"Conservative" radio

[Bikewer]

So, I'm pretty much virginal when it comes to the radical right-wing pundits that (we are told) dominate much of "talk" radio.
I'm an NPR kind of guy, the land of modulated voices and reasoned argument.... (well, mostly...)

However, tonight I took over the squad car and the guy from the evening watch had left the radio on one of the local Fox-affiliate stations. I caught Mark Levin in full rant mode, literally screaming that "we must save this country!" by voting out all those nasty liberals who are intent on doing as much damage as possible before the election....
Wow....
I couldn't stomach more than a few minutes of this drivel, but it's kind of frightening to think that my colleagues are soaking this stuff up....
Well, I am an odd duck; a liberal cop...

So just how much influence do these people have? Is it really just entertainment, as guys like Rush often maintain, or are folks hanging on every word?

[Ziggurat]

So just how much influence do these people have?

As with most "influential" people, that probably depends a lot on what they try to do.

Is it really just entertainment, as guys like Rush often maintain, or are folks hanging on every word?

I'm sure a few people are, just like a few people take Olbermann's rants seriously. I don't think most listeners are that excitable, though.

[Lurker]

Bikewer:

I think there is a sizeable group of people that take the conservative hosts seriously. they have pretty large audiences. If I check up on conservative forums you will see key talking points that a conservative radio host show up a little while after he makes them. So clearly there are people taking them seriously.

Levin......I can't stand the sound of him either. Just the tone of his voice during his rants makes me cringe. And the incessant name calling is puerile IMO.

[Brainster]

Levin strikes me like the cranky old man who yells at the kids to get off his lawn.

Influence? I would point out that almost all the conservative talkers were aligned solidly against McCain in 2008, and he waltzed to the nomination. It's easy to think you're leading the parade when it happens to be going in the same direction you are.

[Arrow]

I'll listen to the radio pod casts of Laura Ingraham. Her recordings can be heard here:

http://www.lauraingraham.com/mediabits

For me, I listen not only because of the information presented, but also because of the humor and different guests that can be on the show. If it wasn't for the entertainment, I probably would not listen.

I think of the talk radio hosts mentioned most concerning influence, it is Glen Beck. I did not get around to reading the article in Forbes on Beck last month but apparently he is a "money making machine" by the magazines account.

John Stossel recently wrote about how when Beck recommended a book it became a best seller over night on Amazon. I've heard other books have had similar results.

http://stossel.blogs.foxbusiness.com/2010/06/09/the-power-of-glenn-beck/

[Lurker]

Levin strikes me like the cranky old man who yells at the kids to get off his lawn.

Influence? I would point out that almost all the conservative talkers were aligned solidly against McCain in 2008, and he waltzed to the nomination. It's easy to think you're leading the parade when it happens to be going in the same direction you are.

Hmm, Beck called for a rally in Washington DC and it attracted 1.7 million people. 1.7 MILLION!! :) That is influence, my friend. Martin Luther King only had a paltry 200,000 at his speech and you would consider him influential, no? Beck is clearly 8.5 times as influential as King. You can't argue facts, man.

[Accidental Martyr]

However, tonight I took over the squad car and the guy from the evening watch had left the radio on one of the local Fox-affiliate stations. I caught Mark Levin in full rant mode, literally screaming that "we must save this country!" by voting out all those nasty liberals who are intent on doing as much damage as possible before the election....
Wow....
I couldn't stomach more than a few minutes of this drivel, but it's kind of frightening to think that my colleagues are soaking this stuff up....
Well, I am an odd duck; a liberal cop...

So just how much influence do these people have? Is it really just entertainment, as guys like Rush often maintain, or are folks hanging on every word?
Do you think that your fellow officers let their agreement with the right-wing radio nuts influence how they go about their job?

[Crossbow]

So, I'm pretty much virginal when it comes to the radical right-wing pundits that (we are told) dominate much of "talk" radio.
I'm an NPR kind of guy, the land of modulated voices and reasoned argument.... (well, mostly...)

However, tonight I took over the squad car and the guy from the evening watch had left the radio on one of the local Fox-affiliate stations. I caught Mark Levin in full rant mode, literally screaming that "we must save this country!" by voting out all those nasty liberals who are intent on doing as much damage as possible before the election....
Wow....
I couldn't stomach more than a few minutes of this drivel, but it's kind of frightening to think that my colleagues are soaking this stuff up....
Well, I am an odd duck; a liberal cop...

