The point is not that a caller should, as has been suggested, "wreck the host's argument," but, rather, raise the level of the discussion so that the caller will be able to present an alternative point of view. You're not going to change Rush's mind on anything, nor should you - it's his show. But listeners aren't stupid, so, if they hear a position at least as cogent as the host's, they have something to think about and respond to instead of a one-sided barrage of rhetoric.
Many hosts avoid substantive discussions by tarring their opposition with a broad brush, e.g., all liberals are leftist loonies or all conservatives are Fascist bigots, and the callers who conform to these stereotypes don't need the host to embarass them, as they do it to themselves. It's the caller who breaks the stereotype that scores the points - the caller who presents what sounds like a reasoned point of view and not just canned talking points. The challenge is to have a substantive discussion that is short, punchy, and within the rhythm structure of the show. Of course, some hosts will cut such callers off because they find them threatening. But the best way to show up a shallow or uninformed host is not to try to change his or her mind but, rather, to present a more intelligent position statement so that some listeners might change their minds.
As for "beating the screener," my guess is that most screeners are looking for good calls - calls that will engage the host and the listeners, and callers that will come to the point and not hem and haw. They do want opposing points of view and not just an amen chorus. Yeah, a host that likes to abuse callers might tell the screener to look for likely victims, but a good host should be able to take on all comers without looking foolish.
But political talk radio, as it exists today, is still a sport. It's not PBS, or even "Meet the Press," and it's certainly not academia. But sometimes it appears to have descended to the level of professional wrestling. If you want to hear political talk as it should be, and as it once was, try to catch broadcasting legend Barry Farber subbing on WABC. Barry is an historian, a linguist, and a master storyteller, and his words and syntax are sheer poetry. But, even more important, he treats his callers with respect no matter what their point of view. Callers call him, not to argue, but to engage him in conversation, and most come away refreshed and energized. The man has class.
Talk radio needs more class. Descending to the level of a host's intellect and style won't make better radio, but raising the bar for the hosts will, and it will lead to better audiences who will expect and demand even more.
