Fox & Friends Embraces O’Reilly Harassment Tactics, Sends Producer To Stalk College Professor
Fox & Friends Embraces O’Reilly Harassment Tactics, Sends Producer To Stalk College Professor
This morning, Fox and Friends praised producer Griff Jenkins for stalking and ambushing Columbia University professor Alan Brinkley to grill him on portions of his book Jenkins found objectionable. Jenkins — who perfected his harassment tactics as a minion of harassment expert Bill O’Reilly — appeared on Fox and Friends to defend his “worthy cause” of ambushing unwitting writers who write things he disagrees with:
STEVE DOOCY: We’ve been watching you badger some guy up at Columbia.
JENKINS: It’s because there’s inaccurate material in these textbooks! It’s a worthy cause.
DOOCY: Sure.
Watch it:
Jenkins claimed that the network invited Brinkley onto the program, but Fox News has been known to lie about inviting its perceived enemies on air. ThinkProgress contacted Brinkley and it turns out Fox extended an invitation to him only after stalking and ambushing him:
A Fox News crew was waiting for me when I left my home yesterday, followed me for two blocks with questions and accusations, and then left. Later that day, I was asked to come onto the show, which I declined to do. I did e-mail the person who invited me with responses to the two mistaken charges they made when I was being followed by the camera crew.
After being stalked and ambushed, Brinkley did release a statement to Fox refuting Jenkins’ claims — and forcing Jenkins to halfheartedly admit he had been wrong about one of his charges.
If Fox News had really wanted a statement from Brinkley, it appears they could have elicited one fairly easily. What Fox’s harassment machine is actually interested in is not the truth or facts but rather intimidating, embarrassing, and silencing its opponents. Please join our campaign to stop such “ambush journalism.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Dammn facts and whatnot!
April 1st, 2009 at 9:53 amAmbush ‘journalists’ should be ambushed themselves.
Jenkins looks like he learned this slimy craft from Billdo, the goon. (Thanks, Letterman.)
I wonder how much Jenkins paid for his on-line degree?
April 1st, 2009 at 9:54 amTransparent attempt to 1) deflect some of this criticism away from BillO and 2) to try to legitimize their own style of ambush journalism as SOP and acceptable journalistic practice (at least at FOX).
They are continuing/preparing a defense of this harrassment technique.
April 1st, 2009 at 9:57 amPicking up the phone and requesting a statement from Alan Brinkley would probably get them better and more detailed information, but it doesn’t make for ratings-grabbing footage. Stalk-and-ambush provides far more drama, and it makes it look like their target has something to hide.
It would be difficult to convince the Fox News core audience of the general immorality of these tactics — this is the kind of stuff they live for. But by shining a relentless spotlight on this kind of sleaze and showing it to be merely a broadcast version of the National Enquirer, it’s possible that thinking people may wish to get their news elsewhere, and the Fox audience could be whittled down to just the kool-aid drinkers.
April 1st, 2009 at 9:59 amKnowing Fox, I’m surprised they didn’t have scantily-scan women ambushing the professor.
April 1st, 2009 at 10:02 amI can’t watch the video, and I don’t see a transcript. Are the “objectionable” parts a matter of opinion? What is the book’s subject matter?
April 1st, 2009 at 10:02 amAP US history. Apparently Fox took issue with the author’s statement that only one person in the aftermath of 9/11 has been charged with a crime.
April 1st, 2009 at 10:07 amGriff? C’mon…effin dumbass fake news name and dumbass fake news glasses and dumbass fake journalistic integrity.
These guys are utter clowns.
April 1st, 2009 at 10:07 ammisscoleopteramolly Says:
Stalk-and-ambush provides far more drama, and it makes it look like their target has something to hide.
Excellent point. The off-the-cuff assumption a viewer makes when watching “ambush journalism” IS that the victim has something to hide AND is actively trying to hide it, thus the necseeity to ambush them.
In essence, then, this style of journalism (if it can be called that) intends by its nature to bias the viewer against the person being interviewed (I’ve never heard of ambush journalism being used on someone who is doing ‘good’ things — “Why are you donating all this money and time to the orphanages?” — in fact, IF that last question were in such an amush, the viewer would be inclined to wonder how that was wrong).
