Yeah that one. I agree that even if it seemed like the odds were stacked against Coburn, he just didn't do a good job in general.
I'm interested in what you think about the DRG vs Chip Berlet debate. What did you think of that one?
For what it's worth here's my opinion of this one. I know you directed this at Red, hope you don't mind.
The host (Amy Goodman?) was professional and adroit, her introduction was somewhat slanted but she redeemed herself by asking very pertinent questions during the debate. Overall, civilised and politely conducted with hardly any cross-talk. A good example of how these events should be handled.
Those are the bones what about the meat?
DRG brings up many well-worn thoroughly-debunked truther canards (the debate is from 2004) ie the Put Options, OBL in Dubai Hospital, PNAC, Pentagon hole to small, fire doesn't bring down steel buildings, aircraft fuel doesn't explode, WTC7 fires were very small and died down quickly, freefall collapse to less than three storeys height, seismic evidence shows underground explosions, WTC steel shipped to Asia before it could be studied, concrete turned to dust..on and on and on. Despite all this, when asked (by the host) to name one structural engineer who refutes the "official story" he cannot do so.
Berlet, faced with this deluge of twoof, takes a good tack and concentrates on one or two of DRG's claims. He disputes the claim that aircraft fuel doesn't explode as it did on 9/11 (and rightly says this is easily disproven). The OBL Dubai hospital visit is dismissed, the sources for that story are anonymous the head of the hospital says it didn't happen. Berlet informs DRG that far from being a non-existent entity a certain pentagon crash witness (by the name of Winslow, I'm assuming that the DRG book claims he doesn't exist) is easliy located, he's a radio reporter in Washington. Berlet let's DRG know that he is relying on substandard research.
In reply DRG goes off on one a little, announcing that Berlet is just "picking holes" in the evidence. DRG asserts that it is the cumalative argument that matters. I find this theory amusing, I'm quite sure that Berlet, given time, could have debunked every one of DRG's claims.
Debunkers 1 Truthers 0
Compus
