Notorious Islamophobic far-right radio host Dana Loesch is stepping up to the plate to make Pamela Geller, Brigitte Gabriel, Frank Gaffney, and the Islamophobia Lobby happy by demonizing Huma Abedin, a Deputy Chief of Staff and aide to Secretary of State (and possible 2016 Presidential contender) Hillary Clinton.
Nevertheless, TeaNN contributor Loesch repeated the false claim by Bachmann without challenge on her radio show.
Last week, CNN contributor Dana Loesch claimed a State Department official has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood -- even as her CNN co-workers Wolf Blitzer and Anderson Cooper dismissed such charges as "McCarthy-like."
Loesch discussed Bachmann's Brotherhood infiltration theory with anti-Islam activist Brigitte Gabriel. When Gabriel said that it was "about time our government begins an investigation into the infiltration of the Muslim Brotherhood into our government," Loesch agreed, saying, "Absolutely," then added:
LOESCH: Looking especially at how some of our foreign policy has been handled, Hillary Clinton essentially siding with the Muslim Brotherhood candidate in Egypt, and then it was discovered that her top aide -- Huma Abedin -- is essentially a member of the female version of the Muslim Brotherhood, the Muslim Sisterhood. All of this -- it seems enough to me to pose questions as to why our government is becoming so close with a group that has been so hostile to the United States, has fought against the United States, has sided with terrorists, and is a very oppressive regime that believes in Sharia law.
From the 07.19.2012 edition of KFTK's The Dana Show:
Loesch then took her defense of Bachmann to Big Journalism.
The Republican establishment has long kept Michele Bachmann at arm's length and the exploitation of her simple inquiry into foreign policy matters (along with Louie Gohmert, Tom Rooney, Trent Franks, and Lynn Westmorland) is just another example. What's worse: they seem eager to work in tandem with the media to help push along the overdramatic and purposeful mischaracterization of the group's inquiry -- and set their sights specifically on Bachmann. The best way to assuage the congressional members' questions about Muslim Brotherhood infiltration is, of course, to prove that they are irrevocably without merit, which isn't done by attacking Bachmann ad hominem and challenging her character. Unfortunately, that's not the route the DC establishment chose.
At least a few high-level Republicans have stuck up for Abedin, such as Arizona Senator and 2008 GOP Presidential Candidate John McCain, Speaker John Boehner, and surprisingly, Congresscritter Jim Sensenbrenner.
Over a year ago today, CNN (or TeaNN) hired the disgraced far-right Teahadist cretin Big Journalism Editor-In-Chief by the name of Dana Loesch.
Here are some of the CNN-related highlights (or not-so-highlights) by Loesch:
February 17th, 2011: Loesch misleadingly declared Michelle Obama's initiative to promote breastfeeding is "nanny state behavior."
On tonight's John King, USA, Dana Loesch was complaining about the breastfeeding promotion as a "nanny state tactic." She was on her anti-Obama high horse. Her counterpart Leigh Ann O'Connor, defended the use of breastfeeding supplies for women.
DANA LOESCH, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: I kind of have to answer yes and no with this. And I don't think it's necessarily Michelle Obama that's trying to do this. I don't necessarily think it's the first lady, but rather some of the actions that the administration has taken. Look, I am all for breast feeding. I myself breast my children until they were well passed a year. And I think it's fantastic and advocacy for that. I'm a very vocal support it.
But at the same time, from a conservative perspective, I have to question what the White House is doing, because breast pumps actually fall under medical devices, which as you know, under the health care law, those devices are going to be hit with a massive excise tax. So, don't make something tax deductible that you're taxing, just don't tax it. That's sort of the first criticism I think I have over it.
But the second thing and this I don't think necessarily pertains to the first lady, but the way that the White House is kind of positioning itself towards this -- as far as breast feeding is concerned, I realize that the White House is trying to exert some influence over businesses to offer, to be more breast-feeding friendly -- again, fantastic. But I don't think it is the government's role to direct business in that. Leave that choice up to the individual businesses, to the parents, to the individual, period.
March 8th, 2011: She compares Sebelius and Democrats to "terrorists."
DANA LOESCH: Absolutely. Well I hope that you are successful in negotiating. I feel like we’re negotiating, and I’m just going to say this, I feel like we’re negotiating, sort of, with, it seems like terrorists to do this to our economy, especially right now. Quite honestly it does. That you would be able to–
Of course, her guest, Teahadist looncase Michele Bachmann (R-MN06) supports Loesch's vile rant. And typical of Dana The Devil, her loonytunes antics will get worse as time goes on.
April 8th, 2011: Loesch rudely talked over Democratic Congresswoman Jackie Speier on the now-cancelled In The Arena.
Loesch was also scheduled to be on Anderson Cooper 360 last night, but thankfully CNN canned her at the last moment and replaced by another Conservative, Susan Molinari, who was a GOP Congresscritter from New York. She is supposed to appear on CBS's The Early Show later today (check local listings, airs on KMOV at 7-9AM CDT) and on CNN later this afternoon.
Of course, she did the usual routine of talking over the others when they're speaking. Eliot Spitzer put her in her place when she claimed that the "Government should shut down due to Planned Parenthood holding up everything." No, the GOP would've been blamed if there was a shutdown, which was temporarily averted just before 10:00PM CDT last night. Better yet, Planned Parenthood was NOT cut.
May 19th, 2011: She falsely accused "Obama of siding with the terrorists over Israel."
