Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Brwn_eyes0511
Josh, you know how much I love you man, but you have to stop listening to Mr. Franken, whose book is just full of those "lies" that he hates so much...
Again, this seems to be a slam dunk for Al. UNLESS, of course, you happen to own a copy of the book Slander, and cannot believe you were duped that bad, so you check it.
Here's what the endnote actually says:
And just to be sure that people do not take this entirely out of context, here is the passage that referred to this endnote:
As I said, the way Mr. Franken lies about lying in endnotes is to quote stuff out of context, and omit the pertinent portion of the endnote from his commentary. All in the interest of exposing the truth. Of course, it's kind of hard to do that when you lie by omission, huh?
|
I'm looking at my hardcover copy and it's clearly page 134.
In any case, you fail to see the point, dear. She lies to her audience by misleading them. There is quite a marked difference between
personality popularity poll numbers and
job approval ratings. She writes in her book that his "approval ratings" never got lower than 75 percentage points during the Iran-Contra scandal; that is incorrect. She refers to approval ratings when she should be referring to his personality popularity numbers. Another misleading fact is that she never tells the reader that his personality popularity numbers were wildly all over the map during both of his terms and once dropped to 50%. She lies by misleading, it's as simple as that. If she were to say flat-out that the public's opinion of him as person was
much better than how they actually felt about his administration and policies, her argument would lack punch and show her hero to be a likable man who was ineffectual as president. She couldn't possibly concede that, silly boy, and instead has to puff his presidency up as the greatest we've had and perpetuate the myth that he ended the cold war. Funny thing is that Clinton left office with higher job approval ratings than Reagan did.