Maggie's Farm

"Anyone being interviewed has the right to know who the questioner is..."

Really? What part of the U.S. Bill Of Rights does this appear in? Or is this some part of the "God-given rights" of which our country's founding documents speak? Before you spout about "rights", be sure you know what the term actually means.

Anyone who attempts to interview - whether a public figure or a private individual - may be considered foolish not to identify themselves...or not. That's however a matter of opinion, not a "right" of the potential interviewee.

"...and the right to not reply to questions."

Again with the "rights" - and once again, the term does not mean what you clearly seem to think it means.

Etheridge is a public figure, elected to assume and hold a position of public responsibility. He is therefore answerable to members of the public. He may choose to demand to know the identity of a questioner, and he may choose not to answer questions, regardless of the identity of that questioner or the questioner's refusal to identify themselves. He has no "right" to know his questioner's name - nor even a "right" to remain mum; only the ability to do so, which he chose to do, although in a very poor and graceless manner.

He further has no "right" to grab, wrestle with or otherwise assault (yes, it was clearly an assault; review the video) a questioner, simply because (apparently) he does not like the question, or the questioner is only willing to identify themselves as "a student".

I sincerely hope that the "student" proceeds legally against Etheridge; I have little doubt, if a fair hearing is held, Etheridge will lose and will be penalized. Sadly, if that should occur, I think it's likely there will not be much of a penalty involved - Etheridge should have to pay a hefty fine, and do some jail time; most "ordinary folks' would do just that, under similar conditions.

"Will those who defend anonymous ambush journalism be as defensive of it when Republican fools are similarly exposed?"

Absolutely - a "professional" political fool is a fool, no matter what the Party affiliation. This isn't about Party, it's about a type of borderline-moronic arrogance towards "the little people" that Party-line flacks like Etheridge have been displaying, increasingly, for too many years. With a bit of hard work and luck, we in the Tarheel State will rid ourselves of Etheridge and his incumbent ilk in November or as soon thereafter as possible. The rest of the country needs to do the same.

Remember In November - and vote accordingly.

BTW - leaping (anonymously, of course) out of the shrubbery to snap in flagrante photos or record embarrassing statements by private or public individuals in situations that should be otherwise regarded as private circumstances is "anonymous ambush journalism"; asking a public figure, in a public setting, a politely (though perhaps detectably-partisan) phrased question, even if the questioner prefers to be identified only as "a student", is clearly not. You really should study-up a bit on the difference, so you'll know it better when you see it.