Turncoat talk show hosts

[FloridaBear1776]

The Mark Williams thread brought this to mind...

If you came of age in the talk radio business in the 80s or 90s, and your views were not mined from the pages of National Review, you could respond to the Rush Limbaugh phenomenon in two ways:

Stick to your liberal guns and fight for the few dwindling slots available on local talk radio, and prepare for long sessions with the program director lecturing you not to be so hard on your dittohead callers who call up to rip you a new one, or...

Pretend to convert and preach the party line.

Which option do you think a lot of talk radio people took?

I always find the allegiance of conservative radio listeners to their favorite talk show hosts amusing, because if they were in radio before 1990 or so, chances are they were liberals who just bent with the wind and became born-again righties. They were a big part of the "Billary" phenomenon in talk radio circa 1994, where certain opportunists consciously mimicked Rushisms and ham-handled the rhetoric of conservatism, referring to Democrats as "dumbocrats" and that sort of thing.

I can think of several hosts who "converted" during their talk radio careers. Those who were caught at it always claimed a "Saul on the road to Damascus" moment when their eyes opened and they repented of liberalism. Mike Siegel and Steve Kane come to mind. Usually it happens when someone changes markets and management is trying to make a square peg fit a round hole. Anyone else have any observations about talk hosts who enter the business preaching one party line, and switch to the other to keep working?

 

[gr8oldies]

Very few talk hosts, or people in general, have all of their opinions fit neatly into a little ideological box. People's views evolve over time, as well. I don't believe a host is going to get very far prfetending to have views that he or she does not. I'll use Mike McConnell on WLW (and "The Weekend" nationally). He went from somewhat liberal in the 80s to conservative and his views have evolved in a libertarian direction..but not docrinaire. Not to bring up the dreaded AAR topic again, but there were reports that at least one potential host turned the gig down because it was expected that the party line be adhered to at all times.<P ID="signature">______________
Greetings from Ohio-where the governor wants everyone to know he's sorry.</P>

 

[Scribbler]

> Not to bring up
> the dreaded AAR topic again, but there were reports that at
> least one potential host turned the gig down because it was
> expected that the party line be adhered to at all times.

Was that during the Evan Cohen era? I'm not sure what "party line" you're referring to, but whatever it is, the AAR hosts don't seem to be adhering to it. Some are saying pull out of Iraq now, but Franken is saying no, stay there and clean up the mess. Franken and Springer are much more moderate than Mike Malloy, who's said that he's through with the Democrats since they're almost as bad as the Republicans.

 

[Tom_]

> Was that during the Evan Cohen era? I'm not sure what
> "party line" you're referring to, but whatever it is, the
> AAR hosts don't seem to be adhering to it. Some are saying
> pull out of Iraq now, but Franken is saying no, stay there
> and clean up the mess. Franken and Springer are much more
> moderate than Mike Malloy, who's said that he's through with
> the Democrats since they're almost as bad as the
> Republicans.


Bob Brinker, Chuck Harder, and Doug Stephan have moved to the left on several issues. In particular, rarely does a program go by for Brinker and Harder where they are not discussing alternative energy strategies and also criticizing the energy policies of the current (and previous) adminstrations.

Michael Savage is now very critical of Bush's plan in Iraq and has also been speaking out extensively against outsourcing and the free trade agreements. However, recall that Savage is of course a registered independent.

As for Scribbler's comment on Mike Malloy being increasingly frustrated with the Democrats, the same is true for Mike Webb in Seattle on newsradio 710 KIRO.

 

[gr8oldies]

I haven't heard Chuck Harder since the early 90s, but as I recall he was somewhat on the left then (criticizing free trade, etc.) He also had guests who purported to have invented "perpetual motion machines" that would eliminate the need for oil, except the evil oil companies wouldn't let them come to market.

The "party line" probably was during the Evan Cohen era; apparently he wanted no criticism of Democrats on AAR. <P ID="signature">______________
Greetings from Ohio-where the governor wants everyone to know he's sorry.</P>

 

[KingDaevid]

Chuck Harder was never left-of-center

> I haven't heard Chuck Harder since the early 90s, but as I
> recall he was somewhat on the left then (criticizing free
> trade, etc.) He also had guests who purported to have
> invented "perpetual motion machines" that would eliminate
> the need for oil, except the evil oil companies wouldn't let
> them come to market.

...Harder was the ultra-right pseudo-populist type. He was the biggest "Militia" booster in the country until it was noticed that the Oklahoma City bombers drew on his show for inspiration...<P ID="signature">______________
King Daevid MacKenzie
WLSU Wisconsin Public Radio, La Crosse
heard weekly on http://whiterosesociety.org
"Kill Ugly Radio." FRANK ZAPPA</P>

 

[2001]

Re: Chuck Harder was never left-of-center

> > I haven't heard Chuck Harder since the early 90s, but as I
>
> > recall he was somewhat on the left then (criticizing free
> > trade, etc.) He also had guests who purported to have
> > invented "perpetual motion machines" that would eliminate
> > the need for oil, except the evil oil companies wouldn't
> let
> > them come to market.
>
> ...Harder was the ultra-right pseudo-populist type. He was
> the biggest "Militia" booster in the country until it was
> noticed that the Oklahoma City bombers drew on his show for
> inspiration...
>

Speaking of Chucker Harder.....Didn't he have a falling out with Art (I believe in aliens) Bell sometime back around late 1996-early 1997?

I seem to have a vague recollection of Chuck Harder coming on Bell's show to discuss some sort of conspiracy about whatever....and he and Bell didn't get along too well. And as a result, there was some lingering animosity between the two talk show hosts (certainly on Harder's part, as I recall) for quite a while after that.

I sure hope someone else here on this board remembers that episode and can fill us all in better with the details!

 

[JohnnyMorganWXJX]

Chuck Harder and your normal run-of-the-mill weirdos

> > I haven't heard Chuck Harder since the early 90s, but as I
>
> > recall he was somewhat on the left then (criticizing free
> > trade, etc.) He also had guests who purported to have
> > invented "perpetual motion machines" that would eliminate
> > the need for oil, except the evil oil companies wouldn't
> let
> > them come to market.
>
> ...Harder was the ultra-right pseudo-populist type. He was
> the biggest "Militia" booster in the country until it was
> noticed that the Oklahoma City bombers drew on his show for
> inspiration...

I wouldn't even call him ultra-right: he's just ultra-strange. And carried on shortwave, which seems to be the province for his type of weird theory hosts.

The anti-free trade argument (started with anti-GATT, then anti-NAFTA) is part of the isolationism wing of the, so coined by me, "Weird Americans" party. It's the same thing that causes rabid "US out of the UN, and UN out of the US" fever, which is caused by New World Order concerns. It's all circumstantial evidence on steroids and blind devotion to holographic beliefs (like the Illuminati). You want to see "out of the mainstream," don't look at John Roberts, listen to Harder's show.

Militias, while arguably based in American tradition (supporters cite the Revolutionary War ad nauseum without citing the Southern militias during Reconstruction), are not accepted by society now--so they're on the weird outcast list.

Perpetual motion machines would be enough by themselves to get on the list--but then Harder goes ahead and adds in the Kevin Trudeau-like "THEY" (oil companies) wouldn't let them market. Weird outcast theory.

He's just a normal run-of-the-mill conspiracy theory, Illuminati, black-helicopter outcast type. He's basically Coast to Coast AM on shortwave.

And there's this "party" on college radio too. I heard a pair last night on Case Western Reserve Univ. station WRUW--every third paragraph or so had to do with either Dick Cheney, the New World Order, CFR [Council on Foreign Relations], Skull and Bones, Freemasons, or Bush's daddy. BOTH fringes of the right and left have picked and chosen their bits out of the pot of conspiracy theories. It's actually fun (once you get past the outrage at rampant stupidity) to listen to these people take themselves seriously as they throw out names of "secret" organizations.

By the way, look around, and you'll find somewhere, I'm sure, some mention of John Roberts' Catholicism having to do with his membership in the current division of the ancient Knights Templar and/or the Knights of Malta,the Vatican Bank's funding of the CFR/Dick Cheney-Freemason Bush war in Iraq to support the New World Order. Oh, and Triangularists, which are Freemason CFR types in high government positions: Papa Bush, W, Kerry, Cheney, Clinton, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz (he's with the UN you know), Tony Blair, Chirac, Schroeder, Putin, and probably Karl Rove supposedly meet in Switzerland and find a way to take over all important world functions either through US-UN-UK military action or economic trade.

