Good Morning AMeMeMeeerica

What is Good Morning America’s obsession with this woman?

And why was she put on today’s show …. two days after the show with Marianne?

Also, why was she given a face-to-face interview, an intimate, softball, cushy interview at that?

She spent her time promoting fat myth after fat myth (obesity causes people to lose their aspirations, Americans can’t “control” themselves, we’re all going to be in the “throes of an obesity bailout” ??)

Here’s some more gems:

“I come from a family of obesity…when you grow up with that and see what it does to people, it’s hard to throw your hands up [about it]”

She generally is misusing parental rights in order to torment her kids and still have them sent to public school.

Obesity statistics —- “one in three are obese” (this is wrong, by the way)

“we just elected a president based on change…we’ve got sick kids, we’ve got fat kids, the school environment needs to be a default of safety”

“Let them call you names, you’re your child’s advocate, there’s no excuse to freshly mint a new fat child in this country.”

Also, the segment featured videos of headless fat children (I’m sure filmed without their permission), randomly interspersed in the segment, focusing mostly on poor little boys’ jiggling tummies. Grrrrr.

So what’s up with GMA, anyway? Does anyone think the timing of this segment is a little too coincidental — Monday, Fat Acceptance; Wednesday, MeMe-brand Obesity Hate?

It reminds me of Rachel’s segment (not on GMA), where MeMe was in the “panel.” This time they just disallowed any debate whatsoever, and gave MeMe the last word.

I’m fuming. Goddamn bubblegum media. When did that woman’s hate become so okay, so reasonable, something an educated anchor would nod to head to, sitting across from her, as the anchor throws the hateful woman softball after softball? You could tell MeMe was absolutely thrilled to be there, since she didn’t have any awful fat people to debate with!

NOTE: I can’t find MeMe Roth’s GMA segment on the GMA website. If anyone sees it later, could you please comment with the link? Thanks!

EDIT: Found the segment. In the “related links” below the article is the link to “The Young, Fat, and Fabulous” (Marianne Kirby of the Rotund’s segment). Perhaps some people reading the hateful, irrational, self-loathing words of Meme Roth will click on that related link, eh?

edited to correct show dates

edited to add Meme Roth segment on Good Morning America: http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/BeautySecrets/story?id=7857306&page=1

No Fat People in Concentration Camps

Oh, how many times us fat activists have seen trotted out this tired platitude:

“Don’t you know, there were no fat people in concentration camps?”

It’s a brilliantly ignorant phrase, at once loaded with misconceptions about fat and about the nature of concentration camps, all while insulting the experience of those who actually had to survive, I dunno, war and genocide and stuff.

As such, I think it’s beneath us to really take it on in a serious manner, debunk, and explain where the misconceptions have taken root. Really, it’s about as well-thought out as the playground curse, “Well you wouldn’t be so fat if you were dead, fatty!” …Well, no kidding. ‘Cuz I’d be dead. Which means eventually a skeleton. Which has no fat.

Usually it’s only the supremely ignorant, or the supremely hateful, who would dare unleash the “no fat people in concentration camps” platitude. A Temporary Lapse of Reason recently posted on a New Zealand doctor who apparently teaches this platitude to his students. (I wonder, does he ever have any students who are fresh from a course on the human metabolism take him to task when he brings this up?)

I think it’s important at this point to remember one important thing, that’s often lost on the non-academic media: there are crackpots, who are so entrenched in some kind of bias that it skews their whole perception of their research and academic goals, all throughout academia. I come from a background of math and physics. At one point in time I was very interested in theoretical physics, and learned a lot of various theoretical physicists (I’m still quite interested, though I come from a different field at this point — complexity theory). I discovered that there was a different theory for the universe for every day of the week, color of the rainbow, flavor of ice cream, and so forth. And that many very serious, life-long academics, were entrenched in theories which, on their face, were a house of cards.

In mathematics it is the same way, though you’d think it would be the field least yielding to crackpots (and it might very well be, but that still doesn’t mean it is entirely free of them). There are many mathematicians so entrenched in expressing ideas using one particular branch of mathematics, that when they encounter these ideas more cleanly and intuitively expressed via different methods, they reject the different methodology all together. These people, who have to prove thousands of statements, using mathematical logic, before they are granted a PhD, can entertain irrational impulses in their professional lives.

Imagine then, a field that is much less precise, much more opaque, much more influenced by politics (and vice versa), much less known than mathematics and physics. It would stand to reason that there would be many more wrong-headed and irrational life-long academics. That is, life-long academics from prestigious places who cling to irrational ideas and theories, because they can bear to think out of the tired, dusty box in which they learned and in which they’ve spent the better part of their life researching within? These people, even when encountering a preponderance of counterexamples to their claim, have the ability to weave in and out of rationality, at once making grandiose, easily disproven claims, and using the force of their dusty “experience” to lend credibility (this is a fallacy of logic called “argument from authority.”).

Getting back on topi, it’s therefore not important to debunk the heath claims made by this so-called doctor — we’ve done it handily, many times before. And, quite frankly, he’s a crackpot if he would ever state such irrational platitudes in the first place. His hate, sense of superiority, and disgust is showing, worn proudly on his sleeve. Through the lens of his hate and bias, his statements might make some kind of sense (and certainly do to the writer of the article, who sadly takes him seriously). But without that lens? Even on their face, to someone who knows nothing about the science of the human metabolism and genetics, they’re utterly ridiculous.

But that doesn’t mean they’re not dangerous. Sometimes, insulated by the Fatosphere, we forgot what the average politician likely believes about fat people.

Quoted from A Temporary Lapse of Reason:

But Dr BirkBeck’s desire to take ‘further steps’, to ‘make people realize’, shame people, legislate their bodies, medicate, mutilate, or otherwise impel people into his ideal of what is good for them is FAR from uncommon. And it all stems from the root of moral superiority that says ‘I know what’s best for you’.

This is such an important distinction to make. As it stands, if you are a fat person in New Zealand, Dr Birkbeck’s words are just words. If you don’t like him, he doesn’t have to be your doctor. However, his words can become dangerous if it is possible to legislate one’s health (I’m not sure if this is currently the case in NZ).

Then all it takes is for one demagogue-doctor to sway some committee comprised of the majority party in power, and suddenly a fat person finds that they are disallowed from obtaining health insurance, or penalized/taxed for their fat, or given an ultimatum to lose weight or be financially penalized at tax time, etc. The legislature can even exonerate itself in the eyes of the non-fat and self-loathing fat (the majority of voters, to be sure) by claiming the extra money from the fatties will be going towards “programs” to “help them” lose the required weight.

Of course, we all know such programs don’t work in the long term (or even short term, looking at some examples from the UK), and what you’ll end up with is a fat tax and useless programs set up to torture fat people. Fat people will be tortured (and possibly mutilated via ‘discounted’ WLS, when the Bunsen Burner weight loss programs don’t work), and will have to foot the bill for their torture.

Dr. Birkbeck, I recognize your methodology, but it hasn’t been in practice for about 80 years or so…

This is another reason why it is vital to make sure that no body of people has the power to legislate your health, and at the very least you have the option to opt-out without financial penalties, the non-payment which could land you in prison. It should never get to the point where some people are fined or otherwise for simply existing as they are. And fat people, by virtue of their existence, would be fined/taxed by a government if any government believed it would be popular to do so. As long as they can get the votes they mean and bring in more revenue, what do they care?

Given our current culture’s entirely irrational views on health, it would be the worst possible thing to get government involved in the legislation of health. It would take a single Dr. Birkbeck to sway some subcommittee regulating the distribution of healthcare that cutting fat people out of the system, and making them pay for it besides, would be a boon to their balance sheet, and it’s all over.

It’s vital to preserve competition in the field of healthcare, just as competition is a boon to any industry. That way people can still vote with their dollars on a much more grassroots, individual manner, that could have the power to see fail one healthcare company overnight, and rise a new, better company in the morning. Actual voting will not give an individual this kind of power over their healthcare, not by far. An individual vote for a politician is so far displaced from the choices those politicians might make about healthcare, there’s no way effective change could occur in the time it would need to occur. The idea that voting for a particular politician will give you more power over your own healthcare than currently exists, is a fantasy, and a dangerous one.

The last thing I, as a fat activist want, is the current fatphobic culture to have the majority vote over my private health matters and, as a consequence, fundamental way of life (since I would be forced to become a marionette to their anti-scientific whims by virtue of my fat). What we have in the US now, and in every other country that hasn’t adopted a government-run healthcare monopoly, is not ideal. There should be far less regulations, restrictions, and tax fiddle-faddling with healthcare as it stands, so that the average person might have a chance of actually affording basic care out-of-pocket (like most people can for auto-insurance).

But that’s not the point. As many prominent economists have noted, it is nearly always a worse idea to move away from greater competition than towards. When you adopt a planned economy, you become a planned citizen. And a planned fat person, in our current culture, and certainly as well detailed by the words of Dr. Birkbeck, is a nonexistent fat person.

The Fat-Hate Troll in the Livingroom

I’m writing this in response to a heartbreaking post on RandomQuorum. I was just going to leave a comment, but really, this hits too close to home for me to be able to leave a comment of any kind of reasonable length.

As background, the author of the post is going through a tough time in her marriage. She married long before her discovery of FA and body positivity, when she was still in dieting-mode, at war with her body. Naturally, negative comments from her husband about her weight were, before FA, likely met with agreement and an extra tablespoon of self-loathing and dieting incentive. Now, after FA, she realizes them for what they really are: the words of a troll.

Yesterday she made the first post on the subject of this particular tough spot in her marriage, to which she had several replies, including a real live troll.

I did manage to catch a troll though! And it’s lucky I didn’t find their comment until this morning, because today I find it kind of amusing/ironic, but yesterday it probably would have made me homicidal.

My dear troll Vicky said: [insert inane troll platitudes here]

After which she and her husband sat down and had a talk about what was concerning her (good for you, by the way — it’s best to air your concerns as they come up, or else they would just fester and make you feel worse). In the description of her conversation, she many times compares her husband’s words to the words of the Vicky-troll. I’m not sure if she was intentionally showing how similar they were, but after reading the post I came away with one very clear impression: her husband is The Fat-Hate Troll in the Livingroom.

Us bloggers know how annoying trolls can be. It’s annoying enough when they junk up your spam box, or even ecstatically get a bit of hate through your filters. Sometimes the words of trolls can rankle for a long time after they’re said, in an almost irrationally important way — like the first “Moo!” from a schoolyard bully, or that time mom clucked when you were weighed at the doctor’s. Now imagine the fat-hate troll — the one who really doesn’t care about you as a healthy person and instead wants you to change your body for their shallow, visual/sexual benefit — in your livingroom. Permanently. There, with you always, to waggle their fingers at your — gasp, SECOND Hershey kiss of the day, and it’s only 7pm??! — and then scurry off to post vitriol on My Fatt Spouse (intentionally mispelled. No search candy for you!).

All I have to say is that the author of the post linked above is some kind of brave I never was, when I had to deal with The Fat-Hate Troll in the Livingroom. When my eff-wad ex said I needed to “lose 50 pounds” if he was going to marry me? — I curled up and cried on my side of the bed, then started starving myself (what else could I do to lose weight? I had already dieted myself down to well below my setpoint). When my self-loathing dad’s “Christmas present” one year was to, on Christmas morning, explain to my brother and I how drinking enough water will make us skinny and promptly stuck us on diets (he was starving himself at the time) — I internalized it, realizing what he wanted more than a talented, sweet, generous, loving daughter, was a skinny one. A few years later I got the praise from him that I wanted, when starvation caused my spine to rise out of my flesh, like a mountain range (and not when I had won third place in the debate competition, that is).

The most dangerous fat-hate troll is The Fat-Hate Troll in the Livingroom. There, he can live where all trolls want to be — inside your head, pushing your buttons, getting you to do what they want you to do, all the time. What kind of love would have you abuse your body? If it’s ignorance which drives his call for you to diet, I ask: has he not watched you diet umpteen times before, and fail? Has he not seen what it has done to your mental and physical health? And, if he’s not really concerned with health but instead with looks, isn’t that fact something that should greatly concern you?

Saying that the world treats fatter people more harshly is a coward’s argument (and is what my dad used, when he would flog himself yet again with some new diet). The world ain’t gentle, and it ain’t fair. But cowering in the corner won’t make the world treat you any better, it will just attract the bullies who feed off cowering conformists. Maybe what’s bothering your husband is that you are no longer cowering in the corner, and he feels like he doesn’t have as much control over you as he used to. Back when you were preoccupied with being thinner, he didn’t have to care so much about your character, individuality, and thinking of you as an attractive woman outside the media-condoned box (which can take some real bravery on the part of many men and women alike). All he had to do was crack that whip — unleash a fat-negative comment — and you were back where he wanted you to be, and he didn’t have to do anything at all.

When it comes down to it, I’m so sorry to say, his arguments are completely self-centered. He’s not even pretending to be concerned about your health. And that is something that might be the real flaw, not his fat-hating attitude. He’s asking you to abuse your body so that he can find you more sexually interesting, and can cart you around like a trophy in public (or, at least, not have to feel “ashamed” of you). This is a real problem.This is not something that can be fixed by convincing him fat isn’t bad, or that you can’t be thin. I’m not sure any of that really matters to him. He’s not treating you like you’re his wife — he’s treating you like you’re his favorite shirt. Can’t let it get too faded or misshapen or wrinkled, what will people think?

The idea that he’s already foisting upon you the necessity of losing post-baby weight kills me, and really drives home his objectification of you.

I’m sorry to say, but the author’s husband and Vicky-troll and two sides of the same coin. And yes, marriage is not something you just discard. Not without a fight. And you are fighting, and really trying to make it work. But is he honestly doing the same for you? Is he even trying to understand where you’re coming from? Or is he so afraid that he’s going to lose whatever control he has over you (which is symbolized by his irrational fear that you’re just going to “keep getting fatter” and Eat the World and so forth), that he, like my eff-wad ex or my dad, will do anything to put you back in that place where your self-abuse can stroke their egos, can exonerate them from ever really thinking or caring about you, and can justify their own deep-rooted bigotry?

Not all husbands need to be indoctrinated in FA not to fat-hate. My husband grew up in the same fat-hating culture as everyone else, and his sexual preference is generally not women as fat as I am (and wasn’t before he met me). We found out that’s just because of what he had been exposed to, and in fact he was attracted to me and loved me for who I was, fat or thin. When it comes down to it, this isn’t really about fat. This is about control and objectification. And his desire to control you, and his objectification and de-humanization of you won’t necessarily be changed by him accepting your fat (though for that same reason I doubt, quite honestly, that he ever would accept your fat).

Not Sorry for MeMe Roth

If you’ve been reading about the recent irrational statements by MeMe Roth like I have, you are likely not surprised. MeMe Roth has been featured on news shows as an “expert” on obesity, since she purportedly has a fat family and is herself thin (and conventionally attractive and young enough to appeal to the talking news-Barbies and -Kens).

I’ve been scanning through the comments on the wonderful posts about MeMe Roth’s telling comparison (overeating is like raping your own body) and disordered confession (she refuses to eat until she runs four miles, which at the time of the interview – 330pm – had not yet occurred), and I noticed a good bit of anger, as well as much pity.

Where do I stand, as a victim of abuse and recovering disordered eater?

Not. Sorry.

Why?

Because she’s hurting other people. If she kept it inside or amongst friends and family (though NOT children), I’d feel sorry for her. I really very truly would. But the idea that she goes on national television, lies consistently about her one-person “organization” so that she can pander her hate agenda in front of millions of people already damaged by the misinformation fed to them by a culture that worships thin, makes me very assuredly shed every last particle of pity I could potentially feel for MeMe Roth.

Regardless of what one’s issues are, and how they were obtained, one NEVER has the right to harm someone else. Psychopathy is no excuse for murdering souls. The idea that MeMe Roth (Meredith Clements) was ever given a informational platform in the first place lets you know how sick and fatphobic our media culture is. Sure, she was likely put on not because the journalists producing the shows actually agree with everything she says, but because she’s “good TV.” However, it’s not like they could put someone on who they thought the public would perceive as a total raving lunatic, and certainly not multiple times. That means that they themselves buy into at least some of her rhetoric.

And that, folks, is the scariest part of this whole mess. Get Meredith Clements off the screen and into counseling, please! I will never be sorry for someone who foists their issues onto others in such a destructive manner. We all have stories, but not one bit of what has happened to us gives us the right to hurt others.

How Dare You Be a FAT Girl Scout?

One of my most vivid anti-fat memories from childhood was the summer I attended a Girl Scouts day camp. It was my first camp experience, and it was filled with the smell of rotting pine needles (lovely), swimming in a warm forest lake (even lovelier), and learning how to build fires and recognize poisonous plants.

What could mar this fuzzy, nostalgic memory of youth? One incident, which brought home to me, perhaps for the first time, that fat people are deviant, meant to be ridiculed and ostracized until they conform.

It was morning. Our camp counselors were older girls, who stayed overnight in the tents (unlike us little kids). They would often hold a sort of “pow-wow” in the morning dew, with the little kids sitting on logs in rows before them. They would talk about what they were planning to do that day, and give us our counselor assignments (I recall it was the first time I heard the word “latrine”).

Most of the camp counselors were thin or average. However, I recall that one of them was fat. The interesting part of this is that I don’t think I even realized it until that morning, when she was mocked, marginalized, and raked over the coals for the sin of being fat.

Before our assignments were given out that morning, a practical joke had been planned by a couple of the thinner counselors. One girl, a particularly sour-faced brunette with a ponytail, pulled something out of her pocket.

“What’s this?” she asked the little kids, who were speechless. “Is it a big pillowcase? Or maybe a sheet? It’s just — so — huge!!” And she stretched it over her head.

It was a pair of panties. Specifically, the fat counselor’s panties.

Now, in retrospect, the counselor wasn’t really that fat, nor were her panties nearly as wide as they were made to seem. In fact, she was likely about the size I am now, perhaps a bit fitter (I’m much more sedentary these days than I used to be, due to the thinness of my extra time and pocketbook, certainly not due to desire). But that’s really beside the point. The point was that she was markedly larger than her thinner counterparts, and THAT was her crime.

The fat counselor’s face went beet red, and she feigned a laugh. The little kids then began to laugh tentatively — sadly, so did I. Suddenly, that particular counselor looked a lot more grotesque to me – ridiculous, even. The mind of a child is particularly malleable to suggestion, and the suggestion that she was deviant due to her size made her LOOK like how they were painting her – bigger, grotesque, unwanted, unlovable, mean, lazy.

The fat camp counselor had the grace to laugh it off (though visibly humiliated), pocketed the panties when given back to her, and that was that.

However, that experience was to paint my vision of fat people and, as I moved from a slightly pudgy seven year old to a markedly pudgy thirteen year old, my vision of myself. It wasn’t until these past two years, when I’ve been involved in fat acceptance, that I’ve retraced this old memorial and laid a bouquet or two at its feet.

I wonder what that fat counselor is doing now, and how her life went as she got older. I hope she has found happiness and acceptance (especially from herself). I wish I could find her again, to tell her I am sorry for laughing at her, sorry for not knowing what I know now.

Say What?

I just came across thisand feel it deserves some attention.

So this fellow posts his picture (above) and says

“I’m fat,” reads the title of the photo. And the photo description says: “I’m terrified. Putting up this image is the single most horrible thing I’ve done to myself … but it’s for a purpose. I’m fat. I’ve been fat for a while. I have a belly and manboobs. I have a 38″ waist. Starting today, I’m making a change. It’s time to hit the gym. Maybe telling the world that I’m doing it will force me to keep going.”

Let’s break it down, because something isn’t registering. Terrified? Of what? Does that picture terrify you? Because, if it does, I’m not feeling it. You know what I’m feeling? A huge surge of pity. Because anyone who is terrified of a little pot belly is being fed a huge line of bullshit from the media, and is doing their health far more disservice with their terror than they are with their body types or their diets.

I agree it’s a horrible thing to do to oneself – not posting a picture of a little potbelly, mind you, but hating yourself that much. I’m not a big preacher of self-love but that doesn’t mean self-loathing should take its place! How about thinking of other people for a little while? Sometimes that takes your mind off irrational fears, like how much your waist measures.

Speaking of which, 38 inches? THIRTY-EIGHT INCHES? Pshaw – meet my left thigh, suckers!

Haha. I don’t really know what my thighs measure, I’ve got better things to do with my time. But honestly, 38 inches is “terrifying”? Are you joking? Does he think they’re going to have to cut a hole in the wall and hoist him out with cranes or something? (Not that that would make him a bad person.)

The link above posts the picture and the caption/info, and then some pearls of “widsom” about it.

1. Fat is serious business and calls for serious measures.

Does it indeed? I’ll keep that in mind.

2. Sometimes you’ve got to bare your bulge to realize you need a change.

Oookay.

A little public humiliation can help in the accountability department.

Humiliation? Terror? Can help? With accountability? Would it help you be “accountable” or would it “motivate” you to anything? Because I find those methods a bit less than helpful.

3. Support can be a powerful motivator — even when it comes from strangers on the Internet.

If you were talking about something else, I guess that would be true, but what does he need support for? I don’t see how people supporting your erroneous terror and self-loathing is a positive thing. Enlighten me.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. One person’s fat is another’s cuddly bear.

True, but this positive message is buried under 20 layers of terror, loathing, humiliation and despair. Had they instead put up his message and picture, stated the bit about beauty being in the eye of the beholder, and built from there a positive way for this man to start looking at himself, to stop being terrified (possibly by bringing up some good solid information as to why he’s not doomed to die tomorrow because of his little paunch, this could have been a wonderful message.

4. Photographing yourself through the weight loss process is not a bad idea.

Well, I really don’t know what to say about that. The weight loss process generally consists of week after week, month after month of deprivation, weigh-ins, lamentations at the piddling 2 ounces that came off one week and gnashing of teeth the week you *gained* two pounds, followed by redoubling of gym efforts, slashing calories far below any recommended healthy levels, cutting all the joy out of the process of cooking and eating, making disgusting substitutions for things you like and crave in favor of cardboard rice cakes until you can’t take it anymore and go on a binge because you’ve been starving for the last 8 weeks; followed by a shame spiral and a redoubling of starvation efforts, starting the vicious circle all over again. End result? Fatter than ever. And a much harder time losing any weight or inches next time you make the attempt – you’ve fucked up your metabolism now.

What do you think about this shot? And what are the chances you’d publish your own gut for the whole world to see?

I think I’ll leave that one open-ended. While I don’t particularly want to post my face online, I don’t think I would mind posting a picture of my belly. I know Melissa of Shakesville posts pictures of hers and to hell with any negative opinion, rightly so. Maybe we all ought to do it to help this fellow realize there is nothing weird or terrifying or disgusting about him, and to tell these fitness people that there is nothing at all positive about humiliation and terror as a “support” mechanism. If anyone can think of a way to gather such pictures and send get the message through to this man, who looks perfectly normal to me, I’m all ears.

Keith Olbermann’s Fat Jokes Aimed At Conservatives – Har Dee Har Har!

Keith Olbermann, the obviously-pro-liberal-biased “journalist” on MSNBC, is known for his puerile jokes about conservatives. Rather than be clever, he resorts to playground jabs at the appearance of those conservatives that particularly irritate him: mainly, fat jokes.

Props to Newsbusters.org for these gems:

During an interview with Newsweek’s Jonathan Alter, Olbermann began: “In his inaugural address, the President essentially tried to create a wedge between those who are reasonable and those who are not. Of course, he was talking about the Muslim world. Is it possible in this different context that he’s trying to do the same as he seeks bipartisanship with the Republicans, sort of, you know, separate, Mullah Limbaugh from the herd?”

And further down the post:

After Alter talked about how Obama, like Reagan, tries to talk about the big picture, Olbermann made another one of his infamous jabs at the physical appearance of conservatives, which at times have come in the form of fat jokes. Olbermann: “And we won`t make any large jokes about Mr. Limbaugh.”

Last September, while discussing one of the presidential debates, Olbermann talked about the possibility of Obama “throwing Henry Kissinger back in Senator McCain’s face,” adding that doing so “is physically a tough act to do certainly.”

Another post on the site reveals fat jokes about about Fox News Chairman and CEO Roger Ailes made by Olbermann. Please go and read the full post, since it’s breath-takingly hateful. An sampling:

The trend toward fat jokes began last Wednesday, September 27, as Olbermann proclaimed that Ailes had “achieved a perfectly circular shape” as the Countdown host attacked Ailes’ criticism of Bill Clinton’s conduct during an interview with Fox News host Chris Wallace. (NewsBusters post on that Countdown.)

On Thursday’s show the personal insults continued as Olbermann called Ailes “the circular gentleman” and referred to him as “Sydney Greenstreet,” an overweight and bald actor who passed away in 1954. The Countdown host also recommended that Ailes “leave some food for Canada.” (First recounted in this NewsBusters item.)

But the first two days were only an appetizer compared to Friday as the Countdown host not only directly called Ailes “fat ass,” but made several other fat jokes during that one show, calling Ailes “the round man” and “the rotund refugee.” He also referred to Ailes making a statement “between pies” and cautioned viewers: “Don’t get your hands too close to his mouth.” (Mark Finkelstein’s NewsBusters item on Friday’s insults.)

The man should be ashamed to call himself a liberal in the true sense, and especially should be ashamed to call himself a journalist. I don’t care if his Countdown show is opinion-based — personal, hate-filled jabs are just a sign that he wants to destroy the character of these people and not his substance differences with their politics.

Destroying people? Bad. Destroying their politics? Better.

Keep trying, Keith.