Comments on: Sunday Talking Head Thread http://firedoglake.com/2007/04/01/sunday-talking-head-thread-48/ Firedoglake weblog Thu, 26 Nov 2009 01:50:32 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: jim http://firedoglake.com/2007/04/01/sunday-talking-head-thread-48/#comment-599346 jim Mon, 02 Apr 2007 00:00:52 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/04/01/sunday-talking-head-thread-48/#comment-599346 <p>The other day I saw some talking heads saying that they thought that the female British prisoner didn’t appear to be a smoker and it looked like the evil Iranians had given her a cigarette in captivity and forced her to pretend to smoke it, presumably to make her look bad to people in the Middle East.</p> <p>But the video of the capture itself shows her sitting in the rubber boat, nervously dragging on a cigarette like a veteran smoker. And as a smoker, I can tell.</p> <p>Don’t these aholes ever even watch their own news videos before they begin to babble away like this?</p> The other day I saw some talking heads saying that they thought that the female British prisoner didn’t appear to be a smoker and it looked like the evil Iranians had given her a cigarette in captivity and forced her to pretend to smoke it, presumably to make her look bad to people in the Middle East.

But the video of the capture itself shows her sitting in the rubber boat, nervously dragging on a cigarette like a veteran smoker. And as a smoker, I can tell.

Don’t these aholes ever even watch their own news videos before they begin to babble away like this?

]]> By: kairos in cal http://firedoglake.com/2007/04/01/sunday-talking-head-thread-48/#comment-599250 kairos in cal Sun, 01 Apr 2007 22:42:54 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/04/01/sunday-talking-head-thread-48/#comment-599250 <p>Buzz Flash reporting on Andrea Mitchell saying that Petraeus has promised “progress” by September - whatever the hell progress means - and being told that Republicans to whom he’d made that promise, had replied that if there isn’t any progress, Republican support would be withdrawn. No given statement of what that would mean in specifics, perhaps in relation to funding or…. But I wish to God people would start talking about the reality of the permanent bases and hammering that big. </p> <p>And the fact that Petraeus hs clearly stated that there really was no real intention of a brief “surge,” that the plan all along was for a long term commitment - I’ve noted this before but don’t have a cite to give now. </p> <p>I’m so disgusted by the failure of the MSM to truly report what the heck is going on.</p> <p>When I watched Hatch this am early I was laughing but also crying in disgust for this pathetic idiot of a man; so glad to have read that he was the last choice for a Repub spokesperson. But why didn’t Tim report on that reality/context? Oh, yes, that would surely have been much too much to ask. God forbid that there be any real contextual honesty. </p> <p>Blessings to all,</p> Buzz Flash reporting on Andrea Mitchell saying that Petraeus has promised “progress” by September – whatever the hell progress means – and being told that Republicans to whom he’d made that promise, had replied that if there isn’t any progress, Republican support would be withdrawn. No given statement of what that would mean in specifics, perhaps in relation to funding or…. But I wish to God people would start talking about the reality of the permanent bases and hammering that big.

And the fact that Petraeus hs clearly stated that there really was no real intention of a brief “surge,” that the plan all along was for a long term commitment – I’ve noted this before but don’t have a cite to give now.

I’m so disgusted by the failure of the MSM to truly report what the heck is going on.

When I watched Hatch this am early I was laughing but also crying in disgust for this pathetic idiot of a man; so glad to have read that he was the last choice for a Repub spokesperson. But why didn’t Tim report on that reality/context? Oh, yes, that would surely have been much too much to ask. God forbid that there be any real contextual honesty.

Blessings to all,

]]> By: LanceThruster http://firedoglake.com/2007/04/01/sunday-talking-head-thread-48/#comment-599066 LanceThruster Sun, 01 Apr 2007 19:36:42 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/04/01/sunday-talking-head-thread-48/#comment-599066 <p>Thank goodness for these summaries. Sirius Satellite Radio recently dropped C-SPAN radio which had the best commercial free Sunday Public Affairs rebroadcasts. I cannot sit still and watch liars not get called on their lies in real time. The condensed version is bad enough. Maybe I’ll get C-SPAN radio again when Sirius and XM merge</p> Thank goodness for these summaries. Sirius Satellite Radio recently dropped C-SPAN radio which had the best commercial free Sunday Public Affairs rebroadcasts. I cannot sit still and watch liars not get called on their lies in real time. The condensed version is bad enough. Maybe I’ll get C-SPAN radio again when Sirius and XM merge

]]> By: Kathleen http://firedoglake.com/2007/04/01/sunday-talking-head-thread-48/#comment-599029 Kathleen Sun, 01 Apr 2007 19:04:24 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/04/01/sunday-talking-head-thread-48/#comment-599029 <p>I loved when Leahy said “I’ve had it” when he referred to the AG “declining the dates that they offered” Leahy went onto say “no more closed door meetings, we want this under oath and public”</p> <p>Hatch was clearly flustered.</p> <p>Rangel was simply amazing on Russert’s MTP. I swear I saw tears in Russert’s eyes as Rangel described his service in Korea. Rangel was focused on military service for all. Compulsory! That will sure change things.</p> <p>Matthews Sunday program has me asking once again what is with Mattthews addiction to the Clintons private lives and superficial issues. He is either talking about how Hillary is not “warm and fuzzy”, or on Clintons marital hanky panky. Chris always has a smirk when it comes to the Clintons, his agenda is clear, take them out.</p> <p>I sure wish Matthews would focus on more substantive issues having to do with the Clintons, like policies and Bill’s focus on the Aids issue. No Matthews twist the focus by inferring that Hillary may spank Bill like Ricki (I Love Lucy) spanked Lucy for sticking her nose into his business. I find Matthews petty when he so chooses to focus on such silly mattters.</p> <p>This morning on Chris Matthews program Andrea Mitchell said “Republicans are going to crack” in regard to support for the war. Andrew Sullivan called the war in Iraq a “Republican branded war”. Sullivan also said that the public looks at the Republican party as “incompetent, nasty and intolerant”.</p> <p>On Matthews show there was also talk about how many Republicans are pissed at Hagel, for his stance against the ongoing mess in Iraq. They said it made him look like an independent. </p> <p>I say “Hagel run as an independent” Would love to see this door open again, with Hagel, Gore and Nader all running as Independents. The time could not be more right! </p> <p>#244 allan in upstate. Yes Nader and anyone else who wants to run as an Independent. I am not one of the herd who blames Nader for the 2000 Selection of our President. I blame the Supreme Court Judicial coup. While I would have never voted for Nader (too dangerous) and spent endless hours trying to talk mostly young voters out of doing so. Nader had every right to run, voters were naive enough to vote for him that ended up being a real problem.</p> <p># 249 Katy mine. Scott Ritter has been trying to tell the American people the truth about Iraq and Iran for a very long time. Ritter is in good and reliable company about his asessment of Iran. Iaea El Baradei, General Wesley Clark, Iaea Hans Blix and Flynnt Leverett at the New American Foundation have similar asessments of Iran’s “alleged” nuclear program that the “cakewalk in Iraq” liars keep repeating as facts.</p> I loved when Leahy said “I’ve had it” when he referred to the AG “declining the dates that they offered” Leahy went onto say “no more closed door meetings, we want this under oath and public”

Hatch was clearly flustered.

Rangel was simply amazing on Russert’s MTP. I swear I saw tears in Russert’s eyes as Rangel described his service in Korea. Rangel was focused on military service for all. Compulsory! That will sure change things.

Matthews Sunday program has me asking once again what is with Mattthews addiction to the Clintons private lives and superficial issues. He is either talking about how Hillary is not “warm and fuzzy”, or on Clintons marital hanky panky. Chris always has a smirk when it comes to the Clintons, his agenda is clear, take them out.

I sure wish Matthews would focus on more substantive issues having to do with the Clintons, like policies and Bill’s focus on the Aids issue. No Matthews twist the focus by inferring that Hillary may spank Bill like Ricki (I Love Lucy) spanked Lucy for sticking her nose into his business. I find Matthews petty when he so chooses to focus on such silly mattters.

This morning on Chris Matthews program Andrea Mitchell said “Republicans are going to crack” in regard to support for the war. Andrew Sullivan called the war in Iraq a “Republican branded war”. Sullivan also said that the public looks at the Republican party as “incompetent, nasty and intolerant”.

On Matthews show there was also talk about how many Republicans are pissed at Hagel, for his stance against the ongoing mess in Iraq. They said it made him look like an independent.

I say “Hagel run as an independent” Would love to see this door open again, with Hagel, Gore and Nader all running as Independents. The time could not be more right!

#244 allan in upstate. Yes Nader and anyone else who wants to run as an Independent. I am not one of the herd who blames Nader for the 2000 Selection of our President. I blame the Supreme Court Judicial coup. While I would have never voted for Nader (too dangerous) and spent endless hours trying to talk mostly young voters out of doing so. Nader had every right to run, voters were naive enough to vote for him that ended up being a real problem.

# 249 Katy mine. Scott Ritter has been trying to tell the American people the truth about Iraq and Iran for a very long time. Ritter is in good and reliable company about his asessment of Iran. Iaea El Baradei, General Wesley Clark, Iaea Hans Blix and Flynnt Leverett at the New American Foundation have similar asessments of Iran’s “alleged” nuclear program that the “cakewalk in Iraq” liars keep repeating as facts.

]]> By: Murphyslaw http://firedoglake.com/2007/04/01/sunday-talking-head-thread-48/#comment-599022 Murphyslaw Sun, 01 Apr 2007 18:58:50 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/04/01/sunday-talking-head-thread-48/#comment-599022 <p>If a small part of the public agrees with Bush because they must follow their leader, and a large part is only mildly concerned because it just reads MSM, imagine how hard it will be for a Democratic Congress or even President to get the resources to Undo all this damage? “Gee, what are you spending time on that for?” </p> <p>Rove has given the Dems another major headache: exposing this stuff while keeping the MSM-reading public’s attention. “Yes, Virginia, I know what it says in the Constitution and your civics book and Time magazine. But they really did do that.”</p> If a small part of the public agrees with Bush because they must follow their leader, and a large part is only mildly concerned because it just reads MSM, imagine how hard it will be for a Democratic Congress or even President to get the resources to Undo all this damage? “Gee, what are you spending time on that for?”

Rove has given the Dems another major headache: exposing this stuff while keeping the MSM-reading public’s attention. “Yes, Virginia, I know what it says in the Constitution and your civics book and Time magazine. But they really did do that.”

]]> By: Julie Waters http://firedoglake.com/2007/04/01/sunday-talking-head-thread-48/#comment-598974 Julie Waters Sun, 01 Apr 2007 17:39:28 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/04/01/sunday-talking-head-thread-48/#comment-598974 <p>Hey! I know that bird!</p> <p>I’d post about politics, but I have to do spring cleaning, so I must flee. </p> <p>Good to see another of my pics up here :)</p> <p>–julie</p> Hey! I know that bird!

I’d post about politics, but I have to do spring cleaning, so I must flee.

Good to see another of my pics up here :)

–julie

]]> By: Arnie http://firedoglake.com/2007/04/01/sunday-talking-head-thread-48/#comment-598833 Arnie Sun, 01 Apr 2007 16:12:31 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/04/01/sunday-talking-head-thread-48/#comment-598833 <p>That Orrin Toady Hatch that you have been exposed to of late is the same, undimminished Orrin Toady Hatch of Watergate and of Iran/Contra hearings. In his life he has shown no growth of character, remaining the same sorry appologist for executive criminality in all cases. George W may be a right hoor, Orrin Toady Hatch will never in his life be anything but a cute hoor, count on it. If it is evil, it is Orrin.</p> That Orrin Toady Hatch that you have been exposed to of late is the same, undimminished Orrin Toady Hatch of Watergate and of Iran/Contra hearings. In his life he has shown no growth of character, remaining the same sorry appologist for executive criminality in all cases. George W may be a right hoor, Orrin Toady Hatch will never in his life be anything but a cute hoor, count on it. If it is evil, it is Orrin.

