important vote that that candidate running for reelection has cast during that term? lawrence, i would say they have gone too far. you have to say look, there s some standards by which you can t uphold support for a candidate. a candidate that doesn t support democracy, that doesn t support a constitution. is a candidate that s gone beyond the pale. it s not to be so much about party, but it s about whether or not you support the constitution. every member of the house takes an oath to preserve, protect, and defend the constitution. if someone doesn t do that, then that person is not able, or credible, to have our support. i think again, going back to what i was saying about the protection of the first amendment. if you re covering a candid, who basically calls for understanding the constitution you have to call it exactly like that. as peter said we have to use the kind of language that
have gone too far. you have to say look, there s some standards by which you can t uphold support for a candidate. a candidate that doesn t support democracy, that doesn t support a constitution. is a candidate that s gone beyond the pale. it s not to be so much about party, but it s about whether or not you support the constitution. every member of the house takes an oath to preserve, protect, and defend the constitution. if someone doesn t do that, then that person is not able, or credible, to have our support. i think again, going back to what i was saying about the protection of the first amendment. if you re covering a candidate, who basically calls for undermining the constitution you have to call it exactly like that. as peter said we have to use the kind of language that journalists are not trying to use, to try to be objective. but there s no objectivity in the face of someone trying to destroy and undermine our