Comments on: Video: Mary Katharine Ham talks sexual deviants on O’Reilly

By: Hot Air » Blog Archive » Video: Mary Katharine Ham says hi to her exes

Hot Air » Blog Archive » Video: Mary Katharine Ham says hi to her exes — Thu, 23 Aug 2007 01:25:55 +0000

[...] week’s fun quotient: near zero, although there is a sharp spike at the very [...]

By: Hot Air » Blog Archive » Video: Mary Katharine Ham on men who smoke bowls and the women who love them

Thu, 16 Aug 2007 01:13:37 +0000

[...] Starts slow but the fun quotient simply soars in the second half. Sample quote: “It’s rough out there for a stoner.” [...]

By: Hot Air » Blog Archive » Video: Mary Katharine Ham on how to cheat and not get caught

Thu, 09 Aug 2007 02:10:04 +0000

[...] The answer lies within. The fun quotient of this week’s segment is a little higher than the last one, just because you can kind of tell MK finds the “fire in the hole” idiocy funny in a stupid, guilty, offensive way. [...]

By: Aylios

Aylios — Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:11:14 +0000

Well actually Bill is right on this one (for a change). MKH’s statement “You have to check the sex offenders register when you’re dealing with someone on Match.com.” is totally unrealistic. As a user of these services you don’t have access to the other person’s real name, only the provider has access to that info. Consequently it’s not possible for users to check any such thing. Match.com however does have access to that info, even if the person gives a false name, they still have to use a real credit card to pay. So the only one that can do any checking of that kind is the service provider.

I’m kinda surprised that MySpace managed to identify sex-offenders, seeing as one doesnt have to pay for MySpace and consequently does not need to use a credit card and why would any sex-offender give their real name on MySpace or any other online service, unless they absolutely have to?

By: Doug

Doug — Fri, 27 Jul 2007 12:08:42 +0000

I thought that “O’R” had messed up when he mentioned “Match.com” at the beginning-I was sure he meant Myspace, as I knew that Match was more regulated. It surprises me that a sexual predator made it past the Match.com screening, but I guess deviants are devious.
Here’s a dating tip for all of you singles out there-shut off your computers and go out in the real world and meet people.

By: archon2001

archon2001 — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 17:47:51 +0000

OT, but MKH should be married and procreating four or five beautiful children for the glorious future of America.

By: Enrique

Enrique — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 16:43:46 +0000

Speaking of sexual deviants, allow me to take a moment of shameless self-promotion: "I apologize if any readers found the preceding to be overly prurient and/or offensive. But if you did find it offensive, please send this column to O'Reilly. I could use the exposure."

By: Hollowpoint

Hollowpoint — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 16:21:13 +0000

Apparently you have to be able to express yourself in 15 second bursts, and definitely don’t pause to take a breath! MM does the best at handling him by far.

smellthecoffee on July 26, 2007 at 10:16 AM

15 seconds? Anyone who goes uninterrupted for 15 seconds on Bill’s show is setting a new record. I do enjoy the show at times, but Bill needs to learn when to shut the hell up.

I think he needs one of those dog shock collars so his producers can give him a jolt every time he interrupts within the first 7 seconds of a guest speaking.

By: Locrian

Locrian — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 15:09:46 +0000

I like clean cut conservative girls…no tats or piercings for me.

By: smellthecoffee

smellthecoffee — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 14:16:25 +0000

Having watched a bunch of these clips with MM, KP, and MKH, on the Factor, it appears that one of the most important skill sets is that of being able to be graceful about being interrupted in 95% of your statements. I’ve seen segments of the Factor where O’Reilly let almost no contribution by his gorgeous, and capapable assistants go uninterrupted. Apparently you have to be able to express yourself in 15 second bursts, and definitely don’t pause to take a breath! MM does the best at handling him by far.

By: oldleprechaun

oldleprechaun — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 13:36:55 +0000

…not a bad idea; if they can do it to informants because it’s “public” information, how much more is conviction info public, since it’s the result of a public trial?

In colonial Williamsburg, they just took the miscreants outside and put ‘em in stocks. Post their crime over their head and let ‘em sit there for a day or two. (Those being the ones who weren’t hanged, of course.)

By: seejanemom

seejanemom — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 11:59:38 +0000

HEY GIRL! Where was your TIARA? You need your OWN show on FNC>>>> THE "IT" FACTOR!

By: Always Right

Always Right — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 11:57:36 +0000

Doesnt the “rat” site sound to you guys a lot like the non-religious version of the Imam-John Doe case…

going after the ordinary citizen who seeks to aid law enforcement in deterring crimes.

Maybe we need a John Doe provision protecting identities of police informants from the general public, and available only for legitimate law enforcement purposes, which would exclude this “rat” jerk from getting them.

By: saved

saved — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 11:57:15 +0000

We have been complaining about MySpace for years. They are just now removing deviants? Don’t they realize that it’s been a tool of bullies posting lies and slander?

Oh I’m sorry, that was the NYT. Never mind.

By: saved

saved — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 11:52:48 +0000

29,000 perverts removed from MySpace.

Turn out the lights. The party’s over.

By: MKH talks about sexual deviants? « Absolute Moral Authority

MKH talks about sexual deviants? « Absolute Moral Authority — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 07:52:37 +0000

[...] Posted by Wickedpinto on July 26th, 2007 really all she has to do is open her fan mail. I’m just say’n. This is actually an offensive and disgusting story, but MKH is always cute adorable and completely hittable throughout. [...]

By: itzWicks

itzWicks — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 05:59:35 +0000

MKH hits gold again with her weekly appearance. I wish FNC would give her and MM their own weekend show already!

By: radjah shelduck

radjah shelduck — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 05:06:07 +0000

If MKH was an actress, wouldn’t she be a natural to play Wonder Woman in that movie that’s being discussed?

By: MrC_5150

MrC_5150 — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 04:27:36 +0000

Love that headline.

“Mary Katharine Ham talks sexual deviants on O’Reilly”

There’s something funny there. I swear there is.

By: urbancenturion

urbancenturion — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 04:26:40 +0000

At 1st I was thinking that it was not any dating service’s responsibility to do background checks, but maybe that could be an option. Although the expenses would probably go up and most of them would go out of business?

Why isn’t there a free national database background check on the internet? Shouldn’t public criminal records be put in a searchable online format? Seems like that would solve a lot of problems in general, not just dating services.

nottakingsides on July 26, 2007 at 12:06 AM

…not a bad idea; if they can do it to informants because it’s “public” information, how much more is conviction info public, since it’s the result of a public trial?

By: nottakingsides

nottakingsides — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 04:06:58 +0000

At 1st I was thinking that it was not any dating service’s responsibility to do background checks, but maybe that could be an option. Although the expenses would probably go up and most of them would go out of business?

Why isn’t there a free national database background check on the internet? Shouldn’t public criminal records be put in a searchable online format? Seems like that would solve a lot of problems in general, not just dating services.

By: PowWow

PowWow — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 04:06:44 +0000

I think some of the tension was because of MySpace. O’Reilly had to stick up for them quick

By: Mojack420

Mojack420 — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 03:17:20 +0000

mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm haaaaaaammmmmmmmmmmm

By: marykatharine

marykatharine — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 02:49:34 +0000

They are sometimes confidential, in extreme cases, and when they have to enter witness protection. A lot of times, though, their involvement is known to those involved in the case. The web site basically takes all the public info available about informants and combines it w the wisdom of crowds, so you can end up getting very specific info about these guys. Some judges are trying to make plea bargain and sentencing agreements documents that you have to visit the courthouse to get, instead of making them available online w other docs.

By: peacenprosperity

peacenprosperity — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 02:31:08 +0000

Why aren’t informants confidential?