MSNBC Contributor, 3-time Presidential Candidate (Republican, Reform), and notoriousracist xenophobe Pat Buchanan went on 97.1 FM NewsTalk's The Dana Show. And of course, Dana Loesch gave Buchanan time to spew his filthyracist and xenophobic rhetoric in his book, Suicide of a Superpower, in addition to the standard Liberal-trashing.
Key Points:
Buchanan says that the "US's real threat comes from within." (approx. 2:00)
He says that "American is not as good [conservative] culturally as it used to be." (approx. 2:40) Loesch stated that "it's the Liberals that are outraged about this book, because it has good points." Uh, Ms. Loesch, they are outraged by it, and for good reason: he appeals to white nationalists and paleoconservatives. (approx. 3:11)
Buchanan says that "Meachem from Newsweek's the one calling for a race war, not me." WRONG, it's YOU that has suggested it. (approx. 3:34) Loesch baselessly claimed that countries have never succeeded based on "government entitlements." (approx. 5:10)
Buchanan misleadingly stated that "people can possibly live off the federal government for all of their lifes-- from cradle to grave." He said he wants to abolish Medicare, Head Start, Food Stamps, etc. (approx. 6:00)
Loesch says that "our generation has been subject to government subsidizing." (approx. 7:57)
From the 10.24.2011 edition of KFTK's The Dana Show:
St. Louis' original nutjob and Eagle Forum founder Phyllis Schlafly appeared on today's edition of KFTK 97.1's The Dana Show to whine about President Barack Obama and the Democratic Party's alleged move towards "socialism." That is patently false, as Loesch and Schlafly are both lying to you.
Key Points:
Loesch baselessly claims that "Obama's amped up the 'socialism' talk." (approx. 1:05)
Schlafly misleadingly stated that "the only jobs he [President Obama]'s increased are government workers." (approx. 1:44)
She claims that "he's making this country to the point that people depend on the government." (approx. 1:52)
She opines that "he is a 'socialist at heart.'" (approx. 2:03)
Schlafly believes that "Obama will be a one-term president, just like what Michele Bachmann said." They're both idiots. (approx. 3:17)
She repeated the frequently-debunked lie that the "stimulus failed." (approx. 3:37)
Loesch falsely claims that "he gives the Government praise for the jobs, not the private sector in every speech." (approx. 4:20)
Schlafly misleadingly stated that the "only 'real job' Obama ever held was Community Organizer." That is far from true. (approx. 4:40)
She baselessly claims that "Obama's leading us down the road to European-style socialism with his policies." (approx. 4:55)
Loesch falsely stated that the former Speaker and current California Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi's views on "Let Women Die Act" (or the "Protect Life Act") were heinous. (approx. 5:30).
Schlafly misleadingly implied that the "Democratic Party and Obama are in the tank with the Radical Feminist Movement." (approx. 5:47)
She thinks that "the Feminist Movement is running counter to what the [Conservative] Americans want." (approx. 6:30)
Loesch claims that "Obama is doing poorly in the polls, and that a Generic Republican can win at this moment." Partially true there. Of course Repubmussen has the Generic GOP Candidate ahead 47-43. The most recent NBC/WSJ poll had Obama head 44-42.
She stated that "anytime a president has a 7%+ Unemployment Rate will likely not be re-elected." This time around, President Obama will likely win re-election easily unless Mitt Romney is the GOP Nominee (w/o major "more Conservative" 3rd Party candidate). If Romney is the GOP nominee, there will VERY LIKELY be a 3rd party far-right candidate that will run either as an "Conservative Independent" or the Constitutional Party's candidate, thereby ensuring Obama a 2nd term..
She also claimed that "The Democratic Party is in trouble come 2012." (approx. 8:00)
Schlafly falsely claimed that "Obama's spreading the wealth around from the rich to the poor." (approx. 8:34)
From the 10.20.2011 edition of KFTK's The Dana Show:
Facts: One of her sons is openly gay (John), but does hold many of the same positions as hers. Andrew Schlafly founded the highly biased Conservapedia.
