PBS's Mark Shields on the GOP Presidential Field: 'They Don't Have Anybody'
On the PBS NewsHour Friday night, the show's liberal commentator, Mark Shields suggested the Republicans have no one to challenge Barack Obama: "The reality of the CPAC meeting is that there's 11,000 people there at the hotel registered for this conference. They're a constituency in search of a candidate. There is -- I mean, usually, it is a candidate looking for a constituency. They want to beat Barack Obama, but they don't have anybody."
In 2007, liberal commentators treated the Democratic field like an embarrassment of riches. They couldn't even be truly embarrassed by Dennis Kucinich. But now the Republicans have "nobody."
Naturally, PBS's allegedly conservative commentator David Brooks agreed: "I personally think there are really very few plausible candidates." He joked that Donald Trump would be the GOP nominee, then suggested Sen. John Thune was promising...because he was "an extremely good-looking guy." He said John McCain likes to say if he had Thune's face, he'd be president. Shields also slammed CPAC for failing to discuss Egypt all day:
SHIELDS: What impressed me the most of all there was what they did not discuss. As the world was dominated and riveted on what was going on in Egypt, they didn't even address it in their speeches.
JIM LEHRER: Well, why do you think that is?
MARK SHIELDS: Well, I think it is a lack of self-confidence, surefootedness. They didn't know what they wanted to say. They weren't sure. The only one who was really critical that I saw was Rick Santorum, the former senator from Pennsylvania, who basically took the line that has been developed by both Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck. And that was that the -- Barack Obama, by not supporting Hosni Mubarak in his hour of need, was turning his back on a great ally. And that -- that became the position. But there was nobody there really celebrating the moment of freedom and taking that, picking up that banner. And that -- that -- I think that does belie a lack of confidence, surefootedness, on a terribly important issue.
Brooks did not reply with the obvious rejoinder that Team Obama hasn't exactly shown "confidence" or "surefootedness" on Egypt, when their top intelligence officials wrongly proclaimed on Thursday that Mubarak had stepped down based on cable news channels (CIA director Leon Panetta) or wrongly proclaimed the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt is secular (James Clapper, director of national intelligence). Brooks picked up on Glenn Beck, saying his fears about Muslim caliphates in Egypt are "delusional" and "wacky" and siding with his old Weekly Standard colleague William Kristol.
This allowed Shields to claim that the revolution in Egypt was secular and yet a triumph for the public-relations face of Islam:
SHIELDS: Joyful, ecstatic. It's a -- it's bottom-up. This wasn't orchestrated from the top, no artillery, no carpet bombing, no IEDs, unlike Iraq, no -- no body counts, just a remarkable, remarkable, historic achievement.
And I think that it puts a brand-new face for those outside of the Middle East on Islam. I mean, this is -- al-Qaida hates what happened, is happening right now in Egypt. I mean, this is an -- this is an achievement of such signal proportion, you can't -- look, this is a, what, 90 percent Islamic nation.
And you look at Muslim faith, and you look at that right now, and you say, wait a minute, how different can they be? They crave democracy. They -- self-determination.
LEHRER: It was a secular -- it was a secular...
SHIELDS: Secular, better for their future. I mean, just a remarkable, remarkable moment, and encouraging.
Liberals claim that conservatives are too harsh on Islam, but they still find the word "secular" always "encouraging."
Shields also claimed that the House Republicans have clearly demonstrated their leaders are not as accomplished as Speaker Nancy Pelosi in her debut:
I think, Jim, what we see in -- there is a real problem for the Republicans in the House leadership, because any new leadership, when they take over, there is a question of, they're developing confidence in themselves, in each other, as a cohesive group.
And it just contrasts to when Nancy Pelosi took over the House, and with a Republican president, in 2006. In the first 100 hours or so, they passed -- they passed the -- a student loan bill. They passed an increase in the minimum wage. They passed veteran benefits.
I mean, and Republicans are kind of feeling their way along. And they are stumbling a little bit. I mean, John -- there is a question of confidence with John Boehner, how much he can have in his leadership, when -- when they can't count and they lose two floor votes this week.
And the freshman that David talked about, some 87 strong, are -- they have to be socialized. They have to be made part of a cohesive unit. And they're not -- they're not there yet. And they do want to cut. They want to cut bigger.
"They have to be socialized." Like they're incontinent puppies. This is how PBS types think about the people who now must be trained to keep funding PBS. House leaders didn't have a good week in counting votes. But the idea that Accomplishment arrived with Pelosi is a rich line. Just start with the idea that Pelosi came in to stop the surge in Iraq. Oops.
Finally, David Brooks suggested that CPAC (and the larger Republican Party) is really becoming a haven for Ron Paul-loving libertarians, and social conservatism is waning:
BROOKS: These are true believers. And they will -- they are going to have a straw poll. And, traditionally, somebody like Ron Paul will win this thing. And so they want the hard-core stuff. And so -- and they want -- they want to establish principle. And the other aspect of this group, increasingly true of the party activists as a whole, is they are quite libertarian, not that interested in social conservative issues. And so they will tend to gravitate towards somebody like Paul.
