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

[Alas Babylon!]

The Talk Shows

Sunday, February 17th, 2007

Guests to be interviewed today on major television talk shows:

FOX NEWS SUNDAY (Fox Network): Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich.

MEET THE PRESS (NBC): White House press secretary Tony Snow.

FACE THE NATION (CBS): Sens. Joe Biden, D-Del., and Richard Lugar, R-Ind.

THIS WEEK (ABC): Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and his wife, Ann Romney; actor Michael Douglas.

LATE EDITION (CNN) : White House press secretary Tony Snow; Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.; New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson; magician Penn Jillette; former Maryland Lt. Gov. Michael Steele; and Marc Morial, president of the National Urban League.

[rodguy911]

It's amazing how fast these things can all transpire, great link.It's even more amazing that we are the always the one's where the buck stops.

[AliVeritas]

Did they ever get David Corn and Mitchell on the stand?

[snugs]

Yes or what we call in Britain racing pigeons

[rodguy911]

Grilling in effigy,o.k,could catch on.

[kabar]

Quite the contrary...I debated where you are rong in your assertions and the best you could come up with was the shiney new words you jsut learned on your "New-Word-A-Day" desk calendar.

LOL. There you go again.

[edpc]

There's always someone who will back a candidate, no matter how remote his chances are. Look at Kucinich as a great example. Hagel, if he runs, will be the Right's equivalent of Kucinich: Someone who's technically in the game and says a lot of stupid things without any real chance whatsoever.

[AliVeritas]

That's a great idea tx.

[windchime]

Did anyone else notice this?

At the conclusion of today's panel, Chris Wallace presented a viewer's challenge of a Douglas Feith comment on FNS last week about the Iraq/Al Qaeda relationship being an "operational" one:

FEITH: No, they didn't. Nobody in my office ever said there was an operational relationship between Iraq and Al Qaeda. It's just not correct. I mean, words matter. And people are throwing around loose allegations, vague allegations, based on not reading the words carefully.

This Weekly Standard article was presented:

Case Closed    From the November 24, 2003 issue: The U.S. government's secret memo detailing cooperation between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden.    by Stephen F. Hayes    11/24/2003, Volume 009, Issue 11

OSAMA BIN LADEN and Saddam Hussein had an operational relationship from the early 1990s to 2003 that involved training in explosives and weapons of mass destruction, logistical support for terrorist attacks, al Qaeda training camps and safe haven in Iraq, and Iraqi financial support for al Qaeda--perhaps even for Mohamed Atta--according to a top secret U.S. government memorandum obtained by THE WEEKLY STANDARD.

As far as I can tell, the "operational" relationship statement can be attributed to the author of the article, but not the Feith memo.  Excerpts of the memo follow in the article.

I couldn't tell whether Wallace was confirming or refuting the accuracy of Feith's denial.

[rodguy911]

I'd agree but the Bryant Gumball and Matt Lauer references seem to dispel that theory,although you never know.

[snugs]

I agree

[AliVeritas]

Amen.

[AliVeritas]

[samantha]

This is extraordinary by the Washington Post, but they are reading that even the Liberals think Murtha is both dirty and scary. Nanzee Pelosi better watch her behind because Steny Hoyer is smiling, and Nanzee continues to implode. Can we say "Freezer Jefferson" as head of the Homeland security Committee in the House? She is so tone deaf, and really believes she can do no wrong like the worst dictator. Steny, when do you plan your hostile takeover to save your majority ?

[BusterBear]

Good Bye Senator Coleman...

Right on, Johnny.

[Alas Babylon!]

Thanks. The only thing I ever really admired about the dems and leftist DBM is how they always--rabidly, religiously, and vehemently--stick up for each other. The problem and quality of the Right is our truthfulness. And that certain starry-eyed desire to seek perfection in our own...

[AliVeritas]

There's no better time than now to shut the press down.
On the Swift program being shut down alone. It would send the message, let the judges reverse it later. Worked for Lincoln and Truman.

[FreeReign]

So why didn't he repeat that kind of response at the latest press conference? He had the perfect openning to do so.

The President didn't give that kind of response in his press conference? I'd have to check the tanscript.

Maybe the President has put the message out so many times that he loses track.

Maybe the President has put the message out so many times that he would find it stunning that some think ithe message hasn't been put out.

Two examples just this week alone;

Feb 15. 2007 | Policy Speech | The President | Excerpt: People understand the consequences of failure. If we were to leave this young democracy before the job is done, there would be chaos, and out of chaos would become vacuums, and into those power vacuums would flow extremists who would be emboldened; extremists who want to find safe haven. As we think about this important front in the war against extremists and terrorists, it's important for our fellow citizens to recognize this truth: If we were to leave Iraq before the job is done, the enemy would follow us home.

Feb. 14 2007 | Press Conference | The President: I concluded that to step back from the fight in Baghdad would have disastrous consequences for people in America. That's the conclusion I came to. It's the conclusion members of my staff came to. It's the conclusion that a lot in the military came to. And the reason why I say "disastrous consequences," the Iraqi government could collapse, chaos would spread, there would be a vacuum, into the vacuum would flow more extremists, more radicals, people who have stated intent to hurt our people. I believe that success in Baghdad will have success in helping us secure the homeland. What's different about this conflict than some others is that if we fail there, the enemy will follow us here. I firmly believe that. And that's one of the main reasons why I made the decision I made. And so we will help this Iraqi government succeed. And the first step for success is to do something about the sectarian violence in Baghdad so they can have breathing space in order to do the political work necessary to assure the different factions in Baghdad, factions that are recovering from years of tyranny, that there is a hopeful future for them and their families. I would call that political breathing space.

The President does put the message out. Your opinion that he doesn't is wrong.

[AliVeritas]

Bingo, you win a year's supply of Rice-a-Roni, the San Francisco treat

[edpc]

This is extraordinary by the Washington Post, but they are reading that even the Liberals think Murtha is both dirty and scary.

After I posted the editorial yesterday, I surmised the WaPo is more interested in providing Dems political cover for '08 than they are concerned about troops/national security. Nothing that's happened since yesterday makes me think otherwise.

[greyfoxx39]

I didn't miss the Blitzer thing....and I understand the point about having to be invited to the talk shows....however, I wonder if Cheney is being utilized effectively in getting out the message. He doesn't need to be on a talk show, but can give speeches in other settings, and I would hope that tough talk in any setting would be picked up by the media with the purpose of slamming him again, which would have the effect of his words being heard.

Maybe Dick and Lynn should begin having "Cheney Chat" weekly on FNC....why not start a new trend? Obviously, the old trend isn't working well.