Because I am a semicentenarian, and can no longer burn the candle at both ends and still show up for work the next day, I can't stay up till midnight to watch The Daily Show and The Colbert Report, so we usually watch it the next night at 8 PM.
The problem is that Keith Olbermann is on at 8 PM. Good thing TDS and TCR are in reruns this week, because otherwise we would have missed Olbermann's smackdown of both Bill O'Reilly AND John Gibson last night. It was truly a thing of beauty. If you didn't see it, Crooks and Liars has the video, or you can read the transcript:
At the end of June we began to devote about 90 seconds out of each news-hour to a feature called "The Worst Persons In The World."
The mighty and the anonymous alike have made the nightly list -- from Robert Novak to Scott Peterson to the Ronald McDonald who held up a Wendy's.
And up until now, though well over 200 people have earned the dishonor, we've never had a complaint.
Our number three story on the Countdown: we have a complaint.
Evidently John Gibson and Bill O'Reilly of Fox News don't like being considered among the Worst Persons In The World, even though they clearly are.
O'Reilly first.
He was funnier.
Last week the Big Giant Head did some sort of year-end wrap-up of his rants and distortions.
It was a self-loofah'ing of congratulation, for the nightly disaster his program means for the truth.
"Speaking of disasters, our competitor at MSNBC is a notorious smear merchant. So far this month, December, The Factor's third rerun at 4:00 in the morning has beaten the MSNBC's original 8:00 program more than 50 percent of the time. Unbelievable."
A couple of things here: We never claimed O'Reilly's program doesn't draw vastly more viewers than does this one. To borrow a phrase -- hey, 800 billion flies can't be wrong.
But it is curious, isn't it, that he brands me a "smear merchant" and yet instead of trying to refute even one of the hateful things we've quoted him as saying or doing, he instead turns to the ratings.
That's probably because the only things we've "smeared" O'Reilly with have been his own quotes.
To borrow another phrase -- when you're as guilty as he is... change the subject.
Unfortunately I now have to change the subject to John Gibson, and this is greatly painful because I really don't know why he's decided to try to destroy himself, but he has.
O'Reilly, after all, is one of those blissful idiots who can rationalize anything. That doing this enough usually results in a nervous breakdown, is well-known, and his clock is clearly ticking, in that regard.
But even he is not so functionally stupid as to deny saying things that are preserved on tape, which is what Mr. Gibson is doing. Let me flash you back to the day he made the Worst Persons list.
But the winner, and this one comes with great personal pain, because we were friends when he worked here and thereafter, John Gibson.
Selling his new book about this phony baloney war on Christmas, John revealed a very ugly side to himself. He is one of those people who think all religions but his are mistaken. You know, the way a lot of these religious nut bag terrorists think. I would think, Gibbie said on a syndicated radio show. if somebody is going to be -- have to answer for following the wrong religion, they are not going to have to answer to me. We know who they're going to have to answer to.
I'd tell you which religion, John, thinks is the only one that's right, but what's the difference? It's not the faith that's the issue. It's the intolerance. John Gibson, today's worst person in the world.
John first complained about that on his radio program. Then he went to town on television.
"I find myself being misquoted or the actual words I've said taken way way way out of context in order to build outrage against me...
Names like 'fathead' and the 'worst something or other' for things I really did not say…
Today one of my former colleagues repeated a misquote to justify saying some truly disgusting things about me. Condescendingly, he 'tisk tisked' that he used to like me. I frankly doubt it. Otherwise, why would he be so willing to believe trash?"
Well, John, I believed it because it's true. And it's on tape.
I'm afraid he is, at best, suffering from amnesia. At worst, he's just flat-out pretending something never happened.
John Gibson's remarks about religions being wrong and those who believe them having to answer for them, came on a show hosted by a Janet Parshall, broadcast by Salem Radio Network, on November 17th -- and they're on tape. The website Media Matters for America has a transcript and an audio link, and I'm afraid there's no ambiguity whatsoever.
GIBSON: The whole point of this is that the tradition, the religious tradition of this country is tolerance, and that the same sense of tolerance that's been granted by the majority to the minority over the years ought to go the other way too. Minorities ought to have the same sense of tolerance about the majority religion -- Christianity -- that they've been granted about their religions over the years.
PARSHALL: Exactly. John, I have to tell you, let me linger for a minute on that word "tolerance." Because first of all, the people who like to promulgate that concept are the worst violators. They cannot tolerate Christianity, as an example.
GIBSON: Absolutely. I know -- I know that. PARSHALL: And number two, I have to tell you, I don't know when they held this election and decided that tolerance was a transcendent value. I serve a god who, with a finger of fire, wrote, he will have no other gods before him. And he doesn't tolerate sin, which is why he sent his son to the cross, but all of a sudden now, we jump up and down and celebrate the idea of tolerance. I think tolerance means accommodation, but it doesn't necessarily mean acquiescence or wholehearted acceptance.
GIBSON: No, no, no. If you figure that -- listen, we get a little theological here, and it's probably a bit over my head, but I would think if somebody is going to be -- have to answer for following the wrong religion, they're not going to have to answer to me. We know who they're going to have to answer to.
PARSHALL: Right.
GIBSON: And that's fine. Let 'em. But in the meantime, as long as they're civil and behave, we tolerate the presence of other religions around us without causing trouble, and I think most Americans are fine with that tradition.
Now, there is always the possibility -- however remote -- that that wasn't John Gibson, but merely some kind of professional John Gibson Impersonator.
In which case, that guy is clearly the Worst Person of All-Time.
Or an evil twin, maybe.
Otherwise... that's really the whole shebang right there. That phrase "wrong religion" actually sounds worse in context, doesn't it?
It's the same kind of misunderstanding and perversion of religion to which we react in horror when we see it in terrorists who have twisted religions for their own purposes.
Might as well have been commentators on some All-Access Al-Qaeda show on Al-Jazeera talking about infidels.
And by the way, don't you get this creepy feeling of embarrassment when somebody trying desperately to be holier-than-thou, promptly mis-quotes the bible?
"I serve a god who, with a finger of fire," you just heard Janet Parshall say, "wrote, he will have no other gods before him.
Actually, Ms. Parshall, as any of us who've actually read the bible know, the first commandment is "thou shalt have no other gods before me."
That's not just a difference in pronouns. He's demanding exclusivity from those who believe in him. Nothing in there saying other people can't serve other gods in which they believe.
Sorry. I've strayed from the main topic, probably because it is awfully painful.
Whether he thinks me insincere or not, I really did like Gibby. Hard-working, always there to cover a shift, or help out in any way he could. Now, instead, he's denying he said some truly despicable things -- things recorded for posterity -- and worse, he's now trying to blame those hateful things on me.
Ordinarily when somebody gets caught saying something as intolerant as this, their choices are a) to apologize, b) to resign, or c) to make sure there's no tape and try to lie their way out of it.
John chose "d" -- blame it on somebody else.
The audio clip is the definitive answer, and I would hope John would now have the self-respect to acknowledge what he said, and to leave the airwaves for good.
Because, between the remark and the denial, he has -- sadly -- forfeited his right to stay here.
He. Was. Not. Kidding.
As much as I love Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert, methinks they must needs be relegated to the PVR box...
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire