We Have a New Home! Please Click Below to Go to the New Freedom’s Lighthouse!


Blog Archive

Thursday, January 28, 2010

Juan Williams Says It Was Inappropriate for Obama to "Scold the Supreme Court" During State of the Union - Video 1/28/10

Here is video of Fox News' Juan Williams reacting to President Obama's attack on the Supreme Court during his State of the Union Address last night:

"I'm not sure it was appropriate for the President of the United States to scold the Supreme Court as the Supreme Court sat there, allowing members of Congress to stand and applaud in opposition to that recent decision - I just, it worries me in terms of intimidating a branch of government."

NOTE: Reader Larry S. pointed out that Juan Williams did not actually say the word "inappropriate." He said "I'm not sure it was appropriate." While the clear meaning of his full statement is that Williams thought it was out of bounds for Obama to do what he did, I should only put the word in quotes if it was literally said. In doing the headline, I let my interpretation go into the quotation marks. I stand corrected, but do stand by the interpretation.


Larry S January 28, 2010 at 4:58 PM  

So, let's get this straight: someone who says "I'm not sure it was approriate" is actually saying "it IS inappropriate"? And it's proper "journalistic" form to put the word "inappropriate" in quotation marks to signify that somebody said soemthing that they didn't actually say?

Awww, hell, you'll just say what you want to say, anyway. Who cares if it's factually accurate or not?

Brian January 28, 2010 at 6:39 PM  

He said it worried him that Obama was "intimidating a branch of government." That would seem to me to go along with his intent that what Obama did was inappropriate.

But then when you support a party that parses the meaning of "is," nothing is clear.

You are right on the use of the quotation marks. I have removed those, but stand by the obvious meaning of what he says.

Larry S January 28, 2010 at 11:03 PM  

"But then when you support a party that parses the meaning of "is," nothing is clear."

I realize Bill Clinton put on a few pounds in his heyday, but I didn't know he was an entire political party of his own. Are you really suggesting that the Democratic Party, as an institution, parses the meaning of the word "is"? Be careful, Brian, you're letting your biases show a bit too much. Maybe, since you support all things Republican, you erroneously assume that anybody who calls you on your biases automatically supports all things Democratic? Wrong again.

By the by, I thought that Clinton committed perjury, that he was rightfully impeached and that he SHOULD have been removed from office for it. I don't believe that anyone should parse the meaning of the word "is", certainly not in that context. Sorry that that doesn't fall into line with your rash assumptions.

Thanks for correcting your error, though. That much, at least, is commendable.

Brian January 28, 2010 at 11:18 PM  

I think we should all be willing to admit it when we make a mistake.

  © Blogger templates Newspaper III by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP