Archive for the ‘MSNBC’ Category

Bristol Palin on Teen Pregnancy: “Learn from My Example”

May 6, 2009

Yesterday on NBC’s Today, Bristol Palin, the daughter of former VP candidate and Governor Sarah Palin (R-AK) said something that I’ve been saying for a long time: “Abstinence is the only 100% foolproof way to prevent teen pregnancy.”  This comes after her comments on FOX News’s On the Record earlier this year when she said, “I think abstinence is, like — like, the — I don’t know how to put it — like, the main — everyone should be abstinent or whatever, but it’s not realistic at all. … Because it’s [sex is] more and more accepted now.”

Go ahead and watch the full interview from the Today show, courtesy of MSNBC and NBC:

I agree with Bristol here.  Abstinence is the ONLY way to ensure that you don’t get pregnant.  It’s just that simple.  There is no other guaranteed way to avoid getting pregnant.  It’s just that simple.  But Bristol is right in what she said on FOX earlier this year – teens being sexually active is becoming more common and more accepted.  That doesn’t mean that this is an excuse for teens having sex.  In my opinion, it’s not that hard not to have sex.  Others may disagree, but there are plenty of people out there who will back me up in saying that saying, “No” isn’t as hard as some people would make you think it is.

Personally, I think that we need to emphasize abstinence as the only way to guarantee against pregnancy, but for teens who are sexually active, they need to use some sort of method of birth control.  Whether or not that will help, I don’t know.  I wouldn’t think that 16- and 17-year-olds would need to be taught about condoms and other forms of birth control – I think there’s enough mention of that in the media already, but apparently I’m wrong (either that or people just figure that they won’t get pregnant because “it won’t happen to me”).

I think Bristol’s story is a great testimony to other teens.  While some may view her as a hypocrite, I think many will view her as someone who went through a lot of hard times and doesn’t want to see other people go through what she went through.

As always, I wish Bristol and Tripp the very best, and to Bristol: good luck on sharing your story with other teens.  I hope people listen – God bless both of you and your family.

Done Ranting,

Ranting Republican

We Should Be Proud of Miss California, and Perez Hilton Should Be Ashamed

April 22, 2009

gallery_photo1239121941swim_californiaAlright, I’m sure many of you have heard the recent controversies surrounding the recent Miss USA pageant and Miss California’s (Carrie Prejean) answer to a question on gay marriage.  Here’s a video of that question, asked by judge Perez Hilton (video courtesy of NBC):

Alright, now, that answer was criticized by many, including Perez Hilton.  Here’s the video that he posted later that night:

I have a few problems with Perez Hilton (other than the fact that he’s obnoxious and I can’t stand him):

  1. He complains that she wasn’t politically correct, and that Miss USA needs to be politically correct.  Well, I’m glad that Perez Hilton believes in being politically correct.  That must be why he called her “a dumb bitch,” and that must be why he went on MSNBC and say that he “was thinking the ‘c’-word, and I didn’t say it.”  Well, Perez, we’re glad that you’re defending political correctness, except when it comes to women.  Had she have called you a “fag,” you’d have been up in arms (and rightfully so).  Show her some respect even if you disagree with her.
  2. He said that she should have said, “I think that that is a question that each state should decide for themselves, because that’s how our forefathers designed our government.”  Well, that would’ve been a nice politically correct answer, but Perez’s question was, “Vermont recently became the 4th state to legalize same-sex marriage. Do you think every state should follow suit.  Why or why not?”  Saying that it should be up to the states to decide would not have been answering the question.

Perez has since come out and apologized, and then on MSNBC, he took back his apology (and indirectly called her “the ‘c’-word”).

Personally, I agree with Carrie Prejean.  I am glad that states have the right to decide; however, I personally think that marriage should be between a man and a woman.  She didn’t answer the question poorly, she just answered it honestly.  She said that she was glad that Americans have the option to choose, but when she goes to the voting booth, she’ll chose to not allow it.

Perez Hilton shouldn’t have even been a judge in my opinion.  His video saying that if she’d have won, he’d have run on stage and snatched the crown from her shows me that he shouldn’t be judging the contest.  If he can’t live with the result of the contest if it doesn’t go how he wants, he should not be a judge.

I’ll conclude this by saying that I think this may have cost Prejean the crown (Perez Hilton himself told ABC, “She lost it because of that question.  She was definitely the front-runner before that.”); however, she may have ended as runner up anyway, so congratulations to Miss North Carolina, Kristen Dalton.

Carrie, you’re a true American hero.  Thank you for standing up for what you believe in.  You’re an amazing icon to young women all over the country, and I respect you.  God bless you, and I wish you the best of luck in life.

Done Ranting,

Ranting Republican

Obama Advisor: Obama Likely to Not Repeal the Bush Tax Cuts

November 23, 2008

Well, I called this one (not on this blog, but another website I post on) over a month ago, when he said that a recession may make him delay the repealment of the Bush tax cuts.  Well, this morning on Meet the Press, an advisor on his transition team, Bill Daley (Secretary of Commerce under President Clinton), said that it’s looking like Obama isn’t going to push for them to be repealed, but just let them expire in 2011.  Here’s the transcript courtesy of Meet the Press:

MR. BROKAW: And let’s talk about taxes for just a moment ,if we can. The New York Times is reporting today that “in light of the downturn, Mr. Obama is also said to be reconsidering a campaign pledge: his proposal to repeal the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. According to several people familiar with the discussions, he might instead let those tax cuts expire as scheduled in 2011, effectively delaying any tax increase while he gives his stimulus plan a chance to work.” Is that your understanding of what may happen?

MR. DALEY: That looks more likely than not, Tom, but the president-elect is very committed to the fact that there must be greater equity in, in the responsibility of, of taxes in this country. We must bring tax relief to the middle class. He has said this now for two years as he’s been out there on the campaign, and he’s going to deliver on that. That’s an integral part of his economic recovery package next year is to bring some tax relief to the American people and the vast majority who are in the middle class, not those of us who do much better than that. So I, I think he’s going, he’s, he’s got a great team he’s putting together: Tim Geithner, Larry Summers, a whole host of other people, that he’s charged with putting this plan together. I think he’s gone out to get the most competent, qualified, experienced people to put this together. We are, as Secretary Baker said, in the middle of an unprecedented economic crisis. We will come out of it, but these are times that no one’s ever seen, and it’s a global issue. And of all the people he’s put forward in these major jobs are very experienced in a global setting of economics also.

