O'Reilly out at FOX!

[JMarie]

1 hour ago, GrumpyGran said:

And...? I know it's the holidays but did Hannity get kidnapped? Surely we would have heard. Did Dumpy actually steal Hannity's thunder with his verbal diarrhea when he was headed out for his "work" vacation? Where are the earth-shattering revelations?

Tuesday's episode was more of his usual, with his usual guests (Geraldo, Newt, Sebastian).  Even though I was fast forwarding through the episode, I could still tell he was rambling on about uranium and Bill Clinton's indiscretions.  Judge Jeanine filled in on Wednesday, and there was a rerun of something last night.  I don't understand how his fans aren't tired of the same exact thing every single night.

[GrumpyGran]

1 hour ago, JMarie said:

Tuesday's episode was more of his usual, with his usual guests (Geraldo, Newt, Sebastian).  Even though I was fast forwarding through the episode, I could still tell he was rambling on about uranium and Bill Clinton's indiscretions.  Judge Jeanine filled in on Wednesday, and there was a rerun of something last night.  I don't understand how his fans aren't tired of the same exact thing every single night.

So, a big nothing burger, eh? No surprise.

[Cartmann99]

3 hours ago, JMarie said:

  I don't understand how his fans aren't tired of the same exact thing every single night.

Perhaps a good chunk of his audience are coma patients?

[JMarie]

Kimberly Guilfoyle is guest-hosting tonight.  Seems to be, or at least it was last month, that she's dating Anthony "The Mooch" Scaramucci.  Ewww.

[onekidanddone]

Ah Mary.  You knock it out of the ball park every time

 

[GreyhoundFan]

"Sean Hannity makes his best case for Trump’s success. Let’s evaluate."

Spoiler

Each weeknight, Fox News Channel airs an unqualified defense of the Trump presidency for one hour. That hour is hosted by Sean Hannity, a media personality who proudly rejects the label of “journalist” and who explicitly endorsed Trump’s candidacy. A profile of Hannity in the New York Times magazine presents a fleshed-out look at a guy who is largely the sum of what he presents on television: a longtime advocate for right-wing politics who has seized on Trump with sincere enthusiasm.

“He’s firm in his support of the president,” one friend of Hannity’s told the paper’s Matthew Shaer, “and woe unto you if you don’t see things the same way. He’s a shield.” Stephen K. Bannon, late of the White House, described Hannity as “the single most important voice for the ‘deplorables’ ” — the description of Trump’s base appropriated from a Hillary Clinton campaign speech.

On Monday night’s show, Hannity picked up a thread that has wound through President Trump’s tweets for some time now, the idea that Trump has accomplished far more than his detractors give him credit for. This was manifested clearly by Trump in a Saturday evening tweet praising a list at a sketchy website called MAGAPill.

Not to be outdone, Hannity created his own list, declaring that “members of the lazy, destroy-Trump media” weren’t interested in sharing these important updates.

... < nauseating video >

Hannity, as noted, is a member of the bolster-Trump media. Which means that his list includes items that are either not accomplishments, not accomplishments of Trump’s or not descriptors of things that actually took place.

As his list scrolled, Hannity lamented that he didn’t have time to discuss each of the items it contained. We do.

Neil M. Gorsuch on the Supreme Court. Actual accomplishment? Yes. This has emerged as Trump’s favorite talking point to describe his success, in part because it serves as a reminder to conservatives of the power of having a Republican president. It’s not debatable that Trump nominated Gorsuch and that Gorsuch was confirmed by the Senate, although the accomplishment is not without asterisks: Gorsuch occupies a seat held open by Republicans until Barack Obama was out of office, and his confirmation came only after Senate rules were changed to allow it.

Stock market at all-time high / Consumer confidence at 16-year high / Almost 1.5 million jobs created / Unemployment rate at 16-year low. Actual accomplishment? Debatable. These things are all generally true. The market keeps hitting new highs; new jobs are being created. But where the credit lies is another issue.

The bull market began in 2009, for example, well before Trump entered office. Consumer confidence is at a high — and also has been trending upward and the unemployment rate downward for some time. The job creation numbers are good, but generally have trailed job growth under Obama in 2016.

Americans still generally give Obama credit for the economy, in fact. Calling it an accomplishment of Trump’s is generous. It’s also risky. The market numbers provide a concrete upward trend to which Trump can point — but if the market dives, he can as easily be blamed.

