Joe Scarborough: I Can Name 200 House Republicans More Qualified Than GOP Presidential Candidates
MSNBC's supposedly conservative host Joe Scarborough on Tuesday continued his months-long attack on the Republican presidential candidates.
After telling his Morning Joe viewers that he would consider voting for potential third party candidate Ron Paul if Newt Gingrich won the nomination, Scarborough said he could "in five minutes write a list of 200 Republican members of the House of Representatives" more qualified than "the presidential candidates that are running right now" (video follows with transcript and commentary):
JOE SCARBOROUGH: I could in five minutes write a list of 200 Republican members of the House of Representatives who would present themselves better, be more articulate, understand policy more in depth, and provide a more nuanced argument against this administration than the presidential candidates that are running right now. And again, I could do it without breaking a sweat.
Readers are advised there are currently 242 Republican members of the House with 84 serving their first term. This means that Scarborough thinks that 42 freshmen Reps are more qualified to be president than:
-
Michele Bachmann, a Congresswoman serving since January 2007 - Newt Gingrich, the former Speaker of the House
- Jon Huntsman, the former governor of Utah and ambassador to China
- Ron Paul, a Congressman that has served on and off since 1976
- Rick Perry, the current governor of Texas
- Mitt Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts
- Rick Santorum, a former two-term Congressman and two-term Senator
Yet in Scarborough's view, there are currently 200 House Republicans - including 42 freshmen - more qualified to be president than any of these seven.
Given that this is basically the same kind of nonsense being spewed by the obviously liberal hosts on MSNBC such as Chris Matthews, Rachel Maddow, Lawrence O'Donnell, Ed Schultz, and Al Sharpton, it's really tough to take seriously Scarborough's claim that he's a conservative commentator.
Sure, he may have had a 95 percent rating from the American Conservative Union when he was a member of the House, but his behavior on MSNBC during this campaign season is far from conservative.
It's not even close.
- Noel Sheppard's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
So what?
Submitted by Newsbubba on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 1:26pm.
I can name 200 pole dancers imminently more qualified to host your TV show than you and Bubbles.
I get your point, but how is it you know so many "pole...
Submitted by jawebster1 on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 1:39pm.
dancers"?
I very sociable, ...
Submitted by Newsbubba on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 2:38pm.
... and I live in a town with lots of talent!
Just where is that town? I might like to visit there one...
Submitted by jawebster1 on Wed, 12/14/2011 - 3:17am.
day.
I can name one former Congressman who is not more...
Submitted by jawebster1 on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 1:37pm.
qualified than any of the GOP presidential candidates to be president.
This person has an unwatched and unwatchable morning show on MSNBC.
Ya' beat me to it, Mr. Webster
Submitted by ConservaSerb on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 4:28pm.
No question there is ONE ex-RINO congressman who isn't qualified to scrub Mika's fake boobs, let alone be president.
What an effin' tool Scarred-bored-one is.
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
One big problem
Submitted by wingnut55 on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 1:38pm.
The main problem with that 200 is they have family that they don't want put through the ringer like Palin's kids, Bush's twins. They would run if their families were treated as the Democrat families are. As long as the MSM keeps attacking the families of Republicans that will be a factor for the people running for President.
spot on
Submitted by lotr on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 2:03pm.
The problem with the 200 (HA-OOH! HA-OOH!) Joe doesn't seem to pick up on is that they willingly aren't running! That's key. And when considers how the current field of GOP candidates, every single one of them, including Romney, gets treated, it's not too surprising why.
Joe is trying to channel Cool Hand Luke:
Submitted by KyWriter on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 1:39pm.
"I can eat 50 eggs!"
Sorry Joe, that means .6
Submitted by inquiringmind on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 1:43pm.
Sorry Joe, that means 1.5 seconds per name. No way you can write that fast.
I'd rather play name that RINO. I can name that RINO in one letter... J
Really
Submitted by John21 on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 1:49pm.
I knew we had alot of RINOs in the party but not that many, they are the only once that Joe would know or would associate with.
Liberals (like Joe) are like Christmas lights, half of them don't work and the rest aren't very bright
Yes, but
Submitted by richflanj on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 1:53pm.
Can you name one Democrat ?
So, Joe has decided on o'bama then, right?
Submitted by ThisnThat on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 2:02pm.
I wonder who Joe is going to vote for President? It's obvious it's not going to be any of the Republican candidates. Who could it be, then? Hmmmmm.
Because, Joe, in case you haven't figured this out yet -- the Republican will be selected from the current list of candidates -- the ones that you said are so terrible. I guess in your little, biased mind then, that o'bama looks real, real good by comparison? Is that what you're saying?
__________
“Didn't win the Medal of Honor? Didn't even serve? Then lie about it. We'll support you." — 9th Circuit Court
TnT
Submitted by Tugboat Phil on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 2:03pm.
I'm pretty sure he'll vote like he did in 08, for Obama. I think that's in his PMSNBC contract.
200
Submitted by jpalm32 on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 2:00pm.
That's 200 more qualified then Obama!
HA-OOH! HA-OOH!
Submitted by lotr on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 2:05pm.
Give thanks, men, to Joe and the brave 200! TO VICTORY!
"Michele Bachmann, a
Submitted by redfish on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 2:07pm.
"Michele Bachmann, a Congresswoman serving since January 2007
Newt Gingrich, the former Speaker of the House
Jon Huntsman, the former governor of Utah and ambassador to China
Ron Paul, a Congresswoman that has served on and off since 1976
Rick Perry, the current governor of Texas
Mitt Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts
Rick Santorum, a former two-term Congressman and two-term Senator" *
* Buddy Roemer, a former four-term Congressman and Governor of Louisiana
Gary Johnson, the former two-term Governor of New Mexico
I should note that Huntsman in general hasn't polled any better than the two candidates left out of the debates, even with all his air-time. The only reason he gets in the debates is because he has a lot of friends from the Bush administration and money from his dad.
The GOP field is weak, but it has as much . . .
Submitted by Galvanic on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 5:36pm.
. . . elected office experience as anything the Dems have offered in recent years.
Look at the two Dem frontrunners in 2008.
- Hillary Clinton: 1.5 terms as a carpet-bagging US Senator from NY
- Barack Obama: 2 years in Illinois state senate; 2 years as US Senator, and hardly ever around to cast a vote.
How ironic, Joe...
Submitted by c5then on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 2:21pm.
Because the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue is not qualified at all, even to the level of any of the current GOP hopefulls.
In fact (to use a MSM term) some critics argue that he is not even Constitutionally qualified to hold the office.
Madison and Jefferson and Franklin built a Republic - Roberts killed it!
I'll call your bluff Joe
Submitted by Cappmann1962 on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 2:51pm.
Name them. And when, I mean, IF you can't, then just tell us how many republicans in total there are in the House.
Flaming Moron.
I can name 200 inanimate objects more qualified than Obama.
Submitted by Order270 on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 2:52pm.
1. A backhoe - for digging us out of this mess
2. A bag of hammers - for having more brains than said POTUS
3. A ball of yarn - for having enough sense to know when to just get out of the way
4. A bulldozer - for razing the WH and other monuments of government greed
5. A divining rod - for being able to make a decision
etc.
Since Joe has all the answers
Submitted by Marsh on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 2:57pm.
why doesn't he put his money where is thin lipped mouth is and run?
Answer: Because he doesn't have the courage of the people who put themselves out there. He's the coward who gets to mock them.
Scarborough likes Paul's policies over Newton's
Submitted by lrgon on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 3:10pm.
In a free society he is allowed to say that and more. As a TV host, or as an average Joe, he can opine whatever he wants.
Scarborough has the right does he not to say that outside of doctor Paul, the current crop of infeebled GOP presidential candidates have less on the ball regarding their knowledge of foreign policy and even domestic policy than just about anyone else on the politcal planet.
The GOP doesn't exactly possess the brightest. Former GOP standard bearer John McCain was asked by News Busters friend and ally CNS news if the Arizona senator was aware that the Defense Authorization Act that McCain voted for had a provision to legalize sodomy and bestiality?
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/what-mccain-says-he-didn-t-know-defense-...
McCain ever the clever weasle, echoed some silly comment to the Christian news service about getting his buddies at the Pentagon to look into it. In that regard the current crop of Republican contenders may have a better grasp of bad policy than clueless Mac from the grand canyon state: " Maaaaacccccccckkkkk, the bill is a stinkerrrrrrrr!"
Joe Scarborough is slammed for saying that he would prefer a third party ticket with Paul as its standard bearer than to vote for Newton "the NAFTA, WTO, ethanol breathing, pimping for Freddie and Frannie," Gingrich.
What's wrong with that?
Joe Scarborough says that one of his two sons is a Paul fan. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sy_oG8yelrU
"Joe Scarborough is slammed
Submitted by redfish on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 4:36pm.
"Joe Scarborough is slammed for saying that he would prefer a third party ticket with Paul as its standard bearer than to vote for Newton "the NAFTA, WTO, ethanol breathing, pimping for Freddie and Frannie," Gingrich."
Because most of the public is against free trade and thinks it cost the country our manufacturing base, Ron Paul supporters like to tout his opposition to NAFTA. But he actually supports the part of NAFTA that most people oppose; he supports the removal of all trade barriers.
In NAFTA, alongside the removal of tariffs, there were provisions which required that Mexico adopt some minimal labor and environmental standards (that didn't go far enough) and establishing some some basis to adjudicate disagreements
Paul would rather have both no trade barriers, and no provisions requiring labor and environmental standards in Mexico. So, under a Paul administration where he got through every piece of legislation he wanted, we would have lost even more manufacturing than we currently have.
Oooops
Submitted by KornKing on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 3:03pm.
Thought this was the thread where we compared Mika's breast size with her IQ
Hey Joe I know way more than 200
Submitted by serious1 on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 3:05pm.
Conservative mouthpieces that could replace you. Never have I seen a bigger RINO than you and it's all because you have no choice if you want to continue being employed by MSDNC.
My dog is better qualified than the residents 600 Penn Ave..
Submitted by gruyere cheese on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 3:16pm.
Because she is smart, loyal, honest, and extremely cute! I know my comment is irrelevant to the subject of this article, but I simply could not resist expressing my point of view in a comical way. Liberals are something else, there are simply no words to describe their logic...
Hay, Joe...
Submitted by CobraMan on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 3:46pm.
Hay, Joe, since you think you're so politically astute, why don't YOU run for president?
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
200 in 5 minutes?
Submitted by almostacowboy on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 3:51pm.
That's 40 per minute. I'll take that bet, Joe.
200 in 5 minutes?
Submitted by almostacowboy on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 3:51pm.
That's 40 per minute. I'll take that bet, Joe.
Dumb and Bumbler
Submitted by Pasco Conservative on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 4:04pm.
Two unwatchable morons with the audience that you can fit inside a small storage unit. They don't have an audience of 200 on any one day.
Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has not heart; and any man who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains.
Joe why are they so irresponsible not to Run.
Submitted by Avitar on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 4:26pm.
Joe tell us who is more qualified! Newt's track record is better than anyoune in the last 100 years. How do you get more qualifyed than that? Please oh please tell us morning Joe.
I assure you that I will believe you if you make a case. For example I agree that there are 200 Republicans in the House who are better qualified than the current Presicent.
Why not let NB's favorite colunmist, Ann Coulter, explain it
Submitted by Jer on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 5:30pm.
beginning around the 3:00 mark. But then she's also slammed Sarah Palin, so what does she know.
