Media conservatives rush to defend Wilson
Conservative media have recently rushed to defend Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC) by criticizing a resolution by House Democrats that formally reprimands Wilson for shouting "you lie" at President Obama during his recent address before Congress. Their defenses have ranged from claiming that the House resolution is a "stunt," to suggesting Democrats are engaging in hypocrisy by reprimanding Wilson, to echoing Republican National Committee (RNC) talking points that the House should also reprimand Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY) for their previous statements and alleged actions.
Conservative media suggest Democratic double standard because they have accused Republicans of telling lies
Sean Hannity: Democrats called Bush a "liar" and were "never asked to apologize." On his Fox News show, Sean Hannity said: "We were talking earlier about all the horrible things that Democrats said about President Bush. Harry Reid among them called the president a liar and a loser. He was given an opportunity on Meet the Press to apologize -- didn't do so. And now they're going after Joe Wilson, who did apologize, repeatedly." Later in the show, Hannity said: "Harry Reid called the president a loser in front of schoolchildren. He's called the president a liar. Kennedy called him a liar. Pelosi has used unbelievable language -- Kerry and Murtha. And the list goes on. Here's the -- it's the double standard here. Democrats are never asked to apologize, and I'm just sitting there saying, all right, Joe Wilson did the right thing. He wanted to apologize, and he did. The president rightly accepted it." [Hannity, 9/15/09]
Alex Castellanos: Democrats "should censure President Obama" for calling conservatives liars. On CNN's The Situation Room, Republican strategist and CNN contributor Alex Castellanos said: "Hard to believe, but there's gambling in the casino, and politics in Washington. If they are going to censure someone for using the word 'lie' to demean their political opponents on the House floor, then clearly they should censure President Obama, who actually did it a few minutes before Joe Wilson right after he made an appeal to bipartisanship. So this is politics. It's not a good day." [The Situation Room, 9/15/09]
Conservative media repeat RNC talking point that if Wilson is reprimanded, so should Pelosi and Rangel
RNC press release: "Perhaps Democrats Should Spend More Time Demanding Apologies From Members Of Their Own Party." In a September 15 statement, RNC chairman Michael Steele asserted that Democrats should also reprimand Pelosi because she "attacked the intelligence committee" and Rangel because he allegedly "cheated on his taxes." From the statement:
In another stunning example of hypocrisy, congressional Democrats are wasting taxpayers' time and resources on a legislative measure to censure Congressman Joe Wilson so they don't have to talk about their exceedingly unpopular health care plan. Without question, Joe Wilson made a terrible error in judgment and has wasted no time in extending a personal apology to the president. The president has accepted his apology. If we are going to march Members down to the well of the house to apologize, Joe Wilson is going to have to get in line behind Nancy Pelosi, who attacked the intelligence community who protects us, Charlie Rangel who cheated on his taxes, Jack Murtha -- a walking scandal, and we all know how the Democratic leadership tried to protect William Jefferson. Democrats don't want an apology. They want a side show -- something to shift the focus away from their government-run experiment on health care.
Neil Cavuto: "[I]f they go after Congressman Wilson, might they then ... go after Charlie Rangel on alleged tax abuses?" Fox News' Neil Cavuto said: "But politics also is very famous for a little tit for tat. Are Republicans considering any action against Democratic leaders if they go after Congressman Wilson? Might they then, as I have heard others express, go after Charlie Rangel on alleged tax abuses and that he is not fit, given that, to be running the House Ways and Means Committee? In other words, do you see this escalate?" [Fox News' Your World with Neil Cavuto, 9/15/09]
Monica Crowley: "[T]here is no evenhandedness here" because no action was taken against Pelosi or Rangel. On Fox Business, Monica Crowley said: "This whole thing is absurd because there is no evenhandedness here. Nancy Pelosi, the speaker of the House, can tar the entire Central Intelligence Agency as a rogue body of liars, and she is OK. And Charlie Rangel, who writes the tax laws, is up to his eyeballs in all kinds of tax irregularities." [America's Nightly Scoreboard, 9/15/09]
Megyn Kelly cites Pelosi and Rangel to complain that "decorum in the House" is a "joke." Fox News' Megyn Kelly said: "You talk about the decorum of the House. And I think a lot of our viewers watch Nancy Pelosi stand outside of her House offices and say the CIA lies repeatedly to her. They see Charlie Rangel, the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, who is now in all sorts of tax trouble -- he pays his back taxes but faces no penalties? And Nancy Pelosi allows him to continue on as the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee? And they think decorum? What a joke." [America's Newsroom, 9/15/09]
New York Post's Charles Hurt: Democrats' actions "might rank up there as far worse." On Fox News' Studio B, New York Post D.C. bureau chief Charles Hurt said: "I mean, conduct unbecoming of a congressman, that doesn't -- you know, when you think about the things that Congress does and congressman do that drive us up the wall -- the crimes that they commit -- it's kind of hard to imagine that this is the one that rises to the level of, you know, of getting admonished over. You know, maybe putting the, you know, as the chairman of the tax writing committee, a guy that has trouble paying his own taxes or, I don't know, inflating the largest real estate bubble that leads to almost a second Great Depression. Those things might rank up there as far worse." [Studio B, 9/15/09]
Conservative media: Democrats' resolution is a "stunt" meant to distract from other issues
Charles Krauthammer: "It is obviously a Democratic stunt as a way to take attention away from the health care debate they are losing." On Fox News' Special Report, Fox News contributor Charles Krauthammer said: "Nonetheless, even besides the hypocrisy, he shouldn't have done it; he apologized. This is obviously a Democratic stunt as a way to take attention away from the health care debate they are losing. And every day that they don't have to speak about the specifics of a [health care] plan -- and the more it is examined, the more it loses support -- is a good day for the Democrats. So this was a good afternoon for the Democrats." [Special Report with Bret Baier, 9/15/09]
Kelly: "It's turning into a big circus now, and people aren't focusing on the issues." On Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor, Kelly said: "I don't care about Wilson at all. I think what he did on the floor of the House was inappropriate, and he owed President Obama an apology, and he gave it to him. And then President Obama, to his credit, accepted it, and that should have been the end of the matter. The reason I care is because our lawmakers have a lot of important things to be dealing with right now. And instead of dealing with them, they've decided to take to the floor, engage in this back and forth, which is taking up the national media cycle for several days to talk about whether he needed to apologize to the people who were present for the comment. The target of the comment has already said 'apology accepted,' and when asked on 60 Minutes whether he thought this dust-up in the House today made sense, President Obama said, see, this is the problem it's turning into a big circus now, and people aren't focusing on the issues." [The O'Reilly Factor, 9/15/09]
Washington Examiner's Chris Stirewalt: House action "clearly seen as a negative that it was a distraction." On CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight, The Washington Examiner's Chris Stirewalt said: "I mean, sure, it's true that they have rules. I think the larger question is: Does this communicate the right message to the American voter? Does this do the right thing for the Democratically-led House that's struggling in the polls right now, that's having some trouble with their initiatives? Does talking about this move the ball? And I think that you saw by the speaker not participating in a very robust way and then limiting debate was clearly seen as a negative that it was a distraction." [Lou Dobbs Tonight, 9/15/09]
Conservative media: Democrats are wasting taxpayers' time and money
Bill O'Reilly: "[T]hey're wasting the taxpayers' time and money." On his Fox News show, Bill O'Reilly said that in introducing a motion to censure Wilson, Democrats are "wasting the taxpayers' time and money." [The O'Reilly Factor, 9/15/09]
Kelly: Democrats "spending time that we pay for -- the taxpayers pay for -- on the floor of the House to issue a disapproval resolution." On America's Newsroom, Kelly said: "Joe Wilson clearly was out of line, clearly lost his temper, and clearly owed President Obama an apology, and he did it. And the president says that's enough, and that this is becoming a circus. And yet people continue to push it -- people like Nancy Pelosi, who even herself that night came out and said, that's enough, let's focus on health care reform. But others in her party rallied and pushed for more, and now we have them spending time that we pay for -- the taxpayers pay for -- on the floor of the House to issue a disapproval resolution. Is this what the U.S. Congress should be focusing on right now?" [America's Newsroom, 9/15/09]
Eric Bolling: "How much more time and money can we possibly waste?" On Fox Business' Happy Hour, host Eric Bolling said: "We have the full House here debating whether or not Joe Wilson should be censured, a rebuke ... disapproval? I mean, how much more time and money can we possibly waste on something ridiculous? ... Barack Obama already said, I accept your apology. Move on already, guys. Why waste our time with this?" [Happy Hour, 9/15/09]
Transcripts
From the September 15 edition of Fox News' Hannity:
HANNITY: We were talking earlier about all the horrible things that Democrats said about President Bush. Harry Reid among them called the president a liar and a loser. He was given an opportunity on Meet the Press to apologize -- didn't do so. And now they're going after Joe Wilson, who did apologize, repeatedly, and as they did earlier today.
