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

[mylife]

My fave part was when he asked "what if you lose", and W goes "Oh I'm not going to lose". And he's not, for the same reason he didn't lose to Algore. Because he knows who he is and John F'ing Kerry doesn't know who HE is. Mr. Bush wants to lead the world to peace, Kerry just wants to be president. Big difference.

I think you are onto something there.

[cyncooper]

I am now very upset. Dateline just showed excerpts of the interview. It just ended. Afterward Stone Phillips spoke with Tim Russert, who had on his furrowed brow, worried look.

Stone asked about the National Guard issue and asked if that was the end. Russert said NO. That "the president has offered his papers" and democrats will be going over them.

WHAT is he talking about?! Russert is saying (or implying) here that some papers have not been made public before which is completely contrary to what President Bush pointed out...that these papers have been available for perusal for years, and in fact have been reviewed time and time again.

Russert assured Stone that this issue is not done.

This is outrageous.

Old Friend, I'm pinging you as you made that comment earlier about Jennings bringing it up at the debate. I happen to agree with you.

[txradioguy]

It happened in South Dakota and Florida as well. Not to mention the polls that were forced to close early because some idiot elections official forgot that the Florida panhandle is on CENTRAL time and not eastern.

[Redleg Duke]

Probably, Peach, like a lot of us, consider President Bush (Not "Bush", you jibbering dufuss!) a good and decent man, doing the best he can with the hand he was dealt.

Ya gotta know when to hold 'em and know when ta fold 'em!"

You, "Conservatie Purists" sacrifice reality on your personal altar of blind righteousness.

[PhiKapMom]

This is crap! Those papers were released in 1994 when he ran for Governor against Ma Richards and the same crap was brought up by the DemocRATs. They were public information in 2000.

How many people have paystubs from the late 60's/early 70's. I know I don't.

Rush Limbaugh better think twice before he ever praises Russert for his interviews again! It was the absolute most biased interview that I have witnessed. You would have thought that Russert was the Prosecutor and Pres Bush was the defendent the way Russert handled the interview. Russert was nothing more than a Clinton DemocRAT political hack asking questions. Sounds like he is very proud of himself.

Didn't have much respect for Russert before this and now have absolutely zero, zip, nada.

[maica]

All I did was merely beat him about the head and shoulders with the facts and the truth.
******

You did great, admirable and appreciated work on this thread today. Stay safe!

[txradioguy]

During the 200 election I did some extra drill time working in the State national Guard public affairs office in Austin. There were two THOUSAND FOIA requests for President Bush's 201 File (official military record of service). NOTHING was found! Not by the national media and not by the Austin American Statesman. The #1 Bush hating newspaper in the WORLD! ANd Russert says it's NOT a dead issue?

I'm doumbfounded.

The Boston Globe first reported this AWOL fairy tale and it got traction during the election. The parent newspaper of the Globe, the NY TIMES did a piece a year later and came to the conclusion that the Globe piece was full of holes and errors and want a factual and truthful story.

And Russert says it's STILL not over?

[mylife]

How many people have paystubs from the late 60's/early 70's. I know I don't.

I doesn't matter the burdon of proof is on those that challenge him.

They can smear all they want but the President has a DD-214 that says HONORABLE

[mathluv]

Your pomposity is boring. If you don't like what we think/say/post, why do you bother? You certainly do not have a way with words to change any minds.

[TheExploited]

Russert is NOT even a good reporter. He just repeats poll numbers and DNC talking points and DC rumors. I would not worry about the National Guard story at all. It is just a sign of desperation.

[windchime]

"Bob Sellers is GOOD. I like him. He doesn't let people get away with spinning on issues."

Sellers doesn't get mentioned much, but he is very knowledgeable about a lot of topics and, as you say, no spinning is allowed.

[txradioguy]

I agree. But there stil seem to be some kool-aid drinkers out there. Case in point my "debate" with huskerco.



Too many people out there, despite the changing numbers, still get and believe the news on the Big Three. THAT is why stories like the AWOL and BUSH LIED and NO BLOOD FOR OIL stay in the news cycles for so long. Because too many people out there still believe what RatherBrokawJennings tell them as the Gospel.

[EllaMinnow]

Methinks Timmy has potatoes where his brains should be.

[syriacus]

Do you really think that, or do you feel that in this times it is simply best to show your support?

Why should I lie? Plenty of others are saying he did well. I don't need to voice a positive opinion on this.

You say he did poorly in the first thirty minutes...what do you think of his performance in the second thirty minutes?

BTW, I did not say the President answered each of Russert's "attacks" perfectly. I said I thought he more than "held his own."

I think Bush is smart enough to realize that not every intellectual skirmish needs to be won.

This interview wasn't a high school debate in which the President had to win all the points. This was his chance to share his opinions and goals with the American people.

I think he fared very well on that score. And, it seems he is smart enough to know that getting his message across to his "fellow Americans" is the thing that really counts.

[onyx]

You'll love it and the transcript is posted on a separate thread here.

[syriacus]

The interview started out disrespectful. First thing, Russert just blurted the WMD question,

You're right! I had first begun to pay close attention to the interview about two or three minutes after it started.

Because of the way Russert had rushed into the issue of WMDs, I was actually afraid, at first, that I had missed the first thirty minutes of the hour long program..

[cyncooper]

I, too, am dumbfounded. And it shows what we perceived during the interview is indeed the case. Russert is going to "report" relying on DNC talking points and facts be damned.

What a travesty.

Stone asked him something else but I was so shocked by his pronouncing this issue as still alive that I can't remember what it was. Then they moved on to other stories. I moved on from NBC.

[cyncooper]

I wanted to be sure and alert you because this is completely unacceptable. For a mainstream "journalist" to completely disregard the state of the record and act like President Bush is and has been hiding something is too much to bear.

[PhiKapMom]

I am glad you did alert us -- this is just unbelieveable -- Russert is nothing more than a partisan hack now!

[cyncooper]

It's not a matter of being "worried" so much, except we all need to realize we have "reporters" running around purporting to be delivering news stories when they in fact are delivering propaganda.

Yes, that is no surprise to me or to other freepers. But it appears to me they have abandoned all pretense and are full steam ahead with baseless allegations reported as if they are true.

It should not be merely ignored. It must be challenged.