Sunday Morning Talk Show Thread 29 April 2012

Various driveby media television networks ^ | 29 April 2012 | Various Self-Serving Politicians and Big Media Screaming Faces

[Alas Babylon!]

The Talk Shows

April 29th, 2012

Guests to be interviewed today on major television talk shows:

FOX NEWS SUNDAY (Fox Network): John Brennan, President Obama’s top counterterrorism adviser.

MEET THE PRESS (NBC): Robert Gibbs, adviser to President Obama’s re-election campaign; Ed Gillespie, adviser to Mitt Romney’s campaign; Democratic strategist Hilary Rosen; Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wash.

FACE THE NATION (CBS): Former Gov. Haley Barbour, R-Miss.; Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa; Gov. Jerry Brown, D-Calif.

THIS WEEK (ABC): Brennan; Carly Fiorina, former CEO of Hewlett-Packard; former Gov. Jennifer Granholm, D-Mich.; Eric Schmidt, executive chairman of Google; David Walker, ex-comptroller general.

STATE OF THE UNION (CNN): House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio; John Brennan, Obama’s top counterterrorism adviser; Govs. Bob McDonnell, R-Va., and Brian Schweitzer, D-Mont.

[tarheelswamprat]

Well said AB well said.

Second that. Thanks to you both for all that you do.

[Unrepentant VN Vet]

...argue plainly, calmly, but do not fall into their trap of getting you angry.

I ordinarily hate to quote a movie catch line, but this is irresistible:

Nobody's ever seen me angry.

(Pardon the late post, but I've been over visiting No. 1 grandson. Kid's been looking for a job for two solid years, had absolutely bupkis for results and I went over to tell him that Grandma and I are going to make him our hired man out on the Homestead to keep him from going over to The Bakken.....which might be "a sure job for big bucks", but the drivers/roads/work over there is killing somebody every four or five days.)

[Gritty]

...one I may use elsewhere, if you don’t mind

Hi, Miss Marple. If you can use it, please do. I, for one, appreciate your posts. You seem to be able to cut to the chase.

[Morgan in Denver]

I didn’t catch that. Interesting. Maybe the deaths have stopped? Naw, that would be too easily disproved. Bush did do a lot for many countries in Africa. 0zero? Not so much. And remember, in 2007 we began the Pelosi/Reid rule.

[ROCKLOBSTER]

You can't comment on anything if no one posts what was said. The first thing every Sunday I used to do was to check this thread. We would have around 500 comments as posters would transcribe what was being said on the shows for the people who weren't able to see the shows.

Sorry, I dropped my cable and lost the Sunday Drive-bys. I'll get it back if it means saving this thread.

[Rational Thought]

I just now got the chance to read your reply. Unless our worlds are completely different, I see no enthusiasm for Romney from Conservatives (I know of the usual faux-conservatives and their sites). What I do see are a lot of folks who are disgusted with the choices (presently), including myself.

I completely understand the objective of defeating Obama, believe me. But if I'm asked to set aside my principles in order to do so (as I view a vote for Romney entails), what I'm actually doing is voting against my values.

Now, I'm not critical of those who want to overlook the numerous flaws with the presumptive GOP nominee in attempting to defeat Obama. Just be prepared, this guy has a history of running Left and I anticipate a huge move shortly. It will be up to you to decide how far you want to go in supporting him (Obamacare, abortion rights, bigger centralized government, etc). But understand, there are a lot of us who see the principles of the Tea Party as our line in the sand, a line which we're not willing to cross. A vote for one opposed to those principles, whether Democrat or Republican, isn't going to happen.

[Alas Babylon!]

Well, here's what I think. Both choices suck, but those are what we have. So the issue for me is which one sucks worse?

I can't violate my principles because Sarah didn't run, so I'm not casting a vote against her. And I do think that sometimes a vote can be against someone, and not necessarily one I'd promote on its own (like Romney).

Both Obama and Romney may be liberals, but Obama is far MORE liberal. And Obama HATES the United States, Her founding fathers, and the white middle class. I really, truly believe that. I don't think Romney does, as Romney's in it for Romney. That is the KEY difference.

But hell, no one listens to what we're saying; their minds are made up. And that is all well and good, but do NOT (and I'm not saying you are Rational Thought, but others have) call me a Romneybot, a traitor, an unpatriotic American. That has been the stab in the back from other FReepers that gets me so riled up. That it comes from the highest echelons here really hurts.

Again, we are wrong in their eyes. Fine. But we are NOT traitors and Romneybots. And to those who would vote for Romney over Obama, those who refuse and have drawn a line in the sand are not lunatics, extremists or Obama-lovers.

Did I mention both choices suck? Still, why go after fellow FReepers with hatred and venom because of this? The whole thing sounds like Trosky versus Stalin and the purges after wards. The propensity to make other people's thoughts demonic is what bothers me most.

[Morgan in Denver]

I didn’t catch that. Interesting. Maybe the deaths have stopped? Naw, that would be too easily disproved. Bush did do a lot for many countries in Africa. 0zero? Not so much. And remember, in 2007 we began the Pelosi/Reid rule.

[merryberry]

Moved from a nebook to a full grown Lap top. Please keep this site, I’ve gone to it first thing every Sunday a.m. I dont contribute because I read it later in the day and the convo is kinda over. But please keep it...its been a part of my life since the “stop hillary” days..,,(wow, the good old days...whodda thunk it??) Thanks my FRiend Alas Babylon! put me (back?) on your Ping list!

[duckln]

She was the sharpest one on the panel. California not electing her as senator was a loss for the country.

[Miss Marple]

Here is my principle:

Save the country.

Obama is all about destroying it. Period. I want my grandkids to grow up in a free country. Romney might not rise to your lofty principles, but as I said, he’s good enough for me. He loves the country and wants his grandkids to have a free country.

So that is my principle. And I don’t know where you are. I am in Indiana, where we had a “RINO” governor (Daniels) who has saved the state. And whatever sites you visit, the ones I visit have come to terms with what we are dealing with.

[RitaOK]

I will try to tone it down for the sake of the self-congratulations going on amongst these lo’ 170 posts or so.

But RT, you are one tolerant soul to venture onto the Establishment useful idiot choir loft here.

How the ladies auxillary and the biscuit eaters can expect to defeat Marxism by coddling a socialist because they’re scared, I’m just sure I don’t know either.

This sure isn’t about the country. It’s about FEAR. The fear voter rationalizes the evils of Romney as good, or better than worst, the fear of OBAMA the Terrible.

This will NEVER end. McConnell & Co. have been in the drivers seat for decades, election after election, handing us one RINO after another. With Rommell as the nominee, or as president, Mac & Co will vote for his ridiculously socialist agenda, where as Obama could offer up the same dang thing and they would stand there and fight him tooth and nail, just because he is Obama The Terrrible.

This election many are opting out, thankfully, and will take care of the contenders down ticket.

I am Pro Life, Romney is not. I am fightin’ mad that he seeded the ground in MA that became the dang template for the individual mandate (purely Marxist) and brought down the gates of Hell on Catholic hospitals to conform to the abortion provisions already in MA. Now we’re fighting for religious liberty coast to coast.

We know very well what the Rommel Record is in MA and voting for this man demonstrates how LOW we are willing to go for Peace and Security.

Clearly, I see that we deserve neither.

Was it Patrick Henry who said to that affect that “ he who would give up ? for Peace and Security deserves neither.”

Bank that. It’s on this thread. In spades.

[caww]

Really enjoyed the read and well worth it bray....would you mind pinking me when you post as this? If you have a ping list?

[caww]

I just read up on Bork and I have to say I’m impressed....looking at where he stands on the constitution is interesting. Reagan wanted him on the Supreme Court but the push to derail him worked so that he never made it. I think it was Scalia who made it instead.

So this to me is good news. If I’m wrong then someone needs to correct me.

[bray]

Thank You.

It is the only one I am writing per week and then a local one about our fight against Light Rail here in Portland. Here is where you will see my stuff on national politics. Are you on Babylon’s ping list?

[superfries]

It was not Scalia it was Kennedy.

[caww]

That was incredibly interesting....humm-mm....quite a different picture ,of course, then the one the media would have us believe in taking out Bin-Laden.

I truly questioned the photo they put out on why Obama was sitting in the back...and hardly noted. It didn't make any sense at the time I viewed it. But having read this it would fully explain that now.

Also I've read other articles along the way the Jarrett is the one calling the shots with Michelle's imput as well. Also there was alot of flake between Rham, Axelrod and Jarrett....and why they might have left.

Thanks for posting this. Does give one something to ponder.

[caww]

No...am not on Babylons list.

It's been so refreshing reading posts on this thread and away from the drama. Though I understand many are venting their loss to Romney, and it needs to get out of the system to move forward....I think all this uproar on the threads has much to do with “emotional” release and people are saying things they might not say otherwise were this loss not so great.

I also think folks are trying to reach out to hold on something “stable” as they feel their nation slip away from them. Asking them to hook on with Romney isn't going to do the trick for them now, and some not even later, or ever. But I feel the dust needs to clear first....every ones dumbfounded, hurt, distraught, shocked, and the list could go on.

I'm trying to look at this as I did Bush when he ran...who I wasn't really excited about either......but when I saw the administration he was appointing I became, over time, more comfortable....and with that also knew were were headed for some rough waters ahead for the powerhouse he built around himself.

Romneys advisers of Bork and Bolton does say something..but will he change that once he's in???? They're both heavy lifters and don't take crap from others. But it sickens me still Romney is where he is....I just cannot vote for him ....I don't know how to bypass all that he opposes in what is all about our nations founding principles and that of conservative values..... and I cannot believe a word he says.... It's a terrible struggle....so it's been refreshing seeing people comment hear with reason and thought instead of all the defenses and rattling.

[caww]

Thanks....wasn’t sure about that as just finding out things about Bork...though it seems have heard of him when Reagan served.

[nfldgirl]

Is there a thread that discusses directly what’s in your post? Thanks!