MR. BROKAW: And, Secretary [James] Baker [Secretary of the Treasury under President Reagan], keeping the Bush tax cuts in place, will that be central to winning any Republican support for a massive public stimulus program of some kind?

MR. BAKER: Well, it depends on which you mean by keeping them in place. If that means he’s not going to try to repeal, not going to try to increase taxes during this very critical next two-year period, then, yes, it would be and probably would be if it means that he’s going to abandon the idea of, of keeping them, keeping taxes low thereafter. But let me, let me second what, what Secretary Daley said about the team that the president-elect is putting together. I think he’s appointed some extraordinarily capable people, and we’re going to see some more, as I understand it. And I think he’s to be commended for that. Bill Daley knows and I know that any new president has got to surround himself with competent advisers, and that’s even more so today when we’re facing the kind of economic crisis we’re facing.

May I say one other thing, Tom? I, I think that a lot of what we’re seeing out there today is a lack of confidence, and the president-elect and, as a matter of fact, the current president have to face this problem over the next 60 days. It’s unfortunate that we’re in this interregnum of a transition, but I think that something very useful might even come out of the two of them sitting down together and addressing not the, not the midterm, not the mid and long-term problem that we face that was the subject of the president-elect’s speech, but the–but facing–but addressing stability of our financial system and to see if there isn’t something that they could do jointly, together, over the next 58 to 60 days that would help us make sure that the–that the financial system is stabilized and, and secure. Because if that goes under, then this thing is even, believe it or not, going to get worse. And I think just the mere fact of their sitting down together and seeing if there’s not one thing that they could come together on would do a lot to restore confidence and, and remove the anxiety and fear that’s out there.

Well, now this is interesting, since Senator Obama has said that he would pay for his health care plan with the money that would come in from getting rid of the Bush tax cuts.  So, this will set him back 2 years which will be $100-$135 billion.

Like I’ve said before, Obama is all talk, on taxes, on Iraq, and on a lot of what he says.  He was elected on promises that he never intended to fulfill, but most Americans didn’t realize that.  Oh well, in 4 years, people will be begging for a Republican in the White House.  Either that, or they’ll excuse Obama by saying, “His problems were Bush’s fault.”  Knowing American voters, I’m scared that it may be the latter.

Done Ranting,

Ranting Republican
add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! ::

Former Secretary of State Colin Powell Endorses Obama

October 19, 2008

Well, this is a blog post I did NOT expect to be writing.  General Powell had made it clear before that he would not be endorsing anybody in this election, so I’m surprised that he has come out and actually made an endorsement.  He is endorsing Senator Obama, but he stressed that this is more for reasons dealing with the economy, and the Supreme Court and the general direction of the Republican party rather than Iraq.  He noted that he still opposes a set date to withdraw from Iraq.

Here’s a transcript of MSNBC’s Meet the Press, courtesy of MSNBC:

MR. TOM BROKAW: Our issues this Sunday: He served as President George W. Bush’s secretary of state and was once called the man most likely to become the nation’s first African-American president. He has been courted by both the Obama and McCain presidential campaigns and said this last month:

(Videotape)

GEN. COLIN POWELL (RET.): I have been watching both of these individuals. I know them both extremely well, and I have not decided who I’m going to vote for yet.

(End videotape)

MR. BROKAW: Is he now ready to make an endorsement in this presidential race? What are his thoughts on the major issues facing the country and the world? Our exclusive guest this Sunday, former Secretary of State General Colin Powell.

Then, with 16 days to go, Decision 2008 heads into the home stretch. What states still are in play? We will hear the latest on some new state polls with NBC’s political director, Chuck Todd. Also, insights and analysis on the race to the White House with David Brooks of The New York Times, Jon Meacham of Newsweek magazine, Andrea Mitchell of NBC News, and Joe Scarborough of MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.”

But first, General Colin Powell, welcome back to MEET THE PRESS.

GEN. POWELL: Thank, thank you, Tom.

MR. BROKAW: We indicated in that opening, there is a lot of anticipation and speculation about your take on this presidential campaign. We’ll get to that in a moment. But in your old business we might call this a tour of the horizon. Whoever’s elected president of the United States, that first day in the Oval Office on January 21st will face this: an American economy that’s in a near paralytic state at this time; we’re at war in two different countries, Afghanistan and Iraq; we have an energy crisis; we have big decisions to make about health care and about global climate change. The president of the United States and the Congress of the United States now have the highest disapproval ratings that we have seen in many years. In all your years of public service, have you ever seen an incoming president face such daunting challenges?

GEN. POWELL: No. I have seen more difficult times in our history. I think about the early ’70s when we were going through Watergate, Spiro Agnew, Nixon period, that was not a good time. But right now we’re also facing a very daunting period. And I think the number one issue the president’s going to have to deal with is the economy. That’s what the American people are worried about. And, frankly, it’s not just an American problem, it’s an international problem. We can see how all of these economies are now linked in this globalized system. And I think that’ll be number one. The president will also have to make decisions quickly as to how to deal with Iraq and Afghanistan. And also I think the president has to reach out to the world and show that there is a new president, a new administration that is looking forward to working with our friends and allies. And in my judgment, also willing to talk to people who we have not been willing to talk to before. Because this is a time for outreach.

MR. BROKAW: Given the state of the American economy, can we continue our military commitments around the world at the level that they now exist?

GEN. POWELL: We can. I think we have to look as to whether they have to be at that level. But we have the wealth, we have the wherewithal to do that. (Clears throat) Excuse me, Tom. We have the ability to do that. And so, first and foremost, we have to review those commitments, see what they are, see what else is needed, and make sure we give our troops what they need to get the job done as we have defined the job. We have that ability.

MR. BROKAW: If you were called into the Oval Office on January 21st by the new president, whoever it happens to be, and he said to you, “General Powell, I need from you your recommendation on where I begin. What should be my priorities?” Where would you start?

GEN. POWELL: I would start with talking to the American people and talking to the world, and conveying a new image of American leadership, a new image of America’s role in the world.

The problems will always be there, and there’s going to be a crisis come along in the 21st or 22nd of January that we don’t even know about right now. And so I think what the president has to do is to start using the power of the Oval Office and the power of his personality to convince the American people and to convince the world that America is solid, America is going to move forward, and we’re going to fix our economic problems, we’re going to meet our overseas obligations. But restoring a sense of purpose, a sense of confidence in the American people and, in the international community, in America.

MR. BROKAW: What’s not on the screen right now that concerns you that should be more prominent in the minds of the American people and the people running for president?

GEN. POWELL: I think the American people and the gentlemen running for president will have to, early on, focus on education more than we have seen in the campaign so far. America has a terrible educational problem in the sense that we have too many youngsters not finishing school. A third of our kids don’t finish high school, 50 percent of minorities don’t finish high school. We’ve got to work on this, and my, my wife and I are leading a campaign with this purpose.

Also, I think, the new president has to realize that the world looks to America for leadership, and so we have to show leadership on some issues that the world is expecting us to, whether it’s energy, global warming and the environment. And I think we have to do a lot more with respect to poverty alleviation and helping the needy people of the world. We need to increase the amount of resources we put into our development programs to help the rest of the world. Because when you help the poorest in the world, you start to move them up an economic and social ladder, and they’re not going to be moving toward violence or terrorism of the kind that we worry about.

MR. BROKAW: Well, let’s move to the American presidential campaign now, if we can. We saw at the beginning of this broadcast a short tease of what you had to say just a month ago. Let’s share with our viewers now a little more of Colin Powell on these two candidates and your position.

(Videotape, September 20, 2008)

GEN. POWELL: I’m an American, first and foremost, and I’m very proud–I said, I’ve said, I’ve said to my beloved friend and colleague John McCain, a friend of 25 years, “John, I love you, but I’m not just going to vote for you on the basis of our affection or friendship.” And I’ve said to Barack Obama, “I admire you. I’ll give you all the advice I can. But I’m not going to vote for you just because you’re black.” We, we have to move beyond this.

(End videotape)

MR. BROKAW: General Powell, actually you gave a campaign contribution to Senator McCain. You have met twice at least with Barack Obama. Are you prepared to make a public declaration of which of these two candidates that you’re prepared to support?

GEN. POWELL: Yes, but let me lead into it this way. I know both of these individuals very well now. I’ve known John for 25 years as your setup said. And I’ve gotten to know Mr. Obama quite well over the past two years. Both of them are distinguished Americans who are patriotic, who are dedicated to the welfare of our country. Either one of them, I think, would be a good president. I have said to Mr. McCain that I admire all he has done. I have some concerns about the direction that the party has taken in recent years. It has moved more to the right than I would like to see it, but that’s a choice the party makes. And I’ve said to Mr. Obama, “You have to pass a test of do you have enough experience, and do you bring the judgment to the table that would give us confidence that you would be a good president.”

And I’ve watched him over the past two years, frankly, and I’ve had this conversation with him. I have especially watched over the last six of seven weeks as both of them have really taken a final exam with respect to this economic crisis that we are in and coming out of the conventions. And I must say that I’ve gotten a good measure of both. In the case of Mr. McCain, I found that he was a little unsure as to deal with the economic problems that we were having and almost every day there was a different approach to the problem. And that concerned me, sensing that he didn’t have a complete grasp of the economic problems that we had. And I was also concerned at the selection of Governor Palin. She’s a very distinguished woman, and she’s to be admired; but at the same time, now that we have had a chance to watch her for some seven weeks, I don’t believe she’s ready to be president of the United States, which is the job of the vice president. And so that raised some question in my mind as to the judgment that Senator McCain made.

On the Obama side, I watched Mr. Obama and I watched him during this seven-week period. And he displayed a steadiness, an intellectual curiosity, a depth of knowledge and an approach to looking at problems like this and picking a vice president that, I think, is ready to be president on day one. And also, in not just jumping in and changing every day, but showing intellectual vigor. I think that he has a, a definitive way of doing business that would serve us well. I also believe that on the Republican side over the last seven weeks, the approach of the Republican Party and Mr. McCain has become narrower and narrower. Mr. Obama, at the same time, has given us a more inclusive, broader reach into the needs and aspirations of our people. He’s crossing lines–ethnic lines, racial lines, generational lines. He’s thinking about all villages have values, all towns have values, not just small towns have values.

And I’ve also been disappointed, frankly, by some of the approaches that Senator McCain has taken recently, or his campaign ads, on issues that are not really central to the problems that the American people are worried about. This Bill Ayers situation that’s been going on for weeks became something of a central point of the campaign. But Mr. McCain says that he’s a washed-out terrorist. Well, then, why do we keep talking about him? And why do we have these robocalls going on around the country trying to suggest that, because of this very, very limited relationship that Senator Obama has had with Mr. Ayers, somehow, Mr. Obama is tainted. What they’re trying to connect him to is some kind of terrorist feelings. And I think that’s inappropriate.

Now, I understand what politics is all about. I know how you can go after one another, and that’s good. But I think this goes too far. And I think it has made the McCain campaign look a little narrow. It’s not what the American people are looking for. And I look at these kinds of approaches to the campaign and they trouble me. And the party has moved even further to the right, and Governor Palin has indicated a further rightward shift. I would have difficulty with two more conservative appointments to the Supreme Court, but that’s what we’d be looking at in a McCain administration. I’m also troubled by, not what Senator McCain says, but what members of the party say. And it is permitted to be said such things as, “Well, you know that Mr. Obama is a Muslim.” Well, the correct answer is, he is not a Muslim, he’s a Christian. He’s always been a Christian. But the really right answer is, what if he is? Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer’s no, that’s not America. Is there something wrong with some seven-year-old Muslim-American kid believing that he or she could be president? Yet, I have heard senior members of my own party drop the suggestion, “He’s a Muslim and he might be associated terrorists.” This is not the way we should be doing it in America.

I feel strongly about this particular point because of a picture I saw in a magazine. It was a photo essay about troops who are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. And one picture at the tail end of this photo essay was of a mother in Arlington Cemetery, and she had her head on the headstone of her son’s grave. And as the picture focused in, you could see the writing on the headstone. And it gave his awards–Purple Heart, Bronze Star–showed that he died in Iraq, gave his date of birth, date of death. He was 20 years old. And then, at the very top of the headstone, it didn’t have a Christian cross, it didn’t have the Star of David, it had crescent and a star of the Islamic faith. And his name was Kareem Rashad Sultan Khan, and he was an American. He was born in New Jersey. He was 14 years old at the time of 9/11, and he waited until he can go serve his country, and he gave his life. Now, we have got to stop polarizing ourself in this way. And John McCain is as nondiscriminatory as anyone I know. But I’m troubled about the fact that, within the party, we have these kinds of expressions.

