Tuesday, July 03, 2007

Why do these people have radio shows? (paca)

A brilliant conversation on talk radio today on the way back to the house this morning between radio host Michael Medved and a random caller, "Roger".

Medved: What do you choose, Roger? Victory in Iraq or defeat in Iraq?

Roger: I don't choose either. I don't think we can win at this point.

Medved: So, you choose defeat.

Roger: No, I said I so not think we can win. I think that is the unfortunate reality.

Medved: You choose defeat. You want the U.S. to lose.

Roger: It's not that simple! It is not possible for us to be victorious. I am not choosing either.

Medved: It's a simple question, Roger. Do you choose victory or defeat? You apparently choose defeat.

I couldn't take anymore and slammed the radio off. I'm sorry, but that "simple question" is so impossibly innane I'm embarassed that Medved has a national radio show at all. Don't the stations which purchase his program hear this and think, "maybe we should look for other shows that would be popular with our audience." The 'simple question' is only legitimate if Medved believes that our desires create the world. I don't like mosquitos, so -poof!- no mosquitos! This is a parallel conversation which would be legitimate if Medved's line of questioning were valid:

Medved: Sun, Roger. You know the big ball up in the sky? Do you choose hot or cold?

Roger: Um, it's hot.

Medved: So you choose a hot sun.

Roger: Well, it is good that it's hot; you know, sun's energy and all for life on the planet.

Medved: You clearly have chosen a hot sun then.

Roger: What?!

The point? One does not choose facts. They just are. That's why they are called facts.*

Of course, there is a legitimate question that Medved could be asking; i.e., is it a fact that we can no longer win in Iraq? That's a legit question and well worth discussing on political radio. What are the facts? But this stupidity of "choosing" reality is embarassing. The conversation clearly only has one purpose. Medved wants to blame people, people that he was waiting to blame before anyone ever spoke, i.e., the mysterious and mighty Left, for a possible reality he doesn't like. I don't mind conservative radio. I just get infuriated at stupid radio.

*Facts, yes, yes, I know about pragmatism, relativism, conceptual shaping of reality, etc. Basic point stands, and Medved certainly doesn't think he's a relativist about reality, though he's acting precisely like one here. A dumb one.

No comments: