Open thread: The O’Reilly Malkin Factor Update: Highlights added

posted at 7:40 pm on July 5, 2007 by Allahpundit

Will there, at long last, be a segment on the iPhone? Or will a certain someone’s shame at a certain other someone’s suffering mean the embargo persists? The Factor is on — in 20 minutes!

Update: Heart-ache. The heart-ache only a widower can know.

Update (Bryan): The challenge with editing these Factor highlight reels is often a) condensing the segments enough so that they’ll keep us within fair use but still make sense, and b) capturing something unique about the episode. In this case, hopefully I’ve managed both. The highlight reel starts off with the show’s only real hard news segment, the terror bombings in London and Glasgow. In this segment, you see Michelle doing what she does best–pursuing a big story by getting at the facts of the matter. The show moved through a few political and “best of” segments, before ending on an interview with an internet porn peddler. I think it’s fair to say that this story didn’t make the boss’ top ten list of stories worth covering today. I left in Hugh 2.0’s birdie flight at the end to memorialize what kind of guy he really is: Having lost the debate and having had his cheap trick on the fake photo backfire on him badly, the only thing he left in his arsenal was a childish gesture. Classy.

Update (AP): In case any curiosity-seeker should wander by wanting to know more about the bogus photo the porn peddler mentioned, here’s the post where it was debunked.


Link: sevenload.com

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

JetBoy, you talking about newshounds?

Bad Candy on July 5, 2007 at 11:52 PM

This is a clip that shows why I love Michelle and have nothing but disgust for those who perform and peddle sleaze.

“It’s my job”…the only thing she didn’t say is: ‘It’s good money’. To that I would have said: That money comes at a heavy price; and I suspect that it already has taken it’s toll on these bottom-feeding, mental midgets.

Christine on July 5, 2007 at 11:53 PM

I think newshounds is a site that watches Fox, dunno if its Soros funded…

I know they’ve gone after Gutfeld.

Bad Candy on July 5, 2007 at 11:54 PM

Was just watching the Markwith segment again. Missed the finger the first time

PowWow on July 5, 2007 at 11:55 PM

Ok, Enough is enough… When is she gonna have her own Prime Time Fox Show already???

Sorry Greta..gotta make some room….

Doogiesd on July 5, 2007 at 11:57 PM

Yea, the hat was a preventative measure to keep his brains in
and as far as comparing himself to Heffner, that’s bad all the way around. Hugh is a pathetic perv who lives in his jammies and leads a meaningless life, despite all his money.

Christine on July 5, 2007 at 11:58 PM

Wow, remind me never to get on Michelle’s bad side. I thought she was going to punch that sleezebucket running the porno site through the split screen when he brought up those doctored photos. I wouldn’t have wanted to be security if they were both in the same room.

BKennedy on July 6, 2007 at 12:00 AM

In all seriousness, I’ve seen some major trolls on here before… but this fragility guy is…. wow

Let’s not feed the troll, he seems to be a waste of breath, so this will be my one and only post in regards to him.

MM hammered that guy, and anyone who’s trying to argue that guy’s side obviously goes to his site, or is one of millions of porn addicts in this country. Just because you look at it all the time does not mean it isn’t depraved.

j_ehman on July 6, 2007 at 12:00 AM

Hefner at least tried for a little glamour and the pretense of sophistication. Hat boy makes Joe Francis look like James Bond.

As for Soros-funded Fox Watchers, they’re out there and they’re usually connected with Media Matters.

see-dubya on July 6, 2007 at 12:02 AM

see-dubya on July 5, 2007 at 11:46 PM

haha, you sound like you’re writing the next “real men of genius” ad.

This is a clip that shows why I love Michelle and have nothing but disgust for those who perform and peddle sleaze.

“It’s my job”…the only thing she didn’t say is: ‘It’s good money’. To that I would have said: That money comes at a heavy price; and I suspect that it already has taken it’s toll on these bottom-feeding, mental midgets.

Christine on July 5, 2007 at 11:53 PM

I just hope you have as much contempt for the skanks that pose for him (and by the way, if you check out his links… these girls are not just neighborhood gals posing like they’re in perfect ten. These are just young porn stars who… let’s just say “do stuff” to each other on webcams, etc. They all have their own individual membership porn sites. Not that it is an excuse for being whorish in the first place, but it’s not like they’re being told “just pose naked for me, you know, real classy, and I’ll get you to Hollywood”. These broads are signing up for internet porn, not “nudity”.

Anyway, my point was that we may have moral issues with what this guy does… but it’s legal, and to act like he’s somehow victimizing girls who are voluntarily signing up to have sex with eachother and with guys and attack just him annoys me. These sluts are just as bad as he is.. in fact they’re worse because they’re letting him make money while they degrade THEMSELVES.

RightWinged on July 6, 2007 at 12:10 AM

I love Michelle on the Factor, and generally enjoy seeing her “facts-in-your-face” style. The Porn segment made me wince a little when she called him a loser without what I thought was sufficient provocation.

The problem with that segment is that he has a right to do what he does under the law, and while it is a sleazy business, there wasn’t much of a “gotcha” possible with the guy, nor is that sort of business unusual. Michelle is great with liars, con men, and politicians — I know, I’m repeating myself, but this was a poor guest to have on — for any moderator to deal with — and it seemed that she was trying too hard.

Go with the flow, Michelle.

Aardvark on July 6, 2007 at 12:10 AM

JetBoy, you talking about newshounds?

Bad Candy

No…unless they became newshounds. The group I’m trying to remember was definetly called “FoxWatch”…but a quick Yahoo! search didn’t bring it up. I know I’m not imagining things….

JetBoy on July 6, 2007 at 12:10 AM

Fragility, why are you so obsessed about Fox News? You sound as if you believe Fox News is one of the most pressing issues of the day that for whatever mysterious reason needs to be remedied. You have me wondering if perhaps you are an operative for the Democratic Party who is trying to prepare the American people for the day in the future when the Democratic nominee will announces their refusal to debate the Republican nominee on Fox News.

Most of us already know this. We all know that the Democrat nominee will not debate in any forum where he or she doesn’t have confidence that all of the questions will be softball.

I think that your efforts would be better spent preparing your average apolitical American that the reason the Democrats won’t debate on Fox News is because of Fox rather than the weakness of your candidate. I don’t think you’re going to get any converts here.

But hey, if you enjoy it….

FloatingRock on July 6, 2007 at 12:12 AM

UN-EFFING-BELIEVABLE!

I was all set to give this Markwith creep a wide berth. I thought the interview spun a little out of control with Michelle’s prodding.

NOW I WANNA SMACK HIM MYSELF!

Google HIS name and go to his site. The effing creep has that photoshopped bikini hack job of MM above the fold on his home page! He thinks he’s making some witty ‘back at ya’ barb. If he were half a photographer, he would recognize the off proportions, lighting and body tones.

I think the guy is well within his rights. I think the girls women he shoots are either vapid, depraved or have low self-esteem. Unfortunately, many women today see porn as empowering and liberating. Others will do anything for money.

Sad. Sad. Sad.

If someone already mentioned this guy’s potentially libelous homepage, I apologize. I didn’t want to provide this pig any link relevance on Google, so do the google work yourself.

I’m pissed.

The Race Card on July 6, 2007 at 12:13 AM

Here’s an example of how Media Matters operatives were the ones who got to Don Imus, for example. I have to imagine they’ve got a few people tasked to keep an eye on Fox–in case a conservative should ever dare to speak a conservative thought there.

I get the impression News Hounds are definitely the B-Team.

BTW Randy et al–the “indefatigability” line was originally George Galloway’s, and was a smidge less than completely sincere.

see-dubya on July 6, 2007 at 12:16 AM

i was hoping michelle would slap him through the screen. i missed the finger maybe she should cut it off with a bolo or cut somethng else off lol

bootheel on July 6, 2007 at 12:16 AM

I looked for an email at the site. Found something, is that against the rules here?

PowWow on July 6, 2007 at 12:24 AM

…To that I would have said: That money comes at a heavy price; and I suspect that it already has taken it’s toll…

Christine on July 5, 2007 at 11:53 PM

Indeed.

Spirit of 1776 on July 6, 2007 at 12:24 AM

I looked for an email at the site. Found something, is that against the rules here?

PowWow on July 6, 2007 at 12:24 AM

I don’t think so… but even if it was, I think they’d make an exception in this case, as he’s dishonestly smearing Michelle, using a long ago debunked photo hoax.

Anyway, in case HA doesn’t want you posting dude’s email, all anyone has to do is go to dougmarkwith.com, and he has a link to email him in the left sidebar. But let me warn you that you’ll be required to see some nipples by going there. So if anyone can’t handle that, don’t go.

RightWinged on July 6, 2007 at 12:39 AM

when that pic popped up… fortunately it loaded after the OBVIOUSLY fake pic of MM, I went AHHH! and stared at the ceiling until I could close the tab….

ya, I know, I’m weird

j_ehman on July 6, 2007 at 12:42 AM

Randy, do we get to see Stacy?

Because if so, I’m not going.

(Actually I don’t see much point in giving this guy the traffic he so desperately craves.)

see-dubya on July 6, 2007 at 12:47 AM

In any case, this is my favorite burlesque show in a long time–Fathead of the Seven Veils!

see-dubya on July 6, 2007 at 12:48 AM

Honestly, get a grip, it isn’t real.

Fragility on July 5, 2007 at 10:26 PM

Rivera isn’t a liberal, Rivera’s an idiot. Smith isn’t a liberal, and his show isn’t political. If you think a show about forest fires and oil spills is a liberal counterweight to Bill O’Reilly, Hume, Gibson, Cavuto, Kasich, Gigot, Gutfeld or Hannity’s America, you’re an idiot

Fragility on July 5, 2007 at 11:00 PM

Because you can’t win.

Fragility on July 5, 2007 at 11:11 PM

It’s too late for this nonsense. Stupidity isn’t amazing, it’s fairly human

You just can’t make up stuff that good. Good night.

Fragility on July 5, 2007 at 11:23 PM

Fragile lady (you’re not an “it” and not a “he”), above is just a sampling of what a weak simpleton would write, all in the span of roughly an hour. Good night, indeed.

Entelechy on July 6, 2007 at 1:04 AM

But let me warn you that you’ll be required to see some nipples by going there.

RightWinged on July 6, 2007 at 12:39 AM

Now ordinarily I’d say “I must face the peril!” to a comment like yours, but I don’t want to give that punk any traffic. And I’m sure his site’s all low-rent crap anyway.

ReubenJCogburn on July 6, 2007 at 1:13 AM

I think we’re all off topic here- the season finale of Sands of Passion is going to be out soon! Never a better time to have stock in the Al Qaeda soap opera!

BTW stop arguing about politics on Fox unless you have the guys actually show up on HA (like Mr. Andrew Levy)…

…and don’t forget- all hail the our savior, the Dark Lord, James Rosen… one day you will return to RedEye.

TheEJS on July 6, 2007 at 1:15 AM

I read somewhere on the internet today that Fox News is not as conservative as you might think. The report said that 81% of the Fox Staffers contributed to the Dumocrat party. I’m sorry but I can’t remember which site it was on, but I have only been on Laura Ingraham, MM, Townhall and HA, unless it was on Time Warner Cable or my local CBS TV site. This may be a link to some of the data: http://www.campaignmoney.com/news_corporation.asp

TruthToBeTold on July 6, 2007 at 1:24 AM

It’s late and the thread is almost unbearably long, but I just have to add my $0.02.

I lost just the smallest bit of respect for MM when she threw out that “loser” ad hominem at the beginning of the segment. A loser he may be, but MM has more than enough tools to take care of him without resorting to finger pointing and yelling “loser”.

Jimnospin on July 6, 2007 at 1:28 AM

Insulting the pornographer was totally classless. I can’t believe that Michelle would stoop that low. She is way better then that. I would’ve left….

He may be a sleaze ball, or he could just be running a website where models send him contend with their 2257’s and posts it good faith. The DoJ dug deep into Suicidegirls.com as well; they have girls applying to the site well before their 18th birthdays, is Michelle going haul Selena Mooney (SG Missy) on the factor and call her a looser also?

If a girl wants to get into porn at 18, its entirely her choice.

Just because you disagree with porn dosen’t make it OK for you to insult people. Childish gesture indeed; Michelle was as bad as Stuart Smalley himself in that segment.

liquidflorian on July 6, 2007 at 1:29 AM

Then I would be a rebel, a maverick, a player–who doesn’t play by the rules.

Not to quibble, but on the street, it’s playa. That hat…it gave me a migraine and it made me angry…just the wearing of that stupid hat….it didn’t matter what he said..the finger was predictable…I just knew..that anyone who would wear a hat like that on television would be a complete and utter douche. Where’s a foot swinging Scotsman when you need one?

austinnelly on July 6, 2007 at 1:32 AM

I hate to admit this but I just surfed over to douche-in-a hat’s site and he’s got the hoax photo of Michelle in the bikini on the front page; the caption on it reads: Taking sexy pictures is wrong, right Michelle Malkin? Maybe someone wants to put some legal kung fu on his a**?

austinnelly on July 6, 2007 at 1:36 AM

uhhhh… i don’t get it… why is fox news giving this guy 5+ minutes of free advertising? Shouldn’t Markwith be put in the “ignore him and he’ll go away” file?

el75 on July 6, 2007 at 2:47 AM

I don’t get why Michelle gives this guy such a hard time for capitalizing on a market need for ‘art’ of this type. Not everybody is lucky enough to have somebody there to meet all their human sexual needs, and they need a little help from time to time.

