Thursday, August 13, 2009

Bill Burton FTMFW!!!

Man if Bill Burton doesn't stop beating Megyn Kelly up like this, he is gonna get arrested for domestic violence!

Her intellectually dishonesty is ridiculous but he just keeps punching her with the facts over and over and over again till she looked damn near dizzy by the end of the interview.

And lets not forget that Bill Burton specializes in tearing Megyn Kelly's arguments to shreds.

Don't get me wrong, I like Robert Gibbs, but I really would like to see Bill Burton out there more.


  1. sheesh, these two should get a room.

  2. I generally like reading your posts but two things are turning me away.

    1. I can't paste into the comment box.

    2. You keep posting these videos claiming the person supporting our side did a good job. Every time I check the video out I'm left shaking my head in dispair. In this case Burton looked evasive--like he had something to hide. He could have said no the first time they asked about deletions instead of giving her the upper hand and letting her drag it out of him in the end. I came away actually wondering what they are trying to hide. One would prefer your spokesman didn't make your supporters wonder what you were hiding! This is another epic fail--a disaster for the White House. Burton should not be allowed on the tube.

  3. Well there are plenty of other blogs out there or you can start your own if you don't agree with the way I run mine.

    It is what it is.

  4. I don't understand why she'd ask Burton if the White House is doing something the White House isn't allowed to do. It's plain stupid. They can't delete emails that come to them in their normal course of business. If they could, people would probably think Nixon was a swell guy. I just wish Burton would have said "That's stupid, Meg."

    Did you see what her co-anchor said at the beginning of the next segment? Cringeworthy.

  5. Jack T

    That's EXACTLY why she was asking Bill Burton the question because she already knew the answer and she wanted to confuse the issue which is why Bill Burton made sure to pound the point again and again that it wasn't about having an "enemies list" and that FoxNews was trying to confuse their viewers.

    What she wanted him to do was admit because of the presidential records act they couldn't delete the emails so she could insinuate that they would be doing something nefarious with the email addresses. But Burton just kept on rope adoping her until she had to try to make the point herself at which time he started talking over her and continuing to press the point that it was about correcting misinformation.

    He handled it perfectly if you ask me and she got frustrated because he wouldn't allow her to frame the conversation.

  6. Of course Kelly had an agenda re getting the info she wanted out there. I can't believe I'm going to say this but I take her point about forwarding emails to the White House which contains the address of a third-party email author. Forwarding without permission or redacting is problematic IMHO. I happen to believe the White House does nothing nefarious with the email address but it is bothersome to me. For example, if Stormfront calls for their members to forward to them emails praising Obama and I wrote one to someone who forwards it to Stormfront, Stormfront now has my email address, which is something I'd never want. The tech geeks at the WH should have thought of another way.

  7. They need to let him out of the cage more often.

  8. AnonymousSecs

    Here is the thing though. Once you send an email to someone it is no longer your property really. I can forward an email from one of my friends to whomeever I like when it boils down to it. That is perfectly legal. If someone wants to forward an email from you to Stormfront there really isn't anything you can do other than not send a person who would do that kind of thing emails anymore.

    This is really just a nonstory masquerading as a half ass attempt at fearmongering. Lets think back to all those "forward this email and get $100" chain emails of the 90s. What exactly would the White House do? Do a trace on each and every email address? I don't think so. And if they did what would be the reason? What would they do if that information even if it was possible to be done?

    Nonstory I tell you

  9. SG

    Legal is one thing. Right is another. I understand your point, though. I also understand Kelly's, though it is hypocritical of her to find fault now. There's a post on Andrew's of a letter from a reader that brings up the point that Fox, et al. never made an issue out of the NSA trolling ISPs and emails for whatever they were searching for.

  10. So in response to my criticism your response to essentially say go elsewere then?

    Not a word about why you thought it was a good interview despite my impression? Just tell me to go away?

    Fine, live in your bubble.

  11. Let me clear something up for you. I don't blog for you, I blog for me. You said you don't like how I handle my blog. That's fine. But just because you like it doesn't mean I have to explain myself to you. There are plenty of other blogs if you don't like it. I gain nothing from you coming here or not coming here. My hope is that you find something interesting while you are here, but if you don't then I won't lose any sleep over it.

    If you can do it so much better why not start your own instead of complaining on mine? That's what it boils down to. So yeah I will live in my bubble and you continue to live in yours.


  12. so if i get an email with "fishy" information in it, and i would like to get some answers about it; then why could i not just pose my questions in an original email to the white house. why does the white house want me to forward the email with other peoples information in it?

  13. Who say's you can't? This is what the WhiteHouse asks you to do.

    "There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to"

    Notice there is nothing about forwarding the email in the text. Also notice that it says in addition to emails if there is anything at all you see on the web send it on which I presume means on any blogs or websites that you can't forward like an email. Its much to do over nothing simply put. You can send it in however you want if you have some kind of problem with forwarding.

  14. "if you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send IT to" not your questions about it, but the email itself.

  15. Look if you want to be paranoid about it then be paranoid about it. Nobody is stopping you. But just don't come here trying to be disingenuous. Nobody has to forward anything the don't want to. How about you spend your time worrying about all the special interests who are generating these eroneous emails in the first place, hmmm?

    Im done with it.

  16. why so testy. it was just a question. disingenous is what people are when they have an agenda. i was just making an observation.


Come Hard Or Not At All!