Signed the Promoting Women in Entrepreneurship Act. Actual accomplishment? Sure. The legislation, signed into law in late February, was introduced by a Democrat from Connecticut while Obama was president.

Gutted Obama-era regulations / Ended war on coal / Weakened Dodd-Frank regulations. Actual accomplishment? Yes. Trump has been deliberate and unsparing in targeting Obama-era regulations and priorities, giving members of his administration a lot of leeway to undercut what prior administrations had done. That includes weakening environmental protections that focused on reducing the use of fossil fuels, and it includes eliminating rules aimed at protecting customers of financial products — like a rule that mandated that financial advisers act in their clients’ best interest.

Promoted buying and hiring American. Actual accomplishment? No. This is not an accomplishment simply because it involves saying “Buy American.” It is also not an accomplishment because there’s no indication that it has done much; even Trump’s private businesses are still hiring non-American workers.

Investment from major business (Foxconn, Toyota, Ford and others). Actual accomplishment? Mixed. Foxconn is planning to build a new factory in Wisconsin. Toyota is planning one, too, in partnership with Mazda. The one from Ford, though, was first announced in 2015, highlighting the question at hand: To what extent does Trump deserve credit?

Notice that Hannity’s list didn’t include the Carrier production facility in Indiana, which was a big talking point for Trump during the presidential transition. That deal has not delivered on its promise of protecting jobs.

Reduced illegal immigration. Actual accomplishment? Yes. Illegal immigration did decline early in 2017, clearly in part out of concern about how the Trump administration would handle those here illegally.

Bids for border wall underway. Actual accomplishment? No. Accepting bids for a construction project is to an accomplishment what ordering a meal is to feeling full.

Fighting back against sanctuary cities. Actual accomplishment? Mixed. Trump has embraced the idea promoted by conservative media outlets that sanctuary cities represent a failure in the fight against illegal immigration. As with buying American, Trump has, in fact, “fought back” against sanctuary cities rhetorically. His administration’s attempt to punish sanctuary cities by cutting off funding was rejected by the courts.

Created Victims of Immigration Crime Engagement Office. Actual accomplishment? Yes. Trump’s Justice Department did create this controversial department, which aimed to provide information on the status of immigrants who’d committed crimes. In its early days, the department largely fielded calls about space aliens.

Changed rules of engagement against ISIS/Drafted plan to defeat ISIS. Actual accomplishment? No. It’s odd that Hannity didn’t use another metric for ISIS (another term for the Islamic State). The Islamic State has lost a lot of territory over the past several months, and its de facto capital of Raqqa has reportedly fallen.

Those could be counted as accomplishments, and Trump has done so. Instead, Hannity celebrates two procedural efforts that are not best described as “accomplishments.”

Worked to reduce F-35 cost. Actual accomplishment? No. “Worked to reduce” is not “reduced,” an actual accomplishment. The cost of the F-35 did drop last year, something for which Trump took credit (although the decrease was had been expected). It went back up earlier this year. The Pentagon is now trying to finagle the price back down.

Five-year lobbying ban. Actual accomplishment? Sort of. Shortly after taking office, Trump signed new lobbying rules that prevented appointees from lobbying their agencies for five years after leaving the administration. But at the same time, Trump’s order eliminated the requirement that the administration inform the public about how well the rule was working and softened Obama-era rules aimed at keeping former lobbyists from working for agencies they’d once lobbied.

Sanctioned Iran over missile program. Actual accomplishment? Sort of. Trump could have pushed to scrap the Iran deal, but didn’t. Instead, he said he wouldn’t certify that Iran was complying with the deal’s terms (which the United Nations says it is) and called for new legislative sanctions on the country. He also added new sanctions against Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, although the effect of that move is expected to be limited, given how many sanctions the group already faces.

Responded to Syria’s use of chemical weapons. Actual accomplishment? Yes. After the Syrian government again apparently used chemical weapons against rebelling forces, Trump ordered airstrikes against airstrips in the country.

Introduced tax reform plan. Actual accomplishment? No. See “bids for border wall underway.” In fact, this is even less of an accomplishment, because the tax reform plans under consideration in the House and the Senate were crafted by lawmakers, not the White House.

Renegotiating NAFTA. Actual accomplishment? Yes. Negotiations are underway.

Withdrew from the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Actual accomplishment? Yes. This was one of Trump’s first moves as president.

Removed the United States from the Paris accord. Actual accomplishment? No. The United States can’t formally withdraw from the agreement until 2020. Trump simply announced his intention to initiate that withdrawal process, which would begin in 2019.

DOJ targeting MS-13. Actual accomplishment? Sort of. Federal criminal investigators targeting criminal gangs is not outside the realm of the ordinary. Trump has focused on MS-13 in part because it overlaps with his push against immigration.

Signed an executive order to promote energy independence and economic growth / Signed an executive order to protect police officers / Signed an executive order to target drug cartels / Signed an executive order for religious freedom. Actual accomplishment? Sort of. Trump likes to tout the numerous executive orders he has signed as accomplishments, but, then, executive orders are unilateral declarations that often have little effect.

When Obama was issuing executive orders, Hannity did not consider them to be accomplishments.

... < tweet >

Sending education back to the states. Actual accomplishment? Sort of. Education Secretary Betsy DeVos has encouraged states to develop their own innovations in education. Part of that effort depends on the Every Student Succeeds Act, which replaced George W. Bush’s No Child Left Behind and reduced the federal government’s role in education.

It was signed into law in 2015 by Obama.

Fixing the Department of Veterans Affairs. Actual accomplishment? Yes. Trump has put a focus on veterans and has signed multiple laws aimed at supporting them.

SCOTUS upheld part of Trump’s temporary travel ban executive order. Actual accomplishment? No. A third party upholding part of a temporary executive order is hard to categorize as an accomplishment. Trump repeatedly has tried to craft a travel ban that the courts would accept, without luck. A partial victory on a measure that was intended to last only 90 days is not what Trump promised.

Authorized the construction of the Keystone pipeline. Actual accomplishment? Yes. Trump’s State Department approved the permits needed to bring the Keystone XL pipeline across the Canadian border to complete a route to the Gulf Coast.

Created commission on election fraud. Actual accomplishment? Sort of. Trump did indeed create this commission. It seems unlikely to complete its mission, though, facing multiple lawsuits, including one filed by an actual member of the commission.

Hannity’s list aside, it’s worth comparing what Trump has done to what he promised to do. His campaign released a two-page list of his plans for his first 100 days in office. It includes some of the items above but also added legislation aimed at repealing the Affordable Care Act (which failed in the Senate), creating term limits for members of Congress (non-starter) and pushing charter schools.

PolitiFact estimates that Trump has accomplished eight of his 103 campaign promises — and broken three of them. Members of the energetic, pro-Trump media won’t tell you that.

I'm sure Hannity will say the WaPo is lying.

[AmazonGrace]

Not sure I want to find out what he did in private, without witnesses, to somebody more than five years ago. 

[Cartmann99]

Well, there's this:

 

[onekidanddone]

2 hours ago, AmazonGrace said:

Not sure I want to find out what he did in private, without witnesses, to somebody more than five years ago. 

 

26 minutes ago, Cartmann99 said:

Well, there's this:

 

Ugh. Here we go again. Not that I'm surprised by this.  He always gave off the creep vibe.

[GrumpyGran]

1 hour ago, onekidanddone said:

 

Ugh. Here we go again. Not that I'm surprised by this.  He always gave off the creep vibe.

Hahahha! I went to the salon today because I'm still slightly concerned about my appearance and the convo was about the whole Matt Lauer and such and one of the other women said there are a lot of men out there sweating. Yep, I think so. 

[infooverload]

I was saying to my husband tonight add another fuck wit to the pile. Followed by do men reach a certain income and power level and go rules um yeah we don't need no stinken rules? Unless it's rules to dictate morality for other people and to espouse their knowledge of Biblical law. While ostensibly breaking them on the regular.

[GreyhoundFan]

"‘Look, I’m not defending Trump’: An anatomy of Tucker Carlson’s deflective agenda"

Spoiler

President Trump cannot possibly be pleased with Fox News host Tucker Carlson. Nor can Paul Manafort, Trump’s former campaign chairman. Nor can Michael Flynn, the fired national security adviser. Nor can Russian President Vladimir Putin.

What gripe could possibly unite these fellows?

Tucker Carlson refuses to defend them. And he is quite vocal about it. “I’m not defending Trump. As an American, I mean it,” said Carlson back in June. Context for that failure to defend came from Carlson’s exasperation with the Russia collusion story. Even though Robert S. Mueller III had been appointed special counsel just a few weeks earlier, Carlson suggested that the whole affair had ground on for too long. “We’ve got as precisely as much proof right now that President Trump committed treason as we had seven months ago when all of this started,” he said.

And so Carlson blasted all the folks whom he holds responsible for feeding the collusion story: Former FBI director James B. Comey, for leaking notes of a meeting with Trump; the media, for being the media; Democrats, for driving the collusion “story line.” They’re all culpable, he argued, for a story that wasn’t panning out — at least not on the Carlson timeline.

Note the one thing that these culpable parties carry in common. They’re all top-of-the-list antagonists of President Trump, as we learn from his Twitter account, his random media appearances, and so on. As he whacks away at these folks, Carlson doubtless understands that he opens himself to the charge that he’s doing the bidding of Trump.

And he cannot possibly allow that impression to prevail. Hence the I’m-not-defending construction. It’s a staple of “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” as the chart below chronicles:

... < great chart >

“I’m not defending” appears to be a distinguishing feature of Carlson’s show on Fox News. A Nexis search for “not defend!” turns up more than 50 results over the past year for “Tucker Carlson Tonight.” Carlson’s cable peers, such as Fox News’s Sean Hannity and MSNBC hosts Rachel Maddow and Chris Hayes, rarely or never employed this language over the same time period.

The mantra continues a dubious tradition during the 8 p.m. prime-time hour on Fox News. Bill O’Reilly, the previous occupant of this table-setting slot, hoodwinked his audience by making showy nods to evenhandedness, even as his selection of topics, guests and talking points pointed in a decidedly ideological direction. Though he rarely used the same “not defending” framework, O’Reilly issued assurances about the “no spin zone” and his straight-talking ways, just in case viewers got the notion that he was tilting things. He was fair and balanced because he said so.

One year into his primetime career at Fox News, Carlson has proven himself a wilier type. Again and again, the host returns to a formula in which he blasts away at someone who’s more often than not a left-leaning figure of marginal name recognition. There’s generally something quite specific that Carlson and his crew have identified about these guests. Perhaps one of them, in their view, overreached in characterizing the federal response to the disaster in Puerto Rico; perhaps one of them, in their view, wasn’t sufficiently critical of a Latino gang; perhaps one of them, in their view, merely wrote something stupid. With these nits in hand, Carlson proceeds to build entire segments around the shortcomings of these folks, who are commonly critics of the Trump administration.

At some point in the midst of ridiculing these targets, Carlson is careful to position himself in the middle of the road, and that’s where “I’m not defending” comes into play. Asked about the tactic, Carlson told the Erik Wemple Blog last week in a wide-ranging interview: “Let me say generally that we don’t talk about Trump, or I try not to talk about Trump very much at all, both because I think Trump is over-covered, but also because I think a lot of the debates that we’re having, the meaningful ones, aren’t about Trump at all.”

“I don’t think the Trump election was about Trump at all,” Carlson said. “And I think there are much bigger questions out there, and I don’t have the answers to all of them.”

More: “I just, I’m asking really simple questions about what people believe and the implications of what they believe. And I don’t know why more people aren’t doing it.” When pressed on his dedication to the anti-anti-Trump cause, Carlson responded, “It’s not all about Trump. Now I know, at your paper, everything is about Trump and like there’s some prize in store for the reporter who catches him in the 10,000th lie or something.

“I mean, that’s how you guys see the world. That’s fine. I’m not — you know, go crazy — but I’m not interested in that.”

Now, Carlson has been not-defending Trump and Manafort and Flynn and the rest of the crew for quite some time. In November 2016, he took over the slot formerly occupied by Greta Van Susteren and has bounced around the prime-time schedule since then. Hundreds of hours of programming, in other words, and many refusals to defend the White House. Given such circumstances, you might suppose that the host would dedicate a segment or two to blasting the fellows that he’s so determined not to defend. We’re waiting.

Deflecting from the depravity of Team Trump by finding fault with those who oppose it — it’s not a strategy or a tactic or a ploy. Rather, it has developed into a worldview articulated in TV format by Fox News and echoed in other conservative media precincts as well. Writing in the New Republic in January, Jeet Heer noted how National Review moved from writing stolid anti-Trump essays during the campaign to more of an anti-anti-Trump posture once the president took office. “National Review kind of likes what Trump wants to do, though they might have doubts about the execution. They also know what they don’t like: Liberals criticizing a Republican president,” wrote Heer.

That’s precisely what Carlson cannot abide and will not defend.

Good gravy. I can't imagine anyone believing him.

[AmazonGrace]

The obligatory Fox hot take is so hot Hell freezes over

 

[onekidanddone]

In a Fox Spews studio Monday:

Imagine if you will Sean Hannity pacing and ranting on how to save Trump from Saturday's Flynn tweet... and DING DONG.. a light bulb goes off above his head.  

"I got it"! "Barack Obama wrote the tweet and Hillary Clinton hit send".  Yea, yea, that will work.  My viewers will buy that.

[GreyhoundFan]

I know it's Faux Business, but that's just another shade of Faux News: "Obama should be arrested for implying Trump needs a filter, Fox Business host suggests"

Spoiler

Call it an unwritten rule — a matter of decorum among the small fraternity of men who once held the title “leader of the free world.”

Before he left office, Barack Obama said his goal was to steer clear of the political spotlight — as George W. Bush had done when he left the White House — giving the new president room to govern without Obama's shouldering into every debate with the megaphone that being a former commander in chief affords.

But a Fox Business commentator said Obama violated that unwritten rule with a recent comment about Trump’s tweets. What’s more, according to Fox Business host Lou Dobbs, that violation should merit arrest.

“I think U.S. marshals should follow [Obama], and anytime he wants to go follow the president like he is and behave [like that],” Dobbs said on his show Friday. “I mean, this is just bad manners. It’s boorish and it’s absurd and he doesn’t realize how foolish he looks.”

“I mean, he should be brought back by the marshals. Isn’t there some law that says presidents shouldn’t be attacking sitting presidents?”

The Obama comments in question came during a leadership forum in India, according to The Washington Post’s Annie Gowen.

Someone asked Obama about recent comments made by his wife, Michelle, in Toronto: The former first lady said it was never a good idea to “tweet from bed,” a not-so-subtle commentary on Trump’s early-morning social media habits.

In New Delhi, her husband agreed.

“Michelle was giving the general idea. … Don’t say the first thing that pops in your head. Have a little bit of an edit function,” he said. “Think before you speak. Think before you tweet.”

Telling Trump to have an edit function is far from the worst thing a former president has said about the commander in chief.

Obama has made stronger statements while defending his legacy against Trump’s attempts to repeal the Affordable Care Act, end the United States’ participation in the Paris climate accord and impose stricter immigration limits.

In January, according to The Post’s Juliet Eilperin, Obama encouraged Americans to protest Trump’s move to ban citizens from seven majority-Muslim countries from entering the United States.

“The President fundamentally disagrees with the notion of discriminating against individuals because of their faith or religion,” Obama spokesman Kevin Lewis said in a statement.

Obama is not the only president to criticize Trump. According to The Post’s David Nakamura, during a rare political speech, former president George W. Bush criticized a political system “corrupted by conspiracy theories and outright fabrication” in which nationalism has been “distorted into nativism.”

“We’ve seen our discourse degraded by casual cruelty,” Bush said during a 16-minute address at “The Spirit of Liberty” event. “Bullying and prejudice in our public life sets a national tone and provides permission for cruelty and bigotry. The only way to pass along civic values is to first live up to them.”

Bush’s father, the 41st president, bashed Trump in more concise, plainer terms, according to CNN.

In historian Mark Updegrove’s new book, titled “The Last Republicans,” George H.W. Bush said of Trump: “He’s a blowhard.”

“This guy doesn't know what it means to be president.”

By Dobbs’s reasoning, the marshals may also have to come for the Bushes, too.

Fuck you, Faux.

[GrumpyGran]

10 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

Isn’t there some law that says presidents shouldn’t be attacking sitting presidents?”

The short answer to that is "No", moron. But there should be a law against you worthless trolls stirring up shit and feeding brainless racists with insinuations that are clearly biased.

[GreyhoundFan]

"Bill O’Reilly sued by woman who says he violated terms of settlement in a harassment case"

Spoiler

Bill O’Reilly is being sued by a woman who claims he violated a settlement agreement in a harassment case by disparaging her in the news media as a liar and extortionist.

Rachel Witlieb Bernstein’s attorneys filed a lawsuit Monday in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against O’Reilly and his former employer, Fox News, for breach of contract and defamation.

One of the lawyers, Neil Mullin, said O’Reilly and the network violated a non-disparagement clause in their 2002 settlement agreement with Bernstein, which stated that if asked about the case, they should simply say “the matter has been settled.”

“But he’s gone far beyond that and painted our client in a terrible light,” Mullin told The Washington Post.

As the New York Times reported:

O’Reilly has repeatedly said that the harassment allegations that led to his ouster from Fox News in April have no merit, that he never mistreated anyone and that he resolved the matters privately to protect his children.