June 29th, 2011: She wanted the country to default so Obama and the Democratic Party can lose in 2012.
On last night's Anderson Cooper 360, Dana Loesch was back on and guess what she did? Went back to her bread and butter-- which was lying, misinforming, and being childish to other guests. Her idea to cut the deficit: more tax cuts for the rich and gut Medicare. And of course, she blamed the Democrats for the debt problems, with no facts to back it up. Loesch also supports this country defaulting for the sake of defeating Obama and the Democratic Party.
At least Begala and Gergen have enough sense to tell the truth--especially on the Republicans rooting for the economy to fail so that they can attempt to win the Presidency come 2012, unlike a certain moron who hosts a radio show on KFTK.
July 18th, 2011: Loesch suggested that "mosques should have to disclose ties to any anti-American organizations."
On today's CNN Newsroom, St. Louis's leading hate jock Dana Loesch went on the air and made this statement: "Mosques should disclose if they have "ties to any organizations that present a conflict of interest to US security."
LOESCH: Well, really quickly, 55 percent of American oppose tax hikes in the debt ceiling talks. But according to -- going along with Herman Cain's discussion here, I'm against mob rule. But I believe that any sort of mosque that's built in a community needs to disclose whether or not it has ties to any organizations that present a conflict of interest to American security. I think that two-way street is fair, so hopefully we can have more of that in the future. PHILLIPS: Maria. CARDONA: It is as far from presidential you can get. It's downright shameful. Would he ask the same of Christians, of Buddhists, of Hindus, of Jewish people wanting to build those kinds of institutions and places of worship in their communities? He is in essence equating American Muslims, Americans in their community with al Qaeda and with Osama Bin Laden, downright shameful. PHILLIPS: Pete. DOMINICK: This is so stupid and insulting. Herman Cain and anybody who shares this kind of idea that says you can't build a house of worship is a joke. It's insulting. I'm no fan of religion myself, but this is too sad. He actually has a lot of executive experience. He should focus on that. Muslims have helped disrupt every plot in America. We need to be their friend, not their enemies and that's exactly what he's doing.
August 15th, 2011: Loesch defended Bachmann's question-dodging on AC360.
Why does CNN allow Dana Loesch on? Simple. Makes them more money and gets the right-leaning audience from Fixed Noise.
October 18th, 2011: On Anderson Cooper 360, she baselessly declared the "Nazis support the OWS Movement.
CNN "Contributor" and St. Louis's Leading Hatemonger Dana Loesch took to CNN's Anderson Cooper 360 last night to make outrageous statements about the Occupy Wall Street Movement, baselessly implying that the "Nazis love the movement." Patently false.
And how many times does CNN's hosts get away with allowing Dana Loesch to spew out lies with little or no pushback?
CNN "Contributor" and St. Louis's Leading Hatemonger Dana Loesch took to CNN's Anderson Cooper 360 last night to make outrageous statements about the Occupy Wall Street Movement, baselessly implying that the "Nazis love the movement." Patently false.
From the 10.18.2011 edition of CNN's Anderson Cooper 360:
She baselessly implied that there was "infighting at #occupystl, and falsely claimed that "ACORN (or MORE) co-opted the movement," both of which are trumped-up lies.
As I've already pointed out,
there is no "civil war" in the OccupySTL group and last week's social
media drama can be traced back to one person who was not communicating
with the group and unilaterally decided to cut off contact. For as
diverse and eclectic a group as they are, they've actually been
remarkably consistent and organized with their social media postings,
and after the initial minor glitch occurred one week ago the Facebook
and Twitter accounts have been steadily growing and impressively
successful.
However, right-wing radio host Dana Loesch, feeling
threatened by a movement that unlike the tea party is actually appealing
to young people, is now pretending to be "concerned" that the movement
was "co-opted" by the right wing's favorite boogeyman: ACORN! Here's the
kind of stuff Loesch
is saying to try to pretend that she would be totally "down" with the
Occupy movement, if it weren't for that pesky ACORN.
Even if ACORN didn't meddle in, Loesch would still hate the Movement, which is actually grassroots, unlike a certain movement that was astroturfed by the Koch Bros and the GOP.
She brazenly stated that "they [OccupySTL] want to disrupt the World Series." That smear was initially pushed by Loesch crony Adam Sharp.
Patch Adams has a post out claiming that OccupySTL wants to disrupt the
World Series. To give Patch a little credit (which is all he deserves
since, after all, he's still pushing bunk info), he at least managed to
include a screen shot of this:
Loesch,
however, jettisoned any attempts to subtly turn a flat out lie in a
mere misrepresentation of reality. She just flat out lied:
Actually, anyone who actually read the post would see that they weren't
"planning on disrupting the World Series." Some people suggested it,
but others (including the person that runs the facebook account) pointed
out it would be a bad idea. And both Loesch and Patch mysteriously
omitted this post which pretty explictly ackowledges that they have no
interest in angering Cardinals fans:
In this past week, CNN "Contributor" and serial liar Dana Loesch has been caught lying multiple times, including the fact that she endorsed Mitt Romney during the 2008 Republican Primaries in Missouri despite the fact that she thinks "Romney is a Socialist, unrepentant RINO, Obama-lite Presidential candidate."
I don't like much about CNN's Dana Loesch but I have to give her credit
for one thing: she's done a great job of "branding" herself as a
rebellious tea party outsider independent from the mainstream Republican
Party. After all, why would gullible news outlets like CNN want to
hire just another person repeating the same old tired Republican talking
points? But, like pretty much everything else that's come from the St.
Louis Tea Party, Loesch's image as a rebellious outsider was
deliberately constructed and almost entirely false.
After
supporting both Roy Blunt and Ed Martin over more conservative
challengers in the 2010 election, Loesch has been seeking attention
lately by bashing GOP front-runner Mitt Romney. A few weeks ago she
said she'd never support him:
Unfortunately for Loesch, even if she easily forgets, those wacky
internets don't. A friend DM'd me a link to the Way Back Machine that
showed that, guess what? Dana Loesch voted for Mitt Romney in the Republican primary in 2008 as the "candidate of change":
Team
Loesch went to the polls this morning and cast two votes for Mitt
Romney. I think he's the best candidate of change and more qualified
than McCain.
Here's a screen shot:
And
guess what else? "RomneyCare" was enacted back in 2006, so I guess
that means that Dana Loesch actually was a fan of RomneyCare *and*
thought it was constitutional. How about that?
This proves the Loesch is just another GOP talking points shill, instead of the "Independent Conservative" mantle she claims to use for her branding.
Dana Loesch, CNN contributor and editor-in-chief of Big Journalism, has been sharpening her Tea Party cred against a Mitt Romney grindstone, bashing the candidate as
an “unrepentant RINO (Republican In Name Only)” whom she “was against”
in the last election, and this election. So great is her animus for
Romney that she gets entire “mailbags of hate” from his supporters. The
only problem is, Loesch voted for Romney in 2008, and the internet has the proof. This is the Tea Party equivalent of being in a mosh pit, and having a Justin Bieber CD fall out of your pocket.
Loesch’s main problem with Romney, if her twitter feed is any
indication, is Romney’s individual health care mandate. I don’t know, am
I reading these right?
I didn’t protest socialized health care for three years to support the guy who wrote it before Obama. #romney I was against Romney last election, I’m against him this election. I will be against him so long as he’s an unrepentant RINO.
Team Loesch went to the polls this morning and cast two
votes for Mitt Romney. I think he’s the best candidate of change and
more qualified than McCain. Rush just has personal beef with McCain and
Coulter, well, she’s Coulter.
Loesch doesn’t say anything about holding her nose while pulling that
lever, but to be fair, the post’s title, “Tuesday Isn’t THAT Super,”
can be seen as an indication that she wasn’t crazy about Romney or McCain. Still, why choose Romney over McCain when the thing you don’t like about the Democrats is this:
Even though I don’t like John McCain for several reasons,
one of which includes McCain-Feingold, another is his hostility to
small business and the free market – he’s still a better choice
to me than the two successfully underwhelming socialists the other side
is offering with their tax-heavy universal healthcare which circumvents
our liberties and makes us all wards of the state.
The funny thing is, while Loesch was casting that vote for Mitt Romney, Barack Obama was actually to the right of Romney (and primary opponent Hillary Clinton) on the issue of health care. One of the things I didn’t like about Obama’s primary platform was that he was against an individual health care mandate.
You can’t do away with preexisting condition limitations without it.
It’d be like taking the “buy one” out of a “buy one, get one free” deal.
Now, we all have our internet skeletons in the closet (like my early support for John Edwards), and it’s quite possible that Loesch was unaware of Romneycare at the time. He certainly wasn’t running on Romneycare. If that’s the case, though, then why go to the trouble of deleting the post from the blog’s archive? Surely, Loesch’s current Tea Party crowd would understand, wouldn’t they?
Dana Loesch, in her response, explains that she wasn’t for
Romney in 2008, she just opposed John McCain more strongly, and cast
her vote for Romney to prevent McCain from securing the nomination.
After her first choice, Fred Thompson, dropped out, Loesch says “We
were, at that point, faced between choosing Mitt Romney or John McCain. I
did not like Mitt Romney.”
Now, you would never know that from her blog post, a fair reading of
which would lead you to conclude that she at least liked Mitt a little.
“I think he’s the best candidate of change,” she said. A fair person
would acknowledge that, based on that post, no one would conclude that
she was “against” Romney in 2008. A cynical person might think Loesch
was just trying to backstop an embarrassing contradiction.
However, in her response, Loesch says that there are podcasts from
the period that demonstrate her dislike for Romney. Fair enough. She
goes on to explain her thought process. “I weighed Romneycare against
McCain-Feingold, and that’s ultimately what made my decision. I disliked
both of them to the point where I almost wanted to choke. And I
ultimately decided that McCain-Feingold, in that particular instance,
was worse.”
Yes, the same Mike Huckabee that Dana Loesch was scheduled to introduce
at a St. Louis Tea Party event earlier this year. If only she had known
about him in 2008! In a bit of cruel irony, she even, coincidentally,
referenced the Tea Party-friendly former governor in that 2008 blog
post, defiantly decrying big government with a folksy, “HUCK THAT.”
If just a tiny fraction of Missourians had voted for Huckabee,
instead of Mitt Romney, the 2008 presidential race could have gone a
whole different way. Going into Super Tuesday, Huckabee was within 67 delegates
of the lead, with 1,069 up for grabs that day, and was polling in a
statistical tie with McCain for the lead in Missouri. Had he won
Missouri, he might have stayed in the race longer, raised more money,
and really given McCain what for. He kept on winning states even after
he dropped out, and even wound up with more delegates than Romney!
Loesch is right, of course. Most liberals feel that Obamacare was a
half-measure, watered down by Republicans, conserva-Dems, and would have
preferred a public option, or Medicare for all. What we got was the
equivalent of eliminating starvation by making it illegal not to buy
food.
From the 10.07.2011 edition of KFTK's The Dana Show:
On her blogposts at the feces-filled Big "Journalism" blog, she and her ilk have demonized the Occupy Wall Street protestors (and its offshoots) for alleged "lawbreaking", being "lazy welfare moochers," and the like.
On last night's Anderson Cooper 360, Loesch was on to offer analysis on the Bloomberg Debate.
From the 10.11.2011 edition of CNN's Anderson Cooper 360:
JOHN KING, CNN ANCHOR: It is 10:00 p.m. here in Washington.
Breaking news from a place north of here. They are just about as
fervent about their politics up in New Hampshire. The Republican
presidential debate in New Hampshire wrapping up just moments ago.
The setting, a town hall. The eight candidates sat around a table
with moderator Charlie Rose. They made their points, traded jabs, as
you can see, elbow to elbow literally. The sole focus of tonight's
face-off, the economy, but politics not far from center stage either.
With Herman Cain's poll numbers surging, he and his 999 plan were obvious targets. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HERMAN CAIN (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Nine-nine-nine will pass,
and it is not the price of a pizza, because it has been well- studied
and well-developed. It starts with, unlike your proposals, throwing out
the current tax code. Continuing to pivot off the current tax code is
not going to boost this economy. This is why we developed 9-9-9, 9
percent corporate business flat tax, 9 percent personal income flat tax,
and a 9 percent national sales tax. And it will pass, Senator, because
the American people want it to pass.
REP. MICHELE
BACHMANN (R-MN), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: And one thing I would say is,
when you take the 999 plan and you turn it upside down, I think the
devil is in the details.
RICK SANTORUM (R), PRESIDENTIAL
CANDIDATE: Unlike Herman's plan, which could not pass, because no --
how many people here are for a sales tax in New Hampshire? Raise your
hand.
There you go, Herman. That's how many votes you'll get in New Hampshire.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KING: A big night for Cain, also a critical event for Rick Perry.
His stock is falling after two shaky debate showings and the Texas
governor needed a strong showing tonight.
And of course
Mitt Romney is still the front-runner, which made him a punching bag
tonight as well. Just hours before this debate, Romney won the
endorsement of New Jersey Chris Christie, who said Romney's experience
in the private and public sectors make him the right candidate to lead
the Republican ticket.
Joining me now to talk about all
of this, CNN political contributor Republican consultant Alex
Castellanos, also CNN chief political analyst Gloria Borger, and CNN
contributor Dana Loesch. She's editor of BigJournalism.com and a radio
host for KFTK. That's 97.1 FM.
Gloria, let's start.
Making the top tier means you catch some harpoons, Herman Cain in the
crosshairs tonight defending 999. How did he do?
GLORIA BORGER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: OK.
He didn't get specific, other than saying that he really wanted to
get rid of the tax code. But it was clear that from a bunch of
Republicans on the stage, they believe that you would never be able to
keep the personal tax rate at just 9 percent and that also a national
sales tax is regressive and something they don't like.
And, Rick Santorum, as you just showed, made a very good point. How many
people in the state of New Hampshire are going to vote for a 9 percent
national sales tax? The Republican Party doesn't like to talk about
that, no matter how much Herman Cain does.
KING: And,
Alex, it is not just the sales tax that is tough to sell. Even
conservative analysis of this plan says the federal government would
lose 18 to 20 percent of its revenue from the current tax system. How
does Mr. Cain sell that? That would make the choices, the spending cut
choices even tougher, and we see Washington can't get that done as it
is.
ALEX CASTELLANOS, CNN POLITICAL CONTRIBUTOR: Unless
you accept Herman Cain's argument of course that a different tax code, a
more dynamic tax code would produce dynamic growth in the economy,
which is not a bad argument to make.
But one thing Cain I
think needed to learn tonight -- and he didn't -- is that these debates
are like parking your car on a hill. Either you keep moving forward or
you slide back. And tonight we may have learned Herman Cain's PIN code
for his bank card, but we sure didn't learn anything new about Herman
Cain.
Romney had a great debate tonight. Newt Gingrich...
(CROSSTALK)
KING: Hang on, Alex.
Dana, one thing we need...
(CROSSTALK)
CASTELLANOS: I was just going to say Romney had a...
(CROSSTALK)
KING: Hang on.
Dana, we needed to learn tonight whether Rick Perry was ready to
play, after two shaky debate performances, a lot of criticisms, how can
he handle himself on this debate stage.
The central issue here was the economy. Here's Rick Perry on his jobs plan.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GOV. RICK PERRY (R-TX), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Romneycare has
driven the cost of small-business insurance premiums up by 14 percent
over the national average in Massachusetts. So my question for you
would be: How would you respond to his criticism of your signature
legislative achievement?
MITT ROMNEY (R), PRESIDENTIAL
CANDIDATE: We have the lowest number of kids as a percentage uninsured
of any state in America. You have the highest. You...
(CROSSTALK)
ROMNEY: I'm still -- I'm still speaking.
(CROSSTALK)
PERRY: ... criticism.
ROMNEY: I'm still speaking. We -- we have -- we have less than 1
percent of our kids that are uninsured. You have a million kids
uninsured in Texas. A million kids. Under President Bush, the
percentage uninsured went down. Under your leadership, it's gone up.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
I
care about people. Now, our plan isn't perfect. Glenn Hubbard is a
fine fellow. Take a look at his quote. Some people say that. Just
because some people say something doesn't mean it's true.
The truth is, our plan is different, and the people of Massachusetts, if
they don't like it, they can get rid of it. Right now, they favor it 3
to 1.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KING: All right, we will get to the jobs plan bite in just a minute. We rolled them in reverse order.
But, Dana Loesch, right there, you see Perry and Romney going at
it. Did Governor Perry turn in a strong and forceful performance enough
tonight to quiet the doubters?
DANA LOESCH, CNN
CONTRIBUTOR: No, he did not. And I was waiting for this question
about Romneycare to be asked sooner. I thought it would appear earlier
in the debate. And then Perry finally asked him. And I thought finally
someone is going to ask about Mitt Romney about Romneycare and its
effect on business in Massachusetts.
But then he took a nap
and he fizzled out. I don't exactly know what happened. He didn't
follow up. He wasn't aggressive with it. And the question itself wasn't
even framed in an aggressive manner. He allowed Romney to skate by on a
number of just outright fallacies. One of them was that, well, we
didn't raise taxes in Massachusetts and we were able to implement this
health care system.
That's not entirely true. It was
because of the runoff costs of Romneycare that taxes did have to go up
after it was implemented. But that is something that Perry didn't
follow up on. And I was waiting for Perry to show everyone that he had
the fire in his belly and that he really wants to run for president and I
didn't see that from him tonight.
And now I'm beginning to wonder whether or not he is really serious about this.
KING: Well, that is an important criticism and critique, Alex.
So you have Dana raising questions there of whether he can go back
and forth with Mitt Romney on at least among conservatives what should
be a perceived Romney weakness. That is one critique Dana puts on the
table. Let's listen now when Governor Perry was asked to describe his
jobs plan.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GOV. RICK
PERRY (R-TX), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: A president, particularly with
the plan that I'm going to be laying out over the next three days -- and
I'm not going to lay it out all for you tonight -- Mitt has had six
years to be working on a plan. I have been in this for about eight
weeks.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KING: Is that good
enough, Alex? You know this debate will be focused on the economy.
Maybe he has more details to give us in the weeks ahead. But given his
slip in the polls, given the questions about whether he can handle
himself in a debate, is that good enough?
CASTELLANOS: No, it didn't seem like it here tonight.
John, I think obviously his campaign decided we are going to
simplify things for our candidate. We're going to give him one idea,
energy equals jobs, and we're going to let him be quiet the rest of the
time and get through the debate that way.
The last
debate, the excuse was made, well, he was standing up all debate long
and he got tired. So this should have been his debate. He was sitting
down. I think next time he will have to get a mattress because there
was no energy, no fire and it was way too simple.
BORGER:
Instead of seeming like an aggressor, Perry sort of almost seemed like
a bystander here. And he really couldn't afford to do that.
He just put out a brutal Web ad against Mitt Romney, which attacked
him on being a flip-flopper and on his Massachusetts health care. And
then tonight, instead of building on that aggressively, he just kind of
seemed to be a little more passive or a lot more passive than I thought
he needed to be.
KING: So, Dana, if that's the case...
(CROSSTALK)
CASTELLANOS: Gloria?
BORGER: Yes.
LOESCH: I wanted to raise a quick point.
(CROSSTALK)
BORGER: We are all on delay.
CASTELLANOS: I was just to say that, to Gloria's point, that that is exactly how -- sorry about that.
But to Gloria's point, that's how Rick Perry's won campaigns. He's
never won campaigns because he's the most articulate candidate or
because he's the brightest intellect. He always wins campaigns because
he sticks a fork in his opponent's eyeball. And he has got enough money
in the bank and there are enough super PACs out there.
And
as Gloria said, there is the negative super ad out there. I would
expect to see some very tough ads from Rick Perry pretty soon in the
Boston and Iowa media markets.
KING: Well, Dana, if
Herman Cain didn't defend his plan plainly enough and if Rick Perry was a
no-show, does that mean by default Mitt Romney won tonight or did
someone else steal this debate?
LOESCH: Well, not necessarily.
And one of the things I was going to say, too, was that, during
this debate, Perry's camp was sending out e-mails of things that he
should have been saying in this debate, for instance, on TARP. I
thought that was so odd. And they do that pretty consistently. That's
something that they should be talking about in the debate.
He had a great opportunity to distinguish himself from these other
candidates. You had Herman Cain and Mitt Romney both defending -- both
defending TARP, rather, just kind of shocking. But I don't think that
Romney wins by default. While he's a good debater and he has great
rhetorical skills, his answers, if you judge them by conservatism alone,
don't pass the smell test. They don't. But because of semantics,
because he's an artful debater...
CASTELLANOS: I disagree.
LOESCH: ... he comes out on top.
But Newt Gingrich I thought always does well, because Newt Gingrich
just chews everybody up and spits everybody out and is able to reframe
any debate that he's in. But I think Romney comes out on top and I
think Gingrich comes out on top. I think Cain did well. Perry did not.
KING: Newt has been strong in every debate. He just hasn't been able to move the poll numbers.
Gloria, let me close with this. CNN has a debate one week from
tonight. If Rick Perry is zero for the past three, I assume that one is
do or die.
BORGER: Yes, it is important. People need
to believe. Republicans need to believe that if they are going to
nominate somebody, this person can stand next to Barack Obama on the
stage and go at him and do well at it.
And if he cannot
do that in a debate with his Republican contenders, with the other
Republicans, he's going to have a hard time against Barack Obama.
That's what people are looking for. And he hasn't shown it yet.
KING: Gloria, Dana, Alex, appreciate your insights.
Right after this Republican debate, again, our CNN debate one week from tonight.
And let us know what you think. We're on Facebook, or follow me on Twitter @JohnKingCNN. I will be tweeting tonight.
Fresh off of Dana Loesch falsely claimingthat the gay soldier wasn't booed, she appears on CNN'sAnderson Cooper 360 to cheerlead for Chris Christie and Sarah Palin (who very likely won't run). The second Republican on the panel, former Bush 43 White House Press Secretary and CNN "Contributor" Ari Fleischer, said that "the Social Conservative base will have a large broken base to support from: Bachmann, Cain, Perry, Palin, Santorum." Fleischer also stated that a divided far-right base benefits Mitt Romney in the Primary." If Romney wins the GOP primary, I bet you that the anti-Romney right will do either of the following: hold their nose and vote GOP (provided that Romney appeases them with a VP pick) or more likely, vote for the Constitution and/or Libertarian Parties at the Presidential level. Finally, former Chief of Staff for Michele Bachmann Ron Carey stated this about Palin: "I like her personally, but she's too unelectable."
From the 09.27.2011 edition of CNN's Anderson Cooper 360:
COOPER: So how is this for a pep talk? President Obama's chief campaign adviser, David Axelrod, said today it will be a titanic struggle to get his boss reelected. A titanic struggle. Over to -- on the Republican side they're going through a titanic struggle of their own in a different way. They're looking for a candidate that can win next year. It's obviously not unusual.
But this is -- this time around Republicans are also struggling and struggling titanically to find a candidate they actually want to win. We've seen Michele Bachmann rise and fall, Rick Perry enter, and now stumble. Now it's New Jersey Governor Chris Christie maybe, or then again maybe not.
He's been on a fund-raising swing through Missouri. Fund-raising for others not himself. Not yet. Perhaps not ever. Tonight he's in Southern California, speaking at the Ronald Reagan Library. Today his brother Todd tells the "New Jersey Star Ledger", quote, "I'm sure that he's not going to run. If he's lying to me, I will be as stunned as I have ever been in my life."
But the day after former New Jersey Governor Tom Cain told the "National Review" that Governor Christie was thinking about it. FOX News says no but a source tells "Politico" Christie is in fact considering it.
Make of that what you will. As for Christie himself, he's always been very clear about it. The answer, he says, is no.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GOV. CHRIS CHRISTIE (R), NEW JERSEY: I don't feel like I'm ready to be president, I don't want to run for president. I don't have the fire in the belly to run for president. I don't feel ready in my heart to be president.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: Sounds pretty definitive. That's Chris Christie. And the "Star Ledger" is reporting that he once again said he is not running this afternoon to a group of influential fund-raisers at a steakhouse in Orange County, California.
There's also of course Sarah Palin. People have been waiting for months now for her to make some sort of decision. "The New York Times" today reporting the Palin announcement could come within days.
In just the last few days, her Facebook page has grown quiet. And she's been keeping a lower profile some believe getting ready for the moment.
Is she, will he, should they? Let's talk about it.
CNN contributor Ari Fleischer joins us, former press secretary for President George W. Bush, now on Twitter @AriFleischer. His latest column up on CNN. com, titled, "It's Too Late for Chris Christie to Run." Also, CNN contributor Dana Loesch, a Tea Party organizer in St. Louis and editor of BigJournalism.com. And Michele Bachmann's former chief of staff, Ron Carey.
So, Ari, let me start with you. You think it would be a mistake for Chris Christie to get in the race?
ARI FLEISCHER, FORMER WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY FOR PRESIDENT BUSH: I just think it's too late. Too much time has passed by. And it is so hard to build a successful presidential campaign. And the scrutiny he would be under, every little mistake he will make and every candidate makes mistakes, it's going to be a piling on.
Candidates need to have an on-ramp to get ready for the presidential especially in the instant era we live in with the Internet. I think it's too late for him.
COOPER: It's also interesting, Dana, because I mean a lot of people say, look, I'm not interested in running, and then they turn out running. But he's actually saying, I'm not ready to be president. That's pretty definitive.
What's -- what do you think is behind all this talk? Is it just wishful thinking on the part of some Republicans? DANA LOESCH, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Well, he's -- the word choice that Chris Christie uses is really interesting to me because he's always said, well, I'm not ready to be president yet. I'm not ready -- not yet. I think at some point it may be in the cards for Chris Christie, but not for 2012.
I don't look for him to do anything until 2016. I still think that he needs to fulfill his obligations to his constituents. And you know he said, I don't have the fire, I don't have the fire in my belly. And if there's one thing that we can count on from Chris Christie is not to mince words.
COOPER: That's true.
Ron Carey, in terms of Sarah Palin, we are still hearing, as we have been for, it feels like, forever now, that her decision is coming soon. Take a look, though, for our viewers, at this week's CNN/ORC poll. Palin is neck and neck with Herman Cain and Ron Paul at 7 percent. That's less than half the support she had a month ago.
RON CAREY, FORMER CHIEF OF STAFF FOR MICHELE BACHMANN: Well, I think Sarah Palin is a very smart person. She has a plus, I agree with, but yet she has such high negatives in -- to the general electorate. She has a really image problem and I think she's going to look at those numbers and say, as much as I think I can offer to the debate, I am not going to be electable this year.
And the last thing we need as Republicans is to put a candidate forward who's very provocative and going to really ruin the chance we have to win with a candidate that's too provocative.
I look at Nevada in 2010 as an example where Harry Reid was behind and basically going to be a loser in every poll. But then Republicans put a very provocative candidate up and Harry Reid was able to make Sharron Angle into the issue, not Harry Reid. And the Obama campaign has said they're going to do the exact same thing to the Republican nominee.
That's where we need to have somebody who is experienced, seasoned and who doesn't have open wounds that the Obama campaign can really take advantage of.
COOPER: Dana Loesch, if Michele Bachmann has -- she's declined in the polls lately. Do you think that make it more likely for Sarah Palin to maybe think, OK, I have an opening?
LOESCH: Possibly. I mean I look at how the president does in the polls as well. And I mean some of the polls that they have released they haven't even bothered naming a Republican candidate. So at this point, quite honestly, I think it could be anyone's game for a number of the candidates.
As to what Palin is going to do, she said that she's going to make an announcement by the end of September. It's getting close. So we'll have to sort of sit back and wait and see. I know that it's kind of difficult to measure how she stands against other candidates because she hasn't really actively gotten out there and campaigned in the way that we would see other candidates do.
I know Ari mentioned an on-ramp to the presidential campaign. We haven't really seen her kind of use that. So there's a lot of stuff in play here, there's a lot of moving pieces, but a matter of days.
COOPER: But, Ari, I mean, Sarah Palin, you know, can kind of create her own on-ramp. It doesn't seem like she's going to be -- whatever she decides to do, she's not needing necessarily to go the traditional route. I mean she's been on various bus tours, although she says she's just on vacation. But clearly, you know, she just happens to be vacationing in spots where there's lots of media.
FLEISCHER: Right, but the fact is the -- because she did not have an on-ramp when she was named as John McCain's vice presidential candidate, she couldn't handle the scrutiny that came with all of a sudden she could be the United States' vice president.
Candidates need that time. Nothing is like a presidential race. The amount of scrutiny, the amount of work, the pressure you're under, the way you have to prove that you're capable of sitting in that chair in the Oval Office. People watch it and they judge you, and they're harsh in their judgments. You've got to be ready for it. That's what doomed her last time.
If she goes this time, frankly, and I'm neutral in this Republican primary, but it would be a dream come true for Mitt Romney. Because what would happen is many of the social conservatives and the base at the Sarah Palin Wing base of the Republican Party, which is an important powerful base, will really split.
They're going to have Bachmann, Santorum, Perry, Palin to choose from. And it really creates a bigger gap for Mitt Romney to run through as more or less the centrist businessman, more traditional Republican candidate. So it would set him up nicely at a time when things are breaking in Mitt Romney's direction at least in the last week.
COOPER: Ron, what do you make of Rick Perry's, I mean, stumble in the last debate? Do you think -- I mean who benefits from that? Is it just a temporary stumble or how bad is he hurt?
CAREY: Well, I think, you know, one thing we can be certain of is Mitt Romney is going to get to the finals. The question is who is going to get there with him? And we build these candidates up to be such the second coming of Ronald Reagan. But then as soon as it starts getting closer to scrutiny, their numbers start to come down.
And I think Rick Perry is going through that. He still very well may become the chief competitor to Mitt Romney. But I think Ari makes a very good point.
I remember back in 2008 how demoralized the Republican base was here in Minnesota when John McCain became the candidate. Because 82 percent of the base thought he was too - the Republican base thought he was too liberal. But yet our process can -- let somebody thread the needle if they do just the right things, and that's where Mitt Romney does want a fragmented field of conservatives.
And if conservatives want to have a conservative candidate run against Barack Obama they need to unite, you know, in the next three months behind the best candidate and not fragment our vote and open a door for a Mitt Romney to become our nominee.
COOPER: Dana, Ari, Ron, thanks very much.
So this segment had 3 Republicans to 0 Democrats. If someone says that "CNN is a Liberal, Lamestream 'news' network," you better think again. Liberal Media my ass.
COOPER: She is running for president, which is very possibly the reason why she is not answering this question about her past statements. When asked about the statements by New Hampshire's concord monitor, Congresswoman Bachmann said, quote, "I'm not involved in light, frivolous matter, I'm involved in fringe or side issues. I'm involved in serious issues".
Yet the light frivolous matters were once serious enough to Ms. Bachmann to advocate changing her state's constitution. By the way, we invited Ms. Bachmann on tonight as we do on many nights yet again our request for interview was declined and accepted calls went un- answered.
Joining us however, Dana Loesch, tea party organizer and editor on bigjourmalism.com also Democratic Strategist Cornell Belcher, who served as a pollster in the 2008 Obama campaign.
So Cornel, obviously folks in the media doesn't like it when folks dodge their questions. Does it have any repercussions on the campaign trail?
CORNELL BELCHER, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: It actually does, Anderson. I'm a little shocked by this coming from Congresswoman Bachmann. It's one thing that voters dislike more than a candidate who doesn't agree with them on the issues is a candidate feel will flip-flop on the issue or change on the issue when its political key inconvenient to do so because they fundamentally then cannot trust the candidate.
And if you can't trust a candidate, I don't care what your position is on education, health care, you know gays and lesbians, if they can't trust you, they're not going give you the benefit of the doubt in any of the areas so its deadly.
And other real quick point about this is you know as a woman candidate, there are stereotypes that she has to deal with that male candidates don't. Minorities have to deal with it as well. This has also sort of become problematic if it looks like you're being dodging or you're ducking the issue or you're not certain about the issue. It also sort of feeds into a stereotype that is harmful to women candidates.
COOPER: Dana, from your perspective, why do you think she is ducking this question? Or do you think she is ducking it?
DANA LOESCH, CNN CONRIBUTOR: Well, I don't necessarily know. I don't necessarily agree that she is ducking the question. I think that she has answered it over and over again. And my assumption is that if she is now running, she is now running for the presidency, maybe she feels that this question isn't relevant at a time when we're dealing with 9.2 percent unemployment, and it's all about the economy right now.
I really think that it could be just very easy for her to just say look, on this issue, with the exception of "don't ask, don't tell," I feel the exact same way about this as President Obama. I feel the same way about this with most people of most faiths.
COOPER: That's not true, though. I mean you mentioned "don't ask, don't tell." but also President Obama is not defending the defense of marriage act, which she is. President Obama hasn't called this satanic or people living this disorder.
LOESCH: No, I'm talking about the issue of gay marriage and I mean the president has said well, my opinion is evolving. So I mean if we're going to talk about statements that Michele Bachmann has made and statements that she has made in 2004 and all of, that I think it's equally fair if we're going to do this, then we need to make sure we give the exact same due diligence to the president's own religious beliefs and the churches that she has gone to.
I mean if we really want to put all of this on the line, then let's put it all on the line. And let's give I mean this is the exact same thing that George Bush also had to deal with when he was running for president. He was asked by the media whether or not he thought that non-Christian were going to hell and I think a lot of the questions that circulate around the issue of religion.
And when it comes to social conservatives are ways for people to perhaps maybe show that these candidates are somehow not as valid as other candidates who don't have as strong as religious beliefs during the campaign.
COOPER: So Cornell, Dana I mean is essentially saying that this is in some ways kind of the media trying to show her to be a fringe candidate.
BELCHER: Well, I think her statement sort of speak for themselves. I think what is interesting here is that, you know, and thing is a fundamentally a good thing, is that when you look at sort of how the American public is shifting on their viewpoint about gay and lesbian marriage and gays and lesbians in the military, you know, you have to seek sort of candidates move in.
As Michele Bachmann becomes less of a fringe candidate, and quite frankly Dana, I you know I think she is your front-runner, she is trying to mainstream herself. And frankly, you're looking at sort of where the public is taking the American people on this. That the American people have moved on, particularly with that younger crowd of voters, you know the 12 percent of our new vote is out there and that the new vote was disproportionately younger voters. They don't even understand the gay and lesbian issue as a political issue. To win those voters, she has to move from where she has been.
COOPER: Dana, I want to branch off to talk about Rick Perry. Obviously, he entered the race this weekend. How do you see him from your perspective? How strong a candidate is he?
LOESCH: I think he is a very strong candidate. And I think he sort of fills a vacuum that has been created by -- you have mitt Romney, which grassroots voters absolutely reject Mitt Romney. He has a very moderate record. He has a very inconsistent record. And he has very - can say that his business-friendly all he wants to, but his record speaks otherwise as a governor - when he was governor of Massachusetts.
And then you have Michele Bachmann who is very, very conservative. She has a history of voting against a lot of big ticket, big government items during her time in the House of Representatives. And then you have Rick Perry who is right in the middle of both of these candidates.
So I think he has the potential to really appeal to grassroots while at the same time I think maybe kind of attracting independents and some more moderates. So I think he is a huge threat initially I think to Mitt Romney, and that's why we're also seeing them going right off the bat and trading barbs at each other.
COOPER: Right.
LOESCH: But at the same time, Perry may want to ignore Bachmann's candidacy as a way to push her to the outside and make it appear as though it's just him and Romney. It's a really interesting triangle.
COOPER: Cornell, as you - from the White House perspective, who do you think they would be most worried about or concerned about?
BELCHER: Look, in the end, I think from the White House - by the way, I don't think I could attack Mitt Romney and Michele Bachmann more effectively than Dana just did.
We're going to look at this and say look, you know what? Either of these candidates are so in the pocket with the tea party. And if you're looking at sort of how the tea party's ratings have dropped over the last couple of months, especially with independent voters, look, if you like what the tea party is doing in congress, wait until they have a governing partner in the White House, and they're going to have that either with either Perry or Michele Bachmann. And the way Mitt Romney is running, even with Mitt Romney.
COOPER: Dana Loesch, Cornell Belcher, I appreciate having you on.
Let us know what you think on facebook. Follow me on twitter @andersoncooper. I'll be tweeting tonight It's been a busy night so far.
Up next, President Obama just wrapped up tone hall meeting in Iowa. Part of a three-day swing through Iowa, Minnesota and Illinois. Republicans have launched an ad against the trip, calling it taxpayer- funded campaigning. Is it?
We'll play some of it so you can decide for yourself.
Why the hell does CNN let on Dana Loesch after all these times she lied to the people on (inter)national TV? And why does Loesch keep calling herself an "Independent Conservative who hates all political parties," when in fact she's just another Republican watercarrier. And she is a BIG Bachmann fan.