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:
This past weekend, on CNN's Your Money, Dana Loesch is trotting out her same old falsehoods about the economy and her endorsing of Mittens during the 2008 Republican Primary, and she's flip-flopping on Romney (a serial flip-flopper himself) now. She also has no credibility as a "grassroots Independent Conservative" for this and the endorsements of Roy Blunt and Ed Martin in the 2010 midterm elections.
VELSHI: All right. Thanks, Tom. In addition to criticisms of his
economic plan, Mitt Romney has had trouble gaining support among the Tea
Party. CNN Contributors Dana Loesch and Will Cain are here. Dana is
also an organizer with the Tea Party.
Dana, looking at some of your Tweets here, just to get a flavor of where you come from when it comes to Mitt Romney.
"I
was against him last election, I'm against him this election, I will be
he against him so long as he is an unrepentant rhino, which is a
Republican in name only."
That go on. That is sort of the flavor. You are not supporting Mitt Romney.
What's your problem with Mitt Romney who is polling, most days higher than everybody else in the Republican race.
DANA
LOESCH, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Well, he and Herman Cain are neck and neck in
a lot of polls. Cain came out on top in the recent poll from South
Carolina. But the last primary I was weighing which was worse Romney
care or McCain-Feingold. And I figure that McCain-Feingold for the
immediacy was worse. But McCain is not a factor this primary. So,
Romney his record is what I have a problem with. He's not a
conservative. He's simply not a conservative candidate. I really do
appreciate the people who try to insist that he is. I mean, look at his
record when he was governor of Massachusetts, 47th out of 50 states in
terms of job creation. He passed-it's still a socialist health care
plan at the state level. Socialism at any level is still socialism. He
tries to use federalism as a way excuse it.
VELSHI: Just to stick up for him a little bit, let's bring in Herman Cain's nephew, William Cain.
WILL CAIN, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: That's my uncle and that's my job. I didn't know that.
VELSHI: Will Cain is not, as far as I know, Herman Cain's nephew. But Will Cain is a CNN contributor.
Will,
Herman Cain is giving Mitt Romney, at the moment, a bit of a run for
his money. But Mitt Romney is still most Republicans choice for the
most part.
CAIN: I have to say Dana is not alone in her
feelings about Mitt Romney. There's a complete lack of enthusiasm. And
it is not just Dana, you can see it in the polls. While Rick Perry and
Michele Bachmann have their rise and falls, from 7 percent to 20 percent
and back down to 7, virtually none of that support seems to flow over
to Mitt Romney.
There's a sense of resignation with Mitt Romney.
Support is resigned to go to Mitt Romney at some point. The reason
for that is because of a complete failure, a complete lack of viable
alternatives.
A failure to find alternatives to Mitt Romney.
Rick Perry stinks of crony capitalism. He stinks of pay to play.
Michele Bachmann shows a complete ignorance of conservative concepts
like federalism, declaring Mitt Romney's health care mandate
unconstitutional, or free market saying she can give $2 gasoline. I
think what you see with Mitt Romney, there's a sense of inevitability,
it will end being him.
VELSHI: Dana, what do you think of Herman Cain's ascendance lately?
LOESCH:
I like Herman Cain. My only criticism of Herman Cain has been his
lack of foreign policy experience. I've been pretty outright with that
from the beginning. I think he needs to be tested a little bit more on
that. And if he is the nominee he should pick someone with a very
strong foreign policy record.
But I like Herman Cain. He's very
good at retail politics, he is good on the economy. I have a little
bit of concern about 9-9-9 Plan. Simply because of the national sales
tax and the possible foundation for a value added tax like we see in
Europe. Other than that, I think that he's better than what, in my
opinion, what we have in the White House right now. So I don't think
that -- he seems like a good candidate, but we still have a long way to
go. And there's still a lot of vetting to be done.
