Rants, especially creating their own "facts", do not even justify a response.

Why even post then?
That has got to be the most ignorant thing I have seen on this thread so far.

One thing you have to consider when you claim that someone has lied is that you have to provide proof to support such a claim.
This is a large part of what we call “Responsible Journalism”.

But you have brought up another good point.
In the media today I’ve seen far to many people try to quip with one sentence zingers that attempt to establish some kind of omnipotent version of reality based on their own personal opinion of the truth because they don’t want to accept reality or watch others accepting it.
This is one of the reasons that Steve Langford’s own “hot button” editorial about prayer in school hit me as one of the most ignorant exercises in tabloid journalism I’ve seen in some time.
His phone call was equally disturbing. This is the GM of a self proclaimed Responsible local media provider. Yet he spent nearly twenty minuets (before even asking to have me on the air) trying to convince me of his own personal opinion over the phone. I’m very sure I was not the only one to write in about prayer in school.
I’m pretty sure (and this is just an assumption mind you) that Steve Langford is a busy man.
Now I’m not some political player and I’m about as famous as the next guy.
The only real accomplishments I’ve had are a few awards from senators, mayors and city council members in California and taking down a powerful internet pornographer in court.
I can understand and I admire Wave3's service to the community opinion and letting people respond and be active in the news in this way but why occupy a simple request to come on air with some soap box effort to change my opinion before asking?
If I own a television station or newspaper, I might ask some of the readers about their opinions for an article or allow them an editorial but I just don’t understand the reasoning in spending nearly twenty minuets on the phone to convince one of them that they should side with my own personal opinion.

Now I enjoyed talking to Steve and he seams an inelegant person who wants very much for some change in this country. But beyond that I don’t know who he is as a person anymore than anyone who sees him doing his own editorials.
His last one disturbed me a bit more though.
It was too much, too angry and WAY too tabloid.
I know he means to get people fired up and win ratings but his way of doing it makes me feel like my brain cells are being deep fried in bovine waste just watching it.

People aren’t stupid. Their not like sheep or cattle. If you respect them and inform them THEY WILL get something good out of it and you will keep viewers.

Some things we say in the news are just opinions (like in hot button) but at least we put some integrity into expressing them when we practice Responsible Journalism.

I think that the important point to keep in mind is that a formal prayer mandated and carried out by the school administration or any other governmental agency is an unfair imposition of religion by the government. Spontaneous prayer (as long as it is peaceful and not disrupting) is, I believe, a fair exercise of personal liberties. For a school administrator to lead a prayer, however, does represent an endorsement of a particular religion by the state.

EXACTLY!!!
And that is also the exact same thing the ACLU said.
Most of these people thought that they had threatened to sue just anyone who prayed at the graduation for any reason and that just isn't true.
And except for this girl being booed when she went to accept her diploma the event went off without a hitch.

Silent prayers are just as good as loud ones. Pray 24/7 if you wish.