The Top 40

They suck, and watching them sucks the mind and the soul.

Hannity, and O'Reilly are both second string intellects. Neither can hold a candle to Levin, Hewitt, or Prager.

JWM

Once off the talking points tether, Hannity is unable to focus on his opponent's points or mount a logical argument. He makes his most moronic guests look smart.

Add "peevish" and "smug" to the "inconsistent" and "illogical" mix and I believe you've entered the no-spin zone.

Where is OUR William F. Buckley?

What Jewel Said!

Hannity reminds me of a "Dementor" from a Harry Potter tale.

Much as I like Beck's radio show, I can only take a minute of watching him on television. Watching television news shows is just draining. I am never informed of anything, only left with more questions than answers, and the endless punctuation of happy commercials into blots of tragedy trivializes tragedy. O'Really's show is nothing but a plug for his awful books, and Insannity's show is...insane.

Morning shows have to be the worst, though. You are safer just leaving the idiots in the idiot box off.

Wow. Hit the nail on the head with Hannity and Beck. Don't watch Hannity any more, gave up listening to him on the radio. And since I can't pick up the other area talk station, my drives home are quiet.
Beck was a lot of fun when he started off on TV, but now his TV show is meh. (Still like his radio show when I can hear it, but I'm out of range for it, too.)
O'Reilly has gone from a must-watch back in the before-times to being like a local morning TV show. Perky guests, perky host (?). He just needs a weatherman. (Ooops. I forgot, he's got Doocy.)

Beck, Hannity and O'Reilly are all self promoters who have found a way to seem to be for "the folks." Other than their support for the conservative side in politics, they are forgettable. However, who is their competition? Does anyone want to watch Chris Mathews, Keith Olbermann, Anderson Cooper, or Brian Williams? The ratings say, "No!"

Guess that's the reason I'm peering at a computer screen instead of a TV screen.

Ah. Good topic.

I don't watch TV at all, but I do listen to talk radio in small snippets: when I drive to work, when I drive home, and four 10-minute breaks during the day at work. Then Mark Levin in the evening after I get home.

There are two talk radio stations in my area. Until recently, the morning drive into work gave me a choice of Bill Bennett and Michael Smerconish. Bennett is very intelligent, but he is also a Washington insider. His bland equanimity in the face of an overt Communist assault on our country frequently has me wanting to rip the radio out of the dashboard and chuck it out the window.

The alternative was Smerconish, an alleged "conservative" who was a vocal Obama supporter in '08. Ever since then, he's been DEAD to me. (Am I allowed to say that?) Luckily, he has recently been replaced in the morning. I don't remember the new guy's name.

During my mid-morning break, I listen to Beck. I love the guy. He seems to have an encyclopedic knowledge of the history of the Progressive movement. As I said, I never see his TV show, but he has a terrific sense of humor on the radio. He can be talking about a deadly serious subject, then make an offhand remark that has me in stitches. Mike Gallagher is on opposite Beck. No contest. Beck all the way. But I only get to hear him for 10 minutes a day.

I time my noon break to listen to Rush Limbaugh's opening monologue. He is also intelligent and funny, a good combination in my book. Dennis Prager is on opposite Limbaugh. Prager is also very intelligent, but I find him a bit preachy. I'll listen to him when Rush is talking about golf or football, or sometimes when there's a guest host. (But Rush often has excellent guest hosts, like Mark Steyn or Walter Williams.) I would listen to Prager more often if he wasn't on opposite Rush.

My post-lunch break also has Limbaugh vs. Prager.

For my mid-afternoon break and the drive home, it's Sean Hannity or Michael Medved. I agree with JWM above. Hannity is simply not in the same intellectual class with any of the other hosts I've mentioned. I also find his voice irritating in the extreme. He always talks at the same volume level and I just can't take it for more than a few minutes. Mark Levin can yell louder, but he can also speak softly and in a normal conversational tone. He modulates his voice better. With Hannity, it's always at the same pitch and volume and I find it tiring.

But the alternative is Michael "Don't call the President a socialist" Medved. He's a very intelligent guy, but he tends to take a very condescending tone towards anyone who disagrees with him. Also, see my complaint with Bill Bennett above.

When I arrive home, I fire up the computer and listen to Mark Levin online as I begin to catch up on my favorite blogs. Hugh Hewitt is on opposite him, but once again, it's no contest. The times I've listened to him, Hewitt strikes me as a loyal Republican Party man first and foremost. Levin expresses a sense of outrage over what the Left is doing to the country which mirrors my own. I think it's real and not a schtick.

So bottom line, I like Levin and Beck the most. I understand that Levin doesn't care for Beck. Oh well. It sort of reminds me of a time in elementary school when my two best friends hated each others' guts.