Yeah, I find Glenn Beck to be very entertaining. Informative? Well not really. As a Republican that is more on the moderate side, I can stomach Beck much more than Rush and Hannity. Sean Hannity is the worst kind of divisive hack there is, IMHO, though much of what he say I agree with, it's the way he says it. Way too divisive, and way too abrasive, to the point of almost being mean and hurtful.
Rush is the grand-daddy of the bunch, and he's not much better than Hannity, but at least I can listen to him. There was a time shortly after 9/11 and just before the last presidential election that I would listen to Hannity and Rush all the time, now not so much, because these guys seem to be part of the problem at this point.
As for Beck, I think he is more entertainment than political commentary, and I think he likes to provide social commentary on the absurd, and for that, he seems bi-partisan.
But anyone that thinks ANY of these guys have the "lock on the truth and facts", well, you really don't understand much about radio, tv and the media today. The reality, I am afraid, is that with so many choices, so many venues vying for your eyeballs and ears the programming almost HAS to pander to a particular viewpoint. The "middle of the road" doesn't sell. It's better to get a 15 or 20 share by catering to the extreme viewpoints than it is to get a 3 share trying to be everything to everybody.
That means that if you listen to Rush and his like, and most of what he says resonates with you, then you are probably more aligned to their pole, and there are as many on the other end of the spectrum that think just the opposite. The truth and the facts are usually in the middle, but the middle doesn't sell.
TJR
