Al Franken: A Model for the Left?

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2003-09-25 08:45am

After reading Al Franken's delightful Lies and the Lying Liars that tell them and seeing his latest TV appearances, I wonder if he might make the ideal spokesman for the left. Don't laugh just yet; Franken is a smart man that isn't nearly as extreme as some left-wing militants and he knows how to fight conservatives on their own terms. The liberals in America are in desperate need of a man like Franken to give them a rallying point and I think he can do the job with aplomb.

Anyways, what do you guys think? Does anyone else here agree that Franken has a great deal of untapped potential?
[/i]

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-09-25 09:12am

I saw him at the famous book convention (on CSPAN) when he ripped into O'Reilly. He's serious and passionate when he wants to be.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-09-25 11:29am

Of course the ideal spokesman for the left is a comedian. The right has provided them so much material lately.

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-09-25 12:14pm

Darth Wong wrote:Of course the ideal spokesman for the left is a comedian. The right has provided them so much material lately.

The funniest incident of 'the right' attacking him was when O'Reilly said Franken "wasn't a satirist (he was just vicious blah blah blah)"- amusing considering his writing credits and awards to that effect in relation to Saturday Night Live.

seanrobertson · Post by **seanrobertson** » 2003-09-25 12:26pm

The Kernel wrote: Anyways, what do you guys think? Does anyone else here agree that Franken has a great deal of untapped potential?

Frankly? (Har har...)

I'm that not impressed with him, but I haven't read his book. Perhaps that's the standard by which he should be judged. Could you briefly summarize his main points?

What, for example, does he believe one should conclude from the "O'Reilly is a liar" stuff? I've seen some people use his fact-finding to construct rather blatant ad hominems; i.e., "O'Reilly lied about where he was born; I'll never believe what he says again!"

Franken himself probably didn't anyone to come away with that "message," but it doesn't matter: American politics is partially a balancing act, about how someone is perceived as much as, if not more than, the strength of his reasoning. On the one hand, you need to be seen as "strong"; on the other, you need to avoid distracting the masses with what they see as "negativity."

I think the latter is what'd make him a rather less than ideal spokesperson. Simply, people expect a certain kind of behavior from big political figures. If Franken's sarcasm didn't, his foam-at-the-mouth "fucking asshole"-type comments could hurt his image. That, and some of his infamous mud-slinging matches with right-wingers might give prospective voters the idea that he's not so much out to advance a certain set of principles; rather, he's just gunning to crash on the other guy.

I think that's sad, but you did say "ideal," someone that'd relate best to as many politically-minded folk as possible. Sadly those people focus unduly on rather irrelevant things, grabbed as much by language as logic *sigh*.

Perhaps I underestimate the average voter, conservative and liberal alike.

seanrobertson · Post by **seanrobertson** » 2003-09-25 12:28pm

Vympel wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:Of course the ideal spokesman for the left is a comedian. The right has provided them so much material lately.
The funniest incident of 'the right' attacking him was when O'Reilly said Franken "wasn't a satirist (he was just vicious blah blah blah)"- amusing considering his writing credits and awards to that effect in relation to Saturday Night Live.

When did he write for SNL? By the time I actually saw him on the show it was...rather less than what it used to be.

But I'll give him props: at least he didn't claim he won a Peabody for his work on the show

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-09-25 12:33pm

seanrobertson wrote:
When did he write for SNL? By the time I actually saw him on the show it was...rather less than what it used to be.

77-80, 86, 89-94

seanrobertson · Post by **seanrobertson** » 2003-09-25 12:40pm

Vympel wrote:
seanrobertson wrote:
When did he write for SNL? By the time I actually saw him on the show it was...rather less than what it used to be.
77-80, 86, 89-94

Interesting--thank you Vympel

I seem to recall that he was involved when it was funny, but I wasn't sure.

Here's a thought: if I'm right, and Franken isn't the ideal spokesperson for the so-called left, who is? Some of my former professors and friends could do a smash-up job, if not for the fact that they're averse to campaigning

Wicked Pilot · Post by **Wicked Pilot** » 2003-09-25 02:14pm

I would want someone who came out of the real world, who accomplished much good in their life, and found fame only later because of their honorable actions. I would rather have someone like Carl Sagan to follow, not Al Franken.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2003-09-25 02:42pm

People, I think you are misinterpreting what I said. By no means am I suggesting that Franken run for office. That isn't the kind of thing he is cut out for. I meant that he could be the new liberal version of Rush Limbaugh (well...you get the idea) and could help bring liberals into a singular cohesive argument, not that he would lead them himself.