So just how much influence do these people have? Is it really just entertainment, as guys like Rush often maintain, or are folks hanging on every word?

I would say that most of these people are 'preaching to the choir'.

However, more and more Republicans are becoming part of this choir so one does need to take them seriously. For example, do you recall a few years ago when Bush II was running for re-election and so many people thought that he would loose since the wars were going so badly?

As a result, Rove re-tooled the Bush Campaign so that it became more of an issue about gay marriage which really brought out many of the fruitcakes who would almost certiantly vote for Bush over Kerry; and thereby, Bush was able to win.

Therefore, while it is easy to dismiss them as just another group of mindless wingnuts, however they compose a sizeable block of the electorate, therefore one does have to take them seriously.

[Ziggurat]

Hmm, Beck called for a rally in Washington DC and it attracted 1.7 million people. 1.7 MILLION!! :) That is influence, my friend.

Quite true. But as I stated before, it depends on what they try to do. Calling for a rally to protest out-of-control government spending will probably attract lots of people. Calling for a rally to demand overturning the civil rights act would attract far fewer people. More extreme rhetoric might be good for ratings, but I'd argue that pundits of all sorts are more influential when they push relatively mainstream objectives.

[Bikewer]

Accidental Martyr: In our particular case, a "campus" law enforcement agency, I'd say no. After a couple of years in this particular sub-set of law enforcement, you need to cultivate at least a more liberal demeanor or you'll be out....
The university is decidedly "diverse". Of course, they do like the bad guys arrested....

But in general, I think it's fair to describe most of my colleagues as "leaning to the right". (as in, just about to fall over...)

[MikeMangum]

So, I'm pretty much virginal when it comes to the radical right-wing pundits that (we are told) dominate much of "talk" radio.
I'm an NPR kind of guy, the land of modulated voices and reasoned argument.... (well, mostly...)

However, tonight I took over the squad car and the guy from the evening watch had left the radio on one of the local Fox-affiliate stations. I caught Mark Levin in full rant mode, literally screaming that "we must save this country!" by voting out all those nasty liberals who are intent on doing as much damage as possible before the election....

Levin is rather...excitable, isn't he? ;)

His book Men in Black (http://www.amazon.com/Men-Black-Supreme-Destroying-America/dp/1596980095/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1276290897&sr=8-4) was actually rather well done (as supposedly his latest book), being a serious discussion regarding the role of judges in politics, but I can't stand his radio program either. I think the worst conservative radio host I ever heard was Mark(?) Savage. The guy was a complete xenophobe and all around idiot, and yes, he yelled at least as much as Levin. There are conservatives that have actual discussions, as opposed to partisan cheerleading (like Sean "Republicans can do no wrong" Hannity), such as Michael Medved. Frankly, Rush isn't as bad as he's made out to be, although I personally find his pompous shtick to be a bit much.

[DJW]

Levin is rather...excitable, isn't he? ;)

His book Men in Black (http://www.amazon.com/Men-Black-Supreme-Destroying-America/dp/1596980095/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1276290897&sr=8-4) was actually rather well done (as supposedly his latest book), being a serious discussion regarding the role of judges in politics, but I can't stand his radio program either. I think the worst conservative radio host I ever heard was Mark(?) Savage. The guy was a complete xenophobe and all around idiot, and yes, he yelled at least as much as Levin. There are conservatives that have actual discussions, as opposed to partisan cheerleading (like Sean "Republicans can do no wrong" Hannity), such as Michael Medved. Frankly, Rush isn't as bad as he's made out to be, although I personally find his pompous shtick to be a bit much.

Levin models his show on Savage's, but I wouldn't call them idiots. They're both quite accomplished academically and otherwise. They're making money and writing books. I'm sure they're perfectly happy doing what they do. Their schtick is often hard to take. I generally steer clear.

I think Beck is trying to be the next Rush. We'll see. I have a hard time paying attention to either of them.

[leftysergeant]

Hmm, Beck called for a rally in Washington DC and it attracted 1.7 million people. 1.7 MILLION!! :) That is influence, my friend. Martin Luther King only had a paltry 200,000 at his speech and you would consider him influential, no? Beck is clearly 8.5 times as influential as King. You can't argue facts, man.

