Skip to comments.Sunday Morning Talk Show Thread 3 October 2004
Posted on 10/03/2004 6:50:36 AM PDT by Alas Babylon!
The Talk Shows
Sunday, October 3rd, 2004
Guests to be interviewed today on major television talk shows:
FOX NEWS SUNDAY (Fox Network): White House communications director Dan Bartlett; Tad Devine, senior adviser to Kerry-Edwards campaign; Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm; Colorado Gov. Bill Owens.
MEET THE PRESS (NBC): Senatorial candidates Rep. Brad Carson, D-Okla., and former Rep. Tom Coburn, R-Okla.
FACE THE NATION (CBS): White House communications director Dan Bartlett; Joe Lockhart, senior adviser to Kerry-Edwards campaign.
THIS WEEK (ABC): National security adviser Condoleeeza Rice; Kerry foreign policy adviser and former U.N. Ambassador Richard Holbrooke.
LATE EDITION (CNN) : National security adviser Condoleeeza Rice; Sens. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., and John Warner, R-Va.
The Chris Matthews Show (Various Channels): Gloria Borger, Sam Donaldson, David Brooks, NYT, and Norah O'Donnel.
CSPAN: Luis E. Lugo , Pew Research Center for People & Press; Michael Cromartie , Ethics and Public Policy Center; Shaun Casey , Wesley Theological Seminary.
Always glad to see you, especially today!
Good morning and thanks for the service, as usual. Sorry the down time will make this thread harder this morning.
Just watched the debate between Dr. Coburn and Brad Carson.
Dr. Coburn clearly won!
Brad Carson was outmatched!
Carson has voted against the Oklahoma Delegation 400 times!
Donate to Dr. Coburn!
The bits and pieces I've seen of net news and morning shows is disgraceful. They'll do anything to discredit Pres. Bush. 30 days left of this BS.
Did anybody catch Carson pulling the notes out of his pocket to read???
Thanks for posting this thread!!
I wish you were right, but I thought Carson, on the offense, prevailed. Dr. Coburn did not hurt himself beyond the setbacks he has had in the past two weeks, but he should have been more forceful. To me, Coburn seemed defensive, when he is clearly a man who does best on offense.
I'm not watching today, I haven't the stomach for it. Besides, I've already heard the spin. But I'll read the threads, thanks to your reliability :o)
Clearly No. 1, plus his ARROGANCE, which many of his supporters do not see
Did anybody catch Carson pulling the notes out of his pocket to read???
No, I did not catch that -- I am not the most observant in watching such "debates." But pulling notes out of his pocket won't hurt Carson with the lower-middle and middle- middle class voters he is seeking to draw away from BushCheney.
Tad Devine always looks like a cat that swallowed a sour mouse.
I sent Dr. Coburn a small check in August, and it was returned without explanation. I thought nothing of that, but now I wonder if his campaign apparatus is inefficient.
Thanks for posting this thread, Alas. I'm watching Fox News Sunday now. They're debating who won the debate.
Another current thread from the Manchester Union Leader says the question is not 'Who won the debate?', but rather, 'Who made more sense?'. He gives examples of Kerry talking in circles:
>Nuclear proliferation is the biggest problem facing the Unitd States, and yet we shouldnt have invaded Iraq, even though I believed the intelligence showing Saddam had weapons of mass destruction.
>This war is a mistake, but no, the men and women dying in Iraq are not dying for a mistake. We shouldnt outsource the fighting to non-American troops in Afghanistan, and yet we should be using more European troops to fight in Iraq.
>This is the wrong war and the wrong time, and yet Ill be able to convince the French and Germans to join this wrong war at the wrong time.
>Ill never let anyone veto a pre-emptive action by the United States, yet pre-emptive action must pass the global test first.
>Its best to have a coalition assembled when facing down an enemy, but I want to deal one on one with North Korea, instead of multilaterally with China, Japan, Russia and South Korea on our side.
I'm amazed....if you "win" the debate, you should be president.
What's all this campaiging about?
Everybody's LOVING the Newsweek poll...as predicted, the MSM is just giddy and all smiles.
Thanks, Alas. Looks like we're back up ahead of schedule. That Yahoo alternate is not very good.
Thanks for the thread.
Every time I see that name... it's so dorky.
It sounds like one of the movie star names of the fifties ... like Tab Hunter,Rock Hudson, etc.
Well, at least Rock Hudson sounded kinda manly. Of course, as it turned out ...
But Tab and Tad. Puleeze.
We're watching, Timmy. First Rather, then Brokaw & Jennings, and then YOU. A*HOLE!
Yeah, I'm so glad I slept late--missed the alternate site thingee.
Questions: Anything positive happen on FNS this morning? I missed it.
Any other polls coming out today so the media can stop riding the Newsweek poll into the ground?
First I've seen of Carson D-OK. Awfully sweet and thoughtful, isn't he? I can't imagine that playing in OK.
On, ahem, another forum this morning I saw an article that mentions that an MA newspaper, the Lowell Sun has come out and endorsed Pres. Bush. I read the endorsement, and it reamed Kerry a new one while praising the president. I've tried going back to the paper's web site, I was going to post a thread on it, but I've been unable to access the paper's web site again. If I can get trough, I'll post it. It was a heck of an endosrement, especially coming from an MA paper.
"...the Lowell Sun has come out and endorsed Pres. Bush."
I am not familiar with this paper, but this does sound like quite a surprise. I hope you can get through.
Lowell is a real working-class town, too.
Anything to the rumor that the Washington Post is going to endorse Bush? Anyone?
Has anyone heard ANY commentator criticize or even MENTION the series of questions used by Jim Lehrer?
I think the questions had a lot to do with President Bush's facial expressions during the 90 minutes.
I have only seen the Fox show and did not hear Brit or the others say a word about Lehrer, or about all the issues in foreign policy that were not addressed.
I had another window open on it - hope the link still works!
Just read their endorsment and it's a beauty. I loved the line about Kerry's ideas having the shape of water.
I'm impressed considering the area of MA that this paper represents.
The article is still up on that, ahem, other web site, so I know I didn't imagine it. But the paper's web site still won't come up for me. I'll keep trying :)
Nice question from Timmy on MTP about Carson saying "vote for W" at campaign stop.
Those are great talking points.
Thanks, but aaaargh, must be another glitch with my FRED (computer). Grumble, grumble. Glad someone else saw it, though. It's a heck of an endorsement.
Timmy's show just started here .. and he starts off with the Newsweek poll
Endorsement: George W. Bush for president
Sunday, October 03, 2004 - It's about national security.
That's the key issue on the minds of Americans planning to vote in the Nov. 2 presidential election.
They must decide whether Republican President George W. Bush or Sen. John F. Kerry, a Democrat, can provide the leadership to safeguard America from foreign terrorism.
Americans aren't fools. They know that without safe cities and towns, America will lose its greatness. Our cherished freedoms and sacred liberties will be diminished, along with our opportunities for economic prosperity and our basic pursuit of happiness.
Our children and their children will live vastly different lives if we fail to guarantee a future free of turmoil.
Islamic extremists, both here and abroad, have one purpose: To destroy America and halt the spread of democracy and religious tolerance around the globe.
They'd like to be plotting in our streets right now. They'd like to be sowing murder and mayhem with suicide bombers and hostage-takings, and spreading fear in the heartland and everywhere else. They'd like to be wearing us down and bringing our nation to its knees.
Since the devastating terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, one American leader has maintained an unbending resolve to protect our homeland and interest against Islamic savages and those foreign governments appeasing them.
That leader is President Bush.
While out-of-touch U.S. politicians and world leaders have attacked President Bush's tactics, they can't question his steely commitment to keep America safe.
In the ashes of ground zero, where nearly 3,000 innocent Americans perished, President Bush vowed to find the perpetrators, in domestic cells and distant lands, and bring them to justice. He said he will do all that is humanly possible and necessary to make certain that terrorists never strike again on U.S. soil.
Can anyone deny that President Bush has not delivered? America the terrorists' No. 1 target has recovered from its tragic wounds and rebounded. It remains safe to this day.
What might a lesser leader have done, faced with the daunting task of deciding America's course against withering, partisan attacks from Democrats, media propagandists, disingenuous U.N. officials and disloyal White House operatives selling their souls for profit during a time of war?
A lesser leader might have caved in. President Bush has stood his ground.
In this year's election, the question isn't whether we are safer now than we were four years ago. We already know the answer. Sure we are and that's because of President Bush. The critical question is: Four years from now, will America be safer than it is today?
In our book, Americans have to place their trust in President Bush. He's proven to be as sturdy as a mighty oak when it comes to saying what he means, meaning what he says and acting decisively.
When it comes to the war on terror, President Bush means to keep our military strong and our country secure.
John Kerry, on the other hand, has all the attributes of the shape of water when it comes to telling us what he believes and what he'd do for America. Like incoming and outgoing tides, Kerry is content to go with the flow. In a dangerous world infested with sharks, Kerry would be chum at America's expense.
We in Massachusetts know John Kerry. He got his first taste of politics 32 years ago in the cities and towns of Greater Lowell.
In his 20 years in the U.S. Senate, Kerry, a Navy war hero, hasn't risen above the rank of seaman for his uninspiring legislative record. He's been inconsistent on major issues. First he's for the 1991 Persian Gulf War, then he opposes it. First he's for the war in Iraq, then he's against it. First he's for a strong U.S. defense, then he votes against military weapons programs. First he's for the U.S. Patriot Act, then he opposes it.
Kerry's solution to stop terrorism? He'd go to the U.N. and build a consensus. How naive. France's Jacques Chirac, Germany's Gerhard Schroeder, U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan and other Iraq oil-for-food scam artists don't want America to succeed. They want us brought down to their level. And more and more, Kerry sounds just like them. In a recent campaign speech, Kerry said America was in the wrong war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time.
No doubt John Kerry sincerely wants to serve his country, but we believe he's the wrong man, in the wrong place, at the wrong time.
Americans should think back three years ago to the smoldering ruins of the World Trade Center. There among the mist lay the images and memories of fallen firefighters, police, a Catholic chaplain and ordinary working citizens moms, dads, sons, daughters.
President Bush, through heartfelt tears, told us never to forget the twisted carnage and the massacre of the innocents. Yet some of us are forgetting.
President Bush told us the attacks must never happen again. Yet some of us are wavering because of the brave sacrifice of soldiers that our nation's security demands.
Well, President Bush hasn't forgotten. Nor has he lost the courage and conviction to do what is right for America.
We know if there is one thing the enemy fears above all else, it is that George Bush's iron will is stronger than his iron won't.
The Sun proudly endorses the
re-election of President George W. Bush.
Bless you! Thanks a lot! (And FRED, your days are numbered...)
As Rush says, 'A Tad too Devine"
Disappointing? Yep..has to be for us given how far ahead Bush was before the debate, but News'weak' is notorious for unreliability when it comes to polling, too.
Since Kerry has framed the election as who will make a better wartime president, I think it would be useful to poll veterans as to who they think would make a better leader.
The Crawford paper endorses sKerry (circ 425!) and it's a national story.
Any bets as to whether the MSM will ever mention this endorsement?
Sadly this is a retorical question, we already know the answer.
"The Debate Through the Eyes of Marines(EXCELLENT PIECE! MUST READ!)The Orange County Register ^ | 10/3/2004 | Gordon Dillow"
See Above.There is another thread up that may give us a sense of what our military are thinking.
Yes, Fox and Friends almost jumped the Shark. Chad(weasel boy)Clanton denied Kerry sad anything about a global test and would not forgo a preemptive strike. I did not get the Bush spokesperson's name she offered to send the clip from the debate and Clanton blew her off. No comeback from the weekend "Gang of Three", after Clanton's comeback they thanked the rep from the Bush campaign and stated Clanton would be back after the break to discuss the NRA "poodle ad". I don't know if it is going to be a continuing theme, but it seems since their ratings increase they are starting to ignore the Conservatives that brought them to the dance. If they continue to whore themselves to the Liberals they will find their ratings can go to an abysmal level just like MSNBC.
Oops, warning. People trying to access the report through the link are not getting it.
What a great endorsement from the Lowell Sun!
Other papers should take a look at that one.
I don't think it sounds like a movie star name. I think Kerry hires spokesmetrosexuals who have names that sound porno. My nickname for "Chad Clanton" is pornboy, Tad Devine could be "pornhurl."
Of course many support Kerry but the ones I've seen who are Kerry supporters seem to do so for other reasons. One, they are diehard Democrats and cannot see beyond their party. Two, veterans have other things that determine who they would support. At the Colorado state fair I saw a guy with a shirt that said "Veterans for Kerry" on it. However, he was also wearing a button that said "Teachers for Kerry." His allegiance to his union outweighed his veteran status.
I agree. However, I've decided after the Dims and the MSM, the group I despise the most are "undecided voters." Those who are just now making up their minds.
Crap like the Newsweek poll does have an effect on them, just like the lame debates. The MSM will RAM it down the UV throats, at the urging of the Dims.
It's part of the vast, left-wing conspiracy!;-)