WWW.RIDESIDE.NET

Posted by ConorClockwise on 2007-03-12 19:00:31 +0000

Ew

Posted by tgl on 2007-03-12 22:27:17 +0000

"That's, like, ageism!" If you don't understand Brittany Spears, than, like, whatever! You certainly wouldn't, like, understand the Patriot Act! More liberal bias in the Media. Why is the Right's viewpoint always espoused by slim, dumb, blondes?

Posted by MF DU on 2007-03-13 02:34:50 +0000

Even if that blonde speaker on the view had an eloquent point to get across, I have a gut feeling that Rosie still would have talked over her and been applauded. I have a lot of respect for Rosie ever since she dropped the Tom Cruise schtick and stood defiantly on the courthouse steps of San Francisco with her partner. At least it seems like there is something genuine there now - I guess it just bums me out when one person makes a "preaching to the choir" type of statement and someone, anyone, says something that doesn't quite line up with the past "choir" statement and the end result is that the opposing speaker is talked over, instantly dismissed, or laughed at (or all three). Also, Rosie has way more oratorial experience - she drops the facade of talking to her other starbucks sipping ladies and looks directly at the audience and slams her point down emphatically - almost warrior 'Pat Buchanan' style. (I used to laugh At the Buchanan thing so much - when he got going on a point - he would start a "wood chopping" motion with his extended fingers and forearm going down towards the podium at a 45 degree angle) Although, I have no ground to stand on as to why she started making bad pop culture references to make her point. Why would anyone be caught dead trying to get across a serious political argument and bringing up Britney Spears? Oh yeah, that's really going to help dissuade any viewers...

Posted by G lib on 2007-03-13 12:49:36 +0000

Even if that blonde speaker on the view had an eloquent point to get across, I have a gut feeling that Rosie still would have talked over her and been applauded. This is absolutely true. But she didn't.

Posted by tgl on 2007-03-13 13:49:11 +0000

In the clip I saw, Rosie let Blondie speak her mind. Blondie decided to whine about ageism (even though she's, like, 30) instead of making a salient point about why the Patriot Act might be necessary. ...and just saying "if it makes us safer" isn't a satisfying argument because I have no way of verifying that claim.

Posted by MF DU on 2007-03-13 14:04:52 +0000

There is no question that Rosie puts up the better argument of the two here. I am just saying that Rosie's answers have a waft of sanctimoniousness to them that doesn't sit well with me.

Posted by virtue on 2007-03-13 16:26:52 +0000

It's really hard not to be sanctimonious when one's debate partner not only offers up no reasonable argument in response to the matter at hand, but then proceeds to focus his/her response on an off the cuff comment not germane to the conversation. The fact that the woman (she must have a name other than blondie) also invokes ageism in a manner that is out of step with its predominant usage is just the rosette on the icing of the cake.

Posted by MF DU on 2007-03-13 17:10:48 +0000

There are ways to disagree without belittling or discounting others.

Posted by Epoisses on 2007-03-13 17:30:17 +0000

Blondie = Elisabeth Filarski Hasselbeck, ex- of Survivor season 2.

Posted by virtue on 2007-03-13 17:40:43 +0000

Yes, there are ways to disagree without belittling or discounting others in an ad hominem way, although an invalid argument can and should be discounted. I'm just not sure that Rosie is doing either in a contectually unacceptable way.

Posted by MF DU on 2007-03-13 17:45:59 +0000

wow.

Posted by ConorClockwise on 2007-03-13 17:50:50 +0000

Good points, virtue.

Posted by ConorClockwise on 2007-03-13 17:52:20 +0000

Another reason to dislike that TV program.

Posted by G lib on 2007-03-13 19:18:01 +0000

The newest sticker: DUMBASS