PBS’ NewsHour dumps right-wing talking head.
By on May 17th, 2007 at 5:17 pm
PBS’ NewsHour dumps right-wing talking head.
Responding to an onslaught of reader complaints about right-wing talk-radio host Melanie Morgan’s shrill appearance on the May 8 edition of PBS’ NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, NewsHour executive producer Linda Winslow said today that Morgan would not be asked back to the show. “We can’t do much to eliminate rude guests from your television screen once the segment has begun,” said Winslow. “What we can do is guarantee you will never see that person on our program again.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
McCain
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Technology
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Nice one, PBS. :-)
May 17th, 2007 at 5:21 pmThank You PBS. At least one network has its Credibility intact.
May 17th, 2007 at 5:22 pmWhoa she’s hot!!
Hey Condi, do you think we can get her in here for a little ‘news hour’ of our own?
May 17th, 2007 at 5:22 pmI have been worried about PBS and NPR since Kenny Tomlinson hijacked them and tried to turn them into Repuke propaganda machines.
But now Bill Moyers is back, and PBS is kicking Reich Wingnuts off the air when they violate minimum standards of conduct.
Good to see PBS and NPR are back from the abyss.
May 17th, 2007 at 5:25 pmAWESOME!!! :D
May 17th, 2007 at 5:26 pmyeap, once again the left wingers hate having to hear opposing point of views.
how tolerant of the left. sad, sad.
May 17th, 2007 at 5:27 pmI have been worried about PBS and NPR since Kenny Tomlinson hijacked them and tried to turn them into Repuke propaganda machines.
But now Bill Moyers is back, and PBS is kicking Reich Wingnuts off the air when they violate minimum standards of conduct.
Good to see PBS and NPR are back from the abyss.
Comment by Tom3 — May 17, 2007 @ 5:25 pm
yeap, now you don’t have to worry, NPR and PBS will keep on being a Dumbcratic propaganda machine.
Nice, right Tom3. of course you don’t mind this.
May 17th, 2007 at 5:29 pmPeople on the left don’t mind opposing opinions. They just like them to be expressed by people who aren’t screeching, yelling, hurling insults and pounding on the table like maniacs.
May 17th, 2007 at 5:32 pm#6 Valiant,
you didnt watch the video did you? just a nother typical knee-jerk thoughtless neo-CON response… I assume you think we just hate her ‘freedomzzz’ too.
change the record kid, I’m sick of this song
May 17th, 2007 at 5:33 pmyeap, once again the left wingers hate having to hear opposing point of views.
how tolerant of the left. sad, sad.
Comment by valiantthelover — May 17, 2007 @ 5:27 pm
This from the Fox News lovers. What a joke. If we weren’t willing to hear opposing points of view you wouldn’t be here would you, asswipe?
May 17th, 2007 at 5:34 pmvaliantthelover,
You seem like a right good fella.
You love divisivinsiness like I do. (Huh, hope I spelled that right)
You hate anyone who disagrees with me. That’s good. At this point, I’m scared to disagree with me becasue your so damn angry about it kid!! I love it!
You like ideology over evidence. Reality is so overrated.
Keep up the Shock and Awe my man!! Git ‘r Dun!!
May 17th, 2007 at 5:34 pmnow lets see how the goopers respond to this “disgraceful act by the “Liberal Media”!
May 17th, 2007 at 5:34 pmSuck a big one Valiant scum sucking knuckle dragging subhuman knuckle dragging douche bag.
In your face, idiot !!!
Hating the Repukians Trolls daily
May 17th, 2007 at 5:34 pmStupid Repuke troll.
You’re putting words in my mouth. I never said that.
OF course, you think it is okay when these Reich Wingnuts go off the deep end and start shouting. You think it is okay for Mann Coulter to call candidates “faggot”. You think it is okay for all of them to spew hate and lies instead of discussing the issues like grown-ups.
The Reich Wingnuts have lowered the level of debate into the terlit. PBS is doing the right thing by kicking them off the air.
