Skip to comments.Sunday Morning Talk Show Thread 1 April 2012
Posted on 04/01/2012 5:09:42 AM PDT by Alas Babylon!
The Talk Shows
April 1st, 2012
Guests to be interviewed today on major television talk shows:
FOX NEWS SUNDAY (Fox Network): Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum; former Govs. Haley Barbour, R-Miss., and Howard Dean, D-Vt.
MEET THE PRESS (NBC): Santorum; Sen. Chuck U. Schumer, D-N.Y.
FACE THE NATION (CBS): Vice President Joe Biden; Republican presidential candidates Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul; Kevin Madden, adviser to Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney.
THIS WEEK (ABC): Reps. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., and Chris Van Hollen, D-Md.
STATE OF THE UNION (CNN): Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.; Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich.; Ryan.
Chris Wallace is one of the nastier hosts on Fox.
I won’t paint the whole network with that brush, although they should get rid of him for Fox News Sunday. Back when Tony Snow was with us, Fox News Sunday was a welcome contrast to the other Sunday shows.
That’s no longer true.
But Fox, especially the early morning shows is still a favorite to me.
So, it was OK for Team Romney to SAVAGE Gov. Palin
two weeks before the ELECTION,
but it is not OK to speak the truth about
Backstabber Milt before he is even nominated?
GIVE US A BREAK, FRiend.
My war is against Marixism,ozero,statism and the regime who are you fighting against and why?
I have never understood this tea and skittles thing. where did that come from? His parents or rather father and friend saying that was where he was going.
I haven’t heard that he had any tea and skittles with him.
Also ... I’m not as up on street and drug slang as I should be ... is it true that tea and skittles are code name for drugs?
The media has been exposed once again, but don’t get your hopes up (as Rush would warn). They won’t change and they don’t care.
NBC edited the 911 call to indicate that Zimmerman brought up race when he did not. the operator asked him race and he wasn’t even sure but said he thought ‘black.’
This is an all out effort to distract from the issues and from Obamanation.
I was watching the Final Four at a tavern on the South Side of Chicago with some old college buddies of the mine, most of whom were conservative Democrats, all of whom hate Obama.
One of them, who’s very involved in the Democratic party, and very knowledgeable about Cook County and Illinois Democratic politics, turned to me and asked me, as the sole Republican there, why in the world are the Republicans nominating Romney.
I tried to explain the herd mentality of establishment Republicans, the desire to find anyone that can beat Obama, the thinking of the establishment that Romney can attract independents, the arguments about money and organization, Romney’s carpet bombing of the airwaves in Republican primaries, etc.
He just shook his head, “Santorum would’ve been a problem for us. But this guy’s a joke. He’s going to get destroyed. Obama’s really vulnerable, and you guys are picking the weakest candidate to run against him.”
I had no response.
Paul is the weakest followed by Saintorum.
From what I've been able to gather, the Sanford police chief (now stepped aside) told a Miami Herald reporter that Trayvon had a bag of skittles, a can of Arizona iced tea, and 34 cents on him at the scene. The Miami Herald did not attribute this information to the chief, it just reported it.
Martin family lawyer, Benjamin Crump, pumped up the "skittles and iced tea" meme.
There is no reliable source evidence.
The weakest to the strongest:
Tea and Skittles is also drug culture talk for marijuana and pills.
I just found that out on a blog this morning.
I think the incident serves multiple purposes, and agree that what you say is one of them.
The issue is also being used to stoke racial division, distract from crime by blacks, enrage the black community, give an excuse to falsely claim "stand your ground" is in play (and to blame), and disarm the honest part of the public.
It’s looking more and more like Romney is gonna take this thing and I find I have an odd detachment about it.
All I want now is someone who can get Obama out of my life, out of the country’s life and hopefully he can move back to Hawaii or wherever he’s from.
I think Romney can beat him if we concentrate on what’s important, i.e. beating Obama.
