Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Sunday Morning Talk Show Thread 24 September 2006
Various big media television networks ^ | 24 September 2006 | Various Self-Serving Politicians and Big Media Screaming Faces

Posted on 09/24/2006 3:15:07 AM PDT by Alas Babylon!

The Talk Shows



Sunday, September 24th, 2006

Guests to be interviewed today on major television talk shows:

FOX NEWS SUNDAY (Fox Network): Bill Clinton (D-FIRPOTUS); Sen. Lindsey Graham, (R-S.C.); Dr. JoGayle Howard, National Zoo panda doctor.

MEET THE PRESS (NBC): Bill Clinton (D-Arkancide); Afghan President Hamid Karzai; John Danforth, former senator and U.N. ambassador.

FACE THE NATION (CBS): Sen. John McCain, (R-Ariz.)

THIS WEEK (ABC): Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, (R-Tenn.); New Jersey Senate candidates Sen. Bob Menendez, (D-N.J.), and Republican Tom Kean Jr.

LATE EDITION (CNN) : Karzai; Sen. Arlen Specter, (R-Pa.); Rep. Jane Harman, (D-Calif.); Iraqi President Jalal Talibani; Alexander Haig, former secretary of state; Richard Holbrooke, former U.N. ambassador.


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: facethenation; foxnewssunday; guests; lateedition; lineup; meetthepress; nieleak; sunday; talkshows; thisweek
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 501-520521-540541-560 ... 1,321-1,328 next last
To: Fudd Fan

Well, I am not seeing it yet. Well there is one guy, but I won't go there. :)


521 posted on 09/24/2006 8:11:06 AM PDT by defconw (Yes I am a Bushbot, so what of it? (Official Snowflake))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 519 | View Replies]

To: defconw; Miss Marple

I absolutely HATE Kennedy. This NYT article is a concerted effort to influence the election. I doubt it'll work because the fact remains, no terrorist attacks here.


522 posted on 09/24/2006 8:11:15 AM PDT by onyx (1 Billion Muslims -- IF only 10% are radical, that's still 100 Million who want to kill us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 518 | View Replies]

To: RobFromGa

"Claims he "never criticized President Bush"

"There are probably hundreds of similar stories, but here is one of them showing this statement of Bubba's to be a lie:"

Here are a couple more:

Sunday, September 18, 2005
How Quickly We Forget
posted by Stephen Johnson

If a liberal ever asks you why conservatives can't "get over" Bill Clinton, tell him or her that it's because of two reasons. The first reason is that Clinton just won't go away:

Former US president Bill Clinton sharply criticised George W. Bush for the Iraq War and the handling of Hurricane Katrina, and voiced alarm at the swelling US budget deficit.

...On Hurricane Katrina, Clinton faulted the authorities' failure to evacuate New Orleans ahead of the storm's strike on August 29.

People with cars were able to heed the evacuation order, but many of those who were poor, disabled or elderly were left behind.

"If we really wanted to do it right, we would have had lots of buses lined up to take them out," Clinton said.

...FEMA boss Michael Brown quit in response to criticism of his handling of the Katrina disaster. He was viewed as a political appointee with no experience of disaster management or dealing with government officials.

"When James Lee Witt ran FEMA, because he had been both a local official and a federal official, he was always there early, and we always thought about that," Clinton said, referring to FEMA's head during his 1993-2001 presidency.

The second reason is that Clinton is an inveterate liar. James Lee Witt was *not* always there early. Just ask Jesse Jackson:

The Hurricane Floyd disaster was followed by what was judged by many to be a very slow Federal response. Fully three weeks after the storm hit Jesse Jackson complained to FEMA Director James Lee Witt on his CNN program Both Sides Now, "It seemed there was preparation for Hurricane Floyd, but then came Flood Floyd. Bridges are overwhelmed, levees are overwhelmed, whole town's under water . . . [it's] an awesome scene of tragedy. So there's a great misery index in North Carolina." Witt responded, "We're starting to move the camper trailers in, It's been so wet it's been difficult to get things in there, but now it's going to be moving very quickly. And I think you're going to see a -- I think the people there will see a big difference over within this next weekend."

http://intherightplace.blogspot.com/2005/09/how-quickly-we-forget.html

September 18, 2005
Uncharted Territory, Once Again

In recent years, the Democrats have violated many of the tacit conventions of civility that have enabled our political system to work for more than two centuries. Yesterday another barrier fell, and once again, we entered uncharted waters: former President Bill Clinton launched a vicious attack on President Bush on ABC's "This Week" program.

This has never happened before. Until now, both parties have recognized a patriotism that, at some level, supersedes partisanship. Consistent with that belief, former Presidents of both parties have stayed out of politics and have avoided criticizing their successors. Until now. The Democrats appear bent on destroying every element of the fabric that has united us as Americans.

Clinton's vicious attack is even worse in the context of his wife's Presidential bid: it is fair to assume that he was motivated not only by partisanship, but by his own desire to re-occupy the White House, and, most likely, wield once more the levers of power.

