CNN congressional correspondent Joe Johns apparently couldn't resist inserting some sarcastic remarks about Republican presidential candidates Fred Thompson and Rudy Giuliani in his "Raw Politics" segment on Thursday night's "Anderson Cooper 360." [Video (1:46): Real (1.29 MB) Windows (1.09 MB) MP3 (806 kB).]
JOE JOHNS: Ever heard the phrase all about the Benjamins? In this town, when you want to monetize power, you go to K Street, lobbying, where top lobbyists make 500 bucks an hour or more. The problem is, you can end up lobbying for some politically awkward clients, like Fred Thompson did for an abortion-rights group, which takes some explaining in front of an anti-abortion audience. "The New York Times" and "Raw Politics" dug up his billing records. Mr. Conservative "Law & Order" got paid $5,000 for 20 hours of work. Heavy political baggage, a hand full of Benjamins. Hope it was worth it, Senator.
Story Continues Below Ad ↓Speaking of law and order, we now know how Rudy Giuliani is going to try to lure Republicans in places like Iowa and South Carolina to vote for the ultimate fancy-pants New York City lawyer. He was even mayor of the city, for crying out loud. Rudy's new mantra, I am a strict constructionist, which is another way of saying conservative standard-bearers like Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito are Rudy's kind of guys.
But now get this. He says his position doesn't have anything to do with abortion or overturning Roe vs. Wade, which all three justices would probably like to do. Wait a minute. This doesn't belong in "Raw Politics." It should be in "Keeping Them Honest."
"Fancy-pants New York City lawyer"? Funny, I thought that was Mario Cuomo.
(Special thanks to MRC intern Joe Steigerwald for pointing out this segment.)
Updated with video links at 17:41 EDT
—Matthew Balan is a news analyst at the Media Research Center.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Looking at the choices...
July 20, 2007 - 15:30 ET by c5thenI'd take "Fancy Pants" Guilianni over "Fancy Hair and Pants" Edwards and "Fancy Broach" Hillary any day. But, in reality I think that Thompson beats them all.
When you work for a company and don't own it, you can not always have the option of picking who your clients are and what projects you are assigned to.
I guess that Joe Johns, while doing a story on the "Alleged" Messiah would wonder what he was REALLY doing out in the dessert for 40 days.
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic
Is Fred actually an
July 20, 2007 - 15:40 ET by sarcasmoIs Fred actually an officially-declared Presidential candidate? Maybe there will be odds on a date out there, or someone here is in the know, but before the holiday came & went I'd been under the impression Fred would declare on July 4th.
JMR
sarc...He is waiting
July 20, 2007 - 15:45 ET by bigtimersarc...
He is waiting until after Labor Day to announce...anyway that is the latest I heard today and it makes perfect sense as I have explained before with this link, you may have missed this, I don't know, but I put this here quite awhile ago a few times, anyway it makes my point, plus the article does too.
Ah, thanks BT. Now I
July 20, 2007 - 16:22 ET by sarcasmoAh, thanks BT. Now I remember, and I promise not to want him to announce 'till after Labor Day. Come to think of it, this might be what Al Gore's doing, too?? And maybe Fred and Al, in this era of big government regulation, have stumbled upon a "new way to run"??! In fact, much like primaries getting earlier, maybe all these announcements will get later. I'm not so sure it's a good unintended consequence, but it is certainly an amusing one...
JMR
sarc, Well as far as I am
July 20, 2007 - 16:27 ET by bigtimersarc,
Well as far as I am concerned it is wi$e for Fred to wait, he doesn't have to declare what his contributions/amount are until Oct.
Plus I think this non-stop election since the '06 election is totally ridiculous and frankly boring, let alone maddening, even though I am a political junkie, enough is enough, and too much is too much, and this has been waaaay too much waaaay too early...
JMHO.
