She also said that "I'm not afraid of going into the lion's den [CNN] and debate Spitzer." Well, Dana, it is CNN that routinely allows you to spew lies unchecked. She accuses the media of "being Liberal." Give me a break!
She also accused the Democrats/Progressives/Liberals of being racist and sexist. Wrong again, Dana! It's your beloved Republicans that are the racists and sexists. She said that she left the Democratic Party over issues like these. She has accused the "Liberals of being violent." No, people like herare the ones inciting violence.
This morning, on the 9AM CDT hour of CNN Newsroom, Dana Loesch, St. Louis's queen oflies, was defending the Birther Movement and Donald Trump. James Carville, the Democratic counterpart to Loesch, thinks that "Trump may be very entertaining, but he's a liar." She was a flip-flopper on this issue, in the past denouncing them as "nutburgers," but recently, she has done a 180... by being a Birther. Dana also blamed the Democrats for starting the Birther nonsense by saying that "Phillip Berg was the originator of the Birther movement." False, it was ultra-righties like Alan Keyes,Lou Dobbs (who thankfully is no longer on CNN, and is now at FBN, aka RNCTV2), Jerome Corsi,Pamela Geller, and Orly Taitz (who was booted off of MSNBC's The Last Word last night) that originally perpetuated the movement, NOT Dems.
After the surprise decision to release his official birth certificate, President Obama stepped up to the podium to explain. He poked fun at the years-long birther controversy, and then he started poking fun at the press for how it covered the issues. At some points, he even got a little angry. But his mood was lighter later at a fundraiser in New York City.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: My name is Barack Obama.
(APPLAUSE)
OBAMA: I was born in Hawaii.
(APPLAUSE)
OBAMA: The 50th state of the United States.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COSTELLO: President Obama's decision to finally release that piece of paper surprised critics and allies alike. On both sides, reaction was swift. Joining us now, CNN political contributors Dana Loesch and James Carville. Welcome to you both.
DANA LOESCH, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Good morning.
COSTELLO: Both of you, Dana, James -- I interviewed the chairman of the Republican party a short time ago. and he talked about the birther issue and how he felt that its time to move on. I just want you to listen to a bit of what he said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REINCE PRIEBUS, CHAIRMAN, REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE: The primary voters will decide in Iowa, in New Hampshire, in South Carolina and the rest of the country as to who they want to represent them on the Republican ticket. It's not my job to play police officer with the candidates. It's up to the voters to play police officer --
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COSTELLO: So Dana, what I was asking Mr. Priebus, and that's why he answered in the way he did -- I asked him why he didn't call on Donald Trump to stop talking about the birther issue and move on if he really wants, like every politician, to move on from this issue. Should he do that?
LOESCH: I don't know that Preibus could actually stop Trump from talking about whatever Trump wants to talk about. I mean, it's Donald Trump. And in the press conference that he gave immediately following the president's press conference, was in my estimation, his victory lap. So, I don't think you could have the RNC chairman call Donald Trump and say can you maybe not talk about this anymore? Can we move on to something else? I don't think it would be successful.
COSTELLO: James, what do you think?
JAMES CARVILLE, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Well, look, not this guy, but think of the speaker of the House who actually knows better saying, well, as far as I know, he was born in America. Then asked him, would you tout all these birther bills by these idiot congressmen doing this stuff, and he said, well, that's not my job to tell congressmen -- Well, dude (ph), that's exactly your job, Mr. Speaker, is to whip your caucus in line. That's why you have a leader and whip.
They're all like that trying to fool around with this idiot. And this is the most idiotic issue I've seen in American politics. And it was just a crock of nonsense. I don't think the president should have done what he did yesterday. Just let these people go make fools of themselves.
COSTELLO: I get you. We're going to talk about that in just a minute. But Dana, I want to go back to you. I mean, will we move on from this issue? Will everybody shut up about it?
LOESCH: You know, yesterday whether the long-form birth certificate was released, we suddenly saw the high unemployment solved, the high gas prices solved and the quagmire in Libya was immediately resolved as well. Except not. So, hopefully!
COSTELLO: Hopefully. And James, why do you think he shouldn't have produced his original birth certificate?
CARVILLE: Why should he? There's no doubt in any sane person's mind that that's what Hawaii requires that. They released that and people could see it. And no one -- it's nonsense. Let these people make fools of themselves. I think it's good for the country to see how many idiots there are out there. We need to get -
(LAUGHTER)
CARVILLE: It's a good way to conduct a idiot census in America to see who all the birthers are. It was a good thing. and working politically for him because all of the Republicans that knew anything were trying to run away from this thing, and they couldn't get rid of it.
I find Trump to be very entertaining. I'm kind of for him. I was for Palin, but she didn't want to talk enough. And then Newt stopped talking, and then Bachmann doesn't talk enough. I want more Trump. We ought to have him on TV every day.
COSTELLO: Well, Dana, it is an interesting question. Because some say all this talk about birther and now producing -- President Obama should produce his college records that this kind of talk is hurting the Republican brand. Is it?
LOESCH: Well, I have to say, too, Carol, that I think the biggest loser in all of this was Philip Berg. Now, he was the Democrat and aide to Hillary Clinton that started it. He's the grandfather of the birther movement. So, I don't know so much it's a strictly Republican brand because it began --
COSTELLO: But frankly, nobody remembers that. Nobody remembers that. All we think about now is Donald Trump and the Republican party.
LOESCH: There's a lot of people doing a lot of hard work making sure people don't remember that. I will say that when you -- some of the stuff I've seen that has been proposed -- I think the birther bill in Arizona where they added you have it to have your baptismal certificate and everything. I've been baptized. I don't have a baptismal certificate. I wouldn't be able to produce one if one was called on me. So, sometimes I think it goes a little bit too far.
Now, I think what this does is it highlights there's a double standard between how investigated Bush was and previous presidents have been and how people didn't go after the president with his records. I think if anything, I think it shows the double standard.
COSETLLO: James, do you agree with that? I know we did --
CARVILLE: Aww, no. By the way, you know, if a Jew runs - if a Jewish person runs in Arizona, do you have to produce a baptismal certificate? I mean, all this stuff - again, it is a very good way for us to take a census of all of the idiots in the United States and let them surface. I think it should have gone on. And by the way, it was Hillary's campaign that found the announcements in the Hawaii paper, so that pretty would debunk all of that foolishness.
Again, Trump -- he's the Republican frontrunner, and he's perfect for them. He's overweight, he's self-indulgent, and he's a simpleton. And he embodies the principles of the modern Republican party --
COSTELLO: OK, Dana, a short last word to that. A short last word.
LOESCH: You can be a simpleton and be as successful in business as Trump has been and be able to fall down and pick yourself as many times as Trump has. I mean, you can disagree with him all you want. I disagree with him on the birth certificate issue, but I won't call him an idiot.
COSTELLO: I got to wrap it up --
CARVILLE: He's also been bankrupt four times. He's just like the Republicans. LOESCH: Not personally. Only his businesses.
COSTELLO: We'll have to continue this offline, as they say. James Carville, Dana Loesch, thank you so for the conversation this morning.
Why does CNN CONTINUE to allow misinformed loons like Loesch, who makes Phyllis Schlafly (a well-known polemicist and kook) look like a sane lady in comparison and is a GIANT embarrassment to St. Louis, On Twitter, Matchbox 20 frontman and solo singer Rob Thomas said: "dear dana loesch, please stop. you are hurting america. this is not a game."
Over the past couple of days, serialliarDana Loesch has promoted flagrant falsehoods about UMSL and UMKC, saying that she claims to have "tapes of UMSL/UMKC teachers encouraging Communism and 'union violence'." Of course, the tapes were edited and distorted, typical of Breitfart cronies. The Columbia Tribune posted this article from the pro-Breitbart/Loesch viewpoint.
Videos showing two University of Missouri instructors apparently advocating for union violence don’t represent the UM System as a whole, a spokeswoman said.
The videos — posted online yesterday on Andrew Breitbart’s Big Government website — show snippets of Judy Ancel, director of UM-Kansas City’s Institute for Labor Studies, team-teaching with Don Giljum of Operating Engineers 148. The Labor in Society & Politics class is a joint effort between UMKC and UM-St. Louis.
The videos are clearly edited — something Breitbart is known for. His news aggregate website is the one that put out an edited video showing Shirley Sherrod, an official at the U.S. Department of Agriculture, claiming she discriminated against a white farmer. The video later was shown to have been edited out of context, and Sherrod has filed a lawsuit against him.
Unlike the GOP spin from Janese Silvey, here's amore reasonable article from Fired Up Missouri:
I'm blown away by this story in the Columbia Tribune by Janese Silvey.
The videos -- complete with the now-familiar quick cuts and odd edits -- are taken from an unknown numbers of classes and feature named and unnamed persons from what we're told are classes about the labor movement led by instructors UMKC and UMSL.
Or should congratulations go to Breitbart for finding someone to republish his dreck in a town that prides itself for top-flight journalism?
Here's one of the videos that Breitbart has obviously distorted.
St. Louis Activist Hub's Adam Shriver slams Loesch and her butt buddies for propagating lies.
@AndrewBreitbart So when are you going to release the full, unedited tapes of the lectures?
cathysherwinCathy Sherwin Yes, Breitbart's deceptive editing hit #MO and the tea party would like to eliminate labor studies. All newsworthy I'm sure. @benpolitico
@TookieW get off your high horse, already.My grandparents,never been in a union,Grandpa was in mgmt.He's worried about GOP ending Medicare.
Don't get so far on a rant you disrespect the many union members working for Ameren around the clock after #tornado. @TookieW @PeterKinder
Naturally, Dana The Devil sent her attack dogs to defend Breitbart and the distorted tapes. Of course, their tweets were just falsehoods and personal attacks.
The fact is! That @stlactivisthub is arrogant enuff to think that @DLoesch views his lil' Boehlert page when HE responds to her show..HE... @stlactivisthub trolled @DLoesch's mommy blog, HE (Adam Shriver) injected himself into Wash U Student paper about Dana...HE..has been trying to bring down @DLoesch her husband,any little thing he @stlactivisthub can get.ALL THIS & every single time falls FLAT on his face!
Ya see @stlactivisthub PRIDES himself in RT's from Senior Fellow @ericboehlert and response from"Breitbart Crew" this is his activist oxygen
I think @stlactivisthub oughtta stick to contemplating the pain fish, may or may not feel... One thing at a time Adam.
@stlactivisthub @DLoesch @jjmnolte YET Adam blogs Aw shucks Think I stood my ground in "mob" later says Tea folks nice people? Which is it?
@stlactivisthub @DLoesch jjmnolte If Dana is afraid 2 reference you Adam,why did SHE confront u last yr rally?Made u look like a smacked ass.
@stlactivisthub @DLoesch Oh and by the way stop stealing Michelle's "punk rawk" ref, come up with your own stuff Adam. ;)
@stlactivisthub @DLoesch @jjmnolte Adam, are that fucking arrogant to think that Dana is following you? Really? You're a parrot of lib talk.
@stlactivisthub @dloesch @flynn1776 99.9% of the time when u see the words.."she or her" on his Twitter page? It's about Dana. A Diva thing.
She is indeed doing libelous activity that warrants being suspended from her job and/or liable to be sued.
Guess who was back on CNN yesterday morning? If you've guessed the Antichrist of St. Louis, Dana Loesch, you're right. She was her doing her usual interrupt the others and spew out blatant falsehoods unchecked routine.
COSTELLO: It is time for "Political Buzz." A lightning-fast conversation hitting the hot political topics of the day. Each of our brilliant political observers get 20 seconds to answer three probing questions. Dana Loesch is a Tea Party supporter and conservative. Cornell Belcher leans left, and comedian Pete Dominick is back to lend his own unique perspective.
Welcome! ok. On to the first question. The United States has handed over the reins to NATO in Libya. Senator McCain says it's time the U.S. retakes control. Does America need to flex its muscle in Tripoli? Dana?
DANA LOESCH, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Well, NATO is the United States. So, essentially what we have done here, Carol, is just transfer control from one hand to the other. And I don't really think -- I've never thought that she would have been involved in Libya because Libya and what is happening there is a civil interest and that has no immediate threat to the sovereignty or safety of the United States.
COSTELLO: Cornell?
CORNELL BELCHER, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: I'm going to -- I'm going to agree here. I think it's interesting. We already have two wars that we haven't paid for, and the interesting thing is Afghanistan has become as unpopular as Iraq. So, now we want to double down on that and get involved in Libya? I don't think so. I don't think the American public has the stomach for it.
COSTELLO: Pete?
PETE DOMINICK, COMEDIAN: Well I think Cornell and Dana are both pretty right on. What is our record of success in our recent military intervention? I'm talking about the last 50 years. With all due respect to Senator McCain and his service to our country and in the Senate, how many times does he have to be wrong on foreign policy before we go to other people? Going to Senator McCain on foreign policy is like going to Alan Greenspan on economics. You've been wrong a lot -
(BUZZER SOUNDS)
DOMINICK: We could listen to others.
COSTELLO: Thanks to all. Second question. Another Wikileaks dump. This time on Guantanamo. Do they strengthen the administration's decision to keep it open? Cornell?
BELCHER: Well, it's a real gray area here. I mean, the truth of the matter is when you look at what's happening, there's some dangerous people there. I think what bothers a lot of Americans, and not just, you know, those progressive Americans, but a lot of red- blooded Americans, is this idea that there's no due process. Can we keep this open and still ensure due process?
The other big thing about this is Wikileaks are endangering Americans with this continual leaking. This sort of stuff should not be out in the open, what they're leaking.
(BUZZER SOUNDS)
COSTELLO: Dana?
LOESCH: Well, this is so weird this morning. I agree but kind of disagree with Cornell in that I think it does become a gray area. But at the same time, there's terrorists, they're suspected of terrorist activity if not outright caught in the act. So, there is no due process because they're not American citizens.
That being said, if you look at the number of detainees who, when they were released, like we had one, Ali Al Sayed, who was released to -
(BUZZER SOUNDS)
LOESCH: -- Saudi Arabia and re-education camp, he joined al Qaeda.
COSTELLO: Right. Went on to do some bad stuff. Pete?
DOMINICK: I couldn't disagree more with both these guys, my friends here. The level of criminality at this camp, we now know, is even worse than even its harshest critics were predicting. This is terrible. What Wikileaks is really exposing what the government is doing. These are government documents. I would beg all of our viewers to go read "The New York Times" or "The Guardian's" article so you can find what your taxpayer money is supporting in Guantanamo Bay -
(BUZZER SOUNDS)
DOMINICK: -- which all the --
COSTELLO: OK, third question. A group of Christian leaders lobbying Congress by asking lawmakers what would Jesus cut? You know, as far as the budget goes, what would Jesus cut? Effective or crass? Dana?
LOESCH: Oh, I think it's incredibly crass. And I have to question these religious leaders. I've always said that big government is the moral failing of man. Because when you have good government that takes away the desire for voluntary charity, you are changing something about humanity. You're changing their desire to do it themselves. And as Christian leaders, they should be encouraging people to get involved and volunteer in charity instead of adhere to the government reappropriation of it. COSTELLO: Cornell?
BELCHER: I don't even know who Dana is anymore.
(LAUGHTER)
BELCHER: I agree. Although -- I'll go the middle role. I know it's not effective because the bottom line is these leaders are going to do what they think is right. And obviously, oftentimes, the politician who is wearing his religiosity on the sleeve is often the one who is enforcing the draconian cuts -
(BUZZER SOUNDS)
COSTELLO: Oh, out of time. I'm sorry! Pete?
DOMINICK: Well, listen, nearly every member of Congress claims to be a Christian. If you think a budget for your home or for the government is considered a moral document, I don't think Jesus would have made the cuts that Congress is making. And it's a check on your conscience.
I think it's sad when an agnostic comedian is ten times more Christian than so many people in Congress act like they are. That's me, by the way.
COSTELLO: "Political Buzz." Fun as always. Dana, Cornell, Pete, thank you so much. We'll see you again on Friday.
Last Friday at the Indianapolis Tea Party, which had Dana Loesch as the keynote speaker, had only between 250-330 people at the event, down from 2,000+ over a year ago. Why? Because even the Tea Partiers over there knew that Loesch was an RNC hack pretending to be a Teahadist. She was repeating the same old bogus lying crap, spouting out about those "trust fund Socialists." Dana was indeed born with a silver spoon in her mouth, and she likes to claim that she grew up poor (when in fact people in this country grew up even poorer than her). She IS indeed a prostitute for the Republican Party, when she claims that she hates political parties.
Image: FuzzyConservative.com
For Christ's sake, she is an embarrassment to ANY intelligent person.
Donald Trump appeared on The Dana Show today. Trump, of course, was on his bash Obama at all costs mode. Trump said that "I would NOT take votes from Obama, but from the GOP nominee." He is also a known birther. He also made a surprise visit to the2011 CPAC meeting.
From the 04.13.2011 edition of KFTK's The Dana Show:
Last night on Anderson Cooper 360, Dana Loesch went back on the show, along with her counterparts (who are much more informed) David Gergen and Cornell Belcher. Why the hell does CNN (and Anderson Cooper) allow her on to spew numerous falsehoods that usually go unchecked. She went to her usual: acting rude and childish when others are speaking, tell numerous lies, and whatnot.
CNN is already trying to look like Fox-lite on a regular basis and their hire of Dana Loesch just looks like one more step in that direction. I thought their hire of Erick Erickson was bad until they decided that we somehow need to hear on a regular basis the political insights of that know-nothing, astroturf “tea party” leader, Andrew Breitbart buddy and embarrassment to the city of St. Louis, Dana Loesch.
Anderson Cooper had her on as a member of a panel to discuss what sort of fights we might be in for with raising the debt ceiling and the recent agreement made to finally get a budget voted on for last year, and par for the course, she had nothing to add to the discussion other than far-right-wing talking points and apparently a complete lack of understanding about the services Planned Parenthood provides to low-income women who have nowhere else to turn in their areas for health care, and just how dangerous it is playing chicken with defaulting on our debt.
From the 04.11.2011 edition of CNN's Anderson Cooper 360:
Transcript:
COOPER: Well, we're talking in depth tonight about the next big showdown between the White House and Republicans in Congress. President Obama expected to lay out his budget-cutting approach on Wednesday this week.
There's a Republican outline already on the table with major spending cuts and changes eliminating Medicare, replacing it with government vouchers to buy private health insurance. But before any of that is decided there is the debt ceiling vote.
Back now with David Gergen, and joining us CNN contributor and Democratic pollster who worked for the Obama campaign and will again in 2012 Cornell Belcher. Also Dana Loesch, CNN contributor, Tea Party organizer, and editor of BigJournalism.com.
So, Cornell, President Obama had hoped for what they call a clean bill on this debt ceiling, a bill without riders that the Republicans would put in. He's not going to get that.
CORNELL BELCHER, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: No, I don't think he's going to get it. And it's going to be another battle. But again, I think the more sort of the way the Tea Partiers are really dominating the conversation on the Republican side, and sort of their extreme agenda where we see, you know, everything from wanting to do away with the EPA to wanting to do away with health care for women under Planned Parenthood, I mean, all these riders and all these sort of extreme sort of social issues, you know, mingling with the fiscal issues hasn't been a winner. I think the president in this battle actually came out looking like even more like the adult in the room willing to compromise. And I think he will again on the issues of the debt ceiling.
COOPER: But, Dana, you obviously see it very differently. Why have these riders? Why not have a clean up and down vote?
DANA LOESCH, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Well, I wish we, I wish we could just all get on the same page and not have and not increase the debt ceiling. But I think when we have to -- when we have to discuss about reducing spending, we have to start cutting somewhere, and I don't know why Planned Parenthood is always used as an excuse because that's not the only outlet that women have, low-income women, to go and get health services.
There's the women's health program that's already in Medicare that's subsidized by the government. So we already have that kind of taken care of. But I do think that it's going to be a huge battle and I don't think that it comes to social issues. I think, bottom line, and this is what the grassroots movement has only ever wanted, is to see some fiscal restraint. I hope that we can get both parties agreeing on this.
COOPER: Do you oppose raising the debt ceiling?
LOESCH: Completely. Absolutely, I do. I look at precedent.
(CROSSTALK)
COOPER: Even though economists say, look -- economists would say look, it would be catastrophic, apocalyptic, you say what, that's fear mongering?