VELSHI: Will?
CAIN:
Yes, I feel the same way about Herman Cain. He's certainly an
attractive candidate. His biography alone is compelling. 9-9-9, I
agree has some serious substantive problems. But I have to say, for
conservatives like Dana, who so strongly will be opposed Mitt Romney, I
say this with all due respect, Dana, at some point you have to ask
yourself, are you taking a position of similar to that of Occupy Wall
Street. I'm going to complain about Mitt Romney, but what will I do?
Will you vote for Obama if Mitt Romney is the candidate? What will you
do?
VELSHI: Good question. Dana, what happens if Romney is the candidate?
LOESCH: See, and that-I'm so glad that Will brought that up. I have mondo respect for Will, by the way.
CAIN: Thank you.
LOESCH:
I think that winning Congress, winning the House of Representatives
and winning the Senate is so underappreciated. Because this is-
CAIN: I agree.
LOESCH:
I sort of look at it like this. If we have another president - if we
have another term of Obama, if conservatives take over the Senate and
maintain control of the House, that's going to pretty much circumvent
anything radical that he would try to do. If you have someone like Mitt
Romney who gets elected, and you have a strong conservative presence in
the Senate and House of Representatives, they are going to do kind of
the same thing and circumvent anything Mitt Romney will do.
The
problem is though, is the Republican Party selling out its soul. There
comes a time when you have to ask yourself when is compromising over and
over again too much to the point when the party becomes
indistinguishable from the opposing political party.
CAIN:
That's a fair philosophical questions, but I think we have to ask
ourselves, would you rather have Republican Congress with Obama as
president or Republican Congress with Mitt Romney as president? I think
the second alternative certainly sounds better.
LOESCH: I
would think that-well, any generic Republican candidate, just to echo
some of the polling, when they do not even bother naming the Republican
candidate, is beating Obama in the polls. I think any Republican
candidate would do at this point. I also think I'm not ready to say
Mitt Romney is going to be the nominee. I'm still-Rick Perry may do
something-
VELSHI: Why is that, Dana, because we're 13 months
away from election. You are wise. Everyone else seems to be treating
this thing like it's going to be decided in the next month.
LOESCH:
Everyone is already ready to crown Mitt Romney. I don't understand
the rush to immediately look at him as the nominee for the Republican
Party. We are still so far way from that. And in terms of fundraising,
too, sure, Rick Perry has problems. I haven't decided on a candidate
and I have criticisms of every single one of them. But he out
fundraises Mitt Romney, he raises like, I think, $3 to $4 million more
than Romney did last quarter.
VELSHI: He did some stuff on
Friday to sort of put some new energy into his campaign by putting out
an energy policy. Let's see where we go with that. We have lots to go
to talk about that.
Dana, always a pleasure to see you. Thanks
so much for being with us. You guys should follow Dana on her Twitter.
Interesting stuff.
Follow Will. Will what is your-
CAIN: Will Cain, pretty simple.
VELSHI: And Dana?
LOESCH: DLoesch.
VELSHI: DLoesch, L-O-E-S-C-H. Follow these two. Good stuff.
LOESCH: S-C-H.
VELSHI: Very good.
Make
sure to tune in October 18th, Tuesday 8:00 p.m. Eastern for CNN Western
Republican presidential debate. It is in Las Vegas. Anderson Cooper
will moderate.
I've got a question. If a foreign student gets a
degree in the United States, in science or technology, or engineer or
math, should they be allowed to stay here and use that education to
start a business? Would that actually create jobs here in the United
States? Don't answer. Don't answer. Think about it for a second.
We're going to take a break, pay the bills, and talk about it on the
other side.
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.
This Past weekend at TeaCon 2011, held in Chicago suburb Schaumburg, Illinois, KFTK radio host, CNN "Contributor," and Big Journalism's Smear Artist-In-Chief Dana Loesch and her cronies (Andrew Breitbart, Glenn Beck, Steven Crowder, Guy Benson) was at the event telling more right-wing gibberish. Also there was the Deadbeat Dad Congresscritter Joe Walsh (R-IL08.)
