Showing posts with label John King. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John King. Show all posts

11.30.2011

On CNN's John King, USA Dana Loesch discusses Immigration

Last night on CNN's John King, USA, Serial Misinformer and CNN "Contributor" Dana Loesch admitted that the Ronald Reagan would have no place in today's GOP by their tough standards.


From the 11.29.2011 edition of CNN's John King, USA:


Transcript::
KING: Tonight's number is a big one, at the moment a big dividing line in the Republican presidential race.

It is 11.2 million, 11.2, an estimated 11.2 million unauthorized immigrants, illegal immigrants, living in the United States according to the Pew Hispanic Center. That makes up almost 4 percent, 3.7 percent of the U.S. population.

Here's a look at where they live. The darker the state, the higher the population of illegal immigrants. And just for a little context, let's look at this. There are 72 percent of the foreign-born people living in the United States are here legally, 28 percent, the 11.2 million, 28 percent illegally in the country.

Whether many of these folks, those here illegally should be granted legal status is a big dividing line at the moment in the Republican presidential race. Newt Gingrich says yes. Michele Bachmann calls that misguided amnesty. Does it matter if someone who crossed illegally has been here 20 days or 20 years?

Not to Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, a national lightning rod in the immigration debate and, as of today, a supporter of Texas Governor Rick Perry.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE ARPAIO, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA, SHERIFF: What difference does it make? If you're here illegally, you're here illegally. If you don't like it, then have the Congress or someone in the states change the law. That's all I have to say about it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Your first reflex is to assume tough talk like that would carry the day in today's Republican Party. After all, John McCain's talk of a path to citizenship nearly derailed his bid for the GOP nomination four years ago and the party moved even more to the right in the Tea Party sweep of 2010.

But is there actually more of a shift back toward the middle on immigration among the leading Republican contenders?

On Capitol Hill tonight, Republican Congressman Brian Bilbray of California, and in Saint Louis, CNN contributor Dana Loesch.

Congressman Bilbray, let me start with that basic premise. If you have Newt Gingrich who has gone from nowhere to the top of the national polls saying, not citizenship but legal status for those who broke the law when they first entered country, but at any time since then have been law-abiding -- perhaps they have children, perhaps they have been paying taxes in America -- that they should be able to have a process to stay. Do you consider that amnesty?

REP. BRIAN BILBRAY (R), CALIFORNIA: Yes, I do.

And I do because I was born and raised on the border. There were two houses between my childhood home and the border. I'm one of the few members of Congress that have seen what happens along the border when people from Georgia or somewhere else that don't understand what is going on with the immigration issue, don't take the time to go to Latin America and talk to people who are considering here coming here illegally, they don't understand that talking about amnesty the reduce illegal immigration, it's about as logical as somebody saying, let's drill a hole in the bottom of a boat to let the water out.

You're going to cause a whole new wave of illegal immigration by sending the wrong signals around the world and not taking care of the real source of the problem. That's illegal employers. The employers are the one who create illegal workers.

KING: But, so, Dana Loesch, to you on this one. If Congressman Bilbray's position is the position of grassroots conservatives and that has not changed since 2008, how did Newt Gingrich go from zero to the top of the national pack when he's been very consistent in explaining his views on this issue and he's not backing down?

DANA LOESCH, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Well, I think, number one, because he's not Mitt Romney. Number two, he hasn't had any gaffes. Number three, immigration, while it is a huge wedge issue amongst many conservatives, I don't think ultimately -- and a lot of them may get upset over this, let's but look at Ronald Reagan.

Ronald Reagan was the amnesty president. Ronald Reagan not only supported and signed a bill into law which granted three million illegal immigrants amnesty in the United States, but he was enthusiastically supportive of it. Now, by our own standards of today, Ronald Reagan wouldn't have a shot.

But ultimately when you talk about John McCain and the comments that he made about a path to citizenship, there were many issues that were derailing John McCain, the least of which was immigration. McCain-Feingold was a huge issue.

But, ultimately, I think immigration isn't going to be as high up on the list as opposed to -- as compared to the some of the other financial concerns. And Gingrich, his position on what some would call amnesty, I disagree with what -- many of his positions and the whole -- under the amnesty umbrella or the immigration umbrella.

For instance, evaluating on a case-by-case basis 11 million individuals and going and having a hearing, I guess, and determining how long they have been here, what ties they have to the community, that's something to dispute. He hasn't gone as far as McCain has, though.

KING: So, Congressman Bilbray, you have Speaker Gingrich, who is at the top of the national polls now, at the top of the Iowa polls. He's running close second in New Hampshire -- I'm sorry -- a distant second in New Hampshire, he's ahead in South Carolina.

He has his position which you call amnesty. Governor Perry says absolutely no amnesty. I want you to listen to him here, and then I will fill in some of the blanks.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOV. RICK PERRY (R-TX), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Amnesty is not on the table, period. There will be no amnesty in the United States. We're a country of law. And the idea that we're going to tell people that somehow or another, you know, that's all forgiven is not going to happen.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: He says that's not going to happen. And he says he would deport -- anyone who was brought into custody any way, shape or form who is here illegally would get immediately deported. He has not though said you would go out and round up the rest of the law-abiding folks. I know they broke the law to get here, but those who are currently law-abiding.

And you have Mr. Romney, who many would say is the Republican front-runner, if it's not Mr. Gingrich, who now says he's not for amnesty. But if you go back a few years, he had the position that is essentially the same as Newt Gingrich's position now.

If those three candidates are among the leading candidates for your party's nomination, Congressman, is it inevitable that you will have a nominee who you disagree with?

BILBRAY: No, it's not.

And let's say one thing for the record. Ronald Reagan recognized that amnesty could only be used once, that if you use it more than once, your credibility of enforcing your law is lost. And the fact is, is that when Perry talks about anybody illegal should be sent out of the country, this is a governor who signed a bill that says if you're illegally in the state of Texas, you get college grants.

You actually get subsidized to go to school, to get a job that's illegal in the country. So Perry's kind of trying to cover himself on this one. And, look, Newt goes a lot of different ways. He's a personal friend. He's really been a great guy to work on.

But the fact is, you have just got to look at the fact that what you're talking about is not what you may want to do some time in the future, but sending a signal around the world that the candidate for president or, worse, the president himself, has announced that if you break the law, come into the country illegal, if you risk your life and be one of those -- or be one of those 600 who die along the border trying to come in the country illegally, we will reward you if you come in here.

And this is a concept that looks like it's compassion, but this is like opening a candy store in the middle of a freeway. While people, children are being killed on the road, you say I don't understand how this happened. Everyone who is given a job and any elected official who is announcing to the world that Washington and the federal government is going to reward illegal immigration are part and parcel to the problem of sending a clear and defined message.

And even Gingrich will say our problem is that we have sent mixed messages in the past and that has enticed people to come here and be here illegally.

Well, Newt, I don't care who you are. Quit sending the mixed message that we are going to somehow reward or accommodate you if you broke the law while there are those waiting patiently to play by the rules waiting to come into this country legally.

KING: Dana is going to be with us later in the program. We will continue part of this conversation then.

Congressman Bilbray, appreciate your coming in tonight. We will watch as this one plays out.

BILBRAY: Thank you. 


Later on the same program, Loesch was back on-- this time paired with Donna Brazile. She stated that Herman Cain may possibly drop out within the next week or so. She claimed this will hurt Mitt Romney's chances of winning the GOP nomination.

Transcript:

KING: Today's biggest headline, though is this drama: Herman Cain's decision to reassess the viability of his campaign even as he forcefully denies a Georgia woman's claim of a multiyear affair.

CNN contributors Donna Brazile and Dana Loesch, left and right, respectively, are with us.

And Dana, I want to go to you first. Herman Cain just in last hour has put out a new statement sent to his supporters around the country. He says this about the woman. Her name is Ginger White, a Georgia businesswoman. "I thought Ms. White was a friend in need of a supportive hand to better her life. Ms. White has made it apparent that she was abusing the friendship. Now I'm asking for your friendship. I'm also asking for your prayers and support. This is a trying time for my family, my campaign and for me. It is also a trying time for our country as we are all distracted from the truly important issues facing our nation."

