Who in the hell would ever hire these 3 dingbats if they ever lost their jobs there? There are so ridiculously stupid.

if Congressman McDermott doesn’t want his comments to be considered “silly”, then perhaps he should refrain from using the world “silly” in reference to reading the Constitution. Since reading the Constitution was one of the “things” the House of Reps did the past 13 weeks, the Congressman is calling the Constitution “silly”.

My my, this whole article by Tommy Christopher is a Dan Abrams hit piece on the GOP, isn’t it? Dan, you can now hang out with the libtards all over Washington DC, they will allow you in…you have suitably carried the water for the Left for the week.

Look, isn’t it nice that we have an example of Fox News lying on the front page today when Howard Dean said the same thing, which is also on the front page today. All you teabags are getting your freedom panties in a knot over it. And lo and behold here is yet another example.

Fox News Lies

This clip makes me feel confidant that my three little girls (9, 6 and 4 yrs old) have a future in, at the very least, TV entertainment. They can have the jobs of these three……next week. My girls are certainly as intelligent – now.

So Mediaite, if I understand correctly what you’re trying to convey here it’s that ” FOX & FRIENDS ” on Friday, according to your, for all intents & purposes, left wing websight, are guilty of exactly the same misrepresentations and use of abject propaganda as your reporter is equally guilty, possibly even more so of using here.

I’m sure you guys weren’t being partisan hacks like those evil folks over at ” FOX “. No you were simply pretending to be opposing liberal hacks, simply to show us what not to do………isn’t that right?

When he says “I am tired of reading the Constitution and all the silly things we have done for the last 13 weeks,” he’s clearly referring to the gimmicky nature of the Republicans’ insistence upon reading the US Constitution into the record at the beginning of the 112th Congress, ”

BS!

He clearly is disparaging the Constitution like most libs do.

Look . I vote (R) . I always have . I do watch FOX . But I don’t understand why folks on the right think FOX is so great . They like all news work on fear . And never drive an issue to a resolve .

FoxNews Lies.

Nacho said:
FoxNews Lies.

If that’s true, you have something in common, son.

Thank God for Fox News!

Funny stuff Tommy.

Still waiting for you report on those photographs of the trooper and the Afghani civilians that were killed….they were plastered all over the European papers, but seems the US media decided not the report it. Gosh, if only the media had done the same with Abu Ghraib. oh wait, Bush was in charge then so you all blamed him directly. Now we have hehimself, so the media spikes all things related to the war.

Interesting.

As far as what you think McDermit said, fine, you can think that all you want. it is your perogative to interpret his words any way you chose.

He was demeaning the constitution, it is not the first time he has done so, nor will it be the last.

Nice straw man, Tommy, classic. The fact that this is less than a nothing story simply confirms that you’re a propagandist for the left. I’m sure Mrs. Christopher is proud to see her little boy grew up to be a liar and a stooge.

Dem4Ever said:
Thank God for Fox News!

Amen, brother! It keeps the idiots happy and makes anyone with a functioning brain ROTFL.

Mr.Papshmer said:
The fact that this is less than a nothing story simply confirms that you’re a propagandist for the left.

did you see who the H/T was to?

funny they never actually write media matters anymore when they give it a H/T.

Dem4Ever said:
Thank God for Fox News!

Joseph Glackin said:
Amen, brother! It keeps the idiots happy and makes anyone with a functioning brain ROTFL.

So true. Whenever Saturday Night Live fails to deliver comedic relief, there’s always Fox News…..and its viewers. Those guys, like bears falling out of a tree onto a trampoline, never fail to deliver a good laugh.

McDermott has a long history of this kind of loathsome behavior.
I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t have spent five minutes trying to defend his behavior, especially not on a Sunday, two days after the supposed inaccurate reporting.

Hey Tommeh, are you familiar with the biased and oftentimes ridiculous “news reporting” of MessNBC’s Andrea Mitchell, Tamron Hall and Contessa Brewer?
It doesn’t seem like it.
Heres some links in case you decide to be an unbiased journalist:
http://newsbusters.org/search/node/contessa%20brewer
http://newsbusters.org/search/node/tamron%20hall
http://newsbusters.org/search/node/andrea%20mitchell
Maybe you can also present those links to Maddow’s stooge, Bill Wolff.

sarainitaly said:
did you see who the H/T was to?

funny they never actually write media matters anymore when they give it a H/T.

WoW! LMFAO! Real good find there Sara! Tommeh was reading MediaSmearers and that motivated him to defend the dishonorable McDermott.

Just when Ole Tom Tom starting swaying a bit to the center ( Chris Mathews), he takes a hard jerk to the left.. he probably felt so guilty attacking the left, the next 2 weeks will be hit pieces to make up for his all encompassing guilt…Or maybe he got a stern tongue lashing on how to be a more biased

jdubbleu said:
tommy was so outraged he took 2 days to write this!

He didn’t even care until MM told him to. He’s a puppet and an embarrassment to this site.

Barack Must Go said:
So Mediaite, if I understand correctly what you’re trying to convey here it’s that ” FOX & FRIENDS ” on Friday, according to your, for all intents & purposes, left wing websight, are guilty of exactly the same misrepresentations and use of abject propaganda as your reporter is equally guilty, possibly even more so of using here.

Actually, you seem to have missed the entire point of this article, which defends the use of interpretive license in “opinion” journalism. The problem is in falsely reporting the facts. If you think there are factual inaccuracies in things I’ve written, I’m happy to have that conversation.

Listen, this was not, I repeat not a lie. It was simply some mischievous speculation. Everyone knows FAUX News does not lie and that they are “fair and balanced”.

There are, once again, a bunch of comments complaining about this story, but not one example that shows I was unfair or inaccurate. Good to know you all vouch for the accuracy and fairness of this article, even if some of you oppose accuracy and fairness. Very consistent.

The very title of this article clearly indicates that in style and content Mediaite is a slave/bitch of Media Matters.

Nacho said:
FoxNews Lies.

Your intelligence and vocabulary is limited strictly to those two words.

Tommy, as you note, the story is accurate. But can you do me a favor and ask Greta Van Susteren why she fails at almost every opportunity to ask follow-up questions?

Mr.Papshmer said:
He didn’t even care until MM told him to. He’s a puppet and an embarrassment to this site.

Well, that’s not actually true. I watched the F&F segment Friday morning, but we gave MMFA the hat-tip because they wrote about it first. For personal reasons, I wasn’t available yesterday or much of Friday, so there you go.

OxyCon said:
Hey Tommeh, are you familiar with the biased and oftentimes ridiculous “news reporting” of MessNBC’s Andrea Mitchell, Tamron Hall and Contessa Brewer?
It doesn’t seem like it.
Heres some links in case you decide to be an unbiased journalist:
http://newsbusters.org/search/node/contessa%20brewer
http://newsbusters.org/search/node/tamron%20hall
http://newsbusters.org/search/node/andrea%20mitchell
Maybe you can also present those links to Maddow’s stooge, Bill Wolff.

Your links sure do show a lot of MSNBC bias but not the lying like Fox blatantly does.

Thanks for making Howard Dean’s point.

___________________________________________
Recent FOX lies…

1 – A guy just hit me!!

2 – Wisconsin poll numbers reversed

3 – BECK: They are all Reform Jews

4 – Mislabeled Ron Paul CPAC video

5 – Obama refuses to “enforce” DOMA

6 – BECK: Only FOX and Washington Times covered Pentagon report

7 – Jennifer Griffin: “Earlier I reported that Fox news had not gone to Ghaddafi’s compound while I reported CNN and Reuters had in fact gone.
I’ve have since learned that Fox did indeed go.”

8 – DOOCY: “Obama is on vacation in Brazil.”
His concession, days later: “OK, it’s not a spring break that he’s on down there, it is an important meeting with the leaders down there to drum up jobs.”

9 – Jim McDermott “called the Constitution silly”.

I’m shocked!! Just shocked I tell you that once again Fox News provides false information.

BFD said:
Your links sure do show a lot of MSNBC bias but not the lying like Fox blatantly does.

Thanks for making Howard Dean’s point.

That’s exactly my point, that even if you grant the opinion/news divide, that doesn’t excuse false reporting. Now, I know there are actually examples of MSNBC doing this (we call them out all the time), but as I state in my article, THEY are at least willing to ESTABLISH a standard for their “opinion” programming,” whereas Fox is not.

Tommy would rather slime Fox than this hero of the left. h/t Michelle Malkin:

For those of you who may have forgotten, radical leftist Democrat Rep. Jim McDermott earned the infamous moniker “Baghdad Jim” after traveling to Iraq in the fall of 2002 for a Saddam-backed junket before the U.S. invasion.

McDermott is also the defiant lawbreaker who leaked a tape of an illegally tapped phone conversation by GOP leaders to the New York Times. McDermott was found by a federal appeals court to have violated the rights of GOP Leader John Boehner, who was heard on the 1996 call involving former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, and was ordered to to pay Boehner more than $700,000 for leaking the taped conversation. The court ordered McDermott to pay Boehner more than $700,000 for leaking the taped conversation. The figure includes $60,000 in damages and more than $600,000 in legal costs. A court had to force McDermott to pay the money — now up to $1 million. It’s unclear how much he has actually ponied up since that ruling.

Which brings us to March 2010: McDermott is still in office, backed by corruptocrat Democrat leaders. He took to the House floor over the weekend to condemn conservatives (including yours truly) and “Teabaggers” for their “indecency.” Our crime? Having the audacity to question Democrat pro-health care takeover anecdotes and to challenge their indecent kiddie human shield strategy.

Yes, the left’s heroes. Wow. Seems hes fairly flush with cash, too. Lookin’ out for the little guy seems so darn lucrative for liberals, doesn’t it, Tommy? Tommy, you could have written so much about the great American, McDermott, but chose to slime Fox instead? What a guy!

ndanielson said:
Tommy would rather slime Fox than this hero of the left.

So it’s ok for a news organization to lie about someone if they find his views or actions repugnant.

Gotcha.

lobodons said:
I’m shocked!! Just shocked I tell you that once again Fox News provides false information.

I’m shocked, SHOCKED, I tell you, that the left would ignore a real sleaze ball to go after those who would actually expose such a sleazeball!

ndanielson said:
Tommy would rather slime Fox

How, exactly, did I do that? Can you explain what I said about Fox News that was untrue or unfair?

And are you saying that if you disagree with or dislike a public figure, it’s ok to lie about him? That’s the central theme of this article, so if that’s what you think, go ahead and make that case.

Tommy Christopher said:
Well, that’s not actually true. I watched the F&F segment Friday morning, but we gave MMFA the hat-tip because they wrote about it first. For personal reasons, I wasn’t available yesterday or much of Friday, so there you go.

I have no doubt that you watch Fox often, hoping to come up with gotchas. In the case of Fox & Friends, it’s a morning show where the players hang out on the couch and talk about stuff. Regarding McDermott’s comments, they correctly concluded that McDermott thought The Constitution was silly. Did he say, “I, Jim McDermott, think The Constitution is silly”? Of course not, but he did include the reading of The Constitution as part of things he thought were silly, which would lead any reasonable person to conclude that, if reading it is silly, it must be silly. And knowing the freakshow that is McDermott’s Capitol Hill constituency, I believe that the F&F crew were contextually accurate whether they knew it or not.

However, carrying water for Media Matters is more important to you, so enjoy being a tool.

Mr.Papshmer said:
Of course not, but he did include the reading of The Constitution as part of things he thought were silly, which would lead any reasonable person to conclude that, if reading it is silly, it must be silly.

Wrong. A reasonable person would conclude that reading PARTS of it while there was much more pressing work to get done was blatant pandering and just plain silly. Like when you jackasses renamed French Fries into Freedom Fries.

A reasonable person would read the sentence and get the same interpretation as Tommy’s. But reasonable isn’t a Fox fan. A Fox fan is an invested fan, an apologist, one who will grab onto a Fox host like a Branch Davidian did Koresh. The Fox flavored koolaid is their favorite. But ‘reasonable’ isn’t in a Fox sick-o-pantywaist.

WOW Tommy – This is your OPINION Tommy,even though you want to present it as FACT:

“THEY are at least willing to ESTABLISH a standard for their “opinion” programming,” whereas Fox is not.”

Fox is NOT willing to talk to YOU about their standard, that is not the same thing Tommy.

Bias

POLITICIAN A: I think getting married underwater in Santa Claus suits is just plain silly.

FOX NEWS: Politician A said today that he thinks marriage is silly.

Mr.Papshmer said:
I have no doubt that you watch Fox often, hoping to come up with gotchas. In the case of Fox & Friends, it’s a morning show where the players hang out on the couch and talk about stuff. Regarding McDermott’s comments, they correctly concluded that McDermott thought The Constitution was silly. Did he say, “I, Jim McDermott, think The Constitution is silly”? Of course not, but he did include the reading of The Constitution as part of things he thought were silly, which would lead any reasonable person to conclude that, if reading it is silly, it must be silly. And knowing the freakshow that is McDermott’s Capitol Hill constituency, I believe that the F&F crew were contextually accurate whether they knew it or not.

I don’t think you read my article carefully enough, then. I defended the kind of interpretive license you describe here, but that’s not what they did. They said McDermott “called the Constitution silly.” That’s a quote. That’s very different from an opinion-oriented interpretation.

TfT said:
WOW Tommy – This is your OPINION Tommy,even though you want to present it as FACT:

“THEY are at least willing to ESTABLISH a standard for their “opinion” programming,” whereas Fox is not.”

Fox is NOT willing to talk to YOU about their standard, that is not the same thing Tommy.

Bias

Well, no, because they haven’t ESTABLISHED that standard anywhere else, either. But if you care about the answer, go ahead and ask them.

Tommy Christopher said:
I don’t think you read my article carefully enough, then. I defended the kind of interpretive license you describe here, but that’s not what they did. They said McDermott “called the Constitution silly.” That’s a quote. That’s very different from an opinion-oriented interpretation.

Oh, stop answering papshmear. He/she/it is a waste of your time and a waste of space here. No one apologizes like a FIXed News apologist.

Tommy Christopher said:
They said McDermott “called the Constitution silly.”

I also came to that conclusion, but that’s not what this is about, is it? This whole episode has zilch-point-nothing to do with Jim McDermott and what he said, and has everything to do with you being a tool of the left in general and Media Matters in particular.

You have no idea if they have or haven’t establisehd such a standard. All you have proven is you don’t know of one and you haven’t seen one….it’s not the same thing. Furthermore, please show me in writing such a standard that MSNBC has, not just some verbage you got from someone. Site your written source. MSNBC puts for errors consistently and they do not offer corrections in many cases; so “stating” this is a standard and then actually following it are two different things.

i ask the same question to MSNBC Bill Wolff, and he lied to your face tommy, i guess fox would do the same

Tommy you prove over and over what a left wing hack write you are.

To quote your buddies at the Daily Kos,

“Have you no shame, sir? Have you no shame?

Where is Mr. Show and his mandatory “You lie!” rant?

Tommy Christopher said:
How, exactly, did I do that? Can you explain what I said about Fox News that was untrue or unfair?

And are you saying that if you disagree with or dislike a public figure, it’s ok to lie about him? That’s the central theme of this article, so if that’s what you think, go ahead and make that case.

I am saying that you set out to make Fox look worse for America’s Constitution than McDermott is to it. That’s all. That puts you more of an ally to that group, does it not? The whole clip you linked is PLENTY evidence of what was and was not said, NO? And the disdain for the US Constitution is more in the left camp than the right, so your bias is evident, as well as harmful to anyone that listens to you.

Mr. 0bama has stated his contempt for the US Constitution, yet look at your BFD, TampoLoco, WeaselClownⓇ​, et al. they all have new “evidence” that Fox news is their enemy, rather than sleazeballs like McDermott. Now is THAT unfair? It’s sick if not “unfair”, but I digress. That is why BFD, TampoLoco, WeaselClownⓇ and the rest are sheep, anyway.

I saw Doocy using an idiom in offering his opinion of McDermott’s obvious disdain for anyone standing in his and his party’s way of imposing their own form of a liberal “constitutional” government. You make Fox the snake, when the real snake is the punk Rep. from Washington State. Not unfair, Tommy, or “untrue” whatsoever, so long as it is snakes that you cheer.

McDermott, DID say that the very efforts of those that stand in opposition (SINCE THEIR LEGITIMATE ELECTION TO OFFICE TO STOP HIM AND HIS ILK)to his form of “governing” in this country was SILLY, ie, 13 weeks that have stopped the unchecked advancement of his party, is silly, and he is tired of it. Perhaps we should have just appointed him King? After all, according to Jim: any efforts to stop him and his socialist clowns from spending America into a banana republic is silly, and at least HE is tired of it, and THAT’S okay, right?

Nope, your swipe at Fox, while sticking up for a sleazeball like McDermott is neither untrue or unfair. It just all depends on what it is you are being fair and true to, doesn’t it? And hey, Tommy, I do think that McDermott thinks the Constitution is silly, and worthless. With geniuses like him, and Pelosi, and Schumer, who needs one??? I think that is what F&F was getting to.

ndanielson said:
I am saying that you set out to make Fox look worse for America’s Constitution than McDermott is to it. That’s all. That puts you more of an ally to that group, does it not? The whole clip you linked is PLENTY evidence of what was and was not said, NO? And the disdain for the US Constitution is more in the left camp than the right, so your bias is evident, as well as harmful to anyone that listens to you. Mr. 0bama has stated his contempt for the US Constitution, yet look at your BFD, TampoLoco, WeaselClownⓇ​, et al. they all have new “evidence” that Fox news is their enemy, rather than sleazeballs like McDermott. Now is THAT unfair? It’s sick if not “unfair”, but I digress. That is why BFD, TampoLoco, WeaselClownⓇ and the rest are sheep, anyway. I saw Doocy using an idiom in offering his opinion of McDermott’s obvious disdain for anyone standing in his and his party’s way of imposing their own form of a liberal “constitutional” government. You make Fox the snake, when the real snake is the punk Rep. from Washington State. Not unfair, Tommy, or “untrue” whatsoever, so long as it is snakes that you cheer. McDermott, DID say that the very efforts of those that stand in opposition (SINCE THEIR LEGITIMATE ELECTION TO OFFICE TO STOP HIM AND HIS ILK)to his form of “governing” in this country was SILLY, ie, 13 weeks that have stopped the unchecked advancement of his party, is silly, and he is tired of it. Perhaps we should have just appointed him King? After all, according to Jim: any efforts to stop him and his socialist clowns from spending America into a banana republic is silly, and at least HE is tired of it, and THAT’S okay, right? Nope, your swipe at Fox, while sticking up for a sleazeball like McDermott is neither untrue or unfair. It just all depends on what it is you are being fair and true to, doesn’t it? And hey, Tommy, I do think that McDermott thinks the Constitution is silly, and worthless. With geniuses like him, and Pelosi, and Schumer, who needs one??? I think that is what F&F was getting to.

Tommy, did he ever get around to answering your question?

ndanielson said:
Nope, your swipe at Fox, while sticking up for a sleazeball like McDermott is neither untrue or unfair.

jim bronson 990cc said:
Tommy, did he ever get around to answering your question?

That is why you are stupid.

ndanielson said:
And are you saying that if you disagree with or dislike a public figure, it’s ok to lie about him? That’s the central theme of this article, so if that’s what you think, go ahead and make that case.

And I never said that, so why address it? As, where in your article, Tommy, did YOU use the word LIE??? Please point that out to 990cc’s of crap. OH,TOMMY! You are INFERRING that Fox lies? I get it now. If the idiom fits…

An idiom is generally a colloquial metaphor— a term requiring some foundational knowledge…

Seems as if F&F have a far more foundational knowledge of McDermott than you care to have or express.

I take it the answer is no.

jim bronson 990cc said:
Tommy, did he ever get around to answering your question?

That’s hilarious! If Tommy doesn’t answer you, you’ll never know, will you? Typical prog fool, waiting for other people to tell you what to think. :)

jim bronson 990cc said:
I take it the answer is no.