Wicked Pilot · Post by **Wicked Pilot** » 2003-09-25 04:10pm

The Kernel wrote:I meant that he could be the new liberal version of Rush Limbaugh (well...you get the idea) and could help bring liberals into a singular cohesive argument, not that he would lead them himself.

I wouldn't want a liberal version of Limbaugh. Limbaugh is just some hot headed talk show host, nothing more. How has he and his conservatism helped the world in any real way? What has he done to earn any following?

seanrobertson · Post by **seanrobertson** » 2003-09-25 04:13pm

The Kernel wrote:People, I think you are misinterpreting what I said. By no means am I suggesting that Franken run for office. That isn't the kind of thing he is cut out for. I meant that he could be the new liberal version of Rush Limbaugh (well...you get the idea) and could help bring liberals into a singular cohesive argument, not that he would lead them himself.

Eh, you mean just me

Hehe. W/ all due respect, you were rather vague.

Now, as you do, I consider this ideal spokesman to be most capable of "unifying" the left, no small task.

Though I specifically mentioned politicians, don't misunderstand me: the "qualities" I mentioned apply to folks in non-official positions as well. Ultimately, their acceptance still hinges on people liking them.

Some of the rightist mouthpieces are testament to this. Limbaugh is oftentimes characterized as a "nothing but a blowhard", O'Reilly's a "bully" and Ann "Shrill" Coulter is...shrill

That is, they are all oftentimes judged by their personalities/conduct alone.

The two men both have a fair number of supporters, but even combined, those three don't bowl over all conservatives. Their abrasiveness and other eccentricities prevent certain people from giving them the time of day; thus, even if such a thing was possible, they never get the chance to unify the right's monologue.

I see Franken in a similar boat. Even if he struck out to be the anti-Limbaugh or left version of O'Reilly--which in some respects he already is, with his new book--I think the same kind of things that turn people off O'Reilly would bug about as many others about Franken.

For example, just yesterday I heard a Democrat friend call Franken a "jackass" for that strongly-worded and rather oddly-timed attack on Brit Hume. (I think Brit's a dolt, but that's beside the point.) I seriously doubt she'll be the only person to react similarly to that or other inflammatory things Franken's said or done.

I suppose that's unavoidable; every political mouthpiece will have views he can't reconcile with his entire party, and he/she will no doubt at times be judged on something other than their reasoning.

But I think there might be a better choice out there--someone's who is less likely to irritate masses with a brightly-colored personality. Who might that be?

I don't know...Jerry Brown and Paul Tsongas always impressed me, and I don't recall either being bashed for a lack of character, obnoxiousness, etc. Clinton whipped them in '92, but maybe they would've fared better as commentators?

Then, Tsongas is dead, so he's out. And Brown said he felt the recall election in CA was fair. That might piss off some of the party hard-liners. I guess he's out too.

How about Lieberman? Is he too moderate?

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2003-09-25 04:16pm

Vympel wrote:I saw him at the famous book convention (on CSPAN) when he ripped into O'Reilly. He's serious and passionate when he wants to be.

Is there anywhere we can see or read this exchange?

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2003-09-25 04:28pm

Illuminatus Primus wrote:
Vympel wrote:I saw him at the famous book convention (on CSPAN) when he ripped into O'Reilly. He's serious and passionate when he wants to be.
Is there anywhere we can see or read this exchange?

It's described in detail in Franken's new book.

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2003-09-25 04:58pm

Well, the only time I've heard him talk was when he was on NPR, and he did nothing but rip into O'Reilly. Not impressive.

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2003-09-25 04:59pm

Well, the only time I've heard him talk was when he was on NPR, and he did nothing but rip into O'Reilly. Not impressive.

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2003-09-25 05:01pm

Well, the only time I've heard him talk was when he was on NPR, and he did nothing but rip into O'Reilly. Not impressive.

seanrobertson · Post by **seanrobertson** » 2003-09-25 05:37pm

HemlockGrey wrote:Well, the only time I've heard him talk was when he was on NPR, and he did nothing but rip into O'Reilly. Not impressive.

