1. Michael Moore 2. Arthur Sulzberger 3. Ted Kennedy 4. Jesse Jackson 5. Anthony Romero 6. Jimmy Carter 7. Margaret Marshall 8. Paul Krugman 9. Jonathan Kozol 10. Ralph Neas 11. Noam Chomsky 12. Dan Rather 13. Andrew Heyward 14. Mary Mapes 15. Ted Rall 16. John Edwards 17. Al Sharpton 18. Al Gore 19. George Soros 20. Howard Dean 21. Judge Roy Moore 22. Michael Newdow 23. The Unknown American Terrorist 24. Lee Bollinger 25. James Kopp 26. Dr. Martin Haskell 27. Paul Begala 28. Julian Bond 29. John Green 30. Latrell Sprewell 31. Maury Povich 32. Jerry Springer 33. Bob Shrum 34. Bill Moyers 35. Jeff Danziger 36. Nancy Hopkins 37. Al Franken 38. Jim McDermott 39. Peter Singer 40. Scott Harshbarger 41. Susan Beresford 42. Gloria Steinem 43. Paul Eibeler 44. Dennis Kozlowski 45. Ken Lay 46. Barbara Walters 47. Maxine Waters 48. Robert Byrd 49. Ingrid Newkirk 50. John Vasconellos 51. Ann Pelo 52. Markos Moulitsas 53. Anna Nicole Smith 54. Neal Shapiro 55. David Westin 56. Diane Sawyer 57. Ted Field 58. Eminem 59. Shirley Franklin 60. Ludacris 61. Michael Savage 62. Howard Stern 63. Amy Richards 64. James Wolcott 65. Oliver Stone 66. David Duke 67. Randall Robinson 68. Katherine Hanson 69. Matt Kunitz 70. Jimmy Swaggart 71. Phil Donahue 72. Ward Churchill 73. Barbara Kingsolver 74. Katha Politt 75. Eric Foner 76. Barbara Foley 77. Linda Hirshman 78. Norman Mailer 79. Harry Belafonte 80. Kitty Kelley 81. Tim Robbins 82. Laurie David 83. The Dumb and Vicious Celebrity 84. The Vicious Celebrity 85. The Dumb Celebrity 86. Chris Ofili 87. Sheldon Hackney 88. Aaron McGruder 89. Jane Smiley 90. Michael Jackson 91. Barbara Streisand 92. Kerri Dunn 93. Richard Timmons 94. Guy Velella 95. Courtney Love 96. Eve Ensler 97. Todd Goldman 98. Sheila Jackson Lee 99. Matthew Lesko 100. Rick and Kathy Hilton
Posts: 2845 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
In my not so humble opinion, any list like that that has Jimmy Carter in the number six slot is full of crap. He's a great humanitarian, a good Christian, among many other things, even if his term in the presidency was less than stellar. He is making the world a better place, not a worse one.
Posts: 3658 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, I don't think I'll be buying it. Or going to the library to read it.
Many of the people on that list haven't done more than give their opinion on something - that shouldn't be considered "screwing up" anything regardless of how stupid their opinion may or may not be.
Posts: 367 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't see any prominent Republicans on that list. Surely at least one of them is screwing up America.
Posts: 9871 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: The number one New York Times bestselling author of Bias delivers another bombshell -- this time aimed at ...
100 People Who Are Screwing Up America
No preaching. No pontificating. Just some uncommon sense about the things that have made this country great -- and the culprits who are screwing it up.
Bernard Goldberg takes dead aim at the America Bashers (the cultural elites who look down their snobby noses at "ordinary" Americans) ... the Hollywood Blowhards (incredibly ditzy celebrities who think they're smart just because they're famous) ... the TV Schlockmeisters (including the one whose show has been compared to a churning mass of maggots devouring rotten meat) ... the Intellectual Thugs (bigwigs at some of our best colleges, whose views run the gamut from left wing to far left wing) ... and many more.