I had identified myself as a liberal my entire life, until this day. I had an early midlife crisis when I was around 19 years-old, when I began to think that I didn’t actually believe in the principles with which I was raised. I was raised by a very big southern Democrat union family. I was indoctrinated by years of pop-culture, educational bias, and family mantra. It was the only way. I did not vote for George W. Bush. I supported Gore. Even as I began to shed the beliefs of a Democrat, one thing remained: I still felt that America had a problem with the “military complex.” The only reason people were hostile to us, I surmised, was because they were intimidated by our military. I thought Bush was representative of this and it was the reason I didn’t support him.
That belief was blown to hell on 9/11.
“Thank God George Bush is president,” I blurted out in the middle of a furious sob. My husband, who was born wearing a Reagan shirt, looked at me with wide-eyed wonderment.
She claimed that she had to "sit with the 3-4 years olds at the Thanksgiving table for being a Republican." (approx. 2:29).
She stated that the St. Louis Tea Party movement started back in February 2009, when The Dana Show was just a Sunday-only show. (approx. 2:54).
She repeated that this is the "biggest movement since the 1960's Hippies." Nope, Occupy Wall Street and anti-war demonstrations are bigger than the astroturfed Teabagger movement. (approx. 3:47)
She falsely claimed that "nobody watches Current TV." In fact, its ratings have increased since Countdown aired back in June, and it's adding The Young Turks with Cenk Uygur to the lineup.
She stated that "our children and grandchildren are going to be subjected to a lower standard of living due to overregulations and socialism." WRONG, it's due to the GOP's policies. (approx. 7:39).
She baselessly compared the Democratic Party to "a Socialist party." She also suggested that the "Congressional Progressive Caucus has overran the Democrat Party." (approx 10:19).
She falsely claimed that the "PPACA supports taxpayer paying for abortions." (approx. 20:12). She advocated for Violence at that rally.
She baselessly stated that Betsey Bruce works for KMOV (CBS 4). No, Bruce works for KTVI (FOX 2), the same station that features the much despised by Conservatives Charles Jaco and the rising star Angie Mock. (approx. 21:19)
She misleadingly claims that "the Liberals, Democrats, Unions are the ones that get violent." In fact, it's the Teahadists (and herself) that commit the most violent acts. (approx. 22:21)
She stated that "Union Bosses are the scum of the Earth." Typical for this union-hating nimrod to say.(approx. 23:50)
She made another phony claim that the "Democrats and Unions are against worker's rights." (approx. 24:17)
She lied about SEIU bussing in people, when her cronies do the same thing and no howls from them there.
She accused "the left of shutting dissent down." WRONG AGAIN! (approx. 29:18)
She said "if you call me a teabagger, does that make you the teabaggee?" Baloney! (approx. 31:31)
We got more evidence of phony claims from her.
The event was home to Andrew Breitbart's violence-laced tirade calling Janeane Garofalo a "Hollywood Sympathy Fuck" and others.
The "Hollywood Sympathy Fuck" rant: From Andrew Breitbart's September 30 speech at Tea Con 2011:
He also told the Unions, Jimmy Hoffa, and Richard Trumka "fuck you!"
As maybe the largest-ever gathering of Tea Partiers commences in Illinois this week, congratulations are due to Mr. Steve Stevlic, the activist without whom TeaCon 2011 would be impossible. Stevlic is the head of the Chicago Tea Party, one of the con's primary sponsors. In the words of radio host and National Review columnist Mark Levin, Stevlic's "terrific." According to CBS, he's the "Democrats' nightmare."
But if you're heading to the festivities this weekend and see Stevlic in person, there's one thing you probably shouldn't bring up with the activist and family values man: his arrest for soliciting a prostitute last summer.
