Replies

I saw this today. I expected to be impressed by Savage. I wasn't. As a matter of fact, neither of them impressed me. The biggest argument against illegal immigration they could have made is that it's you and I- and the people in that audience- that pay for the prisons to house them, as well as the healthcare that they use. If you want impact on an issue, hit people where they will feel it the most- the pocketbook.

you know, I agree with you. savage basically treated the cnn set like his own show, where he gets to yell at people whom he considers stupid (correctly or not) and then hang up on them. barkley, coming from his own mentality, isn't going to back down when someone calls him stupid (correctly or not). so in the end they just ended up screaming at each other - which was entertaining - and, well, whatever...

"I saw this today. I expected to be impressed by Savage. I wasn't. As a matter of fact, neither of them impressed me. "

I agree. OK, so they confronted him with an idiot. But Savage appeared more interested in being pugnacious. When Barley said something that did not make sense--that 70% --30% thing-- Savage appeared more interested in showing that he knew it didn't make sense and calling Barley a name-- could not make a coherent argument or something like that-- and impugn "your whole way of thinking"..

Fine, if you want a fight. But why do that? Actually, Barkley was trying to be on his good behavior at that point until Savage impugned his "whole way of thinking".

Savage was mainly upset that they confronted him wiht a basketball player. He could have used the occasion better than he did.