He doesn’t advertise underage girls, he doesn’t publish underage girls and he doesn’t drug his models… seems to be running a pretty legitimate business meeting a real market need. Porn doesn’t necessarily equal filth, and it’s not really fair to treat everybody who meets that market need, a need that has driven some major technological developments (as a side note), as evil outright.

To consider 18-year-olds as unable to contemplate their own decisions seems to paint ‘models’ in the same light the left paints our ‘poor brainwashed soldiers.’

askheaves on July 6, 2007 at 3:27 AM

Well the guy wouldn’t have flipped off Michelle if Michelle wasn’t so rude to the guy: “Well I’m not going to say thank you, but I will say GOODBYE!” If you don’t want people to be rude to you, then don’t be rude to them.

SoulGlo on July 6, 2007 at 3:46 AM

He was a bit douchie on the Michelle bikini pics, and should have researched it a bit (top-10 google results for ‘michelle malkin nude’ point you to a dozen [heh] sites that debunk it). But he isn’t deserving of full prime-time prejudgement of his entire industry with smarmy remarks.

It’s not real helpful for your cause to invite somebody on purely to beat up on them. Punching bags aren’t great guests, and treating everybody as such makes for lame future guests.

I love ya, Michelle, but at least Bill has a little bit of reputation for bringing on an opposition and letting them have enough say to make it worth their time. Moral grandstanding makes for a boring program and won’t endear a host to their viewers.

I think the boss missed the mark on this one. Could have been more professionally handled. This approach doesn’t work in the long-run as well as Bill’s does. It’s not dumping your principles to let somebody have their say.

askheaves on July 6, 2007 at 4:10 AM

I kinda have mixed feelings about the porn guy. As many people said, if a woman is 18 and wants to become a striper or porn star or whatever by all means go for it. I wouldn’t advise it, but hey, to each his own. When MM called the guy the loser, I admit I flinched a bit…. I heard she was a firecracker, but the fire got started prematurely I think.

But then that guy mentioned that scam of a photo and flipped MM off. So, maybe MM’s prejudgment was right. Didn’t porn guy say he liked the Factor? (Probably not anymore, hehe) If anybody needed any proof the Bill’s viewers are very diverse…there you go :P

As for the women in the porn industry, that would stop IMO when women realize that taking off your clothes for strangers is not that all that cracked to be for that shiny paycheck. Maybe they think it is glamorizing like Stacy thinks? There are plenty of ways to glamorize women without be them being naked. Hell, one of my favorite video game series, Sakura Wars, does that. It also teaches that you shouldn’t piss off a samurai cowgirl as well :P

But I digress. Now, as for the troll, I ask you this. So what if you are right…Fox News is right wing…. and this is bad, why? Because it is not liberal? Oh noes.. people have different opinions than you. You are a big boy, you can handle it. Actually, I admit that “oh noes” comment is directed to some people posting here as well. I will not name names though.

I just realized this my longest post ever! Go me!

Dark Fox on July 6, 2007 at 6:20 AM

Only time I will watch The Factor is when MM is hosting. She ROCKS!

Talon on July 6, 2007 at 6:56 AM

He doesn’t advertise underage girls, he doesn’t publish underage girls and he doesn’t drug his models… seems to be running a pretty legitimate business meeting a real market need. Porn doesn’t necessarily equal filth, and it’s not really fair to treat everybody who meets that market need, a need that has driven some major technological developments (as a side note), as evil outright.

askheaves on July 6, 2007 at 3:27 AM

I disagree..Michelle knows that porn. quickly becomes an addiction. Like all addictions you start out with a low dose…..

Legions on July 6, 2007 at 7:01 AM

Or will a certain someone’s shame at a certain other someone’s suffering mean the embargo persists?

Would that include shame for my fellow man at Low Budget’s suffering there towards the end?

That was just brutal.

Readymade on July 6, 2007 at 7:21 AM

“I am not going to say thank you. Good bye”

I love it. Perfect. Michelle you are the best.

Wade on July 6, 2007 at 8:26 AM

Loser is the perfect word for that clown. He shows up with a snot rag on his head and a jacket that looks like he picked it off the rack at a second hand store on the way to the studio.

Problem is the real loser is society. Societal breakdown does not happen all at once. Look at what Hugh Hefner’s mild nude pictures (by todays standards) have morphed into.

