About us Login Get email updates
Quick Clip
Print

Showcasing Clinton 2003 remarks, Fox falsely suggests  Dem "hypocrisy" on free speech

August 11, 2009 8:24 am ET

From the August 11 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends:

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

Previously:

Conservatives attempting to pit Clinton against Pelosi on what's "un-American"

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by cuardai (August 11, 2009 8:34 am ET)
      6  
      Debate is the operative word here. Debate means listening when other people talk and then countering with your own argument. You either get the other person to agree with your point of view or they get you agree or you both agree to disagree CIVILY. That is what is American...
      Report Abuse
    • Author by thundavolt (August 11, 2009 8:34 am ET)
      4  
      The clip they played actually shows that the previous administration did not want anyone to debate or disagree. The people shouting down politicians do not want to debate and no one has a problem with them disagreeing. It seems to be a culture of drowning out things thy do not want to hear weather they are in or out of power.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by NiceguyEddie (August 11, 2009 8:49 am ET)
        3  
        It seems to be a culture of drowning out things thy do not want to hear weather they are in or out of power.

        Conservatism in a nut's hell.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by citizenbyright (August 11, 2009 9:59 am ET)
          3
        "At any given moment there is an orthodoxy, a body of ideas which it is assumed all right-thinking people will accept without question. It is not exactly forbidden to state this or that or the other, but it is “not done”... Anyone who challenges the prevailing orthodoxy finds himself silenced with surprising effectiveness. A genuinely unfashionable opinion is almost never given a fair hearing, either in the popular press or in the highbrow periodicals." -- George Orwell


        You will find that culture within the ranks of both left and right.

        Try writing something that doesn't resonate properly in this echo chamber,,, ;-)

        Report Abuse
        • Author by magnolialover (August 11, 2009 10:02 am ET)
          1  
          Except, that in this case, the people "disagreeing" with the health care reform choose NOT to have their ideas, or questions heard. They'd rather have their loud voices heard, and that's it.

          They don't want to engage on the merits of the proposals being set forth, because they know they'll look like fools if taken on what is actually in the reform bill.

          I ask them to please, PLEASE actually debate it. They won't. They can't, because their positions cannot be supported rationally, or with, you know, facts.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by citizenbyright (August 11, 2009 2:41 pm ET)
               
            Totally agree with you, on this issue. That is the way they have been led to express it, and in no small part because they have not been led to investigate, or become educated on the issue(s).

            They might be just as against the premise, even if they understood it better, but they would likely7 at least change focus and tactics.
            Report Abuse
        • Author by kfraz43 (August 11, 2009 10:18 am ET)
          1  
          I agree with you to an extent, and I would even go as far as agreeing that the forums here are a bit of an "echo chamber" (ANY site visited by like-minded people is going to possess a particular partisanship).

          The core issue here is NOT the fact that people disagree with the idea of health care reform - it's the attempt to stifle conversation (and therefore meaningful debate) that is the major problem. The m.o. is to make as much noise as possible so it's impossible to discuss healthcare, in order to prevent ANY reform from taking place. Insert fingers in ears, make loud noises with mouth. Repeat as necessary. This is not the same as voicing disagreement with an administration's policy decision.

          And I wish all of these people who just chant "read the bill" could be forced to prove that THEY'VE read it.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by magnolialover (August 11, 2009 10:20 am ET)
               
            They haven't read it, you can tell by their talking points. If they had read it, they'd know 99.9998% of what they're talking about, or "think" is in the bill, isn't actually, you know, in the bill.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by citizenbyright (August 11, 2009 3:24 pm ET)
                 
              In all fairness. I have done an extensive peruse of the Senate Bill, and I'd say that even if they did read it they wouldn't understand 99.9% of it, and neither would 99% of the average populace. Its worse than a credit card contract, which are usually written at around the 24th grade-level, and its over a 1.000 pages of it.

              I rnted a bit about that on the Geist-Palin-Gingrich thread, [currently at the] bottom.
              Report Abuse
        • Author by snoopy (August 11, 2009 12:53 pm ET)
             
          Did someone here send you a death threat?
          Report Abuse
          • Author by citizenbyright (August 11, 2009 2:36 pm ET)
               
            Well, death threats on anonymous message boards do happen, but rarely as its a bit nonsensical. Usually it manifests in a sort of 'you therefore are not a viable life-form' comment. :)
            Report Abuse
    • Author by renardot (August 11, 2009 8:36 am ET)
      1  
      These guys are totally out there. They lie and distort. How do these guys call themselves journalists. Oops they are not
      Report Abuse
    • Author by magnolialover (August 11, 2009 8:36 am ET)
      13  
      OK, let me lay this out for you Fox.

      In 2003, anyone who openly talked about opposing invading Iraq was branded a traitor. A terrorist sympathizer. Some were said to be wanting the US to get attacked again. Un-patriotic, and America hating.

      Fast forward now to 2009. Nobody, and I repeat NOBODY on the left is saying that people who oppose this health care reform should NOT be heard. No indeed. The thing these folks keep missing is that people from the left are calling for debate, and for that debate to be civil. You've seen the films from these meetings. Someone gets up, asks a question that the hoarde disagrees with, and immediately, they get shouted down. When someone is given a chance to speak, they are SHOUTED down.

      People who oppose reform should speak, but they should do so in a manner in which their representatives and or Senators can address them, address their grievances, answer their questions, and field their concerns. Showing up as a mob, yelling, shouting, and screaming about falsehoods you heard on FoxNews and Rush Limbaugh is not a dialogue, and it's not debate.

      Think back, also to 2003, and later years. When people were protesting the war showed up to meetings, or even townhalls, and they got loud, and boisterous what happened? They were shown the door, and rightfully so. A loud protest in a meeting such as this, is not the place for it. Take that stuff outside. Take that stuff to the street.

      What our current crop of mostly, from what I can tell, geriatric protesters seem to forget is that they're indoors, and maybe should be using their indoor grown up voices to interact with their Congress women and men, to hopefully get some real information, instead of the crap they've been fed.

      Something tells me, they don't care. They've already made up their mind, they KNOW that there are "death panels" waiting for them, and God forbid should the government take over Medicare...

      And it's funny that we keep hearing these republican hacks on Fox and other places talk about how democrats are trying to stifle dissent, and then they show video of townhall meetings totally disrupted by these people. I mean, democrats are trying to stifle their "dissent" so much, that they keep letting them disrupt their meetings.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by NiceguyEddie (August 11, 2009 8:50 am ET)
        1  
        Well said, Mags. But you're right: They don't care.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by harley (August 11, 2009 9:32 am ET)
        1  
        Great post, Mags. Thanks
        Report Abuse
      • Author by Truth Crusader (August 11, 2009 1:21 pm ET)
           
        OUTSTANDING POST!!! Damn! SO well said, and SO dead-on!!

        BRAVO!!
        Report Abuse
        • Author by citizenbyright (August 11, 2009 3:38 pm ET)
             
          You said it well. (speaking as one who's still angry about the silencing of protesters that wanted Oliver North to be grilled about all the cocaine that got flown in to MENA airport)
          Report Abuse
    • Author by seeryer (August 11, 2009 8:39 am ET)
      2  
      They might have a point if the quote was:

      "I am sick of tired of people saying that if you scream and holler at town meetings or hang the president in effigy or call him Marxist or Hitler-like that you sowmehow are unpatriotic. We should stand up and yell, "We are real Americans, ya'll are communist marxists who want to euthanize my grandma and we have a right to threaten your well being thanks to the second ammendment if y'all don't let me disrupt and infringe on people who I don't agree with's first ammendment."

      They play dumb and act like she did say that. Same thing with Nancy Pelosi. These people are useless idiots.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (August 11, 2009 9:40 am ET)
        1  
        On the contrary, they are very useful idiots to the Insurance and Pharmaceutical companies.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by marco21 (August 11, 2009 12:09 pm ET)
             
          It does amaze me that these people willfully shill for an industry who'd let them suffer without coverage if an "i" wasn't dotted.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by MidWestThnkr (August 11, 2009 4:36 pm ET)
               
            MONEY talks. They willfully shill for the almighty dollar and don't give a rat's hind end about WHERE it comes from.
            Report Abuse
    • Author by epkklk851 (August 11, 2009 8:39 am ET)
         
      We do have the right to debate and disagree, but shouting people down and cutting off mikes (as Fox does often) is not debate or discussion, it is intimidation. Screaming at a Congressman six feet from him is not political discourse, it is verbal assault. Making snarky remarks that compares yelling and disruption with debate isn't funny, it justifies the behavior on the part of future protesters. I will be going to a town hall in two weeks. I am looking forward to it, I intend to listen and ask questions on health care and maybe mortgage relief but I will come with a camera or a camcorder and I will be taking note of happens. I will see for myself how many people show up with Nazi or Marxist imagery and how many people are yelling. I went to a town hall with this Congressman two years ago, it was very nice. He had some very interesting speakers in, and when twice as many people showed up, they got another auditorium (same building) and wired it with TV coverage so the overflow audience could hear. There was one crazy lady there and some Libertarians outside, but people were well-behaved. I will see if the same is true this year.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by citizenbyright (August 11, 2009 9:47 am ET)
        1  
        Screaming at a Congressman six feet from him is not political discourse, it is verbal assault...


        Thats a good point.

        There are a great many and growing number of school districts where behavior like that will get your child arrested,,, if not tasered THEN arrested,,, AND sent to psycho-pharma-counseling.