Well, the problem is that his attendance figures were a bit off.


they didn't fill half the space that Obama's inauguration did.

Faux News was the primary source of the attendance numbers.:rolleye

(They have a good reason to lie about that.)

[daredelvis]

I think these guys have enormous influence with the 20 percenter's. You know, that 20% that think Iraq was responsible for 9/11, that we found WMD in Iraq, that have a favorable opinion of Cheney, that think Obama was born in Kenya / is a Muslim, and that listen to anything Sarah Palin has to say.

To a lesser extent, they have influence on people who use the term Obamacare and some people who can't figure out that Lurker was being sarcastic with is 1.7 million number.

Daredelvis

[ponderingturtle]

Quite true. But as I stated before, it depends on what they try to do. Calling for a rally to protest out-of-control government spending will probably attract lots of people. Calling for a rally to demand overturning the civil rights act would attract far fewer people. More extreme rhetoric might be good for ratings, but I'd argue that pundits of all sorts are more influential when they push relatively mainstream objectives.

As long as it is vague and oppositional with no real goals. Now if it was cuts in mind like say medicare they would have a lot harder problem getting people out against such rampant socialism.

[ponderingturtle]

Accidental Martyr: In our particular case, a "campus" law enforcement agency, I'd say no. After a couple of years in this particular sub-set of law enforcement, you need to cultivate at least a more liberal demeanor or you'll be out....
The university is decidedly "diverse". Of course, they do like the bad guys arrested....


Like the ACLU guy planning to pull all the cross shaped headstones out of military cemeteries.

[Hlafordlaes]

I think these guys have enormous influence with the 20 percenter's. You know, that 20% that think Iraq was responsible for 9/11, that we found WMD in Iraq, that have a favorable opinion of Cheney, that think Obama was born in Kenya / is a Muslim, and that listen to anything Sarah Palin has to say.

To a lesser extent, they have influence on people who use the term Obamacare and some people who can't figure out that Lurker was being sarcastic with is 1.7 million number.

Daredelvis

Unfortunately, as folks get older and more susceptible to FUD, more tune in to Faux News. What's worse, older people tend to vote more, skewing elections results to the right of general opinion. (I think your 20% rule does hold for people under 50.)

[rustypouch]

Wait a minute... there are people who take Glenn Beck seriously?

I thought he was just satire, like an extreme right version of The Onion.

[thaiboxerken]

Unfortunately, no. There are plenty of people who are fans of Beck and almost worship him. And no, they don't realize that he's just a rodeo clown.

[DavidJames]

Wait a minute... there are people who take Glenn Beck seriously?Yes, seriously. I know more then one. One guy in particular goes out of his way to try and tell me how unbiased and neutral Beck is. The guy, otherwise is perfectly normal. :)

[kevinquinnyo]

There's a guy on AM radio around here called Neal Bortz. I assume he's the equivalent of the rest of those pundits, like Hannity.

The republican radio guys are wrong probably 95% of the time, and the extreme progressive/liberals are wrong probably 99% of the time.

But at least liberals are less annoying. It's a tough call.

[Accidental Martyr]

There's a guy on AM radio around here called Neal Bortz. I assume he's the equivalent of the rest of those pundits, like Hannity.

The republican radio guys are wrong probably 95% of the time, and the extreme progressive/liberals are wrong probably 99% of the time.

But at least liberals are less annoying. It's a tough call.

So who do you think is right? (By "right" I mean "correct"?) ;)

[kevinquinnyo]

So who do you think is right? (By "right" I mean "correct"?) ;)

I believe in Alvin Greene.

I believe he is the best candidate in south carolina for the senate and i believe he stands for jobs, education, and justice.

And the unification of north and south korea


If you want to ask me anything else, my lawyer is handling all of it

[Arrow]

I know Glen Beck has influence, but was surprised to see the Washington Post write that Beck's soon to be released fiction novel, The Overton Window, could influence the next Tim McVeigh. That seems a bit too much.

http://dougpowers.com/

[Lurker]

I know Glen Beck has influence, but was surprised to see the Washington Post write that Beck's soon to be released fiction novel, The Overton Window, could influence the next Tim McVeigh. That seems a bit too much.

http://dougpowers.com/

OK, I will confess to not having listened to Beck for quite a while now. But I would hazard a guess that he is talking about his book regularly (years later O'Reilly still regularly mentions his book - selfpromotion, ya gotta love it!) and within his discussions of the book I imagine he connects the occurances in the book with things that are happening right now. Beck will try and play that the book is a prognostication of what could and is happening in America right now unless we are vigilant.

Of course, all of this is guesswork on my part but I do know Beck and this seems like his MO.

[thaiboxerken]

Scott Hennen is on MSNBC right now defending Rep Barton's apology to BP. Hennen looks like the Mad Magazine guy and says things that are just as silly.

[Achán hiNidráne]

I know Glen Beck has influence, but was surprised to see the Washington Post write that Beck's soon to be released fiction novel, The Overton Window, could influence the next Tim McVeigh. That seems a bit too much.

http://dougpowers.com/

You mean, the ghostwritten novel that was a copy of a previous self-published novel penned by the same ghostwriter?
(http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-kelly/glenn-becks-new-novel-abo_b_613861.html)

[dc1971]

So, I'm pretty much virginal when it comes to the radical right-wing pundits that (we are told) dominate much of "talk" radio.
I'm an NPR kind of guy, the land of modulated voices and reasoned argument.... (well, mostly...)

However, tonight I took over the squad car and the guy from the evening watch had left the radio on one of the local Fox-affiliate stations. I caught Mark Levin in full rant mode, literally screaming that "we must save this country!" by voting out all those nasty liberals who are intent on doing as much damage as possible before the election....
Wow....
I couldn't stomach more than a few minutes of this drivel, but it's kind of frightening to think that my colleagues are soaking this stuff up....
Well, I am an odd duck; a liberal cop...

So just how much influence do these people have? Is it really just entertainment, as guys like Rush often maintain, or are folks hanging on every word?

Hello sir,

First off, congratulations on being able to stomach Mark Levin for the few minutes that you did! The man, like most conservative talkies, is insane! I must point out that, like you, I too am an odd duck be it that I am one who favorites the likes of Rachel Maddow, NPR and longs for the return of Air America but I will tune into the FOX affiliate radio station from time to time just to "see what they will say next".

Yes, it does somewhat scare me that there are people who listen to this type of thing and happen to take it seriously. And yes, I do have friends and colleagues (like you) who lap this stuff up and make it a serious centerpiece for discussion.

Mark Levin is not the only guy screaming at you when you tune into FOX radio, you also have Michael Savage, Sean Hannity, Bill OReilly (who does the same thing on his TV show), and the king of Raising Tone - Rush Limbaugh!

In answer to your question, my own observation would dictate that YES these are people that have quite an influence on the American public. In fact, FOX News is part of the reason for the rise of the Tea Party movement in America.

Chris Matthews had an interesting expose on 'The Rise of the New Right' this past Wednesday. Although Chris Matthews is not one of my favorite news guys, I did find this program interesting, you can view the whole program online...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036697/vp/37742996#37742996

DC

[kevinquinnyo]

Hello sir,

First off, congratulations on being able to stomach Mark Levin for the few minutes that you did! The man, like most conservative talkies, is insane! I must point out that, like you, I too am an odd duck be it that I am one who favorites the likes of Rachel Maddow, NPR and longs for the return of Air America but I will tune into the FOX affiliate radio station from time to time just to "see what they will say next".

Yes, it does somewhat scare me that there are people who listen to this type of thing and happen to take it seriously. And yes, I do have friends and colleagues (like you) who lap this stuff up and make it a serious centerpiece for discussion.

Mark Levin is not the only guy screaming at you when you tune into FOX radio, you also have Michael Savage, Sean Hannity, Bill OReilly (who does the same thing on his TV show), and the king of Raising Tone - Rush Limbaugh!

In answer to your question, my own observation would dictate that YES these are people that have quite an influence on the American public. In fact, FOX News is part of the reason for the rise of the Tea Party movement in America.

Chris Matthews had an interesting expose on 'The Rise of the New Right' this past Wednesday. Although Chris Matthews is not one of my favorite news guys, I did find this program interesting, you can view the whole program online...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036697/vp/37742996#37742996

DC

The more scary thing is that what they say [those types of right wing pundits] isn't always wrong. Often I agree with them.

What's scariest to me, is that they say very rational things, and then follow it with completely insane ramblings that I can't imagine anyone agreeing with.

The reason that's more scary is because both devout right wing followers, and devout left wing conservative radio haters end up getting stupider by listening.

[dc1971]

The more scary thing is that what they say [those types of right wing pundits] isn't always wrong. Often I agree with them.

What's scariest to me, is that they say very rational things, and then follow it with completely insane ramblings that I can't imagine anyone agreeing with.

The reason that's more scary is because both devout right wing followers, and devout left wing conservative radio haters end up getting stupider by listening.

Can you break down what you mean by right wing followers and left wing haters for me?

[Accidental Martyr]

The more scary thing is that what they say [those types of right wing pundits] isn't always wrong. Often I agree with them.

What's scariest to me, is that they say very rational things, and then follow it with completely insane ramblings that I can't imagine anyone agreeing with.

The reason that's more scary is because both devout right wing followers, and devout left wing conservative radio haters end up getting stupider by listening.
Which parts are rational and which parts are insane?

[quadraginta]

Yes, seriously. I know more then one. One guy in particular goes out of his way to try and tell me how unbiased and neutral Beck is. The guy, otherwise is perfectly normal. :)


The large number of intellectual and educational failures needed to sustain such an opinion make for a sad commentary on the meaning of "otherwise perfectly normal".

True, I guess. But still sad.

[corplinx]

Beck probably has the most influence over his audience of any of the right wing radio types. The reason is (ironically), he evolves. I remember when his show first debuted in the Memphis market way, way, way, way, back. He was some sort of right leaning independent with some avante garde presentation that I assumed was supposed to make him hipper to a young audience versus people like Limbaugh.

A few weeks ago at the gym, I noticed beck was on FoxNews. They have 14 large plasmas on the wall and FoxNews, CNBC, MSNBC are usually on the middle 3. Beck's show was on black patriots from early american history. There was his white bread studio audience, and very few of them could identify these people. Beck had just discovered them himself from his own reading.

Beck, for better or worse, represents to right leaning audiences evolution. Beck at some point reached the epiphany that mere partisan right wing traditionalism had no moral underpinnings. He met people like Judge Napolitano and others while working at Fox. They began showing Beck their much more consistent liberty based values which never require apologizing for George Bush.

Beck represents to some in his audience, their same journey into a somewhat post-partisan view of politics. Not to say, they're going to vote for democrats. However, they no longer see the republican party as an analog for their values.

And as Beck reads more, like a child discovering something new for the first time, he shares it with his audience. They grow with him. "Holy crap, do you realize what the constitution actually says?!?!" It is funny to some people. However, a great many people have no idea how to relate the actually framework of the country to today.

The original "conservative" movement of Buckley and Goldwater was about opposing Statism. The Bush era conservative movement was about.... iduno... opposing gay marriage. As Beck moves more towards the views of his libertarian influences like Napolitano, he slowly moves more towards those older views that have a real foundation unlike the Bush-Palin conservatism. His audience makes the journey with him to some degree. They are used to hearing pundits yell at each other on TV, or superficial media coverage. If they tune into Glenn Beck, they might see a one hour special on forgotten black patriots, the Road to Serfdom, the writings of Thomas Jefferson, a study of the results of Mao and Che, or other things.

They actually learn something. People who tune into Hannity or Limbaugh don't learn anything new for the most part unless it is related to current events. They mostly bolster their own prejudices. Beck is more influential since in my opinion his audience learns from him. Both from the topics he picks to cover, and from his own journey out of Jingoism and Religious traditionalism into more proto-libertarian views.

The problem mister Beck will have, is that once he decides who he is, will he have enough credibility left when he gets there to expand his audience. And he bumbles along discovering the right things for sometimes the wrong reasons, he makes mistakes. You can find plenty of them just reading left wing watchdog type sites.

[MaGZ]

So, I'm pretty much virginal when it comes to the radical right-wing pundits that (we are told) dominate much of "talk" radio.
I'm an NPR kind of guy, the land of modulated voices and reasoned argument.... (well, mostly...)