AFP reports:

Breaking with tradition under which US presidents mute criticisms of their successors, Clinton said the Bush administration had decided to invade Iraq "virtually alone and before UN inspections were completed, with no real urgency, no evidence that there were weapons of mass destruction."

This attack was false in every respect. The invasion of Iraq had the support of dozens of nations. The UN's inspections could never be "completed," but the UN itself had reported that large quantities of WMDs remained unaccounted for. On the other hand, Clinton's suggestion that there was "no real urgency" about the situation in Iraq was probably sincere, as it typified Clinton's approach to terrorism: he perceived no urgency after the first bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993, or after al Qaeda's attempt to simultaneously destroy a dozen American airplanes over the Pacific in 1995; or after the attacks on American embassies in Africa in 1998; or after Saddam's attempt to assassinate former President Bush; or after Saddam repeatedly tried to shoot down American aircraft; or after the Cole bombing in 2000; or after the Taliban took over Afghanistan and converted it into a training ground for anti-American mass murderers; or after any number of other provocations. So, naturally, Clinton saw no urgency with respect to dealing with Saddam's regime. Of course, had Saddam facilitated a post-9/11 attack on the U.S. using chemical or biological weapons, you can imagine how harshly Clinton would have criticized Bush for his lack of foresight.

Clinton's assertion that there was "no evidence that there were weapons of mass destruction" is a flat-out lie. The Consensus Estimate of the American intelligence agencies has been made public, and we have quoted from it and linked to it on many occasions. America's intelligence agencies said, with a "high degree of confidence," that Saddam possessed both chemical and biological weapons. These were the same intelligence reports that Clinton received as President, so he is well aware of them. His statement was not a mistake, it was a lie.

Clinton goes on:

Clinton said there had been a "heroic but so far unsuccessful" effort to put together a constitution that would be universally supported in Iraq.
A ridiculous standard, of course. No nation has ever adopted a constitution that was "universally supported," least of all, our own.

And more:

The US strategy of trying to develop the Iraqi military and police so that they can cope without US support "I think is the best strategy. The problem is we may not have, in the short run, enough troops to do that," said Clinton.
Someone tell me: what did Clinton ever do, during his eight years in office, to build up America's armed forces or increase our power? He continues:

On Hurricane Katrina, Clinton faulted the authorities' failure to evacuate New Orleans ahead of the storm's strike on August 29.
People with cars were able to heed the evacuation order, but many of those who were poor, disabled or elderly were left behind.

"If we really wanted to do it right, we would have had lots of buses lined up to take them out," Clinton.

Note that when Clinton faulted the "authorities," he meant the Bush administration--although, as AFP points out, he "agreed that some responsibility for this lay with the local and state authorities." In fact, the entire responsibility lay with state and local authorities. Here, Clinton is simply playing on the ignorance of his listeners--a time-honored Democratic tactic. And speaking of "buses lined up to take them out," readers of this site are well aware that buses were "lined up," and that the City of New Orleans' hurricane plan contemplated that those buses would be used to evacuate residents. But, due entirely to the incompetence and fecklessness of local authorities, hundreds of buses that were "lined up" were never used. Clinton knows this; again, he is baldly attempting to deceive his listening audience.

Clinton finished up with some budget commentary:

On the US budget, Clinton warned that the federal deficit may be coming untenable, driven by foreign wars, the post-hurricane recovery programme and tax cuts that benefitted just the richest one percent of the US population, himself included.
More lies. As Clinton well knows, the Bush tax cuts benefited all taxpayers. And by historical standards, the current deficit is relatively small as a proportion of GDP, and is dropping.

Again and again, President Bush has tried to work with the Democrats as if they were loyal Americans first, and partisans second. He has treated Bill Clinton with a friendship and respect that, candidly, is disproportionate to Clinton's meager accomplishments. Again and again, the Democrats have rebuffed Bush's overtures and taken advantage of his patriotism and good faith. Clinton's politically-motivated tissue of lies and distortions is just the latest example out of many. But it is unprecedented, coming from a former President. That is a sad thing: the latest wound inflicted on the body politic by the Democratic Party.

UPDATE: Reader Steve Tefft sends this Clinton quote from July 23, 2003:

[I]t is incontestable that on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and chemical weapons.
http://powerlineblog.com/archives/011712.php

October 2003:
“When Clinton was here recently he told me he was absolutely convinced, given his years in the White House and the access to privileged information which he had, that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction until the end of the Saddam regime,” . – Portuguese Prime Minister Jose Manuel Durao Barroso said in an interview with Portuguese cable news channel SIC Noticias.
http://polipundit.com/wp-comments-popup.php?p=10038&c=1

December 22, 2003
The Democrats' Greatest Hits: The WMD Collection

Laurie Mylroie has e-mailed us the following collection of quotes on Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction, with thanks to Peter Huessy. Although the underlying point has been made frequently elsewhere, the accumulation of these quotes has a power of its own:

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
- President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
- President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
- Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
- Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
- Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
- Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and
others, December 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do."
- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members .. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/005456.php


523 posted on 09/24/2006 8:11:51 AM PDT by Seattle Conservative (God Bless and protect our troops and their CIC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 219 | View Replies]

To: onyx

Which article?