It's great fun to sit and baffle at the resounding insanity of these people.

 

[clichemoth]

Re: Chuck Harder and your normal run-of-the-mill weirdos

> > > I haven't heard Chuck Harder since the early 90s, but as
> I
> >
> > > recall he was somewhat on the left then (criticizing
> free
> > > trade, etc.) He also had guests who purported to have
> > > invented "perpetual motion machines" that would
> eliminate
> > > the need for oil, except the evil oil companies wouldn't
>
> > let
> > > them come to market.
> >
> > ...Harder was the ultra-right pseudo-populist type. He was
>
> > the biggest "Militia" booster in the country until it was
> > noticed that the Oklahoma City bombers drew on his show
> for
> > inspiration...
>
> I wouldn't even call him ultra-right: he's just
> ultra-strange. And carried on shortwave, which seems to be
> the province for his type of weird theory hosts.

>
> The anti-free trade argument (started with anti-GATT, then
> anti-NAFTA) is part of the isolationism wing of the, so
> coined by me, "Weird Americans" party.

That's a great term for the combined right-left lunatic fringe that have merged over the past 10 years or so into this multi-headed tentacle monster of looniness. I'll have to remember it.


> And there's this "party" on college radio too. I heard a
> pair last night on Case Western Reserve Univ. station
> WRUW--every third paragraph or so had to do with either Dick
> Cheney, the New World Order, CFR [Council on Foreign
> Relations], Skull and Bones, Freemasons, or Bush's daddy.
> BOTH fringes of the right and left have picked and chosen
> their bits out of the pot of conspiracy theories. It's
> actually fun (once you get past the outrage at rampant
> stupidity) to listen to these people take themselves
> seriously as they throw out names of "secret" organizations.

And of course, they like to compare the "establishment" to either Nazis or Stalinists, when it is those two ideologies that actually produced all the wacky stuff they're spouting. What started as absurd propaganda has become fact to so many people.

> It's great fun to sit and baffle at the resounding insanity
> of these people.

The weirdest of them all are the ones that obsess of the alleged disgusting sexual habits of Republican officials. Dick Cheney's name is apparently very appropriate, don't you know? But while these bits of insanity are clearly hard-left in their origin (Nobody's ever accused Al Gore or Jimmy Carter of these things, and discussion of Clinton and the Kennedys is limited to their general womanizing), there's this veneer of Satanic panic laid over it that could only come from the very fringes of Christianity.



>

 

[Tom_]

Chuck Harder for BOTH the far right and far left...

Certainly Chuck would appeal to *both* the far right and the far left, since both extremes (along with Chuck himself) agree on a variety of issues:

1) pro-alternative medicine / anti-establishment medicine

2) anti-free trade / pro-US manufacturing

3) pro-alternative energy

And Chuck appeals to the far right since he has anti-UN guests who have plans for ending terrorism that are VERY extreme, and not accepted by Democrats and those on the left.

So Chuck really isn't a "liberal" host...but many of his positions are consistent with progressive Democrats, just like many opinions of Bob Brinker.

I listen to Chuck's show for his guests on alternative energy, free trade, consumer issues, and his discussions of radio engineering. I do *NOT* agree with his political guests. I am very disturbed by the increasing ultra far right militia/anti-women/anti-Jew/anti-gay viewpoints offered on talk radio, as was discussed several pages below.

 

[JohnnyMorganWXJX]

Re: Chuck Harder for BOTH the far right and far left...

> I am very disturbed by the increasing ultra far
> right militia/anti-women/anti-Jew/anti-gay viewpoints
> offered on talk radio, as was discussed several pages below.

That was en vogue ten years ago. What are you listening to, airchecks?

I don't know of any mainstream pro-militia, anti-gay, anti-women, anti-Jew "ultra far right" host that commands any national attention other than those guys in the SW band.

 

[clichemoth]

Re: Chuck Harder for BOTH the far right and far left...

