“The problem arises when certain public figures believe that their celebrity status grants them expertise that they do not have.”
Your description fits Smith to a “T,” and his often angry, frenetic rhetoric is that of sound and fury, very often signifying nothing. Most often.
Corporate America glorifies a religion of counting in search of profit, such that the sounds and the words do not often have to be well argued, or even to make a whole lot of sense.
They just have to be occasionally furious, and loud.
Smith fits a gilded America the greatest entertainment of which is WWF, rage, and violence, with the alcohol-fueled Sunday betting foray into beast ball, AKA football; Smith’s idea of politics is yet another greedy, toxic spectator sport.
Smith reminds me a lot of Bill Maher, another poorly informed guy with a big megaphone who is WAY out of his depth. Tonight, Harvard prof Steven Pinker took him to school about Trump's confrontation with the school, and Maher quickly changed the subject. Both of these guys are dangerous because the don't know what they don't know.
A hundred years or so ago, H. L. Mencken predicted what we're seeing today when he said:
As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron
And from what I understand about Mencken, he's probably not rolling over in his grave-- rather, I suspect that he's laughing himself silly down there!
I don't watch ESPN. All I know of Smith is what I read.
Wotta clown.
The culture, character, and intelligence of a democracy reflects the culture, character, and intelligence of its populace. That Smith has a large following does not make one optimistic as to our prospects.
Having only seen him occasionally, he's never impressed me as anyone special. Sports? Let him blither all he wants. Fault lies with whoever is willing to pay him to blither. Gives him no cred for ANYTHING ELSE. To me, it's a tell when he says he'll call out 'both sides'. We already have enough 'authentic' nitwits being heard.
What a quack! I’m sure he’ll get some following (there’s always someone!) but think we can write him off as another complete jerk. (But always keep an eye open …)
It's amazing [or maybe not] how many people think they have something truthful to say and others should take seriously. I think, though, the onus is on those who willingly listen to them.
Oh, let me tell you. I'm a book editor to amateur writers. Everybody thinks they have a story to tell. Most now think they have the skill to tell it. Nearly every single one of the last group is wrong.
From the Contrarian: Smith wasn’t having it. “You said a vote for Trump was a vote against you and a vote against y'all as women,” he said. “I want to stay for the record, I took major offense to that…. Black men don't just love our Black women, we revere y'all.”
I don't follow sports and I'd never heard of Stephen A. Smith so I may or may not wind up hearing/reading his political commentary but the statements I quote above seem like a non-sequitur. In other words, someone so illogical would not be someone I think should be trusted to provide useful political commentary.
Jemele Hill, anyone? Sauce is apparently NOT for the gander, just for the goose. As for Smith's comment: “Black men don't just love our Black women, we revere y'all," if revere means applying different standards, I understand why you didn't stand up when she criticized your man.
His interview with Bill Maher was interesting. If he really is a centrist and an equal opportunity confronter and relentless cross-examiner and devil's advocate he could be good for the country. He appeals to people who do not watch MSNBC or whatever they are called now. Challenging guests' talking points and perhaps causing listeners to question their thoughts would be positive. Rambling on like a Cable Pundit will not, unless he truly does that as a centrist. He is funny enough that people who don't pay attention to politics or policy may listen. He can't be any worse than the current TV lying punditry. He probably will know more than those who many people listen to: the guy down the bar, at church, at kids' soccer games, etc. I may or may not choose to listen to him, but will withhold judgment until he produces a year of his show.
“The problem arises when certain public figures believe that their celebrity status grants them expertise that they do not have.”
Your description fits Smith to a “T,” and his often angry, frenetic rhetoric is that of sound and fury, very often signifying nothing. Most often.
Corporate America glorifies a religion of counting in search of profit, such that the sounds and the words do not often have to be well argued, or even to make a whole lot of sense.
They just have to be occasionally furious, and loud.
Smith fits a gilded America the greatest entertainment of which is WWF, rage, and violence, with the alcohol-fueled Sunday betting foray into beast ball, AKA football; Smith’s idea of politics is yet another greedy, toxic spectator sport.
Gentle people, place your bets.
Smith reminds me a lot of Bill Maher, another poorly informed guy with a big megaphone who is WAY out of his depth. Tonight, Harvard prof Steven Pinker took him to school about Trump's confrontation with the school, and Maher quickly changed the subject. Both of these guys are dangerous because the don't know what they don't know.
Probably the most obnoxious sports announcer ever and to think of him dipping his toe into politics is even more obnoxious.
A hundred years or so ago, H. L. Mencken predicted what we're seeing today when he said:
As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron
And from what I understand about Mencken, he's probably not rolling over in his grave-- rather, I suspect that he's laughing himself silly down there!
Why give him free publicity!? I don’t watch his arrogant sports talking head show, neither will I waste time on his insipid blather!
Next up: Elon Musk's new political podcast.
“The problem arises when certain public figures believe that their celebrity status grants them expertise that they do not have.” That part!
Oy.
I don't watch ESPN. All I know of Smith is what I read.
Wotta clown.
The culture, character, and intelligence of a democracy reflects the culture, character, and intelligence of its populace. That Smith has a large following does not make one optimistic as to our prospects.
Having only seen him occasionally, he's never impressed me as anyone special. Sports? Let him blither all he wants. Fault lies with whoever is willing to pay him to blither. Gives him no cred for ANYTHING ELSE. To me, it's a tell when he says he'll call out 'both sides'. We already have enough 'authentic' nitwits being heard.
What's next? Pat Mcafee? How about Lee Corso? The bull sh!t Never ends
All I can say is WHY? Who wants this and who would listen to it?
What a quack! I’m sure he’ll get some following (there’s always someone!) but think we can write him off as another complete jerk. (But always keep an eye open …)
It's amazing [or maybe not] how many people think they have something truthful to say and others should take seriously. I think, though, the onus is on those who willingly listen to them.
Oh, let me tell you. I'm a book editor to amateur writers. Everybody thinks they have a story to tell. Most now think they have the skill to tell it. Nearly every single one of the last group is wrong.
Nice to read something with a touch of humor. Caveat emptor applies to readers [of anything] as well.
From the Contrarian: Smith wasn’t having it. “You said a vote for Trump was a vote against you and a vote against y'all as women,” he said. “I want to stay for the record, I took major offense to that…. Black men don't just love our Black women, we revere y'all.”
I don't follow sports and I'd never heard of Stephen A. Smith so I may or may not wind up hearing/reading his political commentary but the statements I quote above seem like a non-sequitur. In other words, someone so illogical would not be someone I think should be trusted to provide useful political commentary.
Jemele Hill, anyone? Sauce is apparently NOT for the gander, just for the goose. As for Smith's comment: “Black men don't just love our Black women, we revere y'all," if revere means applying different standards, I understand why you didn't stand up when she criticized your man.
He's like a dumb George Will.
His interview with Bill Maher was interesting. If he really is a centrist and an equal opportunity confronter and relentless cross-examiner and devil's advocate he could be good for the country. He appeals to people who do not watch MSNBC or whatever they are called now. Challenging guests' talking points and perhaps causing listeners to question their thoughts would be positive. Rambling on like a Cable Pundit will not, unless he truly does that as a centrist. He is funny enough that people who don't pay attention to politics or policy may listen. He can't be any worse than the current TV lying punditry. He probably will know more than those who many people listen to: the guy down the bar, at church, at kids' soccer games, etc. I may or may not choose to listen to him, but will withhold judgment until he produces a year of his show.
Don't miss a single episode! (I say sarcastically.)
Well, you put Bill Maher in the same sentence with interesting, so you're ripe for Smith's appeal.