The assumption of this technique is also that it ellicits truthful, accurate data that delves deeply into the person being ambushed. That, however, is not the case. What it does is cause incomplete answers and evewn inaccurate answers: a person in such a situation is more likely to misrepresent themselves due to nervousness or even fear.
Not even considering ethics, it is the worst kind of yellow journalism (well, next to just lying outright) because it does not generate accurate data.
April 1st, 2009 at 10:11 amThat’s the next step, Perry. After the Faux News core audience grows bored with regular ambush interviews.
April 1st, 2009 at 10:12 amIf my memory serves me correcly only one person was implicated in direct connection with 9/11 the rest were just detainees? Correct me if I’m wrong.
I bet Cheney put Fox/Jenkins up to this torture/ambush segment as another attempt to make the Bush/Cheney legacy look like roses?
Why does anyone watch Fox News?
April 1st, 2009 at 10:12 amIs everybody in the country going to have to arm themselves with tasers and pepperspray, in order to protect themselves from FoxSpews? Someone is going to have to bite the bullet here and actually knock one of these jerks on his ass.
April 1st, 2009 at 10:12 amwags camponotus saundersi Says:
AP US history. Apparently Fox took issue with the author’s statement that only one person in the aftermath of 9/11 has been charged with a crime.
Oooohhhh…. I see…. its factual material that contradicts their partisan position that they have issue with.
Well, then, by all means … carry on! Anything to protect the legacy, and all that stuff.
April 1st, 2009 at 10:13 amMinistry of Truth
April 1st, 2009 at 10:14 amSelf-appointed protectors
Clowns breathlessly shill
Message:
April 1st, 2009 at 10:14 amCarry mace.
TP – you undermind your efforts here by trying to show “balance” in saying that he admitted to an inaccuracy and that FNC invites people on BEFORE ambushing them!
And saying that the reason they are doing this is because they found misinformation perpetuates their biases, TP.
PLEASE BE MORE FORCEFUL IN CHARACTERIZING THESE FOOLS FOR WHAT THEY ARE — pushing the right wing conservative agenda of the GOP & Roger Ailes.
April 1st, 2009 at 10:17 amIf FNC is doing these ambushes because books are written with inaccurate information, then why do they not ambush Jerome Corsi and Amity Shlaes for their reams of misinformation in their conservative books full of lies?
OH RIGHT — because they only ambush people they DISAGREE WITH.
April 1st, 2009 at 10:17 amThe obvious goal with these harassments is to target some carefully selected individuals, liberals in particular and make them look like “villains” like they have something to hide because they seem to run from “journalists” seeking the truth refusing to answer questions. In reality they just refuse to be stalked by pathetic morons at their homes on their vacations etc.
And if people try to answer often they will be totally unprepared and seem like they dont know what they are talking about, making the stalker look like hes correct. In reality its almost always the other way around.
And if that doesnt work and the target actually fires back and schools and humiliates the pathetic stalker, Faux News always have the final advantage of editing the clip to their liking anyway
April 1st, 2009 at 10:17 amI think the professor had the right idea, just ignore these asshats, say nothing. If everyone who were ambushed did this, pretty soon faux news would have to come up with some other tactic to run their BS. Even faux news won’t keep wasting money if everybody just ignores them.
April 1st, 2009 at 10:25 amOne solution, two words: Junk punch.
http://www.pufferfishblog.com/
April 1st, 2009 at 10:25 amExcellent analysis in #9, Cagey. It’s just more evidence that 24-hour news channels place “gathering facts” and “informing the public” way down on their list of priorities.
Need further evidence? How about those “information crawls” that scroll brief headlines along the bottom of the screen throughout the newscasts? According to one study, the presence of the news ticker is significantly negatively correlated with viewer comprehension of main story information.
The author of the study is Michael Keefe-Feldman, who I believe is on the faculty at Georgetown University. Mr. Keefe-Feldman also found that, results from a cable news viewer uses and gratifications survey suggest that most viewers watch cable news in order to become better informed, however experimental results indicate that this goal is being achieved at very low levels, with the news ticker worsening such a situation.
This tells me that “keeping viewers informed” is no more a priority for Faux and CNN than “a healthy breakfast” is the concern of the makers of Honey Comb cereal.
April 1st, 2009 at 10:25 amNot everybody.
