Dana Milbank is not a happy camper.
A week after the defending the Family Research Council from the claim (from the Southern Poverty Law Center) that it is a hate group, he sat down with Michelangelo Signorile to discuss his piece.
Apparently Signorile took Milbank to task big time because the columnist complained later to The Advocate magazine. According to Signorile:
What do you think? Did Signorile ambush Milbank or is Milbank being too sensitive?
Check out the interview here and then tell me what you think.
Editor's note - Personally speaking, what I think of Milbank's piece and then his appearance on Signorile's show can't be repeated because I am trying not to "lose my religion."
A week after the defending the Family Research Council from the claim (from the Southern Poverty Law Center) that it is a hate group, he sat down with Michelangelo Signorile to discuss his piece.
In a spirited interview, Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank defended his stance that the antigay Family Research Council should not be listed as a “hate group” by the venerated civil rights group, the Southern Poverty Law Center, because they wear suits and “don’t wear white sheets,” and some of their founders and officials are “respected” individuals.
Milbank was invited on my SiriusXM show to discuss the column he wrote last week which has generated much controversy on social media. In the comments section on the Washington Post’s web site and on Twitter and Facebook, many criticized Milbank’s defense of the FRC as a “Washington think tank” which thus shouldn’t be called a hate group, and his calling the Human Rights Campaign and the SPLC “reckless” for terming the FRC a hate group. The controversy reached a point where Washington Post deputy editorial page editor Jonathan Diehl sent a tweet out defending Milbank, but that only inflamed the controversy as Dielhl referred to "idiotic' emails he had received on the topic.
Apparently Signorile took Milbank to task big time because the columnist complained later to The Advocate magazine. According to Signorile:
After the interview, Milbank told The Advocate that the interview was “an ambush and unfair,” and made the same comment in a email he sent to another SiriusXM host which he cc’d me. That is patently untrue: Milbank was not asked to come on the show under any false pretenses. He was invited on the show to discuss the controversial column he’d written, and he accepted the invitation.
What do you think? Did Signorile ambush Milbank or is Milbank being too sensitive?
Check out the interview here and then tell me what you think.
Editor's note - Personally speaking, what I think of Milbank's piece and then his appearance on Signorile's show can't be repeated because I am trying not to "lose my religion."
No comments:
Post a Comment