--i don't think that's 'hurling insults', unless one is so sensitive as to not be able to take amusing analogies. The description there is of a pacifist who is not all that much of a pacifist, which there is plenty of documentary evidence to back up. ----------------------- My point was that people on this list threw a fit when someone ideologically impure was being interviewed by Doug. As if it somehow cast _him_ in a bad light to even interview Levy--no matter how tough or not he was on him.
--still off topic i'm afraid, since i have no objection to goodman doing an interview of DL, I do object to the free pass and the refusal to interview anyone on her show who has done quite good critiques of the DL and the organizations he heads, w/ particular reference to the claims they make about Tibet past and present. --------------------------------------
But don't you think that, given all the ra-ra America stuff that Hope did, and how much he was loved etc., that if someone like Doug interviewed him, asked him the "tough questions" (Why are you a stooge of imperialist warfare? Why make the troops laugh when their killing innocents?) and so on, that there would be very little good that would come from that for the left?
--Bob Hope never pretended to be something he wasn't, unlike DL and his left leaning fans. ------------------------ The Dalai Lama squirms. He hedges, he fudges, he's inconsistent. Maybe he even gets mad and starts throwing things. What has changed? You really think that anyone who's listening to Doug's show who currently likes the Dalai Lama will stop doing so? Maybe so. But it's a lot more likely that people who are listening to Doug's show already feel the way you do about the Dalai Lama.
--hard to say, i'd say it'd definitely generate food for thought for those who adore him and would make the discussion rounds in the internet world, wouldn't be such a bad thing. even better than wasting time on DL, i've recommended that doug interview Barry Sautman, who could do a really fine interview on Tibet.