I love the smell of blogosphere in the morning ...

Well, my morning at least (as a swing shifter).

You know what's funny? We observed, embraced and some even participated in the Tea Party movement, and early on, but always with the cautious concern that it could break away, go Third Party, run Third Party candidates, and in the end implode by ensuring the reelection of a left wing majority. And the exact opposite has happened. Not only were the Tea Party participants savvy enough to recognize they need operate within the primary cycle to be successful, but when they realized that success the entrenched "status quo" Republicans were the ones that went Third Party, risking the election of a Democrat. Florida and Alaska are prime examples. And in the process the actions of these "say and do anything" former Republicans highlighted perfectly why the Tea Party movement was successful - they actively gave voice to those whom oppose the collectivist extremism of the Democrats and the "accessory after the crime" GOP blue bloods.

One thing's for certain. Whether we take it or not, come January, the United States Senate will no longer be a docile millionaires club. Consider this line up - Senator Rand Paul (KY), Senator Marco Rubio (FL), Senator Joe Miller (AK) & Senator Sharron Angle (NV). And I am particularly impressed with Rand Paul & Rubio. These are young, intelligent, articulate conservatives arguing the fundamentals of how smaller government directly benefits YOU. And these, all 4, routinely invoke the question of Constitutionality when discussing how to deal with the nation's woes and fix (or eliminate) existing programs and departments. For this they are labeled "extremists" by the Left. For this they will be referred to as "Senator-Elect" in 24 short hours.

Hmmmm ...

There are no small topics ... only small radio hosts, ay Titus? I've thought on this quite a bit.

I feel Titus' pain in searching for a stimulating, meaningful discussion or commentary on talk radio. Now as a "Reagan-ite" as my bio above and to the right reads, you might be surprised at any frustration coming from me. After all, Conservative Talk dominates the public radio (& satellite) dial in terms of ratings, effect, fame etc. My team owns this particular playing field. However, we are more in agreement then you might expect there Ti' ol' boy. Beck is by far my favorite host. Until recently he spent hours delving into the history of the progressive movement in America, and even the world. He read profusely, and it showed. He took his time to do homework on whom the president surrounded himself with (almost single handily getting Van Jones dismissed from the White House staff), and used this information to paint a broader picture of how antithetical collectivist ideology is to the founding of this nation. While Rush concentrated on the day to day political IV drip of America (and he's fairly good at that), Beck had a pig picture program that used the day to day machinations of the political class as a window into a larger historical discussion on the direction of this nation. Combined with the genuinely comedic banter (often self deprecating) between he, Stu and Pat and presto, there's the best show on the air. But I must concede, he has taken that "big picture" a bit too big when he attempts to invoke 5,000 year old Torah lessons to use as an active commentary on the Obama administration and the nation as a whole. Even I turned to Rush after a bit of this. Now, bare in mind, I say "too big", meaning it doesn't suit MY particular taste, at least not days outside of a huge mid term election. However, his show has been led by Beck's particular emotions, feelings and interests at any given multi week cycle, and if religion is where its taking him, then fine. His "gut" hasn't been wrong yet. But I hope he bares in mind that there are religious oriented shows on the air already, and they're not 1/1,000th as successful as his has been to date. And while I think his religious bent is genuine, and I would tell no man to divert from any peaceful religious road his heart is taking him down, I too hope to see a return to more political, ideological and historical themes soon. And to be quite honest, as a long time listener of Beck's I feel confident in saying that perhaps no one wishes this more then "Stu."

(Just as an aside, I really do feel bad suggesting that any man "back off" his expressing the need for America - or the individual - to turn to God. Is this just selfish of me? For me to demand that Beck get back to what he was doing and abandon his religious direction all so I can be "entertained" during my morning routine? What does that say about me? I've gotta think about that one ... oy)

But back to the larger picture of my radio dial frustration ... perhaps its precisely because I've been listening, thinking, pondering, reflecting, and writing on these issues (and this description captures all of the Bund founders) for quite a long time that I find some of these shows lacking in substance. Perhaps it's because we simply have moved past the trite arguments some time ago (by the way, this is an earnest attempt to deduce the problem, not self/Bund adulation). And there is no bigger disappointment in this realm then Hannitty. YEARS ago, while walking towards the escalator at the Grand on way back from break (which if he was walking with me means Titus was late), I noted to him my feelings that Sean was "in over his head", particularly in his attempts at monologue. His show went national on September 8th, 2001. The popularity of talk radio went through the roof soon after the attacks, for obvious reasons. However, he did do one thing very well on his radio program, and I routinely tuned in for it. He had HUGE guests, with half hour or hour long discussions rather then the 3 minute, TV commercial time out, sound bites. BB Netenyahu, Tony Blair, Vice President Cheney, the list went on. And he was a decent interviewer. Given he was playing Letterman to Rush's Carson, it was the perfect compliment (Rush almost never has guests). But he stopped that. And about the time "Hannitty & Colmes" went to just "Hannitty" (Colmes left on his own accord, Sean didn't get rid of him), the Sean Hannitty Radio show was blanketed with platitudes and trite observations. It was like watching a straight-A student get busted for shop lifting. Perhaps he's simply stretched too thin nowadays, but at this point I'd sooner watch film of Bambi's parents getting shot, on a loop, then listen to his radio program. And I have no doubt our ideologies are in sync to the 90th+ percentile, making this particularly frustrating. There's a local version here, "The Heide Harris Show." She's an ardent conservative, but Dear Lord, saccharin, uncouth. Her very voice makes me want to flee shoeless through a field of crowded bear traps. Atheists must be thrilled at her success, yet more evidence of their theory. Screaming worn out stereotypes at the microphone is no way to garner my listenership. And while I don't particularly seek out information on the Japanese stock index nor bills before the Turkish Parliament, I find myself tuning to the BBC, if for nothing else, to hear people complete a thought in whole sentences at a reasonable decibel. At least when I hear Savage's hard rock theme song float over my radio airwaves I have no idea what he's about to say or where the show will go. And if he could just stop being so bitter about the Beck/Hannitty/Limbaugh trio of success, he'd probably get better ratings.

The bottom line is Limbaugh will continue to dominate the radio dial. Hannitty will continue to be popular with political newbies and those listeners inclined to enjoy "liberal bashing" but not inclined to put much thought into why (which is enough to keep Hannitty successful). And Beck will either overtake Hannitty, and remain the dominant commentating, publishing force that he has become, or his comet will have risen so fast and so high that he will burn himself out and end up on the political version of "Behind the Music." I desperately hope it's not the latter, because like Titus I see him as having the most potential of being "the" show for people of the Bund's persuasion.

But with the exception of Beck's potential, it may be that we must accept a fundamental truth. With thousands of posts in our rear view mirror; with hundreds of books read between us; with untold hours of argument and thoughtful curiosity under our belts, we may have evolved past any radio show being able to hold our attention for a solid 3 hours. That may seem terribly elitist, and perhaps it is, and I am certainly not attempting to say we've learned all there is to know (hardly), all I'm trying to say is while we have evolved, radio programming hasn't. It isn't necessarily that they've gotten worse (except for Sean), but more that our tastes have changed based on our experiences. We've already dissected, discussed, and more importantly settled the topics up for discussion on 90% of any given host's show. So I fear that we are destined to keep jumping around the dial, hopping from show to show hoping we will be lucky enough to tune in during that ever elusive 10% ...

that is, until it gets down to 5%.