About us Login Get email updates
Quick Clip
Print

Napolitano on proposed building energy labeling program: "The next thing you know these fascists...are going to want to put barcodes on our skin

May 22, 2009 1:48 pm ET

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED
Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by nerzog (May 22, 2009 1:54 pm ET)
      2  
      Interesting. Now, under what Constitutional principle will we object to these barcodes on houses? Wait... wait.... don't tell me.... It's called the Right to... or is it the Right of.....

      Dang! I just can't come up with it. I would say the Right to Privacy, but Conservatives have insisted for decades that no such Right exists, so it can't be that.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by jduran4007681 (May 22, 2009 1:57 pm ET)
           
        its the right to privacy unless you know the conservatives are in power then its void
        Report Abuse
      • Author by Johnniewalker (May 22, 2009 2:45 pm ET)
           
        I'm not sure, but he does sound confident when he says it!
        Report Abuse
      • Author by neon desert (May 22, 2009 4:25 pm ET)
        2  
        Considering the primary sources of dissent, the first couple places I'd start looking if I was you would be in the second amendment and the bible. You can be pretty sure their legal justification on the topic wouldn't come from anywhere else.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by jduran4007681 (May 22, 2009 1:56 pm ET)
         
      im getting tired of hearing all this talk about fascist communist, and socialist i think they should go back to middle school and learn to look up definitions i know there can be some similarities but they're not the same thing like all these fox guests use them interchangeably
      Report Abuse
    • Author by mrbailey478303 (May 22, 2009 2:02 pm ET)
         
      An Australian no less....enough said.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by cmiller442 (May 22, 2009 2:07 pm ET)
      2 1
      The guy looked like a sleazeball before I even watched the clip.
      The clip just reinforced it.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by afroman (May 22, 2009 2:18 pm ET)
           
        Can someone tell me when this British guy will get deported? Who gives him the right to come here and start spewing hate with the radical righties at fox.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by fairliberal (May 22, 2009 2:59 pm ET)
          4
        That's not what people were saying yesterday, I guess to please you he must agree with everything you say. ..http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200905210025
        Report Abuse
        • Author by eweston8542983 (May 22, 2009 3:30 pm ET)
          2  
          Didn't your rhetoric coach teach you anything?
          Hasn't your reading here taught you anything?
          This seems to be where you feel any vague insult against people you don't like needs to be said.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by fairliberal (May 23, 2009 1:30 am ET)
              1
            Are you referring to cmiller's post? Do you approve of calling someone a sleazeball or is that OK because the person using that insult was a lib like you. Obviously your standards don't apply to some people, only to the ones you don't like.

            Report Abuse
            • Author by eweston8542983 (May 23, 2009 3:07 pm ET)
                 
              Nah it was all for you sweetheart.
              The phrase,"I guess to please you he must agree with everything you say", struck me as unrealistic unreal, and unsupportable. I had hopes for a better more subtle statement from yoou, as long as you've been arround.
              Cmiller's reasoning for the label might be interesting. Possibly briming with angst and common humanity. It might be his ebil descriptor of choice.
              Some folks fit the description of sleazeball. Cmiller seems to feel Napolitano fills the bill visually and rhetorically. You might ask him how Napolitano fills these shoes. Your post does nothing to resove the this.
              He does look a bit shifty. So, all recorded images do not show you to best advantage or show your true inner nature. Some do.
              Report Abuse
        • Author by nerzog (May 22, 2009 3:54 pm ET)
          2  
          See, Liberals are gifted with what is called Gray Thinking. It's the ability to grasp complexity and process nuances. One of our greatest powers is to agree with a person on one issue while disagreeing on another. It's quite extraordinary... really.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by neon desert (May 22, 2009 4:10 pm ET)
            2  
            I think you're wrong in your assertion that "issue discernment" is one of our greatest powers.

            Therefore you must be a socialist and I hate you.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by fairliberal (May 22, 2009 6:52 pm ET)
              2
            Actually I would disagree, someone who is classifing an indivual as a sleazebag is not engaging in gray thinking. And even pointing out that he thought that before he listened to the clip. I guess you approve of that type of behavior, since you only object to my post, it must be true. Obviously the Judge is capable of gray thinking.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (May 22, 2009 7:01 pm ET)
              1  
              Just as you say that every liberal here will post something deserving of insult before you read it.

