Sunday Morning Talk Show Thread 8 Feb 2004 (Pres Bush on MTP)

Various big media television networks ^ | 8 Feb 2004 | Various Self-Serving Politicians and Big Media Screaming Faces

[Alas Babylon!]

The Talk Shows

Sunday, February 8th, 2004

Guests to be interviewed today on major television talk shows:

FOX NEWS SUNDAY (Fox Network): Sens. John Edwards (D-NC) and Pat Roberts (R-KS); and Rep. Porter J. Goss (R-FL).

MEET THE PRESS (NBC): President George W. Bush.

Transcript of Russert/Bush interview

FACE THE NATION (CBS): Former Vermont governor Howard Dean (D).

THIS WEEK (ABC): Senator John Edwards (D-NC), former Clinton chief of staff John D. Podesta and Republican pollster Bill McInturff.

LATE EDITION (CNN) : Sens. John W. Warner (R-VA) and Carl M. Levin (D-MI); retired Army Gen. Wesley K. Clark; Former Vermont governor Howard Dean; former Carter national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski; and former Reagan deputy chief of staff Michael K. Deaver.

Transcript of Russert/Bush interview

[ilovew]

Lol! Aren't you adorable? :)

[Jorge]

Is John Kerry's ponderous voice starting to grate on anyone else's nerves yet?

I can't stand Kerry's pompous condescending way of speaking. I can't imagine having to listen to this wind-bag for four years a President.

Truth is he's not liked even by many Democrats.
They admit they are just supporting him because they think he can beat Bush.

[oceanview]

I still believe there will be a WMD revelation connected to Syria. I am waiting to see how the media spins that one. It will likely be the "Bush knew all along" theme. Same thing if Osama is captured.

[_Jim]

the decline of the Nasdaq had nothing to do with prosecution of Microsoft.

Did I say it was?

I said it would make a goof come-back comment (there WAS an element of truth in it too).

It JUST so happened that justice filed suit at a most inopportune time that coincided with; and some would say fostered; the steady decline (there was an upward bounce that summer BTW) of the markets.

My POINT was that we DIDN'T need a trip into 'algore excessive technical detail land' on that subject.

[Ron in Acreage]

It was well documented that Rubin and his cronies at Goldman Sachs would buy millions of shares of stock at a time to prop up the market for Clinton when necessary. The Clinton/Reno justice dept. sat by while all the corporate corruption went on.

[Dont Mention the War]

It did. we saw the downturn coming on strong at work in late 3Q/4Q 2000, even before 2001.

Don't forget the dotcom bubble burst around April 2000, and it was all very obviously downhill from there. The only reason a lot of people didn't notice it at the time is because the economy had become so disconnected from reality, and had flown so high so fast without a legitimate reason, that even when it was in the process of dropping back to earth like a rock it took almost a year to get back into a semi-normal range. And by that point Bush was president, so everyone incapable of paying attention used the usual false "correlation equals causation" logic in their tiny little brains and decided "It's all Bush's fault."

[maica]

He [George W. Bush] had better get his act together. I found myself watching him slouch and skitter through the Russert interview, ... from your NRO excerpts

*****

Have these NR writers forgotten the mannerisms of their founder, Wm F Buckley. There never has been a more slouchy, or circumlocutive (probably a Buckley word) speaker in the history of the conservative movement. However, what he said was worth waiting for, just like President Bush.

[MEG33]

I don't think you will be supporting President Bush,somehow.

[mwl1]

The media are spinning the polls that say that 70-82% of Democratic primary voters would be happy with Kerry as the nominee, regardless of who they were actually voting for.

Friends, 70-80% ain't that great -- it means that 20-30% of registrered Democrats do not want Lerch.

[altura]

I'm 500 posts behind in replying to your post that it was a good thing that Russert asked hard questions.

I agree about that, but I don't think it was a good thing for Russert to be quite so confrontive and aggressive toward our President.

It did present a good comparison though (calm, reflective President--vs.--nasty little heckler)

[arasina]

Then why grant an interview to liberal NBC in the first place?

Should he get raked over the coals first for not doing any interviews and then make his first choice for one on a cable network like FNC that is absolutely DESPISED by the "mainstream" media because it does not adhere to the DNC Rule Book? That would not have been a smart move for his first one-on-one "campaign issues" interview.

Stu, I think you're far outnumbered here as far as opinion about President Bush's interview. Most of us believe he handled it quite well overall. It appears he's darned if he does, and darned if he doesn't in your book, no matter what the issue.

[chiller]

Sorry, cyn, but none of us here have EVER misspelled anything. You're banned to lurker status.

[txradioguy]

I certainly hops so. Becasue being here on the ground this was in no way an unjust of bad war.

No thanks needed (but they are always appreciated) Meg, jsut doing my job.

[used2BDem]

Thank you! We have been all over the networks trying to see if someone was going to re-air.

[EEDUDE]

With all due respect to a freeper of long standing, I humbly submit to you that NO vote for Bush is A VOTE for the Dems.

I made that mistake with the first Bush administration and voted for Perot, because I did not agree with one of his positions.

Look what I got for THAT vote.

[cyncooper]

:)

[God luvs America]

Maybe...but even on the simplest things he doesn't stand up for himself enough.

Russert started off by talking of how the Intelligence Inquiry is not due back until March of 2005 after the election, making it a political point...the President responds by rightfully saying he wants an exhaustive examination rather then rushing to conclusions...he should've added, "just like the 9/11 inquiry which we just granted more time to so they can get to the bottom of things"...it would've backed up his point better.

[lainde]

***Did you note what this site says louder than anything? The absence of the 'name' or mention of John F. Kerry.
***

Great observation! It's consistent with the interview where she keeps refering to her "husband" and meant Senator Heinz.

[dagnabbit]

The first half of the interview was a disaster. Bush seemed defensive, unconfident, suttered, repeated himself, and clearly didn't even believe the words that were coming out of his own mouth. When he didn't know the answer to a question, he rambled about something about the "war on terror".
I was cringing.

I'm usually cringing when Bush is not reading from a teleprompter. He's appallingly inarticulate. It's a shame for the GOP, because this administration has fallen into a public-opinion hole with Iraq, from which this President will not be able to talk his way out.

A very good case can be made for Iraq, and others in the Administration will make it, but if the guy in charge cannot convince people, he's through.

[alnick]

TR: Why are you seen as divider, not uniter?

Democrats: Bush knew. Bush lied. Bush was a deserter. Bush manipulated the evidence in order to get our troops killed in an unnecessary war.

Bush: Always polite. Have you ever heard him throw those kind of charges against any democrat since he's been elected? I haven't, even though they're evil, hateful and vicious.

Who's the divider again?