LOESCH: Actually, I do. Some economists have said that that -- that it would be apocalyptic. But others have not so much. I look at precedents. We have raised the debt ceiling 74 times since 1962. And in 10 of those incidents occurred in just the last decade.
Now, every single one of those times that we have raised the debt ceiling, we have never taken the initiative to actually reduce our spending. It just is an excuse to keep spending more and more and to continue to add to our deficit. And I don't see how doing it again would be any different.
I'm all -- I'm completely opposed to it, because I think there's a number of ways that we can -- a number of methods that we can employ in order to bail ourselves out and take financial accountability besides that.
COOPER: David? BELCHER: Really quickly -- but really quickly, here's the problem. And I'm sorry, David. Really quickly, here's the problem. OK. You've got to deal with $100 billion in either cuts or tax increases if you -- if you don't raise the debt ceiling. This is something -- I mean, this is real here.
So OK, so you're going to cut -- you're going to make $100 billion in cuts in you don't raise the debt ceiling? That's nonsensical.
COOPER: David?
LOESCH: Well no, I...
COOPER: Well, let David...
GERGEN: If I could just say a word. I just want to come out on the debt ceiling itself. The debt ceiling is what -- under the debt ceiling you borrow money. They have to raise the debt ceiling in order to borrow money. If we run deficits, the government will have to borrow more money. And therefore, you have to raise the debt ceiling.
Under Paul Ryan's plan, this bold proposal -- I disagree with it, but I concede that it's very bold -- under the Paul Ryan plan, the government does not balance its books. It continues to have to borrow money until 2040. Of course we have to raise the debt ceiling.
The question is what Republicans can extract as a deal to raise the debt ceiling. Everybody agrees you've got to raise it. The question is sort of under what conditions? What are the conditions under which we go forward?
LOESCH: Right.
GERGEN: Do we, in fact, try to really have dramatic cuts in spending or increases in taxes? Or do we just go on willy-nilly and let the debt pile up. which would be extremely dangerous for the country?
BELCHER: But David, the Tea Party...
LOESCH: I want to make a quick point about Paul Ryan's plan as well.
BELCHER: The Tea Party argue that...
COOPER: I'm sorry. Cornell, then Dana...
BELCHER: Real quick and I'll give you-- I'll give you...
LOESCH: I want to make a quick point about that. I want to point out, please. I want to...
COOPER: You're both talking. No one's going to listen. Dana go and then Cornell. LOESCH: I want to make a quick point about Paul Ryan's plan. I'm actually not in 100 percent agreement of it for some of the reasons that David mentioned. Plus, I think it's a huge gamble, because in order to have a balanced budget in 26 years, all of the variables have to stay exactly the same. The economic variables, everything. And I think it's really, really risky.
But I look at it like this. I think Tim Pawlenty had a really good idea when he was talking about using April and June revenues to pay off America's creditors and then, in the meantime, slash spending.
The only way that we're going to be able to not raise the debt ceiling is to make massive, massive cuts in spending. I completely agree with that. And we're not going to be able to raise revenue by having public sector capital grabs. It has to come from the private sector. That has to come from making permanent tax cuts.
COOPER: Cornell?
LOESCH: That's how we have to do it.
COOPER: Cornell?
BELCHER: Well, I just don't think it's practical. If you're talking about sort of the level of cuts that you have to make in order for us not to raise the debt ceiling, you're talking about destroying our economic future. You're talking about taking the economy and putting it into a nose dive again. You cannot cut over $100 billion away from the federal deficit all at one time and not have economic catastrophe. You just can't.
COOPER: David, Cornell was saying he feels that President Obama kind of came out a victor from last week by being above the fray. Do you agree with that?
GERGEN: No. I don't think anybody won that, Anderson. The public CNN poll does approve of what was done. They give a little more credit to the Democrats and to President Obama than they give to president -- than they give to Republicans.
But if you look at President Obama's approval rating, it actually went down slightly in this poll. So I think this came out sort of to be a wash. I think everybody -- I think everybody was -- I didn't meet anybody -- everybody I met was relieved that they reached an agreement. I didn't meet anybody who was really applauding wildly.