[...]
HANNITY: We have this resolution today. He said I've apologized, they've accepted it, and I'm moving on.
J.C. WATTS (former Republican congressman): Right. Right.
HANNITY: And he said he's not going to do what Nancy Pelosi wants. Harry Reid called the president a loser in front of schoolchildren. He's called the president a liar. Kennedy called him a liar. Pelosi has used unbelievable language --
WATTS: Right. Right.
HANNITY: -- Kerry and Murtha. And the list goes on.
WATTS: Right, and we know the ugliness -- that's right, yeah.
HANNITY: Here's the -- it's the double standard here. Democrats are never asked to apologize, and I'm just sitting there saying, all right, Joe Wilson did the right thing. He wanted to apologize, and he did.
WATTS: Right.
HANNITY: The president rightly accepted it.
From the September 15 edition of CNN's The Situation Room:
CASTELLANOS: Hard to believe, but there's gambling in the casino, and politics in Washington. If they are going to censure someone for using the word "lie" to demean their political opponents on the House floor, then clearly they should censure President Obama, who actually did it a few minutes before Joe Wilson right after he made an appeal to bipartisanship. So this is politics. It's not a good day.
From the September 15 edition of Fox News' Your World with Neil Cavuto:
CAVUTO: Yeah, but he's already apologized to the president. But he has already apologized to the president, who said he accepts the apology, wanted to move on. They are not moving on.
REP. JOHN CARTER (R-TX): Yeah, he's -- twice, he has apologized; once when he called him and once in writing. So, he's apologized twice. It should -- we should move on. You know, health care is the issue. Health care is where we ought to be. That is what we ought to be discussing right now. It is a life-changing event. Why are we doing this? Who knows? Politics is funny.
CAVUTO: But politics also is very famous for a little tit for tat. Are Republicans considering any action against Democratic leaders if they go after Congressman Wilson? Might they then, as I have heard others express, go after Charlie Rangel on alleged tax abuses and that he is not fit, given that, to be running the House Ways and Means Committee? In other words, do you see this escalate?
From the September 15 edition of Fox Business' America's Nightly Scoreboard:
CROWLEY: This whole thing is absurd because there is no evenhandedness here. Nancy Pelosi, the speaker of the House, can tar the entire Central Intelligence Agency as a rogue body of liars, and she is OK. And Charlie Rangel, who writes the tax laws, is up to his eyeballs --
DAVID ASMAN (host): Yeah, but it's where --
CROWLEY: -- in all kinds of tax irregularities.
DAVID ASMAN (host): -- it's where -- Tracy, it is where it happened. And even Joe Wilson admits that it happened in the wrong place.
TRACY BYRNES (Fox Business correspondent): But he apologized. It was just --
ASMAN: That's the point.
BYRNES: He did it already. And again --
CROWLEY: The president accepted it.
BYRNES: -- they booed the president in the same place.
From the September 15 edition of Fox News' America's Newsroom:
KELLY: You talk about the decorum of the House. And I think a lot of our viewers watch Nancy Pelosi stand outside of her House offices and say the CIA lies repeatedly to her. They see Charlie Rangel, the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, who is now in all sorts of tax trouble -- he pays his back taxes but faces no penalties? And Nancy Pelosi allows him to continue on as the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee? And they think decorum? What a joke.
From the September 15 edition of Fox News' Studio B:
HURT: Yeah, but, you know, I mean, conduct unbecoming of a congressman, that doesn't -- you know, when you think about the things that Congress does and congressman do that drive us up the wall -- the crimes that they commit -- it's kind of hard to imagine that this is the one that rises to the level of, you know, of getting admonished over. You know, maybe putting the, you know, as the chairman of the tax writing committee, a guy that has trouble paying his own taxes or, I don't know, inflating the largest real estate bubble that leads to almost a second Great Depression. Those things might rank up there as --
SHEPARD SMITH (host): Oh, yeah.
HURT: -- far worse and deserving of censure.
SMITH: It's all politics, man. I mean, he spouted off at the mouth at the president; you know, he had a strong feeling. Then the leadership made him apologize. Then he sort of came back on his apology for his base. And then the other side is doing this for their base. It's all politics, isn't it?
From the September 15 edition of Special Report with Bret Baier:
KRAUTHAMMER: Well, he was out of order; it was a lack of decorum. He shouldn't have done it. I suspect if it had been a different Joe Wilson, the husband of the outed CIA agent who was a liberal hero and martyr in the previous administration, if he'd been in the House and he'd yelled, "You liar," to President Bush, the liberals would have carried him on their shoulders out of the hall as a hero speaking truth to power.
Nonetheless, even besides the hypocrisy, he shouldn't have done it; he apologized. This is obviously a Democratic stunt as a way to take attention away from the health care debate they are losing. And every day that they don't have to speak about the specifics of a plan -- and the more it is examined, the more it loses support -- is a good day for the Democrats. So this was a good afternoon for the Democrats.
From the September 15 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor:
O'REILLY: Tonight Democrats in the House are taking some revenge on Congressman Joe Wilson. They just voted 240 to 179 to issue a formal disapproval of the congressman for calling President Obama a liar last week, and Megyn Kelly is kind of upset about it. Here now is the attorney and Fox News anchor, along with attorney and Fox News analyst Lis Wiehl. Why do you care about Wilson, I mean, you know?
KELLY: I don't care about Wilson at all. I think what he did on the floor of the House was inappropriate, and he owed President Obama an apology, and he gave it to him. And then President Obama, to his credit, accepted it, and that should have been the end of the matter. The reason I care is because our lawmakers have a lot of important things to be dealing with right now. And instead of dealing with them, they've decided to take to the floor, engage in this back and forth, which is taking up the national media cycle --
O'REILLY: Yeah --
KELLY: -- for several days to talk --
O'REILLY: So it's a waste of time.
KELLY: -- about whether he needed to apologize to the people who were present for the comment. The target of the comment has already said "apology accepted," and when asked on 60 Minutes whether he thought this dust-up in the House today made sense, President Obama said, see, this is the problem it's turning into a big circus now, and people aren't focusing on the issues.
From the September 15 edition of CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight:
STIREWALT: Well, I mean, sure, it's true that they have rules. I think the larger question is: Does this communicate the right message to the American voter? Does this do the right thing for the Democratically-led House that's struggling in the polls right now, that's having some trouble with their initiatives? Does talking about this move the ball? And I think that you saw by the speaker not participating in a very robust way and then limiting debate was clearly seen as a negative that it was a distraction.
From the September 15 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor:
O'REILLY: They're wasting -- they're wasting the taxpayers' time and money.
KELLY: Which they do -- that is what they do best, and they did more of it today.
From the September 15 edition of Fox News' America's Newsroom:
KELLY: When Joe Wilson clearly was out of line, clearly lost his temper, and clearly owed President Obama an apology, and he did it. And the president says that's enough, and that this is becoming a circus. And yet people continue to push it -- people like Nancy Pelosi, who even herself that night came out and said, that's enough, let's focus on health care reform. But others in her party rallied and pushed for more, and now we have them spending time that we pay for -- the taxpayers pay for -- on the floor of the House to issue a disapproval resolution. Is this what the U.S. Congress should be focusing on right now?
From the September 15 edition of Fox Business' Happy Hour:
BOLLING: We have the full House here debating whether or not Joe Wilson should be censured, a rebuke -- what was it called? --
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Disapproval?
BOLLING: -- disapproval.
ALAN COLMES (Fox News contributor): Yeah.
BOLLING: I mean, how much more time and money can we possibly waste on something ridiculous? This is --
COLMES: Aw, look at all the taxpayer dollars.
BOLLING: Barack Obama already said, I accept your apology. Move on already, guys. Why waste our time with this?
For the House, with a plate-full of priorities that actually affect the lives of their constituents, to spend one moment on this toothless, worthless reprimand is ridiculous. A stunt would be a kind description for this waste of time. It's no wonder they consistently have such low approval ratings. When they do stuff like this they deserve them.
He still thinks he was right about the issue, even though he was wrong.
The House and the Senate have the right & duty to reprimand its own members for bad behavior.
As is typical, I am certain that your indignation at reprimanding a Republican will easily slide away were a GOP-led Congress intent on such proceedings against Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid.
Besides, they are adults. They can do more than 1 thing at a time.
It's not just "bad behavior", it's against House rules. Teabaggers like Tommy-On can't stand that bit of fact and reality. The House has EVERY right to reprimand Wilson (R) for breaking House rules and they SHOULD reprimand Wilson (R) for breaking House rules.
So what? I guess you forgot about it being the right thing when someone breaks this rule.
Another reason why politicians from both sides should stop placating the far outs of their base and grow a collective pair.
Wish the dems would stick to the rational, because when specific criticism it devolves to "racism!!" it lowers the debate into teabagger-territory.
As MK said above, they can do more than one thing at once.
Bachmann has said that she thinks Congress should be investigated to see who is un-American and that Obama wants to enslave your children.
Pretty simple to claim enabling there ...
Unfortunately, this will not prevent a reoccurrence because the Republicans do not respect the Office of the President or the man.
Your analogy is idiotic. Arguing that Congress can do some very important things while doing other less urgent things is a great argument when someone says that they should be concentrating on the important things and ignoring the more mundane things.
It's not worthless to enforce rules that encourage common courtesy and civility.
And neither does this grandstanding bone the leftist Congress threw to their far left base with this silly resolution.
Dana Rorhabacher and Jeff Flake voted to appease the far left?
Here's one from Rep. Bob Inglis, like Wilson a South Carolina Republican:
Whatever you think of the resolution, that's a reasonable position. I'm suprised you couldn't see that from the "sensible middle." :~O :~O :~O
After all this time, I'm still astonished at what right-wingers think of as "far left" or "leftist".
You seem to subscribe to the "Through the Looking Glass" school of thought that runs, "When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean". You should reconsider: It's not as if our discourse can stand to be cheapened still further.
It's a poor reflection upon the Republicans who didn't vote for this censure. The grandstanders were the Republicans who would not vote for this very reasonable censure.
Another example of projection. It wasn't the people who did the reasonable thing (bringing up a disapproval vote and voting yea) who were grandstanding. It was your side, RightOn.
But I don't expect elected public officials to cater to their whims and sidebar nonsense at the expense of working to solve real problems and honestly addressing important issues. We don't pay them to throw pitchforks and sling arrows at their political opponents, we pay them to rise above crap like that and do the work.
You can't be this stupid that you can't understand this, so it must be that you won't.