However, tonight I took over the squad car and the guy from the evening watch had left the radio on one of the local Fox-affiliate stations. I caught Mark Levin in full rant mode, literally screaming that "we must save this country!" by voting out all those nasty liberals who are intent on doing as much damage as possible before the election....
Wow....
I couldn't stomach more than a few minutes of this drivel, but it's kind of frightening to think that my colleagues are soaking this stuff up....
Well, I am an odd duck; a liberal cop...

So just how much influence do these people have? Is it really just entertainment, as guys like Rush often maintain, or are folks hanging on every word?

Mark Levin and Michael Savage are Zionist warmongers who are pushing the Israeli agenda of attacking Iran. They are conservatives today because their tribe has captured the USA.

[MaGZ]

Do you think that your fellow officers let their agreement with the right-wing radio nuts influence how they go about their job?

Well of course, just look at the Henry Gates episode.

[MaGZ]

Hello sir,

First off, congratulations on being able to stomach Mark Levin for the few minutes that you did! The man, like most conservative talkies, is insane! I must point out that, like you, I too am an odd duck be it that I am one who favorites the likes of Rachel Maddow, NPR and longs for the return of Air America but I will tune into the FOX affiliate radio station from time to time just to "see what they will say next".

Yes, it does somewhat scare me that there are people who listen to this type of thing and happen to take it seriously. And yes, I do have friends and colleagues (like you) who lap this stuff up and make it a serious centerpiece for discussion.

Mark Levin is not the only guy screaming at you when you tune into FOX radio, you also have Michael Savage, Sean Hannity, Bill OReilly (who does the same thing on his TV show), and the king of Raising Tone - Rush Limbaugh!

In answer to your question, my own observation would dictate that YES these are people that have quite an influence on the American public. In fact, FOX News is part of the reason for the rise of the Tea Party movement in America.

Chris Matthews had an interesting expose on 'The Rise of the New Right' this past Wednesday. Although Chris Matthews is not one of my favorite news guys, I did find this program interesting, you can view the whole program online...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036697/vp/37742996#37742996

DC

I saw the Chris Matthews piece. He had a Jew throw in the insinuation that the New Right is full of anti-Semites like the good ole days of Father Coughlin.

[Gaetan]

The being the most smart can come the most stupid if he let right wing republican propaganda from radio stations comes in his head. The real values are: foregiveness, sharing, to help neighbor and so on. Don't let these peoples from medias as Fox news put in your head: hate, vengeance, wrong and so on. The goal of the businesmen who own these medias, bankers and finance is that you vote republican to have tax credits.

Gaetan

[Rikeln]

I think they're pretty influential because they get great ratings. People like Hannity, O'Reilly and Rush are all douchebags imo. I like Michael Savage sometimes though.

[Polaris]

I think they're pretty influential because they get great ratings. People like Hannity, O'Reilly and Rush are all douchebags imo. I like Michael Savage sometimes though.

And yet for all their much-touted "influence" (I recall hearing about it quite a bit in the 1990s), Bill Clinton got elected twice and Obama got elected once (so far) during their heyday.

[kevinquinnyo]

The being the most smart can come the most stupid if he let right wing republican propaganda from radio stations comes in his head. The real values are: foregiveness, sharing, to help neighbor and so on. Don't let these peoples from medias as Fox news put in your head: hate, vengeance, wrong and so on. The goal of the businesmen who own these medias, bankers and finance is that you vote republican to have tax credits.

Gaetan

I agree with those values. I think most people do. But also don't equate "helping your neighbor, forgiveness, and sharing on a micro-level, with support of welfare state type policies.

Those two concepts are not mutually inclusive.

I can donate money to the food bank, or do charity work on Christmas Eve, and at the same time not support any number of federal welfare programs that are said to do something similar.

I guess it sounds like you're assuming conservatives are selfish and uncaring people, and are fed this information from the selfish, uncaring Rupert Murdochs of the world. Do I have that right, or am I misrepresenting what you said?

[Dr. Keith]

However, tonight I took over the squad car and the guy from the evening watch had left the radio on one of the local Fox-affiliate stations. I caught Mark Levin in full rant mode, literally screaming that "we must save this country!" by voting out all those nasty liberals who are intent on doing as much damage as possible before the election....
Wow....
I couldn't stomach more than a few minutes of this drivel,

As a doctor* I would suggest four weeks of The Daily Show. That Stewart fellow is a right proper healing miracle.


*Juris doctorate