That "other places" link used to go to my site. Wonder who I offended.

exactly

Oh. And I agree with your analysis here. Excellent.

good post

once again the party of "tolerance" shows its true colors

I think if you're going to do a legal-like analysis it ought to use evidentiary standards not decency standards. They're more relavent if less fun to discuss.

The question is whether the probative value is outweighed the prejudicial nature of the testimony. Or put differently, does it tell you more about whatever it is intended to tell us about or does it just hurt the target somehow?

And all of the things you listed ("gambling, porn, an affair, homosexuality, etc.") surely tell us very little about Eason Jordan's ability to perform his job but instead are designed to humiliate him or damage his reputation so we, the viewing public, judge him by those actions instead of his comments.

And the great news for CNN is that talking about other stuff allows the network to distract us from what he really said. And what is actually important. So we should stand against the Kausian "anything goes" standard because it allows the MSM to distract us with one hand while performing the liberal "magic" with the other.

If you take my meaning.

The only hint of a "scandal" I see in all of this is the unproven allegation of some involvement in the Plame leak. But until any actual evidence surfaces (which is unlikely, since the charge is almost certainly false), there's no story, and spreading gossip about this man's personal life, seedy though it may be, is not only irrelevant, it's just plain mean.

I don't care that he got a day pass to White House press briefings. They should give those out to as many reporters as they can fit in the room; the whole point of a press briefing is to keep the public informed. It shouldn't be an exclusive event. They should allow journalists from al-Jazeera, Weekly World News, whatever. Even (gasp!) gay reporters should be let in. Why should I care who gets to ask the president a question? I'd like to ask him a few, myself.

speaking of ad hominem, I just put up a post detailing some on the lefts unwillingness to throw with the liberalbloggerstalker gate scandal...

http://labormonkey.blogspot.com/2005/02/lib-bloggers-run-from-stalkergate.html

"...the man ho once donated a kidney..."

Boy, I hope that was a typo! ;)

Holy bat crap on duck. Ace throws a kidney joke out, but WE'VE got "Ask Jeff Gannon" the hottest new advice column from your friends at musings of a fat kid.

Great post.

I'm crying right now.

How could anyone be so . . . so . . . mean spirited as to pick on a courageous man's sexual preferences?

Oh, you mean people who are "on his team" are doing it? Oh. (sniffle) Then I guess it's OK.

Hypocrisy thy name is Leftism.

"Indecorous"?! what a pussy. He jealous that Ace actually bagged Blossom is all, that and that all the discerning blog readers are here.

Hey! I clicked that link earlier and it went to Protein Wisdom!

LOL, yeah Karol, that's strange. I saw that link to Protein Wisdom earlier in the day as well.

Excellent take on Jordan today, Ace.

But Ace, isn't it odd someone who dates Pearl's widown would accuse Americans of targeting journalists? I think that's a legitimate question.

That does it! I'm changing my name AGAIN!

Please refer to me now only as Da Gannon.

Thank you.

Happy Valentines Day, Ace!

I dreamt of dipping you in batter again last night. We really have to stop meeting like this in my dreams. You coy, indecorous, scamp you.

All my love,

Ollie

The message from "Ollie" was about as close to a written photoshop as I've ever seen.

To much weirdness, to small a space.

Ace's really IS turning into a right wing Fark.

Ace,

The reports of the alleged relationship between Mr. Jordan and Mrs. Pearl have been known, and quite public for some time.

As to whether or not they were widely known is a different question. As to what value (in terms of weight or importance) those reports would have on the real or perceived perception on the remarks attributed to Mr. Jordan seems to me to be besides the point.

Nothing could mitigate the impact of the videotape. Pure and simple. If this was not the case, the videotape would have been made public to exonerate Mr. Jordan.

As to the invasion of privacy charge, your points are well taken. But again, I think Mr. Kaus is way off the mark.

It's the videotape, stupid.

It's really sad that this stuff is brought up at all. Every time I hear things like that I think to myself, "Huh. Weird. Non sequitur."

The fact that some are saying that that would be the reason for the firing is really pathetic. I'd much rath er that the firing be for making unsubstatiated allegations of War Crimes against the American Armed Services, or being a lap dog for Saddam's regime.

oops, meant to say "Rather"

Feh. Had a big long comment - which can be summed up with a brief quote:

"You don't argue with stupid"

Well I think it is time for all of us rightwing bloggers to have a SEXUAL OUTING day. Let's just get it over with before the leftie bloggers get to us.
Let's just a pick a day. (Today would have been a good one, but too late for that) Anyway, say.....March 15th, so we can research our memory banks, and just have "This is my sexual history day"
Imagine the hits!!! Then it will be all out there and if any of us become FAMOUS, it will be old news. Who is with me??????...;-)
*note-not pictures need accompany said history.

Okay Rightwingsparkle, I'll volunteer to go first on this sexual outing idea of yours.

I'm a lesbian trapped in a man's body! :)

All I have to say is that you and I are in complete agreement about how this is nothing more than gossip-mongering and bad ethics. They're picking on someone to feel better about themselves, and it's a behavior that they just can't break themselves from.

I posted my own thoughts about this whole thing on my own blog.

/plug

Keep up the good fight, Ace!

Opioninated Vogon, ok, as long as you don't have a mullet...;-)

The scandle is Eason Jordan slandering our Military. Nothing else. Where are the tapes!

I agree, but there are circumstances where such "private" matters ought to be reported, such as when a powerful man uses his intern as a sex toy.

Jordan didn't get hounded out of his job, and this wasn't a lynching. He had every opportunity to release the video and apologize. But his refusal to talk to anybody about his remark made it fester, and made people wonder about it more and check out his history of foot-in-mouth disease.

It's ironic how journalists are circling the wagons and stonewalling this just as if they were powerful politicians being hounded by the press.

Yo ACE, how come if I use the word sex I get bumped and you don't? (as in "details of his sexual inclinations"). This is an outrage and proves what hyocrites bloggers really are. I am consulting my lawyer.