The liberal does not, of course, want to answer Sean's question so tersely because to do so is to lose the argument. The caller did not phone in just to lose the argument based on one rather curt and out-of-context question. So the caller furiously tries to avoid answering Sean's question so obviously requiring a one-word answer.
Me, the listener, is desperately trying to hear what the caller has to say, but Sean keeps on with his genius short question..."Sir, do Americans have the right to protect themselves, yes or no" Sean will say over and over until finally I have to flip the station such is my exasperation with Mr. Hannity.
Sean does the same thing on his show Hannity and Colmes, btw, and I'm often flipping the TV channel elsewhere because it's such a childish way to conduct an honest debate.
Hannity does have great guests on his radio show, something you'll seldom find on Rush Limbaugh. Sean does a pretty good job of interviewing his guests as well.
I find myself tuning in to hear maybe Sean's first monologue as well as a recitation of the guests on a show. If I am interested in the guest to be featured I might stay around. Other than that, his radio show begins at 3:00 pm and I'm seldom tuned in beyond 4:00 pm.
Sean Hannity is on from 3:00 pm until 6:00 pm EST on WABC.com.
Curtis Sliwa and Tammy Bruce
I first heard Tammy Bruce on my local yokel talk radio station. Tammy is allegedly a lesbian but I don't recall where I heard this. But it's not something she keeps a secret and go with me here, it's quite an attention-getter, a conservative lesbian, imagine this.
Tammy's sexual orientation has little to do with anything, however, because by me she's a very attractive woman with a great voice. And if any radio talk show host comes close to Rush Limbaugh in terms of doing a bang-up monologue it would be Tammy Bruce.
Tammy doesn't have many callers either, a sign of a radio talk show host who can hold listeners with more than phone-in nuts and loud on-air arguments.
Which is not to say I have any problem with radio talk show callers. Given a choice I'd much rather listen to a fine host than an inexperienced dolt who just happened to get through on the phone lines. My rule of thumb, wrong or right and yon reader's mileage may vary, is that the more callers a radio talk show takes the less verbal acumen he or she possesses.
Bruce had served as replacement host for Laura Ingraham from time to time. Beyond that, I have only been able to hear Tammy on Saturday nights from 8:00 pm until 11:00 pm. Tammy is also often a pundit featured on Fox news.
Curtis Sliwa is the new guy on the scene. Since I had a habit of listening to WABC on the 'puter, and since one night the computer remained on all night, I was surprised, pleasantly, when early one morn Curtis Sliwa announced that his morning show was upon and that come 10 am he would have another show, this one almost two hours long.
I understand that Sliwa might not be a household name. Although he well could be. For it was Curtis who started the homegrown vigilante group known as the Guardian Angels. Careful to always remain on the right side of the law, the Guardian Angels would patrol bad neighborhoods in the New York area, riding subway trains and in general keeping an obvious and known presence in danger areas that effectively kept criminal attacks down.
Now Sliwa has moved on to bigger and better things. And if one can get around that thick NY accent of his, he does a great job. Well hell, forget the accent, Curtis speaks with slang and malapropos and Sliwa often has longed moved on to his next thought while the listener sits, translates and contemplates the thoughts expressed by Curtis two sentences earlier.
The bigger problem I have with Sliwa is a problem I have with WABC.com in particular. For WABC.com often, I do mean OFTEN, tends to boom, go completely silent, nada, nothing going on the air.
I understand that such as satellites and hard drives stop from time to time. On WABC it happens all the time. AND it happens most frequently on the Curtis Sliwa show.
Just as soon as radio silence fills the air around me I, boom, turn off the radio station. For if a radio station can't keep the air filled with sound than they are worthless.
WABC.com is, I know, a radio station broadcasting over the Internet but hey, I once had a telephone that worked over the Internet and not one single time in a year did that phone not work save when the entire cable service went down. So why can't WABC keep their station on the air over the Internet? Why does it almost always go down during the Curtis Sliwa show, either early 5:00 am in the morn or during his 10 am show?
At any rate, I think Curtis has something going on for him. The few times I am able to listen to his show without the drop dead silence I have enjoyed him, I've enjoyed his tongue-in-cheek commentary, I've enjoyed his quick wit.
Curtis can be heard on WABC.com at 5:00 am in the morning until 6:00 am, IF the air isn't filled with silence, and again from 10:00 am until 11:45 am.
Mark Levin and Don Imus
Don Imus...what's the deal here?
The guy has a lisp that makes my ears hurt.
A fellow with an outrageous lisp gets a job in talk radio. This is like a blind man getting a job leading tours through pretty public gardens or a fellow in a wheel chair demonstrating happening foot trails through a national park. Go figure.
But the childish Imus lisp is not my bigger complaint about this guy. For Don Imus is one of the few liberals ever successful on talk radio and make no mistake, Don Imus is very successful and has a large following.
Imus did get into that flap over the "nappy-headed ho's" comment, and in a movement led by the very honest Al Sharpton of Tawana Brawley fame, was taken off the air until tempers calmed. Imus' name comes up again for yet another controversial comment he made about a famous sports figure and his race.
I mention Don Imus in this esteemed list for his success in a medium usually cruel to liberals, especially liberals with lisps...try saying that fast three times.
I don't like the man, never listen to him and will always think a radio talk show host with such an obvious lisp to be the height of incongruity.
Don Imus can be heard on WABC.com from 6:00 am until 10 am or thereabouts.
As for the so-called "Great One", Mark Levin, I find I must be in a "mood" to listen to Levin's show.
For Mark Levin can grate on one's nerves, especially if he's in a particularly irritable mood.
Mark is a former attorney and his listeners are better for his law experience. In fact Mark wrote a fabulous book, a couple of good books actually, but his "Men in Black" will go down in the eons as the best Supreme court reference of our era. I didn't read it but I've read plenty of reviews and have heard Mark's commentary as he made the book promotion rounds. Maybe now that I can get it at the library I'll pick it up.
Mark wrote another book about the loss of a beloved pet, named Sprite of all things, and according to those who've read it the book was soft and comforting.
Which is a surprise in that two adjectives that would hardly describe Mark's on-air persona would be "soft" and "comforting".
Mark loves to yell at his callers, particularly those self-confessed liberals who call Mark just to be screamed at on the air as I figure.
"Thank me very much" Mark might say. "Get outta my country," Mark will yell at a phone caller who perhaps said something Mark deemed unpatriotic. "Get off the air you dimwit," Mark will shout at yet another obtuse caller who uttered more liberal silliness.
Mark tends to take a lot of callers, especially at the end of his show. Nothing wrong with this except such a program lineup tends to put a whole bunch of yelling in one large block of the program. A couple of sound bytes of Mark insulting liberal callers is cute but there is such a thing as overload.
As for monologues, Mark would get a solid B from me. At times Mark will have me cheering and yelling in the aisles should a Levin program come on with Mark dwelling on a subject dear to me. Mark is at best when discussing John McCain because, heh, Mark has serious issues with this alleged Republican.
Mark Levin can be heard at WABC.com nightly from 6:00 pm to 8:00 pm.
Laura Ingraham and Bill Cunningham
Bill Cunningham replaced Matt Drudge on his Sunday night slot from 10:00 pm till 1:00 am. Bill Cunningham is the guy who called Barack Obama as Barack HUSSEIN Obama during a campaign stop for John McCain.
Responding to criticism for DARING to mention Obama's middle name, McCain blasted Bill Cunningham and that incident sent Cunningham on a route to talk radio stardom.
Bill does not take many callers and I rather like this. And the few callers who make it through, the many thousands on hold to hear Cunningham tell it, usually get to state a sentence or two then Bill will take the expressed thoughts and run with it.
