Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: g_w_north who wrote (176002)	10/4/2003 1:51:50 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1577586

Just because someone is on the left doesn't mean that they can't present a factual argument and vice versa. I agree. There are several people on the left that I have some respect for -- Harold Ford, Joe Biden, etc. But for the most part, I find the Left to be inherently political and power hungry. The Leftist agenda breeds this behavior; only the very best liberals can stay above this degradation for an extended period of time. IMO, of course. I mean Rush calling people "femi-Nazis", "environmentalist wackos" etc. is not exactly intellectual debate. I don't think intellectual debate is the goal -- he is about entertainment, and the reality is that you can't attract, grow, and maintain a substantial audience with a C-SPAN styled political show. But when you throw in a little invective, wit, and sarcasm, you can get listeners. I know your position is that the left doesn't have someone to counter a personality such as Rush Limbaugh but I would disagree. It's simply that your style of politics and debate differs from others' ideas and you simply believe they are childish and their views and how they espouse them. The problem with the liberals putting on this kind of show is they are after the power it would bring them. Whatever criticism one has of Limbaugh, he is quite simply the best entertainer in this medium. He is the Paul McCartney, the Elton John, and Eric Clapton of the business, all rolled into one; nobody else can touch him. Had he been a liberal, I'm sure the show would have been quite successful (the problem, I expect, is that the liberals provide a steady stream of absurdly entertaining material, while the conservatives tend to be far more reasonable and honest -- so it would be more difficult to come up with really good material). As for Al Franken, it's merely comedy. Unfortunately I don't believe there are many conservative comedians because they're probably isn't an audience for it. It has been merely comedy, and I have always thought the guy could be hilarious at times. But he has clearly undertaken a move from comedy into serious politics with the release of his recent book. I think he is trying to be a "liberal Ann Coulter" -- with the mean-spiritedness, sarcasm, etc.; but falls woefully short on the factual end of the publication (Coulter is mean, even hateful at times, but she does have her facts straight). It is ironic that he wrote this book full of outright lies accusing OTHERs of lying. Strange, but it just supports the idea that the public will accept the notion that if someone wrote it it must be true.