Sunday Morning Talk Show Thread 3 September 2006

Various big media television networks ^ | 3 September 2006 | Various Self-Serving Politicians and Big Media Screaming Faces

[Alas Babylon!]

The Talk Shows

Sunday, September 3rd, 2006

Guests to be interviewed today on major television talk shows:

FOX NEWS SUNDAY (Fox Network): Sens. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., Elizabeth Dole, R-N.C., and Arlen Specter, R-Pa.; Washington Redskins coach Joe Gibbs.

MEET THE PRESS (NBC): Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., and his Democratic challenger, state treasurer Robert Casey.

FACE THE NATION (CBS): Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean; Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.

THIS WEEK (ABC): Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del.; Sen. Lincoln Chafee, R-R.I., and his primary challenger, Cranston Mayor Stephen Laffey; actress and animal rights activist Bo Derek.

LATE EDITION (CNN) : Rep. Christopher Shays, R-Conn.; Iraqi deputy prime minister Barham Salih; Ali Asghar Soltanieh, Iranian representative to the International Atomic Energy Agency; Teamsters president James Hoffa and Labor Secretary Elaine Chao; former Clinton adviser Lanny Davis and former Bush campaign strategist Matthew Dowd.

[snugs]

Off to sort dinner out.

Roast pork with new potatoes
Broccoli
Yorkshire Pudding (I know should be with beef but I like it)
Apple Sauce

Sweet
Pear and Pecan pancakes with fresh blackberries and creamfraise

[Morgan in Denver]

I'm on this one now. I cannot believe how far I got behind today. I think I need more training on keeping up with it all.

[snugs]

I agree I remember those threads well - now I really must concentrate on dinner

[Dave S]

Your conclusions are valid if one believes the prosecutor's version of events without any cross examination, test of the evidence, or defense case.

It's easier to believe one man lied Libby, than to believe that six others including Rove and Fleischer lied and that Libby lied to his notes. Are you comparing Libby to the Clinton guy that lied to his diary? For the prosecutors version to be wrong, many people have to be lying or confused. For him to ge correct, only one person has to be lying, Libby. Was it worth lying over no. But a smart lawyer like Libby should have known that.

[Dave S]

Are you really this legally ignorant? Do you REALLY just unthinkingly accept the indictment as proof?

I will accept the premise that Libby is as innocent as Clinton was. Clinton was indicted (impeached). Are you saying he wasnt guilty? Didnt think so.

[samantha]

#473, it is power and job security that attracts them especially since they know unless the do something really, really horrible they will not lose their jobs. I spent a combined total of about 24 years of Civil Service between the Federal and Municipal Government,and the big Union backers were the laziest,most likely to sneak out early come in late,goof off all day, if they could get away with it,and make mistakes for others to correct. The big Union backers spent most of their time talking about how great the Union was and how many more benefits we should push for especially Health care benefits,Pay Increases,and more and more Vacation time. In those days for the most part I kept quiet and paid a lot of attention,and after initially joining the Union (AFSFME)I quit along with other People that felt we were signed on with Organized Crime.

[Torie]

The Santorum-Casey debate can be watched on line by clicking here. You need to click on the words in red, "NBC Meet the Press Netcast."

[samantha]

#475, which one, they are both dumber than the discarded skin from a snake.

[Morgan in Denver]

It's interesting how the Democrats stall our progress and effectivenes, and then complain when the war isn't going as quickly or well as they thought it would. They truly are stuck on stupid: repeat Vietnam.

[altura]

I know... about Williams column... could he be more condescending in his description of the secret service man?

I think he could, if he tried a little harder.

I'll bet the guy would scare the pants off him if he didn't think he is 'untouchable.'

He's an important member of the media, dontcha know.

But (ha, ha) he still didn't get in his room ....

[Roccus]

Thank You!

I've been checking the dates on many of today's posters who are unfamiliar to me. Whole bunchalotta 98's and 99's. OK, they've been here longer than me, I say to myself. But after a bit I think, "could these be a bunch of 'sleeper trolls?'"...Nah, it's just me being paranoid. So I hit my forehead with my mouse and continue reading. But that thought just won't go away.

You have proven that even though I may be paranoid, I'm also right.
Thank you again.

[PerConPat]

We just had to kill enough of both and it ended. Same with islam.

The matter at hand , defeat of Islamic fascism, has moved beyond Iraq and Afghanistan. Although it is important to sustain our excellent efforts in those two countries, the first campaigns in the WOT, the focus will now increasingly shift to Iran and Pakistan.

Nothing, a Dim victory in 2006 or 2008 included, will alter this. Whether America rightly recognizes the need to keep to the Pub's in power or wishes to temporarily avoid the inevitable by returning the party of treason to majority status, the final confrontation with the Mullahs will come. It will come because the Mullahocracy demands that this must be the case.

And when Tehran etc. are smoking ruins, no one outside Iran and some areas of Pakistan will really care. The crucial question is now centered on how much damage will have occurred in the US as a result of terrorist attacks prior to the day of reckoning. And so the Pub's must constantly beat the drum that proclaims the absence of terrorist strikes on the US as a result of our strong military responses to 9/11.

The economy, immigration, global warming, and the next American idol etc. should not not be on the minds of the majority when they they stand in the election booth, if the Right plays their best hand between now and November 7.

Sadly, I must agree with your assessment.

[Morgan in Denver]

That's what I've seen, but I have to admit I am not a government worker nor a union member.

[Txsleuth]

Dang...I nominate that post for "Post of the Year"...and it is only Sept 3rd!

Way to go Johnnie...you really did your homework..and worked hard on that post.

Thanks...got it bookmarked.

[rodguy911]

Wow am I ever chummed up!
If I catch a flight right now I can be there tomorrow morning for leftovers!!

[rodguy911]

Training from the trainor?

[MNJohnnie]

Reagan outspent them so they just couldn't keep up ?

Wasn't the spending so much as out modernizing them. The Sovs knew they could not match the technology revolution going on in the West. Thus they started tinkering with the political structures of their empire to try and find a way to be Communists and competitive. They failed. Now that you mention it.

I never thought about it before reading your post but Reagan winning the Cold War fits Sun Tze definition of Perfect Victory. One where the commander maneuvers the enemy into defeating themselves.

[A.Hun]

I am surprised you have that much faith in this Special Prosecutor...all that the indictment has is excerpts of Libby's testimony.

I find it hard to believe that Libby, knowing that there had to be documentation on when he learned of Wilson's wife's involvement, would have tried to mislead the Grand Jury.

His statements can be construed that he mislead the reporters, not the Grand Jury.

The fact remains that Fitzgerald knew of the leaker's identity, knew that no crime was committed because Plame was not covert, and knew that Libby did not contribute to her public naming, from day one.

If indeed Libby lied under oath, he should pay for his stupidity, but he should never have been forced to testify to start with.

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/iln/osc/documents/libby_indictment_28102005.pdf

[Bahbah]

Also, don't forget while Novak kept quiet, made his bucks on TV Judith Miller went to jail.

Here is something that I have been puzzled about. I believe that the President ordered everyone in his Administration to release in writting any reporter to whom they had spoken from any promise of confidentiality. Judy Miller had such a release, she just didn't think it was worded to her liking and it had to be repeated. But Novak said repeatedly that his source refused to release him. Would not Armitage, being a political appointee of the President, have been required to provide such a release?

[altura]

I'm just thankful I'm the 'class of '97' after reading Rose's post.

What's up with some of those 98ers?

Maybe they're pie in the sky libertarians who will take their ball and go home if they don't get everything they want.