[Speed Gibson,
Friday November 23, 2007 at 7:26am]
Prager vs Brownstein
This Tuesday (Nov 20, hour 2 on Townhall), Dennis Prager interviewed Ronald Brownstein, author of "The Second Civil War: How Extreme Partisanship Has Paralyzed Washington and Polarized America." He is currently a columnist for the National Journal and Los Angeles Times.
I heard this hour in my car while running errands. I was shouting at the radio at Brownstein's nonsense, cheering Prager's calm dismantling of his premise, that the right is responsible for the increasingly polarization. Brownstein soon found himself painted into a corner, saying that these two statements were comparable in this regard:
Dennis had offered quote one and asked Brownstein to provide something comparable from a Republican. He couldn't of course, and made do with statement two above. Having no other cards to play, this was his story and he was sticking to it, lest the entire premise of his book collapse by his own admission.
As Prager says, he prefers clarity to agreement. As with Lori Sturdevant per Michael Wigley, a liberal listens to Brownstein. A conservative listens to Brownstein and understands what he says.
I heard this hour in my car while running errands. I was shouting at the radio at Brownstein's nonsense, cheering Prager's calm dismantling of his premise, that the right is responsible for the increasingly polarization. Brownstein soon found himself painted into a corner, saying that these two statements were comparable in this regard:
- "Our moral values, in contradiction to the Republicans', is we don't think kids ought to go to bed hungry at night." (Howard Dean, DNC Chair, on Meet The Press)
- "She said we have been an ‘on-your-own society.' She said, ‘It's time to get rid of that and replace it with shared responsibility.' That's out with Adam Smith and in with Karl Marx." (Mitt Romney, speaking of Hillary Clinton, while campaigning in New Hampshire)
Dennis had offered quote one and asked Brownstein to provide something comparable from a Republican. He couldn't of course, and made do with statement two above. Having no other cards to play, this was his story and he was sticking to it, lest the entire premise of his book collapse by his own admission.
As Prager says, he prefers clarity to agreement. As with Lori Sturdevant per Michael Wigley, a liberal listens to Brownstein. A conservative listens to Brownstein and understands what he says.