|
Author
|
Topic: Al Franken
|
gruco
I am Ian Garvey's lovechild.
Member # 1645
Member Rated:
|
posted 09-20-2003 02:50 PM
Finished it yesterday. Anyone else read it? Any thoughts?
I really enjoyed it overall. I haven't read Franken's stuff before, so I wasn't entirely sure what to expect. I did half worry that Franken would be to left-wing blowhards what Rush or Coulter is to right-wing blowhards. But the research was pretty thorough, and Franken was actually willing to admit mistakes from both himself and other democrats over the years.
The material on O'Reilly and Coulter was pretty damning. I mean, I didn't exactly place a lot of stock in their opinions beforehand, but....
Al is a little over the top in some places. For example, the story about Kerry leading the Bush (and co.) in Vietnam is not only really strange and out of place, but essentially absent of political commentary and probably the least entertaining aspect of the book. When he really delves into policy though, like the no child left behind act and tax policy, he's great. Brings up sharp, excellent points, and delivers them in a pretty witty and entertaining manner. And he has a lot of observations about political images and campaigning that are really worth reading.
In contrast to the Kerry bit though, I actually thought the "Supply Side Jesus" story was pretty brilliant. Conceived by Brad Whitford, aka Josh Lyman for The Greatest Show on Television!
My biggest complaint is probably that he never went into SEC regulation at all, which is an incredibly important topic, and could weaken some of his points.
Honestly though, even though it's clearly slanted, I'd really recommend reading this. If only because it's worth sparking debate on policy issues, where the current government is taking us, and what the role of politics should be. Plus it's pretty funny (well, funny to everyone not named Ann Coulter, Bill O'Reilly and Charmeleon42).
From: Clock Town | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dweedle
My hands and feet are mangos
Member # 1209
Member Rated:
|
posted 09-20-2003 04:57 PM
I hadn't planned on reading it but your review may have convinced me to do so.
- - - - -
the only way to get pass this will be to commit suicune
From: second of all, Quagmire's not really a bad guy! | Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
NintendoLover
I'm much dumber in actuality than I pretend to be.
Member # 3138
Member Rated:
|
posted 09-20-2003 05:14 PM
Request to be converted to grucoism.
[ 09-20-2003, 05:15 PM: Message edited by: NintendoLover ]
- - - - -
I love Nintendo!
Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
cfalcon
OLDNBLD
Member # 19
Member Rated:
|
posted 09-21-2003 02:10 PM
I've been reading parts of it whenever I'm by a bookstore, and, well, it seems pretty good. Basically he takes the claims of the very noisy conservatives (Ann Coulter and friends) and shows them basically lying- and gives proof. Is the book biased? Well, given that Franken is a total Democrat, yea. But when he's stating facts he doesn't *seem* to be making them up (though I haven't checked myself). Basically, he's biased in the following "ways":
1- If you read a list of lies by some right-winger, you may be tempted to believe that they make stuff up for *all* their points- when in fact, some of their points are legit, just reading it as a normal person you have no idea what's a lie and what isn't.
2- By not mentioning liberals who lie just as often (notably Michael Moore), you get the impression that only right-wingers lie.
Note that neither of these two is actually dishonest, and you can pretty much assume that a liberal (and he admits this freely, not claiming to a moderation that doesn't exist) wouldn't go out of his way to talk down about his own, and wouldn't go out of his way to say positive things about the opposition. So you basically assume he won't comment on these things, and then the book is pretty good to read.
When he gets going it gets pretty darn good. If you are at all interested, flip through it a bit at the store at least.
- - - - -
Subject: Ninja and Opensource
From: 39°45' N, 104°52' W | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
GenyaA310
Farting Nudist
Member # 3409
|
posted 09-22-2003 02:12 AM
Don't even take a word he says to heart. Read Ann Coulter's Treason and look at her painstaking proof in over 700 footnotes and compare that to Franken's few. Then come back and say he has proof that conservatives are liars. Also, Michael Moore is an idiot as well; his 5.5 min filmed interview with Charlton Heston which by looking at the clock in the room shows it was 23 min long (547-610).
- - - - -
You and I have a rendevous with destiny. We can secure for ourselves this, the last best hope that man has to offer or the first steps into a thousand years of darkness. Ronald Reagan
From: Province of Wallachia | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
cfalcon
OLDNBLD
Member # 19
Member Rated:
|
posted 09-22-2003 04:47 AM
Well, nobody has defended M.Moore's lies and misrepresentations here, so simmer down.
As far as Mrs. Coulter's stuff- Al has a part of a chapter where he steps through a few of those footnotes, and shows some of them to be misrepresented or outright wrong. Seriously, look at the book.
Al Franken, when not bringing actual truth to bear, tends to make snide side comments and insinuate bad things (like assuming that the Republicans dislike Clinton because he's attractive and charismatic, mocking people for being rich, etc.). Is this dishonest? No, not at all. But it *is* exactly what you would expect a very partisan portrayal to look like (it isn't like he attacks anybody except the right-wingers for their lies).
If you want to make claims like "mean spirited", go ahead, they are deserved. I claim that he's trying to pull the "liberals are attractive and suave, and also young: conservatives are old and unnatractive (remember, this is the same guy who called Limbaugh fat in a previous book title), and just don't 'get it'" card, which always disappoints me: trying to make liberals look like movie stars always pisses me off (especially when Hollywood, a pretty fucking liberal place, helps out). But it's still a good book, and I don't think he's filled it full of lies (but he does have insinuations and insults). I googled around but didn't find anything: I'll check again in about a week.
I didn't read a ton of Slander, Coulter's recent big book, but I'll have to check it out at some point.
From: 39°45' N, 104°52' W | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
gruco
I am Ian Garvey's lovechild.
Member # 1645
Member Rated:
|
posted 09-22-2003 05:00 PM
quote:
Originally posted by GenyaA310:
Don't even take a word he says to heart. Read Ann Coulter's Treason and look at her painstaking proof in over 700 footnotes and compare that to Franken's few. Then come back and say he has proof that conservatives are liars.
If you want to take issue with the specific points Franken raised here, I'd be delighted to hear your refutations. Don't just fucking assume he's wrong because he doesn't have 780 notes though. It's lot like there's some kind of irrefutable mathematical direct correraltion between having a lot of notes and being right. If anything that only makes it easier to hide your misleading info.
Franken goes into very specific detail about how Coulter's endnotes are misleading, as cfalcon said. For example, she atributes quotes in articles to the publisher, instead of the original source, she uses absurd search methods to "prove" the media overlooks certain articles, and she mentions things that are simply not true.
Now, I haven't single-handedly verified everything Franken wrote (although it wouldn't be as hard as verifying 780 endnotes). But I'm inclined to believe him, given that I've yet to hear a single specific counterpoint to any of his assertions or sources.
quote:
Also, Michael Moore is an idiot as well; his 5.5 min filmed interview with Charlton Heston which by looking at the clock in the room shows it was 23 min long (547-610).
Yeah, this thread isn't about Moore. Although if it was, you probably wouldn't get a lot of argument.
cfalcon-
quote:
I googled around but didn't find anything: I'll check again in about a week.
Googled around for what exactly?
quote:
I didn't read a ton of Slander, Coulter's recent big book, but I'll have to check it out at some point.
Isn't Slander the old one and Treason the new one?
Lemme know what you think if you ever check it out. I am a little curious to see how she constucted her (from what I understand) pro-McCarthy arguments.
From: Clock Town | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Charmeleon42
Date Rapist
Member # 1066
Member Rated:
|
posted 09-22-2003 06:25 PM
From: Mountain Dew Land | Registered: Oct 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dweedle
My hands and feet are mangos
Member # 1209
Member Rated:
|
posted 09-22-2003 06:45 PM
that was so unfunny it made me cringe
- - - - -
the only way to get pass this will be to commit suicune
From: second of all, Quagmire's not really a bad guy! | Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
cfalcon
OLDNBLD
Member # 19
Member Rated:
|
posted 09-22-2003 07:55 PM
re: Slander, Treason
Yea, probably.
I googled around for problems with arguements. To see if he was making stuff up in addition to leaving things out.
From: 39°45' N, 104°52' W | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
GenyaA310
Farting Nudist
Member # 3409
|
posted 09-23-2003 03:01 AM
Coulter constructs her arguments using direct quotes from peoples mouths and direct sources from newspapers (namely the Times and the Washington Post), as well as an examination of the full McCarthy/Joe Welch exchange to demonstrate that before McCarthy "the demagogue" even said one word to "have you no decency' Welch, Welch gay-baited McCarthy's associate Roy Cohn for about an hour, and also demanded that Cohn deliver all the communists by sundown. McCarthy got fed up with what Welch was doing and informed him of the very truth that was going on, there were communists in the government, in Welches office. The Venona cable project showed that there were tons of Communist subversives in Democrat administrations. There is not one person she lables as actually treasonous, but she is trying to prove that the Demo. party is treasonous through actions that they have committed over the years and patterns of behavior that they refuse to change.
- - - - -
You and I have a rendevous with destiny. We can secure for ourselves this, the last best hope that man has to offer or the first steps into a thousand years of darkness. Ronald Reagan
From: Province of Wallachia | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
kikered
Farting Nudist
Member # 830
Member Rated:
|
posted 09-23-2003 10:23 AM
Crap. Up until now I thought that book cover was photoshopped. XD
Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic