Post Republican Debate Coverage (Tuesday's First Hour)
Hi everybody. At the top of the hour Anderson tells us that Scooter Libby has just been sentenced to 30 months in prison. Schandefreude! But we're talking about the debates right now. Anderson throws it to John King to break it down for us. However, holy technical glitch, batman! We can't hear John and then we cut back to Anderson who we also can't hear and he's looking confused and then freakin Larry King, just like, gets up right in front of the camera and then we're back to John who's really confused and then Anderson starts doing the "can you hear me now?" thing and...well that was fun. Live tv. Gotta love it. CNN then finally gets there stuff together and we're back to John, but I miss most of what he says because I'm still sort of laughing about what we just saw. Although most of what he focused on was McCain, specifically what he said to a woman that lost her brother in Iraq. Basically McCain stands by the war, but admits major mistakes were made.
Next up we're joined by Jeffrey Toobin, Arianna Huffington, and Mike Murphy for discussion. Look at Toobin expanding his horizons. Heh. They start by playing a clip of Giuliani where he goes off on the democrats and says they're in denial about terrorism. I'm really starting to dislike this guy. I mean, what kind of person must you be to build your whole campaign on the deaths of 3,000 people? Anderson notes that Giuliani already seems to be running a national race. Mike agrees and says that the republicans (the big three anyway) tend to be playing more like a national race, while the democrats seem to be doing the primary thing. We then get a clip of McCain talking about the war and how we have to win it. Toobin points out that he sounds suspiciously like Bush and people aren't buying that. Arianna adds on, saying that Giuliani actually sounded the most like Bush-even attacking the media. "Which, I have got to say, was a huge applause-getter...," says Anderson. Aw. Well, I like you guys. Most of the time, anyway.
Mike, being on the losing end of this issue with the public, decides to remind us that the world can still change and who people vote for will be who they are most comfortable with. However, Arianna notes that if history is any judge, this time next year things are just going to be worse. I agree with you Arianna, but, um, could you maybe not smile when you say that? Because worse equals more people dying. Next we get a clip of Huckabee and Romney talking about religion. Anderson asks if the Mormon thing is going to be a problem for Romney. Mike says it's not a big deal and, hey, look at me, I agree with a republican. Anderson wonders what's up with all the faith talk in the debates anyway. Arianna then talks about how the democrats talked about their faith in terms of social justice in regards to policy, whereas the republicans just talked about creation and the like. Toobin doesn't think that's fair to Huckabee, who he feels did a good job explaining that being pro-life was more than just about the womb. You know, I have great respect for people who are truly pro-life (against abortion, against war, against the death penalty...), but I haven't found many of them.
On now to some talk on immigration and we've switched out Arianna and Toobin for Amy Holmes and Paul Begala. We begin with some clips and then Anderson wonders if immigration will even be a big issue since it didn't pan out like expected last November. Amy thinks it will be because it's just now hitting the national stage. Paul talks about a nice story McCain told about Hispanics in the military, which he thinks will play well regarding the immigration issue in a general election, though he's not sure about the primary. (Remember, McCain was behind the immigration bill.) While a conservative, Mike is actually a liberal on immigration, so he likes his stance, but thinks most conservatives are very angered about the thought of amnesty. Anderson asks if anyone actually has any realistic proposals. What's that you say? A realistic proposal? I don't think we do that here. Anyway, the answer to his question is...um...no. Mike talks some politics regarding the issue and Amy talks about putting border security first. However, Anderson points out that a fence is already in the McCain bill (and yay for pointing that out, Anderson). Amy doesn't seem to think that will come to fruition. She's probably right.
Moving on now to whether or not we should have started the war in the first place...and a bit of freaking out by Paul Begala and your humble blogger. We get a clip of Romney saying that we had to invade because Saddam wouldn't open the country up to IAEA inspectors. Paul then points out that, um, yes he did let the inspectors in. It was kind of a whole big thing where a bunch of them, led by Hans Blix, combed the country looking for WMDs. And they were still looking when Bush told them to get out and the US invaded. This happened. I remember it. "You can't get something like that wrong. I mean, that's like -- that's like saying the Mexicans bombed Pearl Harbor," says Paul. Mike then throws away the status I bestowed upon him as a reasonable republican, by claiming Paul is taking things out of context. He points out that Saddam threw the inspectors out in 1998...which is totally not what Romney was talking about. After that even Amy gets into it...and I cannot believe they are actually arguing about this!
"You're entitled to your own opinion...but you're not entitled to your own facts," says Paul. Yes! Good Lord! Anyone who was watching the news saw the inspectors there. Although you know why Romney might be confused? Because Bush himself flat out said Saddam wouldn't let them in. Flat out said this when we had seen them there! And did the media call him out on this atrocious bald face lie at the time? No they did not. See, this is why I cannot love the media all the time. Because sometimes they beyond suck. Anyway, Paul's mind is completely boggled, and while I probably wouldn't have gone for the complete freakout he's having, I totally sympathize because my head is feeling a wee bit combustible too. "This is the most exciting thing that has happened tonight. So, I'm just letting it go," says Anderson. Funny, but sorry buddy, also a total cop-out. This is about facts, not opinions. If Anderson knows about the inspectors (and he really should, given this is what he does) he should be in there fact checking this crap. Instead, I'm sitting here going, "Bueller? Bueller?" So a demerit for you, Anderson. Go to the corner!
Then Mike asks why Clinton voted for the war if there were really weapons inspectors in there. What?! Paul tries to explain that he didn't agree with her vote (seriously, why does he have to answer for her vote?), but she made it so the inspectors could continue looking. Amy and Mike argue some more with Paul and Amy says, "Saddam was not handing over material. " OMG. "There weren't any weapons. What could he hand over?" says Paul. He's seriously about to have a heart attack and I'm right there with him. "We're not going to get this resolved tonight," says Anderson. You are being totally unhelpful. Go back to the corner. Paul finally just tells them to go to the CNN archives. Now if you'll excuse me for a second... Ahhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!! Good Lord. And people wonder how we got in this mess.
Man, now I'm all worked up, but we're moving on to a clip of the candidates on social issues...with a message from God Himself. In the clip Giuliani is told a Catholic Bishop has compared his stance on abortion to "Pontius Pilate's personal opposition to Jesus Christ's crucifixion, but allowing it to happen anyway." Ouch. As Giuliani starts to reply, a lightening strike causes the sound to go wonky. Oooh, God is not pleased. It's actually pretty funny because some of candidates take a few steps away from him. Mike and Amy think Romney and Huckabee did good jobs talking about their faith with Amy noting it's not an unusual thing to believe in Creationism. Paul points out that he's faithful, but doesn't want religion taught in science class. Then he and Amy argue about that a bit. The next topic is Giuliani's pro-choice stance, but Paul brings up the fact that many pro-lifers don't even know he's choice. Paul actually compliments Giuliani for being quick on his feet during the lightening strike because Ford and Carter didn't react so well when lights went out during a 1976 debate. "Paul, you've been in politics way too long. You remember moments from 1976 debates. Man, more power to you," says Anderson. Seriously.
Next up we've got our nightly "Raw Politics" with Tom Foreman. First up, we learn that while we haven't been keeping an eye on Bush, he's getting us into another Cold War. Apparently the two countries have been doing some tussling over stuff like missile defense. You know, little stuff. The plus side of a new Cold War? We'll get to hear Anderson say "Poodin" every night. See, nobody can tell me I'm not a glass half-full kind of gal. Next up we learn Clinton has some union problems. It seems one of her strategists might be connected to other groups that undermine worker's rights. Ruh-roh. Tom also tells us that a Bipartison group of senators is trying to get us out of Iraq by introducing "legislation to put more emphasis on training Iraqis, diplomacy, and getting out if any decent progress is made." Sound familiar? Yep, that's basically what the Iraq Study Group wanted. And Bush listened to those guys so well. Finally, we learn that "the Defense Department is downsizing a new weather and climate satellite system because of technical problems and skyrocketing costs." Oh well, I'm sure that wasn't important anyway. It's not like the weather has been up to much lately, right? Oy.
The Shot tonight is that clip of Giuliani "being struck" by lightening. The show tonight was chock full of political goodness and great coverage and totally would have gotten an A, if not for that thing about the inspectors. Seriously, I know someone on this show has access to the Internet. Could nobody check that and then maybe during the second hour let us know that, um, yes, actually inspectors were let into Iraq? Because isn't the whole fact-checking thing kind of the media's job? My mind is boggled here, people. B
Next up we're joined by Jeffrey Toobin, Arianna Huffington, and Mike Murphy for discussion. Look at Toobin expanding his horizons. Heh. They start by playing a clip of Giuliani where he goes off on the democrats and says they're in denial about terrorism. I'm really starting to dislike this guy. I mean, what kind of person must you be to build your whole campaign on the deaths of 3,000 people? Anderson notes that Giuliani already seems to be running a national race. Mike agrees and says that the republicans (the big three anyway) tend to be playing more like a national race, while the democrats seem to be doing the primary thing. We then get a clip of McCain talking about the war and how we have to win it. Toobin points out that he sounds suspiciously like Bush and people aren't buying that. Arianna adds on, saying that Giuliani actually sounded the most like Bush-even attacking the media. "Which, I have got to say, was a huge applause-getter...," says Anderson. Aw. Well, I like you guys. Most of the time, anyway.
Mike, being on the losing end of this issue with the public, decides to remind us that the world can still change and who people vote for will be who they are most comfortable with. However, Arianna notes that if history is any judge, this time next year things are just going to be worse. I agree with you Arianna, but, um, could you maybe not smile when you say that? Because worse equals more people dying. Next we get a clip of Huckabee and Romney talking about religion. Anderson asks if the Mormon thing is going to be a problem for Romney. Mike says it's not a big deal and, hey, look at me, I agree with a republican. Anderson wonders what's up with all the faith talk in the debates anyway. Arianna then talks about how the democrats talked about their faith in terms of social justice in regards to policy, whereas the republicans just talked about creation and the like. Toobin doesn't think that's fair to Huckabee, who he feels did a good job explaining that being pro-life was more than just about the womb. You know, I have great respect for people who are truly pro-life (against abortion, against war, against the death penalty...), but I haven't found many of them.
On now to some talk on immigration and we've switched out Arianna and Toobin for Amy Holmes and Paul Begala. We begin with some clips and then Anderson wonders if immigration will even be a big issue since it didn't pan out like expected last November. Amy thinks it will be because it's just now hitting the national stage. Paul talks about a nice story McCain told about Hispanics in the military, which he thinks will play well regarding the immigration issue in a general election, though he's not sure about the primary. (Remember, McCain was behind the immigration bill.) While a conservative, Mike is actually a liberal on immigration, so he likes his stance, but thinks most conservatives are very angered about the thought of amnesty. Anderson asks if anyone actually has any realistic proposals. What's that you say? A realistic proposal? I don't think we do that here. Anyway, the answer to his question is...um...no. Mike talks some politics regarding the issue and Amy talks about putting border security first. However, Anderson points out that a fence is already in the McCain bill (and yay for pointing that out, Anderson). Amy doesn't seem to think that will come to fruition. She's probably right.
Moving on now to whether or not we should have started the war in the first place...and a bit of freaking out by Paul Begala and your humble blogger. We get a clip of Romney saying that we had to invade because Saddam wouldn't open the country up to IAEA inspectors. Paul then points out that, um, yes he did let the inspectors in. It was kind of a whole big thing where a bunch of them, led by Hans Blix, combed the country looking for WMDs. And they were still looking when Bush told them to get out and the US invaded. This happened. I remember it. "You can't get something like that wrong. I mean, that's like -- that's like saying the Mexicans bombed Pearl Harbor," says Paul. Mike then throws away the status I bestowed upon him as a reasonable republican, by claiming Paul is taking things out of context. He points out that Saddam threw the inspectors out in 1998...which is totally not what Romney was talking about. After that even Amy gets into it...and I cannot believe they are actually arguing about this!
"You're entitled to your own opinion...but you're not entitled to your own facts," says Paul. Yes! Good Lord! Anyone who was watching the news saw the inspectors there. Although you know why Romney might be confused? Because Bush himself flat out said Saddam wouldn't let them in. Flat out said this when we had seen them there! And did the media call him out on this atrocious bald face lie at the time? No they did not. See, this is why I cannot love the media all the time. Because sometimes they beyond suck. Anyway, Paul's mind is completely boggled, and while I probably wouldn't have gone for the complete freakout he's having, I totally sympathize because my head is feeling a wee bit combustible too. "This is the most exciting thing that has happened tonight. So, I'm just letting it go," says Anderson. Funny, but sorry buddy, also a total cop-out. This is about facts, not opinions. If Anderson knows about the inspectors (and he really should, given this is what he does) he should be in there fact checking this crap. Instead, I'm sitting here going, "Bueller? Bueller?" So a demerit for you, Anderson. Go to the corner!
Then Mike asks why Clinton voted for the war if there were really weapons inspectors in there. What?! Paul tries to explain that he didn't agree with her vote (seriously, why does he have to answer for her vote?), but she made it so the inspectors could continue looking. Amy and Mike argue some more with Paul and Amy says, "Saddam was not handing over material. " OMG. "There weren't any weapons. What could he hand over?" says Paul. He's seriously about to have a heart attack and I'm right there with him. "We're not going to get this resolved tonight," says Anderson. You are being totally unhelpful. Go back to the corner. Paul finally just tells them to go to the CNN archives. Now if you'll excuse me for a second... Ahhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!! Good Lord. And people wonder how we got in this mess.
Man, now I'm all worked up, but we're moving on to a clip of the candidates on social issues...with a message from God Himself. In the clip Giuliani is told a Catholic Bishop has compared his stance on abortion to "Pontius Pilate's personal opposition to Jesus Christ's crucifixion, but allowing it to happen anyway." Ouch. As Giuliani starts to reply, a lightening strike causes the sound to go wonky. Oooh, God is not pleased. It's actually pretty funny because some of candidates take a few steps away from him. Mike and Amy think Romney and Huckabee did good jobs talking about their faith with Amy noting it's not an unusual thing to believe in Creationism. Paul points out that he's faithful, but doesn't want religion taught in science class. Then he and Amy argue about that a bit. The next topic is Giuliani's pro-choice stance, but Paul brings up the fact that many pro-lifers don't even know he's choice. Paul actually compliments Giuliani for being quick on his feet during the lightening strike because Ford and Carter didn't react so well when lights went out during a 1976 debate. "Paul, you've been in politics way too long. You remember moments from 1976 debates. Man, more power to you," says Anderson. Seriously.
Next up we've got our nightly "Raw Politics" with Tom Foreman. First up, we learn that while we haven't been keeping an eye on Bush, he's getting us into another Cold War. Apparently the two countries have been doing some tussling over stuff like missile defense. You know, little stuff. The plus side of a new Cold War? We'll get to hear Anderson say "Poodin" every night. See, nobody can tell me I'm not a glass half-full kind of gal. Next up we learn Clinton has some union problems. It seems one of her strategists might be connected to other groups that undermine worker's rights. Ruh-roh. Tom also tells us that a Bipartison group of senators is trying to get us out of Iraq by introducing "legislation to put more emphasis on training Iraqis, diplomacy, and getting out if any decent progress is made." Sound familiar? Yep, that's basically what the Iraq Study Group wanted. And Bush listened to those guys so well. Finally, we learn that "the Defense Department is downsizing a new weather and climate satellite system because of technical problems and skyrocketing costs." Oh well, I'm sure that wasn't important anyway. It's not like the weather has been up to much lately, right? Oy.
The Shot tonight is that clip of Giuliani "being struck" by lightening. The show tonight was chock full of political goodness and great coverage and totally would have gotten an A, if not for that thing about the inspectors. Seriously, I know someone on this show has access to the Internet. Could nobody check that and then maybe during the second hour let us know that, um, yes, actually inspectors were let into Iraq? Because isn't the whole fact-checking thing kind of the media's job? My mind is boggled here, people. B
posted by eliza at 1:14 AM
4 Comments:
Why are the media being so gloves-off with Ron Paul? Is it just because he has no real chance in hell (a la Kuchinich, but on the right)? The guy is bats, plus has a scary history of racism that I doubt he's totally revised (see here: http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/aol-metropolitan/96/05/23/paul.html). Jon Stewart was nice to him, too. Do they not know what he really stands for, and how crazy it is? He's pretty freaking clear on that!
i wonder if amy holmes is the cnn colleague Anderson is supposed to be having a romance with? they both had a cold last night and she is black like jeff koinange's lover.
Wow, anon8:54 is not only reaching, she's inventing. Marianne Brinner, the woman running the JK blog who purports to have had an affair with him, is white. Not that this is a particularly relevant datapoint, but since anon8:54 seemed to think her 'blackness' was relevant, I merely point out that anon is mistaken.
Overly eager to link Anderson with some female, perhaps?
@anonymous 11:56-I don't know much about Paul, other than he's a republican against the war. I did see him on TDS, though. Jon can't rip everybody all the time. Otherwise no politician would ever go on his show.
@anonymous 8:54-I appreciate you stopping by, but this is not that kind of blog. I'd like to keep the comments on topic regarding what was discussed on the show. Thanks.
Post a Comment
<< Home