Originally posted by addabox
Well, I think the point is that Al Franken and Michael Moore don't "go the other way".
They have certainly written books that take specific figures and polices of the right to task, but they haven't written any books, that I know of, whose general premise is "conservatives are the scum of the earth and don't deserve to share the sidewalk with you".
Well they don't call them conservatives. Instead they just call them "Stupid, White Men" as Moore did in his book.
Also you've obviously never heard of Clint Willis and his "I Hate" series which includes the "I Hate Republicans" followed up with more books like....
..The I Hate Ann Coulter, Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage, Sean Hannity. . . Reader: The Hideous Truth About America's Ugliest Conservatives
...The I Hate George W. Bush Reader: Why Dubya Is Wrong About Absolutely Everything
...The I Hate Dick Cheney, John Ashcroft, Donald Rumsfeld, Condi Rice. . . Reader: Behind the Bush Cabal's War on America
etc... I think the point is made...
There is always an effort to claim "equal and opposite" in these kind of things, usually shorthanded by "we have Ann Coulter, you have Al Franken, as if the only possible distinguishing feature of a pundit was partisan affiliation.
By that logic, we shouldn't worry if "The Unibomber Manifesto" hits the best-seller charts, because "they have the Wall Street Journal".
"Rush Limbaugh is a big fat idiot" doesn't even inhabit the same universe as "the 9/11 bombers should have targeted the offices of the New York Times".
Well you seem to point out the key differences in your own examples. The right claims certain people are bad any might even threaten the country. The left meanwhile has folks sending mail bombs, torching SUV's on auto dealership lots, claiming private land for public interest, etc.
Or was that not the point you were trying to get across with the Unibomber example?
Edit: You pointed out the series and I hadn't gotten that far down yet. Good show.