I Have to get Something Off My Chest
Grr. I was attempting to listen to the Ian and Margery show this morning on the radio, but that will be the last time. When I turned it on, Ian was going on and on about how Rosie O'Donnell is claiming that 9/11 is a government conspiracy, it didn't really happen, that our government was involved in the collapse of the twin tours, etc. NONE OF THIS IS TRUE. RD has never said any of those things. She IS currently questioning the collapse of WTC Building 7, which imploded perfectly and was never mentioned in the official reports of the WTC attacks. But isn't that a far cry from being a "9/11 denier"?? I check Rosie's blog from time to time, and she responds to a lot of hostile questions through her blog regarding statements she's made. There's also a link to The View on her blog, so I watch pieces from that show from time to time as well. Well, how did Ian from the radio think RD had said all these things? Because Bill O'Reilly said she said all those things!! Thus it must be true.
Unbelievable. First of all, if your source for information is Bill O'Reilly then WTF are you thinking? Second of all, why rely on anyone else to tell you RD's views, why not go directly to her when she has a blog and has responded to all these questions from people emailing her and from her cohosts on The View?
So I quickly emailed Ian, suggesting that instead of getting his information regarding RD's views from BOR, why not go to Rosie's blog and get them from her? Once he played a clip on the radio which made obvious he was wrong, he did nothing to acknowledge this and just merely shifted the focus of the discussion. What an asshole. Then he read my email on the air, but cherry-picked the words to make it sound as though I was criticizing his right to question her views, which was not the point at all. Double asshole.
My point is this--if you can go directly to the source to get your information, go to the source. The information you receive from anyone other than the source is suspect. They may think they have it right and don't, or they may not care if they get all the details right, or may be too careless to make sure to get all the details right. Then, you've got plenty of people out there who just like to stir up the issues and don't really care about accuracy. Any ideas of who that could be? And in general, comments taken out of context can be made to sound far worse or far better than they really are. Do not rely on what your friend's cousin's nephew overheard the VP say to the secretary in the elevator, etc. Ever play the telephone game? Has everyone forgotten that lesson?
Here's a link to Rosie's blog:
http://www.rosie.com/
Why not get all your facts straight, people?
Grr. I was attempting to listen to the Ian and Margery show this morning on the radio, but that will be the last time. When I turned it on, Ian was going on and on about how Rosie O'Donnell is claiming that 9/11 is a government conspiracy, it didn't really happen, that our government was involved in the collapse of the twin tours, etc. NONE OF THIS IS TRUE. RD has never said any of those things. She IS currently questioning the collapse of WTC Building 7, which imploded perfectly and was never mentioned in the official reports of the WTC attacks. But isn't that a far cry from being a "9/11 denier"?? I check Rosie's blog from time to time, and she responds to a lot of hostile questions through her blog regarding statements she's made. There's also a link to The View on her blog, so I watch pieces from that show from time to time as well. Well, how did Ian from the radio think RD had said all these things? Because Bill O'Reilly said she said all those things!! Thus it must be true.
Unbelievable. First of all, if your source for information is Bill O'Reilly then WTF are you thinking? Second of all, why rely on anyone else to tell you RD's views, why not go directly to her when she has a blog and has responded to all these questions from people emailing her and from her cohosts on The View?
So I quickly emailed Ian, suggesting that instead of getting his information regarding RD's views from BOR, why not go to Rosie's blog and get them from her? Once he played a clip on the radio which made obvious he was wrong, he did nothing to acknowledge this and just merely shifted the focus of the discussion. What an asshole. Then he read my email on the air, but cherry-picked the words to make it sound as though I was criticizing his right to question her views, which was not the point at all. Double asshole.
My point is this--if you can go directly to the source to get your information, go to the source. The information you receive from anyone other than the source is suspect. They may think they have it right and don't, or they may not care if they get all the details right, or may be too careless to make sure to get all the details right. Then, you've got plenty of people out there who just like to stir up the issues and don't really care about accuracy. Any ideas of who that could be? And in general, comments taken out of context can be made to sound far worse or far better than they really are. Do not rely on what your friend's cousin's nephew overheard the VP say to the secretary in the elevator, etc. Ever play the telephone game? Has everyone forgotten that lesson?
Here's a link to Rosie's blog:
http://www.rosie.com/
Why not get all your facts straight, people?
posted by Anna's Mommy at
9:40 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home