Jer
good one Jer
Submitted by lotr on Wed, 12/14/2011 - 11:32am.
Good one -- thanks. Coulter makes good points, largely from the pragmatic angle, which is a legitimate angle to take, one that I happen to agree with.
That said, in spite of her argument, I'm sure many would agree with me that the former Speaker is very well-qualified for the presidency, and I think that's the underlying point of contention that conservatives may have with the knee-jerk criticism (not to mention this being a recurring pattern with all the other candidates thus far). I think people are turned off when a qualified candidate is skewered out of hand. But, as the late William Buckley correctly argued, electability is no-doubt key, and I think that's what Ann Coulter is echoing.
lotr..not only WOULD I agree Newt is well-qualified...
Submitted by Jer on Thu, 12/15/2011 - 2:50am.
but I have explicitly acknowledged as much--for example, in a post about a month ago giving my take on Gingrich, beginning as follows:
"The sharpest knife in the drawer. The personal baggage--three marriages, infidelities, etc.--may remain troublesome to some of the social conservatives, but I think those issues are far enough in the past that they shouldn't adversely impact his candidacy to a significant degree. He's highly qualified in terms of experience and resume`, but he is still inexplicably prone to display a political tin ear on occasion...."
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb-staff/2011/11/17/open-thread-could-gingr...
Jer
Jer
Submitted by lotr on Thu, 12/15/2011 - 2:00pm.
I don't think you'll get any disagreement there....
Scarborough is a fraud
Submitted by Gat New York on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 4:48pm.
Noel -
I've been saying that Scarborough is a fraud and a shill for MSNBC.
He makes these empty claims that he is a "small government conservative" and then proceeds to bash all who actually are.
He has not supported a single GOP candidate to date and I would not hesitate to place him in the same corner of dunces as Colin Powell now - neither should ever be allowed in a GOP function again.
Noel, have you mentioned the blistering attacks on Gingrich by
Submitted by Jer on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 5:14pm.
conservatives such as Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck, Michael Savage, George Will, and Peggy Noonan, and was written off by Dr. Krauthammer?
Newt is being damaged more by them than the liberal media.
Jer
A valid point, Jer
Submitted by Galvanic on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 5:43pm.
Although I've seen some real doozies from the folks on Morning Joe and some of the MSNBC/CNN programs. Matthews was unhinged last night, equating him with Satan.
When it comes to Scarborough, I get the impression that Gingrich really peed in his pudding at one point. But apparently he's not alone.
I think Gingrich is riding the top of the polls because of his debate performances, and the more Republicans become familiar with him, the more he'll drop in the polls. It's unfortunate that no one with his intellect is running, because his baggage is too heavy. The latest revelations about his work for Fannie Mae is a big target on his back, and the other GOP candidates are going to keep shooting at it. (With apologies to the MSM for the targeting reference, though I think they'll give me a pass since I'm talking about Gingrich.)
He's a Beltway insider running against the Beltway.
From what I've read, part of
Submitted by redfish on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 6:00pm.
From what I've read, part of the reason House Republicans didn't like Gingrich is because he was so effective; they were exhausted by all the legislative campaigns.
From the public's perspective, I don't know if that's a negative thing. After Gingrich was kicked out of office, Republicans started going on their drunken spending binge and cavorting with lobbyists like Abramoff. Gingrich kept some self-discipline for the conservative cause.
Noel Sheppard
Submitted by amyshulk on Tue, 12/13/2011 - 8:00pm.
"MSNBC's supposedly conservative host Joe Scarborough"
That will NEVER get old!!!
I've said it before - *if* we end up with Mitt or Newt, the R's in congress better figure out quick how to make them think that *any and all* ideas came from the Pres. if they want it to suceed, that's why down ticket will be more important.
I seriously doubt I'm alone in this - that scads of people will honestly sit out the election out of spite!!!
Ronald Reagan