Part of an appeal like this is to say to your campaign supporters, it's not true. Part of it is to say, "I need fund- raising. I need it fast to prove I can stay in the race." Can he?

DANA LOESCH, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: I don't know. I'm going to be surprised if he -- frankly, if he lasts the week, because he's dipping in the polls. He's losing support amongst the women especially, and I mean how many more of these can his campaign weather? And this last individual, you know, I didn't -- when Politico first broke the story I thought it may have been a hit job that came from the right.

And then continuing to see the stories come out. And then this particular woman, Ginger White, it's not as though this is a simple "he said, she said" game. She's got phone records. She not only has not only has phone records, but the reporter texted the number of -- texted Herman Cain's private number, and he called it back. And these phone records show that they were having conversations at something like 4:30 in the morning.

And I want to be generous with the benefit of the doubt, but at some point you kind of have to stop and pull back and think what's really going on here? Is it really as it seems?

KING: And as we -- as Dana makes the point, you're watching Herman Cain. He's giving a speech in Michigan tonight. He said he would go forward with this speech on foreign policy, but he also said he would make a decision in the next several days as to whether he can go forward.

One important barometer, Donna Brazile, is whether he can raise money. Another barometer is checking with your people in key states, to say are we bleeding? Are we losing support? I was in South Carolina yesterday, and I asked the Tea Party congressman, Tim Scott, who's very plugged into the grassroots where he lives in the Charleston area of the state. Is this hurting Herman Cain? Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KING: What is the buzz about Herman Cain in your state right now?

REP. TIM SCOTT (R), SOUTH CAROLINA: I think the challenges are real. We're seeing a lot of folks trying to second-guess themselves. Trying to find a new candidate. I think we may have the newest candidate to my right.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: We're 35 days from the voting in Iowa. Then a week after that comes New Hampshire, then right after that comes South Carolina. You know what it's like to be in the middle of a campaign when something like this happens.

DONNA BRAZILE, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: First of all, I'm not going to write Herman Cain's obituary. He's an unconventional candidate and let him write his own ending if it is the end of his campaign. This is -- this is going to be a November to remember for Herman Cain. Dana is absolutely right.

Herman Cain will probably have to, you know, find new money, new supporters and a new reason why he's going to continue to stay in the race.

He has not been the candidate of new ideas. He really hasn't caught fire in terms of the kind of organizational strength you need. So I doubt very seriously that he can stay in the race for a long time. But Mrs. Cain is probably the only person tonight who knows exactly how to dial that number right now and say it's time to pack it up and go.

KING: Gingrich benefit the most, in your view?

BRAZILE: Absolutely. He's on the rise, and there's no reason to suspect that Newt Gingrich will not benefit from Herman Cain if he decides to drop out.

KING: And Dana, does this hurt Mitt Romney the most under the theory that he needs two or three people to his right?

LOESCH: Absolutely. It elevates a non-Romney, and I think that Cain might lose some supporters to maybe Gingrich over this. We'll see.

KING: We'll see, indeed. And we'll watch. Herman Cain saying on the phone call this morning he will reassess this over the next several days, making a decision. Watch to see what they say about fundraising in the next 28 to 48 hours.

Dana Loesch, Dana Brazile, appreciate your coming in tonight.

Up next, tonight's "Truth" involves a great lunch and a very important lesson. 


On yesterday afternoon's The Dana Show, 2012 Republican Presidential Candidate and massive hypocrite Newt Gingrich visited her radio show. She and Gingrich both were  focused on "accusing Obama and Holder of not letting states enforce the law on illegal immigration."

From the 11.29.2011 edition of KFTK's The Dana Show:



10.12.2011

Loesch still continues to lie under the sun

 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.
Yeah, about that. A liberal St. Louis blogger tracked down this blog post from Loesch, dated February 5, 2008 10:06 AM:
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.
-

2.17.2011

Loesch on John King, USA: "Michelle Obama's plot to promote breastfeeding is a 'nanny state plot' to ruin families"

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.