> Certainly Chuck would appeal to *both* the far right and the
> far left, since both extremes (along with Chuck himself)
> agree on a variety of issues:
>
> 1) pro-alternative medicine / anti-establishment medicine
>
> 2) anti-free trade / pro-US manufacturing

Since for the most part, the fringe doesn't support modern technological society and the products it produces, calling them "pro-US manufacturing" isn't necessarily accurate. "Pro-small US business" works, though. Or "pro-cottage industry".

>
> 3) pro-alternative energy
>
> And Chuck appeals to the far right since he has anti-UN
> guests who have plans for ending terrorism that are VERY
> extreme, and not accepted by Democrats and those on the
> left.
>
> So Chuck really isn't a "liberal" host...but many of his
> positions are consistent with progressive Democrats, just
> like many opinions of Bob Brinker.
>
> I listen to Chuck's show for his guests on alternative
> energy, free trade, consumer issues, and his discussions of
> radio engineering. I do *NOT* agree with his political
> guests. I am very disturbed by the increasing ultra far
> right militia/anti-women/anti-Jew/anti-gay viewpoints
> offered on talk radio, as was discussed several pages below.
>

Increasing? I don't think the level of hate talk is close to where it was at 10 or 15 years ago when many of these movements were at their peak, especially since mainstream liberals and more rational centrist-populists (i.e. Boortz, O'Reilly, Schultz) have cut into its market share.

 

[gumbo]

I worked with Kane briefly in the 90's; he was a conservative then. Perhaps he became a bit more comfortable being hard-line on the air, but he essentially never changed his views.

I have had similar questions. I'm not doing this full-time, but perspective PDs and helpful friends keep trying to pigeonhole me and I refuse to allow that.



> I can think of several hosts who "converted" during their
> talk radio careers. Those who were caught at it always
> claimed a "Saul on the road to Damascus" moment when their
> eyes opened and they repented of liberalism. Mike Siegel and
> Steve Kane come to mind. Usually it happens when someone
> changes markets and management is trying to make a square
> peg fit a round hole. Anyone else have any observations
> about talk hosts who enter the business preaching one party
> line, and switch to the other to keep working?
>

 

[clichemoth]

Re: Chuck Harder for BOTH the far right and far left...

> > I am very disturbed by the increasing ultra far
> > right militia/anti-women/anti-Jew/anti-gay viewpoints
> > offered on talk radio, as was discussed several pages
> below.
>
> That was en vogue ten years ago. What are you listening to,
> airchecks?
>
> I don't know of any mainstream pro-militia, anti-gay,
> anti-women, anti-Jew "ultra far right" host that commands
> any national attention other than those guys in the SW band.
>
Well, Liddy would fit here, but he's softened his tone considerably over the past 10 years, and Ian Punnett's C2C shows definitely fit. I think there are a few broadcast-band stations that still carry Harder and Gritz, too.

 

[k9ez]

Re: Chuck Harder for BOTH the far right and far left...

> > > I am very disturbed by the increasing ultra far
> > > right militia/anti-women/anti-Jew/anti-gay viewpoints
> > > offered on talk radio, as was discussed several pages
> > below.
> >
> > That was en vogue ten years ago. What are you listening
> to,
> > airchecks?
> >
> > I don't know of any mainstream pro-militia, anti-gay,
> > anti-women, anti-Jew "ultra far right" host that commands
> > any national attention other than those guys in the SW
> band.
> >
> Well, Liddy would fit here, but he's softened his tone
> considerably over the past 10 years, and Ian Punnett's C2C
> shows definitely fit. I think there are a few
> broadcast-band stations that still carry Harder and Gritz,
> too.
>

Liddy is still on? Where?

Ian Punnets show is an "ultra far right militia/anti-women/anti-Jew/anti-gay" show? Not from what I have heard.

Also the original poster said an INCREASE in these types of shows. I would suggest that there has been a DECREASE...if any at all.

 

[clichemoth]

Re: Chuck Harder for BOTH the far right and far left...

> > > > I am very disturbed by the increasing ultra far
> > > > right militia/anti-women/anti-Jew/anti-gay viewpoints
> > > > offered on talk radio, as was discussed several pages
> > > below.
> > >
> > > That was en vogue ten years ago. What are you listening
>
> > to,
> > > airchecks?
> > >
> > > I don't know of any mainstream pro-militia, anti-gay,
> > > anti-women, anti-Jew "ultra far right" host that
> commands
> > > any national attention other than those guys in the SW
> > band.
> > >
> > Well, Liddy would fit here, but he's softened his tone
> > considerably over the past 10 years, and Ian Punnett's C2C
>
> > shows definitely fit. I think there are a few
> > broadcast-band stations that still carry Harder and Gritz,
>
> > too.
> >
>
> Liddy is still on? Where?

WWTN in Nashville, for one. There's no list on his site anymore, so I doubt there are many others. Both XM and Sirius carry him, though.
>
> Ian Punnets show is an "ultra far right
> militia/anti-women/anti-Jew/anti-gay" show? Not from what I
> have heard.

He hasn't done much else besides the NWO conspiracy/militia stuff since he took over for Art. Maybe he isn't quite as rabid (or Premiere/CC just won't let him be), but he's in the ballpark.

>
> Also the original poster said an INCREASE in these types of
> shows. I would suggest that there has been a DECREASE...if
> any at all.
>

I said the same thing above. . . The whole thing peaked 10 years ago. Libtalk is the new hotness, hate talk is old and busted.

 

[JohnnyMorganWXJX]

Wackiness has no boundaries, and neither does hate talk

> > Also the original poster said an INCREASE in these types
> of
> > shows. I would suggest that there has been a
> DECREASE...if
> > any at all.
> >
>
> I said the same thing above. . . The whole thing peaked 10
> years ago. Libtalk is the new hotness, hate talk is old and
> busted.

Some lib talk is hate talk--and some is wacky talk. And some is both.

Whenever I hear Karl Rove or Dick Cheney (or Paul Wolfowitz) brought up on lib talk shows, I immediately think of the host sitting in his studio with tin foil hat on head, clutching tightly to his copy of Fahrenheit 9/11 until "they" get him. It's also pleasant when the same host starts spouting some nonsense about evangelicals being the reason behind the war, and double points if they also mention the rapture as a cause of the Iraq war.

For the record now, I'm Roman Catholic--which is a WHOLE other conspiracy theory!

 

[desertv]

> Michael Savage is now very critical of Bush's plan in Iraq
> and has also been speaking out extensively against
> outsourcing and the free trade agreements. However, recall
> that Savage is of course a registered independent.

Of course Mr. Savage/Weiner is complaining because we haven't turned the ME into a giant parking lot!

 

[gr8oldies]

Re: Wackiness has no boundaries, and neither does hate talk

We all know the Jesuits were behind the Lincoln assassination, JFK..you name it. Just ask Jack Chick (ultra-fundie, paranoid comic tract author).<P ID="signature">______________
Greetings from Ohio-where the governor wants everyone to know he's sorry.</P>

 

[doc9464]

Re: Wackiness has no boundaries, and neither does hate talk

> Some lib talk is hate talk--and some is wacky talk. And
> some is both.
>
> Whenever I hear Karl Rove or Dick Cheney (or Paul Wolfowitz)
> brought up on lib talk shows, I immediately think of the
> host sitting in his studio with tin foil hat on head,
> clutching tightly to his copy of Fahrenheit 9/11 until
> "they" get him. It's also pleasant when the same host
> starts spouting some nonsense about evangelicals being the
> reason behind the war, and double points if they also
> mention the rapture as a cause of the Iraq war.

Johnny, when you listen to RW hosts like Melanie Morgan and Sean Hannity and Ann Coulter spew words that no liberal has ever said or considered, don't you think your example applies visa-versa. The same host has the tinfoil hat, clutching to a printout of Drudge...repeating over and over "Liberals hate america" and "There is a liberal media". Its equally unpleasant to hear how much the right hates dissent and blame liberals for every issue that comes up despite their "lying eyes". Its like when Bush himself tells everyone on video "There is no connection between 9/11 and Saddam" and then Fox shows him in one of his insipid trips where he conflates his military service and the war with 9/11. Yet your host keeps saying, he's not misleading anyone.....damn my hearing and vision...must stay in Lockstep with GOP...must not disagree....
LOL
Johnny, you are pretty fair in debate but this wasn't fair at all..... I know there is some sarcasm/humore there....but im still calling you on the table a little..

>
> For the record now, I'm Roman Catholic--which is a WHOLE
> other conspiracy theory!

Ah ain't going Dere eitha!
>