We reported yesterday about Andrew Bolt’s dodgy use of blockquotes, editorialising and selective reporting to make a point about the delegates selected to the Australia 2020 summit and smear The Sunday Age in the process. (By the way, he has today added to his list of delegates, deliberately using the same style of bullets to make a point.) In his post he labelled nutritionist Rosemary Stanton as an “anti GM food campaigner” which is bad, you see. She’s a filthy lefty hippy, or something like that. One of Bolta’s commenters took the bait and wrote the following.

What?????

This is the woman who, and I kid you not, in her book Food for Life, defines nursing as “standing with light activity”

*slams head on desk again*
– Nemesis12

This comment triggered the kind of response you’d expect until Rosemary Stanton herself dropped into Bolt’s blog-of-shame to set the message straight.

Before damning me, you might get your facts straight. I have written many books but none titled Food for Life and none that say that nursing is ‘standing with light activity’.
– Rosemary Stanton

Without having read any of Stanton’s books this seems like a pretty open-and-shut case. It’s unlikely that Stanton would make such a statement unless it were actually true. But Bolt’s response to this clarification is stunning in its arrogance and lack of ethics — even for him.

UPDATE

Rosemary Stanton replies – kind of – in comments below.

Can you imagine Bolta’s response if he were misquoted, defended himself, and then had his defence dismissed as such? You’d hear the screaming at the Southbank HWT building all the way from Brunswick.

UPDATE (6:45pm): Norbett in comments provides further info that seems to weaken Stanton’s denial but still leaves the fact that Bolt supports his commenter’s inference that nurses do no work.