The Genesis of the Show

War on Guns suggests there’s treachery afoot in regards to tonight’s show. I had the following conversation with Ahab on July 24th, which got saved in my IM logs (no nefariousness involved in the logging.  It helps me remember who to credit when people send me stuff by IM).  I asked Ahab if I could publish it, and he agreed:

10:52:50 PM Sebastian: I think you should do a show on radicalism in the gun rights movement
11:02:30 PM Ahab: We’re actually planning one
11:03:07 PM Ahab: It just seemed natural
11:03:41 PM Ahab: But we need some people to argue on the air about it
11:03:52 PM Sebastian: Kurt Hoffman
11:03:58 PM Sebastian: That would be my vote for the other side
11:07:22 PM Ahab: Oooh, that’s a good one
11:07:40 PM Ahab: I’ll email him to see if he’s available
11:07:51 PM Ahab: You want to be the moderate?
11:10:26 PM Sebastian: yeah
11:10:41 PM Sebastian: But you’re going to have to be the neutral moderator
11:11:13 PM Ahab: That would sort of be the point
11:11:22 PM Ahab: Plus, bonnie can help
11:11:53 PM Sebastian: I wouldn’t suggest like, a debate format
11:12:12 PM Ahab: No no – here’s what I’m thinking
11:12:36 PM Ahab: We have a rough script, and you guys get different questions and stuff
11:12:58 PM Sebastian: yeah
11:13:07 PM Sebastian: That’s the right way to do it I think

I’ll let folks judge for themselves whether our intent was to plot an intellectual ambush. Kurt was just an off the cuff suggestion.  I chose him because I viewed him as a good advocate for his side, and his entire involvement in the incident was above board.  That’s not to say there aren’t others who’s comments and discussion were above board, but Kurt was the first person who came to mind.  The only other discussion I’ve had with Ahab about the show was to see if he’d be willing to share the questions with both Kurt and I ahead of time, so we could be able to answer them without being all “uuuh… well… eeeh.” having to think on our feet.  Ahab’s response was that he actually wanted us to think on our feet, so he only shared a broad outline, with both of us.  Fair enough.  It’s his show.

I think Ahab can manage to put his differences aside, and lead the show in manner that’s fair to both sides.  I hope I’m not wrong about this, but I think it’ll work just fine.

10 thoughts on “The Genesis of the Show”

  1. Yes, in fact we can. I fully expect Kurt and Sebastian to demonstrate that on tonight’s show – it’s funny how rapidly acrimonious the threat at War on Guns became all over the letter “y”.

  2. Eh… it’s not just the letter y. I mean, I’m not saying you have to respect Mike, because he certainly is not in the business of respecting people who disagree with him, but it’s a little disingenuous to suggest that calling him Mikey is just adding ‘y’ to the end of his name. You know that it means more than that.

  3. Is it not a little puzzling that you can express amusement at the reaction to the gratuitous use of the letter “y,” and then shortly afterward acknowledge that it was used as a deliberate and calculated discourtesy?

  4. I look forward to the discussion! I am listening to the ‘guns in church’ chat right now. Seems to be a decent show.

  5. The thing I find most interesting is how quickly Ahab is condemned for being disrespectful towards Mike V., when Mike V. has been incredibly disrespectful towards those that do not share his views. While I can understand the feeling that two wrongs do not make a right, there’s just something deliciously ironic about what basically amounts to the following exchange:

    Mike V. – “If you don’t agree with me you’re a coward and not a real gun defender! You don’t do anything to help out the movement! You’re probably a jack booted thug government thug in disguise! When the revolution comes I’ll be shooting evil rogue gun grabbers like that!”

    More Moderate Gun Bloggers – “Damn, dude, you’re crazy. Stop scaring whitey!”

    More Extreme Gun Bloggers – “How dare you call him crazy despite the fact he’s been incredibly insulting to you! For shame!”

    The best part of it all is that the entire reason that people like Mike V. so ardently support gun rights is for defense; defense from the government, defense from criminals, etc.. Yet, at the same time, when someone defends themselves verbally by stating that you think he’s crazy while he’s outright calling you a jack booted thug sympathizer, you’re then told you’re being disrespectful!

    This is seriously some of the most amazing cognitive dissonance I’ve witnessed in awhile. Kudos, supporters of Mike V.!

  6. I should note: Don’t get me wrong, not all Mike V. supporters are like that. Some are perfectly nice/respectful/reasonable. It’s just that a lot, much like Mike himself, aren’t.

Comments are closed.