Sunday Morning Talk Show Thread 5 November 2006

Various big media television networks ^ | 5 November 2006 | Various Self-Serving Politicians and Big Media Screaming Faces

[saveliberty]

:-) Woo Hoo!

[Bahbah]

Brit felt today he had to give Kerry some benefit of the doubt.

What Brit said was "Even giving him the benefit of the doubt" which is what I say when I mean that I don't believe it for a minute, but will assume it for the sake of argument.

[Seattle Conservative]

We also have the MSM bias in not reporting Dims scandals and beating Pubbie ones to death (like Foley). Here are examples of 2:

Mike Hatch's forgotten scandal (Minnesota)
Powerline ^ | 11-04-06 | Scott Hinderaker

Posted on 11/05/2006 6:17:26 AM PST by Renfield

Mike Hatch is the Minnesota Attorney General and the Democratic candidate for governor running against Republican incumbent Tim Pawlenty. This morning NRO posted my column on the contest between Hatch and Pawlenty: "Code blue in Minnesota." Please check it out.

In the column I refer in passing to Hatch's "highly public fight this summer with a state district-court judge whom [Hatch] had sought to remove from a case[.]" The incident involved reflects profoundly on Hatch in the performance of his duties as Attorney General. This post expands on that reference. All facts necessary to render judgment on Hatch's conduct in the matter are of public record. The conclusions I have reached regarding Hatch's conduct are shared by experts in legal ethics with whom I consulted.

Persuasive evidence establishes that Hatch has committed serious violations of the rules of professional conduct governing lawyers -- and then lied to cover them up. The violations involve more than mere technical mistakes. The violations are of the sort that properly can lead to an attorney being severely disciplined if not disbarred from the practice of law.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1732671/posts

And, of course, they can't say very much against their Rock Star (I'm surprised the AP reported on this):

Sen. Obama linked to accused fundraiser
Boston Globe ^ | 11-05-06 | AP

Posted on 11/04/2006 11:20:54 PM PST by xtinct

CHICAGO --Responding to a newspaper report, Sen. Barack Obama said Saturday that arrangements he had with a political fundraiser accused of shaking down companies might have raised the appearance of impropriety.

Antoin "Tony" Rezko, whom Gov. Rod Blagojevich has described as a friend and a fundraiser, has pleaded not guilty to charges that he plotted to squeeze millions of dollars in kickbacks out of investment firms seeking state business. He also has pleaded not guilty to obtaining a $10.5 million loan from General Electric Capital Corp. through fraud and swindling a group of investors.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1732560/posts

[LibLieSlayer]

You will never get it. It matters not what you or I think. Foxnews by it's own actions is proving what many of us here are saying.

Have a great Sunday samantha!


LLS

[LibLieSlayer]

Listen to his slant on Fridays and during the AllStars segment. It is more than obvious that objectivity suffers when Angle is in the chair.

LLS

[benjaminjjones]

Trunk Monkey

Thanks, I needed that.

[LibLieSlayer]

We owe you a mighty lot samantha. Thank you!

LLS

[cardinal4]

The whole idea of Barack's cannonization was that he was too new to be tainted by corruption. Hillary moves quick when motivated..

[snugs]

It as Laura Bush's birthday yesterday today is their 29th wedding anniversary. I always think this is hard on them being so near election time 2004 even worse but ended up a great celebration.

Ohiowfan will be doing an anniversary special later today where there should be some great photos and graphics.

[snugs]

Agreed a company not renewing a contract is much different from someone being made redundant.

In the former the position remains but for whatever reason the company or the person decides they no longer wish to continue, the latter the job no longer exists.

[Seattle Conservative]

Good points!

[aligncare]

They didn't have any problems with Clinton's spying programs

Yes. Then you see my point. The 'rats will say and do whatever it takes to regain power. But, I don't think that they are suicidal about the terrorist threat...perhaps stoooopid and reckless, certainly wrong on the issue--very wrong--but, not suicidal.

[Chuck54]

Afternoon Snugs.

I like President Bush's answer when someone asked him how old Laura was on this birthday.

President Bush said he would never, ever be caught telling Laura's age........... but he would say she was born the same year he was and he turned 60 this year.

:)

[samantha]

well no matter the reason that you are no longer working be it fired,furloughed or quit/retired you can usually be hired again at better pay because you have experience. When you are fired there is no notice,when you are furloughed, you have to be given quite a bit of notice because of the Law. If you quit most people either have something better in the wings,or they want to rest or vegetate for a bit and are probably fed up with the BS. I believe that Kim Hume was fed up with the direction that Rupert Murdoch was taking his company by putting his Lib Daughter in charge. He has to make up to his older children for having new Heirs.It would be fantastic if Brit and Kim started the Hume News Network,and we could all be shareholders. It might be great for it to be an Internet News Network that could be formatted so that it could be downloaded and printed out to be like your morning Newspaper. it is hard to get Pubbies to give up their Newspapers even if they have gone way to the left and are completely in the tank for Democrats.

[Seattle Conservative]

Regardless of what folks may think of Rudy, he's optimistic and right in that we need to stay on the offense:

Republicans Should Stay Optimistic and On Offense
RCP ^ | November 05, 2006 | Rudy Giuliani

Posted on 11/05/2006 6:11:38 AM PST by paudio

For the past six months, I've been traveling across the country campaigning for Republican candidates. Conventional wisdom from Washington predicts a tough year for the party. By playing offense, solidifying our ranks and reaching out to Reagan Democrats and Independents, I believe that Republicans have reason to be optimistic. Because on the big issues Americans care about - from national security to the economy to the Supreme Court - Republican leadership has delivered time and again on its promises.

Republicans are united by our belief in going on offense to win the war on terror. Five years ago, our nation learned a painful lesson about the dangers of an inconsistent approach to dealing with the evil of terrorism. In his speech to Congress on September 20th, 2001, President Bush declared that we would go on offense against terrorists, and he has made good on that promise. Terrorists have been destabilized and put on defense around the world - including Afghanistan and Iraq.

(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1732666/posts

[cardinal4]

Your post highlights the major differences between the Bush family and the Clintons-Bush and family exude class and grace, while the Grifters ooze crass and base..(is that a word??)

[Citizen Soldier]

I see all her comments as a childish way of speaking, as well as bitter hatred of her opposition. She reminds me of a selfish child who cannot have her way and strikes out.

[Phsstpok]

Timmy is hunched and frowning. WE ARE GOING TO WIN, FOLKS.

Yesterday on my analysis post on the preview thread I posted this:

I will look closely for any hedging by lil' Timmah, along with what his body language is (hunch or no hunch when questioning Dole and Reynolds?) to give me a clue about what he really believes will happen on Tuesday.

You saw what I was looking for.  If he thought they were going to win he wouldn't be in attack mode, which is what I associate with the hunch.  I did here him challenge Rahm pretty good on his negative campaign ads.  I didn't see the hunch because I just couldn't stand to listen to Lil Timmah for long.  I helped my son get his new PC set up instead. 

[MissMagnolia]

Pray for W and The Election

While I generally pray for the country & W, I did something in 2004 I had never done before ..... on election day I went by church and prayed. The sanctuary was dark and quiet with just some sunlight filtering in and I went up directly in front of the cross, got on my knees and prayed that God's will be done and that He would not turn his face away from America. It helped me a lot personally ... and considering the election results, I felt God was still listening. I will be doing the same thing this coming Tuesday.

"The man must be bad indeed who can look upon the events of the American Revolution without feeling the warmest gratitude towards the great Author of the Universe whose divine interposition was so frequently manifested in our behalf." (George Washington 1789)

[Alas Babylon!]

OK, while I agree that change of our battlefield posture is necessary in fighting a war against terrorists or paramilitary forces, but do keep in mind that the military wasn't stupid until Don Rumsfeld came to town. I know you're not saying that, but we need to be careful and articulate the argument well.

The array of forces we've spent 50+ years planning against had been the grand armies of the Soviets, their mighty air forces, nuclear weapons, and global naval reach. I'll doubt you'll find any admirals or generals who thought that we couldn't also fight lesser forces then if we had to, given our might. But when the political leadership of the USA decided that, with the fall of the Soviet empire, we could get a grand "Peace dividend" by cutting our forces down appropriate to the demise of the Soviet forces arrayed against us, I was a little bit concerned.

This happened anyway. We weren't at war, the Soviets were gone, and vigorous Islamic terrorism hadn't made itself a central enemy against us, at least to the general public. I always thought that the DoD draw-down of 1990-2001 (minus the temporary 1990/1 buildup for Desert Shield/Storm--which we jokingly called "Operation Save Our Jobs" at the Pentagon) was short sighted. No one really gave much thought to the long term. So we just cut, closed, disbanded, shut, turned in, DRMO'd, disposed of, mustered out, and otherwise drew down from 2.1 million active duty to around 1 million by the time I retired in 1998.

I wondered about the Chinese. I wondered about the Indians. What could a untied through a Castro-like dictator South America do? What about a reinvigorated Iran and Iraq? Or a united Europe? A reborn Russia? No one really saw any of that as a short term threat, but not planning for them would be folly. In any case, our peacekeeping, nation-building missions in Somalia, Haiti, and Bosnia kept those who remained busy. Operations over Iraq in 1998 and Serbia in 1999 expended all the major smart weapons we had! What if we had to go to war against China then? We'd have been hard pressed.

After Bush became president things looked up. Rumsfeld started working on his lighter, faster, more mobile force plan. Most of the admirals and generals thought this was a good idea, but there were also plans to take another look at our large-array forces and for long term, build nurture, and plan them for rapid deployment if needed. The attacks on 9/11 changed all that. After our lightening attack on Afghanistan, advocates of lighter, faster got more ear time. The shock and awe over Iraq helped that cause, too. Since then, our GWOT has been low conflict, anti-insurgency operations. So much that the Air Force has been volunteering airmen to do convoy duty in Iraq. Now that is great, and I'm proud of these boys (and girls) but this is really not the mission of the Air Force. They'll never have the training and legacy of an infantry force like the Army or Marines. But this is happening because the other services are stretched and the Air Force wants to do its part.

We still need to remember that China is out there, and Russia becomes more and more an adversary every day. After some time we'll probably have to re-mobilize, re-plan and re-equip large scale forces again. That'll be hard to do if we go too far over to the lighter, faster model. I sometimes wonder if Rumsfeld plan takes that into consideration. I've seen the arguments I've made poo-poo'ed a little too much for comfort by those in the Rumsfeld camp.