        (unles of course the kid's just been raised to act like an animal but gets wrongly put into the 504 Plan,,, then he gets a cookie instead)
        Report Abuse
        • Author by magnolialover (August 11, 2009 10:04 am ET)
          1  
          Well, we are starting to see, maybe, where the kid gets the idea that this type of behavior is OK. It all starts in the home. Doesn't it?
          Report Abuse
          • Author by epkklk851 (August 11, 2009 11:46 am ET)
               
            When I was teaching high school overseas, I always looked forward to the Commencement ceremony. The faculty wore our robes and marched in with the Seniors. It was nice. When I was in an American public school, my colleagues were complaining about the upcoming Commencement, so I asked why. Apparently, it is now in vogue to come and cheer for your student, and only your student, like you are at a basketball game. The parents become very rowdy and bring airhorns and things to shake over their heads. What are we coming to? Graduation ceremonies should be serious occasions, applaud every student politely, they earned it; you can party afterwards.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by magnolialover (August 11, 2009 12:13 pm ET)
                 
              I can get on board with that. The commencement part. I mean, is it so hard to act civily in public when you are supposed to? Apparently, it is.

              I hate to say, "back in the day", but, back in the day, when I was growing up, if I screwed up, and someone else caught me screwing up, like a teacher, or a coach, or some other adult in my small town, my parents would hear about it, and when I got home, the punishment would be meted out.

              Go to today. My younger brother is a teacher. He calls the parents of kids he's having troubles with. Not only do the parents dodge his calls, but then call the school back, and complain that my brother is "picking on" their kid.

              That's just a small example, but he hears it all of the time. His principal just shakes his head.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by epkklk851 (August 11, 2009 12:39 pm ET)
                   
                I had a super Senior in my class (a student who remained in school beyond his original predicted graduation date), he needed my class to graduate. He came in late on the first day of class and one other time, and then I didn't see him for the next five sessions. When I called, his mother got him on a conference call with me, he claimed to have been there for every class (I had done the Ferris Bueller thing each class to make sure I wasn't missing him and did a nose count, too.) Anyway, the mother says to me "Miss, do you even know my son?" And I told her, "Ma'am, I've seen your son twice out of seven meetings, I don't know your son, but I would recognize him if he ever came to class." He still insisted he had been there. She ended the call at that point. I never saw the guy again. He dropped out. There is a price for this kind of parenting and this kind of behavior, and it will only get steeper. Uncivil discourse is just the beginning.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by citizenbyright (August 11, 2009 2:55 pm ET)
                     
                  Yes, it is bad, its been bad, and I do think its getting worse. There is a lot of 'general frustration' about, and people tend to take it out on whomever they can get away with taking it out on. [Most] everyone, in one form or to one extent or another, feels beseiged. Economically, ideologically, socially, sexually etc, and it comes from so many directions at once & sometimes nearly impossible to identify the 'source'. A general winner-take-all, 'if my neighbor breaks a leg, I can run faster' attitude. All too easy to circle the wagons around one's self and one's immediate 'group'.

                  One benefit the abject slave had over us,,, he at least knew who was on the other end of his chain.

                  Yes, there's an inordinate amount of monkey-see-monkey do to it as well.

                  Lots of factors 'behind' it all. The culmination of several generations of misguided social-darwinist ideoligies behind the Public School system itself is no small part of it.
                  Report Abuse
    • Author by DAWUSS (August 11, 2009 9:43 am ET)
         
      Where does that right come from?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by The_Cat (August 11, 2009 10:09 am ET)
      2  
      Clinton: You have the right to disagree with your government without being called unpatriotic or un-American.

      Pelosi: Drowning out opposing views is Un-American.

      So, two Democrats agree that discourse is okay. And, we have a panel of conservatives who are breaking their arms trying to pat themselves on the back for discovering 'hypocrisy'. An hypocrisy that doesn't even exist. They've truly begun reporting on fantasyland.

      By the way, Beck, no -one- person can sound like an angry mob, okay?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by shaggles (August 11, 2009 11:46 am ET)
           
        Even if those two statements contradicted each other (which they obviously don't) it still wouldn't be hypocrisy because Pelosi and Hillary are two different people.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by nkurland (August 11, 2009 10:32 am ET)
         
      The two quotes are fairly consistent. What exact aspects of free speech are being violated? The right to shout out civilized discussion? The right to harass and incite violence against elected officials? Fox news simply can't stand others voicing their opinions, or even worse, defending their right to them. This is hypocrisy cloaked in vurtue.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by mk3872 (August 11, 2009 11:21 am ET)
         
      Isn't there ANY difference at all in that anti-war protestors are protesting actual FACTUAL things they do not like that the govt is doing ... like sending our men & women to die?

      When the Tea Party driven Health Care protests are based on LIES and something the govt is NOT doing?

      1. Forced euthenasia
      2. Death panels
      3. Single payer
      4. Govt run health care
      .
      .
      .
      Report Abuse
      • Author by The_Cat (August 11, 2009 12:45 pm ET)
           
        mk3872, I think the 'Tea Party driven Health Care protests' are based on what they -imagine- the government doing with this power someday (i.e., when they have been voted back into office...).
        Report Abuse
    • Author by snoopy (August 11, 2009 11:41 am ET)
         
      Please, reichwingers, feel free to debate. Let us know when you plan to start...
      Report Abuse