Stevlic describes himself as an ordinary guy; a good, decent family man with a wife, two kids, and no pretensions. His humility and ideological fervor have earned him friendly profiles at CTV and the Guardian, and quotes on Fox News and The Hill. At TeaCon, he'll spend the next two days shaking hands, buddying up with Herman Cain, Glenn Beck, Andrew Breitbart and the other assorted big guns flying in for the revelry, and making nice with the hundreds of Tea Partiers who've spent hundreds of dollars to come and be trained in grassroots Tea-Party-foo. It'll be awesome.
When confronted about his behavior yesterday morning, Stevlic told us to direct subsequent questions to his lawyer. He did insist that he'd never tweeted anything about Jackson being a sex machine, which is ridiculous, because, well, see for yourself on the right. (Click the image to expand.)
Oh, well. Stevlic also told us that he'd been convicted of nothing, which is true. According to the Chicago DA, all charges against Stevlic were dropped when Stevlic agreed to participate in a rehab program for johns called "Unhooked," which he did. Stevlic also told us, guilt or innocence aside, that he feels compassion for Jackson, and we're sure he was telling the truth about that one, too. We bet he feels tons of compassion, especially now. It's no fun to have your dirty laundry aired in public. Anyway — Happy TeaCon!
Herman Cain won the straw poll convincingly-- about 77%, but Jon Huntsman and Gary Johnson got blank, and even President Barack Obama got a couple of votes. Michele Bachmann was the closest at nearly 9.5%.
In last night's blogpost by Big Journalism's Smearer-In-Chief Dana Loesch, she (like the other right-wingers whining about it) falsely claims that country music singer and staunch Conservative Republican Hank Williams, Jr. "was silenced by the Obama bootlickers at ESPN for having courage to speak out against Obama."
From my perspective, Williams didn’t call Obama “Hitler”; rather he made an exaggerated comparison to the political conflict between Obama and Boehner. (Perhaps a more appropriate analogy would have been Reagan and Gorbachev.) It seems that progressives are doing more to call Obama “Hitler” with their accusations than Williams implied with his remark. Of course, only Williams himself can clarify that. Regardless, ESPN yanked him from tonight’s broadcast. By the way, what’s with progressives’ new sensitivity over comparing a president to Hitler?
Williams’s job would likely be safe had he done what Mike Tyson did on an ESPN radio affiliate and joked about Palin rape.
Typical for lowlife blogger Loesch to misrepresent the facts for her fanbase who believe that "those Liberals are persecuting us Conservatives." She has been waging a war onESPN for its supposed "Liberal Bias."ESPN isn't Liberal-biased or Conservative-biased, you factless Breitbart hack! Bocephus was (and won't be) NOT silenced or blacklisted, unlike the Dixie Chicks for criticism of Bush and his corrupt Administration during the run-up to the Illegal Invasion of Iraq, who got blacklisted and boycotted by a huge majority of the core fans of Country music.
“While Hank Williams, Jr. is not an ESPN employee, we recognize that he is closely linked to our company through the open to Monday Night Football. We are extremely disappointed with his comments, and as a result we have decided to pull the open from tonight’s telecast.”
Although he is well within his rights to say bullcrap like that, he also is subject to being reprimanded or even fired by ESPN. I say that it is time to drop him completely.
Williams Jr. says, "Some of us have strong opinions and are often misunderstood. My analogy was extreme – but it was to make a point. I was simply trying to explain how stupid it seemed to me - how ludicrous that pairing was."
He continues, "They’re polar opposites and it made no sense. They don’t see eye-to-eye and never will. I have always respected the office of the President.”
Williams Jr. adds, "Every time the media brings up the tea party it’s painted as racist and extremists – but there’s never a backlash – no outrage to those comparisons… Working class people are hurting – and it doesn’t seem like anybody cares. When both sides are high-fiving it on the ninth hole when everybody else is without a job – it makes a whole lot of us angry. Something has to change. The policies have to change.”
I still ain't buying that apology.
Here's the intro for the Monday Night Football theme song, called Are You Ready For Some Football?:
Here was its temporary replacement, Sister Hazel's performance of our National Anthem:
From the 10.03.2011 edition of ESPN's Monday Night Football:
He was on Fixed Noise's Fox and Friends earlier yesterday in which he made the controversial comments.
From the 10.03.2011 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends:
GRETCHEN CARLSON (co-host): I'd love to pick your brain about politics.
HANK WILLIAMS JR.: Yep.
CARLSON: All right. So, I'll start with an easy question, who do you like in the GOP race?
WILLIAMS: Nobody.
STEVE DOOCY (co-host): Nobody?
WILLIAMS: You remember the -- you remember the golf game they had, ladies and gentlemen?
DOOCY: Yeah?
WILLIAMS: Remember the golf game?
DOOCY: Boehner?
WILLIAMS: That was one of the biggest political mistakes ever.
CO-HOSTS: Why?
WILLIAMS: That turned a lot of people off. You know, watching, you know, it just didn't go over.
CARLSON: You mean when John Boehner played golf with President Obama?
WILLIAMS: Oh, yeah! Yeah. And Biden and Kasich, yeah. Uh-huh.
CARLSON: What did you not like about it? It seems to be a really pivotal moment for you.
WILLIAMS: Come on. Come on. It would be like Hitler playing golf with Netanyahu, OK?
CARLSON: OK.
WILLIAMS: Not hardly. In the country this shape is in, the shape this country's in, I mean, no, I don't think so.
BRIAN KILMEADE (co-host): Yeah, I don't understand that analogy, actually.
DOOCY: Well, it's -- it's out there.
WILLIAMS: Well, I'm glad you don't, brother, because a lot of people do. You know, they're the enemy. They're the enemy.
KILMEADE: Who's the enemy?
WILLIAMS: Obama! And Biden! Are you kidding? The Three Stooges.
DOOCY: That's only two.
[...]
CARLSON: I just want to say that we disavow any of those comments or analogies that he's made, at least I'm going to say that, disavow the analogy between Hitler and the president.
Even the ultra-conservative liar Gretchen Carlson said Williams, Jr. went too far with his "Obama to Hitler" rhetoric. = UPDATE (10.06.2011): ESPN has pulled Bocephus for good.
CNN "contributor, Big "Journalism smearer-in-chief, and dangerous whiner radiohost Dana Loesch was named as Worst Person on last night's Countdown with Keith Olbermann. Also, Former Clinton campaign manager and Fixed Noise regular Dick "The Toe Sucker" Morris was Worse and Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) was Worser.
From the 09.28.2011 edition of Current TV's Countdown With Keith Olbermann:
Tea party darling and CNN contributor Dana Loesch has decided to engage in some audacious revisionism in order to defend conservatives from criticism over the booing of a gay soldier at a Republican presidential debate.
Loesch's re-imagining concerned the Fox News-Google debate during which a question given by Stephen Hill, a gay soldier serving in Iraq, elicited audible booing from the audience. Media figures and even some Republican presidential candidates have condemned the booing.
At a fundraiser yesterday, President Obama also condemned the booing while criticizing aspects of the modern-day Republican Party:
Some of you here may be folks who actually used to be Republicans but are puzzled by what's happened to that party, are puzzled by what's happening to that party. I mean, has anybody been watching the debates lately? You've got a governor whose state is on fire denying climate change, it's true. You've got audiences cheering at the prospect of somebody dying because they don't have health care and booing a service member in Iraq because they're gay.
Loesch responded on Andrew Breitbart's Big Journalism, claiming that President Obama had deliberately lied about the booing.
As evidence that Obama was lying, Loesch linked to a previous blog post she had written, claiming that she had "thoroughly debunked" the booing story.
But her previous blog actually confirms the fact that the soldier was booed at the debate.
In her blog post, Loesch had quoted conservative activist Sara Rumpf who was in the audience for the debate in question, and "[t]here was audible booing after [Hill's] question...however, please note that it was not the crowd booing It was only one or two people."
I knew that Loesch was going to get her well-deserved WPITW nomination from Olbermann sooner or later.
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.
This morning while on the Political Buzz panel for CNN we discussed the reported “booing” of the gay soldier who asked about DADT at last night’s debate. Considering the amount of print devoted to painting the entire crowd out to be bloodthirsty haters with zero regard for military service, it’s no wonder that it would become a question the next day.
Unfortunately for the progressives writing the spin (who forget that it was their idol Bill Clinton who enacted DADT in the first place), the entire story of the debate audience booing is a lie.
Sara Rumpf was in the debate audience and what she witnessed was vastly different than the account the outlets linked above are reporting:
I want to put this on the record now about an incident that happened at tonight’s Republican debate. It’s important that the truth is shared, because I have already seen liberal bloggers and some people on Twitter completely distorting what happened.
The debate included video questions that were submitted on YouTube, and one came from a soldier serving in Iraq who is gay and asked about the candidates’ opinions on don’t ask don’t tell. There was audible booing after his question…however, please note that it was not the crowd booing. It was only one or two people.
Frankly, I don’t care where you stand on DADT, you don’t boo a soldier in the battlefield, period. The audience at last night’s debate believe this which is why they verbally took apart the men who yelled. Conservatives police their side.
If progressives want to talk about bigotry, let’s talk about the unfiltered racist hatred they dumped on Twitter the night Troy Davis was delivered justice. Look at Michelle Malkin’s Twitter stream for that. I’m waiting for progressives to clean up their house.
Dear Dana, they DID boo the soldier, you lying moron! And no, Conservatives do NOT police their side.
SANTORUM: The fact that they’re making a point to include it as a provision within the military that we’re going to recognize a group of people and give them a special privilege and removing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, I think tries to inject social policy into the military and the military’s job is to do one thing — and that is to defend our country. We need to give the military, which is all volunteer, the ability to do so…and I believe this undermines that ability.
KELLY: So what would you do with soliders like Steven Hill. Now he’s out…so what would you do as president?
SANTORUM: Look, what we’re doing is playing social experimentation with our military right now and that’s tragic. I would just say that going forward, we would reinstitute that policy if Rick Santorum was president. Period. That policy would be reinstituted and as far as people in, I would not throw them out because that would be unfair to them because of the policy of this administration, but we would move forward in conformity to what was happening in the past, which is — sex is not an issue. It should not be an issue. Leave it alone. Keep it to yourself — whether your’re heterosexual or homosexual.
From the 09.22.2011 edition of FNC's Fox/Google Debate:
(Washington, D.C.) – “Tonight, Rick Santorum disrespected our brave men and women in uniform, and he owes Stephen Hill, the gay soldier who asked him the question about Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell repeal, an immediate apology.
“That brave gay soldier is doing something Rick Santorum has never done – put his life on the line to defend our freedoms and our way of life. It is telling that Rick Santorum is so blinded by his anti-gay bigotry that he couldn’t even bring himself to thank that gay soldier for his service.
Last night, Stephen Hill, who is serving in the Army in Iraq, had the courage to come out as gay to a national audience and ask the Republican presidential candidates about how they’d handle troops like him. The audience responded to his question with boos, and Rick Santorum said he’s reinstate Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (a promise he doubled down on later in the evening).
The big question today, even among conservatives, is: Why did none of the candidates stand up for the soldier? Here are some of today’s reactions to the offensive moment.
So people like Loesch, Santorum, and the GOP will lie about anything to get their homophobic agenda out.
UPDATED: On Fixed Noise's America Live w/ Megyn Kelly, Rick Santorum claims "he didn't hear any boos".
From the 09.23.2011 edition of FNC's America Live w/ Megyn Kelly:
