Pants on Fire: How Al Franken Lies, Smears, and Deceives

Nav:Home > Radio > Pants on Fire: How Al Franken Lies, Smears, and Deceives

Press:Cumberland House WND Books (October 1, 2005)
Author Name:Skorski, Alan


...PANTS ON FIRE amply illustrates not only that many of Al Franken's claims are false but that Franken employs the very tactics he accuses the right of using.


Humor & Entertainment,Radio,General Broadcasting,Arts & Photography,Performing Arts,Politics & Social Sciences,Politics & Government

 PDF Download And Online Read: Pants on Fire: How Al Franken Lies, Smears, and Deceives



Comment List (Total:14)

  •     Whatever happened to intellectual conservatism? This is just another fuzzy-minded, angry "expose" that only seems to show how effective Franken's radio program is becoming.I would welcome an intelligent conservative book, along the lines of William F. Buckley in his prime. Something that challenges my mindset and stands on it's own merits, but this is yet another juvenile piece of sludge that is written at the approximate level of a college Freshman's english term paper. It attempts to be an answer to Franken's provactive and witty writing style, but fails miserably. There is no class, so assumption of intelligence on the part of the reader and - worst of all - seemingly none of the interest in the well-being of the nation that is evident in Franken's work. You may not agree with him, but no one can argue he isn't thinking about the country, and what is best for it.I fear that the Coulter's, O'Reilly's, Hannitty et al stamp is indelibly on an entire generation of conservative writers, and we are stuck with this sort of angry, petty bilge from the right for the forseeable future.
  •     Whatever you think of Al Franken, at least he writes well, has a sense of humor and doesn't take himself too seriously.
  •     This fish wrap was a waste of time and money. Most of the alleged "lies" were not lies at all but appeared to be the author's "take" on things.
  •     All these bombardments from Franken, and no response from the Right - mostly because Al's research is so diligent - until now. And this is the best the Right can do? Bottom line: Skorski is an angry, petulant, 2nd Grader debating a Political Professor Emeritus. He is not Franken's intellectual equal. And yes, I have read the book.Skorski has the gall to print a Department of Labor graph that he can't even read; any moron who can add can see that the numbers prove Franken's point about minimum wages. Skorski says it proves the opposite, after admitting that he can't follow the graph. Then there's his coup de grace: Franken (correctly) caught O'Reilly in a falsehood when Bill said he and his show (Inside Edition) won a Peabody award, and then lied about saying it. Skorski's defense: Franken accused O'Reilly of lying about winning the award HIMSELF, when Bill was really only lying about THE SHOW winning the award. Are you getting a feel for the level of analytical thinking here?If you want the truth, this book is a complete waste of time.
  •     This book is just what Al Franken is talking about. A republican looking out for his special interests and distorting information along with outright lies.
  •     Al is right. Alan is wrong. Al tells the truth. Alan tells lies. Al really cares. Alan is just in it for the money.
  •     If you read the more critical reviews of this book, you will note that the vast majority of them resort to personal attacks which would make Al Franken proud.
  •     This entire book has been discredited online. It is nothing more than a pathetic attempt to get back at Al Franken.
  •     if I wanted to listen to conservative lies and raving i would wach fox news
  •     I had to give this book a chance, so i borrowed a copy from a friend of mine who, for some strange reason, thought buying this was a good idea.I believe there is a severe mental condition that is going around in America. People who are so afraid to think, so allergic to facts and information, actually go out attacking those who are the most credible.Mr. Franken is a comedian. But his books have no inaccuracies. Leave it to a comedian to do thorough research I guess. In his three most popular books, he illustrates in detail how the "liars" lie, and what the lies are.In this book, the author actually shows his own ignorance. But beyond just being somewhat ignorant, the author also reveals the obsession of hating facts. Many times in the book the author makes AL'S OWN POINT. Other times, the author just states a lie over and over to try to magically make it become true.Does anyone care about truth any more? I dont think so. And anyone who would give this book above a "one star" rating, needs to get their head examined.AS FOR THE PEABODY issue- not only did Bill lie, but he expanded the lie. He then claimed he never said the lie. Then he repeated the lie AGAIN. when confronted at the book expo, on the same stage with Franken, he lied again about lying. Then went on his show, and lied about lying about lying. And this man is still employed in the US. oh well.
  •     I read many of the reviews for 'Pants on Fire'. It didn't take too long to realize that the Franken lovers were the 1 star reviewers (who didn't bother reading Skorski's book) and...
  •     While the writing is uneven,the in depth and quality of the reserach and facts to back the author's points is exceptional.
  •     This is actually an interesting book. I'm a liberal and a Democrat, and I read this book not to be convinced about a variety of minor points but to try to figure out where some...
  •     Al Franken's "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them" is based on the premise that right-wing pundits routinely resort to distortion, exaggeration, personal attack and outright lies in the course of stating their arguments. In attempting to rebut Franken, Skorski frequently resorts to just those tactics.One example will serve: It is widely believed in some circles that Bill Clinton had a chance to take Osama bin Laden, that bin Laden was offered on a silver platter and Clinton refused. Franken wrote in his book that in fact, Clinton never did have such an opportunity.Skorski now comes along to "prove" that Al Franken lied about this. To do so, he quotes Clinton's own words. Clinton said that in 1996, there was in fact a possible offer, but because bin Laden had AT THE TIME committed no crimes (this was long before 9/11, before the attack on the U.S.S. Cole and even before the bombings of two embassies in Africa) there was no legal basis for American authorities placing him in custody.Skorski then inserts, parenthetically, his own note telling me that "you will agree" that because Clinton says he didn't want to take bin Laden, that must mean he could have if he had wanted to.But Clinton did NOT say he didn't want to. He said there was no way to do it. In fact, what Clinton said is quite the opposite of what Skorski says he said. There is Skorski lying to his readers, boldly doing it on the very same page as the quote showing he is lying.The rest of the book is equally weakly argued. There may be a solid refutation of Al Franken somewhere, but this isn't it.

Relation Books


Pop Culture,Television,Sheet Music & Scores,Trivia & Fun Facts,Humor,Movies,Radio,Puzzles & Games Book,。 Humor & Entertainment Book 

Humor & Entertainment Book @ 2018