May 17th, 2007 at 5:34 pmHeaven forbid you get an alternative veiwpoint. TV News is tanking as the New Media websites and blogging grows leaps and bounds. Could it be the truth is getting through unfiltered? Ever wonder why conservative talk and internet dominates? The genie is out of the bag libs……..and you can never mold feeble minds again! Bye Bye NYT, LA Times………..you can now rely on the welfare programs you coddled. HAAhaahhahhahhhahhahh!!!!
May 17th, 2007 at 5:37 pmhil,
shut your mouth!! My man valiantthelover is speakin’ truth to power!!
You know your only gonna set him off. Then that vein is gonna pop out his head and then all hell will break loose when he laughs you like this;
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!
Then he’ll say blah..blah…blah LIBRUL IDIOT
right? Let’s not put him through that. If you all could just agree with him, I bet we tack 10 years on to his life
May 17th, 2007 at 5:37 pmWas that really Melanie Morgan, or was it Stifflers mom?
Man.. I laughed aloud when she said TO A MEMEBER OF THE TROOPS that he is not supporting the troops.
By appearence alone, this woman looked nuts. With his fixed hair, and too much make up, and wide eyes, and exentuated mouth movements – it was cartoonish, clownish.
May 17th, 2007 at 5:38 pmValium Lover and Eric should get a room.
BTW, most of the New Media and Blogs and other Internet stuff is progressive/liberal, NOT Repuke/Neocon.
It is the progressive bloggers that are making headlines.
The reich wingnut blogs are a joke.
May 17th, 2007 at 5:41 pmI don’t believe MAF has a miilion members, no way. Oh and Mr. President, 2004 called, it wants “get R done” back. Come on get current.
May 17th, 2007 at 5:48 pm#16
May 17th, 2007 at 5:48 pmLOL!
yessir mister president! :oP
Eric,
Nice Work my man. Way to be there for the cause of freedom and liberty. Whatever the hell those words mean.
She was gonna be out of a job anyway, cause I’m fixing to do away with the freedom of the press. After the NYTimes gave away our illegal bank tracking program and warrantless wiretapping program, I’m not sure we can trust the media in a post 9-11 world.
But to show you I care, just leave your number and address here, and I’ll send Jeff Gannon over to show our appreciation!!
May 17th, 2007 at 5:54 pmLibs do shoddy research like their hero Dan Rather. Uhh uhhh……we didn’t check our sources like we should have…….. Yeah right. They fired your ass and TV News has continued to spiral.
Here are facts Tom – where are yours? 63 percent fewer viewers tuned in to CNN’s coverage of the 2005 Inauguration than in 2001. MSNBC lost 68 percent of its audience, drawing only 385,000 viewers. Quite the opposite, Fox News Channel was up 30 percent over 2001 with an audience of 2,581,000 individuals. Moreover, Fox’s viewership is up 57 percent compared to 2001, while CNN is down 14 percent and MSNBC down 47 percent.
Ouch….scoreboard once again.
May 17th, 2007 at 5:56 pmbut..but…but…Dan Rather, CNN, and MSNBC!
May 17th, 2007 at 6:01 pmyep, once again the left wingers hate having to hear disgusting, rabid sub-humans froth at the mouth.
May 17th, 2007 at 6:02 pmGood riddance. Now she can spend more time injecting her lips with botox.
May 17th, 2007 at 6:03 pmyeap, once again the left wingers hate having to hear opposing point of views.
how tolerant of the left. sad, sad.
Comment by valiantthelover
Opposing points of view do not include racially charged and bigoted spew. WE own the airwaves, not the corporations who use them. The american public should not support and encourage these types of ‘pundits’. She is free to spew her drivel to any street corner she wants, from every mountain top she can climb. Just not using OUR airwaves to insult and degrade loyal, patriotic americans.
May 17th, 2007 at 6:04 pm“Libs do shoddy research like their hero Dan Rather.”
Hardly. Sheesh, ‘Cons don’t even know HOW to do research. They can barely pronounce the word. It has two syllables.
May 17th, 2007 at 6:05 pmyeap, once again the left wingers hate having to hear opposing point of views. -VTL
I read the transcript VTL/H. She had the opportunity to express her views and did so. What she also did was try to TELL Soltz what his views were. Just as you are trying, here, to tell others what there views are.
I cannot say you are a commie loving fake christian because that would not be true. And thats what this woman does in the interview – telling someone else what their VIEW is.
May 17th, 2007 at 6:05 pmFu*k you and your tolerance.
There were people just like you in Germany saying Hitler should have fair and balanced air time.
You are a domestic enemy. You don’t deserve any air time.
May 17th, 2007 at 6:06 pmOuch….scoreboard once again.
Comment by Eric — May 17, 2007 @ 5:56 pm
How about a link trollboy. Oh and what about ABC, CBS and NBC, apparently those figures don’t help your argument, whatever it is.
May 17th, 2007 at 6:07 pmWhen you have an exclusive club that wants to hold onto power, the natural reaction is to take your buisness elsewhere. Talk Radio and internet blogging have been so successful in siphoning off the Walter Cronkite funnelling of news and are far more slanted to conservative views. The comedy of the situatioin is FOX News sprung up and dominated TV to become number one, while Air America tried to compete in the Talk Radio arena. I forgot what place they were in……..oh yeah, BK. At least that leaves mealy-mouth Al Franken to try and get a job in MN as a Senator.
A just-released survey conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press found. Five times more national outlet journalists identify themselves as liberal, 34 percent, than conservative, a mere 7 percent. The poll also discovered that while the reporters, editors, producers and executives have a great deal of trouble naming a “liberal†news outlet, they had no problem seeing a “conservative†outlet, with an incredible 69 percent readily naming the Fox News Channel.
Would someone please provide some supporting arguments here, I’m going unchallenged. Oh yeah, libs just do ad hominen attacks…lol……I love personal attacks because it proves there is no argument. SCOREBOARD
May 17th, 2007 at 6:07 pm2,581,000 individuals -Eric
Thats it 1% of the population (300 million)?
Bwahahahaha
Why Eric I don’t watch TV.
May 17th, 2007 at 6:08 pmNot sure CFM what those numbers are, but 1% isn’t very good the last time I was in school.
May 17th, 2007 at 6:11 pmVTH/L if you want my view, just ask for it. Rush doesn’t know it, Oreilly doesn’t, Goldberg doesn’t, none of them do, not you, not Coulter nor this crowing cranium Morgan.
It seems to me these conservative pundits excel at painting their views on other people. Quite odd this media frenzy hiding behind a fair and balanced title.
May 17th, 2007 at 6:15 pmNot sure CFM what those numbers are, but 1% isn’t very good the last time I was in school.
Comment by Eric
What I mean is that the population of America is 300 million. According to your post the FOX media only has a 1% viewership. Not a voice of reason I would say but of controversy (for ratings) After all thats what pundits are all about creating controversy such as the war on Christmas. I have never been part of this mythical war on Christmas, nor know anyone that has. Yet to listen to folks such as VTH here, it’s absolutely true and ever so called ‘liberal’ is in on the conspiracy and is Godless simply because of the way they vote…
If it weren’t so divisive it would be funny.
May 17th, 2007 at 6:22 pmOh yeah, libs just do ad hominen attacks…lol……I love personal attacks because it proves there is no argument. SCOREBOARD
Comment by Eric
No, it proves that TV pundits are nothing but grits (hominen) attacks. They even have you doing it when you start off a sentence with ‘libs’ VIEW is this (because TV said it was. =)
May 17th, 2007 at 6:26 pmEric,
The Media Research Center is the conservative watchdog group that is the most influential intellectual authority behind the claims that the media “slant reports in favor of the liberal position on issues.” They are the one’s that usually dig up these numbers on media ‘bias’.
While there may in fact be instances where the media’s coverage is tainted by a political bias, the standard of scientifically validating this causal path goes beyond simply collecting “a mountain of evidence.”
The MRC claims to have proven the existence of liberal media bias through “sound scientific research,” but yet their scientific methodology relies solely upon inductive method of investigation while never using a more comprehensive Hypothetico-Deductive Method of scientific inquiry.
The MRC claims that their methodology “regularly documents the national media’s ongoing liberal bias,” but they rely solely upon data-driven analysis that is polluted with many pitfalls associated with inductive reasoning.
