Dafydd,

Talk radio is best early in the AM ;). Where I am Rush is on during lunch hours (11A to 2P). I don't get Hewitt or Medved, so I can't say much about them. Sean Hannity, when I have been able to listen, has had every candidate on multiple times, and whenever possible. I believe Sean is anti-Paul, and definitely anti-Clinton; but I don't think he's nakedly partisan. Rush studiously avoids any political partisanship other than promoting conservatism as he defines it.

Sean tends to lean pro-Giuli... pro-Guigli... pro Mayor of New York. Rush is an anti-Huckabee, and if anything is Pro-Fred.

On the other hand, the only candidate that Rush has ever supported and campaigned for (as far as I know) is Talk Radio Host John Carlson here in Seattle. Rush came up here to attend/lead a rally for John's bid for Gubernatorial Greatness. John got CREAMED at the polls. Ah well.

Frankly I think it is a sign that the age of talk radio is passing.
I actively avoid listening to Hugh and Medved at this time. And I like Hugh personally a lot. We are the same age, have had similar faith experiences, and I think his interviews are often some of the best in radio. But his schilling for Romney really turns me off.
Medved is a bit predictable, but Hugh is flat out annoying.
I bet I am not alone in this assessment.

Mr. Michael:

pro-Giuli... pro-Guigli... pro Mayor of New York.

It's actually easy to remember how to spell Giuliani...

"Guliani" would be a hard-G sound: GOO-lee-ah-nee. But if you put an "i" after the "G", it softens it but doesn't change the vowel sound. Thus it becomes: JOO-lee-ah-nee.

"Go" is generally hard; hence it's "John Gotti," with the G pronounced as in godfather. But Pinocchio's maker, Geppetto, is pronounced jep-PET-to; that's because "Ge" produces a soft G.

So since you know that Giuliani's name starts with a G but is soft, that means it must start either with Gi or Ge. I suppose someone might be named Geuliani; but since it's easy to remember there's an "i" in there at the beginning -- both your ersatz false starts included an "i" -- it should be easy to sound out: GIU-li-a-ni.

Dafydd

"hunter" says: "Hugh is flat out annoying.
I bet I am not alone in this assessment." He's not alone!

I used to really respect Hugh for his depth of analysis and level-headedness. That seems to have all vanished since his affair with Romney began. He came out for Romney real early (and wrote a book about him) which I found a bit hasty. But more significantly he seems to have no consideration for Romney's weaknesses or the strengths of any other candidate.

When I listen to talk radio or read the serious blogs, like Big Lizards and Powerline (Not Townhall. It's become a wasteland of vitriol) I want serious analysis. Hugh seems to have lost that on this issue.

WGPu,
What is possibly most annoying is that on the topic of Romney he does not dialog. He deposes. He asks leading questions, he talks over, he gives false choices, and he does it like someone who teaches, not an experienced litigator or salesman. Conservative talk radio is like any other medium. It is run by people who have the same limitations as anyone else. My bet is that this segment, like TV broadcast news already has, will plateau out. Just how many conservative talk shows of about the same format making the same general takes on the the same current events can the market stand for how long?
So far the answer has been 'a lot and for a long time'. That position is not stable.
My bet is we will see a big shakeout. Clear channel is already experimenting in the Houston market with alternatives. It is not a pleasant experience.

I think Huck started out running for Vice President, and then found himself winning the Iowa caucases. Shocking even him, I'll bet.

If one of the two northeastern "social moderates" wins the nomination Hucklebuck would make an ideal running mate, insofar as he could run around the country reassuring the doubters on the bona fides of the top of the ticket's newly professed beliefs in right to life. He also would make an appealing human side to the stiff and sometimes uncharismatic Romney. He also might bring some electoral strength in the south, a perhaps otherwise tough pull for a northeasterner.

One scehario then is that Giuliani (did I get it right?) will win in Florida, McCain will fade into the obscurity he deserves, and Romney and you-know-who will slug it out, with Hucky as the Designated Veep candidate.

I subscribe to Rush's podcast which makes it pretty easy to listen on my own time with no commercials. The cost is not more than a subscription to the Weekly Standard or National Review and I think I get at least as much, probably more, out of it. Anyone can get Medved or Hewitt podcasts for free at Townhall. It's good that they are free because they wouldn't be worth paying for, in my view.

Rush is the only talk show host who is consistently interesting and informative without guests. Almost to a fault the rest of talk radio is dependent on having interesting guests.

If you are a conservative, Rush's show in the last two days were gems. He is the clearest defender and explainer of conservative principles on the scene. Yesterday's interview with Newt was priceless. Newt has become confused and has been saying weird things since he resigned in 1998, in my view. Rush didn't pull too many punches with Newt and politely exposed his fuzzy thinking. Newt was clearly uncomfortable and fumbled around trying to get his foot out of his mouth.

These are things that need to be done. Waffling conservatives need to be called on their pandering to liberals and I don't see anyone but Rush doing it, certainly not Hewitt, Medved, Ingraham, Bennett (I still like Bill Bennett but he's a milktoast conservative) or Hannity.

Mark Levin is pretty good and his podcasts are free.

So since you know that Giuliani's name starts with a G but is soft, that means it must start either with Gi or Ge. I suppose someone might be named Geuliani; but since it's easy to remember there's an "i" in there at the beginning -- both your ersatz false starts included an "i" -- it should be easy to sound out: GIU-li-a-ni.

Thanks, Dafydd... as a dyslexic, it's just a lot of vowels in spots I usually don't see 'em. Truth be told, if I really cared how to spell his name I could have cut/pasted from the article. It may have been a juvenile attempt at humor, but it was supposed to be a minor smile inducer. But I'll try to remember... for you.

Mr. Michael:

It may have been a juvenile attempt at humor...

I got the joke; I even noted it in my comment. It's just that I used to have a problem spelling Giuliani's name myself, until I really sat down and thought about it (I got tired of looking it up, copying, and pasting!). So I figured, as a public service, I would relate what I finally figured out.

Dafydd

Thanks for hissing in, . Now you can slither in with a comment, o wise. (sign out)

(If you haven't hissed a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Hang loose; don't shed your skin!)

URL:
Remember me unto the end of days? AyeNay!

Comments: (Sssselect text and bite a button to apply HTML tagssssss...)