              Hypocrite, heal thyself.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by fairliberal (May 23, 2009 1:07 am ET)
                  1
                Can you point out where I said anything like that, or ever insulted anyone before reading their post. Or are you just making that up.
                Interesting that you would accuse me of insults but obviously support the lib that did exactly what you accuse me of.
                I think you are the hypocrite that needs some healing.
                Report Abuse
    • Author by Luis81 (May 22, 2009 2:09 pm ET)
      2  
      Oh come on,of course it won't pass,people won't allow it.
      It would probably be voluntary...
      BTW,aren't we all supposed to be in FEMA camps?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by nerzog (May 22, 2009 2:21 pm ET)
        3  
        You know that money they were going to use for the Presidential fleet of helicopters? It's been diverted to make more of those Little Black Helicopters.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by jbrantow (May 22, 2009 2:43 pm ET)
      5  
      Isn't this the same side who is in favor ot the feds to monitor via infrared sensors to find grow lights inside houses so they can seek out and confiscate home grown marijuana plants? Oh I guess in there eye's it's ok to invade peoples personal rights then. Hypocrites!
      Report Abuse
      • Author by NiceguyEddie (May 22, 2009 2:57 pm ET)
        4  
        It's the same side who spies on it's citizens WITHOUT A WARRANT, enforces the law inside a woman's uterus, wants to keep you from getting porn, wants to tell you want substances you can and can't consume, wants to say who can sleep with who and HOW, wants to indoctrinate your kids into their version of christianity AND USE THE SCHOOLS TO DO IT, and wants to claim that there's NO RIGHT TO PRIVACY in the Constitution... all while claiming to have to do this in order to PROCTECT OUR FREEDOM!

        After all: You can't have civil rights if your dead!

        Of course... with the Republican's plan, apparently you can't have them if you're alive either.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by fairliberal (May 23, 2009 1:23 am ET)
            1
          Hmmm, spying without a warrant, are you referring to Clinton....http://jacksonville.typepad.com/patum_peperium/2006/01/clintons_lawyer.html......And it seems that Carter also approved ....
          [edit] Warrantless wiretaps and the history of FISA
          Main article: Warrantless searches in the United States
          The administration has compared the NSA warrantless surveillance program with historical wartime warrantless searches in the United States, going back to George Washington.[41]

          Critics have pointed out that Washington's surveillance occurred before the existence of the U.S. Constitution, and the other historical precedents cited by the administration were before the passage of FISA, and therefore did not directly contravene federal law.[53] Abuses of electronic surveillance by the federal government such as Project SHAMROCK led to reform legislation in the 1970s.[105] Advancing technology began to present questions not directly addressed by the legislation as early as 1985.[106]

          Executive orders by previous administrations including Clinton's and Carter's authorized the attorneys general to exercise authority with respect to both options under FISA.[107][108] In Clinton's executive order, he authorized his attorney general "[pursuant] to section 302(a)(1)" to conduct physical searches without court order "if the Attorney General makes the certifications required by that section".


          Wow, it seems that there is ample precedent going back to the days of Washington.
          And I can see from your post what your priorities are.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by mjh (May 22, 2009 4:26 pm ET)
      2  
      Napolitano on proposed building energy labeling program: "The next thing you know these fascists...are going to want to put barcodes on our skin"

      Well, if the barcode can be used to determine which people are blowing too much hot air, I think that's good . . . and I suspect JAN -- along with Rush, Sean, and Beck -- will have some of the biggest warning labels . . .
      Report Abuse
    • Author by loonz (May 22, 2009 4:31 pm ET)
      1 1
      Republicans already proposed that with the Real ID Act.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by big2xrube6146 (May 22, 2009 9:14 pm ET)
      1  
      Two more AH's that are full of BS.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by TJ_rex (May 23, 2009 4:55 pm ET)
         
      The fascist FOX station calling someone else fascist? That's a hoot!
      Report Abuse
    • Author by twseattle (May 25, 2009 4:51 am ET)
         
      The red-faced judge ranting about 'these fascists' has to be a top five clip for demonstrating what fair and balanced really means.
      Report Abuse