COOPER: Dana, who do you think came out ahead, if anybody, from last week?
LOESCH: Oh, man. I know the right is really, really split on the deals that have been made by Boehner, and I'm a little disappointed. I understand that, all in all, there was only -- you could only cut from 260-some-odd billion on the table, and they ended up with give or take like 40-something billion.
But I think, ultimately, the Tea Party came out to be a little victorious because now we have the president and his administration talking about make cuts to entitlement. And that's really, really huge, especially considering where we were in this discussion just a couple of years ago.
COOPER: David, I sort of see you shaking your head.
GERGEN: Well, I'll let Cornell go. I just disagree with some of that. Look, I think Boehner came out as well as the Tea Party, he brought discipline to his party. There was never $240 billion on the table. The most Republicans were asking for. Back during the elections was $100 billion cuts. Then they lowered it to 60, and they got 38 on the 60.
It seems like a pretty good deal for -- you know, if you're a minority party in Washington. But even so, I don't -- I think we ought to move forward, not backward about -- on these deficit questions.
LOESCH: Right. And...
BELCHER: I will...
LOESCH: I'd like to correct one...
BELCHER: I also...
LOESCH: Sorry, go ahead.
COOPER: I was just going to say I'm talking about after you pass three CRs ands then after you took the 850 billion in defense off of the table, in all, in order to -- the piece of the pie, there was 260 something that could have been cut that they chose to cut from. And they ended up with the figure that they did. That was the point.
COOPER: Cornell, I'm going to give you the final thought.
BELCHER: Really quick here, I think I do have to take my hat off to Speaker Boehner because I think he did sort of -- he did have the tiger by the tail here and it was interesting that Michele Bachmann who I think of as sort of the Tea Party leader in Congress walked out on the Republican conference when this deal was cut.
However, I will say that I think the president does come out looking better on this. I mean, the margin between Dems' approval on this deal and the Republicans' approval on this deal is ten points. I think the president and Democrats come out a little bit better in this.
COOPER: Cornell Belcher, Dana Loesch, appreciate it. David Gergen, as well.
Coming up, the breaking news. The late and frankly chilling word we've been expecting from Japanese nuclear officials. Details on that next.
If CNN MUST have a Teahadist on, it should have someone more qualified and professionally behaved than Dana Loesch. If you think Dana Loesch has ruined the show, contact the AC360 show and ask them to start doing a little more research about their guests' backgrounds, and particularly Loesch's disturbing background. And no, getting a "career highlights" sheet from their publicist doesn't count. Please answer respectfully.
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.
From Mediaite, which is usually not liberal at all:
Speier, you may recall, delivered a wrenching account of her own abortion on the floor of the House in February, and is a passionate defender of abortion rights, and women’s health. Loesch is the Editor in Chief of Andrew Breitbart’s Big Journalism, and no stranger to fighting the Tea Party fight. The combination of two passionate advocates produced sparks, with Loesch in a particularly strident mood, but just as the debate over funding Planned Parenthood reached a fever pitch, Spitzer stepped in with a devastating point.
From the 04.08.2011 edition of CNN's In The Arena:
The above vignette is the only reason I can infer why neither outlet said much, if anything about the protesters killing the victims.
Is anyone else tired of the OUTRAGE! that zealous communities like these exhibit anytime anything remotely controversial occurs involving their religion? So someone burned your holy book. Someone put Christ in a jar of urine and called it “art.” Did you see any headlines like “Remedial Hipster Art Students Beheaded?” No, no you didn’t. Of course, these communities have OUTRAGE! if someone so much as draws their god.
So, pray tell, who burned the Koran that resulted in 9/11? Who burned the Koran that caused the USS Cole bombing? Pan Am Flight 103? Embassy bombings? Fort Hood? The snipers in Washington, D.C?
Are people too scared to say that a group of violent people, looking to perpetuate violence on anyone and will use any incident as a crutch to do so, are responsible for their own actions, thus these deaths? Are people too afraid of looking like bigots (that and “racist” are the new terms to describe anyone who disagrees with left-leaning ideology, replacing “dissenter”) or are they afraid that said group of people will enact the same crime upon them as was done to the victims in this story?
