Suggestion for a Fox News TV Show
Ok, I’m not a fan of shows like The View and The Talk. Sometimes, when I have free time, I watch them to find out what is being said on them. Often it is crazy talk. The View has some of the wost anti-Catholic rants found in the modern age. It’s bad when Whoopi Goldberg appears to be the most rational host on the show. She tries to keep it balanced, though of course, her biases still come out, and her attempts to defend Catholics from criticism often are as wrong as the attacks.
Now, I think Fox News should have their own “woman’s talk” show. The four panelists should be: Sarah Palin, Christine O’Donnell, Peggy Noonan and Ann Coulter. I would find many of their views as erroneous as I find being stated on The View, but I do think they could do a successful alternative to it. Call me crazy, but I do believe in equal opportunity. I also think it would be a good way for Palin, O’Donnell, Noonan and Coulter to channel their ideologies into something productive. It would allow their views to be discussed and debated, just as much as The View and The Talk does for others.
Comments are closed.
Henry,
Pure genius but I would loose Noonan. Who instead?
Rachel Campos what’s-her-name who was on Real World and her husband is coming to Congress.
One of the reasons I chose Noonan is that I think she would help make sparks fly, which are also needed for shows like this.
Henry is correct on the impact Noonan would have. Austin is correct that this should not be done. It would be an act of cruelty to her that she does not deserve.
Maybe Michelle Bachmann. I noted that even AFTER the polls had closed and she need not fear the impact on the election and after she initiated the topic of the need for huge spending cuts, she could not name one particular spending cut. Even after REPEATED requests.
I still don’t have a clue what the Republicans are actually doing to do or propose. If someone does, I think there is a market here in Washington were folks would pay top dollar for some insight.
Any takers?
Ok. I nearly spit out my coffee, and I am laughing but I really don’t know why. I think because that thought actually scares me to death. You are actually asking that we feed the beast. You may think it would help channel their ideologies into something productive, but what? What could be productive? Their views are already discussed and debated. This would just serve to give them more credibility and worse yet, an even larger mass following. That thought really makes my stomach turn.
I don’t think there has been a proper forum for their ideas as ideas to be explored and developed. Programs like this allow for such exploration, and indeed, demands more of the people on the panel when they are on the panel then if they are merely guests on the panel. It is the difference which happens when one becomes a teacher — one has to do much more work, to show one knows the subject, otherwise their teaching comes off as shallow. Empty rhetoric becomes more exposed in this format when one is on the panel (and I think this is true for The View and The Talk as well). It might even allow them to grow, and hopefully in more positive dimensions. It might not. But I do think it would be a good idea — especially if they really bring in a diverse group onto their show, like The View has been known to do. I could be wrong, and just hopeful, but I am one who likes to promote dialogue, and I think this would be a good way for it to go forward.
You know the other day I read a suggestion from someone on another blog, that there should be a political party and it should be “The Pro Life Party”.
All too often both sides of the aisle have felt let down by the two big parties. So why not start your own political party and call it the Pro Life Party? Then everyone could endorse the candidates in that party, and they should hopefully have the social justice side to them as well. I just wonder if something like this could be done. You do have so many people willing to vote on that issue alone, that there would have to be millions of people out there, willing to back it. Anyways, I just thought it was an interesting idea. It may open up more dialogue on how to invent even better candidates that represent us all.
Back to the topic at hand, sorry for getting off track there. I guess you do have a point about the possibilites of growth for them. I guess that is why it will never happen. Peggy Noonan would give them a lot of credibility.
Interesting suggestion. My wife sometimes watches The View while I’m in the room and it is appalling how biased, irrational and uninformed the discussion can be. Whoopi Goldberg is the least offensive of the hosts, by a wide margin. Elizabeth Hasselbeck plays the role of token conservative. She is sincere but not up to the role and she usually becomes a punching bag for the rest of the crew who can beat up on her without fearing a substantive response. Then they can claim that there is some kind of political balance on the show, which of course there isn’t. I like the idea of the Fox counterpart, kind of a Bizarro world version. I’d like to think the Fox version could actually achieve a more thoughtful, rational, and less biased level of discussion. Noonan and Palin could do this. Not so sure about Coulter and O’Donnell.
Henry I would have to say that while I don’t think it is a bad idea, I am not sure of the line up. When I think of Peggy Noonan with the other three women, I feel myself shrinking back. Neither Palin nor O’Donnell could keep up with Peggy if you ask me and I am *not* saying that in the hateful tone of so many. As for Ann Coulter – I’m sorry, that is the problem with her for me, she comes off as completely hateful as I perceive her.
As I said – it is a good idea.
I’m sure there are other possibilities as to who could be on it. I certainly agree with Coulter’s style as being of the type which I find deplorable — yet, again, in a show like this, it could work and also, maybe, a show like this could get her to change.
How about Michelle Malkin? She’s nails on a chalkboard to me, but she’d fit right in.
Malkin could fit, and might be better than Coulter for the show.
May I suggest Janeane Garofalo? Talk about sparks flying…
Why put it on Fox? Just expand The View to include Coulter and Michelle Malkin.
Would Coulter or Malkin deign to appear on a non-Fox outlet?
Okay. To fix the problems with The View, rather than coming up with a right leaning version of the same thing (which is what I think the article was suggesting), I would suggest: keep Whoopi Goldberg; Replace Barbara Walters with Cokie Roberts; Eliminate the Joy Behar position; Replace Elizabeth Hasselbeck with Peggy Noonan; Replace Sherry Shepherd with Donna Brazile. But then you wouldn’t get the same train wreck feeling that now attracts so many viewers.
They have to be invited in order to appear.I have seen Coulter and Malkin on non- Fox programs but not as often as they would probably like. They are both authors and would be happy to appear anywhere to plug their books, and as such once in a great while I have seen them on AM network programs, but not often. Rather than the two of them refusing to appear anywhere but Fox, the more likely explanation is that the leftist powers that be on most news related TV don’t want to get near them. A soft form of censorship if you will.
I would watch that show — con gusto!
I think the problem might be that anyone here is watching these shows in the first place. Sheesh, I’d never even heard of The Talk though I think I’ve read reference ot the The View once or twice…
“I think the problem might be that anyone here is watching these shows in the first place. Sheesh, I’d never even heard of The Talk though I think I’ve read reference ot the The View once or twice…”
Ha ha, I hear you you DC. I don’t watch any of it. I have my own vices, but these aren’t it.
Henry writes, “It might even allow them to grow, and hopefully in more positive dimensions.”
To get an idea how likely that is, I guess we could ask whether Goldberg, Behar, et al. have been enabled to grow through their participation in The View? Or are they pretty much the same as they always were?
Henry,
I thought of you this morning while reading this story. Did you happen to see this one? Palin and Coulter together on a talk show? I can’t see how any good could ever come from it.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/11/04/palin%e2%80%99s-twitter-controversy/#more-133922
No, I didn’t see it.
When I read about Coulter’s tweet that said: “The blood of Jesus against Obama history made 4 Nov 2008 a Taliban Muslim illegally elected president USA: Hussein.”
Henry, it says so much about you that you have hope for Coulter to change. I am being perfectly serious. It is what makes you such a good Christian. Thank you for the reminder that hope for transformation matters.
It’s not always easy to keep that hope, but I do keep it, for anyone. Knowing many of the saints as I do, I know how bad off some can be before transformation takes place.