I might feel more passionate if there were a candidate I could back wholeheartedly.
I spent 3 years fully expecting Sarah Palin to run. She should have. I was greatly comforted though when Rick Perry entered the race. Still disappointed about what happened there and still a little bitter.
We didn’t have a great field to start with and it’s narrowed down to two mediocre candidates. I don’t care. I wish we’d done better but we didn’t. We now need to get behind Romney. Santorum convinced me of that this morning when he totally failed to counter any of Chris Wallace’s accusations in a satisfactory manner. No fire.
Sorry, but I can’t get enthusiastic about Santorum though I prefer him to Romney.
Sadly, Gingrich is out and admits it himself. He’s got some sort of delusion going that he can stop Romney by staying in.
Ask yourself this question:
If Romney was really the candidate that the Democrats feared most, why would the national Democrats and their friends in the media build him up for over a year?
The WAR is against ObamaCARE = RomneyCARE
and is against more taxation (Obama) and more "fees" (Romney)
and is against more coverups (Fast and Furious Obama) or (BIG DIG Romney)
and is against more TARP, Sharia or IAG (Romney or Obama)
and is against any politician that usurps Constitutions (Romney and Obama)
and is against any ineligible POTUS (Romney or Obama)
and is against LYING-FLIPFLOPPING Politicians (Romney OR Obama).
and is against politicians who HAVE LIVED ONLY to
be our next Emperor at all costs (Romney, Obama).
Now, what do you have to support the Backstabber?
Great post, really helps the left so your plan of attack now is what?
The most Liberal:
4) Jane fonda
Can you believe that some idiot ... there are many in Hollywood, but this is a low ... has chosen Jane Fonda to play Nancy Reagan in some movie.
There are a lot of people who wouldn’t go see Jane Fonda if they were paying people to go. I’m one of them.
Vietnam veterans day was March 29th. Maybe most people have forgotten the national disgrace of how these veterans were treated on their return. I have not.
"It's a feel-good story, this Romney thing.
Romney is an ascendant guy."
Sen. John Kerry (D) to Don Imus on RomneyCARE:
"I like this health care bill".
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D) on RomneyCARE:
"To come up with a bipartisan plan in this polarized environment is commendable."
My question as well. Mitt Romney is not the most conservative candidate we could have had, but a bunch of them didn’t run.
He is the most organized and has demonstrated an ability to raise a lot of money, which is sort of important in running against Mr. Big Bucks Obama.
Am I to believe that John Bolton, Paul Ryan, and Ron Johnson are liberals or completely clueless?
I am going with Romney. Would have preferred Perry, but he flamed out early.
bray always writes eloquently and incisively (even in those rare instances where he's wrong... /g). Your caution is merited, however, and the danger of being overconfident is even worse than you stated.
The historical record of oral arguments and subsequent SCOTUS decisions demonstrates clearly that the impressions given by the justices questions and arguments in the hearings are not a reliable indication of how they will vote. Justices often use the hearings as a way to play devil's advocate in exploring AND shaping the parameters of the argument, even to the point of telegraphing or offering clues and leading counsel towards the argument they want.
In fact, Justice Kennedy did exactly that in his final remarks about the "special case" or "exceptional" nature of the healthcare issue. To me it was frighteningly obvious he's determined to find a way to craft a narrowly defined solution to allow them to toss a bone to a public that overwhelmingly opposes this legal obscenity, but still preserve the government's absolute control of healthcare.
Bottom line, it's good to hear some justices give at least lip service support to the principles of the Founders and the Constitution, but there is a terrifying amount of momentum and inertia from so many of those "institutions of civil society" which have been co-opted by the Left as described in Antonio Gramsci's "Long March" socialist strategy.
They are absolutely determined to close the deal and cement their statist control regardless of the wishes of the people of this country. If that entails public violence, assassination (whether character, career, or literal), or simply tearing down the whole edifice on our heads a la Sampson if it appears they might lose, they will do it.