Seems like some of the posters here are more concerned with Michelle’s calling a loser a loser than the subject at hand, therefore implying what this loser does is OK with the posters.

Wade on July 6, 2007 at 8:54 AM

Porno guy was a skeez, and she had it right at the beginning with “you have your fifteen minutes.”

The dude is your classic shady loser. His girlfriend is the classic white trash stripper.

Are we all of a sudden going to stop calling it as it is so as not to offend sensitivities?

BKennedy on July 6, 2007 at 8:56 AM

I think the boss missed the mark on this one. Could have been more professionally handled. This approach doesn’t work in the long-run as well as Bill’s does. It’s not dumping your principles to let somebody have their say.

This comment does capture my sentiments. It was like watching a friend go somewhere they shouldn’t in a conversation.
Michelle, you are above that. Did you take your frustration on the producers out on the nitwit?

More importantly boss, how do you feel about it today, really.

shooter on July 6, 2007 at 9:58 AM

Michelle was brilliant. She doesn’t over-react or flip out over stupid stuff. She does have righteous indignation over the bs. I think she’s great. She really does need her own show though. She’s wonderful on tv.

PoliticallyIncorrectSandy on July 6, 2007 at 10:33 AM

In a journalistic shocker, men like to see naked women and will pay to see them. This, along with water is wet and breathing is good on the next Factor.

I don’t get it…what was the point? Are there no porn sites doing anything illegal that The Factor could’ve gone after? Gee, who knew that porn was such a squeaky-clean industry?

James on July 6, 2007 at 10:36 AM

Gosh The Factor makes MM interview a scumbag pimp and his bitch while the bogus story NBC did on Dragon skin goes untold!

You see that guy try to talk for his bitch. Typical pimp mentality

Drtuddle on July 6, 2007 at 10:47 AM

Well done, MM. Just how many dumpsters does O’Reilly have to scour to dig up this trash for you so repeatedly? Here’s hoping that this guy’s 10 minutes are up; I’m not even going to give him the dignity of having 15.

For the record, if publishing photos of women with the expressed intent of having them look under 18 doesn’t make a guy a loser, then what does? MM is hosting in the No Spin Zone. Calling him something other than what he is would be spin. Loser is about the nicest word that can be used in describing him, I think. I can think of some terms that are even more accurate, but I value my account a bit more highly than apujac did (9:49 yesterday PM).

OK, you’ll get 15 minutes; I’ll use the remaining 5 to throw you under the bus. Hey, doofus, you confirmed MM’s comment in your denial by saying that your bimbos shouldn’t look “college age.” Do the math… oh, wait, you don’t have that many fingers, and, with the ones whose function you do appear to understand, you can only count to two! Also, if the MM photoshop appears real to you, nobody should entrust you with the “business” you run anyway as clearly your eyes don’t work. Moron!

flutejpl on July 6, 2007 at 10:49 AM

Gosh The Factor makes MM interview a scumbag pimp and his b!tch while the bogus story NBC did on Dragon skin goes untold!

You see that guy try to talk for his b!tch. Typical pimp mentality

Drtuddle on July 6, 2007 at 10:49 AM

Dick Morris is very wrong that what can save Bush is to “withdraw” from Iraq. What withdrawal without finishing the job will do is to make the Democrats look smart in calling for withdrawal earlier. The only way to “save” the Republicans is to act on principle and prevail to show everyone it will take character and courage to defeat the radical Islamists. I am with Morris about illegal immigration and his distaste for Hillary Clinton; however, as to Iraq, he is talking as a gutless political calculator and that ends it for me. My loyalties are to the troops in harm’s way in Iraq and Afghanistan, and that includes my U.S. Army First Lieutenant son serving as a platoon leader in Iraq. I am getting really very angry with Republicans like Lugar, Domenici and Morris who, in my view, are disloyal to the troops.

Phil Byler on July 6, 2007 at 11:47 AM

Great stuff on the interview with Markwith. I loved how Michelle let out that sarcastic little “sniff” at the beginning of the interview and later asked the girl point blank “why are you dating this loser?”

The no punches pulled style is definitely a hit with me.

thirteen28 on July 6, 2007 at 12:00 PM

BacaDog on July 5, 2007 at 8:41 PM..I have that same problem only mine goes further…i see swarmy, liars, traitors in all the left wing wacko’s spouting their crap on the tube. That must be some world they live in. I did enjoy the way Michelle closed with Bigotel…she’s getting good at closing an episode, much better put down and transfer than Mr. BO, he acts condescending and moves on.
Question, is that paint or plastic Laura Swortz uses for makeup?

oldernslower on July 6, 2007 at 12:04 PM

Great stuff on the interview with Markwith. I loved how Michelle let out that sarcastic little “sniff” at the beginning of the interview and later asked the girl point blank “why are you dating this loser?”

