Comments on: Random Mutations. http://www.thecontrarianmedia.com/2007/10/random-mutations/ The Toast of Delinquent Intellectuals Everywhere Mon, 30 Jan 2012 23:57:47 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.5 By: casey http://www.thecontrarianmedia.com/2007/10/random-mutations/comment-page-1/#comment-1956 casey Sat, 13 Oct 2007 15:13:45 +0000 http://www.tannermooredesign.com/thecontrarianmedia/2007/10/random-mutations/#comment-1956 I pretty much agree with you, except for the idea that Matthews' and Stewart's "philosophies" are in any way incompatible. I'm pretty sure Stewart has implemented a lot of the strategies in Matthews' book, whether he cares to admit it or not. Matthews' strategic/professional outlook as I see it is this: 1. If you don't have the stomach for it, and don't want to win, don't bother. 2. Be genuinely interested in what people, even your opponents, have to say. 3. Understand and embrace the essential absurdity of it all. 4. But don't let that stop you from following through on your goals. Seems like Jon might already have some familiarity with those concepts. I pretty much agree with you, except for the idea that Matthews’ and Stewart’s “philosophies” are in any way incompatible.

I’m pretty sure Stewart has implemented a lot of the strategies in Matthews’ book, whether he cares to admit it or not.

Matthews’ strategic/professional outlook as I see it is this: 1. If you don’t have the stomach for it, and don’t want to win, don’t bother. 2. Be genuinely interested in what people, even your opponents, have to say. 3. Understand and embrace the essential absurdity of it all. 4. But don’t let that stop you from following through on your goals.

Seems like Jon might already have some familiarity with those concepts.

]]> By: Murf http://www.thecontrarianmedia.com/2007/10/random-mutations/comment-page-1/#comment-1957 Murf Sat, 13 Oct 2007 05:25:56 +0000 http://www.tannermooredesign.com/thecontrarianmedia/2007/10/random-mutations/#comment-1957 I have no problem with Stewart being tough with either Lynne Cheney or Matthews. Lynne Cheney is a political figure. She's not just a wife of a VP. She goes out and makes stump speeches and is a member of a conservative think tank. She's completely fair game. As for Matthews, I think he's fair game because he wrote a book that Stewart strongly disagreed with. Stewart wasn't attacking him; just the philosophy presented in Matthews book. Here's the weird thing, I'm more interested in Matthews book now than I was when I saw a fluff interview with him about the book. Now, I'm curious as to what he said that annoyed Stewart so much. However, I think the reason why authors go on TDS and TCR, despite knowing the audience is politically opposed to them, is that they know the book will get bump in Borders and B&N to the special shelf for TDS & TCR. That's worth the public flogging for them. I have no problem with Stewart being tough with either Lynne Cheney or Matthews. Lynne Cheney is a political figure. She’s not just a wife of a VP. She goes out and makes stump speeches and is a member of a conservative think tank. She’s completely fair game.

As for Matthews, I think he’s fair game because he wrote a book that Stewart strongly disagreed with. Stewart wasn’t attacking him; just the philosophy presented in Matthews book.

Here’s the weird thing, I’m more interested in Matthews book now than I was when I saw a fluff interview with him about the book. Now, I’m curious as to what he said that annoyed Stewart so much.

However, I think the reason why authors go on TDS and TCR, despite knowing the audience is politically opposed to them, is that they know the book will get bump in Borders and B&N to the special shelf for TDS & TCR. That’s worth the public flogging for them.

]]> By: casey http://www.thecontrarianmedia.com/2007/10/random-mutations/comment-page-1/#comment-1958 casey Thu, 11 Oct 2007 15:34:40 +0000 http://www.tannermooredesign.com/thecontrarianmedia/2007/10/random-mutations/#comment-1958 That's why I said complicit by proxy. It's not that he should harsh on her, but why did he take such a tack with Matthews? Is he responsible for the SCHIP veto or the war in Iraq? That’s why I said complicit by proxy. It’s not that he should harsh on her, but why did he take such a tack with Matthews? Is he responsible for the SCHIP veto or the war in Iraq?

]]> By: Neil Cleary http://www.thecontrarianmedia.com/2007/10/random-mutations/comment-page-1/#comment-1959 Neil Cleary Thu, 11 Oct 2007 15:22:30 +0000 http://www.tannermooredesign.com/thecontrarianmedia/2007/10/random-mutations/#comment-1959 <i>C'mon Jon, grow a pair.</i> But in all fairness, <i>she's</i> not responsible for all the terrible things that he does. Why harsh on her? C’mon Jon, grow a pair.

But in all fairness, she’s not responsible for all the terrible things that he does. Why harsh on her?

]]>