Sunday Morning Talk Show Thread 18 February 2007

Various big media television networks ^ | 17 February 2007 | Various Self-Serving Politicians and Big Media Screaming Faces

[rodguy911]

Even then he can't be killed.

[samantha]

Yeah this is all great stuff, except for Tiki becoming Tacky in Prostituting himself. I understand that his salary is going to a lot less retired from Football, but this may have been his plan all along. He needed to start somewhere to get into some form of Broadcasting, and mostly all the slots for Football are filled, and none of the Networks would do on the Job training except FNC. We thought he was a great Family man, now he tells People his hero is that left wing nut, nasty man, anti white people, Bryant Gumball, who was cheating on his wife with White Women. Is this the hero to Tacky Tiki?

[kabar]

Actually I'd be embarassed if any President reacted as you want this one to. Again...that is the job of the Reps and Senators on the Hill to respond like a rabid Rotweiler.

How do you think I want him to respond? Do you agree with his response at the Feb 14 press conference as provided in my post #319.

Again...that is the job of the Reps and Senators on the Hill to respond like a rabid Rotweiler

More hypebole and nonsense.

[Phsstpok]

WHY, tell me why, WHY doesn't the PRESIDENT say this?

Are you certain that he hasn't? 

This is from his speech to the AEI this past week:

Since the attacks of September the 11th, we have been on the offense. I believe the best way to do our duty in securing the homeland is to stay on the offense. And we're not alone. That's what our fellow citizens have got to understand. We're not in this fight against extremists and murders alone.

<snip> 

This war against the terrorists, this war to protect ourselves, takes place on many fronts. One such front is Iraq. We're on the offense in Iraq, as we should be, against extremists and killers.

It sounds mighty similar to what anita posted.  He's been moving in this direction for some time now, but the press just won't report it as it doesn't reinforce their position.   They merely "paraphrase" and mischaracterize what he says or say that he launched a "vicious attack" on honest and patriotic critics, never hinting at the substance of what he said, if they acknowledge it at all.

[Fishtalk]

Oh dear Lord if I didn't just write two to three rather nasty posts about mine own Mike Castle, REPUB congress critter.

This is response to your accusation that I am blaming it all on one man. Whatever "it" is. For now it's that awful non-binding resolution that will be quoted on the Arab street as profound proof that America's bailing out.

And hey, folks...how about this plan by Murtha to slowly BLEED us out of Iraq? How comes the President isn't all over the place against this idea? He should start railing against that horrific idea and he should start NOW.

Goodness, we even have a sound byte of Murtha, bragging I tell you, that he'll tie our military up in such knots that they won't be able to "do anything". I can't imagine a congress critter doing anything so terrible and yet not one pubbie or the Pres is pointing this out.

Silly me, I think Americans would be spitting mad over a congress critter plotting so openly, blantantly and nastily to undermine our troops. Yet it flies, ladida, right under the radar.

We are going to lose this war I'm not backing down. We're going to "lose" it like we lost Vietnam. We're going to lose it because the people that could've and should've...DIDN'T. This includes the President.

We'll be bailing out of Iraq soon enough in shame and disgrace as congress critters like Kerry in Vietnam and now Murtha, blantantly go out and betray our country, and all for their political ambition.

Iraq will be another American defeat, another cut and run, come on folks...look at NORTH KOREA! The admin's backing down on that.

The world will think, forever and ever as I see it, that America doesn't have the guts to fight and complete a war.

And the world will think that mostly because...IT'S TRUE!

Then the libs will be happy because American will be a nothing country, a bunch of cowards....that's where we're going.

We can thank the LIBS and DEMS first, then we can thank the RINOS, than, finally, the President.

They ALL betrayed us.

Hey, I want to be wrong, I desperately want to be wrong. But I'm preparing for the defeat I really fear is coming.

[rodguy911]

NOt even a contest!

[BusterBear]

I end by throwing in that even that silly Wilson/Plame/Russert thing should have been stopped before it began. All the president had to do, seems to me, is point out early on to the American people that NO crime was done, no LAW was broken, that he's stopping Fitzgerald to save American taxpayer dollars.

I remember the political atmosphere at the time this case started. It was one of complete hysteria. Even conservatives were warning the President that "it isn't the crime, it's the cover-up" that got Nixon into trouble. No one at the White House seemed to know what the facts were, people there were spinning around like whirling dervishes, and the Administration completely lost its nerve. John Ashcroft knew he was going to be replaced in 2004 and he was tired of taking brickbats and running interference for the Administration so he unloaded the hot potato onto Comey who unloaded in turn onto Fitzgerald. With the FBI, the CIA, and the State Department concealing facts from the White House and practically the whole political establishment screaming COVERUP, I don't see how Bush could have stopped it, to tell the truth.

[MNJohnnie]

You are right.

Ronald Reagan was the greatest President this Country had in the 20th Century and with out a doubt ranks in the top 3 of all time.

