Why the Left isn't succeeding in Talk Radio

Ever wonder why the libs aren't making it in Talk Radio? O' there are decent talkers who are left of center like Brian Whitman and Alan Combs, but I mean really big time a la Rush, Hannity and Glenn Beck.

The American Thinker has an interesting piece explaining why:

The key to success in this kind of enterprise is the host’s ability to articulate his positions in a logical and cogent manner. This is because most people will not listen for very long to an analysis-driven program if the analysis itself does not make rational sense.

And this is precisely where the crux of liberals’ problem lies. They are simply not able to explain and defend their views in rational fashion. This is not at all surprising, for how does one justify high taxes, gay marriage, abortion, multiculturalism and such? They are all based on false premises and they all produce disastrous outcomes. Anything more than a superficial examination must reveals them for the frauds and failures that they in truth are. This is why liberalism cannot withstand the analytical vigor of talk radio and why it has failed so abysmally in it.

Talk radio has thus exposed in a striking way a fatal flaw at the very heart of liberalism – its indefensibility by rational argument. Without having yet grasped it, it is the medium’s format that became liberals’ stumbling block.

On the other hand, the libs pretty much own TV talk shows. The reason for their success there is the same reason they fail on the radio. TV doesn't allow the time to detail anything and any rational argument from the opposition can be shouted down:

Things used to be infinitely more palatable (for liberals) when the television talk show was the main forum for the mass dissemination of political opinion. Its relatively short broadcast time – rarely more than fifty minutes – is usually intensely contested by several guests. As a result of severe time constraints, the discussants rarely speak for more than a couple of minutes at a time. This, of course, makes any serious analysis all but impossible. This problem is made all the more acute by the fact that the guests’ statements are routinely intended to rebuff points made by their opponents which themselves are often quite irrelevant to the topic under consideration.

This format is just fine with liberals who – knowing instinctively that their positions cannot withstand thorough scrutiny – are always happy to avoid in-depth discussion of anything. Conservatives, on the other hand, are badly disadvantaged in this kind of environment. Conservatism requires methodical exposition, quite unlike liberalism which can only survive in the realm of disjointed statements and unsupported assertions. The television talk show is thus liberalism’s perfect vehicle. Often nothing more than a scattered clash of personalities, it is normally dominated by those with the biggest mouth. And since liberals have almost a complete grip on television, they make sure that the biggest mouths on their programs come from their own camp.

I'm guessing that there aren't too many on the left who realize these truisms. They know they've failed on bigtime radio, but are they intellectually honest enough to see why?

UPDATE: I was on the road sans computer when Brian Maloney over at The Radio Equalizer linked to this post. I didn't get to thank him or welcome his readers in a timely manner and I do so now, belatedly. Thanks, Brian, I literally got hundreds of hits from your link.