- Tim Graham's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Two years out and they have this complaint?
Submitted by pockets64 on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 9:36am.
Of course, 3 years ago, when the Dems were in the same boat, there was no comment about "no leader."
Isn't it true that at any race, there is no clear leader while the runners are taking their places at the starting line?
Oddly enough, it's the Dems who have no real leader in their ranks.
Keep telling yourself that
Submitted by neutron on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 8:11pm.
Hey, Markie! Just keep telling yourself, and oll your PBS psychophants that "truth." It will work as well as "The tea party are racists," and all the other "common knowledge" lies that you circle-jerk guys repeat to each other in La-La Land. BTW, how's that Jaun Williams thing working out for you. I hope PBS et al gets zeroed in the next budget. Then you and me, we'll be on an equal funding footing.
Brooks said:
Submitted by Tugboat Phil on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 9:36am.
John McCain likes to say if he had Thune's face, he'd be president.
More likely if McCain had Sarah Palin's balls he'd be President. And I mean that in the best way possible.
As to discussing Egypt, I'm still not sure what's going to happen will be a good thing yet. Had our President been as equally supportive of the protestors in Iran, who were trying to oust a truly evil regime, I'd be a bit more positive. For all of the repression of Mubarak, Egypt was a pretty open country.
Egypt and repression
Submitted by jon_torlin on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 10:48am.
Phil, when my parents went to Egypt in 2000 as part of a cruise/tour group trip, they said they didn't get that impression either, even with the armed guards that they had for their protection. The Egyptian military felt that protecting the tourists was vital to their economy. One can't argue that logic.
They were rather sad about the whole thing and were glad they got the chance to visit Egypt, Turkey, and Greece on that same trip before the countries fell apart.
-Jon
Phil...
Submitted by the struggler on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 10:52am.
"...if McCain had Sarah Palin's balls he'd be President."....HaHaHa...LOL...too funny.
Phil---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 6:33pm.
the struggler is absolutely correct. That is the best line so far this year.Obama is a lock for 2012
Submitted by DontFeedTheTrolls on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 9:43am.
Well, for once I agree with the PBS partisan hacks. The R's need someone that appeals to not only the R's but also to the I's. No matter who it is, the left will have the MSM (including PBS) deriding that person from the get-go. Not to mention Obama has a lock on the (racist) black vote, felons, the deceased, ghost voters, the (skulls full of mush (thanks Rush)) youth, the just plain stupid, the just plain ill-informed, and idiots in general. Any R candidate will be harrassed by the MSM, endlessly, while they push the theme that Obama has been saving the nation. And if they are white, they will be said to be running only because they are racist. Sadly, I don't see any R winning in 2012.
P.S. Excuse me, PBS, but Egypt is still up in the air. We don't even know who is running things.
Donald Trump
Submitted by Red Jeep on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 9:54am.
I think he could be the next Ronald Reagan, especially in terms of tax policy.
Trump is a businessman which I feel is what we need in government, successful business men, not politicians.
i think he would appeal to the R's and the I's.
Totally Agree red jeep
Submitted by shawn. on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 11:11am.
I would love for Donald Trump to run. Focus on fiscal and military strength and stop wasting time on social issues.Great!
Submitted by Red Jeep on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 11:38am.
...and Trump could be self financing.
But bottom line I would like to see this country run like a business, and that would benefit the Libs too. If this country was breaking even or running some surpluses people would be inclined toward some spending on social issues.
How much do you know about "The Donald?"
Submitted by Galvanic on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 12:02pm.
Successful businessman (except for a few Chapter 11 bankrupcies). TV celebrity. Haircut trend-setter.
Uber-ego.
A new Ronald Reagan? Never. Reagan was genuinely anchored in a political ideology. Trump's only ideology is $$$$.
Donald Trump is all about one thing: Trump.
He's against Big Government when it costs him $$$ through taxation and overregulation of his financial interests.
He uses, even partners with Big Government when he can make a profit from it, and that includes wielding abusive Big Government power to crush average Americans.
http://www.ij.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1002&Itemid=165
Trump is the epitome of the Golden Rule: Whoever has the gold, makes the rules.
If Trump ever announced his candidacy, the Tea Parties would condemn him, and rightly so. If by some strange twist he got the GOP nomination, the Tea Party support for Republicans would disappear.
I know Donald Trump puts in long hours
Submitted by shawn. on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 12:03pm.
he works extremely hard. When he was down and out, he did not pay victim and did a major comeback.
IMO there are two Tea Parties. One is the one that wants fiscal responsibility and strong military and strong borders, the other Tea Party wants these things as well, but wants to focus the issues on stopping gay marriage, and abortion.
Donald Trump knows how to make money and return us to our former financial glory.
Thank you Galvanic, if Donald
Submitted by Reaver on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 12:25pm.
