Scarborough Takes On Limbaugh For Attacking 'No Labels' Group
On Tuesday, conservative talk radio host Rush Limbaugh accused the No Labels crowd of being a bunch of "washed-up losers."
On Sunday's "Meet the Press," MSNBC's Joe Scarborough took on Limbaugh's criticism saying he has "the luxury of never actually governing, never being a president, never being a senator, never being in Congress" (video follows with transcript and commentary):
DAVID GREGORY, HOST: We're back, joined by our political roundtable, and look at this finding from our latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll about how people feel about where the country's headed. Look at that, 63 percent think the country's off on the wrong track. Mark McKinnon, you know as a political pro, that that is a really good indication of the independent vote and where that independent vote might actually go. This was a scene this week, the No Labels launch, the idea of an independent political movement that could somehow break ties. And you had some pretty big figures on the right and the left, but you've also been accused of "childish magical thinking." That was Frank Rich in The New York Times today. The idea that the heavy lifting of moving the country forward could be accomplished by a no labels group is on many, on the left and the right, just unthinkable.
MARK MCKINNON: Well, the political--63 percent of Americans are disenfranchised with what's happening in Washington because they see this harsh, poisonous environment and harsh partisanship. A thousand people from--representing all 50 states came to New York to help launch this effort called No Labels, which is designed to bring more civility to politics and address the hyperpartisanship. And we've had a great success already because we brought together the harsh partisans on the left and the harsh partisans on the right, Rush Limbaugh, Frank Rich, they're all attacking us because they don't want--they think it's magical thinking when Cory Booker works with Governor Christie, working together for solutions. They don't want that because it doesn't help their ratings, it doesn't help their profits. And Frank Rich attacked us in The New York Times today saying we only had three black speakers. Well, he obviously didn't watch the event or he's doing sloppy research because we had three prominent featured African-American speakers, including Mayor Booker, who spoke about all the things that he's doing as mayor there. So it's been a tremendous response we're getting from the middle of America who think that we need to work together like the, like the vice president said.
GREGORY: Well, Joe, what about devil's advocate time here, which is why don't we recognize that politics is not a dirty game...
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Right.
GREGORY: ...that people have deeply held ideological views and differences.
SCARBOROUGH: Right.
GREGORY: ...and that--look what's happened in the Republican Party. It has become more conservative because a lot of Republicans thought, and even independents, that it got away from basic principles.
SCARBOROUGH: Well, sure. But, but as we've been saying for two years on our show, this is still James Madison's Constitution. You have Frank Rich on the left enraged by what Mark's doing; Rush Limbaugh on the right, enraged. And they have the luxury of never actually governing. Never being a president, never being a senator, never being in Congress, realizing you actually have to, at the end of the day, sit down and deal with people across the aisle. You want to talk about magical, childish thinking? To quote Joan Didion, Frank Rich and the left have had a year of magical thinking right now, where they believed they can get absolutely everything they wanted, and when they didn't get it, they became petulant and went off in the corner. What did that end up getting them? Well, about 80, 85 newly elected Republicans in the House of Representatives. We govern in the middle. We always have. With, with apologies to Arthur Schlessinger, there's not a pendulum swing ideologically in America. America stays in the middle, and we saw it.
GREGORY: And...
SCARBOROUGH: When, when you go too far left, they slap you back and when Republicans go too far right, they slap you back as well, into the center.
Actually, that's not at all accurate.
After George W. Bush was re-elected in 2004 - and for the first time since Roosevelt in 1936 doing so while expanding majorities in both chambers of Congress - Republicans moved to the left by punting on Social Security reform and completely abandoning fiscal restraint.
As a result, disgusted conservatives barely showed up for the 2006 midterm elections, and Democrats took back both the House and the Senate that year followed by the White House in 2008.
As such, moving to the left - or towards the center as Scarborough would have it - was by no means a successful strategy for Republicans in the middle of the last decade.
After consecutive electoral defeats, along came the Tea Party, which forced Republicans to the right leading to a resounding GOP victory less than two months ago.
As Limbaugh pointed out Tuesday in his discussion on this issue, "All these centrists, all the independents have moved to Republicans in droves, and the Republicans didn't have to do one thing but stay alive to get 'em."
Actually, what Republicans had to do was act like Republicans again instead of Democrats, for quite contrary to Scarborough's assertion, whenever a GOPer moves to the left, he or she fails and fails miserably.
