Jarvis was pretty excellent on CNN’s News Night, discussing some of the flaws and shortcomings of Michael Moore’s largely ficticious movies. Unlike a lot of people you see on TV these days, Jeff didn’t just offer up cheap sound bites, he attempted to explain in some detail the problem with Moore’s blaming the 9/11 attacks on George W. Bush instead of on bin Laden and Al Qaeda. It seems one would have to be pretty dim to accept Moore’s view of things, but he has his fans.
The BuzzMachine for Jeff’s wrapup and a link to the transcript.
Richard,
Today reading Jeff Jarvis’s comments page, I came across this:
1. oj was found to be innocent by a jury.
2. there’s very few people nowadays who think that kobe will be found guilty of rape.
3. the officiating the nba finals (and much of the playffs) was completely slanted against the lakers. even drunken fans saw that.
4. i never said that Clinton didnt lie under oath.
as per #4, either find me the quote on my page where i said that Clinton didnt lie under oath so as to refresh my memory, or retract your statement on Jarvis’s blog.
i do not know you. i do not know why you feel it necessary to come to my blog and throw your negative crap upon my legitamite opinions.
if you want to disagree with me, fine. use facts, use links, use proof.
but to go to someone else’s blog and spread lies and try to paint me out as someone out of touch or insane or whatever, even when the facts support what i have to say (or in OJ and Kobe’s cases, juries and the law), well, for lack of a better word, it’s retarded, and embarrasing.
many of jeff’s readers dont know me. and they sure as hell dont know you. you can spout something like that out about Clinton, and they just might think that i actually did say that.
the last thing i would ever do is tell someone to limit their speech, but in this case, if you plan on disparaging my name, do me a favor, and (1) be accurate and (2)let me know in my comments that youre talking smack about me somewhere else. i dont see how thats too much to ask.
meanwhile, you might work on attracting people to your site. i, for one, didnt get my audience by leaving negative innacurate crap on other peoples blogs. i got it by writing well and backing it up with facts and links.
Are you sure you didn’t say that Clinton was simply a victim of Ken Starr, Tony?
In any case, three outa four ain’t so bad, is it?
youre as reckless and innacurate as you claim michael moore as being.
should ken starr have been able to bounce from whitewater to arkansas troopers to linda tripp and finally to monica over a period of four years? of course not.
did whitewater have anything to do with monica? of course not.
was clinton and his family and his administration victimized by the starr witchunt – in a way, of course.
but you never said any of that on jarvis’s blog comments. you said that i said that clinton never lied under oath. thats a lot different from what you know i said.
a lot different.
i am a very easy person to disagree with. i say what i think and i put it out there for the world to take aim on. you dont have to make up bullshit and then blush when called out.
what you need to do is go to jarvis’s top post, whatever it is and say “i totally misrepresented tony pierce in a previous comment. i said that he said that clinton never lied under oath, and i was wrong. i knew he had never said that but i wrote it anyway. i’m sorry, and i will stop disparaging other people by making up lies about them.”
if you want to blog about what brought you to start spreading lies about me, fine. do it in your own blog, and if it’s good i will link to it.