It does explain a lot. LOL.

Mr.Papshmer said:
That’s hilarious! If Tommy doesn’t answer you, you’ll never know, will you? Typical prog fool, waiting for other people to tell you what to think. :)

Not really. It is rather apparent that he did not, but continue to delude yourself as you need to.

ndanielson said:
It does explain a lot. LOL.

It explains nothing, like the rest of your posts.

Use The Constitution and Silly in the same sentence, and don’t be surprised that people will interpret your intent is to diminish the Constitution, even if prefect parsing of the sentence somehow acquits you.

Hyper criticism of Fox is now a cottage industry. It’s like mosquitoes and flies droning about.

jim bronson 990cc said:
Tommy, did he ever get around to answering your question?

I don’t get it. But that’s par for the course in this section, hundreds of complaints about things they don’t disagree with.

Tommy Christopher said:
I don’t get it. But that’s par for the course in this section, hundreds of complaints about things they don’t disagree with.

Mr. Christopher, let me say good job. I enjoyed your article and found it very informative.

Maybe the third time is a charm:

Q:

Tommy Christopher said:
Can you explain what I said about Fox News that was untrue or unfair?

Here, for the third time so everyone can see the answer three times.

Nope, your swipe at Fox, while sticking up for a sleazeball like McDermott is neither untrue or unfair.

LOL.

Nope. Last I saw meant NO. Then NOPE his swipe is NEITHER UNTRUE OR UNFAIR, should have cinched it. But, it does explain much.

Your turn! Where did I say this???

Tommy Christopher said:
And are you saying that if you disagree with or dislike a public figure, it’s ok to lie about him? That’s the central theme of this article, so if that’s what you think, go ahead and make that case.

Hence, why would I answer?

he just called reading the constituition silly thats all

cjd ohio 1 said:
he just called reading the constituition silly thats all

so tommy, no he didnt call the constituition silly

Tommy Christopher said:
Actually, you seem to have missed the entire point of this article, which defends the use of interpretive license in “opinion” journalism. The problem is in falsely reporting the facts. If you think there are factual inaccuracies in things I’ve written, I’m happy to have that conversation.

Actually, as you’ve repeatedly done here since I got here a few weeks ago is offer up your own interpretation of what a liberal / democrat meant by his statements instead of supplying those statements in transcript or video form for your readers to form their own opinion as to content, context , etc.

You do however, whenever you believe it bolsters your opinions, arguement supply verbatum written, video of ” FOX NEWS ” or other conservatives statements, etc.

Even your assertion, implication that simply because your buddy over at MSNBC proffered his supposed literally adhered to operating standards, even though we all see the oppisite in practice on a daily basis is also dishonest at best.

” FOX ” refusing to engage YOU personally or otherwise on the same subject, does not automatically make them across the board guilty, again as you’ve implied. It simply means they are not interested in discussing that or I’m imagining anything else with you or personally or as a representative of Mediaite.

I myself approach everything from my own biased point of view. I just make this fact abundantly clear in everything I present to other posters here, there and everywhere…..that’s all.

And finally, no one at Fox accused McDermott of calling the Constitution silly, but they poked fun of him because they think that he THINKS of it as silly. THEIR OPINION! I think their opinion of him is spot on! McDermott and his ilk not only think it is silly, they think they ARE the constitution! Am I lying? They couldn’t PROVE it otherwise with statements like they make! LOL. Of course McDermott thinks the constitution is silly, and working within it for 13 weeks is too. He definitely said that, Tommy.

ndanielson said:
Your turn! Where did I say this???

I didn’t say you said it, I asked. Since everything I wrote was fair and accurate, a reasonable person could conclude that you’re fine with an opinion show on a news network lying about someone. If that’s not the case, then I really don’t know what your problem is.

Media Matters: Accurately quoting Democratic Congressman constitutes a ‘smear’

Apparently, the “watchdogs” at Media Matters – a radical left wing group funded in part by George Soros – think that accurately quoting a Democratic Congressman somehow constitutes a “smear,” even when the context of the remark is explained.

A headline at Media Matters screams, “Right-Wing Media Smear McDermott; Claim He Called The Constitution “Silly”" with a subheadline claiming, “Right-Wing Media Declare McDermott Is “Tired Of Reading That Silly Old Constitution”.”

Set aside for a moment the fact that Jim McDermott (D-WA) actually did say:

“I’m tired of reading the Constitution and all the silly things we’ve done for the last 13 weeks.”

http://www.examiner.com/conservative-in-spokane/media-matters-accurately-quoting-democratic-congressman-constitutes-a-smear

cjd ohio 1 said:
so tommy, no he didnt call the constituition silly

Yeah, that’s what I said. That’s what this whole article is about.

cjd ohio 1 said:
he just called reading the constituition silly thats all

And he wasn’t even accused of saying that. F&F, while making fun of the joke, McDermott, have been accused of lying, but they were just stating that they know what the clown, McDermott, THINKS. I see no lie at all. They obviously know McDermott better than Tommy Christopher! LOL. Don’t liberals always claim to know what someone else thinks? Hey, Tommy, all liberals think the Constitution is a joke. Get it? Most of them just don’t get as close to saying it as this clown did!

Barack Must Go said:
Actually, as you’ve repeatedly done here since I got here a few weeks ago is offer up your own interpretation of what a liberal / democrat meant by his statements instead of supplying those statements in transcript or video form for your readers to form their own opinion as to content, context , etc.

What are you talking about? There are THREE clips in this story! And I DEFEND F&F’s use of interpretive license!

Barack Must Go said:
Even your assertion, implication that simply because your buddy over at MSNBC proffered his supposed literally adhered to operating standards, even though we all see the oppisite in practice on a daily basis is also dishonest at best.

” FOX ” refusing to engage YOU personally or otherwise on the same subject, does not automatically make them across the board guilty, again as you’ve implied. It simply means they are not interested in discussing that or I’m imagining anything else with you or personally or as a representative of Mediaite.

You need to read it slower this time. I never said MSNBC adhered to a factual standard for opinion shows, just that they OFFERED one, which is a FACT, and Fox News has not, not to me or anyone else, which is also a FACT.

I also never said Fox wouldn’t engage me on the subject, I said they wouldn’t respond. There’s a difference.

ndanielson said:
but they poked fun of him because they think that he THINKS of it as silly.

“I’m tired of reading the Constitution and all the silly things we’ve done for the last 13 weeks.”

I don’t know how else to take it, except that he is calling the reading of the constitution silly. No, he never says “the constitution is silly” but his poor choice of words by calling the reading of the constitution silly was mock worthy.

Today morning show this morning reported *live* from the *scene of the crime* where Lindsey Lohan fell down.

FOX morning show mocked McDermott for calling the reading of the constitution silly.

Does anyone really expect much out of a morning show?

They played his statement, everyone could hear what he said. They didn’t lie. He called the reading silly, thus giving them ample opportunity to mock his calling the constitution silly. Just like Stewart or MSNBC usually spend their days/evenings mocking F&F for something they said.

Tommy Christopher said:
Yeah, that’s what I said. That’s what this whole article is about.

but you omitted he thinks reading it is silly

ndanielson said:
And finally, no one at Fox accused McDermott of calling the Constitution silly,

Yes they did. It was even in their chyron. Look at the screencap. DEM CALLS CONSTITUTION “SILLY”

ndanielson said:
Maybe the third time is a charm: Q: Here, for the third time so everyone can see the answer three times. LOL. Nope. Last I saw meant NO. Then NOPE his swipe is NEITHER UNTRUE OR UNFAIR, should have cinched it. But, it does explain much. Your turn! Where did I say this??? Hence, why would I answer?

3 strikes. You are out!

Tommy Christopher said:
Yeah, that’s what I said. That’s what this whole article is about.

cjd ohio 1 said:
but you omitted he thinks reading it is silly

which is funny, since in the article you state that he was clearly refering to gimmicky nature…..etc, but when you write article and we say you are impling or refering to, you state i didnt write that

Tommy Christopher said:
Yeah, that’s what I said. That’s what this whole article is about.

cjd ohio 1 said:
but you omitted he thinks reading it is silly

cjd ohio 1 said:
which is funny, since in the article you state that he was clearly refering to gimmicky nature…..etc, but when you write article and we say you are impling or refering to, you state i didnt write that

They should have done like Olby used to do and just call him names. Then no one could say they were factually inaccurate.

sarainitaly said:
“I’m tired of reading the Constitution and all the silly things we’ve done for the last 13 weeks.”

I don’t know how else to take it, except that he is calling the reading of the constitution silly. No, he never says “the constitution is silly” but his poor choice of words by calling the reading of the constitution silly was mock worthy.

Today morning show this morning reported *live* from the *scene of the crime* where Lindsey Lohan fell down.

FOX morning show mocked McDermott for calling the reading of the constitution silly.

Does anyone really expect much out of a morning show?

They played his statement, everyone could hear what he said. They didn’t lie. He called the reading silly, thus giving them ample opportunity to mock his calling the constitution silly. Just like Stewart or MSNBC usually spend their days/evenings mocking F&F for something they said.

He definitely said that working within the Constitution for the PAST 13 WEEKS was silly, and that he was tired of that! And that is what they have been doing to stop the spending for 13 weeks – working within the laws of the Constitution.

Tommy Christopher said:
Yes they did. It was even in their chyron. Look at the screencap. DEM CALLS CONSTITUTION “SILLY”

The guy loading the chyron could easily be 0bama’s teleprompter-boy wannabe, but who ever it is they certainly do not constitute an entire network, or a person who heard correctly. Chyron typo called Constitution silly.

sarainitaly said:
I don’t know how else to take it, except that he is calling the reading of the constitution silly.

Also note the defense of the congressman, in that he never called The Constitution silly, he said that reading it was silly. Okay, we can play word games all day, but I would contend that it’s never “silly” to read that document, the supreme law of the land and blueprint for the finest nation ever created. By calling its reading silly exposes his contempt for it.

Tommy probably does think he’s correct on this one, which exemplifies the differences between our worlds. Liberals, by and large, do think that The Constitution is silly and an impediment to progress, which is why I find it to be no stretch to extrapolate from McDermott’s remarks that he thinks it’s silly. I came to that conclusion, as did the Fox & Friends crew and many, many other people

The world’s fastest lawnmower – 990cc and 15mph http://www.gizmag.com/go/5322/

jim bronson 990cc said:
3 strikes. You are out!

You should have worn a helmet.

Tommy Christopher said:
What are you talking about? There are THREE clips in this story! And I DEFEND F&F’s use of interpretive license!

I do not see where you’ve defended ” FOX ” at all. In fact you’ve basically stated they’ve misrepresented what Rep. McDermott meant.

You then took the liberty, not possible from the 7 second McDermott clip you’ve supplied, went on to speak for the Congressman regarding his personal reasoning for responding statements in your own words and possibly biased words without making the video or transcript of his actual responses available, the same as you had and have done ( one sided ) in the past.

It’s not the end of the world per se, just the end of the world as we’ve known it in te past.

honestly this is THE BEST comedy show on television right now. Name a comedian who can be topped by the gretch’s comedic ineptitude.

Barack Must Go said:
You then took the liberty, not possible from the 7 second McDermott clip you’ve supplied, went on to speak for the Congressman regarding his personal reasoning for responding statements in your own words and possibly biased words without making the video or transcript of his actual responses available, the same as you had and have done ( one sided ) in the past.

Are you serious? You’re criticizing me for failing to provide the context that F&F failed to provide?

It’s not even necessary in order to know what McDermott was referencing, but I did, in fact, link to a transcript of McDermott’s remarks, in the MMFA article.

Tommy Christopher said:
Are you serious? You’re criticizing me for failing to provide the context that F&F failed to provide? It’s not even necessary in order to know what McDermott was referencing, but I did, in fact, link to a transcript of McDermott’s remarks, in the MMFA article.

I’m merely pointing out you’ve presented your own hooky dooky interpretation of what McDermott stated without offering a transcript, video, etc. I also do not see the link above to which you speak. It’s not a big deal, just my observation.

Why would you bother linking to MM at all? They are a completely disgraced organization and not to be believed; is it really a transcript or did they edit it to make it be something that want to project? They have zero credibility, zip, nada, zilch. You probably shouln’t use them as a source any more.

TfT said:
Why would you bother linking to MM at all? They are a completely disgraced organization and not to be believed; is it really a transcript or did they edit it to make it be something that want to project? They have zero credibility, zip, nada, zilch. You probably shouln’t use them as a source any more.

credibility compared to what? lying about obama spending a billion dollars in india?

TfT said:
Why would you bother linking to MM at all? They are a completely disgraced organization and not to be believed; is it really a transcript or did they edit it to make it be something that want to project? They have zero credibility, zip, nada, zilch. You probably shouln’t use them as a source any more.

also, name somewhere where they have intentionally hidden information or done something similar? can’t you see past your idiotic bias?

Is there anything that Fox does that doesn’t suprise anyone? http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2009/oct/04/fox-news-inaccuracy-class-itself/

BFD said:
Your links sure do show a lot of MSNBC bias but not the lying like Fox blatantly does.

Tommy Christopher said:
That’s exactly my point, that even if you grant the opinion/news divide, that doesn’t excuse false reporting. Now, I know there are actually examples of MSNBC doing this (we call them out all the time), but as I state in my article, THEY are at least willing to ESTABLISH a standard for their “opinion” programming,” whereas Fox is not.

Just in case BFD and Tommeh don’t realize it, “Fox & Friends” is a morning entertainment program just like “Good Morning America” and “Today”, and it’s hosts are “bobbleheads” similar to Matt Lauer and Robin Roberts. Nobody tunes in expecting to hear hard news.

The links I provided, however, are to MessNBC hard news “journalists” that are more biased than dollar store asshole dogs with kraut.

And another thing Tommeh…are you comfortable giving hat tips and using references from extremely biased far-left extremist organizations who have publicly declared “guerrilla war and sabotage” against a news organization? Doesn’t that at the least mean that you condone that kind of behavior? I mean, your ragging about a tiny, nothing little story that MediaMatters is whoring, but what MediaMatters is guilty of doing is far, far worse to most reasonable and rational people.

TheEagle said:
Mr. Christopher, let me say good job. I enjoyed your article and found it very informative.

Nobody likes a suck ass and I’m sure that even goes for Tommeh.

sarainitaly said:
“I’m tired of reading the Constitution and all the silly things we’ve done for the last 13 weeks.”

I don’t know how else to take it, except that he is calling the reading of the constitution silly. No, he never says “the constitution is silly” but his poor choice of words by calling the reading of the constitution silly was mock worthy.

Today morning show this morning reported *live* from the *scene of the crime* where Lindsey Lohan fell down.

FOX morning show mocked McDermott for calling the reading of the constitution silly.

Does anyone really expect much out of a morning show?

They played his statement, everyone could hear what he said. They didn’t lie. He called the reading silly, thus giving them ample opportunity to mock his calling the constitution silly. Just like Stewart or MSNBC usually spend their days/evenings mocking F&F for something they said.

It’s all part of Soros’ plan to sabotage Fox News. MediaMatters is on record stating that they want to sabotage News Corp. If I were Tommeh, I probably wouldn’t touch MediaMatters with a 10 foot pole and a pack of dollar store wieners, because that won’t look too good on a resume, unless your dream job is working in Soros’ basement sitting on a bucket all day long.

OxyCon said:
The links I provided, however, are to MessNBC hard news “journalists” that are more biased than dollar store asshole dogs with kraut.

Hard News like Megyn Kelly?
Hard news like “selling” the Tea Party rally?
Straight news like Bill Sammon “mischievously speculating” during Live Desk?
Or like when they bring Eric Bolling on their straight news program?
Geez, they might as well bring Hannity on to analyze the hard news for them.

When hasn’t Fox & Frauds misreported or fudged up the facts on something? I don’t think they’ve ever seen a far-right talking point they don’t love. Why else would they be making Monday’s a regular segment with Donald Trump, the newest addition to the fringe, birther crowd? Complete jokes.

The true headline of this ‘article’ is:

Tommie Christapher falsley reports that Fox & Friends Falsely ‘Reports’ That Democratic Congressman Called The Constitution ‘Silly’

I guess I’m confused, maybe I haven’t had enough coffee this morning, but the following sentence seems to be missing from Tommy’s article, and there is no indication that an “update” occurred. Can someone help me out please? Was this araticle edited to remove this false statement?

“They are at least willing to establish a standard for their opinion programming, whereas Fox is not.”

Is that statement still in the above article written by Tommy?

ProgLib said:
When hasn’t Fox & Frauds misreported or fudged up the facts on something? I don’t think they’ve ever seen a far-right talking point they don’t love. Why else would they be making Monday’s a regular segment with Donald Trump, the newest addition to the fringe, birther crowd? Complete jokes.

Any one of the cowardly losers over at ObamaVision TV would give someone elses left ____ to have ‘ The Donald ‘ sit down with them on a weekly basis to discuss his views on life, liberty and the persuit of removing Obama from our White House.

You are just disillusioned by the promise of all that free cheese.

ndanielson said:
The world’s fastest lawnmower – 990cc and 15mph http://www.gizmag.com/go/5322/ You should have worn a helmet.

You should learn words have more than one meaning.

OxyCon said:
Nobody likes a suck ass and I’m sure that even goes for Tommeh.

You’ve been doing as long as you have been on here.

OxyCon said:
ust in case BFD and Tommeh don’t realize it, “Fox & Friends” is a morning entertainment program just like “Good Morning America” and “Today”, and it’s hosts are “bobbleheads” similar to Matt Lauer and Robin Roberts. Nobody tunes in expecting to hear hard news.

Far from it. Those shows report HARD news…and do it objectively. You sure as heck must not watch them to make such a BS statement like that. They do cover entertainment and have other news features but they lead off with the most current news of the day. They are also not opinion shows — during those segments like — Faux & Fiends or Morning Joe, which are OPINION shows.

“I’m tired of reading the Constitution and all the silly things we’ve done for the last 13 weeks.”
I don’t know how else to take it, except that he is calling the reading of the constitution silly. No, he never says “the constitution is silly” but his poor choice of words by calling the reading of the constitution silly was mock worthy.
Today morning show this morning reported *live* from the *scene of the crime* where Lindsey Lohan fell down.
FOX morning show mocked McDermott for calling the reading of the constitution silly.
Does anyone really expect much out of a morning show?
They played his statement, everyone could hear what he said. They didn’t lie. He called the reading silly, thus giving them ample opportunity to mock his calling the constitution silly. Just like Stewart or MSNBC usually spend their days/evenings mocking F&F for something they said.

He called the reading of the Constitution (like they do every time when they are “considering the constitutionality” of a debated bill in the 112th congress) silly, which it is! We already have a branch of government that does that job! The US Supreme Court! Like stated, it’s just a gimmick the Repukes are using, which they sidestep anyway if you saw how they passed the anti-abortion bill via committee. The Faux & Fiends morons saying he called the Constitution “silly” or referred to a casual reading of the document, silly, is fallacious. McDermott does not want the Constitution read every time they are trying to pass or considering a bill. It’s a stupid time-wasting rule, and redundant anyway since they already have legal resources that can determine procedure and constitutional merits of bills at their disposal. You wingnuts can’t be this vacuous defending the blatherskiting triumvirate!

OxyCon said:
Tommy Christopher said:
That’s exactly my point, that even if you grant the opinion/news divide, that doesn’t excuse false reporting. Now, I know there are actually examples of MSNBC doing this (we call them out all the time), but as I state in my article, THEY are at least willing to ESTABLISH a standard for their “opinion” programming,” whereas Fox is not.

Tommy Christopher said:
You need to read it slower this time. I never said MSNBC adhered to a factual standard for opinion shows, just that they OFFERED one, which is a FACT, and Fox News has not, not to me or anyone else, which is also a FACT.

I also never said Fox wouldn’t engage me on the subject, I said they wouldn’t respond. There’s a difference.

TfT said:
“They are at least willing to establish a standard for their opinion programming, whereas Fox is not.”

Is that statement still in the above article written by Tommy?

“Obviously, Fox News has differing standards for its “opinion” shows, versus its “hard news” programming, but they’ve never really made clear what those standards are. Does being an “opinion” program lower the standards of factual reporting? Spin is one thing, but do “opinion” programs at Fox have a duty to report the facts accurately?”

not sure if that exact sentence was in the article.

“I never said MSNBC adhered to a factual standard for opinion shows, just that they OFFERED one, which is a FACT, and Fox News has not, not to me or anyone else, which is also a FACT.”

Sounds like he’s saying: “MSNBC told me that they have standards, so they do, regardless of whether or not they comply by them (which they don’t), but FOX doesn’t have any standards because they’ve never told me they have any.”

sarainitaly said:
not sure if that exact sentence was in the article.

if it was, he changed it.

Gasket said:
He called the reading of the Constitution (like they do every time when they are “considering the constitutionality” of a debated bill in the 112th congress) silly, which it is!

When Republicans take over the House next week, they will do something that apparently has never been done before in the chamber’s 221-year history:

They will read the Constitution aloud.

And then they will require that every new bill contain a statement by the lawmaker who wrote it citing the constitutional authority to enact the proposed legislation.

You think that is silly?

Wasn’t it the Democrats who, for 8 years, called every action of the Bush administration unconstitutional?

Aren’t members of congress sworn to uphold the constitution?

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”

Don’t you think with all the charges of * unconstitutionality* against Bush and now Obama, and the fact that they are sworn to support and defend the Constitution, it makes sense that they actually read it, formally. It was afterall, they first time in 200+ years. And what is wrong with citing the constitutional authority to enact the proposed legislation?

Well, it does give the teabaggers a chance to showboat. But I don’t think it goes far enough. I think it should only be read while literally wrapped in the flag. Not the confederate one, yeah..you guys lost that one..the other one.

sarainitaly said:
You think that is silly?

They live in a different world. Here in the real world O.J. killed his ex-wife, muslims kill people when they feel dissed, and Jim McDermott thinks The Constitution is silly. In Tommy’s world, people pat each other on the back and think it’s cool if they can create confusion by calling into question the meaning of “is”.

Again, this isn’t about what McDermott may or may not have said or meant. It’s about a small army of leftists who’ve declared war on Fox. When any of the plethora of leftist commentators smear a conservative, go on about how stupid they are, or call them a c**t, that’s perfectly okay, but heaven forbid Fox forgets to dot an “i”. Fortunately, I believe that most people recognize these whackos for what they are. In the past, it may have worked, but there’s just way too much information out there these days. Tommy and his ilk are on the fringe, and the funny part is that even in his imagined glorious utopia, there’s no place for him outside of the ball bearing factory. There would be very little room for journalists, and even less for opinion people. Most leftists usefulness will have ended. :)

sarainitaly said:
When Republicans take over the House next week, they will do something that apparently has never been done before in the chamber’s 221-year history: They will read the Constitution aloud. And then they will require that every new bill contain a statement by the lawmaker who wrote it citing the constitutional authority to enact the proposed legislation. You think that is silly? Wasn’t it the Democrats who, for 8 years, called every action of the Bush administration unconstitutional? Aren’t members of congress sworn to uphold the constitution? “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.” Don’t you think with all the charges of * unconstitutionality* against Bush and now Obama, and the fact that they are sworn to support and defend the Constitution, it makes sense that they actually read it, formally. It was afterall, they first time in 200+ years. And what is wrong with citing the constitutional authority to enact the proposed legislation?

so you think everytime a bill is up for passing, they should read the constitution? They’re not actually going to use the constitution as the basis for their law, just the other day they talked about extending the patriot act AGAIN! It’s a gimic sarah, a gimic that you seem to have bought into.

sarainitaly:

Yes, the statement I quoted was in the original article, I and others took offense with that statement in particular. Tommy seems tohave a funny way of dealing with FACTS – he deleted the original statement because it was NOT factual, even though he tried to frame it as such.

Go back to page one and two and look at the comments; it appears that Tommy deleted the sentence in question.

Unbelievable.

This sentence WAS part of the original article:

“They are at least willing to establish a standard for their opinion programming, whereas Fox is not.”

where is that sentence now, and if it is no longer included in the article, why not?

maybe they should read boehner’s version of the constitution: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhrgpL0oIvE
which is actually the declaration of independence.

Mr.Papshmer said:
They live in a different world. Here in the real world O.J. killed his ex-wife, muslims kill people when they feel dissed, and Jim McDermott thinks The Constitution is silly. In Tommy’s world, people pat each other on the back and think it’s cool if they can create confusion by calling into question the meaning of “is”. Again, this isn’t about what McDermott may or may not have said or meant. It’s about a small army of leftists who’ve declared war on Fox. When any of the plethora of leftist commentators smear a conservative, go on about how stupid they are, or call them a c**t, that’s perfectly okay, but heaven forbid Fox forgets to dot an “i”. Fortunately, I believe that most people recognize these whackos for what they are. In the past, it may have worked, but there’s just way too much information out there these days. Tommy and his ilk are on the fringe, and the funny part is that even in his imagined glorious utopia, there’s no place for him outside of the ball bearing factory. There would be very little room for journalists, and even less for opinion people. Most leftists usefulness will have ended. :)

that’s right, there’s no room for any kind of thinking but yours. Moron.

Barack Must Go said:
Trump

so I guess the whole, “we’re not going to let current presidential candidates on our network” thing kinda got thrown out the window huh? oh well, let’s see if trump can backrupt news corp this time!

Given the fact that Tommy Christopher thinks there is an appreciable difference between calling someone an asshole and saying that they are made of assholes, I’d say his judgment on this (non-)story is rather suspect.

Also, I find it amusing that I was able to tell who wrote this story just from the headline.

Nationman said:
so I guess the whole, “we’re not going to let current presidential candidates on our network” thing kinda got thrown out the window huh? oh well, let’s see if trump can backrupt news corp this time!

Huh?

Nationman said:
so you think everytime a bill is up for passing, they should read the constitution? They’re not actually going to use the constitution as the basis for their law, just the other day they talked about extending the patriot act AGAIN! It’s a gimic sarah, a gimic that you seem to have bought into.

where do they say they will read it in full every time a new bill is up? i read that the author of the bill needs to reference the part of the constitution that supports the bill, but nothing about a full congressional reading for every bill.

TfT said:
sarainitaly:

Yes, the statement I quoted was in the original article, I and others took offense with that statement in particular. Tommy seems tohave a funny way of dealing with FACTS – he deleted the original statement because it was NOT factual, even though he tried to frame it as such.