The no punches pulled style is definitely a hit with me.

thirteen28 on July 6, 2007 at 12:00 PM

That wasn’t’ good! She immediately went to the lowest common denominator and started insulting the guy. I’m pissed, I can’t believe any one would be so crass.

Are we all of a sudden going to stop calling it as it is so as not to offend sensitivities?

BKennedy on July 6, 2007 at 8:56 AM

No, but are we going to start acting like liberals when ever we have a debate about something we don’t necessarily like or understand? If Michelle wants to turn her righteous indignation on someone how about the barely 18 y/o making the decision to get into porn, rather then the guy buying the content and posting a link.

liquidflorian on July 6, 2007 at 12:45 PM

No, but are we going to start acting like liberals when ever we have a debate about something we don’t necessarily like or understand? If Michelle wants to turn her righteous indignation on someone how about the barely 18 y/o making the decision to get into porn, rather then the guy buying the content and posting a link.

This isn’t on the same level as calling everyone who disagrees with us bigots and xenophobes.

This is on the level where a porn-peddling slimeball acts as an enabler for women willing to sell their bodies and self-respect for all to oodle at. Without enablers, the porn industry falters and women spare themselves a lot of grief.

BKennedy on July 6, 2007 at 12:53 PM

liquidflorian on July 6, 2007 at 12:45 PM

Yep. Lincoln gives the example. Instrumental in destroying a ‘moral blight’ but without railing accusation.

I have no problem w/ MM blasting someone, but there is no justice to open the conversation in that manner, the whole thing is uncouth. She can be happily defended by anyone who enjoys the sparks and thinks that ideological victory is akin to BOR yelling over someone; just doesn’t do it for me.

Spirit of 1776 on July 6, 2007 at 12:55 PM

I agree with James. It was an irrelevant segment. Plus, Michelle was aggressive on the guy, it was uncalled for.

Baphomet on July 6, 2007 at 1:06 PM

This isn’t on the same level as calling everyone who disagrees with us bigots and xenophobes.

No, it’s calling them losers…..

This is on the level where a porn-peddling slimeball acts as an enabler for women willing to sell their bodies and self-respect for all to oodle at. Without enablers, the porn industry falters and women spare themselves a lot of grief.

BKennedy on July 6, 2007 at 12:53 PM

Dude, those barely 18 y/o have their own sites, no one is enabling them but them selves.

That argument won’t hold water either because people (mostly men) will always want to look at women.

I have no problem w/ MM blasting someone, but there is no justice to open the conversation in that manner, the whole thing is uncouth. She can be happily defended by anyone who enjoys the sparks and thinks that ideological victory is akin to BOR yelling over someone; just doesn’t do it for me.

Spirit of 1776 on July 6, 2007 at 12:55 PM

This is where I have my problem. BOR had Jena Jameson on his show and while he disagreed with her he was respectfully and let the woman actually make her point. Granted Jena Jameson is a billion times smarter then that douche in the hat, but have we thrown out common courtesy because the guy is a pornographer? WTF?!

liquidflorian on July 6, 2007 at 1:34 PM

Saying it once again…in Michelle’s defense…She has the insight and savvy to know porn is an addiction to many..like any addiction it always starts off in low dose. It can and has ruined many lives. All starting out with children who view that first image..So she did a great job and she’ll do another tonight..

Legions on July 6, 2007 at 2:38 PM

That wasn’t’ good! She immediately went to the lowest common denominator and started insulting the guy. I’m pissed, I can’t believe any one would be so crass.

That’s some rich irony. Here’s a LOSER who makes his living off of exploiting young and dumb women, and you are calling Michelle crass for not taking the high road?

Michelle’s attempt to shame both of the couple might not make them change their ways, but at least she called it correctly.

Good job, Michelle, no need to pull your punches. There’s too much bullsh!t in the world and sometimes we need someone to state the unvarnished truth.

thirteen28 on July 6, 2007 at 2:45 PM

That’s some rich irony. Here’s a LOSER who makes his living off of exploiting young and dumb women, and you are calling Michelle crass for not taking the high road?

thirteen28 on July 6, 2007 at 2:45 PM

The irony here is your assertion that these girls are being exploited. At any point they could’ve backed out of setting up their own websites and decided not to do it.

liquidflorian on July 6, 2007 at 3:24 PM

The irony here is your assertion that these girls are being exploited. At any point they could’ve backed out of setting up their own websites and decided not to do it.

liquidflorian on July 6, 2007 at 3:24 PM

Keep telling yourself that, I’m sure it helps you sleep at night.