HG,

I didn't catch that. Say again?

I think Franken is an intelligent man, but I would like to hear him do something other than bash O'Reilly or FOX News. We get it already.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2003-09-25 07:20pm

seanrobertson wrote:
HemlockGrey wrote:Well, the only time I've heard him talk was when he was on NPR, and he did nothing but rip into O'Reilly. Not impressive.
HG,

I didn't catch that. Say again?

I think Franken is an intelligent man, but I would like to hear him do something other than bash O'Reilly or FOX News. We get it already.

I think the whole act of bashing the right is simply his response to the years of left bashing that the conservatives have been doing. I think it's probably better to take the moral high ground and refuse to stoop to that level but...well, that cost Al Gore an election didn't it?

Plus I'm willing to put up with a little justified bashing after all the years that the Republicans spent telling us what a horrible person Clinton was for lying to Congress. Gee, a man lying about his sex life...heven forbid! It isn't just O'Reily either. Ann Coulter gets some (deserved) punches as well as Sean Hannidy. I mean, have you heard this bitch (Coulter) talk?

Anyways, I think Franken's most poinent stuff is actually the fact that he doesn't mind admitting where liberals have gone wrong. Sure he bashes the right, but how many of his counterparts on the other side would you see bashing say Bush? Franken has no qualms about admitting the faults of the liberals, which coincidently is their lack of strong leadership. That's why I think he is the man to unite the liberals in this country: he recognizes the problem and he has a very likeable, witty and thoughtful personality. Anyone who's seen him on SNL or his many TV appearances should know that it's hard to dislike the guy.

Also, I think that a lot of the stuff he said about conservative media bias needed to be said. Most Americans are under the impression that the media is LIBERAL biased, a claim that Franken debunks with aplomb.

Hamel · Post by **Hamel** » 2003-09-25 07:43pm

Franken is milking the Faux/O'Really gig for all it's worth. He takes excellent snipes at other elements of the right wing occasionally, but I don't know if he's willing to become THE liberal figurehead right now.

Maybe he is fit to take up the challenge. He doesn't have the (mostly undeserved) negative reputation that Moore has.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2003-09-25 08:39pm

Hamel wrote:Franken is milking the Faux/O'Really gig for all it's worth. He takes excellent snipes at other elements of the right wing occasionally, but I don't know if he's willing to become THE liberal figurehead right now.

Maybe he is fit to take up the challenge. He doesn't have the (mostly undeserved) negative reputation that Moore has.

He seemed pretty into the idea when Jon Stewart had him on The Daily Show. I guess time will tell though.

seanrobertson · Post by **seanrobertson** » 2003-09-25 09:52pm

The Kernel wrote: I think the whole act of bashing the right is simply his response to the years of left bashing that the conservatives have been doing. I think it's probably better to take the moral high ground and refuse to stoop to that level but...well, that cost Al Gore an election didn't it?

I imagine he would partially rationalize his actions in such a way, though I have a no. of responses to that:

1--I don't really care what his intentions were. I'm tired of divisive politics, totally sick of the hard-core conservatives AND liberals. The more time they spend slinging bullshit at one another, the less they're representing my interests. (And Clinton's blow-job aside, I hardly think the bashing's been so one-sided. Both play pretty fucking nasty and focus on incredibly dumb shit.)

2--Like I said, I get his point already. I knew from the outset that FOX News was an amateur outfit. I watch it to stare at Laurie Dhue and Kieran Chetry, pure and simple.

3--I'm not concerned with a high ground, I'm concerned with logic. If everything he's doing is predicated in a Tu Quoque like "the conservatives did it FIRST!" I can't say he's giving me great incentive to hear him out.

Just as an aside, how did Gore lose the election by taking the moral high ground? Didn't he push for the recounting 'til the bitter end? Didn't he offer his concession to Bush the night of the election, only to retract it? Or are you thinking of his campaign strategy?

Plus I'm willing to put up with a little justified bashing after all the years that the Republicans spent telling us what a horrible person Clinton was for lying to Congress. Gee, a man lying about his sex life...heven forbid! It isn't just O'Reily either. Ann Coulter gets some (deserved) punches as well as Sean Hannidy. I mean, have you heard this bitch (Coulter) talk?

