Saturday, September 25, 2010
In the interests of being fair and balanced, a rebuttal by MSNBC host Ed Schultz to the video below of Governor Christie rising to the defense of Meg Whitman.
I wonder if MSNBC has done some research that indicates that its viewers enjoy these kinds of ad hominem attacks. By all means, take issue with specific parts of Gov. Christie's agenda, and discuss why you think he is wrong. But calling someone a "fat slob" (even if the person is overweight) -- does that earn points with viewers that advertisers actually want to reach? Moreover, should commentators from any network speak in defense of any heckler, who by their very nature detracts from civil discourse?
I suppose that Mr. Schultz has had a good run on MSNBC, but I think it's possible that for a variety of reasons (the pending Comcast deal with NBC Universal, a new schedule to deal with declining ratings, general sanity), he might be trying to line up a new gig soon.
CWCID: Hot Air
Well no. It is the NJ teacher's Union that is pretty cold hearted, rather seeing their own members being fired than allow them to contribute to their own job salvation and the state's solvency at the same time.
Ad hominem attacks are both dishonest and cowardly, and their use erases all credibility that the user might have had otherwise.
Such attacks demonstrate that there is no counterargument to the other person's statements, or that the attacker can construct none, and so the attacker resorts to name calling in a dishonest attempt to obfuscate the issue at hand and to try to change the subject, even to an irrelevant matter, rather than concede that the other person might have a point. And they are cowardly through the attacker's lack of moral courage, as well as lack of integrity, in admitting same.
It's useful to listen to the press representatives of the left, as well as those of the left directly, but only to understand the nature of the attacks (and perhaps to hear an actually cogent statement). There's certainly not even any comic relief from such puerile diatribes.
Calling someone a fat slob attempts to connect a negative to the messenger and thus to his message on an irrational, emotional level. To much of that type of thing on both sides of the aisle these days.
Can't we just all balance the budget? Stop "jackpot justice" lawsuit abuse? Fight terrorism or stop the Mexican drug trade? Can't the MSM and our political class do anything important?
They can attack Rush Limbaugh and Chris Christie. It must be because they make such BIG targets, Har... Har..
No wonder the Democrats invited a clown to DC to testify on Friday.
I would guess that a significant portion of MSNBC's audience must think it's a plus, or these wouldn't keep airing. I'm trusting it's not a majority.
(Trusting. Interesting choice of word, I just noticed. I wonder who I'm trusting when I say that.)