It hard to out do Washington, who set the pattern, or Lincoln who bore burdens unimaginable. What Reagan was NOT was God.

He was NOT the perfectly flawless immaculate caricature Reagan as manufactured by the Talk Radio Generation.

And here is the very REAL political danger of this fantasy Reagan. NO ONE will ever live up to the image because NO ONE HUMAN CAN.

So "Conservatives" having created an impossible expectation of "what Reagan would do" will forever be disappointed to discover their current, and future leaders, can NOT measure up to their flawed fantasy hero worship vision of what Reagan did. They set the bar of expectations so impossibly high NO real politician can ever possibly measure up.

Even REAGAN himself could not measure up to Talk Radio Land Reagan!

[txradioguy]

"The President can respond without being viewed as some sort of nut. He just needs to state some commonsense facts. The enemy must take some comfort in the House Resolution. And if the war is such a mistake, why would anyone want to sacrifice themselves or a loved one from now on forward?"

That all well and good. Like I've been telling you repeatedly on here and you refuse to liste to...unless you have a media that's willing to actually REPEAT what the President is telling the people...his message will never get out.


"Hat in hand? The President has a little more power than that. If the Dems want to operate on a continuing resolution for the next two years, so be it. If they want to withhold funds for DOD, let them do it. Reagan operated most of his Presidency with a Democrat controlled Congress, including a House that was overwhelmingly Dem."

Reagan also haad a Republican controlled Senate. The fact of the matter is that the Libtards in this Congress have no fear of blow back from openly opposing the President in a time of war like they would have in years past because of their total control of what the majority of the people see and hear.

And I never thought I'd see the day when a Conservative...a REAL conservative would advocate LETTING the Dems cut off funding?

Do you WANT soldiers to die?


"I am 63 and not part of the Talk Radio generation. I live in the real world and have seen a lot of it."


You are living in a reality that is not up to date with the current situation. The fact of the matter is that in today's environment in D.C. Reagan would NOT have the success he did in 1981. As I stated above...the DBM has tightened it's grip on what the message is they want the people to see. They are the water carriers for the Connumists that call themselves Democrats in D.C. and they have no compunction against outright lying in what they report.

[rodguy911]

Non-binding vote--typical rat maneuver!
Like you say so often if they had to run on what they really believe...they would lose,enter non binding votes.

[snugs]

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/01/20070128.html

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/01/20070124-3.html

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/01/20070114.html

Are just some examples

[Phsstpok]

The next GOP President would be wise to keep (Tony) on.

Wouldn't it be awkward for President Snow to be his own press secretary?
 

[Bahbah]

Thanks, FOXY and all, for the running commentary.

I have too much to do to keep up this morning and I really appreciate it.

[rodguy911]

I"m with you star, it's rather pathetic for FNC to train all these people, chetry, and now tiki and then someone else steal them, but I guess that is the biz.

[txradioguy]

When The Veep goes on TV he quietly eviscorates the Libs. I guess you missed what he did to Wolf Blitzer a couple weeks ago.

Plus you have to remember he has to be INVITED to the Sunday Shows. None of the three talking head tools want to get shown up by someone who is that much smarter than they are. They'd rather have a squishy spined RINO on that they can beat into agreeing with them.

Short of calling weekly press conferences himself...which I've NEVER seen a Veep do...he's limited in how and when he can get the message out.

[rodguy911]

Absolutely and even when they do offer solutions or those rare platforms, they seem to disappear almost immediately. The goal pure unadulterated power.

[Alas Babylon!]

I won't defend everything the Republicans did in Congress. In fact, they sucked. But they still suck less than the dems.

Sadly, we live in the real world. The badly sucking Republicans in control of the House 1994-2006 are still better than a dem controlled House. Recent events this week prove so. Men will die over that vote, and it's only just the beginning of what Pelosi/Murtha has for us on Iraq and beyond.

And Bush should have reined in spending. I disagreed with all his spending, his stand on illegal entry from Mexico, his support for any Palestinians, and his continuous reference to Islam as the "Religion of Peace". Still, he is right on so many other things I agree on. Far, far more than I would with a President Gore or Kerry.

When the party decided on Bush in 2000 I thought it was pretty good choice, considering all the choices AVAILABLE. The events after 9/11 solidified that view for me. I have since stood shocked while he was attacked with so little push back by the rest of the party, especially in having experienced the Clintonista warrior attacks on Ken Starr, Newt, et al, earlier.

[txradioguy]

I read how he responded. And he responded in a way that a President SHOULD respond.


"More hypebole and nonsense."

No...it's bullsh*t on your part because you can't rebut the obvious factual statment I made with more of your bash the President rhetoric.

So instead of not saying anything at all (which wold have been smart on your part)...you take the cowards way out.

[AliVeritas]

http://www.globalincidentmap.com/home.php

[rodguy911]

Tooo good,ROTFLMAO!!