I wholehardly agree that the guy is a fucktard, but beyond the obvious, I am upset that...
1) fox would cover it
2) that they did cover it
3) that they did not allow him time to speak.
I think they should have let him speak, set up, and let him make an ass of himself.
Still, it is pretty crappy journalism that doesnt really say anything, and is not worthy of being seen.
The first 3/4 ths of the segment was the reporter putting words in his mouth. If they were anywhere interested in presenting a semblance of insight into his view, they (fox) would have let him speak.
applying this to something else... say if he were asking about the Mazda 3, and someone was defending say... the claim that Mazda 3's have bad side impact rating. I do not want to hear bullshit about what the reporter thinks he knows, I want to hear what the "expert" has to say.
Bottom line: He is a fucktard, Fox should not have covered him.
<ToiletDuk> i want to meet a 2 year old with no gag reflex