Deseret News | Talk radio shrinks listeners' intellectual capital

Reader comments
G. Donald Gale: Talk radio shrinks listeners' intellectual capital

Page:
1
2
Next >

Doug G | 12:38 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

The only place I'd have to disagree is the contention that Jon Stewart is news as entertainment. The daily show has never forgotten that it's on comedy central; the points it makes are always couched in laughs. It's not news at all. The so called news media, including talk radio, provides the laughs. Jon points them out. It should be more funny, but it's a reflection on the mind numbing reality we live in.

Patriot | 12:56 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

Hey Gale, If your not outraged, you are not paying attention. These Guys are talking about real issues. Beck even spoke about the fact we are 12 Trillon in debt when Bush was in office. Could it be you have to resort to name calling because you can't argue the issues?

Hooray! | 1:18 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

Spot on. One wonders how our system of universal education has failed so miserably to teach critical thinking, which would arm the unsuspecting against the onslaught of bias and fear-mongering so prevalent in talk radio, particularly from the far right. Limbaugh/Hannity/Beck prey on those who cannot or will not think for themselves. So why does KSL continue to broadcast Sean Hannity 3 hours a day?

Comments continue below

WHAT? | 1:40 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

This may be the most intellectually bankrupt piece I have ever read in a news paper. Could the obviously brilliant and highly intellectual G. Don Gale use some facts to back up his "anti-rhetoric?" Could Mr. Gale possibly give some examples of inaccuracies or falsehoods perpetrated by these successful communicators whose major fault seems to be that they challenge the small liberal world Mr. Gale exists in? Doesn't the disturbing information exposed by Beck et al, while being ignored by mainstream media, add to the level of intellectual discourse? Is there some subset of information in existence that does not deserve to be explored? Would the nation be somehow better off if we all just kept our heads in the sand? Just a few questions for Mr. G. Donald Gale. Wow, those people whose names start with initials sound so smart.

Jim Hippen | 2:05 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

Don Gale has selective memory. I used to enjoy his comments when he had a regular pulpit on KSL radio. Now he has gotten too negative for me to enjoy any more. When talk radio began to proliferate in the late '60s and early '70s, almost all the voices were what would now be called 'liberals'. They appealed to those who enjoyed their bashing of the rich, as well as conservative government, which they labeled as obstructionist. They soon lost listeners because they became too negative and attracted too many nuts who enjoyed sharing the pulpit. The conservatives gradually took over because they cheered for the good, as well as exposing the bad. They have started spending too much time bashing and not enough time cheering. Perhaps the pendulum will swing the other way. And they still attract the nuts who enjoy hearing their own voices.

Anonymous | 4:24 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

How true. Because of kooks like Hannity, I have removed KSL radio from my radio push buttons. Like wise Fox News from my favorite list on my satellite dish. I'm sure that KSL & Fox won't miss one viewer, & I sure won't miss the opinionated nuts spreading their brand of garbage. Perhaps KSL should take a second look at their local Hannity wannabe & get some real talent there.

Thanks | 4:35 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

Thank you Don Gale and Deseret News for saying what needed to be said

Steve | 4:35 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

Don't shoot the messanger.

Jack | 5:34 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

Bravo!

Thanks for that excellent article.

Lee Padron | 5:55 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

Mr. Gales gives a great history lesson. He laments the fact that voices with which he disagress have come upon radio as a means to get their message out. Typically, Gales aruges little with the message itself. Beyond a few perjoratives and quick quips, Gale doesn't much take on WHAT is being said, only WHO is saying it.

Another good elitist at work. Attack the messenger. Much easier than attacking the message.

Sorry Mr. Gale but there's plenty of "reserve capital" in arguments put forth by the radio personalities you so detest. The bankrupt ponzi scheme is on the side you respect so much, the same old tired "modern" liberalism of giving away other people's money to buy votes. The same old tried and failed policies of the NEW (same old) progressive left.

This great Nation was built upon CLASSICAL liberalism, nothing like the modern liberalism you cherish. Classical liberals would value the RETURNS on INVESTMENTS that Hannity and Limbaugh can freely provide. Classical liberals would recognize you for the elitist snob you are, just as they did 230 years ago.

Lee Padron
Draper

Jack | 6:51 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

Seems that Gale has been in "commentary" long enough that his intellect has now shrunk to zero.

hypocrite | 7:33 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

those who whine about Beck and Limbaugh while acceptng bias in the MSM are the ones who bankrupt intellegence - I cant get upset about Limbaugh when the New York Times and Newsweek are blatantly pimping the POTUS There must be an alternative to such rot somewhere - anywhere, and at this point Limbaugh is pretty much all there is.

The liberal (yes liberal - that evil word that has been poisened by liberals themselves, not Limbaugh) "I belive in free speech but not your speech" attitude reaks

Really? | 8:11 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

"Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck are to intelligence as Bernie Madoff is to investment." So I guess that means that Rush et al are criminals of the mind and that their metaphorical pozi scheme does only damage and has no value. I suppose the author thinks the nation would be better off without their collective voice. Who then would bring up and discuss issues that the main stream media refuse to include because of their biased ideology? Would we be better off without Rush, Hannity, and Beck? Should we, as we have Madoff, eliminate them and force them from the airwaves? What do we gain from judging any voices as destructive? It sounds wrong headed to me.

Lee Padron | 8:14 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

Gale provides a good history lesson. Then, laments the fact that voices with which he disagrees use radio to communicate. Typically, he argues little with the message itself. Beyond a few pejoratives, he doesn't take on WHAT’s being said, only WHO is saying it and HOW it’s said.

There's plenty of "reserve capital" in arguments made by the radio personalities Gale so detests. The bankrupt “Ponzi” scheme is on Gale's side.

Ponzi scheme? What else do you call giving away other people's money to buy votes? No new wealth created. Social Security? Stimulus? Cash for Clunkers? Only redistributing wealth created by others. Same failed policies of the progressive, liberal left. Isn’t 100 plus years of it enough?

Gale might try actually listening to or reading what Beck, Hannity and Limbaugh say. It may be difficult. But, he should try.

Avoid argumentum ad hominem. That's lazy. Gale's education has prepared him better, no doubt?

Make the case against WHAT Beck, Hannity and Limbaugh say, if you can, not against them or the medium upon which they communicate.

Lee Padron
Draper

Contradiction | 8:15 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

The author's own words, making reference to talk radio hosts "They verbally punish dissent in a land where dissent is traditionally welcomed and protected", totally negates the story.

Are not the talk radio hosts practicing their own brand of dissent? Is not such behavior "traditionally welcomed and protected" in this country?

Bogus | 8:21 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

I don't listen to radio at all, but what a bogus article, the left just can't stand allowing conservatives to have a voice in the market place of ideas. They twist themselves into pretzel trying to cover up their intolerance.

Words, Words, Words | 8:21 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

Seems appropriate that Don Gale is the president of an organization called Words, Words, Words. That's certainly all he offers us here -- words.

To suggest that Limbaugh, Hannity, and Beck are so extremely popular only because they got there first is to offer words over any semblance of analysis -- or even facts.

And to suggest that left-wing talking heads are so extremely unpopular only because their audience is so much more suave and accepting of ambiguity is to offer words in defiance of facts of which we are all aware.

Maybe we ought to pay some attention to Mr. Gale -- he seems to be more than just noddingly familiar with shrinking intellectual capital.

But facts, not just words, words, words, would be nice, too.

RichE | 8:24 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

Bravo! Excellent article - for anyone who has seen the movie with Dolly Parton and Burt Reynolds, titled, "The Best Little W***ehouse in Texas", you can see the absolute similarity between these Talk Radio hosts and "Melvin P. Thorpe" - some of Sean Hannity's music at the top of the hour when he returns from a newbreak is also very similar to the 'Melvin P. Thorpe" musical introductions before he speaks to the masses!

What really irritates me is that the KSL radio station that brings us excellent inspirational music and speeches from LDS leadership; this same radio station is "polluted", by association, with the crassness and self-promotional marketing that Hannity specializes in.

I used to be proud to inform others that KSL was my favorite radio station; I am saddened that I can no longer say that.

Brother Chuck Schroeder | 8:24 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

You say Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck are to intelligence as Bernie Madoff is to investment, when it needs to be Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck are to stealing your thinking and money as Bernie Madoff is to stealing your life time of investment's, all are as crooked as a $3 bill. End of report.

Bro Chuck's Rant n Rave's | 8:29 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

A title, is just a shield, for a weak person to hide behind. Did you know this?. Separation of powers, checks and balances, enumerated powers, independent state governments, frequent elections, impeachment processes, the right to bear arms, an independent private sector, property rights, the right to petition government for redress of grievances, freedoms of speech and press etc, was all created through Judicial Activist Judge's, and, Special Interest groups plus bureaucrats, for control of power, through these people. A fine example, of this, is in a new DVD, that just came out, titled "FOOD, Inc.", a Robert Kenner film. In it, you'll see the few GIANT's that control everything we do, how we live and what we are forced to eat etc., these same people have powerful seats, and are in Congress also, apointed by the President as well, both on the GOP and Democrat side, and, with these people running the show, we can't and will not be able to limit government ever, until they are all gone from those seats, no matter how long we all whine about a smaller government. It's time to stand up, and, face the truth.

Art C. | 8:31 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

Don Gale you got it exactly right.
The people need to wake up who spend so much time and energy on these talk show nut jobs.
Can't you people stop helping these "hosts" make millions who are picking America apart with mis-speak and out and out lies?

Glenn Beck | 8:33 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

Utah, your RINO Senator Bob Bennett was NEVER fearlessly confronting the high priests Nobama of the Church of Liberalism. ACORNS their HIGH god inside their Church of Liberalism. Though liberalism rejects the idea of God and reviles people of faith, it bears all the attributes of a religion itself. In Godless, she throws open the doors of the Church of Liberalism, showing us: its sacraments (abortion) its holy writ (Roe v. Wade) its martyrs (from Soviet spy Alger Hiss to cop-killer Mumia Abu Jamal) its clergy (public school teachers) its churches (government schools, where prayer is prohibited but condoms are free) its doctrine of infallibility (as manifest in the "absolute moral authority" of spokesmen from Cindy Sheehan to Max Cleland) and its cosmology (in which mankind is an inconsequential accident) Then, of course, there's the liberal creation myth: Charles Darwin's theory of evolution. For liberals, evolution is the touchstone that separates the enlightened from the benighted. But Coulter neatly reverses the pretense that liberals are rationalists guided by the ideals of free inquiry and the scientific method. Don't you think it's time to dump Bennett in the great salt lake in 2010?. WAKE-UP.

JMT | 8:46 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

Another thoughtful twist from Don Gale.

America was found on liberalism, but not the liberalism of today. In the mid-20th century the socialist left hijacked the term "liberal" to hide their politics. Just as they are now trying to hijack "progressive."

Historically liberalism was about openness. Take man made global warming. How open is that discussion? Anyone who even asks a question is denounced publicly. It has been decided and we the 300 million Americans are to simply turn off our brain and do as we are told. Historical liberalism was against such political correctness.

Admitted that the big radio talking heads are full of hot air, most of the time. Is it really essentially dumbing down? Do we think so little of those who disagree with socialism that now we have even the pages of the Deseret News editorializing against them? And unlike modern Liberalism, I mean Progressivism, I am not saying pull the Don Gale article. I'm glad you posted it. I am not afraid of others free speech, and in fact when insane things are stated it makes me look that much better.

Don, sorry but your modern liberalism is showing.

All Knowing | 8:50 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

"They trade on pessimism in a land built by optimism. They pejoratively label anyone who disagrees with them 'liberals' in a land founded on liberal thought."

Too funny!!

In actuality, these guys, Limbaugh, Hannity, and Beck, shine pure light on the lies and half truths of the current administration. They've exposed criminal activities of ACORN and the socialistic/communistic mentality of the administration and its dozens of tsars, to name a couple of things they've done for the listening audience.

"They verbally punish dissent in a land where dissent is traditionally welcomed and protected."

What??? They are the epitome of dissent.

TC | 8:54 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

Have you ever listened to Rush? Your ignorance is total.

Another liberal rant | 9:20 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

from Don Gale. This is one of the the best examples possible of the pot calling the kettle black. In substance, I agree with much of what Gale actually says. As a conservative (sometimes Republican and never Democrat), I actually loathe the way Rush Limbaugh and his cohorts make their points. I feel often that these people are driving moderates out of the Republican party and are a cancer within the Republican party and conservative politics. They may be more responsible for electing Barak Obama and our current political crisis than the lousy job Bush and Republicans in Congress have done. They feed on fear. They use the same tactics on liberals that anti-Mormons use on the LDS church.

However, the liberal media are every bit as bad as Rush Limbaugh and his cohorts. They spin most political stories in a light favorable to Democrats' causes. And if you want to talk about despicable, think about the White House's recent declaration of war against Fox News. Don Gale pulls four reasons from his ear (utter nonsense) as to why Conservative talk radio is intellectually bankrupt. His own column is at least as intellectually bankrupt as Limbaugh

We need an educated populace | 9:50 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

Not all, but most people I know who listen a lot to Rush are people with overly simplistic views of life and politics. That seems to be the kind of people he attracts, and unfortunately he doesn't do anything to help the situation.

I've been to universtiy and have taken AP classes in high school so I am not as easily swayed by talk show hosts, because in school I was exposed to multiple sides of many arguments.

A good classical education is important. We already provide people with free education from kindergarten through 12 grade. Perhaps as a society we ought to consider providing free education for two more years. (education has proved to be a good investment for individuals and society) People can use this to get two years of a college degree or two years towards trade school.

If this is done, general educational credits ought to be required. It is important for democracy (a republic is an indirect democracy) that the ultimate rulers (the people) have a well rounded education. We can't afford to have great hords of people with little education being led by demogogs.

KM | 10:04 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

I read the title of the article and had to see the intellectual snob that wrote it. Way to go Don. Gone are the days of Tom Barberi and the intellectually enlightend. Now, we are just too stupid to understand that the govt. is out of control. Why, if we watched CNN or NBC we would be taught by truly smart people. People who would tell us "all is well, all is right, don't worry about the future." If you get your wish, soon the marxists in the White house will "change" it so that those rascally conservative voices will be shut out and shut up.

why not hire educated hosts? | 10:07 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

There is an alternative, KTKK 630 on the AM dial. This radio station has always had multiple points of view.

It is probably past its prime, but I've learned a lot from listening to this station over the years.

I remember once a caller called in (during the 1970's) and said the civil rights movement was a communist plot. The talk show host at the time didn't even bother to argue with this, he calmly replied.

"If this is so, then the communists have done us a favor".

I was so impressed with the insight, he was a far cry from the ilk we have today, conservative or liberal. He was truely educated, a university graduate, not just a high school education like so many of the hosts today, Rush, Beck and Lonsbery.

Not that people with only a high school education can't become knowledgeable via self study, but their education tends to be one sided and shallow. When people study on their own, they study what they want to study, they typically don't expose themselves honestly to all sides of the issues. Formal education forces you to do this.

Anonymous | 10:11 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

Partisan media is hardly a recent development.

Day was when every newspaper had a specific partisan affiliation: Democrat newspapers, Republican newspapers. The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette is still around from that time and makes the point.

Times changed of course. But the Republic somehow survived.

I suspect that Gale knows this history... he's witnessed so much of it personally ;)

DonM | 10:18 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

"Talk show hosts on the other side of the political spectrum did not attract similar interest for four reasons: First, they came too late to the table."

Not true, NPR has been around longer than Limbaugh. The problem is that liberals can't attract advertisers because they can't get listeners.

"Second, their viewpoints are less focused and more universal."

Liberals less focused. I can't disagree there.

"Third, their potential audiences are younger, more diverse, and more comfortable with complex realities."

A recent Gallup poll showed liberals are 20% of Americans, conservatives 40%. The liberals I know are more comfortable with music on the radio. Ideas that challenge their liberal beliefs make them uncomfortable.

"Fourth, station owners – mostly large conglomerates – tend to favor conservative views."

Many of the same companies own non-talk show stations. This is a business. They air what people will listen to.

Overall a disappointing column. I expected an article that addresses intelligence to actually show some. Mr Gale, a do-over please - tells us why Talk Radio is bad to expose ACORN, defend families and religion, condemn fascist Islamic terrorism, champion self reliance and industry, condemn deficit spending.

Author is right | 10:24 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

What "lies" did "liberal" media tell about George Bush?
The truth is, the so-called "liberal" media wasn't hard enough on the policies of George Bush. The media was absent in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq.
In fact, one of NY Times own people, Judith Miller, served as a conduit for the Defense Dept when Bush was Pres. The best reporting prior to the Iraq War came from McClatchy Newspapers. I believe sometimes, in order to avoid any hint of "liberal-bias" journalists don't probe or push-back enough.
Beck/Hannity/Limbaugh succeed to throwing out "news sponges" which take the focus from important issues to the non-important issues.

There are still some good sources left--more reporting and less opinion--PBS, NPR, CSPAN. Web sites such as politifact and factcheck.

rsp | 10:50 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

Rush has about 50 million reasons per year why he's right and GAle is wrong- straight cash homey-!

Don Gale is the problem | 11:12 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

I became so sick of hearing Don Gale's intellectually challenged opinion pieces that I finally just switched the channel or turned the TV off.

Once you know that Don is in favor of a growing government power with commensurately growing taxes there is nothing more to say. I must say I didn't sit down and quantify and qualify all he said but that was the general message.

It is interesting that the most predictable and most mindlessly Statist among us are the ones that are claiming intellectual insight. They just don't seem to see beneath the surface.

Among the ways minds are darkened is indeed the simplification the complex, but another way is to complicate the straightforward.

Here's a simple but true message that all can understand: Government spends more than it has got, borrows the balance from the "Federal Reserve" and lands the taxpayer with the bill. The Federal Reserve collects most of the interest. This has gone on unremittingly and consistently for ninety-six years. All of the bill is paid by the taxpayers and the result is hyper-inflation and personal hardship.

That is even something that even Don Gale clones can understand.

Free Speech | 11:17 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

I agree with an earlier poster who said this column essentially says, "I believe in free speech but not your speech."

One way to undermine a differing viewpoint is to label is inane, simplistic, and intellectually bankrupt--just as Mr. Gale has done. As a result, the tone of the article feels arrogant.

Digbads | 11:29 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

I think Don Gale is very out of touch.
I think the media has really gone down hill since the 70's. Where is the investigative journalism of the past? Where was it in the run up to the war in Iraq? Where was it in investigating the abuses going on by our government during the Cheney years? Where is it in investigating BO?
BO stinks. The press stinks. Our "Fourth Estate" is awol.

Education, Intelligence & Sense | 11:37 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

Someone mentioned the education levels of talk show hosts. Intelligence levels are another thing and so are levels of morality and common sense. The nation was, in a way founded on the "Common Sense" of the early Tom Paine book.

I notice that Michael Savage, freedom-fighting radio talk show host, was not mentioned. Perhaps that is because he is a PhD. No one mentioned the educational accomplishments of liberal talk show hosts or the relevance of them.

I, like most of us, have a degree. The subjects I studied were History and Politics. I must say, though, that in terms of simplistic reasoning no department in university was so simplistic and no course was so easy as those in the Politics and Economics departments, except perhaps the Sociology
Dept. I also have advanced certification in Sociology; I chose the subject because it was a piece of cake.

Wasted speech | 11:56 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

When see Gale company words words words all i see is blah blah blah. What a waste of ink paper, space and time to put this over the hill liberal in the paperl.

Anonymous | 11:59 a.m. Nov. 7, 2009

Unbelievable.

A 200 word posting could not possibly be sufficient to explain the multiplicity of distortions and misinformation unleashed in this sad display of hypocrisy. Gale can malign the words of talk radio commentators, but talk radio cannot malign the greatness of Gale’s heroes. Gales comments lend further credence to the fact that conservative ARE the only intellectuals left in this country.

Mike Richards | 12:08 p.m. Nov. 7, 2009

Mr. Gale has forgotten one word that should be the basis for all news, whether it is radio, TV or newspaper. That word is "TRUTH".

Does Mr. Gale think that MSNBC writes the "truth" or do they publish a greatly watered down version of "truth"? Does he think that Mr. Obama and those that follow him, mindlessly, parroting his every word and promoting his every desire, speak the "truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth"?

Does Mr. Gale think that those who oppose his personal viewpoint are liars? Can he cite specifics? Can he show that "his side" speaks the truth while those that he opposes are full of lies?

It seems to me that Mr. Beck uses actual recordings spoken by those that he thinks have fallen short. Does Mr. Gale imply that Mr. Beck has falsified those recordings, or does Mr. Gale simply ignore the content of those recordings and excuse them because they embarrass him?

A news organization has one duty and one duty only and that is to publish true facts, no matter whether it hurts Mr. Obama's feelings or not.

roger chambers | 12:16 p.m. Nov. 7, 2009

I have never agreed with anything that you have ever written. You are the one who shinks intellectual capital.

Zadruga Guy | 2:00 p.m. Nov. 7, 2009

Thank you Don Gale for speaking the truth.

Coast to Coast | 2:16 p.m. Nov. 7, 2009

Tune into this.....
Those who follow Limbaugh, Hannity, and Beck would be extremely enthusiastic after listening to Coast to Coast Radio. It is on late at night, but worth losing sleep over.
Coast to Coast Radio is filled with extremely plausable conspiracy theories and much more.
I would love to hear feedback on the program!

Not a fan | 2:27 p.m. Nov. 7, 2009

I'm not a fan of the talk radio hosts mentioned, but alas, and this is hard to believe, it seems that their critics are even more myopic. Mr Gale lacks what most everybody lacks, a bit of perspective.

The right has talk radio and Fox News. The left has MSNBC, the biggest chunk of the blogosphere, and most of Hollywood. To a lesser extent the left also has the other cable and network news outlets as well as NPR, and the most influential News Papers. To call one side on biased while ignoring the others displays your own individual prejudice.

Mc | 2:31 p.m. Nov. 7, 2009

@why not hire educated hosts? | 10:07 a.m. "When people study on their own, they study what they want to study, they typically don't expose themselves honestly to all sides of the issues. Formal education forces you to do this."

You are kidding, right? A formal (college) education exposes you honestly to all sides of the issues? The only people who could possibly think that have to be liberals who have never exposed themselves to all sides of the issues.

Paul Macfarlane | 3:34 p.m. Nov. 7, 2009

Mr Gale should be careful about making accusations of simplistic thinking, especially when not backed by evidence. He fails to note that the liberalism of the founding fathers would today look more like today's conservatism, and that the conservatism of that time was tyrannical monarchy. He observes simplistically that our nation was founded upon optimism in contrast to the so-called pessimism of conservative broadcasters. In fact, the founding of our nation was based upon nearly unbounded pessimism about the utility of government institutions, and a pessimistic view of human nature. The constitution was structured based on the idea that men will almost always seek their own interests, and therefore government powers must be bridled, separated, divided, and scrutinized. They were only optimistic that once freed, the individual would naturally create good in the process of seeking self interest.

When accusations are thrown about, first scrutinize to the accuser, since his judgments of others cannot help being based upon his internal truth filter through which he judges himself also. Mr. Gale's accusations are more easily turned upon his own comments than those whom he accuses.

So Far Wrong | 3:35 p.m. Nov. 7, 2009

Gale is so very wrong about Talk Radio and what he says about the media.

What is "intellectually bankrupt" is network news. We became tired of switching on the major networks in the vain hope of hearing a news broadcast and significant investigative reporting.

Instead we hear, on these brainless "news programs", so much of what Obama (previously Bush) or his family or his pet dog did today, swine flu, sports, the weather, the traffic, how we ought to be spending more of our non-existent discretional income, big bad Walmart, how the "recession" is really over, some furry animal tale, some dumb book that someone wrote.

My wife and I got so miffed about all the fluff, and the sameness of the main networks that we bought some satellite access to alternative news. As far as we can see that is on the Fox News Channel. The entire rest seem like so many bad peas in the same pod.

Danger | 4:00 p.m. Nov. 7, 2009

No discerning person would conclude from Ms. Dunn's dimwitted remark that she is a Maoist. That would require more evidence--and that's what makes Mr. Beck's pantomime fear and trembling so odious: He doesn't appear to be interested in further evidence, or really any evidence that doesn't serve his shtick.
What Mr. Beck's silent phone really symbolizes is a new kind of ignorance, a coming high-tech dark age in which people can choose to blow off professional standards of inquiry; in which they can wall themselves off with cable TV and friendly Web sites, dismiss what displeases as liberal bias, and demand that any contrary view be transmitted to them via telephone call from the president himself.

Why not let Mr. Beck and his viewers have their fun? Because ideas have consequences. Maybe, as many believe, Glenn Beck is indeed the future of the conservative movement. From tea parties to town-hall meetings, thousands are signing up and fitting themselves out with their very own hotline to nowhere.

RedShirt | 4:07 p.m. Nov. 7, 2009

To "G. Don Gale " why do you only single out conservative voices? What about the liberal talk shows that are out there, any why only those on the radio, what about TV?

Another thing that makes me know for sure that Mr Gale hasn't listened to Beck very much at is it the fact the Glenn Beck tells his listeners to go out and do the research themselves. Beck doesn't want blind follower. He wants informed listeners.

complex realities.. | 4:23 p.m. Nov. 7, 2009

e.g. the federal tax code, 1000 page"stimulus" bills, and 1500 page "health care" bills. Anything can be solved through Conservative principles and if not...there's a reason God invented nuclear weapons

Page:
1
2
Next >

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.