The Decline of Talk Radio (An exploration that many people might believe is redundant)

This evening I drove home and dialed around on the radio. A year ago I was a pretty regular listener of KFBK but on the 7-10 segment they put on a guy who has a large opinion of himself, his name is Mark Williams. But Williams is one of those guys who gives talk radio a bad name. Some might argue that is a redundant phrase, but when I have had a long day I enjoy seeing what somebody else has to say. In the mornings I listen to a mix that includes Laura Ingram (she is also a bit full of herself but also has some fun bits) and Air America - I wonder how long the pathetic Al Franken and his band of buddies will survive - it certainly is not something done for entertainment.

Since Williams became the regular host in the evening I avoid the station. I usually listen to other stations including a station that carries Dennis Prager at that time of night. Prager has some interesting guests. I disagree with a lot of what he has to say but I've found a number of interviews very interesting. So on the drive home I listen. But in the fall on Friday nights the station covers high school football (in the Spring and Summer they are the Rivercats station) and I am not into that. So by chance I went back to Williams.

I guess Williams gets part of his material from the John Doolittle playbook. Doolittle is a GOP powerhouse who is opposed to the redistricting measure - supposedly because he thinks it will lead to more GASP moderate GOP members. That is one of those political explanations that does not meet the scratch and sniff test. From Doolittle's first election (where he beat a long time democrat from Sacramento for a state senate seat) he has always tried to build his own advantage on redistricting. He worked with some fairly liberal democrat operatives to try to build an incumbent protection plan. He spends most of his time scheming how to make his political position stronger and how to build his organization but not a lot of time thinking about key issues of our day. At one point, when he was my congressman he had the audacity to send (at taxpayer expense) a newsletter that said he was trying to oppose the career politicans (as if someone who has made his entire career from politics is not one). Luckily, in the last redistricting we got moved out of his district and into one with someone who actually thinks a bit more broadly.

Williams got on to 77 and argued that it could well result in producing a panel to draw districts that includes only people that fit the most negative stereo types of GOP rath. (Think of the bogeymen that a rabid GOP partisan would think of) It was offensive from at least two views. First, the chances, when a random selection system is used of getting three people of the same type is virtually nil - are the no-nothings revived from the 1800s? But second, the more obvious response to the idiotic argument of Mr. Williams is to compare it to the present situation - could three of the worst kinds of retired judges (pick your poison) do a better less self interested job in drawing districts than the current system with the self interested players like Doolittle who always scheme to pick their voters? You bet.