Goldberg names names, counting down the villains in his rogues' gallery from 100 all the way to 1 -- and, yes, you-know-who is number 37. Some supposedly "serious" journalists also made the list, including the journalist-diva who sold out her integrity and hosted one of the dumbest hours in the history of network television news. And there are those famous miscreants who have made America a nastier place than it ought to be -- a far more selfish, vulgar, and cynical place.
But Goldberg doesn't just round up the usual suspects we have come to know and detest. He also exposes some of the people who operate away from the limelight but still manage to pull a lot of strings and do all sorts of harm to our culture. Most of all, 100 People Who Are Screwing Up America is about a country where as long as anything goes, as one of the good guys in the book puts it, sooner or later everything will go.
This is serious stuff for sure. But Goldberg will also make you laugh as he harpoons scoundrels like the congresswoman who thinks there aren't enough hurricanes named after black people, and the environmentalist to the stars who yells at total strangers driving SUVs -- even though she tools around the country in a gas-guzzling private jet.
With Bias, Bernard Goldberg took us behind the scenes and exposed the way Big Journalism distorts the news. Now he has written a book that goes even further. This time he casts his eye on American culture at large -- and the result is a book that is sure to become the voice of all those Americans who feel that no one is speaking for them on perhaps the most vital issue of all: the kind of country in which we want to live.
posted
Isn't Michael Savage the fellow who threatened to sue Bush over the term "companionate conservative?"
Posts: 367 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: Reviewer: Joseph Schultz "Joe" (Ashland, OH) - See all my reviews I was expecting to be entertained by this book, but instead I was educated. I voted for Bush in 2000 and have pretty much been a staunch Republican all my life. But over those first four years I quickly discovered that Bush is not a Republican - he's a NEOCON. I didn't vote in 2004 because I couldn't support neocons. Neocons are the Sith who are secretly controlling the Republican party and the nation. With Goldberg's book, it became crystal clear that the people he lists are not enemies of America, nor are they even enemies of the true Republicans that are still out there. These people are the enemies of the neocons in power and this book is designed to keep them that way, at least among the masses who've been successfully coerced thus far. If all it takes to get a book published nowadays is to list a bunch of people you personally hate along with some a page or two of your own ranting, facts-need-not-apply reasons for doing so, then I'm starting my book tomorrow and should have it and my book deal done by the following day. It's clear Goldberg used this exact method on his book.
posted
Al Franken is only on that list at all because he dared to debunk the b.s. in Goldberg's previous book.
Posts: 1357 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Michael Moore doesn't have enough power to be the man most responsible for screwing up America. Most of the other names I recognize are media celebrities. I'll agree that the media do have a lot of collective power to cause trouble. But I suspect that those in political power have more, and they don't get much of a mention.
Posts: 3546 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Jay, the funny thing about this thread, and this book, is that I am not a very "good" liberal, and half the people on that list are my idea of amazing Americans.
MM isn't one of them though...
I also thought it very funny that I could have guessed about half of the top 50. . .
Just because this was your thread.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
It'd be a more amazing list if it had Dick Cheney, Bill Frist, Rumsfeld, most especially Anne Coulter, O'Reilly, and a host of other names on it.
As it stands, the majority of the people on that list hold little to no real power. They can't effect change on almost any level. Except for Jimmy Carter, who is a great humanitarian.
Sad, sad, sad little list.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
This sounds about as stupid as the "Greatest American" show. Which is to say, very stupid indeed.
Posts: 4089 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
Remind me some time to make a list of the people I find vaguely annoying and write a book called People Who Should Be Taken Out Back and Shot to Keep Our Country Free.
The difficulty, of course, would be in finding enough to write about each of them to fill a full-length book. I'd have to include pictures, large text, and a bunch of white space before each entry. Or I'd have to tell some imaginary personal anecdotes. Whichever seems easier.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Have I mentioned what a hackneyed, tired, stupid concept the whole 'sticking up for normal people by labeling everyone you disagree with elitest' thing is?
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
But why are they considered bad Americans? Because they question the idea that America is a perfect, flawless country? Because some of them were against the Iraq war? What about the people who are even more vicious and negative, who do nothing but project lies and stereotypes on a regular basis? I have a lot of respect for many on the list, though Courtney Love and Michael Jackson irratate me, David Duke is annoying and Barbara Streisand did that horrible version of Stoney End and I will not forgive her for that.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'd think Donna Brazil would be on there before Al Gore, at least she still actively participates in the Democratic party.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Lee Bolinger is the president of Columbia University. How, exactly does that screw up America?
Besides being the most ethnically diverse Ivy League school, Columbia is also swarming with liberal hippie intellectuals. What could be worse for America than non-whites learning?
Posts: 5264 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
On the plus side, Courtney Love is apparently neither a dumb nor a vicious celebrity, or else has done so much more good than your average dumb and/or vicious celebrity that she -- along with Babs and MJ -- are in fact better than most dumb/vicious celebrities. This must come as a relief.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Pretty obviously a quick money-maker that will get snapped up by smug neo-cons because it vindicates their own prejudices. Too bad he limited himself to the active ones, he could have complained about Margaret Sanger, Charles Darwin, Martin Luther King, Jackie Robinson, W. Mark Felt, Rosa Parks, Louis, Mary and Richard Leakey, the women who marched for suffrage... There are plenty of interfering, squawking people who simply did not know their place and who spoke out against the People Who Know What's Good For Us.
Not that I don't agree with some of the choices. You can keep Michael Moore, Al Franken, and Kitty Kelly if you'll also be honest enough to include Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, and Bill O'Reilly (of all the spiteful conservative commentators, only Michael Savage?). I agree about Michael Jackson, Courtney Love, and Ann Nicole Smith, although I don't know why the Hiltons are on there but their daughter isn't. The stack of celebrities whose only crime was to speak out against the war? Who cares? How much influence do they really have, anyway.
Eve Ensler? I gotta hear the reasoning behind that one. Is this guy that afraid of women?
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hey, where's Jon Stewart? He's gonna be peeved...
Why is Ken Lay on there but Jack Abramoff isn't? Was Lay's crime willful corporate malfeasance and influence peddling, or was it being caught?
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
By "Screwing Up America" he obviously means "talking a lot". Then the list makes sense.
Bill Moyers is screwing up America? Last I checked he is a retired interviewer for PBS. A liberal interviewer, but just an interviewer.
I'm sorta sad that Pat Leahy isn't on the list. Apparently being a senior member of the senate that the Vice President likes to cuss at isn't screwing up America. Damn.
Posts: 903 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
See, and it's completely rational for us to lampoon the list, the author's motivations, and the rationale for each person on the list, without so much as picking up the book! We're Americans, darn it! We don't need to see something to have an opinion about it!
So a conservative wrote a conservative book. Are we really going to wet our pants over it?
Michael Moore wrote a book that defined Stupid White Men, in part, as guys who ran large companies that provided needed products and gave jobs to hundreds of people. Nobody got worked up about his failure to lampoon people who agreed with him.
What's the suprise here?
This afternoon I picked up a book in the library about the greatest Presidents. Whoever had last checked it out had gone through the list putting question marks by all the ones they disagreed with (Carter low? Reagan high? Clinton just mediocre?) and exclamation points by the ones they liked (Rosevelt high, Kennedy high, etc).
Similiar marks were made throughout the book. Comment looks good for Democrats? Exclamation point! Comment looks bad for Democrats? Question mark! And the inverse for conservatives.
That's all anybody does, really. Wholeheartedly swallow anything that fits their world view, and question anything that would challenge it.
If you're interested in knowing why somebody would think somebody you respect is screwing up America, get the book from the library. If you're not, then there's probably still copies of Stupid White Men or Downsize This kicking around.
And before anybody accuses me of hypocrisy again, I have my copy of Downsize This! sitting three feet away from me as I type this. I saw every episode of TV Nation, and still have a few of them on tape kicking around somewhere. I've been a fan of Michael Moore's since his first film, despite my politics being completely the inverse of his. He can make me laugh like few others.
But I'm also looking forward to Larry Elder's film "Michael & Me," where he turns the tables on Moore.
It's all part of the dialogue in the media age.
Posts: 1894 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hey docmagik! How's it going? Yea comparing this to a Michael Moore book? Not the best way to convince people that it's rock solid.
Posts: 3564 | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Michael Moore wrote a book that defined Stupid White Men, in part, as guys who ran large companies that provided needed products and gave jobs to hundreds of people. Nobody got worked up about his failure to lampoon people who agreed with him.
Nobody got worked up over Moore, eh? You should get out more. I hear they've made entire movies debunking some of his claims.
quote:If you're interested in knowing why somebody would think somebody you respect is screwing up America, get the book from the library. If you're not, then there's probably still copies of Stupid White Men or Downsize This kicking around.
And what if you're not interested in what spin and lies either of these idiots throw around?
I'll write both off as ultra-biased drivel, and if I'm concerned with the issue at hand, I'll get the truth rather than try and average both sides' spin.
Posts: 5264 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
I'm not defending it. It might be drivel behind drivel.
I'm just saying--the book was written by a conservative. The list consists of liberals and people who give conservatives a bad name. Where's the shock in that? Why's everybody so amazed the list is biased?
If somebody had made a big fuss over the fact that a Michael Moore book said bad things about the war in Iraq--not a big fuss over his actual claims, but just a big fuss over the fact that he didn't like the President, you'd think this person was from Mars and didn't know how political books worked.
That's what I'm saying here. I'm not saying nobody got worked up over Moore's actual claims--I'm saying nobody was terribly shocked that he took the political stance that he did.
Am I explaining the difference clear enough?
If a dog poops on your carpet, you're going to get upset over what it's done to your carpet, not that the dog could create poop.
Posts: 1894 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:That's what I'm saying here. I'm not saying nobody got worked up over Moore's actual claims--I'm saying nobody was terribly shocked that he took the political stance that he did.
So you think people are more annoyed because of the fact that he's a conservative with conservative views then what exactly his views are?
Posts: 3564 | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes. I'm saying this thread is about people being shocked that the list is made up of nearly all liberals, when that's the kind of book it is.
It's like when my brother tried to warn us away from seeing "Evita."
He said, "I heard it's just a bunch of singing."
So yes.
The only other explanation--if you want something a little more inflammatory--is that this thread is a bunch of people doing exactly what they're accusing the author of the book of doing.
They're dismissing someone out of hand because of thier beliefs. "His beliefs are different from mine, ergo he is dangerous and/or silly."
Most of them do not actually know the rationale for his beliefs, why he included this or that obscure reference, but they're able to make quick assumptions and judgements based on what motivation would fit their view of conservatives.
Their assumption is that this man is making this list irrationally, simply because these people are disagreeing with him.
However, they are acting just as irrationally. They are not refuting his logic or his evidence--they can't because none of that is presented since this is just a list. They are dismissing him and his list based solely on the fact that it is different from their own.
Not saying that's wrong. That's what a liberal would do, just like cranking out this list is what a conservative would do.
That's what bias is.
Posts: 1894 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually my assumption was based on the list and some extrapolation based on the common denominators. For all I know the title of the book is sarcastic and he likes them all. But it's clear, based on previous opinions expressed, that Jay believes this list is at least partially accurate, so I figured making fun of the list is fair game just to see how he responds.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Yes. I'm saying this thread is about people being shocked that the list is made up of nearly all liberals, when that's the kind of book it is.
It's not shock, it's annoyance. People aren't suprised that someone would write a book like this, or at least I know I'm not. So it's exactly the same as the reaction one gets from Michael Moore.
