Politico, please define "feuds"
August 01, 2009 1:18 pm ET by Eric Boehlert
What, another concocted Politico headline that doesn't match the facts of the story (but lands a Drudge linked)? We're shocked.
From Politico:
Franken feuds with T. Boone Pickens
Obviously, "feuds" implies an on-going and bitter confrontation. Instead, what happened, according to the article, was:
Franken, who was seated talking to someone else, did not stand when Pickens said hello. Instead, Franken began to berate him about the billionaire’s financing of the Swift Boat ads in 2004. According to a source, the confrontation grew heated.
Basically, a conversation took place, and Politico hyped it as a feud.
If Franken has been upset about this since 2004 -- that'd be about 5 years now -- to the point that he can't even stand up to say 'hello' to the old guy, I'd say that Franken is a long-time, bitter queen. He has had an "on-going" problem with the factual anti-Kerry commercials. Perhaps that could be a feud, albeit a one-way feud.
Perhaps your argument would be more accurate if you explained that a feud requires hostility from BOTH SIDES and that because Pickens probably has no idea who Franken is -- and no reason to hate him -- this couldn't be a feud.
Perhaps a better title would be this: "Snippy election-stealer whines like a little baby."
How's that suit you?
It's a shame, too, because all they'd have to do is mention Franken's 'Lies' book, specifically the chapter on the Swift Boaters.