Kilmeade says Boxer used same "condescending tone" with General that she uses "with almost everybody in the military"
June 18, 2009 8:26 am ET
From the June 18 edition of Fox News Channel's Fox & Friends:


Media Matters: The right-wing media's election analysis just ain't that good
The Friday Rush: For conservatives, $400 million buys defeat at the ballot box
The myth of Fox News' ratings spike|
|
||
![]() |
||
The folks at Fox must think this is an awfully thin-skinned General.
This was not some informal meet and greet. They were in a formal hearing and it was no different from a judge asking a person in their court to refer to him/her as "Your Honor." I am sure both would agree that she made no egregious breach of etiquette in her request, though maybe worded a little obnoxiously while interupting the Generals response.
Both of them are professional people, and I am willing to bet dollars to donuts, that both would agree that in formal settings they BOTH have earned and deserve the respect of their positions and titles.
The General wasn't intending to disrespect the Senator, but was simply concentrating on his answer too much to conciously address her as "Senator". I'm sure if you asked him, he'd admit that it was his error, one which he sincerely regrets (along with the feeling of resentment he feels for Boxer putting him on the spot like she did).
"Sir" and "ma'am" are polite and respectful, but when it comes to anyone who has an official title that they have worked hard to get - General, Senator, Doctor, President, etc. - that's what should be used.
But if our TV talking heads are assuming that our generals are as sensitive as the bedwetters at Fox, then maybe Fox needs better hosts.
I have no idea why anyone would give you a thumbs down for the obvious WK. ;-)
I'd prefer that anyone who doesn't like a post of mine will offer a response instead of an anonymous thumbs down.
But I've got to confess, sometimes it's a lot easier to use the thumbs down than to argue with a wingnut.
Sorry, couldn't resist.
I seemed to have angered either three generals or three right wing bedwetters. My money's on the bedwetters.
Especially "That one!".
Sorry, I just find that bit of trivia endlessly amusing.
The General wan't offended, Boxer was. If our Senators are so sensitive, maybe we need better Senators!
The male Senators didn't take offense to being called Sir.
I have no doubt that FOX has an army of interns scouring the media for any and all minutiae from which they can fabricate the Outrage du jour.
They make me tired.
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Hearings.Choose&Hearing_id=c7026be1-802a-23ad-4fa3-4c8ed0b6d074
and watch the webcast of the hearing (starting at 29:40 to 33:45)
Here's the breakdown of the number of times Walsh called Boxer "ma'am":
ma'am 29:44
yes ma'am 29:46
ma'am 30:52
no ma'am 31:43
ma'am 32:46
ma'am 32:56
yes ma'am 33:38
ma'am 33:43
(At this point, Boxer made the "Could you say Senator?" comment)
About two minutes later, Walsh again said "ma'am", but quickly corrected himself:
ma'am um senator 35:40
While perhaps the General was sincere and trained/conditioned to use the word "ma-am", it was becoming tedious. It was 8 times in a span of two minutes.
Another example of a non-event being treated as a major news story.
THANK YOU.
njguy93@yahoo.com