KING: A new change in tax law offers a benefit to mothers who breast feed and has some conservatives complaining of a new nanny state. Here's Republican Congresswoman, a Tea Party favorite, Michele Bachmann on "The Laura Ingraham Show".

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MICHELE BACHMANN (R), MINNESOTA: I have given birth to five babies and I breast fed every single one of these babies, but to think that government has to go out and buy my breast pump for my babies (INAUDIBLE) you want to talk about the nanny state. I think you just got --

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Literally --

BACHMANN: -- new definition of the nanny.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: First lady Michele Obama told a group of reporters last week she wants to aggressively promote breastfeeding as a way to reduce childhood obesity. It's not the first time she's focused on this issue. Here she is talking a few months ago at a Congressional Black Caucus Foundation event.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MICHELLE OBAMA, FIRST LADY: And because it's important to prevent obesity early, we're also working to promote breast feeding, especially in the black community -- where 40 percent of our babies never get breast fed even in the first weeks of life. And we know that babies that are breastfed are less likely to be obese as children.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Smart advocacy or too much lecturing, interference from the White House.

Joining me from St. Louis, radio talk show host, Dana Loesch. She's the editor in chief of the conservative "Big Journalism" blog. And in New York, lactation consultant Leigh Anne O'Connor.

Dana, to you first -- is Michelle Obama trying to create a nanny state in your view?

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.

KING: Leigh Anne, what do you think? Should this -- should the first lady be encouraging this? She's not an elected official or government employee per se, but she's the president's wife. When she speaks, one assumes she is speaking on behalf of the president. At Dana noted, there are some other government actions involved as well.

LEIGH ANNE O'CONNOR, LACTACTION CONSULTANT: Well, we know that breast feeding is important, and one of the biggest barriers to continued breast feeding is working. So if we support these women by giving them -- by letting their flexible spending dollars be used for this equipment, we're not paying for breast pumps. What we're doing is giving women -- letting women use their pre-tax dollars to have this equipment cared for and then they can continue breast feeding. And that's what we want.

It would -- the difference is, how much does it cost for these tax breaks versus the $13 billion that it would cost us in health care because women aren't breast feeding?

KING: Let me look -- let me actually lay out for anyone watching you who hasn't heard the change in the tax code. Let's show what it does. This is an IRS announcement from one week ago, "Recognizes breastfeeding supplies as medical expenses worthy of reimbursement through those flexible spending accounts." Some of you probably get through your employer, health saving accounts, you set money aside tax-free and you can use it on health care expenses. It recognizes breastfeeding supplies as a worthy medical expense. It also authorizes breastfeeding supplies to be itemized as a deduction when you deduct your medical expense if you reach the threshold on your taxes.

I want you to listen to Congresswoman Bachmann. She was on "Good Morning America" this morning talking about her take on the change in the tax code.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MICHELE BACHMANN (R), MINNESOTA: My quarrel isn't necessarily with the whole topic. I've given birth to five children myself. I strongly believe in breastfeeding. But I think what this points up again is that the tax code is used by government as social engineering.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: If you follow that argument, Dana, am I fair to say -- if you take away deductions for breastfeeding devices, we should also take them away deductions for home ownership? Because that's, you know, if that's social engineering, it's social engineering, too, isn't it?

LOESCH: Well, you are talking to someone who thinks -- who subscribes to the Jimmy McMillan theory that things are already too high as is. I won't go in the full effect of that. But you get where I'm going with it.

I just -- I look at deduction -- again, breastfeeding is fantastic but the government, it's already kind of making it a little bit difficult for moms anyway with all of the excessive taxation. And we have 19 new taxes with the health care law. These excise taxes -- I think this is going to cost businesses in excess of over $20 billion a year, which is going to skyrocket, not only the cost of these breast pumps which I used when I was a nursing mother -- but also a lot of other related accessories to motherhood.

So, I just -- I think it's kind of a weird way that the administration is going about it. And again, with the businesses -- if businesses want to attract better employees and more employees by offering perks like breastfeeding rooms and pumps and all of that stuff, then if they want to make a smart business move, they should be allowed to make that decision for themselves without necessarily the government kind of exerting influence over that.

KING: How about that argument, Leigh Anne, that this should be the power of the marketplace, that a competitive business wants to hire you away from where you work right now and say, hey, come here, look what I will do to you to make your life better? O'CONNOR: Well, I think it's important that companies do get a tax break for offering breastfeeding rooms and breastfeeding supplies and time off for mothers to express their milk. It makes a huge difference. There's a huge return on investment on creating these opportunities for women and for their families, and you're going to retain employees.

It's -- and businesses don't know this until maybe somebody says, hey, this is -- this is important. This is going to make a difference locally and globally.

KING: Dana Loesch, Leigh Anne O'Connor, appreciate your time on this important debate tonight. We'll see you both at another time.

When we come back --

O'CONNOR: Thank you.

KING: Thank you both.


UPDATE: From Media Matters on her 1st CNN appearance as an official CNN contributor.

Recently-minted CNN contributor Dana Loesch claimed that breast pumps will be subject to the "massive excise tax" on medical devices under the health care reform law. In fact, the law exempts medical devices that are "generally purchased by the general public at retail for individual use."



From the 02.17.2011 edition of CNN's John King, USA.



=

Hypocrisy Alert: CNN's Loesch complains about CNN

Newly hired CNN contributor and partisan truthless hack Dana Loesch complains about CNN, while on their payroll. Media Matters for America has dug into the archives of Loesch's CNN bashing.

Loesch
CNN hired Dana Loesch as a political contributor last week; however, MediaMatters dug up some blog posts dating back several years in which Loesch calls CNNthe biggest bunch of idiot blockheads,” (June 6, 2009) “state-run media,” (March 2010) and said that the network was the home to “tinfoil hats” (Sept. 2008).

The new CNN hire also wrote that Anderson Cooper got his job “by benefit of silver spoons” (Feb. 2008).

Loesch wrote all of this on her blog “The Dana Show: The Conservative Alternative.”

Media Matters for America has also ripped her anti-CNN attacks while on its payroll:


Last week, CNN hired Dana Loesch as a political contributor. Loesch previously called CNN "the biggest bunch of idiot blockheads," "state-run media," home to "tinfoil hats," and accused the network of having a "blatant disregard for objectivity." Loesch also wrote that Anderson Cooper got his job "by benefit of silver spoons."
Loesch: CNN Is "State-Run Media." From a March 9, 2010, post, headlined, "CNN Joins Coffee Party on the Astroturf":
Loesch: "CNN Are The Biggest Bunch Of Idiot Blockheads." On June 16, 2009, Loesch linked to a post on Anderson Cooper's website and wrote: "CNN are the biggest bunch of idiot blockheads. They've been using Tweets from Iranian protesters and using their names along with the updates, essentially painting a target on the backs of these people. Unbelievable. No wonder media is begging for a bailout." [The Dana Show blog, 6/16/09]
I hope that conservatives continue to wake up in these numbers. We went from 1,500 participants on February 27th to around 8,000+ on Wednesday. Several people have asked me if we will take action - and by action, in case DHS is watching, means legislative action. As I've said before, I don't believe that you can make the case to change a law by breaking it. Before people can take action they have to be awake - and I feel that this first wave of protests have done just that, they've woken up a mass of people that have been verbally browbeaten into thinking that they are a small minority or that their political ideals are dead. Wednesday proved that conservatism is emphatically not dead and no matter how hard the mainstream media tries to stuff this story at the end of their newscasts, in the backs of the metro sections, or ignore it completely, they can't mis-report it out of existence. Our progress isn't measured by whether or not CNN loves us but you could say that our progress can be measure by how badly certain outlets want to shut us up. [The Dana Show blog, 4/17/09]

Is this lady out of her mind, and she is worse than either Malkin or Coulter at this point of the game. This nimrod will NOT let go of "union thugs beating up Gladney" nonsense, even when she's proven wrong. She's scheduled to be on John King, USA tonight.

CNN's Loesch Responds To Media Matters' "Premenstrual Freakouts" Over Her Anti-CNN Remarks
20 minutes ago

From the February 17 edition of KFTK's The Dana Show:
Tweets by @JGibsonDem Tweets by @JPCTumblr