NEWSWEEK: In Chicago, you’re going to be going head-to-head against Rush Limbaugh.
Al Franken: I’m not completely sure what the time slot is. But I’m doing three hours, and 3 p.m. to 6 p.m. would be fine. I just said I don’t want anything earlier than noon. If I did the 9-in-the-morning shift, I’d be up all the night before.
That could make for an interesting show.
[Laughs] Yeah, true, it could. But it may well be that I go up against Rush. Still, I don’t anticipate beating him the first week.
No? Why?
It’s just too much pressure. So let’s just say I’m not going to beat him the first week.
How about the second week?
Well, all right, maybe. It’s just the game of lowered expectations
Do you have a date or a name yet for the show?
I don’t have a date yet. That might be good to know, huh? [laughs] But for the name, I’m thinking of “The O’Franken Factor.” I want to generate interest.
You mean you want to get sued again?
That is our goal actually, to have a lawyer in the studio always. Our goal is to get sued.
Why not? It didn’t hurt sales of your last book [“Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right”].
Exactly.
I read that you actually wanted to call Rush Limbaugh for advice. Is he still speaking to you after you published “Rush Limbaugh is a Big, Fat Idiot”?
Actually he didn’t talk to me before that book either [laughs]. I have never actually talked to him. But I know that when it was first announced that liberals were trying to put together a radio network he said, “Why don’t they ever call me?” So, I’m going to.
On the show?
No, I’m literally going to call him now for advice. He may understandably not want to call me back, but I’m going to call. I checked with [Fox News chairman and CEO] Roger Ailes today for the number. But he said he didn’t have it. Surprising.
You’ve said that Rush just “rails for three hours.”
I didn’t say that in a wholly derogatory way. Just that you’d think that if you did that, just talking for three hours with no guests, no break, you’d need to be taking some kind of drug.
Well, as a matter of fact …
Yes, and one of our goals is to do a drug-free radio show.
Very noble goal.
We’re not sure it’s ever been done before.
So no railing on for three hours?
I’m looking at a different format. I’m going to have a cohost and guests, in addition to questions and answers. We’ll have original comedy.
I figured that’d be a given. Who could you see filling the cohost role?
I have someone in mind but her contract isn’t signed yet. I can’t tell you who just yet.
Can you give us some clues?
She’s really good. She’s done public radio. I actually chose her for her laugh.
There could be worse reasons, but I’m sure there other qualities that got her hired.
The laugh was the clincher. She’s a hell of a journalist, but she’s got a great laugh.
Who would you like to have as your first guest?
That’s a really good question. And congratulations on that.
Thanks, that’s my job. Now what’s your answer?
Any of the former presidents. I’ll take any of them.
There aren’t too many living to chose from.
True, true. OK, everyone from former presidents to my pals like Bobby Kennedy. Or Larry David. He is very committed to the [liberal] cause.
What if you were on the air this week?
It would be Ron Suskind [who wrote “The Price of Loyalty” with former Treasury secretary Paul O’Neill’s assistance, a critical look at the Bush administration].
Have you read Suskind’s book?
No, but I’ve heard some fascinating bits … The idea of O’Neill coming in with list of stuff that he wants to discuss with the president and the president never opening his mouth. And then O’Neill expecting a dialogue and slowly realizing it was just a monologue, just him talking. It’s a funny image. I really believe that Bush is not curious about things, and when 9/11 happened he thought, “Finally, I have something God meant me to deal with that involves a finite set of information, that I can become totally engaged in and not have to be curious in the range of things I am not interested in.”
Have you ever talked to President Bush?
Yes. He winked a lot; he winked at me. I liked him immediately. Then he winked at other people and I thought he was a little promiscuous with the winking. It was August of 1999. I was in Iowa to cover the Republican straw poll for the magazine George and at a little front-porch event at Indianola. It was the one time I met with him and he seemed kind of charming. I asked him a few questions. This was when the cocaine stuff was coming out and I said, “I don’t care if you did it or not but since we are here, I have to ask if you have ever manufactured any crystal methamphetamine.” And he laughed, but I’d hoped he would say no. He didn’t deny it.
This is how rumors start.
No, but had he denied it, I could have asked him why he never gave a straight denial about the cocaine stuff. So, the one time we met he just completely outsmarted me. Just because he’s not curious doesn’t mean he’s not smart.
Let’s look at the Democrats. I know it’s early, but how would you handicap the candidates now?
If Richard Gephardt wins in Iowa, you come out of Iowa with five guys. If he loses, you come out with four. If Gephardt wins it hurts Dean. If Dean wins, it helps Dean–but it depends on how much he wins by. So, who knows? I don’t know.
Who has the best shot at beating Bush?
I don’t know. Dean is like the comedian who just goes on stage and riffs. There is something to be said about someone who is not overly programmed in the way people respond to him. I don’t know if he’s angry as much as he reflects the anger that the public feels. I believe people are really angry at this president because after 9/11 he had [a] unique opportunity. The world was behind us. He had a chance to lead us into a new American century in the spirit of mutual sacrifice and mutual cooperation. And he totally blew it.
What do you see as the biggest issue in the coming election?
I think the biggest issue will be what this guy didn’t do after 9/11 in terms of being a uniter not a divider. Instead of uniting us, he divided us. This is the most secretive administration and the most radical in terms of being economically right wing and in terms of–well, he just will give anything to his contributors. And I think it will be about that. I think it will be about integrity.
Why do you think it’s taken so long for liberals to have a real presence on the radio? Limbaugh has been around for ages.
No one has ever created a radio network like this. But at some point, the radio landscape became so right wing that, by definition, I would be sandwiched between Bill O’Reilly and Rush Limbaugh. That would be like putting hip-hop after country. It just doesn’t work. So we had to put together a network. There will be things that work and things that don’t. I’m hoping to be one of the things that succeeds.
