Since the professer will grade me on spelling.

And yes, Perfessor. Even John King has to answer to higher ups. But when it comes to his product, unless he gets a phone call from a higher numbered floor in the building, or some other building at corporate HQ, no TV News producer in chief on the studio floor calls his shots.

That's an educated guess I'd bet my money on.

@Martin Gifford, January 17, 2008 06:23 P:

"Cocktailhag and Associative Individualist and Glenn Greenwald,

"Are any of you willing to specifically address the point I made? Or is this simply a reactionary left-wing blog, and therefore not progressive? My guess is that you will not specifically address my point because it’s true and it goes against your goals, which deviate from the issue of truth."

Martin,

I recall dashing off a note to cocktailhag because what she'd written struck me at the time as being especially well-written and hard-hitting, but I don't recall the "wingnut welfare check" part, which I don't much care for.

I know I'm imposing to ask you this, but will you re-post cocktailhag's entire post that's in question, so I can see if an apology on my part's in order?

Thanks.

Ken Rogers

I know I'm imposing to ask you this, but will you re-post cocktailhag's entire post that's in question, so I can see if an apology on my part's in order?

-- Associative Individualist

She wrote it. Her post is on page 55 on my computer. Same for yours, most likely.

While you're batting things around with Martin, ask him when he stopped beating his wife.

Did you think to ask me or anyone who works with me whether that was the entire interview? No. (It was not; just a portion used by one of the many CNN programs.)

You could have talked about quilting and knitting and even come up with the cures for the common cold, diabetes and cancer BUT if that part wasn't shown then only a clairvoyant could find out what else was said.

Did you reach out to ask the purpose of that specific interview? No.

We need to know why you blow politicians ego's? I think 'we' are smart enough to figure that one out ourselves.

Or how it might have fit in with other questions being asked of other candidates that day? No.

Just because the other 'journalists' wore out their kneepads that day doesn't make what you did right or more palatable.

Or anything that might have put facts or context or fairness into your critique. No.

Facts? Context? Fairness? The fact is that you got caught blowing McCain's ego. The context was a sick love fest that seems to be easier than actually confronting them on their records and prying into what they really think. Fairness? Is it 'fair' for 'we the people' to have to watch our airwaves used in such a demeaning and vacuous way? We are to be grateful that you took the time to blow his ego on your network?

What was the average person supposed to get out of what you 'reported'? That McCain is a nice guy? A politician that we can 'trust'? Only a fool trusts politicians. I guess you showed your true calling and true purpose.

If I was you, I'd get better knee pads, and ear plugs.

If all you do is throw yourself on your knees in front of politicians and then whine and scream when you are called out for being the slut that you are, you are going to need better pads and the plugs to avoid hearing people calling you what you really are. Are we sure that prostitution is the 'oldest profession'?

@Martin Gifford January 17, 2008 06:35:

@ Cocktailhag, Associative Individualist, and Glenn Greenwald

(Sorry the formatting of my previous post was confusing, so here's a new version)

TO: Glenn Greenwald, Cocktailhag, and Associative Individualist,

Are any of you willing to specifically address the point I made? Or is this simply a reactionary left-wing blog, and therefore not progressive? My guess is that you will not specifically address my point because it’s true and it goes against your goals, which deviate from the issue of truth.

Martin,

Here's my response to your second post, above:

1) First of all, I emphatically agree with cocktailhag that you are bafflingly mistaken in thinking it was incumbent upon Glenn to "prove" that King did not ask better questions of McCain than those in the aired portion of the interview, which is what Glenn was criticizing. Remember, it was after Glenn had published his piece that King claimed he had asked some non-inane questions of McCain that weren't aired. Should Glenn have, before writing his piece, hired a private detective to go through CNN's dumpster to find evidence that somewhere, sometime, King posed non-inane, non-adulatory questions to McCain? Why are you having trouble with the obviously valid point that any "proof" of the existence of any such non-adulatory questions is clearly King's and/or CNN management's responsibility, not Glenn's?

2) In retrospect, I must have skimmed over the part of c-hag's

rejoinder referencing your "wingnut welfare check." Calling people "wingnuts" is not exactly the epitome of intellectual acuity, and for my careless endorsement of her having written that, I do apologize. The more I think about it, the more I think I may have been to some extent conflating my appreciation of other things I had recently read by her with my appreciation of the post that you object to. Let me ask you this: had you previously written something about receiving a check from the Australian government that she could have been referring to? Not that that would in any way justify the "wingnut" epithet, but it would account in part, at least, for the "welfare check" component of her remarks.

Please let me hear from you.

KR

Keep up the good work Glenn. John King just displayed exactly why he is no more than a talking head and why major media misses nearly every opportunity it has to get some substance into it.

Unfortunately the problem is pervasive in the news industry and most likely not directly King's fault. If John starts asking hard questions, well there is probably another drooling sycophant waiting to step up and take his place at the altar of McCain. So to keep his paycheck and stay on TV he throws all the softballs his bosses tell him to. Wouldn't want some other news outlet or reporter in there.

Sure it probably rankles him a bit to be that guy which is why he launched an impotent salvo at you for pointing out how deficient he is as a reporter, but hey it pays the bills, so he'll keep on doing it!