John Gizzi, editor of Human Events was on the Washington Journal promoting the Ten Most Harmful Books of the 19th and 20th Centuries.

He kept referring to the panel as educators and said he had no idea what their views are. Hmmm, he doesn't know anything about Phyllis Schlafly ?

Download -WMP

A caller from NY (moderate Republican) asked him about the make-up and religious background on the panel that put together the list.

Gizzi: I don’t look at their religion anymore than the clubs they belong to. It’s a panel of educators and public policy experts.

The next call

Caller from N. Carolina (Democrat): They are all neo-conservatives, you are not being forthcoming sir.

Gizzi: I would certainly say the people are conservative, but neo-conservative denotes something entirely different. The degrees of the conservatism of the people on that list are indeed very different.

So in a one call he has no idea about the makeup of his own panel of experts that voted on this article, yet in the very next call he knows precisely that they are conservatives. It took all of 3 minutes to flush him out of his spider hole. What this points out is how low he sinks in the depths of chicanery. Everyone knows all about the values that Human Events preachers, so why lie about it? It's like the old saying that you have to be more afraid of the thief who would steal a nickle because he's capable of stealing anything.

Jesse has more on this called: #11 was Pandagon