Posted on 12/04/2016 4:49:40 AM PST by Alas Babylon!
The Talk Shows
Dec 4th, 2016
Guests to be interviewed today on major television talk shows:
FOX NEWS SUNDAY (Fox Network): Kellyanne Conway, former campaign manager for Donald Trump; Karen Finney, former spokeswoman for Clinton campaign; Green Party presidential nominee Jill Stein.
MEET THE PRESS (NBC): To be announced (means can't find a convincing liar).
FACE THE NATION (CBS): Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus; former House Speaker Newt Gingrich; House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi; former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta.
THIS WEEK (ABC): Vice President-elect Mike Pence; Gen. David Petraeus, former CIA director.
STATE OF THE UNION (CNN): Conway ; Robby Mook, former campaign manager for Hillary Clinton.
Solyndra was an agenda driven boondoggle. This was Obama trying to change our economy to making solar panels rather than cars. Pure environmentalism while Carrier is a solid company.
I get the Pepe meme but what’s with the dog? Is that a thing too?
The entire 13 hours show was their attempt to buy weapons. Those high level meetings were about major purchases of weapons we had sold to someone.
I dunno, maybe we never noticed their colors before.
Maybe they’re a new gang and need to make their mark, like the Bloods and the Crips.
Personally, I think this is some sophomoric idiocracy that these people think gives them some sort of advantage or a moral booster to their disheartened followers.
In any case it’s goofy and typical of the Left to view some lame symbolism as political action.
They need to do a full medical examination on this senile witch and declare her mentally unfit for the job.
True....what I didn't mention is that in my 1st complaint I said I was giving them a month to play it straight. In the 2nd complaint I mentioned they had 2 weeks remaining to demonstrate they acknowledge their bias or off they go.
There will surely be a 3rd which will serve as a goodbye. I didn't watch for years until the run-up to Trump. It will be no problem to ignore them in the future.
And just as they ignored the middle of the country, and white voters in favor of coastal minorities, we boomers still have the numbers (and the money to spend supporting their advertisers v. millenials who don't have money to spend on anything.) Old media is deader than ever.
Oh goody, the new Jack Bauer is a black guy. Guess he saves us all from some white cops.
There has been a real shift to black leadership positions on several shows. Blacklist FBI head until she was killed... Quantico also had a female black leader...
The economic nationalists want our economic policies to benefit our people and workers. They want to keep our jobs in America thru both carrots and sticks. We can improve the conditions in the US to make it more welcoming for investment from abroad as well as keeping US businesses here for economic reasons. The stick of tariffs and duties can be used as well. The deterioration of the American middle class and reduction of our national manufacturing and tax base are national security issues.
The US is the world's biggest consumer market. We have tremendous leverage over the rest of the world, which wants to tap that market. Trump wants to use that leverage to make America great again. A growing economy generates the revenue needed to enact his agenda.
The wall represents National Security, meaning your going to come to the US legally or we will not host you as had been past policy.
appreciate and respect your take on Sarah.
Great run of the sailfish... Hopefully they will move up this way.
Stuart is known as “ Sailfish Capital of The World” and the run here is normally later in Dec / January.
Winds die one day, and are back up again so landlocked :(:(:(
However, the Carrier deal is a deal that was needed. It does make me feel somewhat hypercritical to support it, but there it is.
I’m hoping that in the future, Trump will hit many of these “politically-favored” corporations and their paid-politicians while at the same time letting business flourish without picking favorites.
I had a similar initial feeling but then came around to accept it as using “ the peoples money - tax breaks” for the people rather than just letting the jobs go.
Here is a take from ZeroHedge on the color purple (article date Nov 13) - remember, Hilly & Bill were both in matching purple the day after the election when she appeared for the first time (link @ the bottom):
********************************************************
Excerpt from ZeroHedge:
First – the symbolic: Did you notice the color purple? I bet you did, and how could you not? And it’s for that reason I couldn’t help but start to think: Why? For it’s not like they were there to party like it was 1999, were they?
I’ve heard and read a few observations to the effect of: “Both her and Bill chose to wear purple to show unity and blah, blah, blah.” Well, that may be so, but I don’t think so. At least, not in the vein suggested.
I believe that overwhelming presence of purple was to subliminally push, or to stress, the new color of standard/banner for either a new political party, or, at the least, a new political movement to rally under. And it borders on branding genius if I’m correct in that assumption as I’ll try to explain. (Remember: I’m coming at this from the business side, not the political.)
Why purple? Well, there are two distinct reasons. First – purple is commonly acquainted with the mixing of red and blue i.e.,the blending of the traditional color standards of boys and girls, men and women, Democrats and Republicans and so on. So as to its prominence during that presser? It carries an immediate “hook” if you will, as to be used by others in solidarity for what may seem as all the “right” reasons.
It also has another feature ever the more subtle, yet present nonetheless: It’s associated with royalty of yesteryear, not because it “represented the people,” but because purple was the most expensive color to produce, only afforded by royalty.
The adornment of purple still sends to this day a subliminal message of “royalty” or “upper-classed elite.” And both Mrs., as well as Mr. Clinton’s display of it was not subtle. It was made (as seen by my eye) to be unavoidable. Why do I say this? Easy:
In all of the political situations where Mrs. Clinton was to be on a stage where millions upon millions of viewers were going to tune in expressly to watch, or be photographed by countless organizations (think any of the three televised debates) her attire was impeccable. Sure, some joke about the “pantsuit” thing, however, what you can’t joke about is the people responsible (and I would imagine Mrs. Clinton herself) charged with the task as to present her in the best light possible spared no expense as to make sure her outfits were as classy, reserved, and presidential as one could appear. I would extend that to the former president as well.
That is – until her concession speech. Again: Why?
That color purple, along with its tailoring, was not only overpowering (just look to Bill’s tie for clues) Mrs. Clinton’s outfit looked anything but the designer suit we’ve come accustomed to her wearing. Her attire looked more like something that was made for a one time Prince event she may have attended that was rummaged from the back of her closet or donation bin.
Just to clarify: I’m not trying to poke jabs at Mrs. Clinton’s outfit here for sport. What I am trying to do is rationalize why such a choice was made that was clearly uncharacteristic – unless – there was a very intentional meaning meant (for effect) behind it. Which I believe there was. And here’s why:
I believe the real reason why everyone had to wait till the next day for Mrs. Clinton’s concession speech was not because she was too tired, or as some have speculated “health reasons.” No. I’m of the opinion this was always Mrs. Clinton’s plan-B. But as the election drew on, both her and her surrogates (along with the entire main-stream media) thought it was a done deal and broomed it thinking there was no reason to have it at the ready.
Yet, when it proved it was Plan-B, or B-gone entirely? (and I believe the Clinton’s always to have a Plan-B for they have proven to be second to none in political brinksmanship) There was a mad-scramble on to both find an outfit (for optics) and ready the speech as best they could. Reasoning; the moment for implementation of that plan was that concession speech, and not a moment later, if any form of salvage was possible. Hence: “Go home, and we’ll see you all tomorrow!”
Suddenly what has come to be known as “Clinton Inc.” was finding itself going out-of-business. Whether you agree or not is up to you. However, with the revelations of Wikileaks and more, we now have some idea of why both Mr. and Mrs. Clinton were able to acquire such vast wealth, so quickly: It was through their foundations and all the attributes associated with it via their political connections.
Forget about any calls regarding impropriety or whether there are legal issues or not for the moment. And the reason why I say it is this: Even if everything was found to be legal (and that’s for others to decide, not me) the premise of there being a “Clinton Inc.” still stands, which is why I want/need to clarify that. Or said differently: Why people, companies, or countries would donate, or pay the Clinton’s $millions in speaking fees and/or donations going forward ended with Mrs. Clinton’s election loss. e.g., Ending the main funding reason (or product feature if you will) of “Clinton Inc.”
Effectively both her, as well as Bill are now on the outside of the political spectrum looking in. This is, for lack of a better term, the antithesis of their former main “product feature.” And with that comes a very, very, very (did I say very?) reduced speaking fee schedule, along with a sudden drought of once readily provided pleasantries. (i.e., free use of private jets, etc.)
This is a position the Clinton’s have never been in since entering the political fray, which has been nearly their entire lives.
Trust me, there are only a few things worse than a speaker who has lost their “star power” to command fees. One: is a Hollywood actor who has been type cast. Or two: a once powerful politician that lost what was viewed as a “slam-dunk” election. Nobody, and I do mean no-body once afforded the “goodies” at those levels ever becomes comfortable with the realization of “they’re gone,” along with the loss of social status where the old joke, “When the phone doesn’t ring – I know it’s them.” becomes your daily routine. The Clinton’s were looking at being the recipients of all of them.
Read more at link: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-11-13/concession-speech-aka-meet-new-clinton-inc
The entire 13 hours show was their attempt to buy weapons. Those high level meetings were about major purchases of weapons we had sold to someone.
Nice read. Didn’t think about it that way, but you are right there was a lot of emphasis on the meets....
Democrats belief that they and they alone are the pillars of decency in the world. What they believe is the the only proper way to think and act. As such, any and all policies toward that end are justified. And the rest of us are crap.
Well hello Buttons.
And yes, you are absolutely correct.
Rest that I am very guarded about Beelow-although again, understand that I have known this guy for over three years now-and his taking care of me. As I so inartfully put it.
Understand that he does pay rent. He pays $500 a month cash plus he must give me $500 a month in labor. So this “taking care of me” is more blowing leaves and mowing lawn. Something he’s been doing for quite a while but I had to pay him for it...and also I paid Beelow to mow the lawn at daughter’s house, sitting forlorn and empty. But I HAD to take care of it. Cost me $125 to get both lawns mowed. Couple hundred for leaves..... Heh, Beelow’s rent money probably came from me.
He doesn’t really do much else for me but he did send over some kind of Guatamalan meat thing they had for Thanksgiving. I sent them pumpkin pie figuring they maybe don’t have pumpkin pie in Guatamala.
But this fellow is not going to come into my life and treat this hurting and abused mother very nice and take my money. However, know that it’s crossed my mind.
Oh and he also is going to take care of my dogs when I go away. THAT also costs me a fortune.
I am really quite fond of those people perhaps I am a little embarrassed to say. And Beelow is a sweetheart. He’s 31 years old, always working. His kids work too, around the yard I see them all the time..
But I got open eye and cynical mind on the issue at hand.
Wallace referred to Stein as Doctor Stein. Is she a PHD or Medical Doctor? She comes across as not being very smart.
The clock is ticking on a recount, especially in Pennsylvania. How can they have a recount and make the deadline to certify the votes? Jill the Doctor Stein waited too long.
For the 28% Democrat supporters recount never ends, for the rest it ends as Trump delivers on economic growth promise, between 2 to 18 months as the results come in and the media can’t obscure it or continue to credit Obama.
Hands up, don’t watch!
Congrats on the Tide Rolling.
Harvard Medical School
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.