Jack Thompson to unfortunately appear on AOTS

by Joystiq Staff { Aug 9th 2006 at 10:45PM }

As if Jack Thompson wasn't already considered a total disgrace all around the planet, we now hear the man is going to appear on G4TV's Attack of the Show tomorrow night. We're going to assume Kevin Pereira himself will interview the pseudo-lawyer, and we'd like to think Kevin may do his best Bill O'Reilly impression while interviewing this attention hog.

Most pressing question we'd like answered is: Mr. Thompson, would you please go away, forever?

If the answer was yes, you just might find us jumping up and down for joy whilst naked in the streets. Guess we'll all just have to tune in tomorrow night to find out -- that is if your cable provider even gets the network.

[Thanks, Zelda Master]

Tags: Jack Thompson, JackThompson

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)

gamer9190 @ Aug 9th 2006 10:47PM

I would prefer Jack say no, if only to save us that imagery.

B33 @ Aug 9th 2006 10:56PM

AOTS shouldn't be doing this... We need someone better.

Probot @ Aug 9th 2006 10:58PM

As Penny Arcade explains, it's better to have JT against video games than someone competent.

brook @ Aug 9th 2006 10:59PM

Well...I hate the guy as much as any of you, but I will disagree strongly with something the author said. One of the big problems in the US and the world today, is the inability of the average citizen to tolerate the views of others. By wishing that he would just "go away," you are dismissing entirely someone's viewpoint. I think, personally, the dude is seriously crazy and delusional, but I don't want him to go away. I want him to stay on the scene and lose debate after debate. That is what you are missing in this post. Why do you want him to go away? Would you not be able to articulate your point of view in a debate with him? Let's hear some justification for that comment.

Dr.Swiss @ Aug 9th 2006 10:59PM

I heard that if Hilary Clinton becomes president then she will put a tax on video games as if they were tobacco or something. I also heard Thompson either put this into her head or backs her up on this.

Did I read wrong or is this true?

Probot @ Aug 9th 2006 11:05PM

Dr.Swiss,

That's a rumor started on Kotaku:
http://kotaku.com/gaming/top/clinton-to-planning-video-game-tax-looks-for-martyr-189042.php

Wat Tsu @ Aug 9th 2006 11:06PM

Kevin Pereira interviewing Jack Thompson could lead to a surge of jackassery that is capable of destroying small planets.

Donald @ Aug 9th 2006 11:10PM

I'm only commenting to say that I absolutely LOVE the tags for this thread.

BKirst90 @ Aug 9th 2006 11:24PM

brook- I partially agree with you, that "this dude is seriously crazy and delusional." But i think this is the reason so many people want him to go away. If this man's goals were actually to debate, as you seem to imply, rather than to smear the gaming industry with made up facts, many people wouldn't have so much of a problem with him.

Probot @ Aug 9th 2006 11:26PM

Brook brings up an interesting point. Even though JT is crazy and it seems counterproductive to give him the time of day, I haven't really heard a strong debate with him directly.

Chatterbox did an interview with him, but they didn't respond to his criticism, and overall they lost that debate. I don't think it means he's right, since is obviously more experienced than a couple podcast hosts.

80 min. Chatterbox interview: http://www.chatterboxgameshow.com/jack.htm
(The page is outdated, but the file is still there.)

The criticsm he brings up is too big to ignore. GTA is a violent game. There are scientests saying violent games leads to violent people. Laws are being passed in several states (and shot down, thankfully) and politicians are trying to make violent video games a campaign issue. We cannot ignore this. You're doing video game culture a diservice if you think he'll go away and everything will be better.

I've yet to see anyone directly debate JT and win. And that's a shame because I truly believe we're right.

Dr.Swiss @ Aug 9th 2006 11:33PM

Thanks Probot!! I wasn't going to open my mouth and tell anyone until I got the facts straight.

obo @ Aug 9th 2006 11:43PM

Good thing nobody watches G4.

Pixelantes Anonymous @ Aug 9th 2006 11:46PM

Brook, I have no problem whatsoever having people have anti-gaming opinions.

I respect David Walsh opinion tremendously. I think he's completely wrong, but still, it's his opinion and he's welcome to it.

Jack "bat fuck insane" Thompson, however, has no opinion. He has an agenda. And his agenda comes with stuff like "go to hell more quietly". HE is the one who has trouble accepting the other side's opinion. He's just not listening to anything but his own voice. He believes we, as gamers, are not human beings, not because we've done terrible things, but just because we're gamers.

Why the f*** should I tolerate someone like that? In a not-so-civilized world of 150 years ago or so, he'd have been shot in the face already. Several times over. These days all I can hope for is that he goes away. Quietly.

ElChibo @ Aug 9th 2006 11:46PM

I'll encode the interview and put it up on my website tomorrow! (Click my name for my website link)

Ferior @ Aug 9th 2006 11:48PM

I suspect that his answer would have to be a resounding "No" if he had the foreknowledge of your response to a "Yes". He would attempt to encourage the following of laws, and in most places public nudity is against the law.

Also he's a spoilsport.

Pixelantes Anonymous @ Aug 9th 2006 11:49PM

Probot, never wrestle with a pig, you'll both get dirty, and only the pig will enjoy it. That kinda summarizes the "debates" with Thumper.

Dr. Tubesteak @ Aug 9th 2006 11:54PM

Apparently everyone is forgetting that violent movies lead to violent people, the same with T.V.

Remember a few years ago when people were up in arms about the violence on television and the impact it had on the children of America? Well, a certain minority of people came out and stated that it was the parents responsibility to monitor what their children were watching, but no one seemed to give them any attention. Low and behold! An invention comes out called the V-chip that takes away the fact that aduldts actually have to pay attention to their kids when they come home from work and see what type of input they are receiving, it leaves it in the hands of a computer chip. I'm just really tired of politicians and everyone else throwing the parenting card to people behind the counter of a store.

It is inexcusable for anyone to pawn of the resposibiluty of being a parent onto anyone else, let alone an 18 year old who works in a video game store.

Parents, you want the reason your 11 year is playing GTA? Look in the goddamn mirror.

Yeah, I'm drunk and ranting

Crushed @ Aug 9th 2006 11:57PM

Phoenix Wright could defend videogaming. He would spot the contradictions in Thompson's case and reveal them as lies.

Ian @ Aug 10th 2006 12:06AM

Thank god no one actually watches it.

Spencer @ Aug 10th 2006 12:08AM

Obviously just a desperate move by a dead TV network that can't accept its death to gain some popularity by inviting on a desperate idiot who can't accept his fading fame.

K @ Aug 10th 2006 12:23AM

Pixalentes:

"Shot in the face?" You must be a gamer...or a hitman.

Probot @ Aug 10th 2006 12:27AM

Pixelantes Anonymous,

The problem is people are taking him seriously because the opposition isn't vocal enough. He has been on CNN half a dozen times. A law he wrote was passed in Louisiana. There is nothing in mainstream media contending what he says.

The "ignore him and he'll go away" method of debate is valid in a lot of cases. (It works well on Joystiq trolls if people were to give it a try more often.) But it has its limits. Take another controversy that could benefit from some real debate, intelligent design. If a large group of respected scientests got together to collectivly debunk ID, then there would be much less debate.

The same goes for video games. We need people on our side willing to debate. Now, I have no idea if people are trying and have been turned away by him, but I think there are a lot of capable candiates. Will Wright jumps to mind. Henry Jenkins would also do well. I'd also love to see JT on the Daily Show.

The good news is, JT seems much less a threat nowadays. He was dismissed from that case in Florida (and it was done in a way that made the media aware that he wasn't liked very well.) The National Institute on Media and the Family have severed ties with him. Overall, he's losing respect.

But now Hilary Clinton is picking up where he left off, and she has considerably more power. And even though this is a campaign issue to appeal to conservatives, it is an issue that conservatives are interested in as well.

I get the feeling that people believe Clinton is just using the issue to get elected, and she doesn't feel that strongly about it. That may be true, but it also means that she wouldn't care about the consequences if she were to pass laws restricting or taxing games.

People seem to forget that the potential of comic books as a mainstream artform was severlely hampered because of the overly-restrictive rating system. And that rating system was a response to the criticism inspired by a researcher claiming comic books were responsible for youth violence. It's hard not to cringe at the parallels here.

Dallas @ Aug 10th 2006 12:29AM

I think it's a perfect match. Jack Thompson hates videogames. G4 hates videogames. They fit so well together.

Pixelantes Anonymous @ Aug 10th 2006 12:49AM

Probot, I hear you. I agree 100%.

