Posted on 01/29/2006 5:01:14 AM PST by Alas Babylon!
The Talk Shows
Sunday, January 29nd, 2006
Guests to be interviewed today on major television talk shows:
FOX NEWS SUNDAY (Fox Network): Sen. John Thune, R-S.D.; Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind.; Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean; former Commerce Secretary Don Evans.
MEET THE PRESS (NBC): Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn.
FACE THE NATION (CBS): President Bush.
THIS WEEK (ABC): Sens. Barack Obama, D-Ill., and Chuck Hagel, R-Neb.; Dominique Dawes, Olympic gymnast.
LATE EDITION (CNN) : White House counselor Dan Bartlett; Sens. Joseph Biden, D-Del., and Pat Roberts, R-Kan.; former President Carter; former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto.
Really? If he's upsetting GWB, he's really on thin ice. That's hard to do.
That makes three in the last few days: Kerry, from the well of the Senate after he got back from Davos; Ranter on FNC; and now O'Donnell on NBC.
Freudian slip :)
Taking a line from Genesis, the first book of the Bible, Dean explained the first question ever asked by anyone was, "Am I my brother's keeper?"
Funny, I always thought that the Dems had more in common with the one who really asked the first question in the Bible.
Genesis 3:1 Now the serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said to the woman, "Indeed, has God said, 'You shall not eat from any tree of the garden'?"
Frist is doing a terrible job on MTP
Apparently, there are Republicans who have taken money directly from Abramoff himself (in his name) and no Democrat has done this. Assuming that is true, Democrats are painting themselves as saints due to the fact they have received money from Abramoff's clients he lobbies for and not Jack, directly?
If that is the distinction between ethical and unethical, then I would think it preferable for a politician to get money through the front door from Mr. Abramoff rather than getting it slipped under the back door from his clients.
A direct contribution in the sunlight is how the system works best-- Jack Abramoff is not a special interest group. He has a plethora of clients. A direct contribution from him couldn't possibly be for a vote on an issue or bill. Funneling money from a lobbyist's clients to politicians strikes me as being potentially more sleazy. There is no "sleaze-free zone" when it comes to dirty money. I get the sense that Democrats are celebrating their good character because they took something akin to laundered Abramoff money.
If Jack Abramoff is the equivalent of a poison pill, I get the feeling Democrats are bragging that they took the pill as a suppository rather than by mouth.
The only problem here that the Dems would use that one against the Republicans siting the President.
That statement has the same "ring" to it as "I never had sexual relations with that woman".
Actually that Clinton statement was an outright lie. I think Dean is technically correct in that Abramoff never wrote any personal checks as campaign contributions to Democrats the way he did with Republican's campaigns.
But Democrats did accept the use of the sky boxes and other perks that his firm controlled. And they did take the money that Abramoff instructed his clients, particularly the Indian Tribes, to give to Democrats.
On the Clinton fraud meter this is closest to "it depends on what the meaning of 'is' is."
I saw an article last week that said that business in New Orleans are having to close early and on some days because they can't find enough help...
They say they are paying very high salaries for busboys, waiters, waiteress...etc...but, can't find employees...
SOOOOOOOO...why aren't these people that can't pay for their own propane, lining up in the streets for these jobs??
You left out the San Fransico peninsula, Seattle coffee house, and Kerry's (er, his family's) Boston townhouse.
What a marvelous way to put it.
TIMES/BLOOMBERG POLL reported on January 27, 2006
Q: The Patriot Act gave the government greater powers to access records, perform wiretaps and use other means to locate terrorists. Congress will be voting on whether to reauthorize some provisions of the bill that will expire this year. Do you agree more with:
those who want to reauthorize provisions: 59%
those who want to allow them to expire: 33%
Don't know: 8%Q: Which of the following statements comes closer to your view: Americans should...
give up civil liberties for safety from terrorism: 51%
protect civil liberties: 40%
don't know: 9%Q: George W. Bush authorized federal government agencies to use electronic surveillance to monitor phone calls and e-mails within the U.S. without first getting a court warrant to do so. Do you consider this:
Acceptable: 49%
Unacceptable: 45%
Don't know: 6%Q: Would you mind if you found out that your phone calls were being monitored by the U.S. government as part of the fight against terrorism?
Would mind: 53%
Wouldn't mind: 46%
Don't know: 1%The Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll contacted 1,555 adults nationwide by telephone Sunday through Wednesday.
Ya know, that's a great point. Which is worse is something I doubt many will consider, and it should be one of the first questions asked.
I am willing to believe that his mind is elsewhere, like the possible NUKE of the dems. coming up.
Yes, he is, and is demonstrating the ability to think on his feet and modify answers. I am quite pleased with the interview so far.
Interesting...that Fox is having ratings problem..and they are bringing in Trace Gallagher??
Why don't they just read their e-mail...I am sure they would find out how to fix it.
The left's version of fair and balanced
(snip)
All the outrage on the liberal side of the blogosphere is being directed towards Tim Russert for telling the truth:
LAUER: Katie pressed him [Howard Dean] on that and we did some research. We went to the Center for Responsive Politics and found out that technically speaking, Howard Dean may be correct. But here’s what we found. That 66 percent of the money in this situation went to Republicans, but 34 percent of the money — not from Abramoff, but from his associates and clients — went to Democrats. So, can Democrats wash their hands of this?
RUSSERT: No, they will say it is a primarily a Republican scandal because the personal money of Abramoff went only to Republicans. But Matt, the issue is broad and wide. Democrats also understand that they accept trips from lobbyists and meals and so forth, and that’s why in order to reform all this, it has to be a bipartisan approach. But Democrats get raging mad when you suggest this is a bipartisan scandal.
I don't think so. I think most Americans realize that disaster preparedness and the immediate response are mainly the responsibility of the state and locals. Look at Mississippi and Florida, for example. The difference speaks for itself.
But if voters want the Dems to do on the federal level what they do on a state and local level...
Somehow I don't think the Dems will be making a campaign slogan out of that :)
A neighbor of ours was born in New Orleans and lived there for years. She returned to visit family last month and said that Burger King and McDonalds were offering a $6,000 signing bonus if an employee stays for six months.
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.