524 posted on 09/24/2006 8:11:55 AM PDT by defconw (Yes I am a Bushbot, so what of it? (Official Snowflake))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 522 | View Replies]

To: defconw

I refuse to post against him. He needs to win reelection, but anybody who thinks he's a serious contender in '08 is dreaming.


525 posted on 09/24/2006 8:12:24 AM PDT by onyx (1 Billion Muslims -- IF only 10% are radical, that's still 100 Million who want to kill us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 520 | View Replies]

To: Barset
Wallace agreed to a particular format before the interview and he should have stuck to it.

If Bill Clinton's pretend wife Hillary can demand and receive the same thing while she is running for president she might just win.

I just watched Wallace interview Clinton and it's pretty strange. Remember how smart and savvy and what a great communicator Clinton was supposed to be? I don't see any reason for Clinton to do what he did unless he was high or some information is coming up on the horizon that's going to be devastating to Clinton. So damaging that he wants to be able to say it's the right wingers.

526 posted on 09/24/2006 8:12:47 AM PDT by isthisnickcool (Don't worry, everything will be OK. Or maybe it won't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 447 | View Replies]

To: onyx
I think if he shuts up, he can keep his seat.
527 posted on 09/24/2006 8:13:02 AM PDT by defconw (Yes I am a Bushbot, so what of it? (Official Snowflake))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 525 | View Replies]

To: Fudd Fan

He'll run for president as an Independent in 2008... bank on it.


528 posted on 09/24/2006 8:13:26 AM PDT by johnny7 (“And what's Fonzie like? Come on Yolanda... what's Fonzie like?!”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 478 | View Replies]

To: onyx

That's exactly where I am on Allen. He was an excellent governor and a fine senator, and he deserves to be re-elected. But I'm not sure about 08 for him now.


529 posted on 09/24/2006 8:13:27 AM PDT by Fudd Fan (Some pray for peace; I pray for the VICTORY that will ensure it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 525 | View Replies]

To: defconw

The one that says the war in Iraq is responsible for increased terrorism and for the recruitment of new terrorists.


530 posted on 09/24/2006 8:13:44 AM PDT by onyx (1 Billion Muslims -- IF only 10% are radical, that's still 100 Million who want to kill us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 524 | View Replies]

To: johnny7

If he runs, that would be his only option. IMO


531 posted on 09/24/2006 8:14:17 AM PDT by Fudd Fan (Some pray for peace; I pray for the VICTORY that will ensure it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 528 | View Replies]

To: onyx
Oh yes, OK. Do you think they have done it again? Revealed classified information?
532 posted on 09/24/2006 8:14:37 AM PDT by defconw (Yes I am a Bushbot, so what of it? (Official Snowflake))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 530 | View Replies]

To: defconw; Fudd Fan

He really must stop the apologies and he needs to tell interviewers to move on and talk only about issues.


533 posted on 09/24/2006 8:15:25 AM PDT by onyx (1 Billion Muslims -- IF only 10% are radical, that's still 100 Million who want to kill us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 527 | View Replies]

To: defconw

Answer to your question...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1707347/posts


534 posted on 09/24/2006 8:16:01 AM PDT by Fudd Fan (Some pray for peace; I pray for the VICTORY that will ensure it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 532 | View Replies]

To: Fudd Fan
My first clue should have been that the President raised money for him, but has not really embraced him. There is usually a reason for that. Smacking myself in the head.
535 posted on 09/24/2006 8:16:13 AM PDT by defconw (Yes I am a Bushbot, so what of it? (Official Snowflake))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 529 | View Replies]

To: onyx

With the question about his mom that the idiot reporter asked last week, maybe Allen is starting to do that. We'll see... I just hope he wins re-election. Beyond that, I don't know.


536 posted on 09/24/2006 8:17:00 AM PDT by Fudd Fan (Some pray for peace; I pray for the VICTORY that will ensure it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 533 | View Replies]

To: defconw
For sure -- plus they mention that the war has "gone down hill ever since Abu Gahrid" --- how's that for colossal nerve?
537 posted on 09/24/2006 8:17:01 AM PDT by onyx (1 Billion Muslims -- IF only 10% are radical, that's still 100 Million who want to kill us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 532 | View Replies]

To: OESY

538 posted on 09/24/2006 8:17:29 AM PDT by Alas Babylon!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 313 | View Replies]

To: rr1954

I agree w/ you. At first I was surprised that CW and the panel were so restrained. Now I think they were just letting Clintoon hang himself without help from anyone.


539 posted on 09/24/2006 8:17:40 AM PDT by aragona (Boycott CITGO!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 395 | View Replies]

To: Fudd Fan
Ah, remember when Tony said a government official could be a janitor? Here we go again.
540 posted on 09/24/2006 8:17:45 AM PDT by defconw (Yes I am a Bushbot, so what of it? (Official Snowflake))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 534 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 501-520521-540541-560 ... 1,321-1,328 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson