# Those Nasty, Lying Right-Wingers! **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 20, 2003, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-nasty-lying-right-wingers/196456 "2003-08-20T15:22:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2003, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-nasty-lying-right-wingers/196456/21 "2003-08-20T17:25:13Z")
\*\* december \*\* do you plan on answering my question any time soon? ---
**Author:** ![december](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/838e76/32.png) [@december](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/december)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2003, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-nasty-lying-right-wingers/196456/22 "2003-08-20T17:33:07Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Stoid \* > \*\*\*\* december \*\* do you plan on answering my question any time soon? \*\* Unfortunately, there was an intervening post, which masked the fact that the above quote from the cite was the answer to your question. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2003, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-nasty-lying-right-wingers/196456/23 "2003-08-20T17:40:40Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Diogenes the Cynic \* > \*\*What basis do you think Harvard would have for a legal action? \*\* Misrepresentation via use of Harvad Letterhead. Not really sure if this is a crime, but if it is, then some legal action is warranted. Any idea if MA state law covers this? ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2003, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-nasty-lying-right-wingers/196456/24 "2003-08-20T17:43:06Z")
Let’s walk through this slowly, friend. I write to you, ask you for a story THAT I TELL YOU I AM GOING TO PUBLISH IN A BOOK. You don’t respond to my request. Later, it comes out that I was going to be writing a different book than suggested. Tell me: at what point was your right to privacy violated? Daniel ---
**Author:** ![jeevmon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/87869e/32.png) [@jeevmon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jeevmon)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2003, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-nasty-lying-right-wingers/196456/25 "2003-08-20T17:43:06Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by december \* > \*\*Unfortunately, there was an intervening post, which masked the fact that the above quote from the cite was the answer to your question. \*\* No, you answered the question with a non-sequitur. A right to privacy does not protect one from being asked uncomfortable personal questions. It prevents one from being compelled to give an answer. Ashcroft was asked a question that he declined to answer. His privacy rights were no more infringed by Franken’s request than his free speech rights would be infringed by a letter saying “Shut Up.” ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2003, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-nasty-lying-right-wingers/196456/26 "2003-08-20T17:50:42Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by John Mace \* > \*\*Misrepresentation via use of Harvad Letterhead. Not really sure if this is a crime, but if it is, then some legal action is warranted. Any idea if MA state law covers this? \*\* IANAL but I think there would have to be some attempt to defraud the university, or posing as a representaive of Harvard to defraud John Ashcroft. I guess it comes down to a definition of “fraud.” There was no solicitation of money or attempt at personal gain so I would imagine that it would pretty hard to make a case for criminal fraud. In order to file a cilvil case, Harvard would have to show damages and I don’t see how anybody was damaged in this case. BTW, I seriously doubt that Harvard would go after Limbaugh either. ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2003, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-nasty-lying-right-wingers/196456/27 "2003-08-20T17:57:17Z")
jesus, \*\* december, \*\* are you kidding? Do you have the slightest clue what “right to privacy” means? Could you explain, in your own words, what the hell your conclusion is drawn from? Oh, thank you jeev, dan. In light of the posts, \*\* december, \*\* care to withdraw? ---
**Author:** ![blowero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/41988e/32.png) [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2003, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-nasty-lying-right-wingers/196456/28 "2003-08-20T18:01:55Z")
Al Franken is a political satirist; I don’t think it’s appropriate to hold him to the same standards as a public official, nor those of a serious journalist. Network news programs are _supposed_ top be impartial. Franken is quite obviously _not_ trying to be impartial. Are you going to castigate _The Daily Show_ for conducting satirical interviews that are presented as if they were serious? What about _The Onion_? Apples & oranges. ---
**Author:** ![december](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/838e76/32.png) [@december](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/december)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2003, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-nasty-lying-right-wingers/196456/29 "2003-08-20T18:06:55Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by DanielWithrow \* > \*\*Tell me: at what point was your right to privacy violated?l \*\* You don’t have a problem with Franken trying to obtain personal information by means of a lie? Oh, I forgot – you’re a **li** b **e** ral. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2003, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-nasty-lying-right-wingers/196456/30 "2003-08-20T18:14:30Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by december \* > **You don’t have a problem with Franken trying to obtain personal information by means of a lie? Oh, I forgot – you’re a lib** e\*\*ral. \*\* He wasn’t trying to obtain “personal information” under the guise that it would be kept private. He asked for a personal testimonial which would be _published in a book._ Ashcroft had the choice to give a public testimonial or not to. He chose not to. End of story. There was no invasion of privacy because there was no pretense or expectation that anything Ashcroft said would be kept _private_. He was specifically told that anything he said would be made _public_. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2003, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-nasty-lying-right-wingers/196456/31 "2003-08-20T18:16:52Z")
Hot Damn! **December** shows us his abilities at twisting people’s words yet again! Oh, I forgot – he’s a **con** servative. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![december](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/838e76/32.png) [@december](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/december)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2003, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-nasty-lying-right-wingers/196456/32 "2003-08-20T18:23:10Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Diogenes the Cynic \* > \*\*He wasn’t trying to obtain “personal information” under the guise that it would be kept private. He asked for a personal testimonial which would be _published in a book._ Ashcroft had the choice to give a public testimonial or not to. He chose not to. End of story. There was no invasion of privacy because there was no pretense or expectation that anything Ashcroft said would be kept _private_. He was specifically told that anything he said would be made _public_. \*\* If Al Franken didn’t do anything wrong, why did he send a written letter of apology? ---
**Author:** ![jeevmon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/87869e/32.png) [@jeevmon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jeevmon)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2003, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-nasty-lying-right-wingers/196456/33 "2003-08-20T18:27:48Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by december \* > **You don’t have a problem with Franken trying to obtain personal information by means of a lie? Oh, I forgot – you’re a lib** e\*\*ral. \*\* How petty, childish, Coulter-esque, and unoriginal of you. Franken didn’t violate Ashcroft’s privacy. He asked an impertinent question and got no answer. He did not attempt to do any probing to try and find out the answer, and did not try to compel Ashcroft to provide one. And the idea that Franken, a private citizen, could somehow, absent legal process, compel Ashcroft, the top law enforcement officer in the country, to do anything Ashcroft didn’t want to do is patently ridiculous. You’ve alleged that Ashcroft’s right to privacy was violated, but your only support is that he was asked a question to which he did not give an answer. For a right to privacy to even be implicated, there has to be an exchange of some private information. There was none. Ergo, no violation of the right to privacy. You didn’t simply state that Franken’s tactics were tasteless, immoral, or repugnant. You alleged that Franken violated Ashcroft’s right to privacy. In the absence of an exchange of private information, that position is untenable. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2003, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-nasty-lying-right-wingers/196456/34 "2003-08-20T18:28:45Z")
**December** , you bright and intelligent elder you, who’s saying he didn’t do anything wrong? Quit changing the subject. Note what he feels worst about: > [@](#): > > “My biggest regret is sending the letter on Shorenstein Center stationery, I can assure you that no one at the Shorenstein Center had knowledge of the letter before I sent it,” Franken wrote. “I am very embarrassed to have put them in this awkward and difficult position, and I ask you not to hold this against the Center, the Kennedy School, or Harvard in general.” Does that help? No? Lemme spell it out: **he doesn’t give a shit about misleading Ashcroft. He’s sorry for using Harvard’s reputation in a prank without their permission**. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2003, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-nasty-lying-right-wingers/196456/35 "2003-08-20T18:34:24Z")
December: Doing something that is ethically wrong is not the same as doing something that is illegal. Franken apologized for the former. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2003, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-nasty-lying-right-wingers/196456/36 "2003-08-20T19:14:00Z")
Franken is a buck-toothed moron. That said, I don’t see anything other than “prankishness” with regard to his letter to Ashcroft. That’s the sort of thing that humorists do, and Al Franken thinks he’s a humorist. I do think he owes an apology to Harvard, and he’s apparently offered it. His use of the Harvard letterhead was unauthorized, and Harvard has every right to be upset about that. But even this is not a great crime, considering his use wasn’t criminal, and I certainly think his apology ought to square the books with Harvard. So - Franken: not funny, but not criminal, unless you consider the damage he did to SNL when he was a cast member as well as a writer. THAT was criminal. - Rick ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2003, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-nasty-lying-right-wingers/196456/37 "2003-08-20T19:23:09Z")
**bricker** , while I disagree with you about Franken’s humor (at least sometimes he’s funny), that’s de gustibus, and I’m not one to disputandem. However, “the damage he did to SNL when he was a cast member as well as a writer. . . THAT was criminal”?! Whachoo talkin about? [According to this biography of Al Franken](http://www.alfrankenweb.com/bio.html), he was one of the show’s original authors: > [@](#): > > Upon graduating from Harvard in 1973 with a degree in general studies, Franken continued performing with Davis. Their witty-yet-raunchy performances, mainly for college crowds, caught the eye of then-unknown Canadian producer Lorne Michaels. Michaels, a fan of Monty Python, was contracted to develop a variety show for NBC. Michaels, seeing talent in the two, signed the duo for $500 a week each and flew them to New York City. Franken and Davis were the only people hired without actually meeting with Michaels. Had Michaels met with them, Franken often says, they probably would have never been hired. At the time, little did they know, Franken and Davis would help start one of the most innovative shows on television, “Saturday Night Live.” > > During his run on “Saturday Night Live,” Franken received four Emmys for his writing on SNL and a fifth for producing. During 1975-1980, Franken created such sketches as “The Final Days,” a parody of the Nixon presidency and “The Me Decade,” a commentary about why the 70s was about him, Al Franken. > > When Franken, along with Lorne Michaels and most of the cast , left SNL in 1980… Looks to me like he didn’t do damage to the show as a writer; on the contrary, he was responsible for a fair amount of its initial success. I certainly don’t think he can be held accountable for the show’s execrable era in the early nineties. Or do you just hate Stuart Smalley? Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2003, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-nasty-lying-right-wingers/196456/38 "2003-08-20T19:29:18Z")
Yes, I do hate Stuart Smalley. I phrased my cut at Franken poorly. “When he was a cast member as well as a writer” was meant to distinguish the time when he was only a writer from the time in which he joined the cast. In other words, it was his stint as a cast member/writer that was contemporaneous with the show’s first big dip in quality; his time as a writer only appears to have produced little damage or - dare I admit it? - actual quality. - Rick ---
**Author:** ![Master\_Wang-Ka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/master_wang-ka/32/3325_2.png) [@Master\_Wang-Ka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Master_Wang-Ka)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2003, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-nasty-lying-right-wingers/196456/39 "2003-08-20T19:34:04Z")
I think it’s kind of a shame he has to go and squander his credibility like that. While I didn’t think much of the meanspirited style and title of “Rush Limbaugh Is A Big Fat Idiot,” it was hard to argue with facts… and Franken, when he chose to do so, put up facts in that book with a vengeance, as well as pointing out a considerable amount of Republican spin-doctoring intended to mislead the American public… as well as (of course) exposing a large number of Limbaugh’s “statements which have turned out to not be as Limbaugh said they were,” to use totally neutral language. But I would rather see Franken annoying Ashcroft than making any more television or movies with Stuart Smalley in them… ---
**Author:** ![blowero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/41988e/32.png) [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2003, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-nasty-lying-right-wingers/196456/40 "2003-08-20T19:43:01Z")
Geez, give the guy a break. Nobody can be funny _all_ the time. Even Eddie Murphy, who is frequently lauded as the best SNL cast member ever, IMO failed miserably with that “I’m Gumby, dammit!” crap. Talk about not funny… [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-nasty-lying-right-wingers/196456.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-nasty-lying-right-wingers/196456.md?page=3)