Jenkins, on the other hand, has a responsibility, we can assume, as an employee of a larger organization that he can’t speak for the entire organization period. Most corporations have in place rules that dictate who can and cannot speak on behalf of the company, so to say he was being gutless is just silly. Companies have PR agents for that exact purpose, to know exactly what the company’s official position is, and then to spread that position. I bet Jenkins probably wants to keep his job. “Griff- can you please violate company policy and risk your job to answer a rude guy with a camera who keeps interrupting the college journalist who is interviewing you?! Griff! Griff!!! Answer me!!”

Sorry, but you were acting like a petulant child. I would have ignored you altogether if you rudely thought you could just interrupt me as I was being interviewed. What’s worse is that you thought you could be rude to the college kid who has nothing to do with Fox.

No to mention, when I read this (and I think many would see it the same way) it seemed as if Jenkins was the one who called Michelle Obama’s baby mama. Why would Jenkins have to answer for every single person who works for the same company? You have some truly inane columns here on this site, do you think you should have to answer for every single article written here?

You can’t draw a parallel on a situation that is completely perpendicular.

But in drawing that parallel, you are in fact comparing the two! You’re saying Person A did XYZ, and so did Person B! That’s a comparison!

I don’t understand how you don’t think you’re comparing the two, by… comparing them!

Griff Jenkins was dispatched by the “O’Reilly Factor” a political commentary program. If Bill O’Reilly wants to send somebody to ask the questions he wants answered, they are going to be asked from Bill’s perspective. Clearly, that represents any bias O’Reilly may have. But what idiot would not expect that?

Griff Jenkins is what lefties call an “investigative journalist” when attacking the right and I personally don’t have a problem with that title, as long as it’s afforded to anybody asking politically loaded questions. But if you can’t distinguish the O’Reillys’ and Olbermans’ (and their staff) from Major Garrets’ and the Jake Tappers’ you’re a blind fool anyway.

Regardless, you do make some good points in the beginning of the article. The problem with it is you came at it from the Left, since you are a Dem, and the story reflects your bias. And we noticed…. that’s all.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQvo8Z6-Kkg Barack – My babies daddy.

She announced Barak Obama as “her baby’s daddy”….why is it that you never mention that? If you go back in time you will find the use of “his baby’s mama” was a take off of Michelle’s own words.

Ignoring Michelle’s statement in this whole conversation seems disingenuous.

Sing to me, Mr. C, sing to me,

You did “interrupt” another journalist’s interview
.
Is a part of “the whole episode” that put you “in mind of an experience…” your asking Griff for an appointment? Or being turned down by Griff or Fox News for an appointment? Was Griff following his bosses instructions or the policy of his employer or was he being “gutless?” Was Representative Grayson following his bosses instructions? Or the policy of his employer?

“You (Grammie) are correct, I was drawing a parallel between Grayson hiding behind his flack, and Jenkins doing the same.”

Sure, you can draw a “parallel,” in a parallel universe.
From your video. Mr. C, “Did you think it was fair and balanced to say that Michelle Obama was Barack Obama’s Baby Mama?” Here’s a little exercise. Pretend someone asked you the same question. Now answer the question……
Did you think the questioner meant that you said Michelle was Barack’s Baby Mama? Would you have thought the questioner meant that you said it was fair and balanced to say that Michelle was Barack”s Baby Mama? Would you have thought that the questioner meant that someone actually SAID that MO was BO’s Baby Mama? Another little exercise would be to replace the phrase “fair and balanced” with other descriptions; i.e., appropriate, or stupid, or well thought out, or OK, or good journalism, etc.
If you had really “wanted to confront a public figure about statements he had made,” a better and less ambiguous question would have been, “Mr. Jenkins, you just said, “We’re fair and balanced at Fox, so we want everyone to be heard.” Do you believe Fox was being ‘fair and balanced’ by putting up a Chyron that asked, ‘Is Michelle Barack’s Baby Moma?’?”

Anyway, it’s a stupid premise. There was and is absolutely nothing inherently unfair or biased about the Chyron. Was it PC? Nope. Smart? Nope. Unfair? How so?

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=como+sing+to+me+mr+c+sing+to+me&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7GGIE_en&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=rXLqSqOGFoa0tgeL-ZQ7&sa=X&oi=video_result_group&ct=title&resnum=1&ved=0CBQQqwQwAA#

I also hope you went back and looked at the update I made to the post from the weekend that you were curious about.

http://www.mediaite.com/columnists/foxs-white-house-bans-fox-news-story-completely-unravels/

the whole point of drawing a parallel is that they are not the same. A parallel. One parallel. Both Grayson and Griff wussed out and hid behind their flacks. There are many differences between the two, but that is A parallel. One parallel.

Don’t forget to add Joe Biden’s clean comment re Obama. That one was particularly offensive.

Okay… that’s what I was asking. I was bit confused when you started talking about Griff, instead of the subjects at hand (Grayson’s comment / Grayson’s reaction / the ethics of ambush interviews). I wasn’t sure why there was so much back-story on interactions with Jenkins, and how that really related to the story. I had to assume you were making a comparison… but apparently you’re not. So why the back-story?

I was drawing a parallel between Grayson hiding behind his flack, and Jenkins doing the same.

By “drawing a parallel” aren’t you equating the two? Isn’t that what I asked if you were doing? I don’t understand how you can “draw a parallel” but not think you’re comparing the two. That’s one in the same, and as I said before, there is a big difference between a reporter and a congressman.