Just ask former presidential candidate John McCain.
Readers are encouraged to review Jeff Poor's take on this exchange.
- Noel Sheppard's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Joe Scarborough is no
Submitted by rbosque on Sun, 12/19/2010 - 10:41pm.
Joe Scarborough is no politician either but I guess he thinks his opinions are valid and Linbaugh's are not. Stand on your head and p!ss on yourself Joe.
Scarborough a politician
Submitted by yutsnark on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 1:28am.
Actually, Scarborough was a congressman from 1995 to 2001.
Wouldn't that make him an
Submitted by Chris Norman on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 1:34am.
Wouldn't that make him an ex-politician?
Chris Norman
Submitted by yutsnark on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 1:41am.
I stand corrected. An ex-politician.
Sit down. You don't have to
Submitted by Chris Norman on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 1:50am.
Sit down. You don't have to stand.
Thanks Chris Norman
Submitted by yutsnark on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 9:51am.
My feet were getting tired.
LMAO
Submitted by dirtydan64 on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 12:59pm.
Joey likes to pat himself on the back at every oppurtunity he get's and he rode in on Regan's Cost Tails and he know's it !!! If it were for Regan winning Joe would be just another average American Citizen as he should relagate himself as today. He's nothing but a tool for the MSNBC and he's done a poor job at that as well. He almost on a daily basis mouths off at how he and his Colleagues balanced the Budget and all the other Shit that in the end we know that Clinton had nothing to do with because the Econmey was in full swing because of the prior administration not because of what Clinton did. Look at the numbers following when Clinton left office and see just what kind of shape our Econmey was in when GW Bush took office. My God how Fast Joe forgets and if anyone should need to have his beel rung a few times it's Joe !!!
Ahhhh.... that explains
Submitted by retrocon on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 3:53pm.
that explains why he's a weasely, wishy-washy, I.Q. lacking, hypocritical loser.
thanks, that helped.
A weasely, wishy-washy, I.Q.
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 3:57pm.
A weasely, wishy-washy, I.Q. lacking, hypocritical loser with an ACU lifetime conservative voting record of 90.
Jer
90?
Submitted by retrocon on Tue, 12/21/2010 - 10:48am.
Is that all? That means he did a good job of naming post offices and voting for military spending.
Besides, he's gone from politics and become a broadcast whore. Hey, Huffy was supposedly once a conservative, but she found a niche making money and fame off libtards.
retro...
Submitted by Jer on Tue, 12/21/2010 - 12:52pm.
I believe the ratings are based on selective, ideological-determinate, reasonably significant pieces of legislation, so you are half-right.
Broadcast whore, maybe. But a whore who is critical of libs and Dems virtually every day--somehow defying his MSNBC bosses.
Jer
Joey boy....
Submitted by trahantg on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 10:58am.
Joe, you are washed up and irrelevant.....look what channel you are on for proof !!!!!
I have long been disappointed in Joe Scarborough. He...
Submitted by jawebster1 on Sun, 12/19/2010 - 11:01pm.
has obviously given up being a Conservative and is now doing his best to appeal to the type of people who watch MESSNBC. I said this years ago and it is still operative: "So long Joe, It's been nice knowing you."
Love the Joe freeze frame there.
Submitted by Texndoc on Sun, 12/19/2010 - 11:02pm.
He looks like he's checking himself out on the off camera monitor.
Joe said Charlie Crist was the future of politics when he switched to independent, because every sane Republican and Democrat were going to rush in droves to make him Senator. End of story. And, oh, his book on what Republicans need to do to return to power sold 4 copies.
The repubs have been cooperating with the dems for well over...
Submitted by Dave. on Sun, 12/19/2010 - 11:04pm.
...a century now, which is THE reason why this country now has two hands and one foot in the grave, with the other one sliding down hill rather quickly.
Any more cooperation with those who are purposely spending us into the financial toilet, along with working to destroy our way of life, our unique culture - not to mention our very nation itself, and that last foot is going to soon join its twin with a very loud thud.
All this "No Label" nonsense is nothng more than business as usual, and that is not a little nauseating to me given the current sorry state of our nation.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
Exactly! Whenever we are told
Submitted by Ryan Mc. on Sun, 12/19/2010 - 11:06pm.
Exactly! Whenever we are told that we are getting too far to the right I want to ask are people worried they'll get to keep more of what they earn? Are they afraid they might lose grant money for a university in NH? Are they going to be offended by a strong national defense? Are they going to push back on conservatives for defending the original intent of the Constitution? Yeah, some will always hate those things but large majorities, when educated by the candidates, vote for it.
The point about McCain is great. Throw in Bush Sr., Dole, and Ford while you are at it. "Radical right" candidates Reagan and the early version of Bush Jr. won. Bush Sr. won as the legacy RR candidate and had an 80% approval, moved to the center on his domestic agenda and lost a year later. The biggest bust in political history was at the feet of mushy moderation. This is the biggest political lie ever told. Ford couldn't even beat Jimmy Carter as the incumbant, but Reagan beat Carter as the challenger.
Mark McKinnon is a left wing
Submitted by Barack_must_go..... on Sun, 12/19/2010 - 11:11pm.
Mark McKinnon is a left wing bomb throwing hack who calls himself a republican. This juicebag is has about the same percentage Republican in him as Scarborough or his playmate Cindy McCain.........Zero, zilch, nada.........NONE.
He just a progressive operative wannabe that is so very jealous of Sarah Palin's wild success, after he bad mouthed and attempted to personally destroy her, that he's now attempting to reinvent himself as a middle of the road kind of guy.
You need look no further than his many MSNBC appearances, many on Scarborough's show to know just how full of shit this loser is.
Barack_Must_Go.....
Useful Idiot
Submitted by Texndoc on Sun, 12/19/2010 - 11:35pm.
I've never seen McKinnon on any show where he wasn't there to belittle Conservatives and say absolutely nothing , nothing, about liberals or Obama. And he is introduced as a "Republican analyst" and sits there with a smirk on his face.
I've always thought Bill OReilly turned on "Rush Limbaugh Conservatives" (ie, the "right wing wackos") because his head-to-head radio show was a bust, and Scarborough obviously has it out for a political party who didn't buy his book on "what to do".
The Slide
Submitted by Chris Norman on Sun, 12/19/2010 - 11:42pm.
Everytime Republicans behaved themselves like they were told a good little minority party should, we slid to the left. Everytime they compromised like they were told a majority political party should, we slid to the left. Everytime they apologized for being conservative like they were told they should, we slid to the left. the country has been sliding to the left for so long. it's been considered the norm. The slide left might slow or even go back a little to the right occasionally, but the slide for the past century has been inexorably to the left. Scarborough and his ilk want us to stay sliding to the left - slowly but steadily.
Joe Scarborough taking on Rush Limbaugh is like a
Submitted by Rush Fan on Sun, 12/19/2010 - 11:48pm.
piss ant taking on the Lion, the King of the Jungle.
That expression of disgust with piss ant Joe Scarborough out of the way, I concur that Republicans must return to their conservative principles if this great nation is to return to prosperity.
MARK MCKINNON: "And Frank
Submitted by Outback Jon on Sun, 12/19/2010 - 11:51pm.
MARK MCKINNON: "And Frank Rich attacked us in The New York Times today saying we only had three black speakers. Well, he obviously didn't watch the event or he's doing sloppy research because we had three prominent featured African-American speakers, including Mayor Booker, who spoke about all the things that he's doing as mayor there."Am I reading that wrong or did he say "Frank Rich said we only had three black speakers, but he obviously didn't watch the event because we had three black speakers." ???
Good catch. Rich erred when
Submitted by Chris Norman on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 12:05am.
Good catch. Rich erred when he didn't put in "prominent featured" - apparently that makes all the difference.
That reminds me of once hearing Brent Musberger saying on air, "Stranger things have happened, but none as strange as this!"
Was McKinnon talking about
Submitted by Barack_must_go..... on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 3:49am.
Was McKinnon talking about big lips, noses and asses or simply their standing in society?
Barack_Must_Go.....
Sheesh
Submitted by Denny Crane on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 4:22am.
more racist trype.
We Are The 53%
You do know there are black conservatives posting here, right?
Submitted by SickofLibs on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 8:49am.
WTF.
EDIT: strike the word conservatives
Please do me a favor and
Submitted by Chris Norman on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 10:29am.
Please do me a favor and don't post your offensive comments as replies to mine.
Mark Mckinnon is a low life back stabbing jerk
Submitted by philipjames on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 12:07am.
