top TRUTH—THE NO SPIN POLITICALLY INCORRECT ZONE: May 2011 | Conservative Liberal Politics | News Entertainment Debate

Donate Subscribe Angel Investors

Trust Me!

Tuesday, May 3, 2011

A Review of Political Talk Show Hosts

I’m going to briefly review some of the popular political talk show hosts in America. I divide them into

ed Meat Radicals with Charm

Red Meat Screaming Radicals with No Charm, Cheerleaders Blinded by Agenda, His Agenda is Himself, Rational But with a Clear Agenda, and The Great Communicator.

You Can Leave a Comment Here

I Listen to Them All

I consider it my duty, and that of all Americans, to consider both the left and the right. We have two parties for a reason. Each is correct. Each is wrong. Choosing sides is natural, and okay. Making decisions based solely on purist thinking is not a good thing. The world is complex.

Red Meat Radicals With Charm

Rachel Maddow, Glenn Beck

The first two of these political talk show hosts are vision-impaired by their views of the world. They ignore facts that don’t support them, and seek only evidence that proves they’re right. They demonize their opponents.
Rachel Maddow

They are also, however, charming, entertaining, and sometimes funny.

Both are demagogues. Maddow is pedestrian and common. Beck though, approaches mythic proportions, because he has the huge ideas, some of which work, like the Restoring Honor rally on the Washington Mall. Both are good for the nation, and bad for the nation.
Glenn Beck

Both often get their facts right, with good research. Beck is the finest researcher in American politics. Both, however, misinterpret the facts they find with their top-notch research, Maddow blinded by progressivism, and Beck by his conspiratorial paranoia.

Should we listen to them? Yes, but not on a daily basis. It’s worth checking in to see what they’ve uncovered. You won’t find what they broadcast anywhere else on the media. But, it’s not a good idea to get sucked into their visions of the world, which are dark and warped versions of the truth.

One small note on Beck

See my previous Truth articles on him, Beck, Palin, and the Tea Party and The Fall of Glenn Beck, in which I explain more of how I feel about him. I just saw one of his shows two days ago, and it was wonderful. He was concerned about what liberals are doing to our kids through the education system. He was spot on, but this time without his usual end of times foreboding. He was actually working with parents and educators on how to fix the situation.

This is the persona he ought to keep forever, instead of the Huey Long firebrand warning everyone to avoid stocks and buy gold and food insurance. I have little hope for this, however. Beck seems to be getting more religious and end of times, more radical, and more Huey Longish with every passing day.

Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin

Ann Coulter
Coulter is charming, funny, outrageous, and often correct. I find her more grounded than Maddow or Beck. She is outrageous, and says truths that pinpoint exactly who liberals are today. She’s not a demagogue, as she comes close to the truth always, and is entirely sincere. She doesn’t say anything to gain an audience. Is she ever wrong? Yes, as when she opposes unemployment insurance extensions.

Michelle Malkin
Malkin is similar to Coulter in every way. Both are attractive, intelligent, and rigid.

Should we listen to them? Yes. All the time, even if we disagree with them. They are brilliant, funny, charming, entertaining, and all their views touch truth.

Red Meat Radical Screamers with No Charm

Keith Olbermann, Michael Savage, Mark Levin

Keith Olbermann
All three are the screamers, and none of them have any charm. They are unpleasant, hate-filled, and dogmatic. Olbermann is on the far left, and Savage and Levin on the far right.
Michael Savage
Mark Levin

Should we listen to them? Yeah. Force yourself once in awhile to hear them. They do speak truth often, but go so far that they exclude truth from the rest of the spectrum. And, they hate.

Cheerleaders Blinded by Agenda

Ed Schultz, Lawrence O’Donnell

Ed Schultz
Lawrence O'Donnell
I find Schultz and O’Donnell insufferable. But the left love them.

They are also guys who hate, but they at least don’t scream all the time. They are totally blinded by their leftist agenda.

Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity

Rush Limbaugh

Limbaugh is the king of talk radio. He is a genius. He is the one who converted me to conservatism. A great and good man. Rush is funny too, and irreverent. But, he is totally blinded by his agenda. Obama is always wrong, and conservatives are always right. I do buy his vision for a conservative America, but I don’t subscribe to his complete rejection of things like unemployment insurance and the social safety net. He goes way too far.

Ditto with Sean Hannity. They are both charming. One of the things I dislike about Sean and Rush is that I can predict every word out of their mouths. They believe the “invisible hand” of Adam Smith will solve all the world’s problems, and that isn’t true. It’s partly true. Lower taxes and charity will help the poor. But charity will not pay the rent for people who are unemployed. They go too far, and are blinded by agenda.

Should we listen to them? Yes, frequently. They are two of the best spokespersons for their point of view. And, they are often correct. Just don’t join their religion, which is pure Darwinian conservatism.

His Agenda is Himself

Dylan Ratigan
I’ve followed Dylan Ratigan for years. He used to be the host of Fast Money. He’s always been a know it all who used to sound conservative when he was among the investment crowd, but has converted to hardcore liberalism now that he has his own show on radically liberal MSNBC. How anyone who knows business can be liberal I can’t imagine.

Should we listen to him? Yeah. He’s bright. He’s got good guests. You can learn some things from him. Just don’t make him your American Idol.

Rational But with a Clear Agenda

Chris Matthews, Dennis Prager, Michael Medved, and Larry Elder

With Matthews on the left, and Prager, Medved, and Elder on the hard but cogent right, all are principled representatives of their viewpoints. All are rational, except for Matthews 40% of the time.

Chris Matthews

Why do I include Matthews then in the rational crowd? Because he can certainly be reasonable, and will surprise you often with his fair opinions. It’s just when he gets off into calling Tea Partiers racists, or saying that it is his job to ensure Obama succeeds that I want to throw rocks at the TV.
Dennis Prager

Prager and Medved are two of the most reasoned talk show hosts in America. I don’t agree with them on some issues, like unemployment insurance, but I do share many of their other views.
Michael Medved
Larry, a black conservative, I absolutely love, and especially that he is charming, funny, fair, and rational. However, he is a Libertarian, and I disagree with this party on many issues. Again, unemployment insurance, and others.
Larry Elder

Should we listen to all these? Absolutely, often. You will learn a great deal, and feel good about humanity.

The Great Communicator

Joe Scarborough is the only honest political talk show host who is able to enter into the worlds of both the left and right, while maintaining a basically consistent personal philosophy. He is far from the late William F. Buckley in intelligence, and even much below Prager and Medved, but he’s fairly smart.

He is a conservative, but is named a RINO by the hard right. For example, he will often bash conservatives for calling Obama a socialist, and so on. So, he thinks being honest is cruel, and politically suicidal.
Joe Scarborough
Obama is a socialist. There, I’ve said it.

Still, of all the talk show hosts, Scarborough can actually understand the need for both the left and the right, which is my position, and which is essential in a functioning America. Too bad we’re a minority in holding that view.

The Battle Goes On

Republicans won the last election for a reason. And, Obama is none too popular now that people have gotten to know his radical leftism and Chicago style politics.

Still, rational progressives do have a point against this Republican House, and especially the new members of congress. They are cruel proponents of survival of the fittest, when they could settle for just being fiscally rational. It’s an old argument that began even as far back as the election of 1800, when Federalist John Adams ran against states’ rights Jefferson. Progressives versus the Tea Party.

Listen to all the talk show hosts. Just know whom it is you’re listening to, and what their strengths and weaknesses are.

Your Comments are Welcome Here


Technorati Tags for this post: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Regular Technorati Tags for this blog: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


TwitterStumble ThisFav This With TechnoratiAdd To Del.icio.usDigg ThisAdd To RedditAdd To FacebookAdd To Yahoo
Your Opinion Matters

Rock's Political Blogring

Home/Join | List | Next | Previous | Random