And of course, I’m sure you’ll continue to maintain that position if you ever have a daughter or a sister doing what these girls are doing and/or dating a douchebag like Markwith.

Let me guess – you’re a big ‘L’ libertarian, aren’t you?

thirteen28 on July 6, 2007 at 3:35 PM

Let me guess – you’re a big ‘L’ libertarian, aren’t you?

thirteen28 on July 6, 2007 at 3:35 PM

Maybe I am maybe I’m not; you can’t make a compelling argument so your going to throw out some ridicule and see what sticks? Trying some moral high ground of your own, Dude? Is my brand of conservatism not as good as yours?

If my sister for instance wanted to get into porn, I would express concern, of course I would. I would be her choice though, and if she wanted to do it she would do it

I have known girls have modeled for sites like that as well; I respect the choices they’ve made. All of them chose to do it for different reasons, but all of them made the choice themselves.

liquidflorian on July 6, 2007 at 4:01 PM

Maybe I am maybe I’m not; you can’t make a compelling argument so your going to throw out some ridicule and see what sticks?

Well, it’s your choice to decide whether my argument is compelling, is it not?

If my sister for instance wanted to get into porn, I would express concern, of course I would. I would be her choice though, and if she wanted to do it she would do it

Brother of the Year you are. You’d express concern if your sister wanted to get porked on camera for the whole world to see and download. Wow.

I have known girls have modeled for sites like that as well; I respect the choices they’ve made. All of them chose to do it for different reasons, but all of them made the choice themselves.

liquidflorian on July 6, 2007 at 4:01 PM

And that’s the difference between you and I – I wouldn’t respect their choices, even if I had no power to change them. Nor would I turn a blind eye to exploitation by soothing myself with the “they’re just exercising their own free will” argument. You may think that line of reasoning absolves you from any responsibility to protect them from doing stupid and/or self-destructive things, but it doesn’t.

thirteen28 on July 6, 2007 at 4:10 PM

thirteen28 on July 6, 2007 at 4:10 PM

I respect your argument. I note that the removal of one self-destructive action is replaced by another if the cause is not addressed. Calling someone a loser is nothing more than preaching to the choir. Pointless.

Spirit of 1776 on July 6, 2007 at 4:24 PM

Calling someone a loser is nothing more than preaching to the choir. Pointless.

Spirit of 1776 on July 6, 2007 at 4:24 PM

Trying to deal diplomatically with a exploitative dreg like Markwith is equally pointless when the unvarnished truth works just as well.

thirteen28 on July 6, 2007 at 4:31 PM

works just as well.

Works as well for what? ie to what end?

Spirit of 1776 on July 6, 2007 at 4:34 PM

Works as well for what? ie to what end?

Spirit of 1776 on July 6, 2007 at 4:34 PM

Dealing with those people diplomatically will do absolutely nothing to get them to engage in a little self-examination. Ostracizing them as Michelle did may only have a 1% chance of doing the same thing, but 1% beats 0% any day.

I could understand those who disagree with Michelle’s tactics if she was debating some democrat about Social Security reform; it would have clearly been out of context in such a case.

But in this case, especially when the person using the word “loser” has a daughter of her own, I fully understand it and just can’t condemn it at all. Predators like Markwith deserve plenty of scorn, and if the worst he has to deal with is being called a “loser” he’s certainly suffered less harm than he’ll probably do to some of these women, especially by convincing them that it’s ok because they are doing it of their own free will.

thirteen28 on July 6, 2007 at 4:43 PM

thirteen28 on July 6, 2007 at 4:43 PM

With respect, I disagree. Leading questions have power to create fundamental changes.

Predators like Markwith deserve plenty of scorn.

Again I’ll just refer to Lincoln’s example, the manner and result of his life’s work.

I could understand those who disagree with Michelle’s tactics if she was debating some democrat about Social Security reform; it would have clearly been out of context in such a case.

Yes, and the problem is that now I can’t defend MM without checking the context. Now it’s she is a class act, most of the time. Or she address the issues directly without resorting to name-calling, most of the time. Please note, I don’t mean that with disrespect.

Spirit of 1776 on July 6, 2007 at 4:58 PM

Spirit of 1776 on July 6, 2007 at 4:58 PM

We’ll agree to disagree at this point.

thirteen28 on July 6, 2007 at 5:07 PM

thirteen28 on July 6, 2007 at 5:07 PM

Okay. Have a great weekend.

Spirit of 1776 on July 6, 2007 at 5:11 PM

thirteen28 on July 6, 2007 at 4:10 PM

I respect your argument. I note that the removal of one self-destructive action is replaced by another if the cause is not addressed. Calling someone a loser is nothing more than preaching to the choir. Pointless.

Spirit of 1776 on July 6, 2007 at 4:24 PM

Quite the opposite of pointless. It pissed him off and the real loser within him came through the facade he was trying to project of mister nice guy just running a business.

Great strategy by Michelle for all to see this loser for what she already knew he was.

Wade on July 6, 2007 at 5:21 PM

Heh. Name calling = strategy.

Spirit of 1776 on July 6, 2007 at 5:23 PM

Well, it’s your choice to decide whether my argument is compelling, is it not?

Your right, it isn’t….

Brother of the Year you are. You’d express concern if your sister wanted to get porked on camera for the whole world to see and download. Wow.

What would you expect me to do? If she makes her mind up to do something she’s going to do it, regardless of what I have to say. This isn’t Saudi Arabia, I can’t stone her to deth for being in a porno.

And that’s the difference between you and I – I wouldn’t respect their choices, even if I had no power to change them. Nor would I turn a blind eye to exploitation by soothing myself with the “they’re just exercising their own free will” argument. You may think that line of reasoning absolves you from any responsibility to protect them from doing stupid and/or self-destructive things, but it doesn’t.

thirteen28 on July 6, 2007 at 4:10 PM

Yeah, I guess this is the difference between us, I have respect for others and you don’t. Also, yes; I don’t feel the need to protect other adults from making bad decisions. Do I care, yeah I do, but I’m not going to be able to help and or stop them so why insult them for not seeing my viewpoint?

liquidflorian on July 6, 2007 at 5:25 PM

Great strategy by Michelle for all to see this loser for what she already knew he was.

Wade on July 6, 2007 at 5:21 PM

Was that in Sun Tsu, The Book of Five Rings, or Al Franken’s new book?

liquidflorian on July 6, 2007 at 5:27 PM

Yeah, I guess this is the difference between us, I have respect for others and you don’t.

Pretty much. There are people worthy of my respect, and there are people who aren’t. Guess which side the two people interviewed in that segment fall into.

Also, yes; I don’t feel the need to protect other adults from making bad decisions. Do I care, yeah I do, but I’m not going to be able to help and or stop them so why insult them for not seeing my viewpoint?

liquidflorian on July 6, 2007 at 5:25 PM

While I wouldn’t lose sleep over total strangers, you can be damn sure I would try to protect an adult relative (or close friend for that matter) from making a disasterous and self-destructive life decision. I would consider it a moral obligation.

thirteen28 on July 6, 2007 at 5:35 PM

Michelle started the interview by trying to actually show he was a loser by asking questions and highlighting the facts. Once he said people are adults once they turn 18 it is like she all of a sudden totally gave up trying to argue and question and suddenly went to name calling. She alluded to police investigations so what did this guy do that was wrong? It isn’t revealed because she gave up inquiry and tried personal attacks. I thought that was totally unprofessional and unlike Michelle. A very bad day I guess.

Resolute on July 6, 2007 at 6:04 PM

Pretty much. There are people worthy of my respect, and there are people who aren’t. Guess which side the two people interviewed in that segment fall into.

Oh yeah, that guy is a sh!t bag don’t’ get me wrong. I get upset when basic common courtesy isn’t shown. She did exactly to that douche bag what that black panther guy did to her, and why? It isn’t called for or necessary.

While I wouldn’t lose sleep over total strangers, you can be damn sure I would try to protect an adult relative (or close friend for that matter) from making a disastrous and self-destructive life decision. I would consider it a moral obligation.

thirteen28 on July 6, 2007 at 5:35 PM

I was out of line saying you don’t respect people, and for that I apologize. Putting it in the context you’re putting it now makes more sense. I think we must agree to disagree. I’m not of the opinion that performing in porno is entirely a bad life choice.

liquidflorian on July 6, 2007 at 7:24 PM

Michelle did not perform well interviewing the adult web site owner.

MarkB on July 6, 2007 at 7:51 PM

Was that Arab defender guy that was on with Cal Thomas during Michelle’s show today, subbing for Bill, the new ‘Bagdad Bob’? I didn’t catch all of it, but the jerk sure acted like ‘Bob’.

countywolf on July 6, 2007 at 9:23 PM