I met him tonight.

I went to Tower Records Lincoln Square in New York for the book signing. By the time I got to there Al was just finishing up his Q & A with the audience, and the signing began. I saw that Franken was also signing a new CD of material from his Air America radio show, so I went and bought it, getting one of my friends at the store to give me their employee discount.
---I got on line for the signing, not minding that I was almost last, because I wanted to find the spot in his book Lying Liars where he referred to conservative author and activist David Horowitz in passing as a racist so that I could ask him about it. This surprised me when I first read it, because he didn’t provide any explanation as to why Horowitz was racist, which seemed like the kind of invective and vitriol that he criticized when exhibited by people like Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity. My only knowledge of Horowitz was that he had written a book, Uncivil Wars, in which he argued against reparations for slavery, and that for this his speaking appearances at colleges were obstructed through threats, theft of copies of the ad from school newsrooms, and pressure on the faculties. I also remember that Playboy, which was appalled at the censorship of Horowitz’s views, had printed his ten reasons against reparations in their Forum feature, which I thought was admirable, given that it is considered a liberal magazine, and I myself thought most of his arguments were well-reasoned.
---My attempt to research Horowitz online before I left for the city using the WordIQ online Encyclopedia and Wikipedia revealed nothing to corroborate the idea that he is a racist, and frontpagemag.com even stated that in 70’s, Horowitz created the Oakland Community Learning Center, an inner city school for disadvantaged children that was run by the Black Panther Party, that in the 90s he created the Individual Rights Foundation, which led the battle against speech codes on college campuses, and compelled the entire “president’s cabinet” of the University of Minnesota to undergo five hours of sensitivity training in the First Amendment for violating the free speech rights of its students, and that he was a spokesman for the California Civil Rights Initiative in 1996, which barred government from discriminating against or granting preferential treatment to any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin. The site also stated that he is part of Ward Connerly’s campaign to pass a Racial Privacy Initiative, an anti-racial profiling initiative that would prevent government agencies from asking citizens about their race, and that he is an outspoken opponent of censorship and racial preferences and a defender of the rights of minorities and other groups under attack, such as blacks, gays, women, Jews, Muslims, Christians and white males. This hardly sounds like a racist. I’d be willing to listen to Franken’s arguments, if only he’d explain why he thinks Horowitz is a racist.
--- So when I got up to the dais, I asked if I could ask him a couple of questions, and after he said yes, I asked if he planned to respond to any of the refutations of his work that are found on a couple of websites, perhaps to refute them himself. He said that he has done so to some degree in the paperback version (mine was the hardcover), and indicated that a lot of the criticisms are not valid, using as an example a critic who pointed out that a woman (whose name I forget) whom Franken said had broken her arm in his book had not actually done so. Franken explained that it was a joke, and not meant literally. He was essentially saying that the things critics were focusing on were not salient, so I brought up the issue of Franken’s accusing Ann Coulter of lying when she refers to her endnotes as footnotes, since I felt the same way about that, and he responded that the reason he pointed that out in his book was because footnotes can be read easily because they’re on the same page as the main text, and endnotes are harder to use, because they’re in the back of the book, and going back and forth between the back of the book and the page you’re reading is harder, but this seems like a split hair to me, and a threadbare basis on which to accuse someone of lying. I mean, when I recently read Michael Shermer’s The Science of Good and Evil, I actually kept two bookmarks in the book, because I noticed that some of the endnotes were rather extensive, and wanted to read them after reading the indicated passages. If anyone found fault with a statement made by Coulter, would it really be that difficult for them to take their own notes, and/or copy down the sources provided? But I didn’t challenge him on this point, and didn’t want to overstay my welcome with people behind me, so I asked him if I could have my picture taken with him, and he said sure.
---I asked him about David Horowitz, and he said that he called Horowitz a racist because of a poster ad that Horowitz took out pertaining to his book explaining his views, Uncivil Wars, which Franken thought was extremely inflammatory, and although he couldn’t tell me exactly what was in the ad, Franken actually thought Horowitz took it out so that he would be barred from the campus, so that he could later say that he was barred and look like the victim. “You mean he engineered the event?” I asked, and Franken said yes. This seemed extremely conspiracy-ish to me, and I’d like to know how Franken knew that Horowitz had done this, but again, I didn’t push him on it, and instead simply asked him if he thought this ad typifies Horowitz, and if Horowitz is a racist “through and through,” and Franken said he didn’t know, adding that it wasn’t “not the highpoint of the book.” I find this appalling. If you’re going to accuse someone of being a racist and put it in your best-selling book, which garnered lots of publicity, shouldn’t you explain in detail why you think that person’s a racist, and how you know that they’ve done these things you’re alleging, rather than simply refer to them this way in passing?
---After getting home, I tried to find images or text copies of the ad online since getting home. At first, all I can find about it are articles that claim that the ad, which is titled, “Ten Reasons Why Reparations for Slavery Is a Bad Idea and Racist Too,” denounces slavery reparations, and that the reason some saw it as inflammatory was merely because it delved into the topic of racism and reparations. I finally found it here, and it appears to be the same one that I read in Playboy, and I fail to see how it could be seen as inflammatory, and to call Horowitz a racist for it is outrageous. I’m very disappointed in Franken.

