I have been listening to the Gabfest since its inception, but have never been moved to comment until now, largely because I felt that whatever gripes I might have with it were offset by the fact that it was free. However, at the beginning of the August 10 Gabfest, Jacob Weisberg, substituting for the regular crew (who are on vacation for the entire month of August) referred to himself as "the B team" and quipped "The listeners have spoken: They want the regulars back." I'm going to assume that this was a bit of self-deprecating wit on Mr. Weisberg's part, since I cannot imagine that even a single listener complained. I don't mean to state that Mr. Weisberg was such a fine host that I couldn't imagine the Gabfest without him; although he did do a very fine job, and I enjoyed hearing from him. But the regulars -- Plotz, Bazelon, and Dickerson -- are, at best, tired, at worst infuriating, and at any rate need to go, or at least to rotate out on a regular basis. I've believed this for a long time, now, but this August vacation has forced me to confront my dread at the prospect that the regulars will be back, and soon. I actually found myself wishing that August would go on forever. And I hate August.
First, I should state that Mr. Dickerson is not really a problem at all. I find him to be thoughtful and entertaining, and I enjoy listening to him as much as I ever have (especially now that he's no longer flogging his book). But increasingly, he can't seem to keep the other two in line, and on topic. Maybe they've just worn him down. I think if Mr. Plotz and Ms. Bazelon were put out to pasture, then Mr. Dickerson would be an invaluable part of a new lineup. I hope this will come to pass.
The aptly-named Mr. Plotz (because that's what I want to do whenever I hear his voice) is just insufferable. I can count on one hand -- and still have enough fingers left over to hold a scalpel -- the number of intelligent things he has said in the past two years. But a team of mathematicians couldn't count the number of times he has expressed boredom at the topic at hand, or a lack of any opinion about the topic at hand, or a distaste for the topic at hand, or has merely whined that he wanted to change the subject post haste; and when he does have something to say, he does so in a tone that suggests he finds the entire enterprise taxing and beneath his dignity. That's fine at home and even at work, but what exactly does he contribute to the Gabfest? Why is he there?
Ms. Bazelon, on the other hand, often does have something intelligent to say, when the topic is dictated by Mr. Dickerson and when she can actually bring herself to say it (which she often can't, sadly). Left to her own devices, however, she invariably steers the conversation to the subject of parenting. Again, that may be fine at home or the office, or even in another forum, but the Gabfest is and should be about politics and public affairs, not the nutritional value of school lunches and the pros and cons of recess. I don't know what cocktail parties she's going to, but if I should ever be invited to one I hope they'll warn me in advance.
Worst of all, though, is all of the inside chatter, especially between Plotz and Bazelon. Do I really need to know what they're wearing, who took someone else's Rice Krispie Treats out of the office fridge, or anything at all about their spouses and/or children? If I want that kind of thing, I'll watch Regis and Kelly.
As you may have guessed, this has been grating on me for a long time, now, but the August vacation greatly exacerbated the situation by giving me a glimpse of how much better things could be. Every guest host you had on the Gabfest last month was immeasurably better than Plotz and Bazelon (as is occasional substitute Tim Noah), and the August 2007 Gabfests (except for the last one, when the "A" team returned) were better than the regular lot by an order of magnitude, even considering the fact that each one only had, in effect, two voices (since June Thomas doesn't participate much, for some reason). MY POINT IS THIS: For the love of God, can't you disband this unholy oligopoly that rules the Gabfest and rotate in some fresh talent? I don't care if you pick an all-new regular lineup or just switch over to some sort of rotation system -- any change is bound to be for the better. Yes, I know this is a free service, but the fact is, you have an opportunity to make a really important contribution to the public dialogue with the Gabfest, and right now that opportunity is being wasted. Or worse: you're actually alienating people. Please, repent thy ways! We need you out here!

Yeah i just listened to the most recent Gadbest and lt seems these folks are a little too interested in themselves and the fact that one of them is sitting in a closet as they speak.

I do not know the full backgrounds of these folks but there seems to be a greater need for better diversity of opinion here. Perhaps a rotaing group with more age difference and class background.

I mean why does a man start his description of a candidates campaign with a two minute description of what the bus looks like? What has that got to do with anything?

>>I mean why does a man start his description of a candidates campaign with a two minute description of what the bus looks like? What has that got to do with anything?

On my podcast the bus remarks took up less than ten seconds:

"I'm standing now looking at two enormous buses that are wrapped in the image of Fred Thompson. This is his first day on the campaign trail. "Fred Thompson: United in our core beliefs is what the side of the bus says."

Perhaps you listened to the extended bus description only remix gabfest.

Okay John, it just seemed like two minutes.

Wow! I couldn't disagree with Wrybred more. I counted the weeks during August until Dickerson, Plotz and Bazelon were together again. For me, there is an atmosphere in the group that I find very appealing. The personal details, the freedom for the topic to wander within limits and the general unrehearsed, upbeat character of the conversations make me feel, for the minutes commuting on Friday morning, as if I worked with a group of entertaining, witty, and likeminded people like these three (sadly, I do not.)

I guess it all comes down to taste. Either you feel attracted to someone or something, or you do not. I really hope the gabfest doesn't change significantly because it has a chemistry that works for me, if not for Wrybred. And this week (Sept. 14) the newbies thought cocktail chatter meant the last thing they heard at a cocktail party, and I think they forgot what year it is near the end.

Horace,

The Gabfest is not changing. The three of us plan to be back next week and for many weeks to come. When one or two of us can't join in we'll continue to find smart, witty guests. Thanks for listening.

John

John, why not? While I certainly respect Horace's opinion, I happen to agree with Wrybred, and I think she or he made some very good points. What would be the harm in rotating in a larger pool of voices? Especially if -- as Wrybred writes, and I happen to agree -- some of them are tired, or not making much of a contribution? Stephanopoulos does it, Russert does it, Chris Matthews does it, Peter Sagal does it...so why not you guys? I'm sure there are plenty of people there at Slate who would enjoy being a part of the mix on the Gabfest, and who would have salient and interesting things to say. And you could stay on as host -- it seems everyone agrees you're doing a good job. What do you have to lose? Oh, and I really enjoyed this week's Gabfest. The fresh voices, and different perspectives, made for a very good exchange.

I echo Horace's plug for the current team. It is precisely the joking asides and personal tidbits that make Gabfest unique. I find most political talk shows (and I'm not an afficianado) are either too fast-paced and too dry (MacGlachlin group) or else emphasize satire such that the show may be funny, but it's not stimulating or challenging (Stewart, Colbert, etc).

I feel like I walk to work with friends, who happen to be better versed in politics than I am but don't quite talk over my head (the August team spoke over my head more frequently, which was my biggest complaint though that is obviously a personal preference).

One other unique factor is that the Gabfesters are, first and foremost, writers, and they talk like writers --- humble and sometimes overly verbose, you can tell they want to do the subjects being discussed justice, by articulating everything just so. I sympathize, and its very endearing.

I liked the "b-team", although I also like the regulars alot. The vacation crowd brought a bit of diversity to the group. Perhaps you could think about having some guests who are gay or non-white and from outside of slate, although most of them are on the sunday talk shows.

Although I appreciate and agree with most of this poster's generalizations about the regular gabfest crew, I cannot agree with his conclusion! I love listening to the gabfest *precisely because* it is not just a dry series of diatribes about topics in the news. It is fun - it is intelligent and yet entertaining, and I'm hopeful that most gabfest listeners agree.