Hannity

[mellestad]

Lol.  It takes a lot to get Fox to pull you out of an event because you're being too partisian 

http://mediamatters.org/research/201004150087

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Under fire, "furious" Fox News execs yank Hannity from Tea Party event
April 15, 2010 9:00 pm ET

SUMMARY: Amidst a firestorm of criticism, reportedly "furious" Fox News executives have yanked Sean Hannity from taping his April 15 show at a Cincinnati Tea Party event which charged admission and had "all proceeds" benefiting the organization. As Media Matters for America had reported, Hannity's appearance, which was promoted on 18 different editions of his Fox News program, elicited criticism from news and broadcast veterans who questioned the ethics of raising money for a political organization during a production of a Fox News show.
The plan: Want to see Hannity? Pay the Cincy Tea Party
Hannity attendance required paid admission. As Media Matters documented, Hannity was scheduled to tape his April 15 show at the Cincinnati Tea Party's (CTP) 2010 Tax Day Tea Party, which required paid admission. A promotional flier for the event promised a "Taping of Sean Hannity's Fox News Show," a "Hannity Book Signing," and speeches from local Ohio figures. According to CTP, "All proceeds benefit the Cincinnati Tea Party." CTP's flier:



Higher ticket prices for better viewing of Hannity. CTP sold more expensive tickets by promising better viewing of Hannity's Fox News program. For instance, CTP offered "premium reserved seating by the Hannity show" for $20; VIP seats, which included a "Floor ticket to event and dinner at the UC restaurant overlooking the arena!" for $100; and general admission seating for $5. The Cincinnati Enquirer reported on April 13 that the $20 premium seats give you "a chance to be on TV" and added that organizers "expect a sold-out crowd" of 13,000.

Tea Party organizer says they "coordinated" with Hannity's Fox staff "to plan the logistics"
"

• ur tea party people coordinated with his staff to plan the logistics of the event." On April 13, Media Matters emailed the Cincinnati Tea Party and asked if Hannity was being compensated for his appearance and if the organization worked "with Mr. Hannity's Fox News staff." CTP communications manager Sue White replied: "Mr. Hannity is not being compensated by any tea party, but our tea party people coordinated with his staff to plan the logistics of the event."

Media Matters report: Hannity Tea Party show plan raised ethical eyebrows
On April 14, Media Matters investigative reporter Joe Strupp reported that "Hannity's plan to do his show Thursday night from a Tea Party event in Cincinnati that will charge admission is raising ethical worries among several news and broadcast veterans. The idea that a news show that covers the Tea Party issue, among others, would seek to raise money for the event during a production of the show has some in the industry crying foul."

•Society of Professional Journalists' Smith: "ncestuous" and "clear conflict of interest." Strupp quoted Kevin Smith, president of the Society of Professional Journalists, who stated:
"Unequivocally, from our standpoint, this is wrong," declared Kevin Smith, president of the Society of Professional Journalists. "For a news organization to charge people for access, then take that money and roll it over to a political action group that they cover quite a bit."

Smith added, "It has gotten to the point where you cannot delineate between Fox News and the Tea Party movement - it is incestuous. There is a clear conflict of interest here."

•NPR ombudsman: Undermining "fair and balanced" slogan. Strupp wrote: "Alicia Shepard, ombudsman for National Public Radio, also found fault with the plan. 'If the job of a news organization is to present the facts in an unbiased way and if Fox is charging people to raise money for a political cause, then they are undermining their mission to be fair and balanced,' she said. 'Is Sean Hannity's mission to be fair and balanced or to be a pundit with a political bent? It is clearly new territory.'"
•GWU's Sesno: Violates "virtually every [journalism] rule." Strupp wrote: "Frank Sesno, who spent 21 years at CNN in Washington and now serves as director of the School of Media and Public Affairs at George Washington University, said: 'It violates virtually every rule of every ethical guideline that journalism covers. The idea that you would support a [political] movement and ask your audience to pay for it.'"
•Poynter's Steele: The "traditional standards are both eroding and corroding." Strupp wrote: "'The traditional standards are both eroding and corroding,' [The Poynter Institute's Bob Steele] said when told of the plan. 'Does Sean Hannity consider himself a journalist? Does Fox News consider his program journalism? If either or both of those answers are yes, there is a serious problem with what he is doing with this event and the financial piece.'"
•Sienna's Smith: It's "ethically challenged." Strupp wrote: "Then there is Dow Smith, who spent 27 years in broadcast news and served as news director at television stations in Miami, the District of Columbia and Detroit. He called it 'ethically challenged.' 'There is no way you should be doing this,' said Smith, who is now a journalism professor at Siena College in New York. 'If I was a news director and found out one of my reporters had done this, I would have fired them on the spot.'"
Balt. Sun critic: What "Hannity and Fox News are doing is wrong." Baltimore Sun critic David Zurawik also criticized Hannity and Fox News, writing that "as a down-the-middle media critic, who has defended Fox News more than perhaps anyone else in the mainstream media when it came under fire last year from the White House, I need to go out of my way to say that what Hannity and Fox News are doing is wrong":

Look, I'll not pre-judge the show. But as a down-the-middle media critic, who has defended Fox News more than perhaps anyone else in the mainstream media when it came under fire last year from the White House, I need to go out of my way to say that what Hannity and Fox News are doing is wrong.

Even if you buy the argument promoted by Fox management that Hannity's show is opinion, not news, and everyone on the planet knows that, it is still wrong to use your broadcast in such an overtly poilitical manner.

Providing a forum for voices of dissent is one thing. Indeed, I have argued it is a good thing, and praised Fox News for doing it when so much of the rest of the media seemed to be on bended knee before Obama in the first few months after his inauguration. The administration seemed to lack any plan to help the millions of Americans who were losing jobs left and right, and it seemed as if the most the press could do was celebrate Obama with a cult of personality chorus of hosannas. Fox was one of the few media outlets delivering on its watchdog responsibilities.

But for Fox News to let Hannity take his show on the road and use it as a political tool to help mount dissent and fan the flames of protest is another thing altogether. The ratings might be nice, but Hannity and Fox News are playing a dangerous political game by putting the program in league with such Tea Party roadshows, and for once, I agree that they deserve all the criticism they are getting from the left.

LA Times on April 15: "Fox News yanks Sean Hannity from Cincinnati Tea Party rally he was set to star in"
Fox exec: We "never agreed to allow the Cincinnati Tea Party organizers to use Sean Hannity's television program to profit from broadcasting his show from the event." The Los Angeles Times reported in an April 15 article that "[a]ngry Fox News executives ordered host Sean Hannity to abandon plans to broadcast his nightly show as part of a Tea Party rally in Cincinnati on Thursday after top executives learned that he was set to headline the event, proceeds from which would benefit the local Tea Party organization." From the article:

Angry Fox News executives ordered host Sean Hannity to abandon plans to broadcast his nightly show as part of a Tea Party rally in Cincinnati on Thursday after top executives learned that he was set to headline the event, proceeds from which would benefit the local Tea Party organization.

Rally organizers had listed Hannity, who is on a book tour, as the headliner of the four-hour Tax Day event at the University of Cincinnati. The rally, expected to draw as many as 13,000 people, was set feature speakers such as "Liberal Facism" author Jonah Goldberg and local Tea Party leaders. Participants were being charged a minimum of $5, with seats near Hannity's set going for $20, according to the Cincinnati Enquirer, which reported that any profits would go to future Tea Party events. Media Matters for America noted that Hannity's personal website directed supporters to a link to buy tickets for the Cincinnati rally.

But senior Fox News executives said they were not aware Hannity was being billed as the centerpiece of the event or that Tea Party organizers were charging for admission to Hannity's show as part of the rally. They first learned of it Thursday morning from John Finley, Hannity's executive producer, who was in Cincinnati to produce Hannity's show.

Furious, top officials recalled Hannity back to New York to do his show in his regular studio. The network plans to do an extensive post-mortem about the incident with Finley and Hannity's staff.

"Fox News never agreed to allow the Cincinnati Tea Party organizers to use Sean Hannity's television program to profit from broadcasting his show from the event," said Bill Shine, the network's executive vice president of programming. "When senior executives in New York were made aware of this, we changed our plans for tonight's show."

Critics of Fox News have accused the network of promoting Tea Party even as it covers the political movement as a news story. A spokeswoman for the network said that Neil Cavuto was the only host other than Hannity at a Tea Party event Thursday, stressing that Cavuto was covering the Atlanta event for both Fox News and Fox Business Channel, not attending as a participant. Carl Cameron provided news coverage of the Tea Party events around the country out of Washington.

Hannity promoted his Cincy appearance on 18 shows since early March
Hannity: "We will be in Cincinnati. Hope you can join us. Go to Hannity.com for details." According to a Media Matters search of the Nexis database, Hannity promoted his Cincinnati appearance 18 times since March 5. In doing so, Hannity routinely directed viewers to his personal website (Hannity.com) to find out how "you can join us" and "be a part of the studio audience, meet us on our tour." Fox News also routinely aired on-screen text directing viewers to Hannity's website. On his personal website, Hannity linked viewers to the University of Cincinnati box office to buy tickets. From Hannity's website:



Hannity's link directs to the University of Cincinnati's box office purchase page for the "CINCINNATI TEA PARTY":



The following are the 18 instances of Hannity mentioning his Cincinnati stop (via Nexis) on Fox News:

•April 14: "Now, before we go tonight, we want to thank the folks here at the Gwinnett Center. Tomorrow, tax day, we will be in Cincinnati. Hope you can join us. Go to Hannity.com for details. See you tomorrow night."
•April 13: "And last but not least, we are ending. We'll be in Atlanta tomorrow, Cincinnati on Thursday. Thanks for being with us."
•April 12: "[T]hen our final show will come Thursday from Cincinnati. That's right, tax day, April 15. Now, details about the tour and the book are on my Web site and how you can part of the "Hannity" program and come see us."
•April 9: "Our final show on the 15th, by the way, tax day, a big rally in Cincinnati. We have great guests lined up all next week. And details about the tour and the book are at Hannity.com."
•April 8: "And then tax day we will be in Cincinnati. If you want to join the show, it's all on my Web site, Hannity.com. And hopefully, you can part of the studio audience. My website, Hannity.com."
•April 7: "We'll be in Atlanta. April 15, we will be in Cincinnati. If you want to be a part of this show, it's all on my Web site, Hannity.com. Hannity.com."
•April 6: "And by the way, if you want to find out how you can join us, either there or in Grand Rapids on Thursday or in New Orleans on Friday or the following week in Florida, Atlanta and Cincinnati on April 15, just go to my Web site. Details about the tour, my new book are at Hannity.com."
•April 5: "This week on Wednesday we will be in Minneapolis, and we'll be with Governor Palin, Michele Bachmann. Then to Grand Rapids. At the end of the week, New Orleans. Then we'll be in Kansas City and in Nashville next Saturday. Then The Villages in Florida, and then we're in Atlanta, then Cincinnati. And by the way, you can come to any of the shows. Go to my Web site, Hannity.com."
•April 1: "And then off to Atlanta and then tax day Cincinnati. And you can join us. Just go to my Web site, Hannity.com, and you can find out if you can come see a live show of 'Hannity.'"
•March 31: "We will be in Cincinnati, Ohio, for a big Tea Party rally."
•March 30: "As you can see, we're going to be tomorrow in Salt Lake City, then Minneapolis with Governor Palin, Grand Rapids, New Orleans, Florida, Atlanta, Cincinnati, and Pittsburgh and then Philly this weekend. ... So it's [Hannity's book] in bookstores everywhere. It's on my Web site, Hannity.com. Also, go there to get details on how you can join us on tour."
•March 29: "And we will be in Cincinnati, April 15. Now, on location, 'Hannity.' Go to my Web site, Hannity.com."
•March 26: "Then we are off to Atlanta, Georgia, on April 14, Cincinnati, Ohio, on tax day, April 15. And we'll be bringing you a lot of live, on location 'Hannity' shows, and maybe you'll come out and join us. All the details for the tour are on Hannity.com, my Web site."
•March 25: "We'll be in Atlanta, Georgia. Then on April 15, Cincinnati, Ohio. Now, you can be a part of our live studio audience. All the details for all of our stops are on Hannity.com."
•March 24: "We will be in Atlanta, Georgia, and Cincinnati, Ohio. And we're going to bring you live, on location 'Hannity' shows from all these cities. Details about the tour and some other cities we're going to on the weekend are at Hannity.com. Hannity.com, my Web site."
•March 23: "We're going to be at The Villages in Orlando; Cincinnati. All the details as we launch one week from today my brand-new book, my first book in six years, 'Conservative Victory: Defeating Obama's Radical Agenda.' If you'd like to join us to see this program, if you'd like to get an early copy, Hannity.com, my Web site. My last name, Hannity.com, for all the details."
•March 22: "We're going to be in Cincinnati. We're going to be in Orlando. We're going to be at the Villages, Bob, where you and I will play golf together one day. And we'll be in Atlanta. Now, if you want to be a part of the studio audience, meet us on our tour. We'll be in Philly, Pittsburgh. Hannity.com, my Web site. Hannity.com."
•March 5: "All right. [Radio host] Billy Cunningham, in 25 days from now, and then on April 15, we're going to be in the great city of Cincinnati for a big, huge Tea Party rally."
While Hannity promoted his Cincinnati event, Fox News also regularly aired graphics directing viewers to his personal website. The following are examples from four recent shows:

April 13:



April 12:





April 9:



April 8:



&mdash E.H.H.

Copyright © 2009 Media Matters for America. All rights reserved.

[MrRezister]

If MediaMatters says it, it MUST be true!

Of course another possibility is that FOX just didn't want the Cincinnati Tea Party making money off of Hannity's name.

But hey, the "too partisan" line sounds good, too.

[Battle Monkey of Zardoz]

But it's ok for other "News" stations to get thrills up their legs.

[kgbsquirrel]

This sounds like a simple case of the network Hannity is contracted with has the rights to use his name/image for profit and simply put the kaibosh on someone else trying to do the same. *shrug*

[sanglant]

sounds like msnbc has something similar(in there contract).
http://news.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474978155323

[Jimmy Dean]

I don't like the idea of any of the city Tea Parties charging for admission to the 04-15 events.  even if it is to benefit the group.   The 04-15 event should damn well be free.  If you want to make a fun raiser to raise money, do it some other time.

[mellestad]

Media matters is just the first place I got when I googled.  This has been on multiple msm outlets as well.

The problem is you can't have a 'news' show involved in fundraising for a specific political party and then cut to a commercial that says, "Fox news, fair and balanced!".  It looks bad.

I would hope any media outlet would get riled up at their employees doing something similar (As the above article about MSNBC).  Hannity won't get fired because he's popular, but it isn't going to endear him to any of the higher ups at Fox.  Every time someone does something like that it is a direct assault on the reputation of the overall organization.

[makattak]

Media matters is just the first place I got when I googled.  This has been on multiple msm outlets as well.

The problem is you can't have a 'news' show involved in fundraising for a specific political party and then cut to a commercial that says, "Fox news, fair and balanced!".  It looks bad.

I would hope any media outlet would get riled up at their employees doing something similar (As the above article about MSNBC).  Hannity won't get fired because he's popular, but it isn't going to endear him to any of the higher ups at Fox.  Every time someone does something like that it is a direct assault on the reputation of the overall organization.

You're right you can't have a NEWS show doing that.

Political commentary doesn't quite fall under "News", though. It's called "Opinion."

[mellestad]

You're right you can't have a NEWS show doing that.

Political commentary doesn't quite fall under "News", though. It's called "Opinion."

Apparantly Fox thought it was close enough  

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

Media matters is just the first place I got when I googled.  This has been on multiple msm outlets as well.

Most of your vaunted MSM outlets report Media Matters info as gospel truth.  The quality of your nooz is not improved any by taking it second hand from Media Matters vs getting direct from Media Matters.

[mellestad]

Most of your vaunted MSM outlets report Media Matters info as gospel truth.  The quality of your nooz is not improved any by taking it second hand from Media Matters vs getting direct from Media Matters.

So are you disputing that this happened, or are you just bickering with me because of your contrary nature?

I've never even read media matters, I don't even know who they are.

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

I've never even read media matters, I don't even know who they are.

That might be the problem, right there.  

Media Matters is a far left non-profit that exists to keep watch over right wing commentators and personalities, searching for things that can be made to appear damaging or embarrassing.  Whenever they find something that they think sounds squichy, even if it's out of context (especially if its out of context), they pass it off to the MSM sources who dutifully report it as gospel truth.

Media Matters has a history of stretching the truth beyond all recognition.  They are not at all trustworthy as a credible news source.

[mellestad]

That might be the problem, right there.   

Media Matters is a far left non-profit that exists to keep watch over right wing commentators and personalities, searching for things that can be made to appear damaging or embarrassing.  Whenever they find something that they think sounds squichy, even if it's out of context (especially if its out of context), they pass it off to the MSM sources who dutifully report it as gospel truth.

Media Matters has a history of stretching the truth beyond all recognition.  They are not at all trustworthy as a credible news source.

*sigh*

Are you disputing that this happened, or are you just bickering with me because of your contrary nature?

If it actually happened, I don't see why I need to care whether media matters is left, right or center.  I just used them because they came up on google as a written source for what I heard on the radio from two news shows.

I'm searching right now, and I'm not seeing anyone disputing that they were charging for tickets to see Hannity at the Tea Party rally.  The local Tea Party released a press release, but all they say is that no-one was making personal profit from the ticket sales, but that wasn't what anyone was complaining about anyway so it isn't exactly a denial.

And since I've been reading about it, it seems even more clear.  Blogs, including media matters, had been complaining for a couple days before the events.  Fox got wind of the ruckus on the Internet and they pulled Hannity.  They even issued a press release stating that they did so.

What is there to argue about Headless?  Again, are you just being contrary?

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20100415/NEWS0108/304150112/Hannity+nixes+appearance

[makattak]

*sigh*

Are you disputing that this happened, or are you just bickering with me because of your contrary nature?

If it actually happened, I don't see why I need to care whether media matters is left, right or center.  I just used them because they came up on google as a written source for what I heard on the radio from two news shows.

I'm searching right now, and I'm not seeing anyone disputing that they were charging for tickets to see Hannity at the Tea Party rally.  The local Tea Party released a press release, but all they say is that no-one was making personal profit from the ticket sales, but that wasn't what anyone was complaining about anyway so it isn't exactly a denial.

And since I've been reading about it, it seems even more clear.  Blogs, including media matters, had been complaining for a couple days before the events.  Fox got wind of the ruckus on the Internet and they pulled Hannity.  They even issued a press release stating that they did so.

What is there to argue about Headless?  Again, are you just being contrary?

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20100415/NEWS0108/304150112/Hannity+nixes+appearance

That's a fine position so long as you don't impugn someone for quoting "World Net Daily". (I'll continue to impugn both.)

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

*sigh*

Are you disputing that this happened, or are you just bickering with me because of your contrary nature?

Neither.

What is there to argue about Headless?  Again, are you just being contrary?

The issue is your interpretation of the events, your smarmy attitude towards Hannity and Fox News.

[mellestad]

Neither.
The issue is your interpretation of the events, your smarmy attitude towards Hannity and Fox News.

So how is my interpretation flawed Headless?  Enlighten me as to the truth behind these events.  I've given multiple indepentant sources for what happened and they jive with what I said.  Fox news itself issued a press release confirming what I said.  I'm not seeing anything saying anything else besides what I said.  What exactly is at issue with my interpretation of events?  You keep saying you have a point, besides being argumentative, but you're not backing it up with anything besides opinion.  Show me where I'm wrong and I won't have any problem admitting I was in error and retracting my statements.


@Mak:  Pardon?

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

So how is my interpretation flawed Headless?  Enlighten me as to the truth behind these events.  I've given multiple indepentant sources for what happened and they jive with what I said.  Fox news itself issued a press release confirming what I said.  I'm not seeing anything saying anything else besides what I said.  What exactly is at issue with my interpretation of events?  You keep saying you have a point, besides being argumentative, but you're not backing it up with anything besides opinion.  Show me where I'm wrong and I won't have any problem admitting I was in error and retracting my statements.

Asked and answered.  See above.

[mellestad]

Asked and answered.  See above.

The weight of your cited evidence to the contrary isn't very convincing.

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

The weight of your cited evidence to the contrary isn't very convincing.

Ho-kay.

 

(I think you're confused.  We don't disagree on the facts of the issue.  It's your interpretations and conclusions that are in question.)

[sanglant]

Mmm ho-cakes. oh wait.

[mellestad]

Ho-kay.

 

(I think you're confused.  We don't disagree on the facts of the issue.  It's your interpretations and conclusions that are in question.)

Right, you are saying it had nothing to do with politics or Hannities support of the Tea Party.  You are saying that if it had been, say, a random speech that Hannity set up on his own and the organizer was charging for admission, Fox would have banned that as well.

Right?

That seems to be reaching.  Even the Society of Professional Journalists says the entire situation breaks the standard code of journalism ethics.  I'm not even saying Hannity is a journalist, I'm just saying it seems pretty clear someone made a bad decision.  If it didn't look bad, I can't imagine FOX would have cared.

I've given evidence, if you want to disagree with me that's fine, but I'm not going to worry too much about changing my opinion on the subject unless you put something on the table yourself to back up your point of view.  I'm willing to listen.

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

Fox objected because someone else was profiting off of their property (the taping of Hannity's show).  It was a business decision, plain and simple.  

Your conclusions and interpretations on the subject, namely that Hannity was spanked by the Fox execs for being too partisan, that Hannity's behavior looks bad, or that it impugns Fox's already low reputation, are all way off the mark.

If you want something "on the table", then I'll refer you to the cincinnatti.com article you yourself cited.  Go read it.  Take note of Bill Shine's remarks on the subject.

[mellestad]

Fox objected because someone else was profiting off of their property (the taping of Hannity's show).  It was a business decision, plain and simple.  

Your conclusions and interpretations on the subject, namely that Hannity was spanked by the Fox execs for being too partisan, that Hannity's behavior looks bad, or that it impugns Fox's already low reputation, are all way off the mark.

If you want something "on the table", then I'll refer you to the cincinnatti.com article you yourself cited.  Go read it.  Take note of Bill Shine's remarks on the subject.

So your response is that poor innocent Hannity was being taken advantage of by those profiteering Tea Party activists and Fox moved to stop it, and it had nothing to do with politics and nothing to do with the reaction from other media sources criticising the apparant partisian act?  And you know that because Media Matters stated otherwise and anything Media Matters says is the opposite of true?

 

Ok then.

[alex_trebek]

Right, you are saying it had nothing to do with politics or Hannities support of the Tea Party.  You are saying that if it had been, say, a random speech that Hannity set up on his own and the organizer was charging for admission, Fox would have banned that as well.

Right?

That seems to be reaching.  Even the Society of Professional Journalists says the entire situation breaks the standard code of journalism ethics.  I'm not even saying Hannity is a journalist, I'm just saying it seems pretty clear someone made a bad decision.  If it didn't look bad, I can't imagine FOX would have cared.

I've given evidence, if you want to disagree with me that's fine, but I'm not going to worry too much about changing my opinion on the subject unless you put something on the table yourself to back up your point of view.  I'm willing to listen.

I strongly dislike Hannity because of his obvious partisanship.  The difference between you an I is I also strongly dislike Olberman Matthews, Stewart, etc, as well.

That said, I don't give a flying crap how they make their money.

Since Hannity's not a journalist, what do journalistic ethics have to do with anything?

Your lack of posts criticising the partisanship of leftist opinion show hosts (see above) hints towards your biases. Please understand, I don't give a crap if you believe in Marxism, Communism, or Libertarianism.

I just get annoyed by those that criticize others for being partisan while being partisan yourself.

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

So your response is that poor innocent Hannity was being taken advantage of by those profiteering Tea Party activists and Fox moved to stop it, and it had nothing to do with politics and nothing to do with the reaction from other media sources criticising the apparant partisian act?  And you know that because Media Matters stated otherwise and anything Media Matters says is the opposite of true?

 

Ok then.

I never said anything like that.

Look, I don't know what your game is, but I'm weary of it.  I don't know what you've got against me personally, and I don't know why you're deliberately misinterpreting what I say.  I also don't understand why you have a problem with Hannity and Fox, or why you're trying to turn this into some sort of scandal.  But no matter.  That's your business and I'll leave you to it.

What interests me is that I'd like to have an honest dialog with you about this stuff.  I enjoy discussing politics with smart people, particularly with people who disagree with me.  You seem pretty smart, but it's tough to have a real conversation when you're so anxious to twist facts into something of your own imagining, rather than take them as they are.  And it's tough to have a real conversation when you selectively ignore and misrepresent what the rest of us are saying to you.

I'll make you a deal.  You accuse me of being argumentative, so I'll quit being argumentative.  In return, I expect you to get real with us and quit playing your games.  Sound fair?