Why did you say that Franken "knew" the event in question was engineered, when, in his own words according to you, he said he "thought" that was the case?

That was my wording, but not necessarily his. I don't recall his exact words, but I don't think it was with the word "thought"; he worded it in a matter-of-fact manner. My use of the word "thought" in relating his words was meant in the sense that "that's what he believes." Sorry if I was unclear on that point.

Al Frankin is a comedian. This works out well as I usually end up laughing at him everytime he opens his mouth. Faaaaaaar more so these days then when he was a writer for Saturday Night Live. Where he came up with such bland characters as Stewart Smally.

Al Franken is a comedian only if you think lies are funny.

I dunno, I think he says lots of funny things in his books. His comment about O'Reilly's book, Living With Herpes had me in stiches.

But what lies in particular on his part were you referring to, Dan?

Incidentally, I finished Horowitz's book Uncivil Wars about a week or two ago, and found both Horowitz's elaborations on the original ad's arguments, and his description of the controversey and attacks upon him that followed, to be well-argued. I emailed him a short while ago to tell him this, and to give him the link to this board, and he thanked me. I highly recommend the book.

New documentary about Franken.

Air America files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.

Does anyone know if Franken won the Senate seat? The last I heard, the recount was very close, with Franken ahead by only a couple of hundred votes.

It's still in limbo. Probably won't be decided officially until after the New Year.

At least a couple more weeks. (Weeklystandard.com)

Franken Wins, Coleman Concedes.

8 months later, wow.

Maybe we should let these things be decided by Domino's. 30 days or less, or we'll take away three filibusters.

Well, it was after the new year.

Anyone here remember when Franken got in trouble in SNL's fifth season when he delivered "A Limo For The Lame-O", a monologue where he took then-NBC Entertainment President Fred Silverman to task for failing to create/greenlight any decent shows on NBC ("Supertrain", anyone?) and that he didn't deserve to be supplied with a limosine from the network? Franken was let go, and in 1980 Lorne Michaels had left and Jean Doumainin took over and nearly destroyed SNL completely! And then the late Charles Rocket said "F***" on the air, and everyone except Eddie Murphy and Joe Piscopo were abruptly fired. And an article I read concerning the truly terrible 80-81 season of SNL read that "It would take nearly a decade for the show to recover."

However, Franken would return to portray Stuart Smalley in the 90's, and would even get a movie out of it. I've never seen it myself. And the fact that he became a politician is kind of weird, and I recall what Ronald Reagan said in response to Ed Asner (then president of the Screen Actor's Guild) critizizing one of his policies by saying "What does an actor know about politics?" Pot, meet kettle!

Anyway, Franken is a Senator now, I forget for which state. Just thought I would add this here!

He's the junior senator from Minnesota.

Ahh, I see.

His segment on SNL was The Al Franken and Tom Davis Show. Tom Davis just died in July.

I absolutely love the original SNL, to the extent that I've still never watched a full episode of the show since the original cast left. Franken and Davis were two of the main writers. But I could never even chuckle or produce a smile from watching their segment. And it's not because of a differing political alignment. It was just lame, although some people really seem to like it.

I'm with you 100%, Kevin. I haven't really watched SNL since the original Not Ready for Prime-Time Players left. And, I never thought Franken was particularly funny. (I've never seen Franken's Stuart Smalley movie, Stuart Saves His Family, either, despite a good deal of play on HBO in the mid-'90s). SNL now seems nothing more than a launching pad to a movie career. The most recent example is Kristen Wigg, whose Bridesmaids was a huge hit (in addition to being actually funny), and who recently left the show. Hope Ms. Wigg's career doesn't go the way of Tim Meadows'. Whose Ladies Man movie, IIRC, went nowhere.

Senator Al Franken has been accused of groping and (unwanted) kissing of news anchor LeeAnn Tweeden. "President" Dump has weighed in on this matter with his (unwanted) opinion, while staying silent on the Roy Moore sex allegations issue, and his own problems with sexual harassment and assault (including a lawsuit from a former Apprentice contestant). More here.

Franken's accuser is a birther who is a paid regular on Sean Hannity's show. This makes me pause.

Al Franken is expected to resign from the Senate today, amidst a slew of sexual harassment allegations. Yet the Senate Republicans will embrace Alabama candidate Roy Moore, if he wins the special election on December 12. And it looks like he will, despite accusations of sexual misconduct, including having sex with teenage girls while Moore was in his thirties. This is a product of the age we live in - the age of Donald John Trump.