LIES

Al Franken says God told him to write this book. That's pretty funny.

Al Franken says God told him to write this book, that's pretty funny. I mean, it really is a very funny book. I wouldn't lie to you.

There's some introductory stuff about Harvard, Franken's research team, and his conversation with God. Then, in the first chapter, he gets right to his first point — which, in my simplified wording, is: conservative spokespeople are like charcoal-covered pots calling a white kettle black. This is where the book really shines. Franken and his research team have (to shamelessly mix metaphors) dug up the smoking gun and run it up the flagpole. I salute their efforts. The right-wing zealots1 have gone effectively unchallenged for too long. It's not just that (by accident or design) they get things wrong — it's that when someone points out an error they've made, they ignore the protest, and often try to drown out the protester.

Take Ann Coulter. (Please.) Chapter 1 of this book opens with Franken describing her condemnation of The New York Times for its refusal to carry the story of Dale Earnhart's death on its front page for two whole days (my emphasis). In fact, such a story was right there on the NYT front page the day following his death. Franken reproduces the page in question to prove it. The chapter goes on in this vein, amply demonstrating that Ms. Coulter is guilty not only of sloppy research but of lifting unattributed quotes from other sources and implying (imp-lying) they were part of a Times editorial. In short, she tells lies. It broke me up to read how Franken debunked her attempt to show the liberal bias of print media in general by claiming a Washington Post staffer is the son of a well-known socialist candidate for president. (He isn't.) How did Franken do this? He called the staffer and asked him. I'm reminded of Tom Paxton's comment on the liner of one of his albums: You don't have to invent something to satirize such people, said Paxton. You just quote them.

Similar treatment is given to other leading lights of the conservative bent. (Note how I resisted the temptation to describe them as "leading heats". Or, no, actually I didn't resist. If I had I wouldn't have inserted this parenthetical comment.)2 I won't attempt to list any of his points here. Suffice it to say that he tears apart a specious table which claims to prove that the huge budget deficits of the 1980s were due to the Congress, not Ronald Reagan. The table comes from the Web, and was reproduced in Sean Hannity's book Let Freedom Ring. And this is a real hoot: I just visited that Web site and, though the URL has changed3 and the table has been reformatted, it still presents the same specious numbers in the same specious way.

Franken's other point — really the main thrust of the book — is to analyze the policies and actions of the Bush administration. He does a mostly serious and fairly competent job of this, presenting a great deal of factual information. He wanders quite a bit; but he hits the major topics: tax cuts, environmental protection, terrorism, the war in Iraq, education, the economy. Some highlights are his revelations of the dirty tricks used against John McCain in the 2000 Republican primary in South Carolina, his dissection of Bush's tax cuts, and the way he illustrates the environmental record of the current administration by focusing on the "CAFO" (pig farm) problem. In this respect, the humorous and imaginative treatment found in Lies is a useful complement to such thoroughly sober analyses as The Book on Bush (reviewed in this section.)

Franken's book has three principal defects:

• He invents facts and conversations. This is part of his humorous debunking approach, and obviously intended to be instantly recognizable as such. However, it isn't always so easy to spot. He should have used some typographical technique to distinguish it from the straight story. Perhaps narrower margins, or a different typeface.
• He overdoes the hostility and the gutter language. Sure, this is to satirize the way his victi... uh, his subjects talk. But I feel a more "highbrow" tone would be more effective.
• Franken gets facts wrong. Yes, folks, even with a crack research team of 14 highly astute Harvard students. I have more to say about this in my Errata page and in a rant, both linked below.

However, he gets far more of his facts right than wrong, and the majority of his jokes work. My bottom-line judgement: While it has flaws, this is an enjoyable book with some vital messages to convey. I recommend it, though not with my highest rating.

To contact Chris Winter, send email to this address.
Copyright © 2004-2024 Christopher P. Winter. All rights reserved.
This page was last modified on 22 August 2024.