I recently saw a debate between Radley Balko and Wendy Murphy on the Stossel show. Radley challenged her claim that only 2 percent of sex offenders are actually on sex offender registries and she had no real response to back it up nor did she really have a point that the statistic was supporting. She merely was trying to state a statistic purely for its own sake.
Today Radley eviscerates her on this as the latest in a long string of nothing arguments, but the real shocking thing is that she is apparently is a pundit for hire with no real agenda other than to appear on television.In a prior interview she said
You have to appreciate my role as a pundit is to draw inferences and make arguments on behalf of the side which I’m assigned
I know that the cable news forums are profitable entertainment enterprises but I’d at least expect the people arguing a point at least to believe the point and not just be assigned a role and accept it. If I wanted that I’d go find the local high school debate team.
A gun for higher who is neutral or ambivalent with respect to the topic at hand will be a less useful debater, which ultimately lessens the impact of the debate as a whole. It also makes it less entertaining which I would assume would make the networks sit up and pay attention.