Yes, I thought that instantly as well. I was even more concerned when I saw the rebroadcast of the "dittocam" footage with him waving his arms around as he talked about how Fox was acting. That is exactly why I related this back to your challenge in post #1 from this thread. We have to be prepared to question the factual basis for the DBMs egregious misrepresentations of fact in their broadcasts.
They no longer have the benefit of the doubt as to the presentation of facts. In fact we must start from the premise that everything they say is in some way a lie and our mission in life is to catch them at it.
Some of the things I think that would help is defusing the "authority" of these people early, before they get famous and have amassed a war chest. That means when they first show up on a talk show, someone needs to make an effort to appear as soon as possible to refute them. This refutation has to NOT be belligerent, but rather sympathetic. Things like "I understand why Miss X feels that way, but here is why her idea can't work. I really wish it could, because I hate to see anyone suffer."
It is disastrous to ignore these people (like Cindy Sheehan) because they simply get more well-known over time and eventually begin to be seen by the public as authorities on whatever they are griping about.
And lastly, much as it pains me to say this, as long as the democrats can drag out victims for whatever issue they want to push, we should have people we can use to refute them. We did have some people refute Cindy (parents of soldiers who died in Iraq) but she had the stage by herself for far too long. I don't like the idea of recruiting our own victims, but I don't know how else we will be able to refute them otherwise.