]]> By: Kalliope http://firedoglake.com/2007/04/01/sunday-talking-head-thread-48/#comment-598823 Kalliope Sun, 01 Apr 2007 16:06:30 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/04/01/sunday-talking-head-thread-48/#comment-598823 <p>While Bob Schieffer made his summary on MtP<br /> (have the politicians not learned their lesson after Watergate and Iran Contra that lying, in Positions of Trust, does not pay?), I was thinking to myself: I wonder why the Constitution recommends the death penalty for certain acts of treason. </p> <p>Maybe it is that those who never suffered from too short a memeory in the first place, but rather from a very long plan to subvert the Constitution cannot come back time and again and do their nefarious deed again. </p> <p>Hm, I never supported the death penalty, but I cannot find fault with the Constitution either.</p> While Bob Schieffer made his summary on MtP
(have the politicians not learned their lesson after Watergate and Iran Contra that lying, in Positions of Trust, does not pay?), I was thinking to myself: I wonder why the Constitution recommends the death penalty for certain acts of treason.

Maybe it is that those who never suffered from too short a memeory in the first place, but rather from a very long plan to subvert the Constitution cannot come back time and again and do their nefarious deed again.

Hm, I never supported the death penalty, but I cannot find fault with the Constitution either.

]]> By: Jesterfox http://firedoglake.com/2007/04/01/sunday-talking-head-thread-48/#comment-598775 Jesterfox Sun, 01 Apr 2007 15:48:29 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/04/01/sunday-talking-head-thread-48/#comment-598775 <p><a href="#comment-598720"><em>Jesterfox @ 174 </em></a></p> <blockquote><p><a href="#comment-598578"><em>jayackroyd @ 72 </em></a></p> <blockquote><p>A rapid withdrawal would be very very difficult. First you’ve gotta get the 100,000 contractors out, which is tricky because a number of them are working security. Then what? </p> <p>I know this brings to mind Mayor Daley telling Johnson to just put them onto planes and fly them out, but what do you envision? </p> <p>The simplest plan would be to not rotate people in as people are rotated out, taking a proportionate number of contractors out that same time. Then gauge the size of the resulting conflagrations in the now American-free areas.</p></blockquote> <p>Fuck the contractors! We would be better off if none of the Blackwater forces <em>[redacted by CHS: NO, and I mean no, violence or wishes therefor. Period.] </em> Private mercenary forces destroy democracy.</p></blockquote> <p>Sorry about that. I should have said that the contactors are not our responsibilty and that they can make their own way home as they are able. They are better equipped and better paid than our forces. I am sure that they have plans for this eventuality.</p> Jesterfox @ 174

jayackroyd @ 72

A rapid withdrawal would be very very difficult. First you’ve gotta get the 100,000 contractors out, which is tricky because a number of them are working security. Then what?

I know this brings to mind Mayor Daley telling Johnson to just put them onto planes and fly them out, but what do you envision?

The simplest plan would be to not rotate people in as people are rotated out, taking a proportionate number of contractors out that same time. Then gauge the size of the resulting conflagrations in the now American-free areas.

Fuck the contractors! We would be better off if none of the Blackwater forces [redacted by CHS: NO, and I mean no, violence or wishes therefor. Period.] Private mercenary forces destroy democracy.

Sorry about that. I should have said that the contactors are not our responsibilty and that they can make their own way home as they are able. They are better equipped and better paid than our forces. I am sure that they have plans for this eventuality.

]]> By: Gunga Djinn http://firedoglake.com/2007/04/01/sunday-talking-head-thread-48/#comment-598725 Gunga Djinn Sun, 01 Apr 2007 15:29:52 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/04/01/sunday-talking-head-thread-48/#comment-598725 <p>barbara @ 46</p> <blockquote><p> . . . was anyone else totally embarrassed to see Junior shooting off his mouth at the egregious (morning, E) seizure of British sailors? I get that the U.S. should probably weigh in on this, but it is beyond the pale that the master of deception and flapdoodle be our spokesman. Ick.</p></blockquote> <p>Embarrassed wouldn’t be my choice of words. Is there a word for locking an obnoxious drunk in the closet so that the party can go on?</p> barbara @ 46

. . . was anyone else totally embarrassed to see Junior shooting off his mouth at the egregious (morning, E) seizure of British sailors? I get that the U.S. should probably weigh in on this, but it is beyond the pale that the master of deception and flapdoodle be our spokesman. Ick.

Embarrassed wouldn’t be my choice of words. Is there a word for locking an obnoxious drunk in the closet so that the party can go on?

]]>