Go back to page one and two and look at the comments; it appears that Tommy deleted the sentence in question.

interesting. i was doubting you, just didn’t know for sure. i saw he referenced it in the comments, but didn’t know if it was an actual quote from his article.

that’s sneaky, and uncool.

Fox News says anything they good damned want to. They have always been liars and Republican barf bags/

sarainitaly said:
interesting. i was doubting you, just didn’t know for sure.

I wasn’t doubting you – not was. gawd i need an edit button!!!!!!

sarainitaly said:
Wasn’t it the Democrats who, for 8 years, called every action of the Bush administration unconstitutional?

Aren’t members of congress sworn to uphold the constitution?

That doesn’t mean you have to waste valuable time on the floor of congress to read it. We know what it says, and so do they. The whole process was a ridiculous stunt by the Republicans to pretend like they care about the Constitution, while they go on their merry way the next day being corrupt politicians again. There are Democrats who are just as corrupt as Republicans, but Democrats aren’t the ones wanting to read the Constitution out loud. It only comes from the side that is ideologically bankrupt.

ProgLib said:
That doesn’t mean you have to waste valuable time on the floor of congress to read it. We know what it says, and so do they. The whole process was a ridiculous stunt by the Republicans to pretend like they care about the Constitution, while they go on their merry way the next day being corrupt politicians again. There are Democrats who are just as corrupt as Republicans, but Democrats aren’t the ones wanting to read the Constitution out loud. It only comes from the side that is ideologically bankrupt.

i don’t think taking a couple of hours out of the last 221 years was that silly, or invaluable.

“There are Democrats who are just as corrupt as Republicans, but Democrats aren’t the ones wanting to read the Constitution out loud. ” – Yea, because they don’t want people to be reminded of the things they are doing that are unconstitutional!

Barack Must Go said:
Huh?

foxnews said their policy is to drop someone from the pay roll when they start running for president. It supposedly excuses having potentials their like sarah palin and gingrich.

sarainitaly said:
where do they say they will read it in full every time a new bill is up? i read that the author of the bill needs to reference the part of the constitution that supports the bill, but nothing about a full congressional reading for every bill.

so when they reinstated the patriot act which part did they cite?

Fakes “News” distorted something somebody said? Whoa! Stop the presses!

This article refers to the the old saying; “You’re entitled to your own OPINION but not to your own FACTS.”

Tommy C quotes MSNBC’s Bill Wolff: “Factual errors bear correction in all cases.” I have heard occasional corrections on MSNBC shows, which verifies Wolff’s statement.

Boehner and the Republicans engage in meretricious displays of patriotism, which they promptly undercut by their words and actions. Reading the Constitution on the House floor was a fine idea; cutting out the parts they didn’t like was NOT. They campaigned on jobs, then proceeded to ignore the subject once elected. McDermott isn’t the only one annoyed by such pretentious foolishness.

They just passed a bill which essentially says that any OTHER bills they pass immediately become law, regardless of (or perhaps in spite of) how the Senate votes – and a direct violation of constitutional procedure. I wonder which part of the Constitution they will cite in order to supersede that same document – a document they claim to hold dear..

Taking a lesson from their mentors at Fox and others in the conservative media, many right-wingers here distort truths beyond recognition by engaging in rhetorical funambulations of dubious merit in order to arrive at anything resembling the end result they seek. They cannot or will not accept proven facts that are inconvenient to their foregone conclusions or preconceived notions.

They deserve either scorn or pity; I’m not sure which.

Sara-I find your posts more often than not articulate and factual however I have to disagree with your posts in this case regarding the reading of the Constitution. Mind you I am not diminishing the need for them to be knowledgeable of it. If they aren’t they shouldn’t be there in the first place. It hasn’t been done as you say for the last 200+ years for good reason. It is a monumental waste of time given how little time the do nothing Congress spends in session. Granted it may only take a couple hours to read, but shouldn’t that time be spent actually getting something done? Shouldn’t they earn their income before these misleaders go on some undeserved break or holiday or fact finding mission? I am not justifying Mcdermott’s comment as much as I am critical of a Congress that does this on the pretense of getting things done when in reality they waste precious time they could be solving some of the massive problems that this country is facing. What have these incompetent Democrats, Republicans & Independents actually notably accomplished as of late? Not much in my opinion.

Rockycomet said:
It hasn’t been done as you say for the last 200+ years for good reason. It is a monumental waste of time given how little time the do nothing Congress spends in session. Granted it may only take a couple hours to read, but shouldn’t that time be spent actually getting something done?

i just don’t think it was that big of a deal. sure it was theatrical, but at least they weren’t throwing parties, filling our NCAA brackets and golfing. it was theatrical to prove a point – that they need to respect and observe the constitution. In the grand scheme of things, I don’t really think anything *didn’t get done* because of it. They have enough problems getting things done as it is. haha

sarainitaly said:
i just don’t think it was that big of a deal. sure it was theatrical, but at least they weren’t throwing parties, filling our NCAA brackets and golfing. it was theatrical to prove a point – that they need to respect and observe the constitution. In the grand scheme of things, I don’t really think anything *didn’t get done* because of it. They have enough problems getting things done as it is. haha

“throwing parties” you ever seen those republican national conventions in florida?

sarainitaly said:
i just don’t think it was that big of a deal. sure it was theatrical, but at least they weren’t throwing parties, filling our NCAA brackets and golfing. it was theatrical to prove a point – that they need to respect and observe the constitution. In the grand scheme of things, I don’t really think anything *didn’t get done* because of it. They have enough problems getting things done as it is. haha

So you agree that they have enough problems getting things done? Shouldn’t they refrain from creating new precedence with those theatrics? I agree it’s not a big deal but consider how much monetary value there is when all these misleaders have to sit around during this venture collecting income that could be directed more positively. Congress doesn’t answer to anyone in the immediate to keep them moving along to accomplish something. As I mentioned they don’t spend that much time in session that they can take that kind of time and money and trivialize it. I’m no BHO fan but this is about Congress’ ineffectual behavior. Again if they aren’t aware of the Constitution to respect and observe it then they should not be there. Consider a company policy meeting starting with the reading of its employee manual and/or mission statement at the start, needless to say that would not be considered valuable time spent in reaching the objective for the meeting. Likewise Congress should be about addressing the problems at hand. I won’t go into which ones, from your posts I have read I think you know where their concerns should be.

Mr.Papshmer says:
Again, this isn’t about what McDermott may or may not have said or meant.
…………………………………………….
It should be, because this is another of many, many times Fox has been caught in a lie or rabid spin attack! They spewed this vomit several times, then you tea spin it to liberals being worse! If teas don’t like to be poked for lies or moron statements, stop making them and better yet, don’t lie about a liberal slip to try to keep up! Keep the hate alive! Spin on down the road!