Back then it was about the unconstitutional Ten Commandments monuments at some local public schools.
This time it's about something else.
In an hour long rant began with Marty vehemently opposing this editorial in the NYTimes about NSA Whistleblower Edward Snowden. The fun thing is that even though he read the thing on the air, he kept making the same mistake about what the editorial said.
Marty kept saying the Times wanted a pardon for Snowden. Marty kept saying Snowden was a traitor.
And this is what they actually wrote:
Considering the enormous value of the information he has revealed, and the abuses he has exposed, Mr. Snowden deserves better than a life of permanent exile, fear and flight. He may have committed a crime to do so, but he has done his country a great service. It is time for the United States to offer Mr. Snowden a plea bargain or some form of clemency that would allow him to return home, face at least substantially reduced punishment in light of his role as a whistle-blower, and have the hope of a life advocating for greater privacy and far stronger oversight of the runaway intelligence community. [Emphasis added.]A plea bargain or clemency is not a pardon, Marty. You should know that. A "substantially reduced punishment" also not a pardon, Marty. You should know that, too.
In addition, Marty said a number of times that the NSA surveillance stopped 50 terror attacks - so they're justified.
Only there's a problem with that number. From the Huffingtonpost:
"Would you agree that the 54 cases that keep getting cited by the administration were not all plots, and of the 54, only 13 had some nexus to the U.S.?" [Senator Patrick] Leahy said at the hearing. "Would you agree with that, yes or no?"That would be the same Keith Alexander that lied to Congress about the NSA surveillance.
"Yes," [NSA chief Gen. Keith] Alexander replied, without elaborating.
It's impossible to assess the role NSA surveillance played in the 54 cases because, while the agency has provided a full list to Congress, it remains classified. [Emphasis added.]
Marty, you should know this, too.
But the real take-away from Marty's rant is his collateral damage. In insisting that the Times wants a pardon for Edward Snowden (something we already know is untrue), Marty repeatedly asked why not a pardon for "Mr. Bradley?"
Who, you might ask, might this "Mr Bradley" be?
That would be Marty Griffin's snarky name for Chelsea Manning. Throughout the hour, Marty Griffin insisted on calling Manning a "he" throughout his rant. He (Marty) added that "Mr Manning" had some sort of "bizarre sex-change thing" going on. He then returned to using the masculine third person pronoun and "Mr Bradley."
Can't even use her last name, I guess.
How enlightened of you, Marty Griffin!
IIRC Marty cost a former employer a tidy sum when he allegedly slandered some Dallas players? Amazed he's managed to find a job in broadcasting after that fiasco. http://www.dmagazine.com/publications/d-magazine/1997/march/media-did-marty-griffin-get-conned
ReplyDeleteMy favorite quotation: "I think he’s a well-meaning guy," says John Miller, news director for Channel 8. "But he’s naive and not the brightest fellow."
Marty Griffin lashed back at the bloggers at 2 political junkies. My $.02:
ReplyDeleteLanguage. Names. These are the tools of communication. To be in the broadcasting business and not care about the basic building blocks is reason for pause. Back at college at the J School, if we miss spelled a person's name then the grade was an automatic "F." To twist on the individual's name formerly known as Bradley is grounds for failure in a matter that is fixable. You decide. Fail, or not.