[/quote]Not saying that's wrong. That's what a liberal would do, just like cranking out this list is what a conservative would do.[/quote]
Wow, you've drawn yourself quite a thick line there. "This is what Liberals do... This is what Conservatives do..." That kind of thinking will always lead someone to think one side is inherently better. Three guesses as to which side you believe is better.
Posts: 3564 | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Jebus, I was saying that, just like a conservative would make a list that categorized people who thought differently from him as bad, liberals would then use that list to categorize him as bad.
In other words, I'm saying both sides are doing exactly the same thing.
Which means there's not a side I was pushing as being better. I was just tilting the scales back to center.
Posts: 1894 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
What if you're peeved at demagogues and rabble-rousers and crooked politicians from both sides?
It's not opposing opinions that bother me. If this country can't handle hearing ideas we might as well fold up now. What bothers me the most is the tactics and methods used, even if I agree with the ideal behind them, because extremists of any stripe are more inclined to damage the society they're in just to achieve their short term goals.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Jebus, I was saying that, just like a conservative would make a list that categorized people who thought differently from him as bad, liberals would then use that list to categorize him as bad.
In other words, I'm saying both sides are doing exactly the same thing.
Which means there's not a side I was pushing as being better. I was just tilting the scales back to center.
You keep doing this Liberal/Conservative thing. I'm sure there are plenty of Conservatives who would dislike this list, aswell. Just like I know there are plenty of Liberals who dislike Michael Moore.
Posts: 3564 | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged |
I am not either. I AM tired of people on BOTH sides throwing around labels and making absurd claims about their opponants. I won't listen to Rush or AC (and I don't mean the bands here.. ) most of the time because I usually already know what they will say....it takes very little to guess what Al Franken and MM will say about the same issues as well.
I do like listening to Molly Ivans and Jon Stewart, and to O'Rielly sometimes, because at least they make some good points, even if I don't agree with ther conclusion all of the time.
There is a difference between hate-spewing and reporting, or even political commentary and humor.....and if I wanted to listen to a bunch of idiots spewing this type of crap I would just go listn to the a bunch of drunks down at the local bar talk about the Red Sox/Yankees games this year.
I guess you could say I am biased against poor attitudes, which is why I dislike MM and AC about the same amount. Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
dogmagik reminds me of Mr Card for some odd reason, are you OSC in disguise? You argue an excellent point. And as for getting rid of extremists... then where will us old Bolsheviks go?
Posts: 1567 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wouldn't say get rid of anyone..I have learned a few things from even right-wingers and extreme lefties.
I just don't thin that there is anything wrong with filtering out most of what some of these people think. I don't have to read through their crap to reconize the smell from a distance.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: Yes. I'm saying this thread is about people being shocked that the list is made up of nearly all liberals, when that's the kind of book it is.
Well, no. That's the kind of book it IS. The kind of book it CLAIMS to be is a list of the Top 100 People Screwing Up America.
I think what we're doing is pointing out that it's regrettable that this particular conservative believes the two lists are apparently conflated.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rather than the conservative bias of the list, I was more bothered by the fact that anyone has the stones to point to 100 people and declare that they're breaking a society that's been around for more than 200 years.
Last time I checked these people haven't shot anyone, or started antigovernment movements, or take part in burning down the White House. Most of them like a good hamburger like the average American. Most of them talk for a living, which just doesn't make the list for "Screwing Up America"-worthy professions.
I'd never say that Ann Coultier or Rush are screwing up America. I don't agree with them in the least, but they're just as right as the people I do agree with.
Posts: 903 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
To truely improve something you have to go beyond simply questioning and assaulting, it is always easy to be on the offensive. I can always come up with something you did wrong, no one is perfect. The difficult part is trying to construct, organize, and to keep something running smoothly on a day to day basis without any crazy abuse or perversion of power.
Posts: 1753 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would have to say that the current America is not a society that has been around for 200 years, I'd say it was more developed from around the time of WWII on.
Posts: 1753 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Cry]](graemlins/cry.gif)
