Two talk show hosts I once liked and listened to often until their acts wore thin are shown the door by their employers. Glenn Beck and Fox News part ways, while Jay Severin is let go from WTKK in Boston. When I first listened to each of these men on the radio (before Beck got his TV gig) as a fellow talk professional I admired their ability to put on a very entertaining show. Each man at times could put on some very compelling radio, irrespective of the political views they were espousing. You just had to listen. Each man parlayed their creativity and style into monster contracts as they built big ratings generating big revenues for their employers. So long as those ratings and revenues continued to roll in their employers were willing to overlook the more outrageous or controversial things they said. It's easy to ignore activists and community leaders who demand that you fire one of your hosts when your numbers are really good. After all, in the modern radio and television business the first and foremost duty of management at all levels is to hit their revenue numbers (exceeding them is even better). Corporate managers at the regional and national level for these big media conglomerates only see the numbers. Having said that, there is a duty to safeguard the broadcast license of the facility. It is, after all, the license that is the most valuable asset that the big media conglomerate purchased in the first place. Once upon a time, when broadcast companies were small and oftentimes owned by people who were based in the community those outlets served, there was a greater fear of upsetting the locals and endangering the license. That no longer exists. But there is such a thing as a talk host who is more controversial than he is worth. If the ratings and revenues don't make taking the heat a worthwhile endeavor, then broadcast managers are not going to be willing to put up with that heat. This was the case for both Fox News and WTKK in my view. If both men were still pulling monster ratings and huge revenues, then the aggravation of dealing with their sometimes strange theories (Beck) and vulgar pronouncements (Severin) would be worth it (and worth the big money they were getting paid). Without those ratings and revenues, forget it. There is a lot of interesting political commentary from various sources concerning the potential for a government shutdown and the Ryan 2012 budget. Liberal editor and columnist Robert Kuttner is disappointed with President Obama's performance thus far in fighting against the GOP's spending cut proposals, both the ones in the current budget and those proposed by Congressman Ryan. For his part Ryan says the President's budget proposals put the U.S. on an unsustainable track. Paul Krugman, on the other hand, believes Ryan's proposal is ridiculous. Michael Barone believes Rep. Ryan has presented a bold plan which will form the basis for GOP's economic platform in 2012. He believes the American people are now so worried about unsustainable debt and deficits that they will rally around such a plan. I disagree, but more on that later. Charlie Gasparino also likes the plan, but is disappointed that the GOP presidential contenders all seem to be hiding from the details. They are hiding from those details because, like me, they believe when "the people" get wind of those details the majority will reject them.