It was Mark Mckinnon and Nicole Wallace who were the backstabbing rats from the McCain campaign who were leaking and smearing Sarah Palin even while the campaign was still going. These two low life scum and sewer dwelling rats are walking around presenting themselves as Republican geniuses when in fact they are prostitutes who will smile and shake your hand with one of theirs while they slip a knife in your ribs with the other.
Mark McKinnon - slime ball scum
Nicole Wallace - dried up smelly skank
See - this is why you will
Submitted by Chris Norman on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 12:39am.
See - this is why you'll never be invited to be a panelist on a talk show.
The dried up smelly skank
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 10:36am.
was defending Rush Limbaugh and blasting Frank Rich on Morning Joe earlier today.
Jer
Oohhh
Submitted by Boudin on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 10:07pm.
So, should that excuse her backstabbing of Palin and McCain? Always the equivalency game, eh Jer.
BTW, who was she defending Rush from, Joe the conservative?
Not a game at all, Boudin.
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 10:56pm.
Not a game at all, Boudin. Nor am I excusing whatever backstabbing in which Wallace may have engaged with respect to Palin and McCain. But, anytime I post information which may shed additional light on a subject, or enlarges or enhances the perspective, or tends to undercut to any degree the central thesis of an argument or accusation, I can generally rely upon you to pop up and lodge the tiresome equivalency charge. Once again, you did not disappoint. And, once again, it is a total non sequitur.
As a matter of fact, Wallace and Scarborough were both criticizing Frank Rich--the liberal NYT columnist. Neither were critical of Rush this morning, but Wallace was particularly vocal in her support of Rush and hammering of Rich--information you won't find in the blogs of NB.
Jer
"--information you won't find in the blogs of NB." ---
Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 11:31pm.
because, Jer, Wallace supporting Rush and hammering Rich doesn't exactly qualify as "Liberal bias in the Media".
No telling, though. what that event would constitute in a liberal's mind.
If a conservative said it, and it was true, I could see a liberal considering that as being biased.
MD
McKinnon's NOT a Republican Consultant
Submitted by TexasMom0517 on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 12:19am.
I heard him billed as such today, and I almost lost it. Bush 43 hired McKinnon at the recommendation of Bob Bullock. For those who don't know, Bullock was the DEMOCRAT Lieutenant Governor of Texas when Bush was governor. Up until Rick Perry, it was the LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR who really wielded power in the state of Texas. For most of my lifetime, it was Bill Hobby. Bullock and Bush had an unusual and surprising friendship, partially based on their common allergy to alcohol and abstemiousness. McKinnon had ALWAYS worked on behalf of DEMOCRATS in Texas- Ann Richards, Bob Bullock, etc.- until he worked for Bush. Working for a GOP candidate was an anomaly. He is not a Republican and McCain was foolish to hire him in the first place. "No Labels" is just another way of saying "I'm really a liberal, but I don't want you to know it so I can get elected/hired."
Aren't we tired yet of being conned?
Thanks for the information.
Submitted by Chris Norman on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 1:39am.
Thanks for the information. Apparently. for their biased purposes, they prefer him to be known as a "Republican consultant". It makes him sound so much more altruistic.
TexasMom.....Thanks for the abundance of information. I
Submitted by Rush Fan on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 1:57am.
don't believe McCain was foolish to hire McKinnon. In my opinion, it was a perfect fit for a RINO like McCain who felt extremely comfortable reaching across the aisle. McCain would fit like a glove in the No Name organization.
McKinnon, Democrat Consultant
Submitted by TexasMom0517 on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 10:03am.
From Wikipedia:
McKinnon’s first political campaign experience was volunteering for Senator Lloyd Doggett’s [Democrat] 1984 campaign. Paul Begala, who worked in the upper echelon of the campaign at the time, gave him his first big break moving him into the press office for Doggett’s campaign.[5][6] Mark McKinnon then went to work for former Texas Governor Mark White [Democrat] during his 1986 campaign [7] and then worked on former Louisiana Governor Buddy Roemer’s campaign in 1987.[3]McKinnon later went to work for the New York-based international political media consulting company Sawyer Miller Group in 1998.[8] McKinnon spent the next several years working on many Texas Democratic winning campaigns,[9] including for late Governor Ann Richards, [Democrat] former Houston Mayor Bob Lanier[Democrat] , and the late Congressman Charlie Wilson[Democrat].[10] After returning to Texas, he joined Public Strategies, Inc. in 1990 and in 1996, McKinnon announced in the Texas Monthly that he was shifting gears and leaving partisan politics in an article entitled, "The Spin Doctor is Out".[5]
EVERY CAMPAIGN HE WORKED ON WAS FOR LIBERAL DEMOCRATS.
Yes well...that's perfect for MSNBC's purpose
Submitted by Blonde on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 1:37pm.
Identify him as a Republican strategist.
Because we as we all know, the Democrats are so worried and concerned that the Republican Party will lose its way (squishy middle).
How utterly typical. A resume full of Democrat positions, of course, qualifies him to become a Republican strategist.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Scarborough is a tool.
Submitted by RogerCfromSD on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 3:21am.
Scarborough is a tool.
Another bunch of liberal
Submitted by Richard B. on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 3:59am.
Another bunch of liberal know-nothings.
Too Far Right? When?
Submitted by JakeMo on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 4:13am.
Scarborough: "... when Republicans go too far right, they slap you back ... into the center."
Where is the historical evidence of that? I don't remember that ever happening.
By my recollection, we've either gone moderate/RINO and ended up losing because no one knew what the h we stood for, or we went right (once in my lifetime) and our man had to leave because of term limits.
Can someone turn me on to the time we went "too far right" and got slapped back to the center?
Here are some options:
Dole '96
McCain '08
Spendaholic GOP Congress '06
Bush '92
Ford '76
I can't think of another time we got slapped. Of those times I've listed, which of them is "too far right?"
Goldwater '64?
Submitted by yutsnark on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 10:06am.
Goldwater '64?
Scarborough needs to update his references
Submitted by JakeMo on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 1:23pm.
We can debate when things drop off the American electorate predict-o-meter. But I'd suggest that the election of '64 is not a good gauge of current voter sentiment.
If RINOs are still using that election as a reference point on the map to electoral success, that may explain why they're lost in woods.
After the JFK assassination in Nov. 1963...
Submitted by Red Jeep on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 1:36pm.
...it was doubtful any Republican would win in 64. The people gave LBJ a chance not realizing what a socialist he was. His Aid to Families with Dependent Children (ADC) enslaved thousands of black families to the government teat and making sure Dad was never home.
Party of Lincoln
Submitted by JakeMo on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 2:12pm.
Yes, I agree. Certainly everyone I've known who voted in the '64 election (most of them now deceased) believed that the election was purely about "continuing the Kennedy legacy." I know liberal historians like to argue otherwise, but they have a vested interest in keeping the "Goldwater was too conservative" meme alive.
Debate on the subject seems pretty academic at this point. The Goldwater election has as much currency as a "Party of Lincoln" pin. Both make for colorful feathers in the GOP cap, but I doubt either election sways even 1 voter in the '12 election.
I agree that nobody could
Submitted by yutsnark on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 7:20pm.
I agree that nobody could have beat Johnson in '64. But Goldwater was a particularly controversial figure. Remember, in those days there were a number of Republicans who proudly called themselves "liberal," and they walked out on his acceptance speech.
The Dems (and liberal Repubs) portrayed Goldwater as an "extremist." They had people scared that he would nuke anyone who looked at him funny. You may have seen the tasteless attack ad on this theme (A little girl picking flowers, interrupted by the appearance of a mushroom cloud in the distance). It was immediately pulled, but the media referenced it repeatedly.
No labels?
Submitted by Denny Crane on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 4:31am.
Bad Idea. Labels are everywhere.
If we don't have labels, how do we know where they stand on an issue?
"how do you feel about taxes on the rich?" Yes, the rich should pay taxes. "How much?" Their fair share. "Should we raise the rate that they pay?" Stop it, you're trying to label me.
"What's your stand on immigration reform?" Yes we need reform. "What do you think we should do?" Reform the system. "How?" Stop it, you're trying to label me.
What a joke this group is.
We Are The 53%
You've demonstrated exactly
Submitted by Tenebrous on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 4:03pm.
You've demonstrated exactly the real reason for this group and how it ties into Joe's foolish concept of "governing from the middle". Vague pronouncements would rule the day and the people would be kept in the dark -- kind of like we were about Obama in the last presidential election.
Visions and Principles blog
So you have to be batshit crazy AND a Nancy Pelosi
Submitted by ConservaSerb on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 4:48am.
to have an opinion about the idiots in Congress?
Idiots in Congress, you know who you are.
And Scarsblowhard? You sucked as a legislator. You suck on TV. You suck, period.
A wise & frugal government, which shall leave men free 2 regulate their own pursuits of industry & improvement, & shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government. T. Jefferson
Please
Submitted by DontFeedTheTrolls on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 7:07am.
Please get the 'African-American' crowd to adopt 'no labels'. I'm sick of their divisiveness.
Yikes!! Help!! I almost agree with Rush Limbaugh!!
Submitted by mytwosense on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 9:17am.
Except that, Joe Scarborough has always been, a loser. A dishonest loser at that. And being Mark Penn's wife? Since when has that been a credential?
Just one more way
Submitted by Iron Tigers Vet on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 9:08am.
for Joe to get his 15 seconds of lame. How can you argue what is fact. The "no labels" group is a place/people of lefty ideology who are too chickensh*t to say they are. Just like the "coffee party", this will also fade away into oblivion.
Unfortunately, Joe and the rest of the MSM will not...
Scarborough Gushes Over Gov. Christie's Anti-Spending Screed
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 9:18am.
Morning Joe host says he felt like a "14-year-old Beatles groupie" while listening to the Republican Governor of New Jersey during "60 Minutes" interview speak impassionately about the necessity for curbs on entitlements and government spending.
NB conservatives scramble to find way to torque Scarborough's words to fit current narrative that Joe has morphed into RINO or even liberal Democrat taking marching orders from Obama to please MSNBC masters.
Developing...
Jer
One day he is this and one day he is that
Submitted by Red Jeep on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 9:42am.
Scarborough is not a good liberal or conservative. Fence sitter is what I term him.
Red Jeep...
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 9:53am.
He has consistently attacked big government spending. Day in and day out. During the Clinton administration...the Bush administration...and the Obama administration. Even on the recent tax compromise bill he has adopted the conservative position in attacking it.
Jer
Yes, true...
Submitted by Red Jeep on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 10:14am.
...and a stopped watch is right once in a while too.
In that case...
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 10:21am.
What policy issue is he wrong about [from a conservative perspective]?
Jer
Why the concern that Conservatives should love Joe?
Submitted by Red Jeep on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 10:40am.
I have no specific policy to give you that I think he is wrong about. I decided he was a fence sitter long ago. Could not watch his show "Scarborough Country." His morning show is just a coffee club for Libs and RIINOs. You should enjoy it.
Red Jeep...
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 10:48am.
I'm not concerned about consevatives loving him. I have a problem with someone's views being misrepresented.
I do enjoy the show. I've always enjoyed listening to a variety of viewpoints. Buckley's Firing Line was my favorite politically-oriented program for years. Big fan of Will and Krauthammer, too.
Jer
Joe's got his moments...
Submitted by SamC on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 9:56am.
Joe's got his moments, but they are few and far between. Day after day he sits there with the uber libs on MSNBC spewing garbage just like this. Because he slips from his role every now and then only proves what his true ideals are. Joe wants to be liked by everyone and Joe wants to get what Joe can get and has absolutely no priciples because of it.
He's completely wishy washy on conservative ideals so I don't understand why you expect the folks here on NB to approve of him.
If NBers believe his appeals
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 10:04am.
If NBers believe his appeals for civility are anti-conservative, then I wouldn't expect most folks here to approve of him.
If NBers respect adherence to conservative principles with regard to philosophy and policy, I would expect general approval.
Jer
He is Not Appealing To Civility And You Know It
Submitted by Tenebrous on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 4:01pm.
Joe is not calling for "civility", except in a hypocritical public "look what I did, mom" way. For evidence of this, you can just watch his show, where he remains incivil to people with whom he disagrees. NB has even posted examples of his hypocrisy (what, did you think he had turned over a new leaf). So, the evidence is in. Joe is not calling for civility.
Perhaps you should work on that memory thing, Jer. It seems to be failing you.
Visions and Principles blog
My memory is just
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 4:38pm.
My memory is just fine--considerably better than yours,Tenebrous--but I appreciate your concern.
I don't watch the show every day, or all of it when I do watch it, but I watch it often enough to know that he is generally civil to his guests--although he did cut Mika's dad a new rectum during an argument over Israeli/Palestinian issues [Scarborough was correct].several months ago.
