Posted on 08/13/2015 8:09:09 AM PDT by conservatism_IS_compassion
I'm just going to tell you a little story - I've gotten into the habit lately - some of the fellows with the cameras back there know this - I have started collecting jokes which I can absolutely prove are jokes made up in Russia and are told among the Russian people, usually about their system. And one of them - I'll just tell you one little one here because you've all been so kind about me. This particular joke they tell among themselves is that an American and a Russian are arguing about their two governments. And the American said,
“Look, in my country, I can walk into the oval office, I can pound the presidents desk, and I can say, “Mr. President, I don't like the way you are running our country.’”And the Russian said,“I can do that too.”And the American said,“You can?”He said“Yes, I can walk into the Kremlin, into the General Secretary's office, pound on the General Secretary’s desk, and say, ‘Mr. General Secretary, I don't like the way President Reagan is running his country.’”
Isn’t that the same thing Megyn Kelly and the rest of journalism treats Republicans? Any Democrat can go on the TV news, pound on the podium, and say,”I don’t like anything about the Republicans”And any Republican can truthfully reply,“I can do that too."Really?"Sure - I can go on the TV news, pound on the podium, and say,Telling the unvarnished truth about Democrats and Political Correctness? Not so much.'I don’t like anything about the Republicans'”Unless you’re Carly Fiorina - or maybe Donald Trump.
Maybe the connection isn’t a profound point - but there’s really nothing like a mention of Ronald Reagan to chirk up the morale . . .
I like it. It makes the point in a fairly subtle and funny way.
The LSM charge GOPers with “crimes”, note that they are presumed guilty and given 10 sec. to mount their defence and prove that they are not guilty. Not innocent, but just not guilty. It’s the seriesness of the charge. The LSM behave like Dingy does in the safety of the floor of the Senate.
Haha, that was good analogy.
Big difference is that, when it comes to Megyn Kelly, she wasn’t told what to say about republicans or even democrats. She can bash either side, if they have issues that need to be addressed.
On the democrat side with their preferred networks’ coverage, the hosts/reporters/pundits, are all lined up to support whatever the issue is, and whoever the candidate is. IOW, liberals in the media had better follow the liberal party line. On the republican side, we better not insist that the media support our party line.
We are supposed to be the party of the facts and truth, and Megyn wasn’t supporting any one candidate, nor was she picking out Trump to undo his campaign or to get back at him for past indiscretions. Whatever the issues with Trump, Megyn just brought them out. Can’t bash someone for discussing or questioning the veracity of a candidate.
YOu obviously did not watch the debate.
Bloody Kelly Megyn, or whatever her name is,
took 30% of the debate time lecturing against
Mr. Trump. She follows orders from above,
and the biased moderators ate up more than a third
of the ambush-’debate’ time.
FOX “News” is a criminal enterprise.
Don’t forget Ted! But HE is an *equal opportunity* corruption exposer.
BTTT
Some might take issue with your rhetoric, but no candid person in good conscience could disagree.
No, she can’t - even if you think she herself is not pro Dem. She can’t get Hillary on her show if Hillary doesn’t trust her to pitch softballs. Hillary doesn’t have to, because Clinton groupie reporters are a dime a dozen.Objectively, grilling Republicans on non-policy questions - practically irrespective of what issue you think a particular Republican has - is unfair if Hillary is going to get a pass on her cavalcade of issues.Objectively speaking, it is therefore unconscionable to eat up 30% of the time, keeping the audience from hearing what they came for - substance.
Love it! Thanks.
Good one c_I_c. Machinegun Kelly’s pre-meditated, rapid-fire, Marxist-meme, interrogate-interrupt, amplify-the-lie AMBUSH of a republican presidential candidate was as bad as it gets. She emptied the magazine on Trump in rat-a-tat fashion. He is still standing. She’s bleeding out.
This is true, but there is a much larger point which Ms. Kelly can thank her lucky stars Trump did not seize the moment to articulate. With a big in-person audience of Republicans at his back, Trump might have discussed exactly what the whole audience was thinking:
- The country is severely, even desperately, on the wrong track. And its incumbent president has monarchial self-conceit and is dangerous to the Constitution.
- Democrat front-runner Hilary Clinton has a trail of scandals longer than your arm - from Whitewater, to Cattlegate, to most or all of the scandals of the Clinton presidency. Not excluding email and server gate.
- Democrats generally, and Clintons in particular, never suffer the humiliation of having to answer, not just the first question, but the second. And if necessary, the third and fourth as well. Clintons lie, Clintons stonewall, Clintons evade.
- Therefore the audience for the Republican debate is interested practically exclusively in the substantive policy differences among the candidates.
- That is the audience which gives FNC its ratings superiority over all other cable channels. It is an audience which feels disrespected by all other journalism outlets, and if it ceases to feel respected by FNC, the ratings of FNC will fall back into the pack.
If Donald Trump had made those points, the live audience would have gone wild. Then what would Megyn Kelly have done? She could have switched to “softballs” which drew out the substance from each of the contenders - or risk losing her audience completely.
The Republican Party did not select FNC for the debate so that FNC could do opposition research against it. And that’s not what the audience wanted.
My previous post re: Hillary notwithstanding, I agree that Hillary is not a sure thing. If it looks like she is guilty of a violation which, by law, disqualifies her from public office (let alone the presidency) the DNC might actually get cold feet about nominating her. Who knows but that a blue state with a red governor might not kick up a fuss about putting and unqualified person on the ballot?
I said,It's true that we want to concentrate on the substance of the issues and of the candidates. But, when it comes to the candidates, we must also examine who they are very closely. Megyn's questions were focused on the 'character’ issuesthe audience for the Republican debate is interested practically exclusively in the substantive policy differences among the candidates.
My problem with that is the “Russian Rabit Stew” issue:In Soviet Russia, an American takes a seat in a restaurant, studies the menu, and tells the waiter,It appears to me that you are ordering Russian Rabbit Stew in your, and Megyn Kelly’s, priorities. Hillary’s character is the “horse meat,” and the character of the worst Republican in the field is rabbit. You label each “the character issue,” and in the process you cannot help exaggerating the importance of the flaws in the Republican:“I’ll have the rabbit stew, please."The waiter brings the meal, the American takes a bite of it, and exclaims to the waiter,This is terrible food. Are you sure this is rabbit stew?The waiter replies,Yes, of course.The American responds,Are you sure about that? It tastes like horse meat to me.The waiter replies,Well, it does have some horse meat in it . . .the American replies,Some horse meat?The waiter replies,Well, half and half.the American replies,Half and half?The winter repliesYes - one horse and one rabbit.Sure, Hillary has flaws - but she is so clever at making sure she never gets convicted or even criminally charged.Just remember, slapping two shell-shocked soldiers is a character issue, too - one that should have been prevented from recurring. It was; George S. Patton was relieved of command, and did not command the invasion at Anzio. Which promptly turned into a battle of attrition. Lots of Germans died for their country - but just as many soldiers for the Allies did the same. It was “a thousand pities that we didn’t let Patton do it.”And besides, Donald Trump spat on the sidewalk back in 1922 . . .
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.