______________________

assleyjohnnychimeridollar says:
October 29, 2009 at 9:57 pm

I’m sorry, I thought you were “JohnT.” I have come to learn you’re a different person, although similar. I think Grammie points out some of the other names you’ve been known to post under… so different identity, but same basic persona. My original comment stands with the needed alteration.

But Assley… as an experienced blog shouter, as you apparently are… shouldn’t you have better material? I mean, the insults thus far, well… they suck. I’ve heard a lot about you… intolerant, immature, uneducated, liar, etc. And while all those things seem to ring true in your few posts here… I expected a higher quality of insult from someone like you. Someone who is apparently unable to post anything constructive, and must resort to juvenile attacks, should at least be well versed in such attacks. Your stuff is sophomoric… childish, even for the content contained. Please try harder in the future.

Dollar you idiot, did you not watch the video, are you and Grammie taking a nip from the same bottle. He asked Griff if that comment was Fair and Balanced. But I forget you get paid to lie for your employer.

“Keith Olbermann, Andrea Mackris, Loofah, Falafel, Malmedy”

Because once it’s clear that Griff didn’t make the statement, then your intended ‘parallel’ that you want to draw becomes much weaker. Griff is questioning a Rep about the Rep’s own statements, and the Rep is fully free to speak if he wants. You were questioning Griff about something someone else did, that Griff had nothing to do with, and since he works for the company in question he was likely told not to comment on such internal matters.

in the video, I confront Griff for the “statement he made” that Fox is fair and balanced by asking him if it was fair and balanced when Fox called Michelle Obama Barack’s baby mama. Crystal clear, no correction needed, but thanks for saying the rest of it was fair.

yeah, this is why I opted out of debating the “baby mama” comment in the first place, so just ignore that part.

I didn’t say I wasn’t comparing Grayson to Jenkins, I asked where I said they were the same. You are correct, I was drawing a parallel between Grayson hiding behind his flack, and Jenkins doing the same. Another commenter tried to make me defend the notion that Griff and Grayson are exactly the same, which I never said.

This is highly misleading. Griff Jenkins never made any such statement, and to claim he did is simply false. The whole ‘baby mommma’ business was over a chyron that appeared at the bottom of the screen. A freelance producer thought it clever, but it wasn’t. That producer was fired, and an apology was made on air. Shortly thereafter the producer was rehired…by CNBC.

So it’s wrong to claim you were confronting Jenkins about a statement he made. And it shows his unwillingness to interact with you in a different light, as you’re asking him to comment on a controversy that was being dealt with at the top of the FNC pecking order. He’s just a feature reporter and I would expect his instructions are not to comment on internal FNC affairs.

Actually I think you need to do a correction or revision to your article, to remove the false claim that Griff Jenkins ever made any such statement. Thank you so much.

Hey Hagzilla,
Take another shot of the Absolute, take some valium and got to sleep, wake up repeat.”

Don’t you think by now you could learn how to spell “Absolut” correctly. If that is too taxing you might want to try Grey Goose as an easier substitute. :)

Sara,

I was asking Griff about his statement that Fox is “Fair and balanced.” I didn’t say the phrase was malicious, I simply asked the question. Fox, however, did feel compelled to apologize. Hmm.”

I assumed that this comment referred to this link:

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2008/08/25/fox-attacked-the-backstory/5

It appears from your last comment to Blue that I misunderstood you also. Only after reading the comments did I think you were criticizing Jenkins for telling you, and I paraphrase, that he couldn’t answer you re the baby mama comment when he was working.

So, if you were not comparing Jenkins v you to Grayson v Jenkins what did you mean by ” Fox, however, did feel compelled to apologize.” followed by HMMMM.

The more said about this the more confused I become.

Hey Grammie or Hagzilla do you have any proof of what you said?”

Since you asked so nicely, which we both know is an earth shattering first for you, I’ll be happy to oblige using your very own behavior to illustrate.

First, there is the fact that you continually referred to a lady, Cecvelia, who was commenting at the same site, as C**tcelia (and yes those stars do represent u & n). When called down for it you gloated that no one could stop you.

Second, you continually referred to lady posters as drunks, sluts, comfort girls etc.

Third, you were totally engrossed with using vivid sexual terms, descriptions and accusations of homosexuality/transgendered as insults against many of the men.

Fourth, you have, by your own many admissions, stalked a very nice young man from site to site with no other purpose than to make it unpleasant for him in your very own nasty style.

I believe that is enough to qualify you as a loud mouthed tough guy (in your own little mind at least), especially from the safety of your keyboard. However, you have even posted several times that you set no limits on what you say b/c you are not face to face with your targets but far away at your keyboard.

I, therefore, submit that you are exactly the type of miserable coward I accused Grayson of being. It is my experience that your type of bully turns into a milquetoast except when you are performing from a distance in complete safety.

BTW, Blue, he is not BusterJohnT. He is Steve Doooshy, Patrick, Bababouey etc, and he has been banned from quite a few sites exactly b/c of the behavior you and I just described.

where in my article did I say they were the same? Quote?

I’m agreeing with Griff, hiding behind your PR flack is a weak-ass move. What’s the problem?

the “statements he made” that I’m referring to are that Fox News is fair and balanced. He did make that statement.

As far as chasing him down, I’d suggest you read the backstory first, then we can talk. I didn’t chase him down, and I didn’t interrupt him.

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2008/08/25/fox-attacked-the-backstory/5

Are you really trying to compare an elected official and a reporter, as if somehow the two were equal? One works for us… the other for a television station. They are not equal, and therefore, do no need to conform to the same standards or rules.

That’s pretty… “Duh,” don’t you think?