Al Franken’s book is quite funny, yes. It’s also, however, trying to make many serious points about politics, the media, the war, etc. Furthermore, it repeatedly points out (or claims it points out) cases in which various conservative figures have lied.
Therefore, it absolutely calls out to be vetted for accuracy thoroughly and rigorously.
Just because something is funny doesn’t make it not meaningful. And I found several of his arguments to be very meaningful. If you would like me to mention them and attempt to debate them, let me know.
Oh, and Scylla, care to point out the outright fabrication?
I’m still waiting for cites on Franken’s fabrications. I even opened a thread in the past asking for people to tell what was incorrect in his Rush Limbaugh book, and I got nothing.
Can’t find that thread now for some reason, maybe it was part of that lost content.
Did you apply that same principle to Clinton? Aside from the chronic adultery and “false, misleading and evasive answers that were designed to obstruct the judicial process”[sup]*[/sup], Clinton’s famous “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky” was pretty stupid. So was “That depends on what your definition of is is”.
[sup]*[/sup]U.S. District Judge Susan Webber Wright
That’s it! Thanks ArchiveGuy. Maybe my search for “Franken” in the title doesn’t get a hit for “Franken’s”. Although logicially it should, I would think.
It seems my memory was accurate; nobody can come up a disputed fact from Franken’s book.
yeah, or Bush 1.0. Dole himself is not a bad guy, but he would be surrounded by evil most foul. The same type Bush 1.0 was and Bush 2.0 is. Clinton was also surrounded by evil, but it was decidedly less foul, more of a mild distaste, like mayonase left out in the sun as opposed to mayonase found after 16 years in the back of the fridge.
Franken’s a piker. You people want to see a fucking liar, I refer you to that A-hole Don Novello.
Novello went around dressed as a priest (which he’s not) and called himself “Father Guido Sarducci” (a FAKE name!). He claimed to regularly consult with the Vatican - a lie! He would go on TV and solicit money for fake charities! He even tried to start his own fraudulent religion, where everyone could be a Pope!
He wrote numerous lying letters to all manner of innocent corporations and institutions and even heads of state, using another FAKE name, “Lazlo Toth”. He even wrote President Nixon and, while LYING and under false pretenses, conned him out of five dollars!!
Why has this rapscallion gone unpunished in the marketplace of ideas?
I mean, i really thought that you were too smart to take such a ridiculous, knee-jerk attitude to those who criticize Bush. You’d think a libertarian, someone not aligned with either major party, would be cognizant enough of various political allegiances to realize that criticism of a Republican president does not necessarily mean support for his Democratic predecessor.
Have you joined the Brutus school of political debate?
Go down until you find Sofa King’s post and start reading.
According to links to the actual study Franken cites Franken has outright stated that the results are the opposite of what they actually were.
Secondly, he completely falsified the actual meaning of “ditto.”
I was interested enough in what Sofa said to go check out the first 12 or so pages of Franken’s Limbaugh book on Amazon.com and indeed Franken has fabricated the results as described.
This doesn’t bother me all that much. Franken’s a political humorist. It seems pretty clear to me from the first 12 pages that Franken is riffing and making use of license.
But since you asked, the dittohead thing is most likely a fabrication (though if he was really ignorant of the show he might not know what it actually means and Franken does claim ignorance.)
The study though is a definite falshehood.
Let me know if you have any questions, and give Sofa any credit due. He did the work and produced the cites.
