As I’ve
written before, I try to avoid blogging about MSNBC stuff
because the viewership size doesn’t justify the effort, but
sometimes it’s worth it to cite examples of how off-the-wall the
Left can be — not that we need many reminders.
As I’ve
written before, I try to avoid blogging about MSNBC stuff
because the viewership size doesn’t justify the effort, but
sometimes it’s worth it to cite examples of how off-the-wall the
Left can be — not that we need many reminders. Or like
yesterday, when progressives just forfeit a battle by
inaccurately reporting historical events. That’s what Ed Schultz
did when former Newt Gingrich spokesman (when he was House
Speaker) Tony Blankley was a guest on his program, to discuss the
1995 government shutdown in light of a potential lame duck
session this November. Newsbusters’ Noel Sheppard
captured the exchange:
Clearly underestimating his opponent, Schultz rudely introduced
the subject of a Republican proposal to not have the Congress
come back for a lame duck session after November’s elections by
saying, “No one knows better about shutting down Congress than
someone who was right there working for Newt Gingrich when it
happened before.”
Not letting this stand, Blankley gave the “Ed Show” host a
much-needed history lesson…
SCHULTZ: You bet. Do you think it plays to the sensibilities of
Americans to suggest a plan that, gosh, the Congress would only
be in session to do something for the American people several
weeks out of the next four months?
BLANKLEY: Well, first of all, I’ve got to correct the record as
I expected I would. Newt did not close down the government in
‘95. The Republican Congress passed two bills and the President
Clinton decided to veto them because he didn’t like what was in
the bill, which was funding plus requiring to balance the
budget in seven years. And by the way, if you dispute it, I do
have in my hot little hands the transcript from Nightline of
the night the government closed down with Cokie Roberts and
President Clinton agreeing that he vetoed the bill. So, putting
that aside, we didn’t want to close down the government. We
wanted to balance the budget….
SCHULTZ: Well, let me, so you don’t have history revisionism
going on here, Tony, the fact is is that it was Newt Gingrich
who made the decision based on the action of President Clinton
that okay, that’s it, we’re just going to shut her down. The
President was not advocating shutting down the Congress. Is
that correct?
BLANKLEY: That is not, that is not true. Newt passed, we
passed, we passed the bill with the money and the debt limit
raise which is what was required. By the way, I have a
Congressional Research Service study that says the same thing.
Republicans passed the bill. The President vetoed it.
Not realizing his gaping wounds, as Sheppard notes, Schultz
continued to press Blankley based on his ridiculous premise. I
love it when the Left makes it so easy.
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause
and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress
impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist
surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our
culture.
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it,
makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so
many people seem to be hostile to it?