Intimidating Brokaw and Stephanopoulos
Tom Brokaw is a liar. He told the New York Times on Saturday that he was not intimidated by the Republican attacks on the media last week.
Mr. Brokaw said he was subjected to some “good natured ribbing, friendly fist-shaking,” in the hall, but “nothing out of the ordinary,” or, for that matter, nothing that would impede him from discharging his normal celebrity duties.
Stephanopoulos mouthed the same cliches last week that he was not part of any “media elite”. But this morning on Meet The Press and This Week Brokaw and Stephanopoulos might have just as well have been reading a script written by John McCain’s campaign staff as they interviewed Biden and Obama.
MR. BROKAW: I want to move on in a moment, but there’s another headline that appeared in the New York Post. Oprah Winfrey decided not to have Sarah Palin on the show before the election. “No-Prah!” That’s the New York Post headline. “TV first lady’s Palin insult,” as they called it. Oprah did come out for Barack Obama, did have him on the show. Do you think that some people will see that as an elitist position, that in some ways Democrats may be afraid of her, Sarah Palin?
Stephanopoulous asked an equally “Drudge” question early in the Obama interview about the Saddleback Forum and abortion.
ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos Reports: Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., admitted this weekend that his response on the definition of human life at Rick Warren’s Saddleback Forum was “probably” too flip.
When asked at what point a baby gains human rights, Obama said last month “that whether you’re looking at it from a theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that question with specificity, you know, is above my pay grade.”
But in an exclusive “This Week” interview airing this morning, Obama told Stephanopoulos “what I intended to say is that, as a Christian, I have a lot of humility…all I meant to communicate was that I don’t presume to be able to answer these kinds of theological questions.”
It’s very clear. Republican intimidation of the media works. We saw it leading up to the invasion of Iraq, when every one of the networks was afraid to question Bush on the reasons for war. Guys like Brokaw and Stephanopoulos talk a good game, but they are total pussies when the party in power calls them out. Although both Obama and Biden handled the hostile questions well, it was clear that NBC and ABC were trying to placate the Republicans. Later this week Sarah Palin will be interviewed by “Softball Charlie” Gibson. He’s even more easily cowed than Tom and George. Once that’s done, they can say that Sarah has been vetted by the media and she won’t have to have a press conference.
Charlie Gibson is one of the main offenders who have driven me away from the so-called “mainstream media.” His performance, along with that of Snuffleupagus, during the Democratic “debate” between Obama and Clinton, marked a low point in network television reportage and public service.
My wife and I never used to watch network news. Then, on 9/11, our daughter called to tell us something was going on in New York. We turned on the television, and by chance tuned to ABC news, where Peter Jennings did a marvelous job of keeping his viewers informed. His performance matched that of Walter Cronkite on the day John Kennedy was shot. We became regular viewers of ABC evening news. But now, I just cannot stand it. With about 10 minutes of hard news and the rest of the half hour devoted to feel-good stories, I can do better with PBS and NPR, along with the BBC and a few other overseas news outlets. Gibson, along with other talking heads on network TV, is an utter disgrace to what had been, for a few golden years in the ’50s and ’60s, a real public service.
Charlie Gibson is one of the main offenders who have driven me away from the so-called “mainstream media.” His performance, along with that of Snuffleupagus, during the Democratic “debate” between Obama and Clinton, marked a low point in network television reportage and public service.
My wife and I never used to watch network news. Then, on 9/11, our daughter called to tell us something was going on in New York. We turned on the television, and by chance tuned to ABC news, where Peter Jennings did a marvelous job of keeping his viewers informed. His performance matched that of Walter Cronkite on the day John Kennedy was shot. We became regular viewers of ABC evening news. But now, I just cannot stand it. With about 10 minutes of hard news and the rest of the half hour devoted to feel-good stories, I can do better with PBS and NPR, along with the BBC and a few other overseas news outlets. Gibson, along with other talking heads on network TV, is an utter disgrace to what had been, for a few golden years in the ’50s and ’60s, a real public service.
Everyone on television is an actor. Game show contestants, reality show artists, preachers, politicians, and newscasters. They are all in show business, and show business is a lie. I mean that in the kindest and most appreciative way, but show business is at its heart a lie. If it is good show business, it is the lie that illuminates the truth. But high paid performers like Brokaw and Stephanopoulos have too much to lose, and they speak the truth at great peril.
