Al Franken has written a liberal masterpiece of epic proportions. If any individual should fail to understand the “obvious conservative bias in the media” or “the Bush Administrations total lack of competence and initiation of ‘Operation Ignore’” they need only to pick up Lies And The Lying Liars Who Tell Them to get their facts straight.
From page one Al Franken launches into a very detailed, volatile, humorous, self-patronizing, and sometimes lewd all out assault on the extreme right. His first victim to fall is Ann Coulter, who I must admit, completely deserved the endless onslaught provided by Franken. His detailed fact-checking, word-twisting, humor and just-barely-good-enough-to-cover-his-own-derrière concessions made the entire section a rather informative, albeit, attack-based, vulgarity laced, read. The next individual on the chopping block was Bill O-Reilly who’s inspiring comments such as “He says he’s a satirist. If Franken’s a satirist then I’m Jennifer Lopez” and “shut up!” and “shut up!” and “Satire my butt.” and “SHUT UP!” fill the books review pages. Franken has such a high respect for O’Reilly that he even dedicates the book to him (after hastily crossing out the typed dedication to his wife and family). Franken then slowly but surely picks apart O’Reilly, the ‘No Spin Zone,’ FOX News Corporation, and O’Reilly’s life story in a comical, degrading, and insulting fashion that is sure to leave the reader rolling on the ground with laughter or head bursting like a cheap water balloon from fury. Regardless, anything and everything O’Reilly had ever come into contact with is essentially damned to hell and
Lumia 2
burned with sulfur by the time Franken reaches his climactic ending. Fortunately (or unfortunately) Fr...
... middle of paper ...
...one else retorts with is false. Absolutes, normally in any form, should cause a reader concern and require deeper research before a verdict can be reached. That being said, despite his slightly slimy tactics (sadly much like the ones he condemns) Franken’s arguments are logical and convincing in their own satirical way. One might be slightly more inclined to believe the book and treat it as a Grail of sorts if they find themselves swimming in the liberal end of the political pool, whereas conservative swimmers would do everything to burn the book with any means necessary. For those who like to wade and splash around in the middle of the watering-hole, it’s a great read for all those interested in a funny, interesting, and excitably written piece. A word of the wise to all those who do pick it up though, in the words of Al Franken “Don’t believe everything you read.”
Lying is a natural human defense that we use for various things. Everyone lies. In The Crucible we get to see exactly what could happen if lies spiral out of control to the point where crying witch is believed at every turn. In the article “Ways We Lie” by Stephanie Ericsson, she discusses the different types of lying and when they are typically used. Some of these include Facade, White Lies, and Groupthink. These three types of lying are directly relevant and present in The Crucible. The plot is driven by lies, and as they pile on top of eachother is becomes harder and harder to uncover the truth.
As you walk apprehensively onto the stage, the large audience howls those infamous expressions. You nervously seat yourself beside your fiancée not knowing what to expect; you are nervous and overcome with anxiety. Finally, Jerry, in his scratchy, high-pitched voice, utters those predictable words, "So, don't you have something to tell your boyfriend?" She turns to you, holding your hand in the most gentle and loving manner, gazes into your eyes and says, "Remember about four months ago when I disappeared that night at your parent's house? Well, that night your sister and I went to your old room and had a long talk. Since, you haven't paid me enough attention lately I have been sleeping with her ever since."
In the short story The Ways We Lie, Stephanie Ericsson describes many different categories of lies. She first starts out explain the little white lie, describing it as a lie which is told when trying to avoid hurting someone. An example she gives in the text is, “telling a friend he looks great when he looks like hell can be based on a decision that the friend needs a compliment more than a frank opinion”(Ericsson, 2004, 121). Ericsson then describes facades, facades according to the Ericsson is when a person shows you what they want you to see, but it’s not the real them. Stating “facades can be destructive because they are used to seduce others into an illusion” (Ericsson, 2004, 122). A perfect example of facades are when a person has to
In conclusion, I felt that this column was written as a piece of trickery. It was devised to fool average people into agreement. I also felt that anyone with mild intelligence and critical reasoning skills could easily punch an incalculable number of holes in his arguments. So, did he achieve his goal? I believe that this piece of writing could easily win over half of the U.S population, but that doesn’t speak well for his writing necessarily. If I haven’t made it obvious enough, I disliked this column, and hope he can be more sly next time.
In theory, political campaigns are the most important culmination of the democratic debate in American politics. In practice, however, the media shrouds society’s ability to engage in a democratic debate with unenlightening campaign coverage. Because of this, it is difficult—if not impossible—to have educated political discourse in which the whole, factual truth is on display. After years of only seeing the drama of presidential campaigns, the American public has become a misinformed people.
The question of what constitutes morality is often asked by philosophers. One might wonder why morality is so important, or why many of us trouble ourselves over determining which actions are moral actions. Mill has given an account of the driving force behind our questionings of morality. He calls this driving force “Conscience,” and from this “mass of feeling which must be broken through in order to do what violates our standard of right,” we have derived our concept of morality (Mill 496). Some people may practice moral thought more often than others, and some people may give no thought to morality at all. However, morality is nevertheless a possibility of human nature, and a very important one. We each have our standards of right and wrong, and through the reasoning of individuals, these standards have helped to govern and shape human interactions to what it is today. No other beings except “rational beings,” as Kant calls us, are able to support this higher capability of reason; therefore, it is important for us to consider cases in which this capability is threatened. Such a case is lying. At first, it seems that lying should not be morally permissible, but the moral theories of Kant and Mill have answered both yes and no on this issue. Furthermore, it is difficult to decide which moral theory provides a better approach to this issue. In this paper, we will first walk through the principles of each moral theory, and then we will consider an example that will explore the strengths and weaknesses of each theory.
He examined twelve textbook and stated that “Two of the twelve textbooks I studied were "inquiry" textbooks, assembled from primary sources… The ten narrative textbooks in my sample continue to pay overwhelming attention to the actions of the executive branch of the federal government.” Basically, all these textbooks does not really portray the history of US. And imply that the balance of power has not changed. It excluded its participation in state-sponsored terrorism, and just showed how America is a heroic, wonderful country. Thus, ruining the real history of US and the way people look at the
In this era of technology there has become an increasing thirst for a constant flow of information and news. With the giant news corporations such as CNN, Fox, and MSNBC there are plenty of places you can go to find information. However, Stephen Colbert has paved the way for a new type of news through his patriotic filled program, The Colbert Report. Colbert portrays himself as an extremely conservative, right winged pundit, anxious to assert his opinion on every issue that crosses his desk. However, this is not the true Colbert, it is merely the façade that he hides behind to conceal his left leaning tendencies. In this paper, I will prove the effectiveness of Colbert’s Republican disguise and whether or not it has an affect on the younger audience that he caters to.
Katz, Elihu, and Jacob J. Feldman. (1962). The debates in the light of research: A survey of surveys. In The Great Debates, ed. Sidney Kraus. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, pp. 173-223.
When initially asked about the morality of lying, it is easy for one to condemn it for being wrong or even corrupt. However, those asked are generally guilty of the crime on a daily basis. Lying is, unfortunately, a normal aspect of everyday life. In the essay “The Ways We Lie,” author Stephanie Ericsson makes note of the most common types of lies along with their consequences. By ordering the categories from least to most severe, she expresses the idea that lies enshroud our daily lives to the extent that we can no longer between fact and fiction. To fully bring this argument into perspective, Ericsson utilizes metaphor, rhetorical questions, and allusion.
Are everyday rituals, such as, facades reflected as to being a lie? Simply preparing for a meeting or interview does not come off as lying, although another type of façade such as when someone asks, “Are you okay,” after a death of someone close to you, in reality it is a form of a lie, because you are not being honest. In Stephanie Erricsson’s article “The Ways We Lie,” she discusses many different types of lying, that most wouldn’t even consider. Ericsson claimed, “But façades can be destructive because they are used to seduce others into an illusion” (409). Depending how a façade is used, the outcome can be beneficial or damaging. There are facades that are used to cover up one’s true feelings, in order to protect an individual and then there is a type in which one puts on a mask to cover up how awful of a person they are. Charity, a former friend, deceived me with the qualities of everything she was not, my mom is a great example of when it comes to hiding when she is saddened. In this article “The Ways We Lie,” Stephanie Ericsson has a great point of view on the destructiveness of facades, although, it can very well be used in a good way just as much as in a bad way, in fact, like my protective mother, using facades for mine and my sisters own good and then a conniving friend using facades in
For example, he compares two opposite books. First, “The Silencing; How the Left is Killing Free Speech” by Kirsten Powers, a “liberal, Fox News Pundit” as Sanneh calls her. And second, “End of Discussion: How the Left’s Outrage Industry Shuts Down Debate, Manipulates Voters, and Makes America Less Free (and Fun)” by Mary Katharine Ham and Guy Benson. Sanneh implies that Powers has strong opinions of what people should be allowed to say whereas Ham and Benson claim that people get needlessly offended over small things and decide to fight everyone about
In “The Ways We Lie,” by Stephanie Ericsson, she defines various types of lying and uses quotations at the beginning of each description as a rhetorical strategy. Throughout the reading she uses similar references or discussion points at the beginning and ending of each paragraph. Most believe lying is wrong, however, I believe lying is acceptable in some situations and not others when Stephanie Ericsson is asked, “how was your day.” In “The Ways We Lie,” she lies to protect her husband’s feelings, therefore, I think people lie because they are afraid of the consequences that come with telling the truth.
This approach was used throughout Sarah Palin’s political run. Thus, making political satire change the meaning of political journalism. Ian Reilly presents this argument in Satirical Fake News and/as American Political Discourse, saying: “Over the past decade, satirical ‘fake’ news has emerged as ubiquitous of popular political discourse that questions, above all else the logical and integrity of contemporary journalistic practices (Reilly, 2012.)” Consequently, reinforcing our argument that political satire not only shouldn’t be ignored. It also presents the dynamic change of how political journalism is
What are lies? A lie is defined as follows: To make a statement that one knows to be false, especially with the intent to deceive. There are several ways that lies are told for instance, there are white lies, lies of omission, bold faced lies, and lies of exaggeration. No matter what type of lie that one chooses to tell many people believe that lies do more harm than good.