Did anyone hear the first hour of Randi's show today? Something strange happened.

[cherokeeprogressive]

She suddenly started celebrating because she got hold of a story stating that the California Supreme Court today overturned Proposition H8te. For a few minutes, she was in a very very good mood. She even went so far as to say that her live-in boyfriend Howard helped write the decision, going on to state that he was a lawyer. I was very happy about the overturning, and proud for her and Howard that Howard was intimately involved.

Minutes later, she came back from a commercial apologizing for her error, and stating that the story in front of her was actually a year old, and that she was mistaken, the California Supreme Court DIDN'T overturn Proposition H8te. Then she blamed her staff, saying something to the effect that the story had to go through a lot of people before it got to her and no one noticed the date. I was thinking to myself, "Well, Randi, YOU didn't notice the date either before you spread bad information to anyone listening in". I was bummed. Then, after a while, I started wondering... Why would she say her Howard was involved, when it never happened in the first place? Proposition H8te didn't pass until November. WTF? Was she making shit up to make herself look better?

I tried to reconcile her statement by telling myself that maybe he worked on whatever court ruling came out last May, but I couldn't get there. If the story she was speaking about today were true in the first place, his involvement would have been a current thing.

Can someone help me square those two things? A non-story, and her claim that her boyfriend was intimately involved in it?

edited for spelling.

[LSK]

1. I didnt hear the 1st hour, but the 2nd and 3rd hours have been unbelievably good

She totally is spelling out the whole story of linking torture to the justification of the Iraq war.

And my guess is perhaps Howard is working on overturning it.

[EFerrari]

2. The year old story was posted by mistake at DU this morning. n/t

[cherokeeprogressive]

4. Yes but why insert her boyfriend into it?

By the way, this is off topic but who's got the best record in baseball? Without ManRam even! Yeehaw!

[LSK]

6. maybe hes working on it???

:shrug:

[EFerrari]

7. I can't tell you. I don't listen to her.

:)

[Howardx]

11. additionally off topic

GO DODGERS!

waiting for todays game!

[lapfog_1]

12. After prop H8 passed...

her friend (who is a lawyer in San Francisco, if I recall correctly), wrote a BRIEF on the constitutionality of Prop H8 and submitted it to the CA supreme court. The court is considering whether or not to hear the case challenging Prop H8.

I think she has been so busy with other things (like getting a new home on the radio, moving to DC, etc) that she probably hasn't kept up on the status of that court challenge (which, last I heard, hasn't gotten very far).

So she was taken in by a prank posting (someone believes it was a mistake, I believe it was a prank) about a CA Supreme Court decision from a year ago... that was posted here in DU under LBN. I don't know if her staff read it hear or it was forwarded to them by someone that reads DU. Anyway, she ran with it for about 5 minutes or so before someone clued her in that this was not correct, that it was an old story.

She then came on and issued an apology.

But I'm sure she is correct that she and her friend from SanFran did write a brief on Prop H8 and submitted it to the court for the current constitutionality argument. (he wrote it and she helped, according to her).

[anigbrowl]

14. Because he had worked on the older case...and because she's a BS artist

She sees a news story come in over Twitter or wherever it was that mistakently dug up the old story today, and even though she (obviously) heard nothing about a current , ongoing case, she tried taking part of the credit because she thought it would make her look good.

this is why I don't listen to any talk radio, left or right. It's all a bunch of BS, and a waste of your time.

[SeattleGirl]

3. Dates sometimes DO get overlooked. As to the other part of your

post, just because it was an old story doesn't mean her boyfriend isn't working on trying to get H8TE overturned now, or hadn't worked on it in the past.

Randi can get into hyperbole, but I really don't think she's a deliberate liar or anything.

[cherokeeprogressive]

8. I'll have to find the podcast and listen to it again.

I think her words were something to the effect that "he helped write the decision". The DECISION to overturn Prop H8te. The decision which hasn't been written yet. Last May's ruling didn't involve Proposition H8te because it hadn't even passed yet.

[LSK]

10. podcasts are posted here

http://www.progressivetalk1150.com/cc-common/podcast.html

[lapfog_1]

13. The words were "he wrote a BRIEF and I helped him"...

and, yeah, the brief is on Prop H8.

A decision would have to written by the court. I don't believe the "case" is even close to a decision.

[Kadie]

5. here... Prop. 8 hoax flies through the Net

Prop. 8 hoax flies through the Net

Punked by the Internet

It came out of the blue on a Facebook feed, a link from ABC's web site saying that gay marriage had been affirmed by the California Supreme Court. Within minutes everyone remotely concerned with the issue was cross posting it across Facebook. We were about to post it to the site when suddenly we realized it was either a hoax or the product of over enthusiasm.

Common sense, not fact checking, revealed that the link was to the second page of an ABC Report from 5/15/08, exactly one year old. Since the year was left off on the second page of the article and the url everyone blindly assumed it was new. Without that critical bit of information, social networks lit up and passed the information along without digging any further. The story reached a fever peak around 11:37 this morning when Perez Hilton posted it.

Soon thereafter Perez Hilton took it down as well.

Just the latest of many lessons on this Internet media lifestyle. We'll just have to be patient and watch for the true ruling from the California Supreme Court, which is due in early June.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/scavenger/detail?blogid=111&entry_id=40180&tsp=1

[peacetalksforall]

9. Eary June. State Supreme Courts: CA Prop 8. MN Coleman-Franken. nt

[northoftheborder]

15. R. Rhodes

I do not have access to Rhodes now, but I used to listen to her from time to time. She prides herself on doing her homework, but I've found she does NOT always have her facts straight - shoots from the hip, and strains to make her point.