Everyone on television is an actor. Game show contestants, reality show artists, preachers, politicians, and newscasters. They are all in show business, and show business is a lie. I mean that in the kindest and most appreciative way, but show business is at its heart a lie. If it is good show business, it is the lie that illuminates the truth. But high paid performers like Brokaw and Stephanopoulos have too much to lose, and they speak the truth at great peril.
Jon, you shouldn’t fall into the trap of dis-missing Sarahcuda. Knowing the liberal media, it is pretty obvious that if you keep her from the press for a while, you’ll have liberals screaming she s hiding. And once they have all worked into a froth, and com,mitted themselves and their (your) credibility to expecting her to fall abart, then you bring her out and you get the same damn effect as her speech.
I’m not saying Palin is a press conference champ, BUT, if I were you, I wouldn’t be approaching it like this.
Why not just wait a bit, keep your powder dry?
Jon, you shouldn’t fall into the trap of dis-missing Sarahcuda. Knowing the liberal media, it is pretty obvious that if you keep her from the press for a while, you’ll have liberals screaming she s hiding. And once they have all worked into a froth, and com,mitted themselves and their (your) credibility to expecting her to fall abart, then you bring her out and you get the same damn effect as her speech.
I’m not saying Palin is a press conference champ, BUT, if I were you, I wouldn’t be approaching it like this.
Why not just wait a bit, keep your powder dry?
“Davidson Goldin, formerly the editorial director of MSNBC and a co-founder of the reputation management firm DolceGoldin.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/08/business/media/08msnbc.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
REPUTATION MANAGEMENT!
“Davidson Goldin, formerly the editorial director of MSNBC and a co-founder of the reputation management firm DolceGoldin.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/08/business/media/08msnbc.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
REPUTATION MANAGEMENT!
It is so frustrating to try to find real news reporting. I don’t feel like any media outlet is providing unbiased views. The distortion seems to have reached epic porportions. You and your readers know that but what about the zillions of viewers that bump along through life thinking Fox News is the “real news”. That is what scares me.
It is so frustrating to try to find real news reporting. I don’t feel like any media outlet is providing unbiased views. The distortion seems to have reached epic porportions. You and your readers know that but what about the zillions of viewers that bump along through life thinking Fox News is the “real news”. That is what scares me.
For instance
“MSNBC Takes Incendiary Hosts From Anchor Seat”
For instance
“MSNBC Takes Incendiary Hosts From Anchor Seat”
I am usually a regular viewer of Morning Cup of Joe on MSNBC. But he had his head stuck so far up the ass of the Palin bus during the RNC that I’ve not watched in once in the past week. The pandering was outright disgusting. And the manner in which they tried to stear the Palin was unprofessional.
I am willing to give Gibson the benefit of the doubt. But we’ll see how he does during the interview. And we’ll see whether she gives more than just portions of her stump speech as answers. I am hoping Gibson asks some of the tough questions and stays away from this daughter-is-preggers-but-opposes-abortion crap that really is not a valid issue for this cycle. I’m hoping he’ll ask about her record as a tax raisers, an anti-environmentalist, a Ted Stevens 527 director and… yes… as an Alaskan separatist symphatizer.
I am usually a regular viewer of Morning Cup of Joe on MSNBC. But he had his head stuck so far up the ass of the Palin bus during the RNC that I’ve not watched in once in the past week. The pandering was outright disgusting. And the manner in which they tried to stear the Palin was unprofessional.
I am willing to give Gibson the benefit of the doubt. But we’ll see how he does during the interview. And we’ll see whether she gives more than just portions of her stump speech as answers. I am hoping Gibson asks some of the tough questions and stays away from this daughter-is-preggers-but-opposes-abortion crap that really is not a valid issue for this cycle. I’m hoping he’ll ask about her record as a tax raisers, an anti-environmentalist, a Ted Stevens 527 director and… yes… as an Alaskan separatist symphatizer.
Morgan – the only people I’m seeing worked into a froth are the filthy bigots brought into the Sarah Palin Wing of Your party. If you look in the ‘public comment’ sections of any of the big networks (all over the internet really) – The Hate Speech is intense.
What is it about Sarah Palin that has inspired such a display?
Morgan – the only people I’m seeing worked into a froth are the filthy bigots brought into the Sarah Palin Wing of Your party. If you look in the ‘public comment’ sections of any of the big networks (all over the internet really) – The Hate Speech is intense.
What is it about Sarah Palin that has inspired such a display?
“If you look in the ‘public comment’ sections of any of the big networks (all over the internet really) – The Hate Speech is intense.”
It is, Noel, but a lot of that is coming from Obama supporters and they set the tone earlier this year in the smearing of Hillary Clinton.
It won’t be heard here, but some of us who are/were Democrats have been pleading to stop this because it is too easily turned back. The longer it goes on, the more it begins to resemble Mutually Assured Destruction and that is subtly cultural. Endorphin addiction is a real condition and nowhere seen as intensely in culture as on the web, first in the list servers, and now in the comment sections of blogs.
Bad juju.
Spy Vs Spy was funny as a MAD strip because it showed that ultimately both sides lost.
“If you look in the ‘public comment’ sections of any of the big networks (all over the internet really) – The Hate Speech is intense.”
It is, Noel, but a lot of that is coming from Obama supporters and they set the tone earlier this year in the smearing of Hillary Clinton.
It won’t be heard here, but some of us who are/were Democrats have been pleading to stop this because it is too easily turned back. The longer it goes on, the more it begins to resemble Mutually Assured Destruction and that is subtly cultural. Endorphin addiction is a real condition and nowhere seen as intensely in culture as on the web, first in the list servers, and now in the comment sections of blogs.
Bad juju.
Spy Vs Spy was funny as a MAD strip because it showed that ultimately both sides lost.
I have to say – I spent hours going through these sections once I discovered them.
No.
A lot of it is Not coming from Obama supporters
It’s probably 20 to 1 (or more) – Hate Speech coming from Palin supporters.
Interestingly, McCain is never mentioned -
They clearly don’t want to think about his liberal views.
I have to say – I spent hours going through these sections once I discovered them.
No.
A lot of it is Not coming from Obama supporters
It’s probably 20 to 1 (or more) – Hate Speech coming from Palin supporters.
Interestingly, McCain is never mentioned -
They clearly don’t want to think about his liberal views.
Len
How far back do you trace this tit for tat?
Obviously, the outrage commentators on the right are emulating the Yippies and all of that comedy.
The Clinton impeachment was inspired by the Nixon impeachment.
The abortion clinic bombings mirror the bank bombings of the Sixties.
It reminds me of a friend who tells me that if her uterus hurts, her husband will say his uterus is killing him.
You are right. Somebody has to get off this unmerry go round.
In your view, how far reaching is this?
And what about this endorphin addiction? I definitely have it. How about you?
I have to remind myself to breathe.
We are being buffeted by an idiot wind.
We would all do well to remember the Chinese proverb, “He who seeks vengeance must dig two graves: one for his enemy and one for himself.”
Len
How far back do you trace this tit for tat?
Obviously, the outrage commentators on the right are emulating the Yippies and all of that comedy.
The Clinton impeachment was inspired by the Nixon impeachment.
The abortion clinic bombings mirror the bank bombings of the Sixties.
It reminds me of a friend who tells me that if her uterus hurts, her husband will say his uterus is killing him.
You are right. Somebody has to get off this unmerry go round.
In your view, how far reaching is this?
And what about this endorphin addiction? I definitely have it. How about you?
I have to remind myself to breathe.
We are being buffeted by an idiot wind.
We would all do well to remember the Chinese proverb, “He who seeks vengeance must dig two graves: one for his enemy and one for himself.”
I’m only pointing this out because I think it’s important for moderate Republicans, Independents and Dead End Hillary supporters to know who might be next to them in the polling station. One would think a Hard Right Supreme Court would be enough – apparently it’s not….
I’m only pointing this out because I think it’s important for moderate Republicans, Independents and Dead End Hillary supporters to know who might be next to them in the polling station. One would think a Hard Right Supreme Court would be enough – apparently it’s not….
“What is it about Sarah Palin that has inspired such a display?”
One part of the answer is that the culture warriors are the type of people who cannot admit they are wrong, even to the point of blowing up the world to prove it.
I personally think Len is right that it is a bad idea to participate in this juvenile game with no winner. At the same time, I agree with you that the great preponderance of hate speech at this time comes from the right. It is obvious. There is no current equivalent to the radio personality and ideologue Savage, for one of very many examples. Not even close.
“What is it about Sarah Palin that has inspired such a display?”
One part of the answer is that the culture warriors are the type of people who cannot admit they are wrong, even to the point of blowing up the world to prove it.
I personally think Len is right that it is a bad idea to participate in this juvenile game with no winner. At the same time, I agree with you that the great preponderance of hate speech at this time comes from the right. It is obvious. There is no current equivalent to the radio personality and ideologue Savage, for one of very many examples. Not even close.
Noel: Yes it is and it’s building on both sides now. Palin acted like a shock to the left and they are reacting in degrees of mad, sad, bad and rage. These are all classic endorphin addiction reactions. At scale, it is as if the US had all become heroin junkies looking for a fix.
http://cyberpsychos.netonecom.net/jsailing/actual/heroin.html
A topic of interest post-election would be to see if there is an untick in opiate usage, alcoholism, etc. The smarter people turn to pot or other happy drugs instead of depressants.
It’s far reaching, VBM, in the Internet community at least. It is sometimes hard to tell if the population at large is that engaged but I suspect the numbers are higher this time because the left is fully engaged and the right hasn’t been. With Palin acting as a shock to the left and an enticement to the right, the numbers are going up and polls are shifting. This is a classic phase change behavior (see complexity theory) but I think it is very unstable and we will see oscillations around those numbers right up to the election unless one of the candidates gets a numeric lead that is plus 15 points or so at which point the system will become stable.
Noel: Yes it is and it’s building on both sides now. Palin acted like a shock to the left and they are reacting in degrees of mad, sad, bad and rage. These are all classic endorphin addiction reactions. At scale, it is as if the US had all become heroin junkies looking for a fix.
http://cyberpsychos.netonecom.net/jsailing/actual/heroin.html
A topic of interest post-election would be to see if there is an untick in opiate usage, alcoholism, etc. The smarter people turn to pot or other happy drugs instead of depressants.
It’s far reaching, VBM, in the Internet community at least. It is sometimes hard to tell if the population at large is that engaged but I suspect the numbers are higher this time because the left is fully engaged and the right hasn’t been. With Palin acting as a shock to the left and an enticement to the right, the numbers are going up and polls are shifting. This is a classic phase change behavior (see complexity theory) but I think it is very unstable and we will see oscillations around those numbers right up to the election unless one of the candidates gets a numeric lead that is plus 15 points or so at which point the system will become stable.
That is some interesting systems analysis. Thank you, Len.
That is some interesting systems analysis. Thank you, Len.
Len-I think that Speed is the evil drug of choice right now.
http://jtaplin.wordpress.com/2008/01/16/hopped-up-in-america/
Len-I think that Speed is the evil drug of choice right now.
http://jtaplin.wordpress.com/2008/01/16/hopped-up-in-america/
Come on flower children and my esteemed old professor. Remember what one of the wisest poets of your generation said, “the center will not hold.”
Well, Didion not only was right, but over the last 15 years, while I was working at William Morris and JT was calling my bosses to save TO DIE 4, there was this first Iraq numero uno, a tad little riot in lalaland, and then iraq-seister #2.
While we can debate rahrayrahs, the fact is the fissures created by the 60/70 protests, reaching their low-point in the Nixon resignation, never stabilized and while your generation became yuppy/buppy, by every social justice measure, this country became more unequal and harsh. Citizens have become consumers first, the wealthier you are, the higher the gates.
and we r all plugged up by our consumer & mobile pods.
Now it’s come home to roost; Obama’s support of the bail-out and his vote for telecom amnesty show how compromised he is and will have to be in order to win/stay in power.
The type of de-federalizing project Jon aspires to is so ambitious, it seems a great way to channel our attention away from pragmatic projects, like Castells “Studio Scuplture” public spaces/public parks in LA, which could have an immediate impact and benefit from the support of someone with your stature.
I hate to remind folks: but real people need real help and if they don’t get it; it’s understandable that they consider whatever alternatives are presented to them, esp. if one thinks it’ll “change” things.
The American republic – since the center imploded in the 60/70s – has failed; now news is ent; citizens are content with walled gardens and blogs are called “socratic” forums, when in fact, they’re just micro-networks, which have existed as long as modernity; they were just slave ships/global trade then.
A democracy depends on a vibrant public square; not a micro-networks aghast at how “brain-washed” or “manufactured” those gullible Republicites r. The odds of a true public square being revitalized and the country’s opposing sides coming together are low. Echo-chambers can, at times, create soothing sounds. But preaching amongst the converted combined with a lack of humility is a toxic combination (& here I’m talking about the “debate” outside this blog in our real, wicked society).
Come on flower children and my esteemed old professor. Remember what one of the wisest poets of your generation said, “the center will not hold.”
Well, Didion not only was right, but over the last 15 years, while I was working at William Morris and JT was calling my bosses to save TO DIE 4, there was this first Iraq numero uno, a tad little riot in lalaland, and then iraq-seister #2.
While we can debate rahrayrahs, the fact is the fissures created by the 60/70 protests, reaching their low-point in the Nixon resignation, never stabilized and while your generation became yuppy/buppy, by every social justice measure, this country became more unequal and harsh. Citizens have become consumers first, the wealthier you are, the higher the gates.
and we r all plugged up by our consumer & mobile pods.
Now it’s come home to roost; Obama’s support of the bail-out and his vote for telecom amnesty show how compromised he is and will have to be in order to win/stay in power.
The type of de-federalizing project Jon aspires to is so ambitious, it seems a great way to channel our attention away from pragmatic projects, like Castells “Studio Scuplture” public spaces/public parks in LA, which could have an immediate impact and benefit from the support of someone with your stature.
I hate to remind folks: but real people need real help and if they don’t get it; it’s understandable that they consider whatever alternatives are presented to them, esp. if one thinks it’ll “change” things.
The American republic – since the center imploded in the 60/70s – has failed; now news is ent; citizens are content with walled gardens and blogs are called “socratic” forums, when in fact, they’re just micro-networks, which have existed as long as modernity; they were just slave ships/global trade then.
A democracy depends on a vibrant public square; not a micro-networks aghast at how “brain-washed” or “manufactured” those gullible Republicites r. The odds of a true public square being revitalized and the country’s opposing sides coming together are low. Echo-chambers can, at times, create soothing sounds. But preaching amongst the converted combined with a lack of humility is a toxic combination (& here I’m talking about the “debate” outside this blog in our real, wicked society).
Yes, Jon, that and prescription drugs. My son tells me his generation is deeply into the pharmaceutical industry. Since I see a lot of that behavior in the cube farms, it seems to be the case. The Mothers Against Drunk Driving put a real dent in the nightclub industry so public self-medicating is down here. On the other hand, meth is more popular and pot, the perrenial, seems to be as popular as ever.
I play guitar. That works for me.
Again, I’ll be keenly interested to see the numbers post-election asking if our communications forums having become denser and all on results in addiction transfer or if a damping effect is seen across the forums.
Remember that Jimmy Carter era Coke commercial that had a somatic effect. Will we see something like that in the popular media or something else?
@Lewis: It depends on us. The major media centers, the virtual world servers, the a-listers, we can affect the outcomes. We can’t control them precisely, but we do have influence. We actually can take control of our own wiring but this is nothing new to the zazen practicioners.
Yes, Jon, that and prescription drugs. My son tells me his generation is deeply into the pharmaceutical industry. Since I see a lot of that behavior in the cube farms, it seems to be the case. The Mothers Against Drunk Driving put a real dent in the nightclub industry so public self-medicating is down here. On the other hand, meth is more popular and pot, the perrenial, seems to be as popular as ever.
I play guitar. That works for me.
Again, I’ll be keenly interested to see the numbers post-election asking if our communications forums having become denser and all on results in addiction transfer or if a damping effect is seen across the forums.
Remember that Jimmy Carter era Coke commercial that had a somatic effect. Will we see something like that in the popular media or something else?
@Lewis: It depends on us. The major media centers, the virtual world servers, the a-listers, we can affect the outcomes. We can’t control them precisely, but we do have influence. We actually can take control of our own wiring but this is nothing new to the zazen practicioners.
Lewie, why do you think I’m here?
It was an echo chamber full of Jon’s thinkalikes. I was compelled by God’s Will to come alter the pH of the fishbowl.
One can’t have it both ways. You either stand for wide open opinions/discussion, or you don’t. What’s weird, is you don’t even grip how “other” you sound to normal people.
You sound “other” because you call the masses gullible, brain-washed, and manufactured. Most “non-other” people, don’t think everyone who disagrees with them are those things.
In normal society, we agree to disagree. I’m certainly not an advocate for normal, but it takes about 10 seconds of listening you regret this country at its core, and even I long for normal.
You hate to remind folks? That other people need help? And if they don’t get some “help” they are going to do what? Rob and steal? Riot? Raise up and slaughter citizens? Look, I’m all for legalizing hookers and drugs to empty out the prisons, but we are still going to jail the thieves.
I think I agree with your earlier point, that most people are too busy with the fruits of capitalism (consumer and mobile pods) to riot in the streets. Did you see how silly the “anarchists” looked at the RNC convention, running along and then trying to break a bank window… screaming at that tightly wound Michelle Malkin, until SHE LOOKED NORMAL too.
Lewie, simply, you don’t have to write off everyone who disagrees with you. All of this does re-raise a question that I always forget to ask about in the face of weirdness like this:
How do mentally rationalize when you meet with people who have IQ’s as big as yours, but haven’t reach the same conclusions as you? I mean, there they are, some group of normal smart people, who aren’t corporate henchmen, they’ve studied cultural theory, they listen to Jon’s kind of musicians, and they aren’t liberals – what does your mind make of them? How do you write them off? Or do you think they don’t exist?
Lewie, why do you think I’m here?
It was an echo chamber full of Jon’s thinkalikes. I was compelled by God’s Will to come alter the pH of the fishbowl.
One can’t have it both ways. You either stand for wide open opinions/discussion, or you don’t. What’s weird, is you don’t even grip how “other” you sound to normal people.
You sound “other” because you call the masses gullible, brain-washed, and manufactured. Most “non-other” people, don’t think everyone who disagrees with them are those things.
In normal society, we agree to disagree. I’m certainly not an advocate for normal, but it takes about 10 seconds of listening you regret this country at its core, and even I long for normal.
You hate to remind folks? That other people need help? And if they don’t get some “help” they are going to do what? Rob and steal? Riot? Raise up and slaughter citizens? Look, I’m all for legalizing hookers and drugs to empty out the prisons, but we are still going to jail the thieves.
I think I agree with your earlier point, that most people are too busy with the fruits of capitalism (consumer and mobile pods) to riot in the streets. Did you see how silly the “anarchists” looked at the RNC convention, running along and then trying to break a bank window… screaming at that tightly wound Michelle Malkin, until SHE LOOKED NORMAL too.
Lewie, simply, you don’t have to write off everyone who disagrees with you. All of this does re-raise a question that I always forget to ask about in the face of weirdness like this:
How do mentally rationalize when you meet with people who have IQ’s as big as yours, but haven’t reach the same conclusions as you? I mean, there they are, some group of normal smart people, who aren’t corporate henchmen, they’ve studied cultural theory, they listen to Jon’s kind of musicians, and they aren’t liberals – what does your mind make of them? How do you write them off? Or do you think they don’t exist?
Lewis said: Come on flower children and my esteemed old professor. Remember what one of the wisest poets of your generation said, “the center will not hold.”
Much as I love Didion, you do know she was quoting Yeats, and he wrote that in a much earlier time? Hope I’m not being patronising in mentioning that. The centre has been failing to hold for a long long time now.
I will agree, however, that Slouching Toward Bethlehem remains one of my favorite reads.
Lewis said: Come on flower children and my esteemed old professor. Remember what one of the wisest poets of your generation said, “the center will not hold.”
Much as I love Didion, you do know she was quoting Yeats, and he wrote that in a much earlier time? Hope I’m not being patronising in mentioning that. The centre has been failing to hold for a long long time now.
I will agree, however, that Slouching Toward Bethlehem remains one of my favorite reads.
So is this what the media gets subjected to when they ask the democrats hard questions, for once?
What kind of questions would you like them to ask? Something that would be less revealing of their actual thoughts and feelings?
I don’t understand your criticism of the interviews. You mention softball questions, but this is probably some of the toughest questions these guys have gotten besides in one of the debates, where Clinton complained about the biased media coverage. Was that the Republicans bullying the media? I don’t think so, it is obvious that the media, especially MSNBC and NBC has been baised for the most part on behalf of Barack Obama.
So is this what the media gets subjected to when they ask the democrats hard questions, for once?
What kind of questions would you like them to ask? Something that would be less revealing of their actual thoughts and feelings?
I don’t understand your criticism of the interviews. You mention softball questions, but this is probably some of the toughest questions these guys have gotten besides in one of the debates, where Clinton complained about the biased media coverage. Was that the Republicans bullying the media? I don’t think so, it is obvious that the media, especially MSNBC and NBC has been baised for the most part on behalf of Barack Obama.
I think bias is obvious too, but it is also pulling back. Stunned by the success of Palin in changing the election dynamic, they are reassessing their ratings future.
Question I would ask of Palin: Governor, you say that you are the daughter of a science teacher and that leads to the point of view that children should have all the information and then make up their minds about intelligent design. Governor, science is a method, not information. That method is one of testable hypothesis and observation that can be repeated by anyone who sets up the same conditions.
Governor, what test can be performed, observed and repeated that will offer evidence for intelligent design?
Note, complexity and organization are not sufficient because it can be shown that random processes can create these without intelligent intervention.
I think bias is obvious too, but it is also pulling back. Stunned by the success of Palin in changing the election dynamic, they are reassessing their ratings future.
Question I would ask of Palin: Governor, you say that you are the daughter of a science teacher and that leads to the point of view that children should have all the information and then make up their minds about intelligent design. Governor, science is a method, not information. That method is one of testable hypothesis and observation that can be repeated by anyone who sets up the same conditions.
Governor, what test can be performed, observed and repeated that will offer evidence for intelligent design?
Note, complexity and organization are not sufficient because it can be shown that random processes can create these without intelligent intervention.
Len,
I CANNOT believe I’m even discussing this but, Ben Stein won me over… it is a careful argument, so think it thru – before anyone goes licking my butt on it. Fact is we wouldn’t have this stupid problem if we privatized education, then parents would decide what kids learned period.
In his documentary about “intelligent design” Stein chases down Dawkins, and nails Dawkins down over and over with this question:
where did life come from? what was the exact moment, where some non-living thing, BECAME a living thing. yes yes, there has to be certain conditions for life, but when was that EXACT moment of LIFE.
And Dawkins runs around a lot, and then he FINALLY says something odd (very scientology), “well, realistically, we probably most likely had our first life deposited here BY ALIENS.”
Ben, doesn’t let up, he says, well back there on the alien planet, when was their first life moment? what chemicals get mixed together to make life, and Dawkins, says I HAVE NO CLUE.
——
Ok, first off, I don’t believe in intelligent design. Evolution is just fine.
BUT, if parents want to tell their kids god started life then UNTIL science figures out how to answer the question better than Dawkins:
1. the teacher is still only teaching evolution. take a test. learn the answers. repeat them. etc.
2. but if a kid says, “my parents say,” the teacher needs to EXPLAIN that NO ONE KNOWS. That Dawkins has no answer, and SINCE he has no answer, and before the teacher mentions the ALIENS, the teacher needs to say something like – “many religious people believe in science, and science offers us provable repeatable methods, science helps us build and make everything, but that doesn’t mean science has figured it all out yet. many religious people think they will never figure out where the spark of life comes from, because a god made it happen. know one knows who is right. there are even scientists trying to prove it is god. AND there are some scientists who don’t think there is a god.” then after that if the teacher wants to mention the aliens they can.
there you have it, the correct approach to discussing (not teaching) intelligent design in public classrooms.
Len,
I CANNOT believe I’m even discussing this but, Ben Stein won me over… it is a careful argument, so think it thru – before anyone goes licking my butt on it. Fact is we wouldn’t have this stupid problem if we privatized education, then parents would decide what kids learned period.
In his documentary about “intelligent design” Stein chases down Dawkins, and nails Dawkins down over and over with this question:
where did life come from? what was the exact moment, where some non-living thing, BECAME a living thing. yes yes, there has to be certain conditions for life, but when was that EXACT moment of LIFE.
And Dawkins runs around a lot, and then he FINALLY says something odd (very scientology), “well, realistically, we probably most likely had our first life deposited here BY ALIENS.”
Ben, doesn’t let up, he says, well back there on the alien planet, when was their first life moment? what chemicals get mixed together to make life, and Dawkins, says I HAVE NO CLUE.