Just anyone to the left of Dick Cheney.
April 1st, 2009 at 10:26 amFurthermore, the stalker’s carefully prepared questions are very often loaded questions (generally complex questions (”when did you stop beating your wife?”), begging the question, or leading questions).
So, to answer most of those questions is to give the interviewr just exactly what they are seeking (as opposed to the truth), since any answer to many of such questions can be interpreted as the framer of the question desires.
April 1st, 2009 at 10:27 amralph, isn’t that everybody?
April 1st, 2009 at 10:27 amangels81 Says: Even faux news won’t keep wasting money if everybody just ignores them.
Good observation.
I’ve ignored them since they went on the air, & feel like some of my life wasn’t wasted listening to screaming people ranting about shit they made up in the first place.
April 1st, 2009 at 10:30 amFox News: ‘We make shit up so we don’t have to report facts’
angels, nah. Dick is safe. And Billy Kristol.
April 1st, 2009 at 10:30 amThe best part to this, if these guys were ambushed in the same way. They would spin it as crazy leftist socialist trying to shut up anyone who disagrees with them.
April 1st, 2009 at 10:31 amCageyCretin, that’s why I say the professor did the right thing, and say nothing. Everybody who is ambushed by these thugs should do the same thing. Ignore them and keep walking, give them nothing.
April 1st, 2009 at 10:32 amSince the network is expanding it’s stalking and harrassment beyond BillO World, I suspect the victims have the opportunity to form a class for action against Rupert directly.
Sue his old, saggy ass! Money is the only thing these people understand. Clearly, facts are beyond their abilities.
PEACE
April 1st, 2009 at 10:34 amFox and it’s wing nuts are really getting out of hand.
April 1st, 2009 at 10:34 amOne of these days, someone that they decide to stalk is going to turn the tables on them and then watch the whine, scream, yell unfair unfair.
Karma can be a b**ch.
Next on Fox News…Journalism Gone Wild!!! see our reporters harass, irritate and just be complete asses…..
Yellow journalism at it’s best.
April 1st, 2009 at 10:34 amralph the wonder locust Says:
Need further evidence? How about those “information crawls” that scroll brief headlines along the bottom of the screen throughout the newscasts? According to one study, the presence of the news ticker is significantly negatively correlated with viewer comprehension of main story information.
That is very interesting, and makes rational sense — how can you process and think about the information being told to you while you are reading and trying to process the ticker?
Let’s try it a little differently: if you are talking to me, telling me some important information, and while you do that I am reading a textbook, do you assume that I have heard and understood all that you have said?
April 1st, 2009 at 10:35 amZimzone Says:
Fox News: ‘We make shit up so we don’t have to report facts’
_____________
Seems like it’s worth pointing out, again, that Fox is the only “news channel” that has claimed in court that they have a Constitutionally protected right to lie and call it “news”.
Gawwd… I can only tell how queasy it made me feel to call Fox a “news channel”…
April 1st, 2009 at 10:36 amangels81 Says:
CageyCretin, that’s why I say the professor did the right thing, and say nothing. Everybody who is ambushed by these thugs should do the same thing. Ignore them and keep walking, give them nothing.
Agreed – excellent point.
Some could even ‘one up” them (after they run their segment) by calling them out — on neutral ground (pick an unaffiliated show to meet on and discuss).
April 1st, 2009 at 10:38 amSorry to say, there is no case for a class action suit. What these thugs do is legal. They hide behind the press shield and make sure they do it on public property. If you noticed the clown stopped as soon as the professor entered private property. The best way is make them waste their money by getting nothing but silence.
April 1st, 2009 at 10:40 amPay no attention
April 1st, 2009 at 10:40 amWe do the thinking for you
Dance my puppets dance
The Republic of Hymenoptera Stupidity Says:
Seems like it’s worth pointing out, again, that Fox is the only “news channel” that has claimed in court that they have a Constitutionally protected right to lie and call it “news”.
I’ve seen this mentioned many times here. I do not doubt the essence, but I am curious as to the details — is there a link (even to a TP thread) that someone can easily provide? Just asking — very curious.
Must go — be back.
April 1st, 2009 at 10:41 amLook at that wussy-looking puke, Griff Jenkins.
What a dipshit.
I, for one, would like nothing better than to give him a chance to stalk me so I could kick his sissy-fied ass.
April 1st, 2009 at 10:43 amCageyCretin Says
April 1st, 2009 at 10:11 am
Not even considering ethics, it is the worst kind of yellow journalism (well, next to just lying outright) because it does not generate accurate data.
___________________________________________________________
Um…Fox News tends to lie outright, too.
April 1st, 2009 at 10:48 amCageyCretin Says:
I’ve seen this mentioned many times here. I do not doubt the essence, but I am curious as to the details — is there a link (even to a TP thread) that someone can easily provide? Just asking — very curious.
______________
http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?t=23679
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Akre
http://www.foxbghsuit.com/
Here’s a pdf of the actual motion filed by the Fox affiliate, just so’s folks know I’m not twisting words…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Akre
April 1st, 2009 at 10:52 amSo let’s see. They ambushed Jerome Corsi when?
April 1st, 2009 at 10:55 amOoops….
Here’s the pdf:
http://www.2dca.org/opinion/February%2014,%202003/2D01-529.pdf
April 1st, 2009 at 10:56 amSee, now they’re no better than Jerry Springer or Maury Povich! If this is journalism then it’s yellow journalism!
April 1st, 2009 at 10:58 amPerry logan Says: “Knowing Fox, I’m surprised they didn’t have scantily-clad women ambushing the professor.”
TYPICAL LIBRUL DISTORTION! I BET YOU WORK FOR GEORGE SOROS’ MSNBC!!!
FOX ONLY USES BIKINI BABES WHEN THEY ARE PERTINENT TO THE STORY!
Like “Can Playboy Bunnies Pick DOW Jones Stocks?” or “What Do The Girls-Gone-Wild Girls Think of Burqas?” or “How Obama’s Socialist Budget Punishes Small Businesses—Like Strippers!”
(I suppose I better say ’snark’ at this point, just in case!).
April 1st, 2009 at 10:58 am5th Estate Says:
Like “Can Playboy Bunnies Pick DOW Jones Stocks?” or “What Do The Girls-Gone-Wild Girls Think of Burqas?” or “How Obama’s Socialist Budget Punishes Small Businesses—Like Strippers!”
______________
Whoa… time ta buy a TIVO machine!!!!
Oh wait… yer only kidding… dang…
April 1st, 2009 at 11:00 amLast night, Keith Olbermann named Bill O’Reilly his “worst person in the world.”
wrong.
more accurately, he was ONE of the worst, a “runner up”…
but he did take the bronze AND the silver…
my idjit congressman, john shitkus, IL 19, won the gold.
April 1st, 2009 at 11:01 amThe ambush interview can be appropriate. 60 Minutes (when it was still 60 Minutes) perfected the technique for a variety of deserving miscreants.
However, in this case, Fox is either trying to settle a score or silence people with whom they disagree. I am sure that one polite phone call to Mr. Brinkley would have resolved this matter.
April 1st, 2009 at 11:01 amI’m dying to know what the “inaccurate information” is in the textbooks.
Somehow, I think it won’t help the idiot Jenkins’ cause.
A nice pepper spray held in the palm of the hand might do wonders for this type of “journalism.”
April 1st, 2009 at 11:04 amFor the record, O’Reilly was not the “Worst Person”. He shared the bronze and received silver. That went to Congressman Shimkus (R) for his ridicule about CO2 emissions.
But back to the matter at hand. Let’s not fight ambush with ambush. I didn’t like the methods that were used in the past, and I didn’t like the “ambush” on O’Reilly before. Let’s not put out fire with more gasoline.
I’m personally amazed that Doocy just stood there and “complimented” Jenkins for his “journalism”. Jenkins appeared to be nothing more than a student coming to Brinkley for a question, but only with a camera instead. He comes up to him unprepared (forced to pause and open up his book at the 1:20 mark), a waste of any busy professor’s time.
Later, he twists words, first claiming there was “only one such suspect was ever changed with a crime” (0:53), then states that “no one was ever charged” (3:28). Well, which is it? Are we talking about the same thing or not? Jenkins is mixing himself up here and appears rattled throughout his monologues.
Jenkins then stumbles over accusations that there were grammatical errors and words left out (3:54), which is not what he was to point out. This is a content argument, not a presentation argument. If we’re to go that nit-picky about the English language, perhaps he could also address the misspellings on Fox’s chyrons?
And finally, speaking of accuracy, it’s “Unfinished Nation”, Griff, not “Unfinished Business” (0:12). Whoops.
April 1st, 2009 at 11:05 amCageyCretin, Ralph the wonder locust Says (re ‘the crawl‘).
I’m selective about my TV news watching–it is subject driven; who might have the ‘best’ coverage for a given story I’m interested in?
On the 24-hour channels they all run crawls, AND display ’summary’ chyrons which change every minute. Along with the frequent deference of the show hosts to their guests the whole is presentation of information is incoherent.
It explains a lot about certain public issue perceptions, and it also explains a lot about why a significant portion of the population now uses the internet as a preferred news source—because the recipient of the news has more control over the information flow.
April 1st, 2009 at 11:19 amOnce, just once, I’d like to see one of these stalkees go “Chuck Norris” on these Fox teams.
April 1st, 2009 at 11:27 amIf you don’t lie or fudge the truth you have nothing to worry about or be afraid of. Brinkley didn’t even try to defend himself. It was obvious he has something to hide or is ashamed over not telling the whole truth.
April 1st, 2009 at 11:28 ammorganes, no matter what he said to this thug would have been taken out of context to make him look bad. Its a waste of time to answer any of these thugs pretending to be news men. Silence when being attacked with leading questions doesn’t mean you have anything to hide. Get a clue will ya.
April 1st, 2009 at 11:32 amShame on him for stooping so low!
Wait, what?
April 1st, 2009 at 11:33 ammorganes Says:
If you don’t lie or fudge the truth you have nothing to worry about or be afraid of. Brinkley didn’t even try to defend himself. It was obvious he has something to hide or is ashamed over not telling the whole truth.
Defense #1 is at 3:15.
Defense #2 is at 3:36.
April 1st, 2009 at 11:34 ammorganes, As far as I know, only one person has been charged with being involved with the attack on 9/11 which is what the professor wrote in his book. If you know of anyone else who was charged, please give a link.
April 1st, 2009 at 11:36 am19. Angels81
I’m not sure. A photo of someone walking away without responding is nice and sensational.
Personally, I can’t wait for the lawsuits against Faux to start for what is obviously harassment.
Not to mention, isn’t this tactic (espcially against someone who has a book out and therefore anxious for publicity and the book circuit) a clear attempt to suppress speech ?
April 1st, 2009 at 11:39 amI don’t have video at work either but from what i remember watching Faux&Fiends this morning the professor wrote that only ‘one person in guantanamo bay was charged with a crime’ (fox)…
Now how out of context that was is hard to tell, but that statement is wrong. We know of at least 6 that have actually been charged with a crime. So yeah, its still about 1%, but OMG LIBRUL BIAZ!!!
April 1st, 2009 at 11:42 amGood point Morganes… So tell me, when did you stop beating your wife?
April 1st, 2009 at 11:44 amMapleStreet: What lawsuits? No matter how foul what they do is, its legal. They hide behind the press shield and confront people on public property. Ambushing someone once on public property for some BS interview is not harassment, no matter how crude it is. That’s why if no one was to respond to this tactic, faux would have to find some other way to spread their lies. Faux will not waste money on silence.
April 1st, 2009 at 11:49 amIs it time for “citizen journalists” to keep “media journalists” (and I use that term VERY loosely with regard to Bill-O The Clown) honest by questioning their hypocrisy via repeated on-camera ambushes as well?
April 1st, 2009 at 11:58 amamish, that’s exactly what TP and other progressive blogs do. We will continue to shine the light on these thugs.
April 1st, 2009 at 12:00 pmmorganes Says:
___________
STEVE DOOCY: We’ve been watching you badger some guy up at Columbia.
_____________
Even Doocey calls it “badgering”, you idiot.
Got a question for you… who’s more likely to be misinfiomed DELIBERATELY by their sources of information… Columbia students or Fox viewers?
Think CAREFULLY before answering…
April 1st, 2009 at 12:14 pmThanks for the links, TRoHS (spelled backwards, it’s “SHoRT” :0 ).