So, when I look at all of this and I think back to my Army career, we’ve got two individuals, either one of them could be a good president. But which is the president that we need now? Which is the individual that serves the needs of the nation for the next period of time? And I come to the conclusion that because of his ability to inspire, because of the inclusive nature of his campaign, because he is reaching out all across America, because of who he is and his rhetorical abilities–and we have to take that into account–as well as his substance–he has both style and substance–he has met the standard of being a successful president, being an exceptional president. I think he is a transformational figure. He is a new generation coming into the world–onto the world stage, onto the American stage, and for that reason I’ll be voting for Senator Barack Obama.

MR. BROKAW: Will you be campaigning for him as well?

GEN. POWELL: I don’t plan to. Two weeks left, let them go at each other in the finest tradition. But I will be voting for him.

MR. BROKAW: I can already anticipate some of the reaction to this. Let’s begin with the charge that John McCain has continued to make against Barack Obama. You sit there, as a man who served in Vietnam, you commanded a battalion of 101st, you were chairman of the Joint Chiefs, you were a national security adviser and secretary of state. There is nothing in Barack Obama’s history that nearly paralyze any–parallels any of the experiences that you’ve had. And while he has performed impressively in the context of the campaign, there’s a vast difference between sitting in the Oval Office and making tough decisions and doing well in a campaign.

GEN. POWELL: And he knows that. And I have watched him over the last two years as he has educated himself, as he has become very familiar with these issues. He speaks authoritatively. He speaks with great insight into the challenges we’re facing of a military and political and economic nature. And he is surrounding himself, I’m confident, with people who’ll be able to give him the expertise that he, at the moment, does not have. And so I have watched an individual who has intellectual vigor and who dives deeply into issues and approaches issues with a very, very steady hand. And so I’m confident that he will be ready to take on these challenges on January 21st.

MR. BROKAW: And you are fully aware that there will be some–how many, no one can say for sure–but there will be some who will say this is an African-American, distinguished American, supporting another African-American because of race.

GEN. POWELL: If I had only had that in mind, I could have done this six, eight, 10 months ago. I really have been going back and forth between somebody I have the highest respect and regard for, John McCain, and somebody I was getting to know, Barack Obama. And it was only in the last couple of months that I settled on this. And I can’t deny that it will be a historic event for an African-American to become president. And should that happen, all Americans should be proud–not just African-Americans, but all Americans–that we have reached this point in our national history where such a thing could happen. It will also not only electrify our country, I think it’ll electrify the world.

MR. BROKAW: You have some differences with Barack Obama. He has said that once he takes office, he wants to begin removing American troops from Iraq. Here’s what you had to say about that: “I have found in my many years of service, to set arbitrary dates that don’t coincide with the situation on the ground or what actually is happening tends not to be a useful strategy. … Arbitrary deadlines that are snatched out of the air and are based on some lunar calculation is not the way to run a military or a strategic operation of this type.” That was on February 10th of this year on CNN. Now that you have Barack Obama’s ear in a new fashion, will you say to him, “Drop your idea of setting a deadline of some kind to pull the troops out of Iraq”?

GEN. POWELL: First of all, I think that’s a great line, and thanks for pulling it up. And I believe that. But as I watch what’s happening right now, the United States is negotiating the–an agreement with the Iraqi government that will call for most major combat operations to cease by next June and for American forces to start withdrawing to their bases. And that agreement will also provide for all American troops to be gone by 2011, but conditioned on the situation as it exists at that time. So there already is a timeline that’s being developed between the Iraqis and the United States government. So I think whoever becomes the president, whether it’s John McCain or whether it’s Barack Obama, we’re going to see a continued drawdown. And when, you know, which day so many troops come out or what units come out, that’ll be determined by the commanders and the new president. But I think we are on a glide path to reducing our presence in Iraq over the next couple of years. Increasingly, this problem’s going to be solved by the Iraqis. They’re going to make the political decisions, their security forces are going to take over, and they’re going to have to create an environment of reconciliation where all the people can come together and make Iraq a much, much better place.

MR. BROKAW: Let me go back to something that you raised just a moment ago, and that’s William Ayers, a former member of the Weathermen who’s now active in school issues in Illinois. He had some past association with Barack Obama. Wouldn’t it have been more helpful for William Ayers to, on his own, to have renounced his own past? Here was a man who was a part of the most radical group that existed in America at a time when you were serving in Vietnam, targeting the Pentagon, the Capitol. He wrote a book about it that came out on 2001, on September 11th that said, “We didn’t bomb enough.”

GEN. POWELL: It’s despicable, and I have no truck for William Ayers. I think what he did was despicable, and to continue to talk about it in 2001 is also despicable. But to suggest that because Mr. Barack Obama had some contacts of a very casual nature–they sat on a educational board–over time is somehow connected to his thinking or his actions, I think, is a, a terrible stretch. It’s demagoguery.

MR. BROKAW: I want to ask you about your own role in the decision to go to war in Iraq. Barack Obama has been critical of your appearance before the United Nations at that time. Bob Woodward has a new book out called “The War Within,” and here’s what he had to say about Colin Powell and his place in the administration: “Powell … didn’t think [Iraq] was a necessary war, and yet he had gone along in a hundred ways, large and small. He had resisted at times but had succumbed to the momentum and his own sense of deference–even obedience–to the president. … Perhaps more than anyone else in the administration, Powell had been the `closer’ for the president’s case on war.”

And then you were invited to appear before the Iraq Study Group. “`Why did we go into Iraq with so few people?’ [former Secretary of State James] Baker asked. … `Colin just exploded at that point,’ [former Secretary of Defense William] Perry recalled later. `He unloaded,’ Former White House Chief of Staff] Leon Panetta added. `He was angry. He was mad as hell.’ … Powell left [the Study Group meeting]. Baker turned to Panetta and said solemnly, `He’s the one guy who could have perhaps prevented this from happening.'”

What’s the lesson in all of that for a former–for a new secretary of state or for a new national security adviser, based on your own experience?