Cunningham can launch into a wicked monologue that minces no words. Instead of calling Obama by his REAL middle name (which is Hussein how is this anybody's fault?), Bill now refers to the presumptive Democratic nominee as Barack MILHAUS Obama.
Heh.
MILHAUS was Richard Nixon's middle name.
I greatly enjoyed Bill's shows during the McCain flap and continue to do so every Sunday night on WABC.com from 10 pm till 1:00 am.
We left the queen of radio talk show, Laura Ingraham until last mostly because as of this date, 6/29/08, the woman has disappeared from the radio air waves!
I have, of late before this date, seen Laura on various Fox News shows, including Bill O'Reilly and now she evidently has her own Fox show. It's call "Just In" and it comes on at 5:00 pm until 6:00. This slot had been occupied by John Gibson with the fabulous hair. Gibson has health issues as I understand it and until Laura that very important time slot had been held by various and sundry, and I do mean sundry.
I like Laura and I enjoyed her radio show. As I understand it, Laura is going to be back on the radio but as of yet I don't know when. Laura's show airs live from 10:00 am till 1:00 pm but on WABC.com I always listened to the taped show from 10:00 pm through 1:00 am. I wonder if Laura's new show now takes up that time slot and she might be forced to change the time her show airs live.
Which brings me to a less than honorable mention for that Fox chick who's been replacing Laura during this interlude. I speak of Monica Crowley and folks, not gonna happen.
This is not to say that Monica does a bad job. She just doesn't do a good job and hey, I gave her every chance but within an hour of tuning in I simply must snap it off.
Monica Crowley is entirely too damn nice to host a talk radio show. Period.
She comes across as unbelievably upbeat even when speaking of those issues which cause conservatives great anger. Monica also is sweeter than saccharine with phone in callers, the exact opposite of Laura Ingraham who does have a bit of a temper that at times manifests itself inappropriately.
In fact Laura tends to give her guests on her Fox News show a bit of a growl but I like it. She doesn't let liberal guests go on and on with their vapid commentary and nonsensical talking points. Husband and I both comment on how much we like her confrontational style and we ponder how long before Fox pulls her off.
Laura even gave Rush Limbaugh a verbal beating once when she phoned up Rush to ask his opinion on some issue. If anybody knows anything about Rush Limbaugh surely they know that Rush can talk knowledgably about anything (except male/female relationships-see above), he speaks it well and he's eloquent.
Laura, who can be childish and petulant on occasion, didn't get a word in during Rush's commentary but go to hell, she called the man up for his opinion, did she not? Yet she complained on the air about how Rush grabbed up all the air time and I was embarrassed for Laura. You are not a child, Laura. You call Rush for commentary, be prepared to let the man speak without throwing a childish hissy fit, how about it?
Laura despises Dick Morris and this is evident whether that pundit with zero believability is a guest on her radio show or her Fox show. This is fine with me because by me Dick Morris lost any toe-sucking credibility a long time ago when he was caught with a prostitute...sucking her toes of course.
Plus Dick Morris is NEVER right about anything in his prognostications. Fox should hire ME to predict political eventualities. I'd be much cheaper and probably more accurate.
So I overlook Laura's petulance re Dick Morris the zero pretending to be somebody important. But when Laura went after Rush Limbaugh I took umbrage.
As of this writing, Laura Ingraham's show can be heard on WABC.com from 10:00 pm until 1:00 am. Her show is live in the mornings but I don't know where but it's NOT on WABC.com.
So there you have it. The best of the radio talk show hosts and few not so much. I've listened to plenty of others, particularly replacements for Rush Limbaugh. A few of them are okay and in a future update of conservative radio talk show hosts, we'll re-assess.
=============
Focus on TV Posts of Fame
Those Wacky TV Chefs. Includes Rachel Ray and the sexiest chef of them all.
TV News Pundits including Russert, spitting Matthews and the one I adore.
