Sunday Morning Talk Show Thread 29 January 2006 - Pres Bush on FTN!

Various big media television networks ^ | 29 January 2006 | Various Self-Serving Politicians and Big Media Screaming Faces

[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.

[Phsstpok]

More importantly, the courts have ruled in favor of domestic surelliance.

No, they haven't. "Domestic surveillance" is the lefties version of what's being done. What the courts have ruled is legal, and what the President has authorized, is to pursue foreign intelligence without the need for a court approved warrant, even if a portion of that information is gathered within our borders.

Clinton did precisely that when he authorized the FBI to break into Aldrich Ames house and gather evidence without a warrant. It was a matter of national security and the courts allowed that evidence, and evidence derived from what they learned, to be used at trial. Where the quandary and stigma comes from is that Nixon said things like the Watergate burglary were done for National Security as a dodge. The point was specifically made this morning that no one has suggested that Bush is doing anything for any reason other than to listen to terrorists.

Don't let them define the terms of the debate. It's NOT DOMESTIC SURVEILLANCE.

[Chuck54]

.until I remembered that everyone is already "giving" his seat to that weasel Harold Ford, Jr....gack!

Ford has more baggage (mostly family connections) than a tramp steamer. He will do well in Shelby county Tennessee, but can never win a state wide election.

[A.Hun]

Good morning eeevil...they should stick to making beer (if you want to call it beer).

[snugs]

I hear what you say but I think the Dems are more likely to use the Katrina disaster than the Republicans as an election feature.

The MSM have condemned the President on this and continue to even some of the more right wing say there is blame to lay at his feet, despite evidence everywhere.

[tarheelswamprat]

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.

In a media battle being waged by soundbites and deceptive terminology, this line has powerful potential. I suggest you send it to Rush, Hannity, et al.

[Mo1]

Nor will we ever hear about raising taxes on old money family trusts that people like the Kennedy's have hidden behind all their lives.

Exactly!!

It's not so much what these libs say .... It's what they Don't Say that we should pay attention to

[La Enchiladita]

I will phone Frist's office first thing in the morning.

[Bahbah]

I have a question. Are we buying oil from Iran?

[p23185]

Why do they want us to LOSE this war? @@@@@ Because being in power is more important than living in a safe prosperous country. Just consider what Democrat rule has done to many American cities.

Because every one of them, every last one, are virulent anti-American types!

[OldFriend]

Osama Obama is the orca's puppet.

[p23185]

Talk about terror tactics!

The RATs are TERRORISTS and I sure hope the NSA is listening in on the leadership for this reason alone. NOT because they are political opponents, but because they are terrorists!

[Seattle Conservative]

"Timmy attacks and when Frist corrects him Timmy just puts his head down and goes on to another talking point."

That's their typical MO. If that can logically debate the issue (which is most of the time), they change subjects. Or, if it's Dean, Dingy Harry or their ilk, then they add a Bush lied or Bush wasn't truthful (as Dean has just mentioned).

[A.Hun]

According to this site...no.

http://www.gravmag.com/oil.html#imports

[OldFriend]

The CSPIN host mentioned a poll that shows that 75% of Americans believe BOTH parties are corrupt.

Of course, that was early this morning and everyone but FNC will ignore those numbers.

[Txsleuth]

I am not disputing what you saw...but, if these businesses are SO in need that they are paying $6000 signing bonuses and WAY over minimum wages for minimum wage type jobs...

then I dare say...they would all get together and get a bus service of some kind, to go out and pick these people up, don't you??

[snugs]

Great to hear

[Seattle Conservative]

"Obama was dead against it because he said "it would not be worth it because there are not enough votes. Apparently something changed his mind - either they are getting close to enough votes or DUers and KOS threatened him which they have been doing to all Democrat Senators. Talk about terror tactics!"

My guess is that Hillary probably told him to jump and get on board if he wants to be her VP.

[jslade]

Am I seeing things or is that freak Osama Obama wearing an earring in his left ear?

[Chgogal]

Ick. Cannot stand Hagel. It amazes me how we elect the likes of Hagel, Kennedy, Kerry, Turbin (my Senator...phooey!), etc.

Me thinks we are fools sometimes. Thanks for watching! Too bad Hagel is rowing the wrong boat. He is sounding foolish.

[Cboldt]

Clinton did precisely that when he authorized the FBI to break into Aldrich Ames house and gather evidence without a warrant. It was a matter of national security and the courts allowed that evidence, and evidence derived from what they learned, to be used at trial.

There was no trial. Ames and his wife entered a plea bargain.

Where the quandary and stigma comes from is that Nixon said things like the Watergate burglary were done for National Security as a dodge.

Quite true. That is part of the "nub," of what will constitute adequate justification for intruding on what the pulic thinks is privacy. Does there need to be a reason? Does the reason need to attach to the person under surveillance? Does the agent who is asserting he has a reason to intrude need to share the reason with anybody?

Generalities just don't do - but that's all we're gonna get.

Don't let them define the terms of the debate. It's NOT DOMESTIC SURVEILLANCE.

It's not foreign surveillance either. And to the charge of it being domesitc, I think a good response is "So what? If the terrorists are in the country, should we stop listening?"