GEN. POWELL: Well, let’s start at the beginning. I said to the president in 2002, we should try to solve this diplomatically and avoid war. The president accepted that recommendation, we took it to the U.N. But the president, by the end of 2002, believed that the U.N. was not going to solve the problem, and he made a decision that we had to prepare for military action. I fully supported that. And I have never said anything to suggest I did not support going to war. I thought the evidence was there. And it is not just my closing of the whole deal with my U.N. speech. I know the importance of that speech, and I regret a lot of the information that the intelligence community provided us was wrong. But three months before my speech, with a heavy majority, the United States Congress expressed its support to use military force if it was necessary. And so we went in and used military force. My unhappiness was that we didn’t do it right. It was easy to get to Baghdad, but then we forgot that there was a lot more that had to be done. And we didn’t have enough force to impose our will in the country or to deal with the insurgency when it broke out, and that I regret.

MR. BROKAW: Removing the weapons of mass destruction from the equation…

GEN. POWELL: I also assure you that it was not a correct assessment by anybody that my statements or my leaving the administration would have stopped it.

MR. BROKAW: Removing the weapons of mass destruction from the equation, because we now know that they did not exist, was it then a war of necessity or just a war of choice?

GEN. POWELL: Without the weapons of mass destruction present, as conveyed to us by the intelligence community in the most powerful way, I don’t think there would have been a war. It was the reason we took it to the public, it was the reason we took it to the American people to the Congress, who supported it on that basis, and it’s the presentation I made to the United Nations. Without those weapons of mass destruction then Iraq did not present to the world the kind of threat that it did if it had weapons of mass destruction.

MR. BROKAW: You do know that there are supporters of Barack Obama who feel very strongly about his candidacy because he was opposed to the war from the beginning, and they’re going to say, “Who needs Colin Powell? He was the guy who helped get us into this mess.”

GEN. POWELL: I’m not here to get their approval or lack of approval. I am here to express my view as to who I’m going to vote for.

MR. BROKAW: There’s a summing up going on now as, as the Bush/Cheney administration winds down. We’d like to share with our audience some of what you had to say about the two men who are at the top of the administration. At the convention in 2000, this is Colin Powell on President Bush and Dick Cheney at that time.

(Videotape, July 31, 2000)

GEN. POWELL: Dick Cheney is one of the most distinguished and dedicated public servants this nation has ever had. He will be a superb vice president.

The Bush/Cheney team will be a great team for America. They will put our nation on a course of hope and optimism for this new century.

(End videotape)

MR. BROKAW: Was that prophetic or wrong?

GEN. POWELL: It’s what I believed. It reflected the agenda of the new president, compassionate conservatism. And some of it worked out. I think we have advanced our freedom agenda, I think we’ve done a lot to help people around the world with our programs of development. I think we’ve done a lot to solve some conflicts such as in Liberia and elsewhere. But, at the same time, we have managed to convey to the world that we are more unilateral than we really are. We have not explained ourself well enough. And we, unfortunately, have left an impression with the world that is not a good one. And the new president is going to have to fix the reputation that we’ve left with the rest of the world.

Now, let me make a point here. The United States is still seen as the leader at the world that wants to be free. Even though the numbers are down with respect to favorability ratings, at every embassy and consular office tomorrow morning that we have, people will be lined up, and they’ll all say the same thing, “We want to go to America.” So we’re still the leader of the world that wants to be free. We are still the inspiration of the rest of the world. And we can come back. In 2000, it was moment where I believed that the new administration coming in would be able to achieve the agenda that President-elect Bush had set out of compassionate conservatism.

MR. BROKAW: But it failed?

GEN. POWELL: I don’t think it was as successful–excuse me (clears throat)–I don’t think it was as successful as it might have been. And, as you see from the presidential approval ratings, the American people have found the administration wanting.

MR. BROKAW: Let me as, you a couple of questions–quick questions as we wrap all of this up. I know you’re very close to President Bush 41. Are you still in touch with him on a regular basis? And what do you think he’ll think about you this morning endorsing Barack Obama?

GEN. POWELL: I will let President Bush 41, speak for himself and let others speak for themselves, just as I have spoken for myself. Let me make one point, Tom, both Senator McCain and Senator Obama will be good presidents. It isn’t easy for me to disappoint Senator McCain in the way that I have this morning, and I regret that. But I strongly believe that at this point in America’s history, we need a president that will not just continue, even with a new face and with some changes and with some maverick aspects, who will not just continue, basically, the policies that we have been following in recent years. I think we need a transformational figure. I need–think we need a president who is a generational change. And that’s why I’m supporting Barack Obama. Not out of any lack of respect or admiration for Senator John McCain.

MR. BROKAW: And finally, how much of a factor do you think race will be when voters go into that booth on November 4th?

GEN. POWELL: I don’t know the answer to that question. One may say that it’s going to be a big factor, and a lot of people say they will vote for Senator Obama but they won’t pull a lever. Others might say that has already happened. People are already finding other reasons to say they’re not voting for him. “Well, he’s a Muslim,” “He’s this.” So we have already seen the so-called “Bradley factor” in the current–in the current spread between the candidates. And so that remains to be seen. I hope it is not the case. I think we have advanced considerably in this country since the days of Tom Bradley. And I hope that is not the case. It would be very unfortunate if it were the case.

MR. BROKAW: Finally, if Senator Obama is elected president, will there be a place for Colin Powell in that administration? Maybe as the ambassador at large in Africa or to take on the daunting task of resolving the Israeli/Palestinian issue?

GEN. POWELL: I served 40 years in government, and I–I’m not looking forward to a position or an assignment. Of course, I have always said if a president asks you to do something, you have to consider it. But I am in no way interested in returning to government. But I, of course, would sit and talk to any president who wishes to talk to me.

MR. BROKAW: You’re not ruling it out?

GEN. POWELL: I would sit and talk to any president who wishes to talk to me, but I’m not anxious to rule it in.

MR. BROKAW: General Colin Powell, thank you very much for being with us this morning. Appreciate it.

GEN. POWELL: Thank you, Tom.

MR. BROKAW: Coming up next, Decision 2008, the home stretch. We’ll look at the states and strategies in play with David Brooks, Jon Meacham, Andrea Mitchell, Joe Scarborough. And Chuck Todd, our political director, will take us through the electoral map.

Overall, I think that this won’t really have a huge effect on the campaign for either side.  I don’t think Obama is going to win many more people over with this.  I think that the people that this could have swayed have already been won over to one side or the other, but I can definitely tell you that this won’t help McCain.  It was a blow to the McCain camp.  A small blow in my opinion, but it’s a blow that McCain really can’t afford to take right now.