Sure. That's why I nicknamed her "Shrill."

That's why I think he is the man to unite the liberals in this country: he recognizes the problem and he has a very likeable, witty and thoughtful personality. Anyone who's seen him on SNL or his many TV appearances should know that it's hard to dislike the guy.

Yet Coulter's just a "bitch." While I might agree with that assessment, I find that you stated such a distinction between the two rather interesting.

And honestly, no, I don't like him, nor am I alone in that regard. I think sarcasm has its place, but when you're constantly dripping with it, it graves on my nerves. He can be kinda funny, but let's be real here: if his appeal was limited to political insights with some humor dashed on top, he still wouldn't be my first choice.

And no matter how deserving his quarry might've been, I agree with my Democrat friend: screaming about an "asshole" Brit Hume was a PR nightmare, nothing less than moronic. If someone liked him for that, eh *shrugs*...more power to 'em. (Incidentally, I think that's a terrible example for a potential leader to set. Imagine Bill Clinton showing up at a DNC commitee, raising hell like that.)

Before someone attempts otherwise, let me suggest that you don't get me wrong; I'll probably still read Franken's book at the store sometime. I believe that he might have something worthwhile to put forth, whether I feel he's overrated or not.

But that takes us back to what you were saying about the best spokesman and mouthpiece for a political group. That is, I wonder how many people will do as I might, setting aside the man's person to hear him out. How many people refused to read O'Reilly's books because they simply do not like him?

I think it'd be easier to just find someone else for what you're proposing. Conservatives would still target the ideal spokesperson, but I imagine you could find many just as capable as Franken with a smaller bulls-eyes on their chests.

IOW, I think Franken would be attacked so vehemently even his allies would wonder if it's worth the all the trouble. Would his insights warrant, let alone weather, those distractions?

I don't think so. That's probably part of the reason that liberals don't have very strong leadership: as in many areas of life, some of the most talented and capable people are too outspoken to assume the role you're suggesting, a role that still requires lots of politicking.

Also, I think that a lot of the stuff he said about conservative media bias needed to be said. Most Americans are under the impression that the media is LIBERAL biased, a claim that Franken debunks with aplomb.

Didn't he focus primarily on FOX News? It definitely is conservatively biased, but I don't think it's at all representative of the majority.

What does he say about other news agencies and papers, like the New York Times? I've seen evidence that there's considerable liberal and conservative bias on every level of the news media.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2003-09-25 11:26pm

Ann Coulter is more than a bitch, she thinks that every Liberal in America is a traitor. But I'll digress...

This may surprise you, but at the moment Fox News is the most popular news channel on television. Yeah, even more than CNN. Funny isn't it? Franken glazed over the other media outlets in his book, but he was pretty fair to them overall. He at the very least disproved a liberal bias.

Anyways, as to Al Gore, I think you are oversimplfying the situation. Read Franken's book (or Michael Moore's Stupid White Men) for more details. The short answer is that Gore had every right to be pissed as the GOP was commiting some extremely unethical acts during the recount process to ensure a Bush victory. It's hard to know what to believe anymore since this has been so overexposed in the media, but I think that if you read Franken's book you will come away with at least a severe distate for how the Florida situation was handled.

Glocksman · Post by **Glocksman** » 2003-09-26 02:14am

I don't know...Jerry Brown and Paul Tsongas always impressed me, and I don't recall either being bashed for a lack of character, obnoxiousness, etc. Clinton whipped them in '92, but maybe they would've fared better as commentators?

You don't remember when Jerry Brown was Governor of California?

Hint: His nickname was Governor Moonbeam.

Jim Hightower has always impressed me among the leftist commentators and would seem to me to be an ideal spokesman for the left. He's funny, insightful, and smart. Everything that Michael Moore isn't

Plus he's actually held poltical office and knows how to score points without pissing people off.

Al Franken's book on Limbaugh didn't impress me very much at all. I hope he's a better writer of comedy than of political satire and commentary.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-09-26 02:20am

The Right is much better at presenting a unified front than the Left, probably because of inherent ideological tendencies (the whole "my country, right or wrong" mentality of the neo-cons translates sooo easily into "my leader, right or wrong" and "my party, right or wrong").

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Al Franken: A Model for the Left?

Al Franken: A Model for the Left?

Re: Al Franken: A Model for the Left?