'Is It Always Incumbent on You to Be So Condescending?'


J$P Video! Barney Frank snaps at Neil Cavuto.

From Your World, January 4 2007:

As surely as night follows day, Rep Frank appears on Fox and picks a fight with the interviewer [QuickTime video]:


posted: Thu - January 4, 2007 at 05:07 PM       j$p  send 

Tom
Were you not watching the segment beforehand, which ended literally 10 seconds before Frank came on, not after a commercial break, after which Cavuto said "So even Democrats can't screw this up?" or did you miss the on screen text reading, "Dems blowing opportunity with ego-driven power trip?"
 
Sure, pretend like Cavuto is the victim here.
January 4, 2007, 5:12:45 PM EST – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
I just checked the tivo, and the segment before Frank came on, not after a commercial break, was the daily roundtable on the markets. After which Cavuto did not say what you claim he did. What he said, DURING the segment, to one of his panelists, was "So YOU'RE SAYING, even Democrats..." You take Cavuto asking a question of a panelist to sum up his position, doctor the quote to leave out the first three words, and in true Fox hater fashion make it look like Cavuto was speaking for himself.
 
If you want to make a valid point, then make it. But tell the truth.
January 4, 2007, 5:34:54 PM EST – Like – Reply


Tom
It's obvious from what he said that he supported the statement, saying "EVEN" the Democrats can't screw it up. He supports the statement and you know it. Stop playing games. He is speaking for himself. The mere amount of biased segments show that it's the position of the network.
 
"Are Democrats splintering apart?"
"Dems blowing opportunity with ego-driven power trip?"
 
If CNN ran headlines with those kind of biased headlines Cavuto would be screaming and pulling his hair out yelling about "liberal bias".
 
The guest, by the way, did not say, "Even the Democrats...", Cavuto added onto what he said while asking him the question, meaning that Cavuto heard him say "Nothing can screw this economy up" and he added onto that by saying, "NOT EVEN THE DEMOCRATS can screw it up?"
 
So yes, it is Cavuto's opinion. He's a pathetically partisan little mouthpiece for the GOP.
January 4, 2007, 5:54:04 PM EST – Like – Reply


Tom
I also notice you don't seem to have much to say about the previous segment, in which the panelists bashed Dems around the table, not one single liberal or Dem supporter, just, "Dems are bad, want to destroy the economy, blah blah blah".
 
Oh, I'm sure they're all "independents".
January 4, 2007, 5:56:15 PM EST – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
There weren't any Repubs on with Frank. There weren't any on with Bart Stupak either. Horrors! Fox is a propaganda arm for Nancy Pelosi!
 
Yet even in your replies, after being called out, you still doctor and falsify Cavuto's quote. So much for that.
January 4, 2007, 6:01:08 PM EST – Like – Reply


Tom
That's his quote. It's not falsified. You misread what I said and came to the conclusion that I was claiming that he said that as Frank was coming on, or between segments or something. What, did you think I was claiming he was talking to the camera by himself? Jesus.
 
John Gibson was right on after him, antagonizing Kirsten Powers and then kissing up to Ed Gellespi. Notice the difference in his approach? He fed the Republican his own talking points and led into questions to help the former RNC chair get his own talking points into gear, while he continually cut Kirsten off with a lot of outrage over the fact that Dems are shutting out Republicans for the first 100 hours (only).
 
Did you once see Gibson have any outrage at all while the Reps were in power? That's the definition of hypocrisy.
 
That's the first time I've ever seen multiple Dems brought onto Cavuto's show at once, and even when he did he was obviously antagonistic. The entirely context of him bringing on Jesse Jackson was to push a GOP talking point that "The UNHINGED FAR LEFT IS DESTROYING THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY", i.e. the "Dems fracturing?" text on screen and Cavuto asking the ridiculous question, "Are Democrats eating their own alive?"
January 4, 2007, 6:20:32 PM EST – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
"Did you once see Gibson have any outrage at all while the Reps were in power?"
 
Oh let's see. Dubai ports. Immigration. Denny Hastert Foley affair. That's three. You want more, you'll have to do your own research. Just don't doctor any more quotes, OK?
January 4, 2007, 7:19:53 PM EST – Like – Reply


Ira
Tom: And don't forget the guy who was bashing Wal-Mart.
 
Three Libs out of 4 segments!
January 4, 2007, 7:58:15 PM EST – Like – Reply


Tom
Oh let's see. Dubai ports. Immigration. Denny Hastert Foley affair. That's three. You want more, you'll have to do your own research. Just don't doctor any more quotes, OK?
 
1.) Dubai Ports was not a partisan issue. Conservatives opposed allowing Arabs to control U.S. ports because they'r kneejerk fanatics. I'm a liberal, and I was actually ok with it.
 
2.) Illegal immigration is a conservative issue, meaning that Republicans criticizing the president are doing so from a CONSERVATIVE position, not a liberal position. That simply proves that he's ideologically partisan. "Hurr, I'm an independent because I criticized Bush over immigration" is like listening to a liberal say, "Hurr, I'm an independent because I criticized Clinton for welfare reform and compromising on gays in the military instead of just letting them serve". It's a pathetically transparent lie, and you know it.
 
3.) Foley - No real outrage, he spent more time attacking Democrats and claiming Dems were behind the whole thing. Indefensible to begin with. You make it sound like you're not outraged about it.
 
There, I debunked all three ridiculous points. Gibson is a conservative partisan hack. Wrote a book claiming all of those evil liberals want to take away Christmas from the kiddies.
January 5, 2007, 2:23:53 PM EST – Like – Reply


Tom
If the only criticism you can find of Fox hosts critiquing the president involve them complaining that Republicans aren't conservative enough, then don't bother, because that's so pathetic it's not even worth addressing. When you find a video clip of John Gibson attacking the Bush administration for its treatment of prisoners, it's tax policy, it's stand on gay rights or anything from a non-conservative perspective, then you can claim he's non-partisan.
 
If all you've got is, "Gibson is an independent, he rightly points out that Bush isn't conservative enough" then you're obviously an ideological fanatic who thinks that positioning yourself to the right of the GOP therefore makes you an independent. It doesn't. It makes you a nutjob and nothing else.
January 5, 2007, 2:27:01 PM EST – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
Said troubled Tom:
 
"Did you once see Gibson have any outrage at all while the Reps were in power?"
 
So I list three examples. How do they conform to Tom's question? OK class, let's look:
 
1. That was Gibson outrage when Republicans were in power.
 
2. That was Gibson outrage when Republicans were in power.
 
3. That was Gibson outrage when Republicans were in power.
 
But Tom said he "debunked" them. Does he claim they were not outrage? No. Does he claim it wasn't Gibson? No. Does he deny Republicans were in power? No. He debunked them by rewriting his original question to make it fit the results he wants! Classic Fox hater trick, the ever-shifting goal posts.
 
And even his weak arguments are mired in fantasy. Gibson called for Denny Hastert to resign from the first day. Tom's claim that he spent more time attacking Dems is just made up fiction, the stock in trade of the Fox haters.
January 5, 2007, 2:30:29 PM EST – Like – Reply


Tom
"But Tom said he "debunked" them. Does he claim they were not outrage? No. Does he claim it wasn't Gibson?"
 
First off, your response is childish and ridiculous. I didn't ask a general question, "Was Gibson ever outraged when Republicans were in power". Yeah, I think it's safe to say, that in the last 8 years he's probably been pissed off about something, at some point. You're deliberately playing stupid, and you're very good at it.
 
No, the question I asked was, "Where was the outrage when Republicans were in power?" following a debate over the issue of what Republicans did to Dems and are now asking not to be done to them. In other words, the real question was - apparently you're too stupid to figure this out on your own because you can't win the argument and therefore act like a spoiled brat by ignoring common sense and picking up the literal sentence by itself, out of context - where was Gibson's outrage that Republicans were doing THIS when Republicans were in power?
 
Apparently you need to have your hand held through every question.
January 5, 2007, 5:27:39 PM EST – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
No the question you asked, set aside in a paragraph all to itself, was:
 
"Did you once see Gibson have any outrage at all while the Reps were in power?"
 
I gave three examples which you tried to debunk. When that didn't work now you're trying a new tack, apparently insisting you were really talking about, what, how the House of Representatives is run? That certainly isn't what you asked, and you didn't even claim that until your debunking was debunked.
 
Whatever.
January 5, 2007, 5:36:00 PM EST – Like – Reply


thebronze
Tom (Lefty),
 
You're out of your league and your (alleged) arguments don't hold water.
 
Quite while you're behind...
January 5, 2007, 11:04:56 PM EST – Like – Reply


Chad P
I love when people argue to others who have 0 chance of ever being persuaded.
January 16, 2007, 12:26:14 PM EST – Like – Reply


Sock Puppets
Nice argument Johhny, you got taken to the woodshed by Tom and fisked and your answer is the answer teenagers use when they lose an argument 'Whatever.'.
January 29, 2007, 9:58:47 AM EST – Like – Reply