Mullin said O’Reilly’s comments violated the 2002 agreement and illustrate a broader issue, in which powerful men who are exposed as harassers attempt to discredit their victims.

“The reason women don’t come out is because there’s a pattern of these men lashing out,” Mullin said.

A spokesman for O’Reilly declined to comment. O’Reilly’s attorney and Fox News could not immediately be reached for comment.

The Times reported in April that O’Reilly and Fox News paid out millions of dollars to five women to settle harassment claims.

As the newspaper said at the time:

Fox News has been aware of complaints about inappropriate behavior by Mr. O’Reilly since at least 2002, when Mr. O’Reilly stormed into the newsroom and screamed at a young producer, according to current and former employees, some of whom witnessed the incident.

Shortly thereafter, the woman, Rachel Witlieb Bernstein, left the network with a payout and bound by a confidentiality agreement, people familiar with the deal said. The exact amount she was paid is not known, but it was far less than the other settlements. The case did not involve sexual harassment.

Bernstein’s attorneys said in a statement Monday that she “was not the source for this revelation.”

“Knowing Ms. Bernstein and O’Reilly’s other victims are afraid to speak out because he and Fox forced them to sign nondisclosure agreements, O’Reilly and Fox have made false and disparaging claims,” Mullin, her attorney, said in a statement. “They should release all victims from their NDAs and let the truth out. It is cowardly to publicly attack these women knowing they have been subjected to contractual provisions requiring absolute silence.”

The lawsuit says Bernstein has suffered loss of income, emotional distress and sickness.

Fox News severed its relationship with O’Reilly in April amid mounting harassment claims.

Color me unsurprised.

[AmazonGrace]

 

[onekidanddone]

23 minutes ago, AmazonGrace said:

 

Can't be true because global warming is a hoax.  I just hope the first responders are okay

[GrumpyGran]

On 12/6/2017 at 4:07 PM, onekidanddone said:

Can't be true because global warming is a hoax.  I just hope the first responders are okay

 Fake news suddenly becomes very real?

[AmazonGrace]

just hear those handcuffs ringing and jing ting tingaling too 

come on it's a lovely weather for a sleigh rape together with you

 

Personally I hope Santa Claus finally gathers the strength to come out and report Mommy for that time she tickled him under the beard so snowy white and sexually assaulted him under the mistletoe.  

[AmazonGrace]

Jeanine Pirro is being unhinged again. 

[Audrey2]

5 hours ago, AmazonGrace said:

just hear those handcuffs ringing and jing ting tingaling too 

come on it's a lovely weather for a sleigh rape together with you

 

Personally I hope Santa Claus finally gathers the strength to come out and report Mommy for that time she tickled him under the beard so snowy white and sexually assaulted him under the mistletoe.  

I'm glad you mentionef this. I Saw Mommy Kissing Santa Claus has always been one of my 3 least favorite Christmas songs. Even though i know the "punch line", a song about groping and insinuated infidelity doesn't scream "Christmas" to me. 

[Cartmann99]

8 hours ago, AmazonGrace said:

just hear those handcuffs ringing and jing ting tingaling too 

come on it's a lovely weather for a sleigh rape together with you

Personally I hope Santa Claus finally gathers the strength to come out and report Mommy for that time she tickled him under the beard so snowy white and sexually assaulted him under the mistletoe.  

From the article:

Quote

Failla and Ingraham then turned their attention to Vox, which they ridiculed for imposing a two-drink limit at this year’s office holiday party in an effort to keep things under control.

Limiting the alcohol limits the fun, Failla argued, offering an enthusiastic endorsement of drunkenness at office parties.

“I’m pro-holiday Christmas party,” he said. “I think it serves a purpose, which is to build comraderie over someone getting trashed. You know, you get that one night a year to be like, ‘Simmons took his shirt off and jumped in the the water fountain.'”

Is everybody at Fox a complete moron? You want your boss thinking of you as that person who finds creative solutions to problems, not that person who gets drunk and climbs up on a table to sing Margaritaville. 

 

[JMarie]

3 hours ago, Audrey2 said:

I'm glad you mentionef this. I Saw Mommy Kissing Santa Claus has always been one of my 3 least favorite Christmas songs. Even though i know the "punch line", a song about groping and insinuated infidelity doesn't scream "Christmas" to me. 

Grandma Got Run Over By A Reindeer is mine.  If she lived close enough to be able to walk home, why couldn't anyone have gone to her house and pick up her missing medication, or walked or driven her home after the meal?