Tuesday, September 15, 2009

Is "factually challenged" OK?

This is what happens when rules replace good manners and laws replace self-restraint. The result, no doubt, will be more ingenious and imaginative invective — followed by more rules.
House Rules Committee Chairwoman Louise Slaughter (D-NY) has released a helpful, updated primer for members regarding their conduct on the floor and in committees. ....

Under section 370 of the House Rules and Manual it has been held that a Member could:
  • refer to the government as “something hated, something oppressive.”
  • refer to the President as “using legislative or judicial pork.”
  • refer to a Presidential message as a “disgrace to the country.”
  • refer to unnamed officials as “our half-baked nitwits handling foreign affairs.”
Likewise, it has been held that a member could not:
  • call the President a “liar.”
  • call the President a “hypocrite.”
  • describe the President’s veto of a bill as “cowardly.”
  • charge that the President has been “intellectually dishonest.”
  • refer to the President as “giving aid and comfort to the enemy.”
  • refer to alleged “sexual misconduct on the President’s part.”
House guidelines for Presidential put-downs - Glenn Thrush - POLITICO.com

1 comment:

  1. Is it ok for an entire side of the House to boo a president during the State of the Union address?


Comments are moderated. I will gladly approve any comment that responds directly and politely to what has been posted.