And the fact that General Powell won’t be campaigning for Obama will make his influence a lot smaller than Obama would like.

Done Reporting,

Ranting Republican
add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! ::
[dig=http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Former_Secretary_of_State_Colin_Powell_Endorses_Obama]

The Video of the Obama “Sing for Change” Kids Is Creepy and Disturbing

October 2, 2008

So, I saw on the news last night, the following video of a group of kids singing an Obama song, under the direction of Kathy Sawada, a music teacher (just a note – this video was not done through any official school organization or anything like that.  I included her occupation just for background):

Holy crap, that’s freaky!

Now, here’s what the website, Sing for Change, says on it’s main page (Note: I can’t get on it anymore – it looks as if it was taken down, because it’s now just redirecting me to the domain-hosting site):

Sing for Change chronicles a recent Sunday afternoon, when 22 children, ages 5-12, gathered to sing original songs in the belief that their singing would lift up our communities for the coming election. Light, hope, courage and love shine through these non-voting children who believe that their very best contribution to the Obama campaign is to sing.

And on it’s About page:

Sing for Change was a confluence of hard work, good will, and shared vision. Inspired by ideas raised at a grassroots Obama fundraiser, a music teacher, Kathy Sawada, and the children composed and rehearsed the songs in less than two weeks. Several musicians heard of the effort and volunteered to accompany the children. Parents and older siblings designed and provided the T-Shirts and the banner. There’s a first for everything, but rarely do so many firsts come together at once: for the children and their parents, this is their first performance, first video, first banner, and first involvement with grassroots work on a presidential campaign.

As Sunday approached, a neighbor volunteered a home. Production wizards got wind of the project and offered their help in recording it. The likes of Jeff Zucker, Holly Schiffer, Peter Rosenfeld, Darin Moran, Jean Martin, Andy Blumenthal, and Nick Phoenix rearranged schedules to participate. Holly Schiffer was able to get three High Definition cameras (Panasonic HVX250’s), and an AVID editing facility. When Jeff Zucker went to pick up the camera package, Ted Schilowitz happened to be there and offered a RED camera set up on a SteadiCam.

What we accomplished in a few hours on a Sunday afternoon embodies the nature of the Obama campaign: its grassroots inspiration, its inclusiveness, its community building. People pitched in quickly for a cause that resonated with them. There were not many conditions: “Think this is a good idea? Want to help? Great. Sunday at 12:00.” At the heart of the project were 22 children and their music. The willingness of all involved to come together for them was a testament to our hope, unity, courage, joy and belief in the future represented by these children.

That’s right, that would be THE Jeff Zucker, the President and CEO of NBC (let’s see if NBC and MSNBC are going to be able to maintain that appearance of being “balanced” now – not like I ever thought they were).

This is just sick.  These kids, especially the young ones, couldn’t have formed logical opinions on who they’d support in this election.  I’d say the same thing if they were singing for McCain (although, it’s interesting, there’s quite a few videos of children singing for Obama on YouTube, but none that I could find for McCain).  Heck – I’d say this was crazy if they were singing about Abraham Lincoln – 5-year-olds don’t know if they’d have agreed with Lincoln on his interpretation.  What if the kid wants to be a states’rights secessionist – he has that RIGHT (although, in my opinion, that person would have a skewed interpretation of the Constitution).

The point is, no SANE parent would have a kid as young as most of them participating, and applauding.

It’s brainwashing.  It would be brainwashing if this was for McCain.  It would be brainwashing if this was done for Lincoln even – and most Americans LOVE Lincoln.

The point is, the parents who participated in these need to have their heads examined.  I feel sorry for the kids who didn’t know any better.  “OOH!  OBAMA WILL BRING CHANGE!  Let’s sing a song about him!”  No – these kids were persuaded to do this by their parents (maybe with the exception of those 10-12).

Even my liberal roommates and thec onservative/semi-apathetic one agreed with me on this – it’s creepy.

Done Ranting,

Ranting Republican
add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! ::

Newt Gingrich Slams MSNBC Reporter During Discussion on Sarah Palin’s Qualifications

September 3, 2008

Here’s a video of Newt Gingrich being interviewed by MSNBC’s reporter Ron Allen.  A transcript is available below the video:

Allen: But to be fair, her resumé is not something that we’re familiar seeing with Presidential candidates.

Gingrich: It’s stronger than Barack Obama’s.  I don’t know why you guys walk around saying this baloney.  She has a stronger resume than Obama.  She’s been a real mayor, he hasn’t.  She has been a real governor, he hasn’t.  She’s been in charge of the Alaskan National Guard, he hasn’t. She was a whistle-blower who defeated an incumbent mayor.  He has never once shown that kind of courage.  She’s a whistle-blower who turned in the chairman of her own party and got him fined $12,000.  I’ve never seen Obama do one thing like that.  She took on the incumbent governor of her own party and beat him, and then she beat a former Democratic governor in the general election.  I don’t know of a single thing Obama’s done except talk and write.  I’d like you to tell me one thing Senator Obama’s done.

Allen: Thanks very much, Mr. Speaker. I’m going to leave it there.  I’m not going to argue the case.  Thanks very much.

And then he goes back to Keith Olbermann who goes to a commercial break.  Unfortunately, Olbermann doesn’t have videos up from yesterday, and MSNBC doesn’t seem to have anything else up either.  If anybody has the response from Olbermann, I’d love to link to it!

But that was pretty awesome.  Like I say, the media needs to be put in its place sometimes, and boy did Gingrich do that!

Done Laughing,

Ranting Republican
add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! ::

A Tribute to MSNBC’s Tim Russert

June 14, 2008

As most of you know, MSNBC’s Tim Russert, the host of  Meet the Press passed away earlier today.  He collapsed from a heart attack while at work.

Russert was a great reporter, who didn’t focus on partisanship, but focused on getting the facts.  Meet the Press was a difficult show for many politicians to go on, because of Russert’s commitment to finding the truth.  He didn’t make it an easy interview for anybody.

On this Father’s Day weekend, my thoughts and prayers go out to his family.  He will be missed by all, but it must be especially difficult for his family.

I will leave you with a video, and Russert’s famous words: “That’s all for today. We’ll be back next week. If it’s Sunday, it’s Meet the Press.”

Rest in peace Tim.

Done Eulogizing,

Ranting Republican
add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! ::

Obama: “Voters Are Tired of” Hearing About Reverend Wright

May 1, 2008

Today, MSNBC’s Today Showaired a clip of an interview between Meredith Vieira and Barack and Michelle Obama that will air on Saturday.  In it, Barack and Michelle Obama discussed their pastor, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, and the ongoing campaign for the Presidency.

Here’s a link to the MSNBC video (unfortunately, due to the computer virus, I am unable to upload it for you to see here, and it was too long for me to transcribe, but I’ll try to embed it sometime later this week):

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/24402686#24402686

Here, we have some quotes from the beginning:

Michelle Obama said, “We hear time and time again voters are tired of this [the Reverend Wright story]. … They don’t want to hear about this division, they want to know what are we going to do to move beyond these issues.  And what made me feel proud of Barack in this situation is that he is trying to move us as a nation beyond these conversations that divide.”

Barack also told Vieira, “When the first snippets came out, I thought it was important to give him the benefit of the doubt because if I had wanted to be politically expedient I would have distanced myself and denounced him right away, right?  That would have been the easy thing to do.”

He then when on to criticize the media, saying, “I think it’s pretty clear what has happened.  We’ve had — what — two months now, or a month and a half, in which you’ve had the Reverend Wright controversy, you’ve had the issue of my comments in San Francisco that have been magnified pretty heavily — that’s been a pretty full dose.”

Michelle was also interviewed by CNN, yesterday, where she said that Barack’s denunciation of his pastor was “a tough thing for him to do. … Yes, it was painful.  Yes, it’s been difficult, but I think that the more difficult thing that this country is facing is trying to move politics into conversations around problems and problem-solving, and that’s what we’re going to be pretty determined to do.  I think that this is about all I’m going to say on this issue, and I think we’re going to close this chapter and move into the next phase of this election.  With that, I’m hoping that we’ll talk about something else.”

Now, I have to disagree with the Obama’s here.  If the media is still airing these stories, then people are interested.  The media does not air things that lose them watchers, they air things that get people to watch, and these are new stories.  Every time Wright opens his mouth, he says something “newsworthy” and that’s coming back to haunt Obama.  Perhaps Obama supporters are tired of hearing about it, but I guarantee you that most of America is not.  Now, I’m not saying that the media should focus on Reverend Wright, I’m just saying that the mere fact that they are shows that people are still interested.

Hopefully I’ll be able to see the full interview on Saturday, although I will be out of town, so I can’t guarantee that.

Done Hearing About Reverend Wright,

Ranting Republican
add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! ::

Howard Dean: “We’ll Know Who Our Nominee Is” by the “End of June”

April 28, 2008

Today, Democratic National Committee Chairman and former Vermont Governor Howard Dean appeared on MSNBC’s Today Show, where he was interviewed by Meredith Vieira.  He discussed the current situation between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton as well as what role the Superdelegates will play in the nomination process.  The following is a video of the interview, and I have typed a transcript below it:

Meredith Vieira: Howard Dean is the Chairman of the Democratic National Committee and former Governor of the State of Vermont.  Doctor Dean, good morning to you.

Dean: Thanks for having me on.

Meredith: Thanks for being here.  You just heard that Reverend Wright is making headlines again.  How much does he complicate your efforts to eventually bring this party together?

Dean: Well, you know, I—I’ve made it a point not to comment on either of the campaigns, so I’m not gonna comment on Reverend Wright, which is all about—in this campaign.  My focus is John McCain.  Uh—John McCain wants to stay in Iraq for 100 years.  He thinks the economy is the problem of the mortgage holders, and not the mortgage lenders.  Uh—he thinks that we ought not to have health care for our kids.  Uh—there’s a big difference between both Hillary—Clinton and Barack Obama.  On the one hand and John McCain on the other, so I—I’m not gonna get into the Obama versus Clinton stuff.

Meredith: But race has certainly become a key element in—in this campaign, on both sides.  You can’t ignore that.

Dean: I—I’m not totally convinced that it is a key element, uh—[unintelligible].  I think that people make up their minds on a variety of issues and I think they’ll continue to do that.  But again, I—there’s a big—the biggest difference on this campaign is not between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.  It’s between John McCain, who’s a candidate of the past, a candidate that offers us four more of George Bush—uh—and either of our two candidates, who are really gonna be agents of change.

Meredith: But first you have to have somebody nominated, and you’re hoping to see this nomination wrapped up by June.  How optimistic are you that that will happen?

Dean: I think it will happen.  Um—I think—we—we got nine more primaries.  I think we’re gonna get through those.  Uh—we’ve got two really big ones coming up a week from tomorrow.  Uh—and then—uh—the—there’s 500 of the 800 unpledged delegates have already said who they’re for.  I think the remaining 300 will do that by the end of June and we’ll know who our nominee is, and that’s what we need to do.

Meredith: But if you listen to Senators Clinton and Obama over the past few days, they’ve been arguing over what criteria the Superdelegates should use to make their selection, and Clinton is suggesting that it’s the person who has the most votes, popular votes, and she has those if you count Michigan and Florida.  Barack Obama is saying, “No, no, no, it’s the person who has the most pledged delegates.”  But if I understand the rules right, the Superdelegates don’t have to abide by any of those criteria.

Dean: Uh—the—the rules say that the delegates can vote their conscience, and they—they’re Superdelegates—and they will vote their conscience.  Most of the time, and in fact, all of the time in my personal experience, they have voted for the person with the most pledged delegates, but there’s—that’s not in the rules, and they can do—I—I think what they’re gonna do is vote for the person they think can beat John McCain.  Look, we’ve just got a new ad out on the—on McCain’s position on the war.  It’s so far away from where Americans want to be, that I just can’t imagine how they’re gonna elect John McCain.  The only way that John McCain wins this race is if Democrats are not united.  We need to be united in order to win.  We need a new direction for this country, and again, John McCain offers the—the past.

Meredith: But right now you are not united, sir, that’s very clear.

Dean: Well, we’ve got a race going on, and as soon as we finish that race, we’ll be united.

Meredith: But what—what—you—you talked about the Superdelegates following the will of the pledged delegates.  If they don’t do that this time, and as you said, they don’t have to, there is the possibility of a perception that the race was stolen.  How do you ensure that it was not, to the person who loses?  How do you ensure that it was fair?