Despite the ostensible "detachment", "objectivity" and "impartiality" supposedly guaranteed by their lifetime appointments, the SCOTUS ARE political animals, they DO respond to pressure and their own ideological biases, and they WILL factor into their decisions the possible societal consequences of cutting the legs out from under a century of statist centralization and consolidation.
If they were to decide to strike a blow at Leviathan government, they might or might not succeed, and even if they managed to inflict a significant blow, a wounded Leviathan might do incalculable damage as a result. They may, quite reasonably from a certain perspective, although not necessarily wisely, decide to split the baby and kick the can a little farther down the road.
I am not optimistic. A Supreme Court which can give us such blatant constitutional obscenities as Roe vs Wade, McCain-Feingold or Kelo vs New London is not to be trusted. We need to beware of taking too much comfort in their recent oral arguments, however comforting they may have been.
Yeah, we need a socialist liberal hack to save us from a socialist liberal hack.
Mybe the Solicitor General is too used to dealing with the MSM, not the Surprene Court.
We already know everything we need to know about Mitt Romney. He's a given at this point. We also know everything we need to know about the statist/marxist regime now in power.
Now we have to decide whether we care about helping the country or ozero. Do you want to stand up against the fascist/Marxist regime we have and oppose them with every fabric of your body or are you merely committed to standing in the corner and complaining? Let me know just how well that works.
Yeah, we need a socialist liberal hack to save us from a socialist liberal hack.
Thanks AB. Down to KY and KS for basketball Kings.
OMG WAY TO GO ANN COULTER!
Way to KICK ASS!
The decision now is where to go from here.
Some will go in the corner and pout. Others will oppose the marxist regime we now have with all they have regardless of whether or not we got our way or our candidate. The ones still in the battle are called adults.
I agree, Miss Marple. Sad to say but we just didn’t present a good field to begin with.
When I saw Santorum this morning, I just began to feel more tolerant of Romney.
There’s no doubt in my mind that he will be a thousand times better than Obama.
Running as a conservative, even a moderate conservative, he will espouse views we like and then he will have to govern that way, especially if we take a bigger majority in the house and get the Senate.
He’s just a more attractive all-round person than Santorum and has more money and organization.
In my (liberal) Bible class at my (liberal) Episcopal church where I make a nuisance of myself weekly, they consider Santorum a joke and a religious fanatic. They are not deep thinkers on political issues, of course.
They were also laughing at his use of the term, B*** S***.
He can be so D*** clueless. Romney may seem scripted but at least he doesn’t make as many dumb mistakes.
Unfortunately you are correct. Its not great strategy to anticipate what the court will do better to wait.Sad that the passing of such an obviously flawed act of congress needs such thought by supposedly greater minds.
You can dodge the question of “where we go from here” all you want. But, it keeps coming back to smack you in the face one more time.
Yes. Sadly, the Supreme Court has become a political body which is another good reason for biting the bullet and voting for Romney.
Can you imagine another couple of justices as clueless as the “boatload of money” gal?
She says we don't have "a more gov.t problem, we have a free enterprise problem", simply brilliant.
Sorry there is so much animosity/infighting here today. Not like the Rush thread at all. Too many here that refuse to see reality coming their way.
Also note this week the media wants to sell Republican endorsements of Romney as “mainstream Republicans”, ala the Washington Elite.
That remind me of ANOTHER good idea Rick Perry had.
No lifetime appointments for judges, even Supreme Court.
It seemed like a good idea at the time and I would be for a long term, say ten years—even fifteen, but we don’t need any more sick old ladies dozing off on the bench because they can.
Same with me,hell I don’t even drink any more! I got a ping about the drug slang but quite frankly I was not surprised now the we are learning who this guy really is. Not quite the sweet young black teenager he was made out to be, it appears.
Have to agree. At this point I am trying to gin up some support for a Marco or Paul Ryan as VP. That could make all the difference in a close race.