By failing to scientifically validate their claims through top-down, deductive means, then their liberal bias theory is really nothing more than a unsubstantiated hypothesis.
HYPOTHESIS VS. THEORY VS. LAW
There are very distinct differences between a scientific Hypothesis, Theory and Law.
From the Marriam-Webster online dictionary:
HYPOTHESIS implies insufficient evidence to provide more than a tentative explanation (a hypothesis explaining the extinction of the dinosaurs).
THEORY implies a greater range of evidence and greater likelihood of truth (the theory of evolution).
LAW implies a statement of order and relation in nature that has been found to be invariable under the same conditions (the law of gravitation).
The Media Research Center’s rhetoric describes “liberal bias” as if they have established it to the level of a “law” or “theory.” However, the MRC’s inductive scientific methodology has never evolved their claims beyond the level of establishing a hypothesis that the media’s coverage is tainted by a liberal bias.
PROVING LIBERAL BIAS
The MRC likes to assert that they’ve already proven liberal bias by collecting “a mountain of evidence.” Here is an example:
“The key to the MRC’s effectiveness is the ability to prove bias by using scientific studies and word-for-word quotes from the media.”
From the online CIA book”Psychology of Intelligence Analysis”:
Scientific method, for its part, requires that one seek to disprove hypotheses rather than confirm them.
In other words, a hypothesis can never be proved by the enumeration of even a large body of evidence consistent with that hypothesis, because the same body of evidence may also be consistent with other hypotheses. A hypothesis may be disproved, however, by citing a single item of evidence that is incompatible with it.”
In order for the MRC to prove liberal bias, then their approach should be to search for evidence that disproves the liberal bias hypothesis. If negative evidence is found, then this confirms the null hypothesis. The liberal bias hypothesis is then re-evaluated, redefined and clarified as to better isolate the conditions under which liberal bias is most likely to occur (i.e. when there is strong opposition from the Democratic Congressional leadership on specific domestic issues).
Instead, the MRC combs through the nightly newscasts to cherry pick evidence that confirms their liberal bias hypothesis.
The MRC’s claim to have proven liberal bias implies that they think that they have validated their hypothesis to the point of elevating it to a sound theory. They would argue that they accomplished this by conducting “thorough, comprehensive, and ongoing analysis based on quantitative and qualitative research.”
But the MRC primarily relies upon accumulating qualitative instances of liberal bias by analyzing a large number of news stories. The MRC will emphasize the number of stories that they combed through in order to give a false impression that they performed a quantitative analysis.
For example, here is an excerpt from a MRC study investigating ABC’s alleged anti-war and liberal bias:
“In a review of 234 stories on ABC’s World News Tonight from January 1 to March 7, the Media Research Center found that ABC News failed its promise to serve the American people as an independent and objective observer.”
A review of this study shows that the MRC only provides qualitative instances of ABC’s alleged anti-war/liberal bias, and provides no quantitative analysis. The MRC also ignores all other sources of bias. There are plenty of other economic constraints, institutional constraints, sociological factors, and influences from the field of journalism that the MRC fails to take into account.
May 17th, 2007 at 6:29 pmTom3 – I am thrilled that Bill Moyers is back – and have you noticed that since Tomlinson left there have been more programs about what is going on in the world and a whole lot less of those stupid geezer music shows? (I am a certified geezer and I hate those shows – too much like an infomercial.)
May 17th, 2007 at 6:31 pm“Nice one, PBS. :-)
Comment by Zooey — May 17, 2007″
zooey, what did she say that was wrong?
May 17th, 2007 at 6:34 pm” PBS is kicking Reich Wingnuts off the air when they violate minimum standards of conduct.
Comment by Tom3 — May 17, 2007″
And just what standard was violated?
May 17th, 2007 at 6:36 pm“People on the left don’t mind opposing opinions
Comment by qusan — May 17, 2007″
Really? You haven’t been around here long have you?
May 17th, 2007 at 6:38 pm“you didnt watch the video did you?
Comment by hil — May 17, 2007″
Give us an example?
May 17th, 2007 at 6:39 pm“If we weren’t willing to hear opposing points of view you wouldn’t be here would you, asswipe?
Comment by Shane — May 17, 2007″
You have no control over who comes here!
May 17th, 2007 at 6:40 pm“You like ideology over evidence.
Comment by President Bush — May 17, 2007″
Can you give us an example?
May 17th, 2007 at 6:41 pmWhat are the ratings of PBS and NPR? If they were a private broadcaster, they’d have gone the way of Air America. They couldn’t survive on their own.
May 17th, 2007 at 6:41 pm“Suck a big one Valiant scum sucking knuckle dragging subhuman knuckle dragging douche bag.
In your face, idiot !!!
Hating the Repukians Trolls daily
Comment by Buck Fush — May 17, 2007″
Did your mother help you put that statement together or did you do it all by yourself?
May 17th, 2007 at 6:43 pm“You think it is okay for Mann Coulter to call candidates “faggotâ€.
Comment by Tom3 — May 17, 2007 ”
If the shoe fits?
May 17th, 2007 at 6:44 pmSo far…….no counter arguments with supporting data. This is so easy……and fun. Thanks.
May 17th, 2007 at 6:46 pmzooey, what did she say that was wrong?
Comment by michael
Click on the links, michael. Find out for yourself.
May 17th, 2007 at 6:50 pmyep, once again, lefties hate liars & character assassination, straw men, lies, more lies, red herrings. etc., the standard tools of the loonie right. You know, those people who don’t have a clue about how to have a civil discourse.
May 17th, 2007 at 7:02 pmAs they say, the facts have a liberal slant. That’s why right wing tools avoid facts at all costs, of course.
Eric,
There is no liberal media bias you good man you. But keep telling them that. Working the refs has paid diviends for Phil Jackson, and it will work for us as well.
Me and my super wealthy friends own the media outlets and they do what we say. It works out nice for us. Not so nice for you…..I mena liberals, not so nice for liberlas!!
May 17th, 2007 at 7:03 pm“Ever wonder why conservative talk and internet dominates?”
You wingnuts need a daddy to tell you what to think that’s why. We never listen to it.
May 17th, 2007 at 7:08 pmAwww, how sad, a lil’ trooper upset and wetting themselves because one of their W-loving media whores now can’t shill on one tv show
So far…….no counter arguments with supporting data. This is so easy……and fun. Thanks.
Comment by Eric — May 17, 2007 @ 6:46 pm
And none of your insipid blather will do anything to get Morgan the Dumbass back on the PBS Newshour
Don’t that just suck, someone like Morgan, who hasn’t gotten a single thing right about Iraq-Hey, just like W-has one less outlet to pitch her shrill spiel from?
But hey, you keep blathering away, won’t change a thing, as none of what you’re throwing around will somehow magically and immediately rally the public around this President again
And for you W lackeys who have no problem with calling for others in the media to be fired-such as Dan Rather-choke on your faux outrage, and deal with it like adults for a change
I know, an impossible request for the rapidly dwindling number of sheeple devoted to the Glory Of All Things W, but maybe they’ll get past their natural mental limitations and give it a shot nonetheless
May 17th, 2007 at 7:16 pmeric: you and your fellow 28%’s all watch Faux. Myself and my fellow dems, with the ability to think critically, divide our viewing amongst CNN, CNN Headline News, MSNBC, PBS, CNBC, NPR, Air America, etc. Of course Faux’s numbers will be higher. Try adding up the totals of Faux’s competitors, and see what comes out.
May 17th, 2007 at 7:30 pmFREE MELANIE MORGAN! bring her back on you wusses. She is the best example of conservatism in the modern era. Let the light in! There is no better representative of the 28%.
May 17th, 2007 at 7:40 pmDid your mother help you put that statement together or did you do it all by yourself? Comment by michael — May 17, 2007 @ 6:43 pm
Did your (senile) mother help you put that question together or did you do it all by yourself?
May 17th, 2007 at 7:41 pmCan you give us an example?
Comment by michael — May 17, 2007 @ 6:41 pm
Can you give us a relevant question?
May 17th, 2007 at 7:41 pmYou have no control over who comes here!
Comment by michael — May 17, 2007 @ 6:40 pm
You have no control over who makes you look like a r*t*rded little fool!
May 17th, 2007 at 7:42 pmzooey, what did she say that was wrong?
Comment by michael — May 17, 2007 @ 6:34 pm
Why do you need someone to point it out for you?
And just what standard was violated?
Comment by michael — May 17, 2007 @ 6:36 pm
And just what standards do you have?
Really? You haven’t been around here long have you?
Comment by michael — May 17, 2007 @ 6:38 pm
Really? You haven’t paid attention very well, have you?
May 17th, 2007 at 7:43 pmThe problem is why they ever invited her in the first place. I can’t believe they didn’t know what kind of a person she is and what she represents. I am willing to bet that if Bush hadn’t appointed his neoCON buddies to the board for PBS, they never would have had a guest like her on one of their shows. I have to say, though, that I am deeply disappointed in Jim Lehrer for ever allowing this to happen. If he had any spine he would have refused to have this hate-monger on his show.
May 17th, 2007 at 7:55 pmYou have no control over who comes here!
Comment by michael — May 17, 2007 @ 6:40 pm
Michael forgot his trademark question mark… but I recognize his idiocy.
May 17th, 2007 at 7:57 pmI am with Kate Henry (post 59). Morgan is a known outrage. The News Hour has long ago established that they prefer their right wing spin in the dulcet reasonable sounding tones of David Brooks or David Gergen. Who in the hell got Morgan on the show?
May 17th, 2007 at 8:02 pm“valiantthelover”. Opposing points of view. Is that anything like the opposing points of view you get over at Faux Noise. What…you don’t get to hear opposing views on Faux Noise. Well, I never. I guess that’s why I don’t watch Faux Noise.
Melanie Morgan is nothing more than a hatemonger in the same camp as Mann Coulter. They never have anything good to say about anyone other than Republics and anything other than the Republic party. They wouldn’t know an opposing point of view if it hit them in the face.
May 17th, 2007 at 8:18 pmI’m sure Faux News is trying to book the b*tch at this very moment.
Way to go, PBS!
May 17th, 2007 at 10:04 pm#44
“What are the ratings of PBS and NPR? If they were a private broadcaster, they’d have gone the way of Air America. They couldn’t survive on their own.
Comment by muckdog”
Huh? You don’t know what you’re talking about…
The point of public radio and television is that ratings *don’t* matter, they’re not getting advertising revenues.
NPR Radio in northern california is actually one of the most popular stations as far as ratings go, but they still have their pledge breaks because they don’t do ads.
May 17th, 2007 at 10:13 pmPBS did the right thing.
May 17th, 2007 at 10:19 pmWOW
May 17th, 2007 at 11:02 pmA producer who actually responded to the public outrage over the shrill Morgan.
The point of public radio and television is that ratings *don’t* matter, they’re not getting advertising revenues.
Ah, the liberal dream. A program just for the sake of having a program. Who cares if anyone is watching? LOL.
May 17th, 2007 at 11:50 pmWatch Melanie Morgan whine about this denial of her First Amendment rights on her KSFO morning show from now until eternity.
Guaranteed.
RWer? Then by deduction a whiner, of course. They all are.
Cheers,
May 18th, 2007 at 3:32 am“We can’t do much to eliminate rude guests from your television screen once the segment has begun,â€
How much of their work, if any, is live? This is rubbish.
Perhaps it shows that they do sometimes react to feedback.
May 18th, 2007 at 8:04 amIt’s about time someone stood up to these filthy sonsofbitches.
May 18th, 2007 at 9:39 amthis woman works for a pr firm for republican candiadates, yet she accuses the VETERAN of “using the war for political gain.” i agree with some others: what in the HELL was PBS doing by inviting her in the first place? she’s completely delusional, ill-informed, and PARTISAN. i would really love to hear a rational argument for staying the course in Iraq, but I have yet to hear one, not from the president, not from any legislator, not even from the military. how can any thinking person defend this lunatic? like coulter, limbaugh, savage, and the rest, this rw zombie shock-jock is merely an entertainer for the masses in idiot america, and belongs on Fox with the rest of that crew, not on any serious news program. Kudos to PBS for rejecting rw propaganda as “debate.”
May 18th, 2007 at 6:40 pm