Brown’s biggest adversary wasn’t the person he was debating, David Haryansi, but host John Stossel and the audience. And this week, Stossel continued to criticize Brown’s argument and performance in a column.
Concerning that column, Brown said:
. . . don’t get me wrong: I love John Stossel, and he’s a voice for sanity on fiscal issues in TV Land.
But what do you say to a man who, when you point out that the reason the government is involved in marriage is that taxpayers and society have a key interest in bringing together mothers and fathers to raise their children together, responds this way:
“Again, so what? I don’t care if there are three fathers and six mothers. If it’s a stable relationship and the kids are connected with their parents, that’s great.”
That’s a fantasy, not a proposal to take children’s needs for their mom and dad seriously.
For the record, I’m really not a fan of Stossel. I think that he is the personification of a once proud journalist who gladly handed over his integrity at the sight of his first big paycheck.
And I really don’t buy his “Im a libertarian” nonsense. I am of the opinion that calling himself that is merely a way for him to rationalize what he has become.
Having said that, Stossel rightfully panned Brown. And I am not saying that simply because I don’t agree with Brown’s position in the first place.
Brown was abysmal on Stossel’s show:
Brown came across as boring and listless, talking out of the side of his mouth with a rapid but monotone delivery which gave away the fact that he was reciting carefully memorized talking points as if he had done it a myriad of times before, which he probably has.
A little tip, Brian. I know you have probably recited those nonsensical talking points so many times that you can do it in your sleep, but your delivery of said talking points is not supposed to give that actuality away.
And the part, seen below, bears seeing again because it emphasizes the fact that Brown was clearly going through the motions:
I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall if Brown was forced to have an explanation with NOM’s “secret backers” because of his performance.
And just in case you are wondering, Brian, the answer is yes.
You did come across as if you are merely going through the motions to get that big paycheck.
It definitely beats working.
But one has to wonder is this a sign that a change may be due for NOM. According to Equality Matters:
This is at least the third major cable news appearance in the past couple of months during which NOM’s president has had a less-than-stellar performance. During two recent interviews on MSNBC, Brown found himself facing hosts and guests who came prepared to challenge his anti-equality talking points and refused to let him get away with baseless assertions.
If this trend continues, NOM might want to consider avoiding appearances on major cable news networks (or at least find a new spokesperson).