We see the classic signs of projection from Right ON here. It's the hypocrisy, stupid. On your side of the aisle, you DO treat your own kind differently than you treat the opposition, so you assume that we would do the same thing, but we wouldn't. What Charlie Rangel did has been identified as inadvertent and he immediately remedied his error when it was pointed out. Wilson, on the other hand, violated House rules yet won't apologize to the House members for doing so! Your analogy sucked, and still you can't admit it.
It wasn't needless or senseless politics. It is very necessary to enforce civility and common courtesy. It's too bad that for your side, partisan politics is more important that civility.
------------------------------------------------------------------
My Blog
Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, one of the many activities deemed punishable by court-martial is "contempt toward officials." This code of laws applies not just to active-duty officers but to retired ones, too. It's right there in Article 2, Section (a) (5): Persons subject to the UCMJ include "retired members of a regular component of the armed forces who are entitled to pay."
“Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.”
It does not matter if he thought his outburst was true, nor does it matter if he was speaking as a "citizen" or a member of the House of Representatives.
The elaboration of Article 88 of the military's Manual for Courts-Martial, the implementing document for the UCMJ, states:
It is immaterial whether the [contemptuous] words are used against the official in an official or private capacity.
In short, it's no defense for a retired colonel in the SC National Guard to say, "I'm just speaking as a private citizen."
Second, the manual notes:
The truth or falsity of the statements is immaterial.
So there goes THAT argument.
Yep, court martial him. He will be a martyr. The Democrats will look like absolute fools and lose every election from now until doomsday. Wilson will win in a landslide and raise more money than he ever dreamed. Limbaugh, Beck and the rest will grow so loud and popular that their marginalized stature now will look like peanuts when compared to the fallout from a media blitzed court martial trial of one Joe Wilson.
One for the books.
Well put. And when you drag them through a meaningless exercise in public admonishment it only emboldens them and their supporters to play the victim role to the hilt.
The republicans/conservatives have lied about many things over the years, and with healthy assists from the so-called liberal media, have been getting away scot-free. They have been held accountable for none of their transgressions, from lying us into into a war in Iraq to wrecking the economy. They have always been rewarded for their failures. This is why the country is in the shape it is in today.
The outrage over this vote in the H of Rs to let Wilson know that his behavior was wrong is being blown all out of proportion because republicans/conservatives are finally being forced to realize that Congress does have rules, and those rules must be followed. The real outrage should have been the suddenly re-discovered interest in working to solve America's problems that I saw on display in the H of Rs by the republicans yesterday. After lying and obstructing progress for 8 months, when some of the members of the H of Rs decided to condemn Wilson's actions as a violation of Congressional rules of decorum, all of a sudden the republicans were focused on the amount of time wasted by discussing the reasons for/against passing the resolution. More lies. Republican after republican standing in the well, pushing the same lies. Hypocrites and liars on parade, in living color.
It is never a level playing field when one side is able to commit multiple acts of wrong-doing and continue getting away with them. Wilson showed no real remorse for his act. After apologizing to the president, he wasted no time defending his actions, all while not telling his supporters that all of the members of Congress had advance copies of the president's speech before the speech was given in the joint session. Even after the media fact-checked the president's statement and determined that it was Wilson who lied, his supporters continued to rally around him. For Wilson to apologize and then turn around and act in a way that nullifies the sincerity of the apology illustrates the flaw in his basic character. The truth is not his friend.
To those posting on this site in defense of this type of behavior, you are no better than Wilson. If you will not stand for truth and facts, what you are standing for is the perpetuation of lies and mis-information. Good luck with that because, sooner or later, the facts will come out, the truth will come to light, and you'll realize that you've been made a fool of by the very people whose every word and action you accepted as gospel.
Seems like Congress has bigger issues to waste taxpayer dollars on...like, say, the Presidential Eligibility Act, which didn't seem to need amending for 38 years until the guy that doesn't look like us got into office.
Mr. News
Mr. News