PDA

View Full Version : How to get fired from Fox in under 5 minutes


Mort
02-13-2012, 03:59 PM
Apparently this guy got fired from Fox after this rant (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOaCemmsnNk)

Gilshalos Sedai
02-13-2012, 04:04 PM
Not surprised.

Sei'taer
02-13-2012, 04:11 PM
What if the judge was correct?



Is this guy a contributor or a fox personality? I had to look him up to see who he was. I wonder if he got canned for voicing his opinion and it doesn't match Foxnews? Seems like the best explanation to me.

Dajoran
02-13-2012, 04:30 PM
He wasn't fired for this.

His show Freedom Watch is being axed along with the rest of Fox Business' Prime-Time shows.

According to what I can find so far he is going to be moving to Fox News (http://nation.foxnews.com/judge-napolitano/2012/02/11/judge-napolitano-will-go) from Fox Business.

When I was checking this, straight information on Google was a hard to find through all the rumour sites.

Mort
02-13-2012, 04:36 PM
Either way, if he got fired for saying this, or if he said it because he was about to be fired/moved or whatever, it's pretty funny :)

DaiShan1981
02-13-2012, 05:30 PM
Names like "Freedom Watch" always puzzle me. I know it's not the only one of it's kind on Fox. Judging from a European (or at least a Dutch) perspective, I believe with some certainty that any show with a name so pretentious (or dumb, I can never decide which, which adds to my confusion) would get laughed off the screen before it got there. Even our current right-wing prodigy Geert Wilders wouldn't try something like that, I think. It must to be a cultural thing.

Terez
02-13-2012, 06:17 PM
When you type 'judge' into Google, he's the second result after Judge Judy.

Mort
02-13-2012, 06:29 PM
Is he really a judge? Why is he called Judge if he's not working as one?

Terez
02-13-2012, 06:40 PM
Is he really a judge? Why is he called Judge if he's not working as one?Because he was one. So he's not practicing, but he does have the experience. It's kind of like a football player becoming a coach and then a sports commentator.

Kimon
02-13-2012, 06:41 PM
Is he really a judge? Why is he called Judge if he's not working as one?

We have a long-standing habit of allowing people to continue claiming honorifics long after being booted from office. For former presidents that is one thing, but you can also see this for instance with Romney - still referred to as governor, though he would have been crushed had he ran for re-election to the governorship of Massachusetts (although he technically wasn't defeated so I suppose he deserves a pass on this), Rick Santorum - still given the designation of senator, though he was trounced in his re-election bid in 2006, and with Newt Gingrich - as Former Speaker of the House and US Rep, though he resigned in disgrace.

Mort
02-13-2012, 06:49 PM
Because he was one. So he's not practicing, but he does have the experience. It's kind of like a football player becoming a coach and then a sports commentator.

It's kind of like stupid :)

We have a long-standing habit of allowing people to continue claiming honorifics long after being booted from office. For former presidents that is one thing, but you can also see this for instance with Romney - still referred to as governor, though he would have been crushed had he ran for re-election to the governorship of Massachusetts (although he technically wasn't defeated so I suppose he deserves a pass on this), Rick Santorum - still given the designation of senator, though he was trounced in his re-election bid in 2006, and with Newt Gingrich - as Former Speaker of the House and US Rep, though he resigned in disgrace.

Silly honorifics. At least put "former" in front of it. But hey, I can't get used to you call your doctor "Doctor Lastname" :) Or is that not cool now?

Terez
02-13-2012, 08:53 PM
Governor Romney, Senator Santorum, Speaker Gingrich, and Dr. Paul.

GonzoTheGreat
02-14-2012, 05:14 AM
"What if reality was real?"

Are people actually allowed to ask that kind of thing on Fox? If so, then it's a far more liberal network than I'd thought.

Ozymandias
02-15-2012, 10:06 AM
We have a long-standing habit of allowing people to continue claiming honorifics long after being booted from office. For former presidents that is one thing, but you can also see this for instance with Romney - still referred to as governor, though he would have been crushed had he ran for re-election to the governorship of Massachusetts (although he technically wasn't defeated so I suppose he deserves a pass on this), Rick Santorum - still given the designation of senator, though he was trounced in his re-election bid in 2006, and with Newt Gingrich - as Former Speaker of the House and US Rep, though he resigned in disgrace.

Actually, Kimon, there are rules of address regarding these things. I believe offices that have only a single officeholder (aka governor) are only addressed with the honorific while they hold said office. So your right that addressing Mitt as "Governor Romney" is incorrect. But for senators, judges, congressmen, etc, it is actually permissible to continue to say Senator Santorum or Representative Gingrich. You seem to think they don't deserve it, which is your own business, but technically a tv personality looking to show respect or formality is correct in using their former office titles.

DaiShan1981
02-16-2012, 08:43 AM
I'm pretty sure if you've been "President", you keep the title.
[EDIT] Or was it that you get it back posthumously?

GonzoTheGreat
02-16-2012, 09:12 AM
Or was it that you get it back posthumously?
How to test that? :eek:

SonofElvis
02-16-2012, 11:44 AM
Actually, Kimon, there are rules of address regarding these things. I believe offices that have only a single officeholder (aka governor) are only addressed with the honorific while they hold said office. So your right that addressing Mitt as "Governor Romney" is incorrect. But for senators, judges, congressmen, etc, it is actually permissible to continue to say Senator Santorum or Representative Gingrich. You seem to think they don't deserve it, which is your own business, but technically a tv personality looking to show respect or formality is correct in using their former office titles.

The rule is that if there are more than one, you keep the title. Therefore, Governor Romney is correct, as there are many governors out there. However, referring to Newt as "Speaker" is incorrect. At any one time, there can be only one Speaker of the House. President as an honorific after leaving office has been accepted since the beginning; when George Washington died, papers referred to him as President. It's the only acceptable use of a singular position title after the title no longer applies.

GonzoTheGreat
02-16-2012, 12:49 PM
How about if the title may be held by one or more* people simultaneously?
To wit: does Newt Gingrich have the right to demand that he's adressed as Man of the Year (which title (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Person_of_the_Year) he got in 1995)?

I'm a bit curious to what extend Americans carry this idea of non-noble noble ranks.

* Or fewer. See 1982.

eht slat meit
02-16-2012, 12:56 PM
How about if the title may be held by one or more* people simultaneously?
To wit: does Newt Gingrich have the right to demand that he's adressed as Man of the Year (which title (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Person_of_the_Year) he got in 1995)?

I'm a bit curious to what extend Americans carry this idea of non-noble noble ranks.


Not that far, really. It's mostly the press, which probably feels a need to present at least a modicum of respect, and folks with an agenda. Nothing says 'authority' like constantly tacking on an honorific.

Nobody gets referred to as the Man of the Year in anything other than passing mention of their accolades, and would be laughed out of politics for insisting on it. Honorifics are generally based on those that have been -earned- somehow, like the doctorate or through an election. And like I said... even then it's not common practice for people to refer to Gingrich as "Speaker Gingrich".

Terez
02-16-2012, 01:03 PM
How about if the title may be held by one or more* people simultaneously?
To wit: does Newt Gingrich have the right to demand that he's adressed as Man of the Year (which title (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Person_of_the_Year) he got in 1995)?

I'm a bit curious to what extend Americans carry this idea of non-noble noble ranks.

* Or fewer. See 1982.Those that live in the political world feel the need to use titles. It's brown-nosing. They wouldn't do it if it didn't pay off. Meanwhile the rest of us are snickering every time someone addresses Newt as Speaker because we know about the (quite successful) GOP coup to overthrow him on ethics violations.

Kimon
02-16-2012, 08:33 PM
Actually, Kimon, there are rules of address regarding these things. I believe offices that have only a single officeholder (aka governor) are only addressed with the honorific while they hold said office. So your right that addressing Mitt as "Governor Romney" is incorrect. But for senators, judges, congressmen, etc, it is actually permissible to continue to say Senator Santorum or Representative Gingrich. You seem to think they don't deserve it, which is your own business, but technically a tv personality looking to show respect or formality is correct in using their former office titles.

Was it not obvious that I was mostly just making a snarky observation about the quality of the field of Republican candidates?