My take on the situation is that the media is no longer doing their job. They don't challenge JT's insane rantings, they RARELY bring anyone of substance to debate against him, and when they do, they don't control the debate and it often degrades into a shouting match about David Walsh' funding sources.

If the media was doing their job, first of all they wouldn't have him on the show at all, because he's insane and even a rudimentary background check would reveal it. If for some magical reason he would get on the show, the reporter working the story would've done some research on the issue at hand and would actually know SOMETHING to challenge at least some of the most insane things JT lets out during his tourette moments. If even that fails and the reporter is as clueless as one can be, it would be at least nice to have someone semi-intelligent debate AGAINST JT on even ground. That means that JT doesn't get to interrupt every 15 seconds with "DAVID WALSH IS BOUGHT BY BESTBUY DO YOU DENY THAT!!!??" when the discussion is about something entirely different. And finally it would be nice if the reporter would be GUIDING the discussion somehow, and not just let JT take it wherever the hell his lack of medication drives him at any given moment in time.

But I suppose that's too much to ask even for CNN. I would understand that from dorks like Donny Deutsch, but every media outlet JT's been on is like that.

HotShotX @ Aug 10th 2006 1:23AM

It's certainly a cold day in Hell that we just MAY have a reason to watch G4TV.

~HotShotX

Swift @ Aug 10th 2006 2:50AM

@4

When your viewpoint is as distorted and downright wrong as JT's on video games is, you deserve to have your point of view out right dismissed and ridiculed.

Ratchet the Lombax @ Aug 10th 2006 5:47AM

Probot:
I think the reason that no one has debated him and won is because they just can't fathom his level of stupidity. Have you ever tried to win an argument with a 6yr old? It's kinda hard since they really haven't got the mentality to comprehend what you are saying. The same goes for Jack Thompson when he can't think of something intelligent to say in response to a question he resorts to name calling and pulls crazy analogies out of his ass. It will be funny if AOTS sees a huge ratings spike from all the people wanting to see Jack make a fool out of himself yet again. He really is a poster boy for the old saying "It is better for people to think you are an idiot than to open your mouth and remove all doubt". Put it this way at least with him it's like we are having a battle of wits with an unarmed man, if he had some since he might be dangerous.

IanC @ Aug 10th 2006 6:04AM

Why is he going on G4, he hates G4 and thinks only brain dead people (ie gamers) watch it.

jack thompson @ Aug 10th 2006 7:14AM

As Bill Buckley once wrote: "You can judge a man by his enemies." I'm not a "total disgrace on the planet" as alleged here. I'm despised by video gaming knuckleheads, and that, ladies and gentlemen, is an endorsement. I've been on the Today show 8 times and 60 Minutes twice, and you all have not.

Why? Because you have no facts to support your mental masturbatory activity, and I have the facts and the science to prove it is harmful. That is how I wrote and got through the Louisiana legislature, unanimously, a video game bill. I'm no genius. But hard cold facts work.

Tune in tonight. You might learn something, despite your animus. Hooah! Jack Thompson

shn00kums @ Aug 10th 2006 7:20AM

Without sounding as crazy as JT himself I believe the problem is with public acceptance in general.

People are way to comfortable with accepting at face value whatever is covered on "reputable" news channels or common media. If CNN or BBC say something is fact one assumes it to be true, however when a 3rd party appears on said channel and spews forth their sentiment as fact, this is just bad journalism and even worse is the public attitude of NOT CHALLENGING a public figure.

Sure we (gamers) and most of our friends (free thinking individuals) will challenge the predominantly incoherent ramblings of a madman, but the vast majority of the media indoctrinated "free world" will be eagerly awaiting the next sermon from the Jack Thompson pulpit. Preaching is not teaching and only real debate would suffice to shut this fool down.

PS: I wouldn't mind seeing John Stewart getting stuck into this guy, or a 60 minutes/harball style interview with an "interrogative reporter."

jack thompson @ Aug 10th 2006 7:57AM

As to #5 above, I told her staff the tax idea is patently unconstitutional. See, you have no idea what I believe. Tune in and learn. Jack Thompson

Pixelantes Anonymous @ Aug 10th 2006 8:08AM

Jack "bat fuck insane" Thompson, you wouldn't know what unconstitutional is if it hit you in the head.

Nice way to show exactly what you are in your first comment in this topic, btw. And you're still exploiting the fine people in the US military for your own agenda. Shame on you.

Probot @ Aug 10th 2006 8:20AM

shn00kums,

I think everyone needs to understand something. JT is a very clever guy. All the childish nonesense he spews here never reaches CNN. On mainstream media, he's a calm, collected, experienced lawyer with an expertise in video games and pop culture censorship.

@Jack Thompson

"I have the facts and the science to prove it is harmful. That is how I wrote and got through the Louisiana legislature, unanimously, a video game bill."

And that bill was quickly blocked by a federal judge.
And it will be overturned like all the other laws because it fails to address the main concern. Our society believes minors should be protected from depictions of sex. There is no link between video games and actual violence. That danger has not been proven enough to allow a law on the books.

And all the evidence you point to is useless because it doesn't prove anything. Any study on media violence has one of two flaws. One, they either only test for reaction to violent images or they only test aggression levels.

In the first case, it makes perfect sense for person to feel less emotion about a violent image after he's been looking at other violent images. The content really doesn't matter. If you show someone pictures of the holocaust for 20 minutes, I doubt photos of stabbings will have much psychological effect.

In the second case, the data is more reliable, but the fact remains that increased aggression levels don't necessarily translate to real world violence. In fact, youth crime and school violence are at the lowest levels in 10 years.

These cold hard facts work pretty well, too.

Probot @ Aug 10th 2006 8:24AM

"...I told her staff the tax idea is patently unconstitutional."

From what I remember, I believe you told Clinton that using the ESRB ratings to set up laws is unconstitutional, and it is. I don't know if you've ever responded directly to the tax possibility.

What about a tax on a product is unconstitutional? Can you not have a federal tax on creative works?

Ratchet the Lombax @ Aug 10th 2006 8:42AM

See as I stated above when backed into a corner those without any intellectual leg to stand on will resort to name calling. In the first paragraph he calls us gamers knuckleheads oh that really hurt. We "knuckleheads" contribute a great deal to the economy with the games, systems and magazines that we buy. Billions of dollars a year in fact. In reference to his comment about only hit-men and gamers shoot people in the face, does that make the vice president a gamer or a hit-man? If he is a gamer what's his gamer ID? I want to play him in a game of Halo that would be cool. As far as tuning in and learning something, I don't put much stock in AOTS as my major source for anything intelligent. Eating raw eggs drinking from a beer bong and breaking a DS Lite that's top notch journalism right there. If anything the last time I watched it I think I lost a few IQ points trying to sink to their level. I would imagine Mr. Thompson has had to resort to going on some lame third tier cable show to get his views out. If he hates games and gamers so much why go on a shoe targeted toward games and gamers. Oh wait AOTS doesnt appeal to gamers never mind.

mogbert @ Aug 10th 2006 10:12AM

I think they are making a mistake, but it depends on the way that they handle him. If they treat him as a serious person, as an idustry specialist (which he has been billed as before) then they are going about it the wrong way. I think they should do it more as a Daily Show interview.

The concept that violent games lead to violent people is flawed I believe. We have been getting more and more violent games, and yet violent crimes are dropping. I think that the violent games work more as a pressure release valve, it lets you get those emotions out before they have time to build up and escalate. In short, violence has been around much longer then video games, so blaming video games is just the latest scape goat. When he sees a young person accused of a violent act, he asks if they played video games, and acts like that proves his point.
However, by the same logic, bread is a leading cause of violence. Doing a poll of a local prison, I've found that a huge percentage has eaten bread. In fact, quite a few ate bread no more then a few days before commiting the act of which they are incarserated for. This PROVES that bread causes crime. STOP BREAD NOW!
Instead of seeing what percentage of violent people play games, why don't they see what persentage of gamers have been arrested for violent acts. Maybe because it would go a long way in disproving the basis of their political platform.

Undertaker @ Aug 10th 2006 10:17AM

Jack, heres a sugestion, how bout you try going 60 seconds without insulting everyone insight. Oh, and you can stop tooting your horn about you tv appeatances, I have a google search set up to track you, and I got new jack, you haven't shown up on Mainstream media in months jackass.

And low, how the MIGHTY have fallen, the man whose "been on 60 minutes and the today show, suddenly is going on G4, a television channel he once stated as being "A channel only watched by morons." Gee, then I guess Me and the 80 million plus gamers who don't watch it must be smarter then you. After all, were not going to be on the show, cause we know not to make fools of ourselves.

So, as the saying goes, fuck you, fuck your bullshit agenda, and hope you like losing in Louisiana. Heard the AG told you to go to hell, and your buddy burrel seems to get dumber by the second.

If people are judged by there enemies, then gamers are the smartest people alive, as we have Doctors, lawyer, and politicans against us, and We are STILL KICKING ALL YOUR ASSES!!!

lackingcleverness @ Aug 10th 2006 10:27AM

I pretty much guarantee it won't be worth watching.
I saw Periera's interview with Uwe Boll, and he was sycophantic to an annoying degree. I doubt he'll seriously debate Thompson.
Anyway, why do we not have anyone capable of forcefully articulating our (pro-gaming) stance? This guy is on news networks, and his wacky theories go uncontested. I would like to see his insane proclamations destroyed through use of logic, sense and statistics. Good Lord, the facts are on our side here.

Rallion @ Aug 10th 2006 10:49AM

Of course the mainstream media seems friendly to JT. His vilification of video games exonerates other forms of media. Everybody has an agenda and real opinions don't matter.

ANd it also makes sense that everybody's distancing themselves from him now, once they've seen how juvenile he can be, particularly with the namecalling.

OtakuCODE @ Aug 10th 2006 10:53AM

Dancing, plays, books, radio, music, films, television. They've all gone through this, and every idea trotted out by Mr. Thompson is old, tired, and proven wrong.

The difference with videogames is that the fight is happening on a different battlefield. In a society that no longer values freedom, is desperate for protection from imagined fears, and is convinced the government can protect them.

Jeddy3 @ Aug 10th 2006 11:28AM

"I've been on the Today show 8 times and 60 Minutes twice, and you all have not."

So, by that rationale, the amount of times you've been on TV determines how intelligent you are?

In that case, Jon Stewart must be one of the smartest men in America, since The Daily Show is on 4 nights a week.

I've seen you on 60 Minutes and on various other news outlets. I've seen you state blatantly incorrect facts such as when you claimed that the NFL would not let Midway use their name for Blitz: The League because they felt the content was too violent. A simple fact check would have revealed that the real reason was because Electronic Arts had only months earlier signed an exclusive publishing deal with not only the NFL, but the NCAA, and the AFL as well, giving them, and only them, the right to use the names, teams, stadiums, and player likenesses for all of those leagues.

Funny how you throw those "hard cold facts" out the window when they don't support your argument, isn't it? That's why you have no integrity. You're like Michael Moore - any valid points you may make are immediately invalidated when you begin twisting facts to suit your agenda.

CK Moran @ Aug 10th 2006 11:59AM

so are you still going to have that ugly albino caterpillar on your face for the segment?

HotShotX @ Aug 10th 2006 12:40PM

"I've been on the Today show 8 times and 60 Minutes twice, and you all have not.

I guess you DID need something to do now that your careers as a lawyer and soon as a public advocate are in the shitter.

Jack, regardless of what the problem is, trying to implement laws that affect everyone when the problem is with a select few will simply not work.

How about trying to educate others on the source of the problem, such as lack of parenting and teaching kids the difference between right and wrong.

I've been playing games since I was six. I lived in a relatively poor family, and was teased on repeatedly throughout school. When Columbine happened, a lot of kids thought I was next.

Since high school, I'm an active volunteer and blood donor, I worked on the committee for Relay For Life and attend a private university in Florida studying Aerospace Engineering, and plan to get my Ph.D. I'm a martial artist, and just got my skydiving license. I play video games regularly in college, along with my friends and girlfriend (she's quite the shot in Halo 2, and valedictorian of her high school).

I've been playing games all of my life, from Excitebike to Resident Evil 4. I've killed numerous people in GTA, fought the undead in the bloodbath known as God of War, and had a joyful romp through "I'm OK" by Thompsonsoft.

You wanna know what really made me into a decent person despite all of this "bad influence" known as videogames over the years?

I saw everything in everyone else that I NEVER wanted to be like when I was being picked on from elementary school and on. My parents also kept me in line, and told me to work hard so that I could achieve more in life than they did.

There's nothing wrong with video games, the problem lies in the fact that people are just not willing to take responsibility for their own actions, and you are contributing the problem by pointing your finger at any scapegoat you can.

Parents are supposed to raise decent, productive kids.
Video Games are supposed to entertain, and raise money.

Those are two basic truths:
When a game does not entertain, it does not sell, and does not make money. The game is dropped, and if necessary, developers are fired for making a bad product.

Now, when a child does something wrong, the parents are supposed to discipline them and correct the error in their ways. When they do not, their behavior becomes worse and the problem spreads to other children/people.

The solution is simple: "Fire the parents." They have failed in their duty, and they need to take responsiblity for their own children, and no one else should be stepping in to divert the blame elsewhere.

~HotShotX

Duncan @ Aug 10th 2006 1:39PM

"I've been in 60 minutes and you haven't!!! Na, na, na, na!!!"

/sticks tongue out!

Thenamelessdan @ Aug 10th 2006 2:15PM

Really we should feel sorry for Jack he so out of touch with reality he honestly believes what he says no matter how plainly false it is.
Example:
He in a Shreveport Timeseditorial in regards to the LA law he claims: “The FBI and Secret Service found, in studying all the school shootings up to and through Columbine, the one common denominator was the immersion of the perpetrators in violent entertainment.” Neither the FBI nor the Secret Service have ever said anything of the sort. It is true that the Secret Service in its report, “The Final Report and Findings of the Safe School Initiative”, found that “Over half of the attackers demonstrated some interest in violence” they also noted that “there was no one common type of interest in violence indicated” and that Thompson's preferred target of immersion in violent video games was present in only 12 percent of cases. The FBI in its report, “The School Shooter: A Threat Assessment Perspective”, also makes it explicitly clear that “No one or two traits or characteristics should be considered in isolation or given more weight than the others. Any of these traits, or several, can be seen in students who are not contemplating a school shooting or other act of violence” and both organizations empathized the fact that “There is no accurate or useful "profile" of students who engaged in targeted school violence” and that “there is no set of traits that described all–or even most–of the attackers.” It is quite clear there is no common denominator, of any sort. Furthermore, neither the FBI nor the Secret Service made as much as an intimation of the relationship between violent media and school violence being casual in nature, the Secret Service in fact stated, “Many adolescents are fascinated with violence and the macabre, and writings and drawings on these themes can be a reflection of a harmless but rich and creative fantasy life.”

The FBI’s and Secret Service’s actual recommendations, are the polar opposite of Thompson’s misguided approach. Rather then trying to find some sort of common denominator, the research rightfully concluded that a milieu of factors were responsible for each of these tragedies and that anything short of a comprehensive threat assessment approach will not prevent these tragedies from occurring.

Mr. Thompson by advocating a contraindicated approach and even worse coning other into wasting resources doing so is part of the problem he is supposedly trying to prevent.

I can’t seem to find the editorial in question on the Shreveport Times website anymore but here are the links to the FBI and Secret Service studies.

www.secretservice.gov/ntac/ssi_final_report.pdf
www.fbi.gov/publications/school/school2.pdf

jack thompson @ Aug 10th 2006 3:27PM

John B. Thompson, Attorney at Law
1172 South Dixie Hwy., Suite 111
Coral Gables, Florida 33146
305-666-4366

August 10, 2006

Patricia Vance
President
Entertainment Software Rating Board
317 Madison Avenue, 22nd Floor
New York, NY 10017 Fax: 212-759-2223

Re: Take-Two’s Bully

Dear Ms. Vance:

Tonight I shall appear at 7 pm on G4’s “Attack of the Show,” to talk about the above, due out now in October, although only for the Sony platform.

Please be advised that I presently intend to file a lawsuit against the ESRB if it releases the game as a “Teen” or T-rated game. You can see that even video game enthusiasts agree with me on that: http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/08/10/044937.php

Govern yourself accordingly, Ms. Vance.

Regards, Jack Thompson

Copies: Media, others

KungFu-tse @ Aug 10th 2006 3:37PM

You know what's really sad is that Jack has to post his letters and press releases here like he did on the GP comments pages. Just goes to show you how desperate he is for attention.

KungFu-tse @ Aug 10th 2006 3:43PM

Oh, yeah. And I watch the Today show and GMA on a regular basis. I've seen psychics, people who claim to talk to the dead, and reincarnated kids of dead WWII pilots. So according to Jack's logic, people who can talk to Elvis from beyond the grave have as much credibility as Mr. Thompson because they've appeared on the Today Show.