Well, the good news is that
July 20, 2007 - 16:43 ET by sarcasmoWell, the good news is that people care. The bad news seems to be that the candidates mostly seem to like an echo-chamber of similar views. I'd still love to see 'em all play poker (and, as before, my money in that poker game would be on Rudy and/or Mitt and NOT anyone as painfully-honest as Dr. Paul!). But even though I think my guy will lose chip-wise, I'd love to see the candidates campaigning-together. Did you know that Barry Goldwater and JFK had planned to go around the country for a while IN THE SAME PLANE??? Can you imagine being a fly on the wall, or the potential good -- even if Goldwater had lost -- being around eachother's ideas may have done for JFK's hypothetical second term? I hope "the people" override the ever-present handlers in this election and force all the candidates together for undignified things, and not just "dignified" things like the debates, optional undignified stuff, like card & chess games, or maybe even distance-runs or swimming. Maybe whatever each one's good-at he/she could introduce to the others. But there's no reason for TV viewers now used to shows like "Survivor" to let them get away with treating eachother as if they don't exist. And aside from the entertainment-value, shoving them all together for a while in a big plane or train might even save the taxpayers a few bucks on Secret Service protection.
JMR
LOL sarc... Well I know
July 20, 2007 - 16:48 ET by bigtimerLOL sarc...
Well I know of a few I'd love to shove together on a plane or train or slow boat to oh say China...
For good!.... Heck Hillary knows all about the capital in that country now doesn't she?
LMAO!
And supposedly, Hillary
July 20, 2007 - 17:07 ET by sarcasmoAnd supposedly, Hillary (like my engineer-in-the-'50s Mom!) was a Goldwater Girl. Being around the right or wrong people can obviously have a lasting effect. And I the more I read about him, the more I think Barry Goldwater's were some huge shoes that we have yet to fill politically in America. I often wonder what would have happened in the '60s and '70s if we'd somehow been blessed with frugal Barry as President instead of that Texas-sized-spender, LBJ, but I guess my fiscal alternate-history fantasies are a lot like most of the others... ;^)
JMR
Sarc, I remember my mom
July 20, 2007 - 17:18 ET by BlondeSarc,
I remember my mom throwing away her Goldwater button in disgust (actually tossing it out the window of the '56 Thunderbird) when Goldwater lost. I even remember where.
Wish I had that campaign button now.
He's not yet declared and
July 20, 2007 - 16:17 ET by JDWHe's not yet declared and the dems are running away from him faster than the illegal who was shot on the border. Compare their reactions to let's say sen Clinton who is defending image (cleavage) rather than issues v. the fear of Sen Thompson's announcement.
JDW
News media: Scoreboard for terrorists
Well thats a good screen shot!
July 20, 2007 - 16:09 ET by c5thenAt least the graphics on the CNN show agree that abortion is indeed a sin.
That is an admission that I never thought I'd see.
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic
Sorry C5
July 20, 2007 - 17:33 ET by exLibI think what liberals do is insist that because they don't say "sin" is wrong they are not guilty of it. To a liberal that is the highest order. Don't make up a moral code and you are not obliged to follow it.
However, the other rule of liberalism is to be the first to throw the stone at the one who commits the real sin, which is to actually accuse someone else of sinning!!!
How's that for convoluted logic.
Of course this is in direct conflict with the Bible which states that the object is to recognize and admit ones sin and then repent. No one is perfect, so that certainly is not the standard for preaching the good news.
Anyone else notice the
July 20, 2007 - 21:29 ET by GregEAnyone else notice the barrage of airtime that Obama, Clinton, and Edwards stories (or they themselves, in the case of Edwards) are getting? To me it seems to be quite a lopsided phenonemon, Dems vs Reps in free news channel/news show air time. Yes, I am not naive enough to expect any different, but the blatancy of it all is rather disgusting in what should be objective news outlets. Did I actually say objective? What was I thinking?
And these are the same people who would stand up and whine for the Fairless Doctrine. Oh yea, but that's different......they'd say.