If you watched the Nat'l Press Club Panel this morning (with jeff gannon)

First, go to jeffgannon.com (I know, euwww) and read his take on it, and how he felt physically threatened by Mike Rogers and had to have protection upon exiting the building. Then go to Mike Rogers's site, blogactive.com and read what he had to say, and his email to gannon. Then, go to wonkette.com and read her take on the whole thing.

Whew....but, interesting.

The C-SPAN 2 re-broadcast will be tonite at 8:00 Eastern, 7:00 Central.

I kinda enjoyed the whole program this morning, because it proved what we knew all along...Jeff Gannon/Guckert is such a light-weight in the brains department, that he comes off as a huge joke. He honestly doesn't have a CLUE about anything. It was like watching a train-wreck. There's no way the White House considered that particular guy a serious journalist. I also was interested in seeing that Ana Marie Cox, while she cannot be considered a serious blogger/journalist either, was a bull-dog in taking this guy down. She's kinda a joke herself, but redeemed herself today. I also liked seeing Matt in person, as I've read his work often..he seemed to think the whole panel exercise was amusing. Instead of thinking that C-Span allowing Gannon to appear on the panel legitimized his assertion of being a journalist, I think they actually, and intentionally, let everyone see what a huge joke he is. I enjoyed it thorougly.

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2005/04/08.html#a2369

Seventeen minutes including Wonkette's smackdown and the question about who Jeff may have slept with.

who saw it were kind of upset with the whole thing, and weren't able to give as detailed a view.

I'll check out Wonkett and Matt's sites first. Then I'll decide if I want to see that disgusting POS Gan/Gurk... I don't have much tolerance left to deal with seeing a guy who is rewarded for being a fake reporter and male escort by the National Press Club.

:thumbsup:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x3447254

Thanks for the info on the blog reports.

"We" saw a guy who doesn't seem to understand some basic tenets of journalism ("The objective is 'truthfullness'" for one), much less rational thought. It was creepy watching him assert things that I would have a hard time admitting to myself late at night.

"They" saw a guy who was struggling to get the message out and faced with mighty liberal opposition.

"They" don't even understand the field of play, much less the rules.

It's all kind of shocking and depressing.

Ha ha ha ha.