Please consider writing —at least on occasion— for the WSJ! Your writing is right up there with stephen Moore, Henninger,Strassel..easily!
Do you want me to make a call to the big shots at the WSJ???I don’t know them, but I ‘ll call. ha.
How Romney performs will have everything to do with the total TEApublican makeup of Congress and the Senate after the election.
If instead he's handed a bunch of liberals to deal with...well we've already watched that movie.
Yes, along with term limits and a balanced budget amendment we could turn things around big time.
First, it is NOT over.
Second, ROMNEY is a documented LOSER:
"As U.S. real output grew 13 percent between 2002 and 2006, Massachusetts trailed at 9 percent.
* Manufacturing employment fell 7 percent nationwide those years, but sank 14 percent under Romney, placing Massachusetts 48th among the states.
* Between fall 2003 and autumn 2006, U.S. job growth averaged 5.4 percent, nearly three times Massachusetts' anemic 1.9 percent pace.
* While 8 million Americans over age 16 found work between 2002 and 2006, the number of employed Massachusetts residents actually declined by 8,500 during those years.
"Massachusetts was the only state to have failed to post any gain in its pool of employed residents," professors Sum and McLaughlin concluded.
In an April 2003 meeting with the Massachusetts congressional delegation in Washington, Romney failed to endorse President Bush's $726 billion tax-cut proposal."
[Cato Institute annual Fiscal Policy Report Card - America's Governors, 2004.]
And remember Bill Ayers/Bernadine Dorn/Weather Underground, its all part of how they will community organize off campus.
You know, if Rick Perry hadn’t been talked into getting into the race by certain people in that “influential” conservative group, he could have entered later and maybe given Romney a run for his money. He would have been prepared and not been embarrassed in the debates, which, by the way, MANY conservatives here and elsewhere trashed him for mercilessly, not stopping to think that perhaps “Deeds, not words” is a better way to judge candidates.
I am hoping Romney shows the same degree of ruthlessness going after Obama that he has shown in the primaries. People keep acting like he’s squishy and not very bright, but I don’t see someone who made his money as a venture capitalist being a milque-toast type of guy.
We will see. He’s going to be the candidate. And for anyone holding out for a brokered convention (where we show ourselves as idiots to the entire nation, with lots of delicious infighting egged on by the media) let me give you a couple of points.
1. It will be terrible for our chances of winning.
2. If you think that those delegates, most of whom will be Romney delegates, are going to suddenly give the nomination to Santorum or Palin or Newt, you are living in a dream world. Before they do that they will draft Jeb Bush. That is reality, not some fantasy that Santorum’s people dreamed up to keep getting paychecks.
Its not about what used to swing between your legs its about not getting your way. You obviously don’t handle that too well now do ya?
You know, the only people who use that analogy about the lipstick on a pig are democrats, ever since Sarah Palin.
Go pout somewhere. I deal with reality.
Hey Hippie, I don’t know who those people are but I am really honored you would compare me with them.
I have the best job in the world and am fighting the war against the commies right here in PTown. We submitted our 4 petitions which will put a roadblock up against Light Rail coming our way.
This is as big a story as is possible in this city which is the model for the Obozo mass transit system. Freedom Rules!
Pray for America
It’s not a huge surprise that any candidate that has been running for years has lots of support from within the party has all kinds of organization, all kinds of money, can win a nomination of either party.These things don’t happen in a vacuum. They happen for a reason.
Put me in the opposition party! No way am I sitting in the corner and pouting!
Her defense of the stand your ground law was brilliant.
Snuffelupags was dumbfounded.
Dittos, Santorum is a far better candidate than Romney. It may be inevitable but was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? What? Never mind, he’s on a roll!
We still have primaries left and now that Newt has basically dropped out let’s have a two man race and continue the dialogue.
I still hate that Mitt uses the scorched earth campaign method and ends up hurting himself as much as he does his opponent.
Pray for America