April 1st, 2009 at 12:22 pmI don’t rememeber if I saw it here or another site, but I agree with this – one person says that the best way to handle these ambushes is to stand there and say, over and over again “You do not have my permission to use my likeness, voice or words in your broadcast.” Absolutely nothing else. They will get tired first and leave. It gives them nothing they can use or distort. And nicely takes care of the impression of guilt you would give by walking away. Also, if they are on your property, you can add “Please leave my property or I will call the police”.
April 1st, 2009 at 12:25 pmthuggin’ it up to entertain the dummies. dummies are entertained when “some new york college smart guy” gets a camera shoved in his face. “it’s something to watch before WCW comes on”, one dummy reflected.
foxnews = dummy entertainment.
HI! Dummies. Have a President Obama day!!!!!
April 1st, 2009 at 12:27 pmmorganes Says:
If you don’t lie or fudge the truth you have nothing to worry about or be afraid of.
ahhhh.. the goood ol’ wiretapping talking point? Of course, you support THIS for the current administyration wiretapping and studying YOU, right? AND since you support this line of thinking, you don’t see anyhting wrong with people from the Bush administration being ivestigated? I mean, if they did nothing wrong then they have nothing to fear, right? Even IF the investigators, judges and jury are ALL far-left thinking people, right? Truth will beat out any “spin”?
Brinkley didn’t even try to defend himself. It was obvious he has something to hide or is ashamed over not telling the whole truth.
Actually, he did defend himself, AND he sent them a letter to further explain his position.
“It was obvious” is entirely subjective — what facts have you to offer that make it objectively “obvious” that he is hiding or ashamed of something? You assume to think for everyone else. This is pseudoreasoning — nonargumentative persuasion for one (the statement could also conceivably fall into other pseudoreasoning fallacies — a common occurrance: once one leaves behind logic and argues with fallacies, they tend to overlap a bit).
April 1st, 2009 at 12:34 pmCageyCretin Says:
Thanks for the links, TRoHS (spelled backwards, it’s “SHoRT” :0 ).
__________
When the bug names go away, it’ll go back to TRoS…
April 1st, 2009 at 12:45 pmThe future is … TASERS.
Anybody stalking you, grab your taser, turn, and tase ‘em in the ballz…
and then giggle uncontrollably while watching them grovel in the dirt, writhing, whining, screaming, and clutching their roasted nutz…
April 1st, 2009 at 12:51 pmKeith Olbermann should just name the “worst” prize the “O’Rilley” prize. Then he could focus on other horrible people like Cheney or Norm Coleman.
April 1st, 2009 at 1:09 pmI can turn a fox stalker into prison companion in less than 5 minutes…
1. Compliment him about how their mother/girlfriend/wife did a special trick for you last evening in front of stalkers’ camera crew.
April 1st, 2009 at 1:12 pm2. Keep needling said fox stalker about the proclivities of said partner while stalker/bully keeps asking questions about “topic” they came to stalk you about.
3. Watch stalker lose his cool and either threaten or attack you on camera.
4. Call Police and have fox assaulter arrested for assault and or battery.
5. Wave bye bye to Prison “companion”
i have never watched fox “news”. sometimes i will be in an office or a waiting room and fox will be on the tv. my gym has a tv tuned to fox in the a.m. i see idiots spewing and ranting and i ask myself, how can anyone with the brains of a gnat sit and watch this tripe. of course i feel the same about all network news. with the death of peter jennings the last viable network news went straight into the toilet. long live the internet.
April 1st, 2009 at 1:37 pmI’d like to see swarms of different insects around until O’Reilly apologizes to Amanda on air and stops his ambush squad.
Yeah, well, I guess that’s like forever.
April 1st, 2009 at 1:41 pmagain i have to ask why an American broadcasting co.is owned by an Australian citizen we have allowed a foreign operative to buy up numerous media outlets more than he was legally allowed to before his friends the Republicans deregulated the industry this is nothing more than Republican smear TV boycott all Rupert Murdoch owned media outlets fox both news and entertainment and any of the rags he euphemistically calls news papers
April 1st, 2009 at 2:42 pmI would love for those Fox idiots to try that with someone like me. The last thing they would see for awile is the sole of my shoe as it came down on their pathetic faces! A nice liberal I am not.