Dean: That’s exactly what I’m doing.  I stand up for what the rules of the party are.  You may or may not like the rules, but both candidates knew what the rules were when we started—uh—they both have campaigns among pledged and unpledged delegates, and my job is to uphold the rules—without fear or favor of any candidates.  Look, somebody’s gonna lose this race with 49% of the delegates.  We can’t win the Presidency without those 49% that represent the candidate that doesn’t win.  And so, I need to make sure that whoever loses feels that they’ve been treated fairly and respectfully, and that’s what my—that’s my job and that’s what I’m gonna do.

Meredith: Have you spoken to the two candidates, taken them aside, and said, “Look [unintelligible] if you lose, I expect you to go out there and campaign vigorously,” for the other one?

Dean: I don’t think I need to do that.  Look, when I lost to John Kerry, I didn’t need to be told that this was about something that was greater than—than me, this was about the country.  And I worked very hard for John Kerry, and it took me about three months to get my folks to change their position and not support me, but support John Kerry for the Presidency, because it was about what was good for America, and I think either of these candidates are experienced public servants and they know, without being told by me or anybody else, that their obligation is to their country, and I think that they will do that very thing.  As soon as they know that they aren’t gonna win, they’re gonna support the other candidate.

Meredith: Alright, Howard Dean, thank you very much.

Dean: Thank you.

Now, let’s look at some parts of Dean’s interview.

First, I have to clarify a statement that Dean made:

Uh—John McCain wants to stay in Iraq for 100 years.  He thinks the economy is the problem of the mortgage holders, and not the mortgage lenders.  Uh—he thinks that we ought not to have health care for our kids.

Yeah, that’s blatantly untrue.  Nowhere has McCain said that he WANTS to spend 100 years in Iraq, but that we should stay there that long if necessary.  He never said that we shouldn’t have health care for kids, but that the government shouldn’t be buying health care plans for them.

Meredith: But race has certainly become a key element in—in this campaign, on both sides.  You can’t ignore that.

Dean: I—I’m not totally convinced that it is a key element, uh—[unintelligible].  I think that people make up their minds on a variety of issues and I think they’ll continue to do that.

Dean, buddy, where’ve you been?  Of course race is a key element – this is America.  It’ll be a key element for another 50-100 years.

Meredith: But first you have to have somebody nominated, and you’re hoping to see this nomination wrapped up by June.  How optimistic are you that that will happen?

Dean: I think it will happen.  Um—I think—we—we got nine more primaries.  I think we’re gonna get through those.  Uh—we’ve got two really big ones coming up a week from tomorrow.  Uh—and then—uh—the—there’s 500 of the 800 unpledged delegates have already said who they’re for.  I think the remaining 300 will do that by the end of June and we’ll know who our nominee is, and that’s what we need to do.

I honestly don’t see Clinton as giving up by then.  If she’s behind, she’ll take it to the convention floor and fight for every last delegate to come over to her side.  The only way she’ll win it is if Florida and Michigan are seated, and Obama wouldn’t allow that, and even if he did, his supporters wouldn’t, and the future of the Democratic party would be bleak at best for the next 20+ years.

Meredith: But what—what—you—you talked about the Superdelegates following the will of the pledged delegates.  If they don’t do that this time, and as you said, they don’t have to, there is the possibility of a perception that the race was stolen.  How do you ensure that it was not, to the person who loses?  How do you ensure that it was fair?

Dean: That’s exactly what I’m doing.  I stand up for what the rules of the party are.  You may or may not like the rules, but both candidates knew what the rules were when we started—uh—they both have campaigns among pledged and unpledged delegates, and my job is to uphold the rules—without fear or favor of any candidates.  Look, somebody’s gonna lose this race with 49% of the delegates.  We can’t win the Presidency without those 49% that represent the candidate that doesn’t win.  And so, I need to make sure that whoever loses feels that they’ve been treated fairly and respectfully, and that’s what my—that’s my job and that’s what I’m gonna do.

Right on.  If the Democrats don’t unite (and they won’t!!!) it pretty much gurantees McCain the win.

Meredith: Have you spoken to the two candidates, taken them aside, and said, “Look [unintelligible] if you lose, I expect you to go out there and campaign vigorously,” for the other one?

Dean: I don’t think I need to do that.  Look, when I lost to John Kerry, I didn’t need to be told that this was about something that was greater than—than me, this was about the country.  And I worked very hard for John Kerry, and it took me about three months to get my folks to change their position and not support me, but support John Kerry for the Presidency, because it was about what was good for America, and I think either of these candidates are experienced public servants and they know, without being told by me or anybody else, that their obligation is to their country, and I think that they will do that very thing.  As soon as they know that they aren’t gonna win, they’re gonna support the other candidate.

But you and Kerry didn’t fight NEARLY as much as Obama and Clinton are.  And you and Kerry didn’t go through all of the primaries before you knew who the nominee was.  The two are VERY different, and althouigh the 2 candidates may APPEAR to get along, they won’t, and Americans will see this.  In addition, the supporters of the loser won’t all go over to the other side, and many of them will stay home, ESPECIALLY if Obama loses.  All those young people who got involved will suddenly become apathetic again.

I honestly wonder if Dean really believes what he’s saying, whether or not he truly believes that everything will work out alright.

Frankly, I don’t see how the Democrats could pull off a win, unless the Republicans and/or McCain screw up big before November (Mark Foley, George Allen, etc…).

Done Ranting,

Ranting Republican
add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! ::

Obama Slams Chris Matthews and Cable News in a Joke During an Interview

April 5, 2008

During an interview at West Chester University (just outside Philadelphia, PA) with Chris Matthews on Hardball: College Tour, Obama was asked, “At any time in this campaign, did you have a chuckle … something … that you just went to bed laughing about.”  Obama responded with, “Oh, I think that happens once a day, but then I stopped watching cable news.”  Matthews responded, “Oh.”

Here’s a video clip of that part of the interview:

And, here’s another clip from The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, with a little back and forth between Matthews and Obama, as well as Stewart’s commentary: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNMZZzd1wts.

I’ve gotta say, I liked this from Obama – the media needs to be put in it’s place every once in a while, and although it was a joke, Matthews’s reaction (especially the tone of the “oh” and his face, and then him just trying to go on) was priceless.

Done Laughing,

Ranting Republican
add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! ::


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 288 other followers

%d bloggers like this: