Sunday Morning Talk Show Thread 3 June 2007

Various Self-Serving Politicians and Big Media Screaming Faces ^ | 3 June 2007 | Various Big Media Television Networks

[Alas Babylon!]

The Talk Shows

Sunday, June 3rd, 2007

Guests to be interviewed today on major television talk shows:

FOX NEWS SUNDAY (Fox Network): Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich; U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker.

MEET THE PRESS (NBC): Democratic strategists Bob Shrum and James Carville; Republican strategists Mary Matalin and Mike Murphy.

FACE THE NATION (CBS): Sen. Ken Salazar, D-Colo.; Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y.

THIS WEEK (ABC): Iraqi President Jalal Talabani; Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa.; NASCAR driver Kyle Petty.

LATE EDITION (CNN) : Sens. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Richard Shelby, R-Ala.; Elizabeth Edwards, wife of presidential candidate John Edwards; Tagg Romney, son of presidential candidate Mitt Romney.

[bray]

You and Laura/Rush cannot support or discuss this bill in a logical manner because your/their radio audiance would have a cow.

I dare any of you to interview a low tech owner and try to find out the facts of cost of labor in those industries.

Most will not talk for fear of reprisal or your DNCixty Minutes type of vilifying those businesses. But you should educate yourselves before you vilify them for cheap ratings.

I know some and they are friends who would hire American labor if they could find it. All that is left is Mexicans and Crackheads, which would you choose for your business?

Pray for W and Our Troops

[bray]

You and Laura/Rush cannot support or discuss this bill in a logical manner because your/their radio audiance would have a cow.

I dare any of you to interview a low tech owner and try to find out the facts of cost of labor in those industries.

Most will not talk for fear of reprisal or your DNCixty Minutes type of vilifying those businesses. But you should educate yourselves before you vilify them for cheap ratings.

I know some and they are friends who would hire American labor if they could find it. All that is left is Mexicans and Crackheads, which would you choose for your business?

Pray for W and Our Troops

[Arrowhead1952]

I’m sending that to Senators KBH and Cornyn as well. I also faxed that Rasmussen Reports poll that only 26% support the amnesty bill. FR thread link below.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1843813/posts

[ThreePuttinDude]

George Will is snarlingly distainful of Fred Thompson

That does it, I'm supporting Fred for sure.....

[mathluv]

'The only upside to all of this debate is that it’s distracting the Media from leaking any more top secret operations in foreign countries to the enemy on the front pages of the NY Slimes.'

LOL! I had not thought of that aspect!

[Arrowhead1952]

My understanding is that both KBH and Cornyn voted FOR a portion, or the most recent related bill, instead of against.

I think that vote was for an amendment to the original bill.

[txradioguy]

Yeah I can see your POV as well. It would explain why he picked Gonzalez as his AG.

I just don’t remember him being all open borders like when he was my Govenor.

He’s adopted more of a “go along to get along” attitude since he arrived in D.C.

[Bahbah]

Wolf is doing the puffiest possible interview with Elizabeth Edwards, a woman whom I dislike intensely.

[brydic1]

If only this man’s passion had been directed against the Kennedy-Clinton crowd and their every effort to destroy America over the last 6 years. Of course, he still displayed no more credibility nor reasoning when he jumped on those who oppose the immigration bill than he does when he tries to defend conservative values.

[mathluv]

I think you are correct, but it was still a portion that should have been voted down, not for.

[Cedric]

Did you know she has cancer?

[MNJohnnie]

Incorrect. But if you add the phrase, “at, near or below minumum wage with no benefits” you’d be correct>

Umm source for this "fact"?

This is the other really really obnoxious habit of the Antis. You simply scream down any facts that don't conform to your dogmas. Sorry but Mol is right.

Last week's unemployment number came in at 4.5. Anything under 5 is considered full employment. 5% of the work force are the marginal or unemployable. The sick, the handicap, the substance abusers etc. SO, if we have 20 million illegals here and we assume that 10 million have jobs, the question remains "who is going to do all those jobs" Certainly not American Citizens since they all ready HAVE jobs. They are certain NOT going to take jobs that are "at, near or below minumum wage with no benefits".

Rodguy, a little help here?

Rod you had a really good explanation a few weeks back on how Illegal immigration retards innovation and technical development. Can you repost that to Cedric?

Perhaps then the Ultras MIGHT grasp how to argue this issue and win. Right now this putting their hands over their ears and screaming "NO NO NO NO" at everything that doesn't fit their dogmas is driving away far more people then it is attracting to their side

[bray]

I watched a half dozen Mexicans put the roof on a retirement building yesterday. Then I drove through a fast food restaurant and was served by them before I had one fill my car and then drive through the carwash that one ran.

A couple months ago I took a $100 out of a cash machine and it had a malfunction so I went into the bank to report it. A Mexican comes up to me and says is, this your money? Apparently I left the $100 sitting in the out slot of the machine. He could have taken it and nobody none the wiser, but brought it into me. Guess their not all evil vultures.

Pray for W and Our Troops

[BusterBear]

What’s an FDR?

It's the name of a highway on the east side of Manhattan that periodically becomes flooded; or shut down when the President visits the UN.

[eeevil conservative]

Bray— let me just get something clear.

I don’t think you listen to my show. If you did- you would have heard me clearly state yesterday that I did not use media or politicians to tell me what is in the bill...

I am actually READING the bill for myself. so there is your “logic” for you.

And as far as the audience goes— you are dismally mistaken. They WANT to talk about this logically- and they DO.

I don’t DO or SAY anything based on the radio show audience or ratings. I am who I am- period. I say what I think- and it has cost me friends- but at least I don’t waste my time being something I am not.

I am who I am- if the audience likes it and wants it- great, if not- so be it. I have not been in radio for years, and study markets and listeners, etc...

I show up and say what is on my mind. That is it.

And not YOU or anyone else is going to brow beat me or shame me into cowering to an audience or popularity contest. I was eeevil conservative for years before I ever hit a radio studio, and will continue to be eeevil conservative long after I am off the air.

You have something you want to share on the air- that you think we have missed- by all means call in. No one is shunned from the show. We allow anyone on air. We don’t SCREEN calls at all.

[Bahbah]

Did you know she has cancer?

Yes, I know that.

[kabar]

You want to explain to me how Bush is suppose to arrest 20 million Illegals all by himself?

You want to tell me how Bush is going to win the war in Iraq by himself? Please. Bush is the CIC and the Chief executive officer of this country responsible under the Constitution for enforcing our laws. The buck stops at the WH. The idea that Bush is directing the Executive Branch to enforce the laws and is being countermanded by underlings is just nonsense.

How Bush is suppose to, all by himself, undo 50 years of conscious neglect by both sides of the political aisle on this issue?

First, he had an excellent opportunity to undo this neglect after 9/11. National security became the issue, not just illegal immigration. And the President has the laws on the books to take action, including the Secure Fence Act of 2006, which the WH is holding hostage to comprehensive immigration reform. The Clinton administration did a better job of enforcement against business than the Bush administration.

I know emotions run very high on this issue but this conscious adaptation of the debate tactics of the Hysteric Left by a good chunk of the Right these days is simply inexcusable.

We have the Rep President of the US going against his own party on this issue and siding with the Dems. Bush actions are the ones I find inexcusable.

This is why the “Nativist” accusation works for your opponents. Too many people read the sort of ranting hyper emotional screaming and simplistic sloganeering coming from the Right on this issue and wonder if the accusation ins’t hitting close to the truth.

The WH started the name-calling labelling conservatives who oppose his position as nativists and xenophobes. If nativist means that we don't want this country destroyed, then so be it. Samuel Huntington described it thus:

The persistent inflow of Hispanic immigrants threatens to divide the United States into two peoples, two cultures, and two languages. Unlike past immigrant groups, Mexicans and other Latinos have not assimilated into mainstream U.S. culture, forming instead their own political and linguistic enclaves—from Los Angeles to Miami—and rejecting the Anglo-Protestant values that built the American dream. The United States ignores this challenge at its peril... Americans like to boast of their past success in assimilating millions of immigrants into their society, culture, and politics. But Americans have tended to generalize about immigrants without distinguishing among them and have focused on the economic costs and benefits of immigration, ignoring its social and cultural consequences. As a result, they have overlooked the unique characteristics and problems posed by contemporary Hispanic immigration. The extent and nature of this immigration differ fundamentally from those of previous immigration, and the assimilation successes of the past are unlikely to be duplicated with the contemporary flood of immigrants from Latin America. This reality poses a fundamental question: Will the United States remain a country with a single national language and a core Anglo-Protestant culture? By ignoring this question, Americans acquiesce to their eventual transformation into two peoples with two cultures (Anglo and Hispanic) and two languages (English and Spanish).

Last week you wrote THIS, which was one of the best arguments on the issue I have read. THAT is the tone and the manner the Antis SHOULD be adopting. Use this sort of calm, deliberate sensible tone and the Antis turn all the arguments directed at them back on their opponents heads.

Many of the so-called Antis have used cogent, logical arguments supported by facts to counter this bill, e.g., Jeff Sessions, Jim Demint. The people who use emotion and charges of racism are the Left and interest groups like La Raza. They are the ones who have changed the language so illegal aliens become "undocumented workers" who must be able to "come out of the shadows." Amnesty is no longer amnesty but getting to the "back of the line" on "a path to citizenship." This Orwellian Newspeak is meant to frame the debate and lump legal immigrants in with illegal aliens.

[Cedric]

Yes, it it particularly irritating that he saved his most virulent rhetoric to attack his political allies.

[eeevil conservative]

This is where you have it over me on info... I know little about his time in Texas....

The key is to stay engaged and not let this Bill go through..

[eeevil conservative]

ROFLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

oh my gosh, I think I am going to wet my pants!

;-)