Talk Radio Hosts Offer the GOP a Huge Leadership Pool

Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Laura Ingraham, Glenn Beck, Michael Savage, and countless other talk-radio personalities fill our public airwaves with hours of political advice, political analysis, and political prescriptions for the nation's future. Their certitude on all subjects is awe-inspiring and like George W. Bush they "don't do nuance." They're rich enough to finance their own campaigns, and they have a perfect platform for getting their message out. They have open invitations to speak at political events and rallies. And they have a vast army of dedicated followers who would gladly volunteer to knock on doors, pass out leaflets, and make phone calls. Like President Barack Obama most of them are best-selling authors.

So with the Republican Party flailing about looking for new leaders why don't any of these high-powered conservative radio talkers run for public office?

Sean Hannity, for example, (although he never finished college) got his start in radio as a volunteer at the UC-Santa Barbara station, KCSB, so why doesn't he claim California as his home state and challenge his nemesis Senator Barbara Boxer? Michael Savage, who is originally from the Bronx, could likewise claim New York and make a bid for Hillary Clinton's former Senate seat (maybe then England would allow Mr. Weiner in for a visit). Glenn Beck has roots in both Florida and Pennsylvania so he could be a "double threat." Given Beck's ties to the Tea Bagger movement he would be a superb candidate for the Republicans to win back either Mel Martinez's seat in Florida or Rick Santorum's seat in Pennsylvania. After seeing their talk-show brethren run for office perhaps Bill Bennett, Michael Reagan, Neal Boortz, Hugh Hewitt, Lars Larson, Mike Gallagher, Tucker Carlson, Michael Medved, and Dennis Prager would throw their hats into the ring. These conservative superstars gained eight years of valuable experience carrying water for George W. Bush and Dick Cheney and then honed their political skills by repeating every smear, lie, and innuendo about Obama during the 2008 campaign.

And if a "big tent" is what the Republicans are looking for there are a number of influential women from the talk-show ranks who could step up and save the party. Laura Ingraham, for example, being from Connecticut, could try to unseat Joe Lieberman. Ann Coulter, also of Connecticut stock, could go after Christopher Dodd. From her perch in Seattle, Michelle Malkin might be able to replace either Senator Maria Cantwell or Senator Patty Murray. In Virginia, Janet Parshall could run for office without even leaving her radio studio. With Ingraham, Coulter, and Malkin running for the U.S Senate (assisted by possible congressional runs by Peggy Noonan, Elisabeth Hasselbeck, and Monica Crowley) we could someday see a "Year of the Republican Woman."

Which brings me to the de facto leader of the Republican Party: Rush Limbaugh. Of course a man of Limbaugh's stature could not waste his time on the U.S. Senate. No, the only office worthy of this man's talents is President of the United States. He brings to the table a unique set of skills: astute political analysis, charisma, speaking chops, and a huge following (he really knocked 'em dead at the Conservative Political Action Committee). And if Limbaugh teamed up with FOX's Bill O'Reilly the Republican Party would have a political "Dream Team." O'Reilly would bring experience, level-headedness, and common sense to the ticket. Rush can recruit throngs of "dittoheads" while O'Reilly sparks enthusiasm among people in a slightly older demographic. Given both men's talents for demagoguery and huge followings the only problem might be determining whose name should appear at the top of the ballot.

Then again, maybe none of these Republican media stars have chosen to run for office because: 1). They'd have to take a huge pay cut; 2). They'd have to engage voters in serious discussions about real problems instead of just hurling partisan invective; and 3). Although they know audiences find them "entertaining" voters would humiliate them at the polls.

Comments

[tippydog11]

Well, cannot send Micheal Savage to British Government just got banned from visiting the country period.-----under fostering "extremism" for bashing Islam, autistic children gays etc etc...

[tippydog11]

Yah right....the same Micheal Savage radio host, who was shocked shocke when he learned that the British Government has banned including members of the KKK from visiting their country because they --foster---" extremism" and put their citizens in danger...Micheal Savage who bashed Islam, gays, autistic children...etc etc...
Other civilized nations do not tolerate nor accept such hate basing...of others...Glen Beck, Hannity, Rush etc would not be tolerated or would their so called news be acceptable period...I read that not even Fox in Canada could get a license to even call themselves "news period'...only a license that allows them to call themselves entertainment ...had a bigger riot over Fox coming in then abortion rally....please...

[Tzimisce]

They're afraid to step outside of their facts-optional bubble. They know that the moment they do, reality will hit them right smack in the face.
Just the other day, Limbaugh the Hutt questioned the existence of a recession. This is a man so insulated from the realities of everyday life that he actually has the gall to say that the best way to beat a recession is 'not participate'. This is a guy who makes $50 million per year spewing lies and venom, suggesting that the only thing the 10% or so of Americans who are currently unemployed are lacking is a little... willpower?

[Skeetshooter]

Right wing talk show hosts do present a large pool of talent; a broad, wide, and remarkably shallow pool.

Expecting them to exhibit the patience to sit for hours listening to stultifying debate, the intellectual rigor to assess details of policy, or the courage to take responsibility for actual results, would be like expecting an astrologer to be a dedicated astronomer, a phrenologist to be a qualified psychiatrist, or a Christian Scientist to be a medical ethicist. Any impulse these folks have to serve the public is vastly overshadowed by their narcissistic desire for attention and their attraction to the cheesy drama of conspiracy theories.

[BlueRoseofTexas]

As we all know the real reason none of them ever run for office is that you can't hang up on NPR or anyone in the media asking you questions if you want to be taken seriously. You can't prescreen questioners and ensure that anyone who is liberal sounds like a crackhead and anyone who is conservative is fawning and slavering their dittos and adulation to an orgasmic level.

[radiogeek321]

What's missing in this discussion is a particular FCC regulation: the Commission requires radio and TV stations to offer equal and equivalent time to any and all legit candidates for Federal office. Therefore, if, say, Limbaugh ran for President, every station that carries him would be forced to sell roughly three hours every day to each and every opponent Limbaugh had. No station would want to do that (they'd have to sell it cheaply and it would ruin their program schedules), so they'd drop Limbaugh's show for the duration of the campaign. After he lost, many of the stations probably wouldn't re-up and Premiere/Clear Channel would be missing a major contribution to their bottom line and Rush might have to give up his Gulfstream. However, if Limbaugh ran for Governor of Florida (and wouldn't THAT be a trip), the Federal law wouldn't apply. So the only thing these bozos could run for is STATE office - and goodness knows, such positions wouldn't do enough to feed their apparently gargantuan egos.

[Driver125]

"we could someday see a "Year of the Republican Woman."
As if Bachmann, Palin and Foxx were not enough for you? A government of the Aliens, by the Aliens for the Aliens of the Twilight Zone?

[roch20]

I'd have to vote for the third reason, as why don't they run;
3). Although they know audiences find them "entertaining" voters would humiliate them at the polls. DUH!

[Articulator]

Would love to see Rush have to answer a question from an un-vetted caller, never mind handle a debate. He could never do it.

[libslayerguy]

He'd be like his chumchum, W, spout the prepared stuff and not take questions from anybody not already singing in the choir.

[jaggededge]

4) they have absolutely no answers/solutions

[gregrocker1]

The teach in the great Universities around the world that the U.S. has undergone a coup by the right's dirtiest tricksters, some from the original Nixon squat, who pirated the AM radio dial and over 20 years installed the greatest disinformation operation in world history. No other country would allow such blatant falsity and vile smear to be broadcast on the pubicly owned airwaves, yet there was virtually no pushback for this entire time, leading tens of millions of willfully ignorant listeners to hold "false certainty" on almost every issue, swinging 5 of the past 7 national elections.