He does engage in occasional stream of consciousness rants--a tendency which he acknowledges--which are most often [but not always] directed at big government liberalism and more often than not will involve excessive spending issues; or matters of national security as exemplified by his excoriation of the left a week or so ago over its attacks on CIA interrogation techniques.
Jer
Broken Clock
Submitted by NevadanConservative on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 4:10pm.
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
A rather simplistic homily, but accurate.
If he is young enough and BHO etc don't utterly destroy the country, we might well be saying President Christie in 2020.
NVCon
PURPLE IS THE NEW BROWN see below link
http://inlinethumb43.webshots.com/17194/2872764590061034863S600x600Q85.jpg
Soooooooo
Submitted by SamC on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 9:49am.
the guy from the 'no labels' group was not offended that Frank Rich felt the need to label his speakers as black, he felt the need to go on and further label them as 'prominent' and 'featured'.
I don't think this group is going to get very far.
Rush is Right
Submitted by bsny on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 10:33am.
Labels are very important. How else would you correctly identify him as a blowhard, schmuck or a plain old horse's ass without these very imporant labels.
Yes, Joe, he may not have
Submitted by Rusty Shackleford on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 10:33am.
Yes, Joe, he may not have ever had the luxury of never having governed, but do you know what luxury he's never been able to enjoy? Having an audience full of gullible idiots. Unlike you, Joe, he's never had the luxury of speaking to an audience of morons and that forces him into a situation where he needs to be colorful and amusing yet intellectually stimulating as well. So while you can blither and blather about any nonsensical thing that pops into your head and you're audience will eat it up, Limbaugh has never had that luxury, and oddly enough it is Limbaugh who is succeeding while you kinda flounder along on a network with medicore ratings.
BTW: How's the retooling of your radio show? Will it be back any day now? Is the blonde chick's favorite Founding Father still Lincoln?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chris Matthews: The Joy Behar of MSNBC.
Bill Maher: The Joy Behar of HBO.
Paul Krugman: The Joy Behar of The New York Times.
Luxury?
Submitted by permagrin on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 11:01am.
I thought not running for office and being elected was a decision, not a luxury.
Ipso facto
Submitted by Galvanic on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 12:08pm.
SCARBOROUGH: " . . . And they have the luxury of never actually governing. Never being a president, never being a senator, never being in Congress, realizing you actually have to, at the end of the day, sit down and deal with people across the aisle."
Hmm. Well, applying that standard, since Scarborough has "never had the luxury of soldiering, never being a commanding officer, never being an NCO, never being in a combat unit, realizing you actually have to, at the end of the day, deal with people who are trying to kill you," I'd say he disqualifies himself from commenting on the military or war.
But he speaks about defense and the wars almost daily.
He's jealous of Limbaugh's
Submitted by wiwf on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 12:10pm.
He's jealous of Limbaugh's popularity and power!How About a Different Venue?
Submitted by Caringwhiteguy on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 12:48pm.
McKinnon says "a thousand people from all 50 states came to New York", etc. blah, blah, blah. How many of those thousand people would have showed up if the meeting had been held in Keokuk or Stevens Point? Truth is they all wanted to be on stage in NYC. They all wanted to show how caring and sensitive they were. They all wanted their friends to see the power of their intellect. No doubt they also wanted to squeeze in a visit to MOMA and coffee with their favorite old Columbia literature professor.
Wanna show us how much you believe civil discourse is the key to making the world a better place? Do it in Topeka.
Who is Joe Scarbrorough?
Submitted by johnnyatlanta on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 2:06pm.
Who is Joe Scarbrorough and why should I care what he thinks? I must be working to pay my taxes while this guy is on the boob tube. From what I read about the guy, he's all over the map like a charging RINO veering left then right then left again. If he supports Bloomberg, he certainly must be ALL bad.
I'm so glad he in this
Submitted by Semus on Mon, 12/20/2010 - 2:11pm.
I'm so glad he in this position where he just makes a fool of himself, instead of holding office,
Yikes!! Help!! I almost agreed with Rush Limbaugh!!
Submitted by mytwosense on Wed, 01/12/2011 - 12:31pm.
wtf!? I almost agreed with Rush Limbaugh!!Except that, Scarborough has always been, a loser.
A pompous, bellicose, dishonest, hypocritical, arrogant, deceitful loser at that.