Al Franken a Lying Liar

[bfp]

Al Franken, author of "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them," is getting a bit of his own medicine via a new website created to challenge the liberal humorist's claims in the book.

Frankenlies.com points out several factual missteps in Franken's book, complete with footnoted rebuttals.

Written in a comical tone, the site points out the irony of Franken's claim that 14 researchers helped him fact-check his book, while frankenlies.com employs exactly "zero Harvard researchers."

One of Franken's "lies" cited is his contention President Bill Clinton thwarted "plots to kill the pope and blow up 12 U.S. jetliners simultaneously."

Frankenlies.com corrects the author, noting it was Philippine officials who prevented the attack on the pope in Manila in 1995.
"The truth is that Bill Clinton had as much to do with thwarting these plots as, well, as much as Al Franken did," the site states.
Another Franken claim the site takes on is that former Bush foreign policy adviser Richard Armitage "bolted" from a Senate hearing and "[knocked] over veteran reporter Helen Thomas, breaking her hip and jaw."

The person behind frankenlies.com, who remains nameless on the site, shares a brief e-mail dialogue he had with Thomas in which the longtime White House correspondent says the claim is "not true," and then thanks him "for your concern."

The site further takes issue with Franken's sourcing of Net blogs as evidence to back up his claims:

"If Franken's presentation weren't shameful enough, he reaches one of the lowest rungs of journalistic integrity when he cites Internet 'blogs' as evidence of 'voter suppression' during elections of 2002. (And he doesn’t even cite a single specific blog address for someone to investigate for himself!) ("Lies," page 363). Blogs, like the graffiti one sees on the walls of a public restroom, are not subject to any editing, fact checking, or rules whatsoever. To level such serious implications of racism and then cite Internet blogs as a source of information is hardly up to the standards of any credible author. …"

The site's creator posts some comments from readers:
"Can someone please tell me why Mr. Franken's book is not relegated to the FICTION section of the book stores? Keep up the good work," says one reader.

Said another: "Thanks for helping to right the many wrongs. ... When did comedians become foreign policy experts, and when did the American people start taking these comedians seriously?"
Frankenlies.com invites readers to contact the creator if they know of any inaccuracies in the site's analyses. No word yet on whether or not Franken himself has challenged any of the postings.

Says the site's creator: "This site is not intended as a personal attack toward any individual. It is intended as an honest challenge/critique to a published work."

[Adam D]

Hey look, it's a Michael Moore wannabe.

[bfp]

Originally posted by Adam D
Hey look, it's a Michael Moore wannabe.

Just noting the double-standard.

[Adam D]

Originally posted by bfp
Just noting the double-standard.

Of what?

Originally posted by Adam D
Hey look, it's a Michael Moore wannabe.

And what a forthright and honest presenter of fact mr. Moore is.

[bfp]

Originally posted by Adam D
Of what?

Franken wrote a book as of late for a reason. To establish that there are liars in the media on the right that lie to the public.

And he did the same exact thing in his book.

[Adam D]

Originally posted by bfp
Franken wrote a book as of late for a reason. To establish that there are liars in the media on the right that lie to the public.

And he did the same exact thing in his book.

Topic of Franken aside, there are liars, spinners, and poor journalism on the right. That's true of mainstream media as well though, and Franken is included in that.

I don't care for Franken for a couple of reasons. One, like Ann Coultier, he's using political situations and politics as a whole, not to even make a real argument, but to rant and rave for his own gain. He's not adding anything real to the larger political debate in this country.

Two, and I guess it's along the same line as the first, his style of writing and argumentation is the same reason I don't like Limbaugh or O'Reilly or anybody else that uses the same style of throwing around jingo and making half-assed arguments that are jingoistic. Instead, he could make a clear, concise, research position and say exactly the same things he does say. Michael Moore, for what it's worth, is a good example of this, at least in his older books. I realize not every political discussion has to be serious (why I think Moore's political humor is as popular as it is) but it should maintain accuracy and make a concise point, rather than nitpicking at pointless issues and slinging jingo.

When Franken kept his nose out of partisan politics he was one of the funniest writers ever.

His SNL stuff was amazing and Franken and Davis wasn't bad.

Like Lenny Bruce (although not nearly as tragic) his "comedy" is becoming bitter and not funny.

[Adam D]

Originally posted by xiannaix
When Franken kept his nose out of partisan politics he was one of the funniest writers ever.

His SNL stuff was amazing and Franken and Davis wasn't bad.

Agreed.

[bfp]

Adam, O'Rielly and Limbaugh have nothing in common.

[Adam D]

Originally posted by bfp
Adam, O'Rielly and Limbaugh have nothing in common.

1. They are both conservative

2. They both host radio talk shows

3. They are both male

4. They both support Bush

5. They both attack liberals and the Left

6. They both make their arguments based on jingo

[bfp]

1. They are both conservative

O'Rielly isn't conservative

2. They both host radio talk shows

That's a given. I can't believe you responded with that. I meant their dialogue.

3. They are both male

" " " "

4. They both support Bush

Actually, O'Rielly supports Lieberman as well.

5. They both attack liberals and the Left

O'Rielly attacks Bush and the right all of the time.

6. They both make their arguments based on jingo

[Adam D]

Originally posted by bfp
O'Rielly isn't conservative

Like I'm not Leftist.

O'Rielly attacks Bush and the right all of the time.

Right. A slap on the wrist for the Right occasionally is not attacking them.

whatever.

[Xodiac]

Hm...regardless of what I think about Al Fankin, most of his "lies" exposed in this web site seem to be just various critisisms of his book, his sources, misinterpretations of his jokes, and information did he failed to include that works in favor of the other side. One of the entries attacks Al for not having any black co-authors in his book. Okay this may or may not be a valid criticism, but, how is not having black authors lying? I don't have any black authors co-writing this post, so I guess I'm a liar too.


In any case, I found this site pretty dissapointing, as there unfortunately really wasn't that much in there that was really too detrimental to his credibilty, especially for a website called fankenlies.com. I mean, if it was called "idontlikefranken.com" or maybe "frankensbookblowsyourgrandmasass.com" then I might spend more time considering the individual merits of the arguments themselves.

Originally posted by bfp
O'Rielly isn't conservative

thats funny. i seem to see him and his book listed as an offering from the Conservative Book Club......