Oh, you mean THIS one??
Posted on 03/04/2007 5:03:17 AM PST by Alas Babylon!
The Talk Shows
Sunday, March 4th, 2007
Guests to be interviewed today on major television talk shows:
FOX NEWS SUNDAY (Fox Network): Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.; Reps. Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich., and Charles Rangel, D-N.Y.
MEET THE PRESS (NBC): Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.
FACE THE NATION (CBS): Sens. Carl Levin, D-Mich., and Joe Lieberman, I-Conn.
THIS WEEK (ABC): Sens. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., and Trent Lott, R-Miss.; Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson.
LATE EDITION (CNN) : U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad; Sens. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., and Jon Kyl, R-Ariz.; Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo.
Did you hear what Robinson said about Rep. John Lewis??
He said that Rep. Lewis was talking about backing Obama...but got a phone call from Bubba Clinton...saying "remember me?"
I wonder what, if anything the Clintons have on the members of the Cong. Black Caucus....because I just can't see them going for anyone BUT Obama.
Agreed .. But my concern is that Murtha's comments are encouraging to the enemy and people will die because of it
Yeah, that point was not "selling" very well and the DNC Talking Points deleted it.
Graham just keeps on hammering the Dims about "if they're serious, cut off the funds".
I'm not a Graham fan but today he was at his best. IMO.
Why do conservatives not like him?"
As a friend of mine would describe it:
Conservatives are getting tired of Lindsey's conservative "Thorazine Shuffle"......
Zalmay Khalilzid is saying that HE will be the one representing the USA at the meeting that Iraq has set up with it's neighbors.
Wolk asking about people questioning us sitting with Iran while they are helping kill troops..
K...saying that it will give him a chance to talk to Iranians about the weapons coming over border to harm our troops...but stresses this is a multi-lateral meeting.
Thanks as always anita -- you media nuggest is always one of the most interesting on this thread weekly.
I watched bits and pieces of various shows today; here is my take:
Chris Wallace is getting almost unwatchable. I was watching in bed (bad sinus headache today), and it was BORING as all get out. He buys completely into dem spin and didn't challenge Wrangle on the tax breaks only for the rich garbage that Charlie usually spews. The panel was so boring, I fell asleep!!! (could have been the headache though).
Howie Kurtz on Reliable sources was a real jerk today and went after Anne Coulter, while ignoring Bill Maher completely. One guest went after him as well, since Howie didn't have any harsh words for Edwards anti-Christian bloggers, so how dare he go after Ann. He also was astonished that Mitt Romney "introduced" Coulter at CPAC, and he had to be corrected on that as well from the guy from politico.com.
George Steponallofus wa interviewing Paulson and had to bring up Hillary's comments about how China owns us, he scoffed and pretty much dismissed Ms. Hill's comments completely.
Lindsey Graham was great; Fat Tim Russert is still a potatoe head (and a liar who submitted a false affidavit to a federal court in the Libby case, and ignores that fact completely). Timmy needs to retire or be fired.
Obama is still the king and Hillary's going to Selma is nothing but a copycat act. She doesn't want Obama to get all the press today, and she can't get it on her own, so has to bring the first Black President with her to get any credibility in Selma today. (I don't recall which show that commentary was on).
They're just so jealous that all the publicity is going to the other reporter who was shot. The interview on CNN with Larry King reminded me of the Reeves. Very creepy.
An entire generation of Americans that have been fixated on Hour long Crime or Drama Shows think that everything must be solved in an hour with 15 minutes of Commercials. They have no concept of War, no concept of Peace, or anything in between. Where would they get educated on these matters? Not History books anymore, or History based Motion Pictures, not their wacky Parents, not the Diaper Clad DBM. We can see that we really have our work cut out for us.
Oh, you mean THIS one??
Yep and the fact that Timmy didn't hammering Graham with rebuttal questions and quotes from articles was very telling
It's not a discussion Liberals want to have
Heard that hitlery's appearance on CNBC went over like a lead balloon......with democrats. She's totally ignorant of economics, our finanacial policies........only jumps in as the opportunist she is.
Thank you, Laverne.
I am so sorry to hear about your headache...I hope you start feeling better soon.
Kind of fits in with Walter Cronkheit referring to Obama as young, only in his 20s.
IMO McCain ended his candidacy when he said the lives of our troops were being wasted in Iraq. The only thing he had going for him was his stalwart position on the war and now he's torpedoed that.
The reason McCain didn't go to CPAC is that they don't represent his base, the media do. If he'd gone to CPAC Lil Timmah and friends would have criticized him for "pandering to the right" (which is how Eugene Robinson described what McCain's going to CPAC would have been). Since he didn't go they praised him, and likely for the reason you propose.
Rudy should watch Lindsey Graham's performance on MTP this morning. He can pull that off even better than Lindsey did. Hammering away on that issue will go a long way to getting movement conservatives over his social issue positions.
He can also make a credible argument that, even though he thinks abortion ought to be a woman's choice under the law, he doesn't think the courts should be the ones deciding it. He can say he would appoint judges who feel that way too. He could even stand up and say that he would fight for state laws that protect a woman's "rights," but would insist that the laws be passed by the legislature and the people, not put in at the whim of the courts. He can couch all of this with the rhetoric of "only Nixon could go to China."
How about Rudy/Newt '08?
Regional balance (at least North/South). Great presence in the traditionally solid blue North and a really good shot at staving off any inroads by the Dhimmicrats it the old South. The weakness is in the western states, but Rudy will have a lot of appeal in California and with the law and order types in the Southwest. He'll have a hard time selling his position on immigration, but at least he's pursuing the rhetoric of sealing the border even if he does support the "pathway to citizenship" for illegals currently here. My hope is that he argues for enforcement first as a means of providing security at the borders. Again, emphasizing his law enforcement credentials.
Wow.... I think I've used up my typing/reading time for the day on this one post!
I watched Meet the Press. Murtha was his usual self. He actually almost completely fulfills the paradigm on how to become a demagogue.
First, he is a defeatist on the war but he realizes this is too small a group to prevail.
Second, knowing the above he then launches into a series of poorly sourced comments designed to discourage everyone. His usual mantra is this is "a civil war...we can't win it militarily..." and so forth. He repeats the same points over and over again like a good propagandist does in order to garner more support.
Third, he does not come out with a full frontal assault of name calling and denigration like most people intending to become dominant, totalitarian leaders. He does, however, indicate the usual moral superiority of being antiwar. In this he permits his followers to demean those who believe otherwise and also gives his antiwar followers a reason or purpose for living. By having "antiwar" as a purpose they achieve two things--discharge a complex issue with a syrupy emotion and achieve instant moral superiority over any opponent.
Murtha has definite totalitarian ambitions but he breaks down under scrutiny.
Lindsey Graham broke Murtha's arguments down. Lindsey was passionate, a master of the facts and capable of forcing "what happens if we withdraw" as the principal defect of Murtha's position. An extraordinary job! I take back some of my negative assumptions about Graham.
Graham did have trouble with "polls." This is much easier to refute than it seems. Mark Twain had it right when he said "...what most people call thinking is emoting...the aggregation of emoting is public opinion...it answers everything...some act as if it were the voice of God..."
Polls, in general, are tough to explain and understand. See a discussion of the foibles and problems of polls: HERE. Polling on "war" is fraught with the problem of who is in favor of war? The easiest, and most noble sentiment, is to be antiwar no matter what. That is what the polls on this issue are concluding and little more.
Thanks, Laverne.
They also have no concept of time either
Last night I took my girls and a friend of their to see a play at the local high school
The friend said she liked the play ... but kept whining about how it took to long
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.