<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Fair &amp; Balanced</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/01/03/fair-balanced/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/01/03/fair-balanced/</link>
	<description>Like Kryptonite To Stupid</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2009 12:04:12 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Jay Tea</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/01/03/fair-balanced/#comment-58393</link>
		<dc:creator>Jay Tea</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Jan 2008 01:25:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=4433#comment-58393</guid>
		<description>The sexual harassment laws are civil matters, Tom, not criminal -- and hence, no conviction. For example, take OJ Simpson. Acquitted in a criminal trial, found liable in a civil one.

And to most people, if one lies under oath while defending oneself in a civil case, that is pretty much tantamount to an admission of responsibility.

And as far as Hume and Wallace having solid journalistic credentials -- I recall Hume spent several years as White House Chief Correspondent for ABC, and won an Emmy for his coverage of the first Iraq War. Wallace was likewise White House Chief Correspondent, but for NBC, and his career highlight was when he caught Ronald Reagan trying to change his story about the arms-for-hostages scandal.

On the other hand, we have Chris Matthews, who worked for Democratic House Speaker Top O&#039;Neill for six years; George Stephanopolous, former top aide to Bill Clinton; Keith Olbermann, sportscaster; and... um...

Who else DO you have, anyway? Al Franken? Jeannine Garofalo? (Who I loved in &quot;Mystery Men,&quot; by the way. VASTLY underrated film.) Glenn &quot;King Of Socks&quot; Greenwald?

J.


</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The sexual harassment laws are civil matters, Tom, not criminal &#8212; and hence, no conviction. For example, take OJ Simpson. Acquitted in a criminal trial, found liable in a civil one.</p>
<p>And to most people, if one lies under oath while defending oneself in a civil case, that is pretty much tantamount to an admission of responsibility.</p>
<p>And as far as Hume and Wallace having solid journalistic credentials &#8212; I recall Hume spent several years as White House Chief Correspondent for ABC, and won an Emmy for his coverage of the first Iraq War. Wallace was likewise White House Chief Correspondent, but for NBC, and his career highlight was when he caught Ronald Reagan trying to change his story about the arms-for-hostages scandal.</p>
<p>On the other hand, we have Chris Matthews, who worked for Democratic House Speaker Top O&#8217;Neill for six years; George Stephanopolous, former top aide to Bill Clinton; Keith Olbermann, sportscaster; and&#8230; um&#8230;</p>
<p>Who else DO you have, anyway? Al Franken? Jeannine Garofalo? (Who I loved in &#8220;Mystery Men,&#8221; by the way. VASTLY underrated film.) Glenn &#8220;King Of Socks&#8221; Greenwald?</p>
<p>J.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: (: Tom :)</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/01/03/fair-balanced/#comment-58392</link>
		<dc:creator>(: Tom :)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jan 2008 18:37:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=4433#comment-58392</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;Bill Clinton, on the other hand, violated the sexual harassment laws he&#039;d personally signed.&lt;/i&gt;

&lt;i&gt;J.&lt;/i&gt;

Remind me again - when was he convicted of violating these laws?  what time did he serve?  What penalties did the courts give him for violating the sexual harassment laws?  Because, until you do, this is just more Republican&#039;t innuendo unsupported by facts.  Sorta like the Chris Wallace clips he put on just before trying to play &#039;gotcha&#039; with the Clenis.

Which reminds me - it sure seems funny that you say nothing about the biased &#039;journalism&#039; that Hume and Wallace engage in, and instead nit-picked the Clinton - Foley comparison.  Almost like you were unable to handle reality and instead had to resort to the standard Republican&#039;t slime-and-distort tactics.  Good job reinforcing the stereotype of the weaselly, dissembling, hypocritical, oafish Republican&#039;t moran.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>Bill Clinton, on the other hand, violated the sexual harassment laws he&#8217;d personally signed.</i></p>
<p><i>J.</i></p>
<p>Remind me again &#8211; when was he convicted of violating these laws?  what time did he serve?  What penalties did the courts give him for violating the sexual harassment laws?  Because, until you do, this is just more Republican&#8217;t innuendo unsupported by facts.  Sorta like the Chris Wallace clips he put on just before trying to play &#8216;gotcha&#8217; with the Clenis.</p>
<p>Which reminds me &#8211; it sure seems funny that you say nothing about the biased &#8216;journalism&#8217; that Hume and Wallace engage in, and instead nit-picked the Clinton &#8211; Foley comparison.  Almost like you were unable to handle reality and instead had to resort to the standard Republican&#8217;t slime-and-distort tactics.  Good job reinforcing the stereotype of the weaselly, dissembling, hypocritical, oafish Republican&#8217;t moran.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jay Tea</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/01/03/fair-balanced/#comment-58391</link>
		<dc:creator>Jay Tea</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jan 2008 17:16:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=4433#comment-58391</guid>
		<description>Tom, Foley was excruciatingly careful to NOT go after underage pages. So the guy was a disgusting, vile, repulsive scum, but NOT a criminal.

Bill Clinton, on the other hand, violated the sexual harassment laws he&#039;d personally signed.

J.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tom, Foley was excruciatingly careful to NOT go after underage pages. So the guy was a disgusting, vile, repulsive scum, but NOT a criminal.</p>
<p>Bill Clinton, on the other hand, violated the sexual harassment laws he&#8217;d personally signed.</p>
<p>J.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: (: Tom :)</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/01/03/fair-balanced/#comment-58390</link>
		<dc:creator>(: Tom :)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jan 2008 15:11:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=4433#comment-58390</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;As I&#039;d heard it, Brit Hume and Chris Wallace -- two guys with solid journalistic credentials&lt;/i&gt;

Really?  Solidly harrassing Democrats, and solidly fluffling Republican&#039;ts?  Sounds like they&#039;d be perfect moderating a presidential debate &lt;i&gt;(cough)&lt;/i&gt;...

I mean, who can forget the &lt;a href=&quot;http://thinkprogress.org/2006/09/24/clinton-video/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Chris Wallace spanking by the Clenis&lt;/a&gt;?  Or Brit Hume saying that &lt;a href=&quot;http://thinkprogress.org/2006/10/01/hume-foley-clinton/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Bill Clinton&#039;s Lewinsky problem = Mark Foley&#039;s underage page problem&lt;/a&gt;?  Such unbiased reporting!  I can only imagine the &#039;fair and balanced&#039; questions they would be asking...
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>As I&#8217;d heard it, Brit Hume and Chris Wallace &#8212; two guys with solid journalistic credentials</i></p>
<p>Really?  Solidly harrassing Democrats, and solidly fluffling Republican&#8217;ts?  Sounds like they&#8217;d be perfect moderating a presidential debate <i>(cough)</i>&#8230;</p>
<p>I mean, who can forget the <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2006/09/24/clinton-video/" rel="nofollow">Chris Wallace spanking by the Clenis</a>?  Or Brit Hume saying that <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2006/10/01/hume-foley-clinton/" rel="nofollow">Bill Clinton&#8217;s Lewinsky problem = Mark Foley&#8217;s underage page problem</a>?  Such unbiased reporting!  I can only imagine the &#8216;fair and balanced&#8217; questions they would be asking&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: merl</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/01/03/fair-balanced/#comment-58389</link>
		<dc:creator>merl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jan 2008 11:07:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=4433#comment-58389</guid>
		<description>I wish just once that someone would tell him just how stupid he is.
Or say, &quot;is that supposed to be a serious question?
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I wish just once that someone would tell him just how stupid he is.<br />
Or say, &#8220;is that supposed to be a serious question?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SpiderJ</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/01/03/fair-balanced/#comment-58388</link>
		<dc:creator>SpiderJ</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jan 2008 05:55:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=4433#comment-58388</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;I guess the chance that the leading Democratic candidates might have to face real questions from Hume and Wallace was too great a price for access to the highest-rated cable news channel and some great publicity for the CBC...&lt;/i&gt;

&quot;My oh my,&quot; thought the trout, &quot;That &lt;i&gt;is&lt;/i&gt; a mighty plump and juicy worm hanging there on the end of that hook. Why, it might just be worth the sudden inability to breathe, the painful bludgeoning, and the eventual filleting, grilling, and consumption.&quot;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>I guess the chance that the leading Democratic candidates might have to face real questions from Hume and Wallace was too great a price for access to the highest-rated cable news channel and some great publicity for the CBC&#8230;</i></p>
<p>&#8220;My oh my,&#8221; thought the trout, &#8220;That <i>is</i> a mighty plump and juicy worm hanging there on the end of that hook. Why, it might just be worth the sudden inability to breathe, the painful bludgeoning, and the eventual filleting, grilling, and consumption.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jay Tea</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/01/03/fair-balanced/#comment-58387</link>
		<dc:creator>Jay Tea</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jan 2008 05:33:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=4433#comment-58387</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t recall Hannity being discussed as a moderator in the proposed debates. A fair comparison might be if MSNBC had proposed Keith Olbermann to moderate the Republican debates.

As I&#039;d heard it, Brit Hume and Chris Wallace -- two guys with solid journalistic credentials -- were being batted around. They would have done a hell of a lot better than that twit from the Iowa newspaper did...

But we&#039;ll never know. The nutroots killed the debate that was being co-sponsored by Fox and the Congressional Black Caucus. I guess the chance that the leading Democratic candidates might have to face real questions from Hume and Wallace was too great a price for access to the highest-rated cable news channel and some great publicity for the CBC...

J.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t recall Hannity being discussed as a moderator in the proposed debates. A fair comparison might be if MSNBC had proposed Keith Olbermann to moderate the Republican debates.</p>
<p>As I&#8217;d heard it, Brit Hume and Chris Wallace &#8212; two guys with solid journalistic credentials &#8212; were being batted around. They would have done a hell of a lot better than that twit from the Iowa newspaper did&#8230;</p>
<p>But we&#8217;ll never know. The nutroots killed the debate that was being co-sponsored by Fox and the Congressional Black Caucus. I guess the chance that the leading Democratic candidates might have to face real questions from Hume and Wallace was too great a price for access to the highest-rated cable news channel and some great publicity for the CBC&#8230;</p>
<p>J.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