Even when the Annenberg School, the U.S.'s most prestigious broadcast university, studied the issue for a dozen years and published the results demonstrating that facts had been completely overrun by falsity due to this disinformation operation on public owned airwaves, Congress just ignored them and their results were only published overseas and are only really studied outside the country. So I had to pick up the German magazine Stern to learn that what we were experiencing here was "far beyond Goebbels wildest dreams."

The only real fix is for a new FCC to require broadcasters to present a plan for balance as a requirement for relicensing, a solution which avoids the red herring status of the Fairness Doctrine and obviates the issue as owners try to explain how having 99% fringe rightist talk is balance.

[GettinItRight]

Give me a break. It's called freedom of speech.

Besides, most mainstream media news outlets have given very little time to true conservative ideas, so it is a relief to finally have our views and political opinions be represented. While conservative representation isn't even close to liberal representation in Big Media, it is nice to have some representation in the Big Media for once.

[miles120]

FCC regulation doesn't necessarily infringe upon one's right to speak. The truth of the matter is that the First Amendment is totally irrelevant in this debate.

The modern conservative movement has been steadily changing doctrine for the past thirty years, and we are now clearly seeing the results. Media consolidation is one process that amplifies the imbalances present between public interest and corporate profit. The idea of ownership regulation was that, if many owners were in the marketplace, then a more balance spectrum of ideas would probably exist. As fewer owners are allowed in a single market, there are obviously fewer ideas. The result is that the audience becomes greatly segmented - joins a "team" - and can't relate to anything that the other side is saying.

The "team" notion is supported by your use of the term Big Media to describe everything that doesn't conform to your ideas. There is no room for nuance in your argument because there is no nuance in the marketplace.

[Provit2me]

You mean freedom to be berated and called names - I heard Hannity call a serious caller yesterday ' genius' as a cut down because she was asking a serious question and he couldn't answer it so he screamed at her - I felt bad for her. So, free speech lives on - yah

[elr50]

"Conservative representation isn't even close to liberal representation"? What the hell are you squawking about? You got a whole damned NETWORK owned by Rupert (sh--head) Murdoch. I am so sick of you dittoheads complaining about the "liberal" media. You are so full of BUSHIT.

[petrosbasileus]

This is the scariest thing I have ever read.

[GettinItRight]

The scariest thing I have read is all these people who want to control speech. What is this, a communist country? Give me a break.

Do you people realize that this arguments are precisely the way that communist and totalitarian governments are sold to the people?

Don't believe, then go over to The Communist Party USA home page and see for yourself.

[petrosbasileus]

Why are you on Huffington Post? Go read Ann Coulter. (Haha... GOPers reading... I forgot, I'm sorry.) I mean, seriously. IF you don't agree, perhaps instead of coming on here and telling people to go to socialist countries like France and England (which, by the way, are not socialist), why don't you just... you know, leave?

[leonel]

DID FOX AND CNN ACTUALLY HELP KILL THE REPUBLICAN PARTY?
If it turns out that the Republican Party goes in decline for a longer period, there may be a search for some previously undetected cause. The fact that FOX and some CNN commentators create an outlook that is unrealistic, and therefore led conservatives and especially Republican politicians to take it more seriously than was warranted, is a good possible explanation. If the polls that show they are down to 20 % hold up, this is a big surprise to everybody. Some of us who follow the ideological winds with pretty open minds believe that FOX and CNN are entitled to put on their views, but I suspect that their creation of unreality may turn out to be fatal miscalculation.

[Downtown]

I'm a UCSB alum (who actually graduated!) and I apologize for KCSB being the birthplace of Hannity on the radio!

Four years ago, in an attempt to fight back against the right's monopoly of talk radio, some folks here in DC started Progressive Blend Radio (www.pbradio.net), a progressive-talk internet radio station.

Joe, I'd love to have you as a guest on my show any time! ;)

[lovable]

palermo i see u are answering comments . why are u not on tv saying this.?

[lovable]

they are cowards and could never engage in real dedate. they are safe behind the mic!!!!! and no media person ever calls them out ha ha they are safe