——
Ok, first off, I don’t believe in intelligent design. Evolution is just fine.
BUT, if parents want to tell their kids god started life then UNTIL science figures out how to answer the question better than Dawkins:
1. the teacher is still only teaching evolution. take a test. learn the answers. repeat them. etc.
2. but if a kid says, “my parents say,” the teacher needs to EXPLAIN that NO ONE KNOWS. That Dawkins has no answer, and SINCE he has no answer, and before the teacher mentions the ALIENS, the teacher needs to say something like – “many religious people believe in science, and science offers us provable repeatable methods, science helps us build and make everything, but that doesn’t mean science has figured it all out yet. many religious people think they will never figure out where the spark of life comes from, because a god made it happen. know one knows who is right. there are even scientists trying to prove it is god. AND there are some scientists who don’t think there is a god.” then after that if the teacher wants to mention the aliens they can.
there you have it, the correct approach to discussing (not teaching) intelligent design in public classrooms.
Science does not explain first cause, Morgan. It can’t. There is no test. Intelligent design can be discussed in a comparative religion class but not a class teaching science. No matter how Stein argues it, it is logically fallacious.
Ask Ben to explain the Phoenix Lights scientifically. There is a ton of film, ten thousand witnesses who tell the same consistent story, and nothing but stonewalling and silence from the US government.
So on the evidence, let’s teach UFO investigations as a course at USC.
There is a great line in one of the Angel episodes where the bad girl says, “Of course I’ve had sex while under the influence of magic. I went to USC.”
Science does not explain first cause, Morgan. It can’t. There is no test. Intelligent design can be discussed in a comparative religion class but not a class teaching science. No matter how Stein argues it, it is logically fallacious.
Ask Ben to explain the Phoenix Lights scientifically. There is a ton of film, ten thousand witnesses who tell the same consistent story, and nothing but stonewalling and silence from the US government.
So on the evidence, let’s teach UFO investigations as a course at USC.
There is a great line in one of the Angel episodes where the bad girl says, “Of course I’ve had sex while under the influence of magic. I went to USC.”
Again, len, I’m not for teaching the ID. And we only have this problem because of public education.
BUT, I will not let a teacher without an answer, tell someone else their answer is wrong. ALIENS, Len, ALIENS.
A teacher needs to be able to nuance their way thru a strong science lecture, without tearing down someone’s belief system, or we need to shut down the public schools.
The point of Stein’s argument, isn’t that creationism is worth teaching. And science doesn’t need to SUPPORT religion, either.
It’s that Science doesn’t have a decent enough answer to get in the way of religious belief on the first cause. Aliens is not a good enough answer. Might as well say God. Or Clowns, if some parent believes it already.
It is very much like Global Warming that way. Nice arguments, but not enough to get in the way of the market.
BTW, I fully expect someday, we’ll “make” life – we’ll figure out the first cause and be able to replicate it. And when we do, the scientist can stop respecting religion.
Again, len, I’m not for teaching the ID. And we only have this problem because of public education.
BUT, I will not let a teacher without an answer, tell someone else their answer is wrong. ALIENS, Len, ALIENS.
A teacher needs to be able to nuance their way thru a strong science lecture, without tearing down someone’s belief system, or we need to shut down the public schools.
The point of Stein’s argument, isn’t that creationism is worth teaching. And science doesn’t need to SUPPORT religion, either.
It’s that Science doesn’t have a decent enough answer to get in the way of religious belief on the first cause. Aliens is not a good enough answer. Might as well say God. Or Clowns, if some parent believes it already.
It is very much like Global Warming that way. Nice arguments, but not enough to get in the way of the market.
BTW, I fully expect someday, we’ll “make” life – we’ll figure out the first cause and be able to replicate it. And when we do, the scientist can stop respecting religion.
They shouldn’t tear down a belief system. They should teach science as method and evolution as process. When asked where life began, they should say science has no answer for that. Even if life can be synthesized, so can rubber but it is still synthetic rubber.
But telling them about intelligent design contravenes science if presented AS science. That’s all.
They shouldn’t tear down a belief system. They should teach science as method and evolution as process. When asked where life began, they should say science has no answer for that. Even if life can be synthesized, so can rubber but it is still synthetic rubber.
But telling them about intelligent design contravenes science if presented AS science. That’s all.