Thank you Galvanic, if Donald Trump is a successful businessman than Barack Obama is a successful president.Here's more on Trump, Reaver
Submitted by Galvanic on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 12:45pm.
http://www.legalzoom.com/legal-headlines/celebrity-lawsuits/how-does-trump-repeatedly-file
Trump is very successful at keeping his bankrupt casinos afloat, while collecting top compensation as CEO -- hey, isn't that like the guys who got $ millions in bonuses from TARP?
As you can see in the linked information, Trump hides behind Chapter 11 protection, draws top dollar for himself, and the only folks who get burned are his creditors, who get nickels on the dollar.
Trump's self-promotion has worked on many Americans who hold him as a model of success, but Trump is an example of what plagues American business enterprise, both economically and morally. He's "too big to fail."
Galvanic, what's not to like?
Submitted by Red Jeep on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 12:51pm.
Right now Donald Trump is all about one thing, Donald Trump. And so he's looking out for #1.
But he strikes me as a person that if President his new #1 would be the country, and bringing it back to where it used to be. That's my subjective opinion.
As far as being against big government and using big government when he can, he's a savvy business person.
I would like to see America back in the "gold" again and make the rules for the rest of the world. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. We will see if he is not liked by the Tea Party.
You're entitled to your opinion, Red Jeep
Submitted by Galvanic on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 1:43pm.
You've read mine.
Assuming that Trump would suddenly change stripes reminds me of those in the MSM who insisted that Senator Barack Obama -- ranked as the most liberal Senator on the Hill and a friend of Rev. Wright and Bill Ayers -- would govern from the center.
Trump is a champion of "too big to fail" and as Vera Coking discovered, "too big to be denied." Most Tea Partiers won't be fooled.
Galvanic
Submitted by Jerry Mack on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 3:29pm.
Trump is a champion of "too big to fail" and as Vera Coking discovered, "too big to be denied." Most Tea Partiers won't be fooled.Anyone can take it to a Trump Casino, bet on it and win.
Red Jeep, "Savvy business"
Submitted by Liberallies on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 2:10pm.
Red Jeep,
"Savvy business" is kind words for "master manipulator of the financial system and ability to get away with anything he wants". NO thanks! I do not know him personaly, of course, and the few times he has come on Foxnews and other channels I like what he says, but individuals like him are clueless about the plight of the middle class and lower class. There is no empathy. We need empathy from a candidate, not sympathy or pity or the believe that they are there to lead the ignorant masses into a better world.
Sadly, Donald Trump, as he has portrayed himself, is just one of those individuals where the mighty dollar is the most important thing in their lives. I believe this is a huge character weakness in an individual and not a strength.
As someone said below, Donald Trump, if he were ever to run and win, would turn out to be another filthy rich Bloomberg type politician.
It is time that regular joes ran and won, not millionare elites that have NEVER experienced the hardships of average Americans.
The USA is becoming a nation in which the rich, which includes out of touch Democrats and Republicans, rule the middle class and lower class. They pass laws that completely affect our lives, but have no effect on their lives.
Nothing wrong with making money, working hard and becoming rich. But when the rich are the only ones who can run for a political office, there is something wrong with that nation.
We can agree that...
Submitted by Red Jeep on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 4:08pm.
"It is time that regular joes ran and won, not millionare elites that have NEVER experienced the hardships of average Americans."
I'd like to see you, or your neighbor, or your parents be able to run for the Senate, the House of Representatives, or be President.
I can't figure out how. Maybe we should pass a law that like the National Guard, employers must excuse employees that obtain full time political office and rehire them when their term is over. Maybe couple that with term limits or something else.
You are right that the rich rule politics, and the new MSM rich rule news dissemination and neither group has much of a clue about the realities of life for the lower classes economically.
I am tired of voting for the lesser of 2 evils. I only voted in the last presidential election because Sarah Palin ran, otherwise for the first time in my life I would have stayed home.
Do I think Trump is the best candidate "out there?" No. I just think that for now he is the best of those interested.
Red Jeep, Well that is just
Submitted by Liberallies on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 11:44pm.
Red Jeep,
Well that is just it...how to go about getting average joe/jane elected. Money rules politics, in a way, it always has. However, I do believe that there have been average joes/janes elected into office and stand up to the political machines, Sarah Palin, Lincoln and others come to mind.
It is possible!
I just think people have to stand up to the political machines whether Republican or Democratic. These machines, where lobbiest, ward presidents, etc do favors for each other and forget the little men, women and children.
We have become a plutocracy and it is not a good thing!
Shawn, "stop wasting time
Submitted by Liberallies on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 1:21pm.
Shawn,
"stop wasting time on social issues? you can bet that the Left will never stop wasting time on social issues!
Abortion is a horror, a horrific one! Thank goodness for blacks that there weren't too many in the Republican party who thought like you and the other wishy-washy "centrists" before during and after the Civil War.
Financial responsability for a nation is NOT the only thing that is needed for a country to be succesful. You might want to pick up a book or two on how the Founding Fathers believed that a succesful country needed to be a lot more than just money and a strong military!!!
Besides, if you want to be so shallow and think merely in money terms, how many tax payers, how many producers, workers, individuals who could have been part of this capitalist nation have been slaughtered thanks to abortion? How many billions has the USA lost due to abortion? Due the math! More than 60 million children have been slaughtered since Roe vs. Wade, if you want to reduce us to mere money, you can bet the USA has lost quite a few billions!!!
Gay marriage? once again, if you want to think in money terms, how many of these so called marriages will not have children?
You might want to look at Europe where the birth rate is so low that the older generations can no longer be supported by their socialist governments and programs. As my cousins in Spain have told me, it is so bad in countries like Spain, government retirement plans will disappear in the next decade or so because there aren't enough younger individuals putting money, through their taxes, into these programs.
Abortion and gay marriage are social issues as well as financial issues for a country!!!!!!!
You are a beacon of light and hope LL
Submitted by shawn. on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 3:46pm.
Even though I did not say I support abortion or gay marriage, your words never fail to inspire.Shawn, what to do with
Submitted by Liberallies on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 9:09pm.
Shawn, what to do with irrational beings like you. please point out where i said you support abortion or gay marriage. I did not, so why do assume as much. what you did say is that these two issues should be ignored. ignoring these is as bad as supporting them since the Left will not leave these alone. As the saying goes, all that is needed for Evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing. If you bothered to beyond Shawn's world, you would realize that standing up for babies in the womb of a mother and standing up against gay marriage is a great thing for this nation. But all you have left is childish sarcasm since you cannot defend your self-centered points. Like o said, thank goodness that for blacks that Republicans did not leave social issues alone before during or after the Civil War.sorry
Submitted by shawn. on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 9:13pm.
It is just not a big voting criteria for me. Thx again for the inspiring post :-)
social issues
Submitted by Agnostic on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 9:17pm.
I'm all for discussing social issues but to face any problem and solve it then the problem must be faced from a position of strength. Without our fiscal policies providing the nation with a solid foundation social issues are not going to be solved. IMHO
a logical post
Submitted by shawn. on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 9:20pm.
Thx agnostic. I totally agree. Fix the fiscal mess first.
Agnostic,I believe that
Submitted by Liberallies on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 11:46pm.
Agnostic, I believe that social and fiscal issues are intertwined. Billions of federal dollars go to organizations, groups, individuals who perform, push and indoctrinate abortion. Same with gay marriage. Also, how many billions, if not trillions, has the USA lost in tax revenue due to millions slaughtered since Roe vd. Wade? I am of the believe that positions of strength do not come from money, they come from a well formed character. With countless abortions a year and a nation without morals, a sound fiscal USA is not going to give us strength. The fiscal mess comes because of a lack of a strong morals, social issues.
big picture
Submitted by Agnostic on Mon, 02/14/2011 - 8:24am.
Of course they are intertwined. That is one reason the schools did away with economics.
Look at it from the opposite direction - if you fiscally set up a conservative federal government then a majority of your social issues either become states rights issues or free market decisions. Example: federal government funding of abortion or matching of state funded abortions or support for the groups like planned parenthood goes away and so do most of the clinics. Now you are dealing with relative small amount of people in clinics funded from liberal groups and the only advantage they will have in distributing their message will be a compliant media and not the hundreds of millions of tax dollars they receive indirectly.
Strength comes not from money but from stability first which comes both from a well formed character and a financial base. The character is there but it is masked by the billions being spent to fight any type of message about responsibility. IMO, the nation is not without morals but we are growing quickly into a nation that is ambivilant about moral issues due to laziness and a sense of entitlement. Laziness and entitlement both go away with a properly structured financial base.
I'm not saying the moral fight must be abdicated for the sake of the economic fight but I think you will find that removing the federal government and what they supply to state governments as a weapon used by the left then the battle for moral and morale will be closer to a real debate.
Shawn, and your childish
Submitted by Liberallies on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 11:34pm.
Shawn, and your childish sarcasm continues. well like i said, thank goodness for blacks that Republicans did not take "fiscal responsability" first voters into account. Blacks would still be slaves if it were for Shawn since fiscal responsability comes before all for him. Now do what you do best avoid debate by hiding behind childish sarcasm.
wasting time?
Submitted by shawn. on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 9:15pm.
Your the one posting to me, not vice versa. Perhaps if you didn't respond to me, you can have all the time in the world.
Stop wasting time on social issues?
Submitted by ckc1227 on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 6:15pm.
You mean like Obamacare?
'Obamacare'
Submitted by Agnostic on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 9:20pm.
Like those big bombs in the old sci-fi books - the planet killers - Obamacare is a nation killer that encompasses fiscal, judicial and social issues.
Agnostic, And so is
Submitted by Liberallies on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 10:08pm.
Agnostic, And so is abortion!Ahem.
Submitted by Ashrak on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 1:21pm.
McCain "appealed" to the (R)s and (I)s. How did that work out again?
When the election was about clear choice - Obama policy or not - Obama policy (and most of those supporting it) got thumped.
Wishy washy candidates are a recipe for disaster. 2012 has to be about a crystal clear choice with Obama on one side and his opponent being on the other. Obama loses that race - and the race card along with it.
Donald Trump? The same Trump that just....
Submitted by ckc1227 on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 6:07pm.
The same Trump that just gave $50,000 to Rahm Emanuel's campaign? No thank you.
All right, that does it!
Submitted by Red Jeep on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 9:11pm.
No Trump for me. Anyone that would support that ..... has no moral values.
Trump and Emanuel understand each other
Submitted by Galvanic on Mon, 02/14/2011 - 12:20pm.
Trump knows how to get what he wants. He gets cozy with municipal and state government leaders in order to co-opt their favor when it comes to zoning laws, tax breaks, and wielding eminent domain like a machete at a barroom brawl.
Emanuel knows that politics needs more and more $$$ each election, and the best way to get $$$ --- the so-called Third Way --- is to build symbiotic relationships with Big Business.
Allowing the government to pick winners in this fashion is the antithesis of laisez faire economics, but it's the environment that Trump thrives in, regardless his rhetoric about Big Government.
meanwhile outside the media bubble...
Submitted by MidAmerica on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 10:01am.
The great unwashed masses are not a sure lock for obama. If the economy does not improve in any appreciable way then a lot of low information voters will vote for 'Anybody but obama'. Voters threw out Jimmie Carter based on emotion. They were sick of the direction of the country. Obama got a lot of votes based on the bad feelings generated against George Bush. However this time obama will be the loser against a sour nation. If the Republicans just run a campaign that stresses a positive future they don't even need to announce a candidate. People will vote for a direction more than for a particular candidate. It's just that simple.
The media hype that there are no Republican contenders with a large national following is correct. But... that changes as soon as the Republicans nominate and smartly and fully support their candidate. You know.... unlike last time when a lot of 'smart' and 'in the know' Republicans got caught up in obamamania.
No, it's Not.
Submitted by Tenebrous on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 7:30pm.
It's a good thing I'm sitting down. You mean you can't think of A SINGLE REPUBLICAN with a LARGE NATIONAL FOLLOWING?
Seriously?
*twiddles thumbs* You still haven't thought of one?
Ok, I'm still waiting.
Surely you've heard of Sarah Palin?
Visions and Principles blog
Don't stand up yet!
Submitted by MidAmerica on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 8:05pm.
None have cre
LOL
Submitted by MidAmerica on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 8:08pm.
The dog ate my reply!! The page locked up during the write up and when I tried to edit it wouldn't let me and ate nearly all my key pounding effort..
Ahhh
Submitted by donabernathy on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 10:23am.
Propaganda...err.... media ......machines never see a candidate that can beat their dear dictator.
roflmao
Somewhat correct
Submitted by Doktor Riktor V... on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 10:31am.
I will agree there is no leader for the run towards POTUS, however, we're just getting to the starting line. As most of the above posters had commented, let someone, with the ability to convey the conservative, (note, RINO's need not apply) message of smaller government, lower taxes, and the encouraging of the free enterprise system, and they will win support, even amongst those who through no fault of their own were hypnotized by the vocal talents of President Obama and suffered a momentary loss of reason.
As a side note, I work P/T in a local grocery store, as such I see a lot of folks, who are down on their luck due to job losses etc, having to use the smart cards issued by my state. Many of them, have this look upon their faces of being totally humilated for having being forced to resort to such an action. These folks, many who were once swayed by Obama, now register disqust at the mention of him and his neomarxist pals in DC.
As I feel for them, I do not judge them. I do feel badly for them for having help to put into power the very person that has led them to this point in life. On rare occassions, some look resigned to living this way for quite some time. Hope has be become hopelessness, and change has become anything that; "will get me out of this nightmarish quagmire of not beng able to provide for my family."
I'd say then from personal observation that there are many folks who are looking for a platform that would help them get out of this misery.
"SHIELDS: What impressed me
Submitted by forest on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 10:37am.
"SHIELDS: What impressed me the most of all there was what they did not discuss. As the world was dominated and riveted on what was going on in Egypt, they didn't even address it in their speeches." That's just smart. Nobody knows what will happen, and they don't want to make fools of themselves by proclaiming that there is now "democracy" in Egypt, like they progressives are foolishly doing. It's a military junta for crying out loud, and they just backed off Mubarak's promise to have elections in September. I don't expect to see any democracy there soon, but if there is an election, it might end up being a one-time thing, depending on who wins.The drum that the media will
Submitted by motherbelt on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 10:44am.
The drum that the media will beat for the next 20 months:
Obama is unbeatable.
Tell that to Bill Clinton.
Wrong yet again, comrade Shields
Submitted by Dave. on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 10:53am.
We have the Hermanator.
And he is going to stomp your Kenyan commie Muslim puke of a fraudulent POTUS right into the dirt, where he belongs.
:-)
Vote for the American in November
Yes to the Herminator. Col.
Submitted by ricklail on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 11:58am.
Yes to the Herminator. Col. Alan West for VP. The Dems are already going after Col West in Florida. The Herminator is a business man foremost. Col West is an ass kicker. Just what we need in the WH.
Hermanator will not get far.
Submitted by Dan The Man 2 on Mon, 02/14/2011 - 1:39am.
Hermanator will not get far. I believe he will be marginalized as was Alan Keyes when he ran for President. I really liked Alan and he made sense, but he was blunt and to the point.
Uh, pretty sure John Bolton
Submitted by bkeyser on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 11:24am.
Uh, pretty sure John Bolton spoke at great length about Egypt.
And as for Ron Paul winning the straw poll- no real surprise here. CPAC-goers are largely college kids and Ron Paul is a keep-our-soldiers-on-our-shores and lets-all-smoke-pot kinda guy; this plays well to DC area dorm rooms. It means nothing. Ron Paul is an eccentric.
If I went to a Star Trek convention . . .
Submitted by Galvanic on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 12:13pm.
. . . and took a straw poll of attendees on the top TV series of all time, I think the results would be predictable.
Same with CPAC.
History has shown that it has no impact on GOP primaries or outcomes, and Fox News paid way too much attention to it.
BK, Thanks for the link to John Bolton
Submitted by upcountrywater on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 12:57pm.
He mentioned in his speech that 0bama was going to cut defense.
Sure enough this just popped up on Drudge.
Cuts to defense 79 Billion.
Pentagon cuts would include the C-17 aircraft, the alternate engine to the Joint Strike Fighter
Aloha.. to any sort of jet fighter, ya know one that can carry a decent payload.
More like the flipper, than the gipper
You Didn't Build That.
Destroying from within
Submitted by jon_torlin on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 1:14pm.
Yeah, another useful piece of equipment to be tossed aside a la Chairman. He continues unfettered to dismantle this country.
-Jon
ucw
Submitted by bkeyser on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 1:56pm.
I said this yesterday and I could say it until I'm blue in the face (not a racist remark against blue people)- this is straight out of the playbook. I wrote somewhere on Townhall's site in early '08 that Obama would spend like crazy on every liberal ladder rung until the public started looking for pitchforks, then he'd go after defense as a way to become "fiscally responsible." It's just another tactic to transfer wealth; into bong-bred fantasys and away from national strength. Democrats are so self-loathing.
Never fails. Every democrat president does this and every subsequent Republican president has to rebuild our Armed Forces.
And of course they'll do what they can to punish the USMC- killing the JSF was inevitable. Not like Marines need close air support or anything.
[oops- spelling sux]
Vanishing American Air Superiority, 1952 to 2012 RIP
Submitted by upcountrywater on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 3:00pm.
0bama wants to bring the war dead back to the massive totals of WW-2.
libs love the JSF, hanger queen, can you say f-111
This effort followed a fiasco involving the General Dynamics F-111, which might be called liberalism's attempt to build a combat aircraft. Though intended as a fighter, the production F-111 was a monster aircraft the size of a medium airliner, and just about as maneuverable.
Clinton hosted the Taliban.
0bama will cheer the spread of democracy with the islamopods flying f-16's over Israel.
The backbone of the Egyptian Air Force is 220 F-16 fighters.
Scrap this contract
You Didn't Build That.
This is a trap that has been
Submitted by Liberallies on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 1:59pm.
This is a trap that has been thrown out by Obama to Republicans...sort of a, "I dare you!"
Republicans have been talking about cutting spending and Obama and the Democrats are saying, fine, let's start with defense budget. When Republicans come out and say, "Errrr...Mr. President, we need our defense budget to protect this nation" Obama and his ilk will say that Republicans are not serious about cutting spending.
The media, Obama, his minions and his ilk will ignore the fact that republicans in Congress have drawn plans to cut over $100 billion dollars on social programs and other ridiculous Democrat party pet projects.
Republicans/Conservatives have to be really smart on this if not they are going to be played big time by Obama.
Obama is a lock in 2012
Submitted by cbeyer on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 12:33pm.
None of the Republican candidates have any charisma other than Sarah Palin who is intensly hated by the mainstream media. Ron Paul is an eccentric joke whose foreign policy is no policy other than isolationism.
Further, wittness how the media is trumpeting Obama as a moderate. Why? Because they know moderates were responsible (along with conservatives) for the 2010 election results. If he can be portrayed as 'centerist'....which of course he is not, some of the great unwashed (moderates) will come back. Worse, even with worsening employment, disasterous levels of debt and rising energy prices, the media still loves BO with slavish devotion.
The 2012 Republican candidate will have the support of talk radio and to a lesser degree, Fox News. Barack Hussein Obama will have NBC, ABC, PBS, CNN, CBS, AP, NYT, and the vast majority of major city editorial pages and news reporting singing his praises and covering for his failures. Viewed in that context, we can only hope that we capture the Senate, increase numbers in the house and are able to stop his agenda.
most don't vote on issues other than their own personal issues
Submitted by MidAmerica on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 12:51pm.
The forces you fear have insurmountable power were also the ones who were unable to stop the Republican wave of the last election.
The MSM only matters in a close election. In 2008 the Republicans put up a poor choice of a candidate and the media was able to boost obama across. Obama was not a sure fire winner and only because certain events went against McCain was obama able to win. So, in reality obama has always had a large chunk of 'soft' supporters and i suspect they are lost to him now unless the Republicans manage to again put up a weak candidate and/or run a poor campaign.
The event mostly was the
Submitted by Dan The Man 2 on Mon, 02/14/2011 - 1:45am.
The event mostly was the impending bailout of the banks, which it turns out was not needed.
Charisma
Submitted by Jerry Mack on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 3:37pm.
Yep! Too many voters decided that charisma was more important than qualifications. Hopefully the bandwagon hoppers will stay home in 2012. Even better would be for them too get their head out of their sit down place.
Unfortunately Shields it right
Submitted by Bobbygn on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 1:14pm.
The Republicans will never be a serious force to defeat Obama in 2012 unless they can bring out a new candidate that dont come across as a mealy mouthed preacher that acts as if they are on the verge of pulling the Bible out at any minute.
They cannot get derailed by abortion issues and must be smart enough to not let themselves be ambushed by the liberal MSN.
This person has to have the balls to take on the media at the press conferences. Be prepared to throw their bias back in their face and expose them in public and work to neutralize them.
The only person interested in the job right now that might do these things would be Donald Trump.
Hows that for the worse of a bad crop?
You are an ignorant troll.
Submitted by Tenebrous on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 7:34pm.
I can think of at least FOUR SEPARATE individuals who have that sort of courage AND whom would defund Abortion, Inc on top of it. Yet you can't think of one? I would like to say that we have a failure of imagination, here, but that's not it. You are uninformed, and by this stage in the game, you must be purposefully uninformed. Those people are better known as "trolls".
Visions and Principles blog
The left attack artists , the
Submitted by Ashrak on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 1:16pm.
The left attack artists , the Saul lovers, are the ones who don;t have anyone to attack. They want the Conservative side to pick right now so they know who to attack. The Liberty Movement has outsmarted them, and they know it. What this claim is about, and expect to see more of it, is a baiting - and nothing more.
The projections is becoming moe and more outlandish as th days go by. It will become moreso as time passes.
The progressives, at PBS and elswhere, didn't know what hit them in the 2010 election cycle and they remain unaware about what is about to happen in 2012. FOXNEWS can pimp Romney all they want to, the progressives can wish for it all they want to, but it ain't gonna happen any more than Paul.
Right now, I am hoping for a Palin/Cain ticket. As Illinois is the stand alone state to raise taxes, Illinois will stand alone as the only state that would vote for Obama. 1984.........
Wow, where to start with this nonsense?
Submitted by Blonde on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 1:21pm.
These people are living in make-believe land. There are plenty of probables, many of whom spoke at CPAC the last few days. If you're interested, you can go to CPAC and sign up, all of the videos are posted.
So far, I've watched Ann Coulter (who had ALOT to say about Egypt), and my rep, Allen West, who apparently rocked the house (see Drudge). Our own Lachlan Markay was there, and when I asked him which speeches were worth watching, he replied: Hayley Barbour, John Bolton, Mitch Daniels, Cheney/Rumsfeld, Rick Perry. Mitt, Newt, T-Paw, and Thune were all good, but sort of run-of-the-mill presidential stump speeches.
Now, as to this nonsense about "socializing" the 87 new House Members. HOGWASH! I wish I'd kept it, Allen West sent me a "progress" e-mail prior to his innauguratation, there were activities galore for the freshmen members, including a day or so at the Heritage Foundation, IIRC. Many of the Tea Party members are never going to be "socialized" into part of a cohesive unit, Sheilds, you dummy! In fact, their whole raison d'etre is to NOT become socialized and captured by the system. Sheesh!
Go watch the CPAC videos yourself, especially Allen West, and Ann Coulter was better than I've seen her in a long, long time (I think she's great live, I find her books unreadable).
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Blonde, EXACTLY! the
Submitted by Liberallies on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 2:03pm.
Blonde,
EXACTLY! the individuals that the Tea Party put in Congress were not put there to be socialized into the DC political machine. We put them t here to be DIFFERENT and stand up to the DC political machines whether Republican or Democratic!
This is something that too many partisan hacks fail to see. Any Congressmen that was elected thanks to the Tea Party and decides to not act as they promised in the campaign will have hell to pay and will not last long in Congress.
It is about time that the established and entrenched political machines in Washington DC, whether Left or Right, Republican or Democratic, Conservative or Liberal, start fearing the American people. Government must fear the people NEVER the other way around!
Thanks, Fut
Submitted by Blonde on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 2:15pm.
That was exactly the point I was getting at (and should have put in bold). Many there have no intention and have gone on the record that they are NOT going to be captured by the system.
Do yourself a favor, and go to CPAC and watch Allen West's speech.
LOL, he said something about joining the Congressional Black Caucus, "40 of them and 1 of me, I like those odds". Also called out the left for the "Tea Party is Racist" comments. His first week in Congress he wrote to Eric Cantor, calling for a longer schedule, said Cantor's 110 days or whatnot was a lazy agenda!
The one minus in his resume is that he is a TN Volunteer, although he gets half of that back for getting his Masters at Kansas State (okay, he gets another one back because he said he spent Saturdays learning all of the SEC fight songs!).
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Donald Bloomtrump
Submitted by Jack Bauer on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 1:38pm.
I quite like Trump as a personality. Seems a you could share a beer with him.
Politically I suspect he's like that other New York billionaire BLOOMBERG aka Nanny McFee-Taxes-Scold.
Though he's probably not such a crazy authoritarian as Bloomberg -- a man who would feel right at home in China were the governemnt can tell you how many kids you are allowed to procreate.
All of the above Mr Obama? --- How about ALL OF THE BELOW, instead.
What a pathetic lap dog
Submitted by Semus on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 1:40pm.
What a pathetic lap dog Shields is. But he's just one of so many.
An arithmetic answer to an idiotic remark
Submitted by hbnolikeee on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 2:22pm.
"They Don't Have Anybody"Zero is greater than -100.
Get it Leibniz?
PPP survey shows tough climb ahead for GOP
Submitted by Lipton on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 2:48pm.
http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2011/02/obama-in-swing-states.html
I don't get why such poor performance hasn't turned off more voters on Obama.
Saw this
Submitted by bkeyser on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 2:52pm.
Check the internals.
I can't seem to find them as of yet, but I'll look into it
Submitted by Lipton on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 3:09pm.
I am a newbie/ameteru, part-time idiot (the rest of tthe time conservative), etc. In other words just learning..
Lipton
Submitted by bkeyser on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 3:22pm.
They're not public. It was probably a poll of "adults" (the least accurate method) with a +9 or above dem sample. Or, more than likely, they sampled dems at the same rate as the '08 election results which has zero reflection of reality in '10. For all the info PPP published, it could've been an online poll. Don't fret the results, they're totally worthless. Keep in mind PPP is DKos' paid polling firm.
Lipton
Submitted by Jerry Mack on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 3:21pm.
Check Rasmussem and Real Clear Politics. Does Lipton have anything to do with Tea Party?
I have been a tea partier, but am more active now
Submitted by Lipton on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 3:54pm.
in my local GOP. I try to stay involved in the tea partiies, but I have prioritized getting involved in my local GOP party. Did a lot of GOTV efforts for state and local candidates, and hope to keep that up. Got a tea party event tomorrow, that I will be attending, but my recent focus has been local GOP. I just simply don't have the time to do all that I want to do.
Socialized
Submitted by Jerry Mack on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 3:41pm.
Be more like Brooksie!
Gergen is a joke. A RINO's
Submitted by eaglewingz08 on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 5:36pm.
Gergen is a joke. A RINO's RINO. If he were in office he would have pulled a Spector/Jeffords. This is the first time in sixty years that the repubs don't have an annointed or presumptive standard bearer. You'd think the libtards would be celebrating this democracy, 'embarassment of riches'. But, no. That's supposed to be a liability not a strength. What happened to liberals' credo, 'diversity is our strength'?
Obviously Shields didn't watch anything from CPAC, otherwise he would know that Ann Coulter skewered Obama and his Administration yesterday on Egypt. Liberals like Shields just lie like a rug and neutered RINOs like Gergen let them get away with it. That's why when NPR and CPB get defunded I will not shed any tears.
No Frontrunner = Too Many Targets
Submitted by Tenebrous on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 7:41pm.
That's what's really going on. Shields is annoyed that he doesn't have someone he can direct all his impotent rage towards. It's not as though the GOP has NOT A SINGLE PERSON who is willing to pick up the gauntlet; it's that the possibilities are legion.
And here's my opinion of Trump. No man who supports Rahm Emmanuael will get my vote -- EVER. The very same people who will vote for Trump because of his reality distortion field are the VERY SAME PEOPLE WHO VOTED FOR OBAMA ON THE BASIS OF HIS. That we need to make this point after Obama's election is stunning.
Of course, the real problem is not so much Trump, but the perpetual willful ignorance, lazy thinking, and spiritual abandonment of so many who call themselves conservatives.
Visions and Principles blog
Agreed
Submitted by Blonde on Sun, 02/13/2011 - 8:04pm.
The Donald is a cartoon candidate.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Two Words.
Submitted by NL207 on Mon, 02/14/2011 - 10:37am.
Sarah Palin.
State Funded Media Propagandist Shields is, like the rest of the liberal press, so scared sh*tless of a Palin candidacy that he can't even admint she exists.
Shields is still enthralled with the grandiose image . . .
Submitted by Galvanic on Mon, 02/14/2011 - 12:30pm.
. . . of Obama, not unlike the MSM was enthralled with Hillary Clinton in 2007.
But as they failed to appreciate Obama's potential to win, so do they underestimate the current field of possible GOP candidates, most of whom have far more executive experience than Obama had.
Maybe it's because Shields is repelled by the conservative message that he assumes none of these Republicans can gain traction with the public.
If so, he's probably wrong.
I still think that the GOP nominee will be someone other than the folks who attended CPAC. I just don't know whom.