The good stuff starts at 2:42:
Link: sevenload.com
Am I the only one who thinks Michelle Malkin should have her own show?
(Hot Air has this and more on Michelle's O'Reilly Factor appearance tonight)
The good stuff starts at 2:42:
Link: sevenload.com
Am I the only one who thinks Michelle Malkin should have her own show?
(Hot Air has this and more on Michelle's O'Reilly Factor appearance tonight)
4 comments:
Lord, I only pray you are the only one that thinks Ms. Malkin should have her own show.
Talking over a guest, insulting a guest is not what I seek in a news commentator.
If Fox and Ms Malkin do not approve of what that guy does, why give him free publicity. But if they bring him on air, be respectful.
She wasn't and earned the finger.
Anonymous,
First of all, understand that this "guest" had called Fox News asking for a chance to "defend" his website. But what he was really after was a chance to give his website exposure.
Or didn't you see his hat turned backward to reveal the hp address of his site?
Understand what his site is...a website using nude barely legal models posing as if they were young teens. In other words: child porn, but without the legal hassles of actually using underage models.
That type of "guest" does not deserve respect...he deserves derision. Michelle gave it to him with both barrels...
Nigel, you missed the point in the my 3rd graph. Why did Fox and Malkin deem it necessary to provide website exposure?
BUT, if they do, they need to be respectful.
The guy, even by your standards, operates a "website using nude barely legal models". But they are legal. His business is not against the law. It is not something I want to be involved with, but he is not breaking any laws. Fox and Malkin need to treat him as a non-lawbreaker.
Personally, I think Fox and Malkin should not have put him on the air.
They and he, did it strictly for publicity. Not for news.
As far your your comment that Ms Malkin gave "it to him with both barrels" she didn't. All she did was insult him by calling him a loser and shouting over his words. That is not derision, that is just being a VERY bad commentator.
Derision would have allowed the guy to speak, and then make comments that deride or belittle his point.
Anonymous, I totally got your original point.
Fox News was not giving this guy "free publicity", even if that is what he was after. I am guessing that a very small percentage of The O'Reilly Factor's target audience would be even remotely interested in such a site.
I guess where we are just going to have to disagree is this: scumbags like this don't deserve any respect at all. You may see his enterprise as "legal"...I see it as highly immoral and disgusting. And his site feeds a sickness...those who may be interested in child/teen porn.
Post a Comment