April 1st, 2009 at 3:26 pmangels81 – There are a couple of places I could see a lawsuit. One is that many of the ambushes have happened on private property. Another is that if I follow you, and you take a wandering course which clearly shows you are trying to avoid me, it can be consired harassment. I could also see this as stalking a celebrity – which has legal sanctions in may places.
April 1st, 2009 at 4:07 pmAll Jenkins needs is a Brown Shirt to show his true leanings.
April 1st, 2009 at 9:54 pmLast night, Keith Olbermann named Bill O’Reilly his “worst person in the world.” … Does a day go by that Olbermann doesn’t mention O’Reilly’s name? I find in all rather old and boring. That dog don’t hunt no more. Honey, where is the TV clicker. I have had enough of this juvenile stuff.
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:46 amkwsventures Says:
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:59 amKeith Olbermann says he’s the worst person in the world because O’Silly’s azz is the worst person. O’SillyO claims to be a real journalist but he’s just a real liar! Real journalists back up what they’re saying with facts and are supposed to be objective. That’s just not O’Sillyho! He’s presented himself as a puffed up pompous azz! I’ve had enough of rightwingnutcrazies criticism when the GOP has crashed and burned. I’ve had enough of trolls coming on TP spewing nonsense that they’ve heard off of Bedlam Beck’s, How in the Hell Hannity’s and O’SillyO’s phone sex stalker shows!
kwsventures Says:
I am sure Kieth will miss you. After all he really needs the brainwashed moron demographic.
April 2nd, 2009 at 4:54 ammorganes Says:
If you don’t lie or fudge the truth you have nothing to worry about or be afraid of. Brinkley didn’t even try to defend himself. It was obvious he has something to hide or is ashamed over not telling the whole truth.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
That is plain idiotic. Here is an excerp of what he said.
“Americans responded to the tragedies with acts of courage and generosity, large and small, and with a sense of national unity and commitment that seemed, at least for a time, like the unity and commitment at the start of World War II…”open and unembarrassed displays of patriotism and national pride.”
It is just stupid to say he had anything to hide he isnt an idiot. Why would he think that no matter WHAT he said this crew would not take his interview, heavily edit it and make him look foolish. It was clear THEY had an agenda. Your claim of what YOU think is obvious is YOUR WISHFUL THINKING. Time to decide whether or not you want to spend the rest of your life brainwashed and oblivious.
April 2nd, 2009 at 4:54 amSo, would it make sense to turn this around on Oreilly and the Fox crew? Send some people with camera and mic to question them on the multitude of errors and distortions they spit out all the time? Take the top few more recent ones and do the same thing to them? I know it’s sinking to their level but it’s very tempting. “Have you no shame… have you no decency” would surely be appropriate in the dialogue.
April 2nd, 2009 at 7:26 amCome to think of it, if someone were to try this, Colbert might be the best one. He’s got experience interviewing people and making them look bad mostly by letting them talk.
April 2nd, 2009 at 7:28 amAs an educator, I need to be able to teach subjects based on facts. When facts and/or history of events are distorted and can’t be trusted as factul because the author(s) inserted opinion, those textbooks are worthless.
All should be demanding that textbooks are accurate and not based on ones opinions as textbooks cost a lot of money. A good education involves the teachings of various subjects that are documented on he facts. It is up to the student than to digest the facts. This, of course, is totally dfferent than someone’s views based on their own values and experiences.
If an author of a textbook is unwelling to stand behind what he has written and declines media interviews to set the record straight and bring forth new documented facts, it is the media’s job to demand accountability from the author. There are many knunkle heads that don’t know their history and will believe the falsehoods. No one should support deception and lack of accountability.
April 6th, 2009 at 6:57 pmnuna, if you are an educator, then it’s no wonder we have so many illiterates enjoying Faux. But you’re not really an educator, are you? No, you’re just another right-wing troll, a “knunkle head,” to borrow your phrase. Here’s a hint – don’t tell people you’re a teacher when your grammar (not to mention your “logic”) would make a sixth-grader blush.
April 8th, 2009 at 11:42 pmOK Pat obviously senile dementia has set in. Time to see the nice young men that will need to take care of you soon.burun estetigi rent a car arac kiralama
April 18th, 2009 at 6:16 amsac ekimi