Filing two reports for Thursday’s "American Morning," CNN reporter Bob Franken asserted that Democrats are "more sincere" in their expressions of concern for ailing South Dakota Senator Tim Johnson. Reporting on what the political ramifications would be if the Democrat resigned from Congress, thus giving Republicans control of the Senate, Franken used apocalyptic language to describe such an occurrence. The loss of Johnson, who suffered a brain hemorrhage on Wednesday, would be a "major, major disruption" and could leave Congress "ripped in half by fate" Such an event would enable the Republicans to "protect their party's president from a full-scale assault." It was this type of over-the-top reporting that led to Franken’s claim that the Democrats are the ones who really care about the Senator:
Bob Franken: " Without question, all the expressions of concern for Senator Johnson are very sincere, but I've got to say that the ones from the Democrats, Miles, are even more sincere."
Co-host Miles O'Brien "Absolutely."
During his first segment, which aired at 7:32am, Franken introduced colorful phrases to describe the dire ramifications of Johnson’s resignation, which would allow South Dakota’s Republican governor to appoint a (likely) Republican replacement:
Franken: "If senator Johnson can no longer serve, and that's a big if, the balance of power in the Senate would turn upside down. It's as simple as that. Republicans would almost certainly take back the Senate that the Democrats had just wrenched from their control in last month's election."
John Mercurio (Hotline): "Democrats are expecting to come back to Capitol Hill in January in control of a legislative agenda. And this put a huge wrench in what Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are expected to try to accomplish in the first few--over the next two years."
Franken: "Tim Johnson of South Dakota is one of the states where the sitting governor chooses a replacement, without regard to party. Republican Governor Mike Rounds could be expected to appoint someone from his own party to fill the vacancy until the next election in two years. Instead of the 51/49 majority Democrats fought so hard to achieve, it would become 50/50, and the tie would be broken by the President of the Senate -- the Vice President of the United States, Dick Cheney. Of course, Democrats would still control the House, but the opposition party's newly gained power in Congress would suddenly be ripped in half by fate, and GOP senators would be able to protect their party's president from a full-scale assault. Without question, all the expressions of concern for Senator Johnson are very sincere but I've got to say that the ones from the Democrats, Miles, are even more sincere."
O'Brien "Absolutely. Bob Franken, thank you very much."
An hour later, Franken continued discussing the issue in fearful terms, relating what a "disruption" such a shift in power would be:
Franken: "And the Republican governor of South Dakota would replace him with a fellow Republican, which he's allowed to do in that state. It would mean that the Senate goes 50-50. There's a tie-breaker here, and it belongs to the Vice President of the United States, the President of the Senate. And he's a Republican, of course, and that would mean that suddenly the majority, the majority power would go back to the Republicans which would be a major, major disruption. Even though the Democrats control the House of Representatives, a role of the Senate has always been to stop, to slow down the House and that would put the Republicans back in power. But that, of course, is all speculation, Miles."
Upon hearing this news, most Americans likely responded by saying a prayer for Senator Johnson. Wondering who is "more sincere," or speculating about the apocalyptic impact of his retirement, seems more than a little crass, even for CNN.
A transcript of both segments, which aired on December 14, follows:
7:32am
Miles O’Brien: "Democratic Senator Tim Johnson of South Dakota reported in critical condition now after brain surgery overnight in a Washington hospital. Johnson was rushed to the hospital yesterday after suffering stroke-like symptoms during a conference call with reporters. If Johnson can't serve in the new Congress, Democrats could lose their one-vote majority in the Senate. 'American Morning's' Bob Franken is here with us for more on the political implications. A little bit of speculation, but nonetheless, a lot of talk in Washington about this."
Bob Franken: "A lot of speculation. Of course, we don't know the ultimate prognosis. He's in medical hands right now, but that hasn't stopped the political hands from quickly engaging in down-home calculation. The speculation began almost immediately after word got out Johnson had been stricken at the end of a political conference call with South Dakota reporters."
Tim Johnson: "The money was proposed to be provided a year ago, second to -- you know -- it just is frustrating."
Franken: "If senator Johnson can no longer serve, and that's a big if, the balance of power in the Senate would turn upside down. It's as simple as that. Republicans would almost certainly take back the Senate that the Democrats had just wrenched from their control in last month's election."
John Mercurio (Hotline): "Democrats are expecting to come back to Capitol Hill in January in control of a legislative agenda. And this put a huge wrench in what Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are expected to try to accomplish in the first few--over the next two years."
Franken: "Tim Johnson, South Dakota is one of the states where the sitting governor chooses a replacement, without regard to party. Republican Governor Mike Rounds could be expected to appoint someone from his own party to fill the vacancy until the next election in two years. Instead of the 51/49 majority Democrats fought so hard to achieve, it would become 50/50, and the tie would be broken by the President of the Senate -- the Vice President of the United States, Dick Cheney. Of course, Democrats would still control the House, but the opposition party's newly gained power in Congress would suddenly be ripped in half by fate, and GOP senators would be able to protect their party's president from a full-scale assault. Without question, all the expressions of concern for Senator Johnson are very sincere, but I've got to say that the ones from the Democrats, Miles, are even more sincere."
O'Brien "Absolutely. Bob Franken, thank you very much."
8:32
Miles O’Brien: "Democratic Senator Tim Johnson of South Dakota in critical condition now after brain surgery overnight in Washington. Johnson apparently suffering a stroke yesterday in the midst of a conference call with reporters. If Johnson cannot serve in the new Congress, Democrats could lose their one vote majority in the Senate. ‘American Morning’s’ Bob Franken is here with more on the political ramifications. Good morning, Bob."
Bob Franken: "Good morning. And the Democrats are probably feeling star-crossed this morning while they're also concerned about the health, of course, of Senator Tim Johnson. But they have to worry that the very hard-fought victory, I mean really hard fought that brought them a 51 to 49 majority in the U.S. Senate would suddenly be taken away by fate, if it is a chance that the senator is replaced. And the Republican governor of South Dakota would replace him with a fellow Republican, which he's allowed to do in that state. It would mean that the Senate goes 50-50. There's a tie-breaker here, and it belongs to the Vice President of the United States, the president of the Senate. And he's a Republican, of course, and that would mean that suddenly the majority, the majority power would go back to the Republicans which would be a major, major disruption. Even though the Democrats control the House of Representatives, a role of the Senate has always been to stop, to slow down the House and that would put the Republicans back in power. But that, of course, is all speculation, Miles."
O’Brien: "And at this point, we really don't even know what happened to him or what the prognosis is. So yes, I imagine Democrats, you know, they're concerned about a colleague, but the political calculus is going on."
Franken: "Well, you know, it's interesting in Washington, I can tell you that everybody went through this thought process: It's really too bad about Senator Johnson. Now what's going to happen?"
—Scott Whitlock is a news analyst for the Media Research Center.




















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Bleeding in the brain huh....
December 14, 2006 - 16:09 ET by Coulter CultureBleeding in the brain huh.....That explains to me why one person out there is a Democrat. "Liberals are always against America. They are either traitors or idiots, and on the matter of America's self-preservation, the difference is irrelevant." --- Ann Coulter (my hero)
This begs the question...is t
December 14, 2006 - 16:25 ET by paperheadThis begs the question...is there some sort of test out there to determine if a baby will become a Republican or a democrat? The media is reporting that he had this ailment since birth.
Good point!
December 14, 2006 - 16:28 ET by Clear thinkerGood point!
the majority power would go b
December 14, 2006 - 16:28 ET by MassConservativethe majority power would go back to the Republicans which would be a major, major disruption.
Didn't take long for CNN to start crafting the new playbook if case Johnson is forced to step down. If the Republicans get control of the Senate back the MSM will start focusing on how disruptive they are when the stop cold any of the nutty proposals from the Democrats.
Everyone seems to be positioning this unfortunate situation as 'good' for the Republicans. I see it as the opposite. If the Democrats can retain control of both houses it works in the Republicans favor for the next two years as the 'bait and switch' tactics from the election become more evident. They will have no one to blame when there ridiculous ideas are exposed and it becomes evident how out of touch they are with this country.
I would NEVER say give up con
December 14, 2006 - 16:37 ET by BrownCowI would NEVER say give up control to make a point as some had before the elections. Now that we have lost control I do see the validity in your comments M.C. I would prefer that they stay in power for two years so the public can see that they have no plans or ideas for any issue facing this country. While my glass is half empty . . . I have a feeling that either way we will continue to see the MSM disinformation campaign roll on strong. If we get the senate do to this unfortunate situation there will be a firestorm of “foul play” and if we do not there will be the same ‘ol cheerleader routine we are seeing now.
Absolutely! As soon as I saw
December 14, 2006 - 16:37 ET by Nathan R MIAbsolutely! As soon as I saw we lost the house in november I knew our best bet for '08 was to let the Dems take it all. That way when they shoot themselves in the foot, hopefully we'll be back to our roots and be able to make this country great again.
I would say that we write the governor asking him to keep the senate in Democratic control, if the Senator has to step down.
True. But it would have bee
December 14, 2006 - 17:57 ET by mattmTrue. But it would have been better if the GOP had stuck to the platform, kept their noses clean and stood up to the liars in the press. Then, they might not have lost, and we wouldn't be facing two years of the same liberal crap that had been screwing this country up prior to the 1994 GOP congressional victory.
Yes, if the GOP would have ke
December 14, 2006 - 18:14 ET by Nathan R MIYes, if the GOP would have kept their noses clean. But, they didn't so now we (the people) have to make sure that our group gets back on track. The congress think they know what we want. We have to write them and make sure they know.
We should also get involved i
December 14, 2006 - 18:24 ET by mattmWe should also get involved in politics on a local level and make sure the candidates we get are good ones and that they know we expect them to be true to the republican platform. And keep the media under the microscope.
Absolutely, we have to get ou
December 14, 2006 - 18:29 ET by Nathan R MIAbsolutely, we have to get our voices heard on all levels. A good republican will listen to the people who voted them into office. Not, assume they know whats best for us.
Compare the MSM's distress ov
December 14, 2006 - 16:41 ET by GalvanicCompare the MSM's distress over Johnson's condition, to their enthusiasm for Sen. Jeffords when he declare that he was leaving the GOP and going independent (Though causussing with the Dems). The shift temporarily gave the Dems control of the Senate between Thanksgiving and New Year's Day, and though this had little impact legislatively, the MSM was thrilled to interview "Majority Leader" Tom Daschle.
Just as.... the Republicans
December 15, 2006 - 01:40 ET by TelemarkTumaloJust as.... the Republicans have no one to blame except themselves for:
1. The failed war in Iraq. Americans dying daily, terrorism progressively rampant there, a Civil War brewing, and an American President who remains delusional in installing a western style Democracy.
2. Ever increasing budget deficits and a growing national debt that has reached record amounts. How is it that a so called tax and spend Democrat reversed a trend of increasing deficits and then the so called fiscal conservative President Bush has expanded the national debt to all time records?
3. An all time low for America and it's place in the world. We have somehow gone from being the world's best defender of freedom, to now becoming the bully of the world's playground. Why is it that this President believes that the entire rest of the world is wrong in seeing through his ways of war mongering. Misdirected missles are no substitute for intelligence.
4. A persistent disregard for the protection of our future.... little or no planning for future energy needs sans oil..... a lack of interest and continued reversal of air and water protection..... no leadership in healthcare.
5. The Republicans and the Bush administration have had a bully pulpit for the past 6 years and have done absolutely nothing in the areas of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid Reform.
No wonder the President's approval ratings are at an all time low. If you must, blame it all on the liberal media. In the meantime, watch Americans vote with their feet. Roosevelt would be ashamed of the current Administration. He didn't blame anyone but took full responsibility for his actions!
Remember... when there is a drought... some pray for rain. Those who succeed start digging a well.
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the
President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is
not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the
American public." President 'Teddy' Roosevelt
I do like your quote about
December 15, 2006 - 02:06 ET by Conservative VoiceI do like your quote about digging a well, but other than that..
1. The war in Iraq is being managed fairly well. The only thing we are losing is the media war, and a backbone to not fight the war with all our might and strength.
2. Republican control does not mean conservative control
3. Still the best all time defender of freedom, and in case you forgot...9-11
4. Drill more oil, its really that simple. Go ahead and research for different fuels and sources, in the mean time drill for more oil and stop thinking the evil oil companies are out destroying the planet. But at least your true colors are being exposed.
5. On SS the president tried to push reform, but the democrats played fear games with the elderly, so the issue was dropped when we had more pressing issues, such as 9-11
6. The ratings are low because the republicans ignored their base, President Bush tried to out democrat the democrats, and we are not fighting the war on terror with all guns blazing...because the media has held us back.
Well put CV! I am so sick
December 15, 2006 - 07:13 ET by JerryWell put CV! I am so sick and tired of this "failed war" mantra of our ignorant buddies on the left. Let's look at this "failed" war, shall we?
Never before has any regime been ousted in less time and with fewer casualties.
Never before has any war been prosecuted with fewer civilian casualties (caused by the conquering force).
Never before have two countries gone from tyranical rule to free elections in a shorter amount of time.
Never before has the future of a political party been so invested in the failure of a war than the democrats and the Iraq war.
Never before have former leaders gone overseas to criticize our leaders and military during a war.
Our military has done an amazing job in the face of:
A hostile non-uniformed enemy that hides among women and children.
A hostile political party that is invested in their defeat.
A hostile press that desperately wants victory... the political victory of democrats that is.
What if the NE Patriots went to Miami to battle the Dolphins, and the Dolphins didn't have to play within the rules while the Patriots had to follow every rule to a tee?
What if half of the Patriots fans were cheering against them, just as the democrats are cheering against our military?
What if the Boston press was reporting on the game in the same manner as the MSM is reporting the war?
The Patriots may have just marched the length of the field for a touchdown, but if the press reported it as "another failed possession by the hapless Patriots, a qb sack, 2 off-sides penalties, what a disaster!", what impression do you think the people in Boston would have of their team's performance??
Give me a break Telemark. Get a clue.
When asked if he went to war with Iraq to derail the impeachment
vote: “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any
President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).
I also think that the Leftist
December 15, 2006 - 14:03 ET by UnsaneI also think that the Leftist TT should be asked about why he feels the government needs to put forth leadership on health care. Let me guess: TT doesn't believe the laws of economics apply to health care; he also believes that the government is there to coddle,spoil, and babysit him and the rest of the citizenry of the United States.
"Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel of envy." -Sir Winston Churchill, British statesman (1874-1965)
Sure, I am a huge fan of ca
December 15, 2006 - 17:34 ET by TelemarkTumaloSure, I am a huge fan of capitalism and the free market. I also work in healthcare and my practice is in a very competitive market, I pay my taxes and believe in individual responsibility. I hate how the beauracy of healthcare has grown and detest the piles of paperwork that comes between my patients and my work to help them. But, I am also not naive. The alternative of no government oversight in medicine would lead to outrageous corruption and dangerous medicine for patients. So... if I'm hearing you correctly, you believe government has no role in healthcare. Fine. So, we should allow anybody who would like to do so, practice medicine with no government oversight, no formal training requirements, no licensing, and no liability for their actions.... anyone can sell any drug or health related instruments with no government oversight.... we shall do away with the FDA and the DEA and you will refuse to accept medicare payments for your healthcare when you turn 65. Did I hear you correctly?
Several issues
December 15, 2006 - 17:43 ET by dagdaThere are several different issues here. Doctors are licensed by their respective states. There is no reason those states could not take on licensing drugs as well. The market place can also take care of negligent doctors. They would be driven out of business by malpractice suits. Or their insurance would be so high that they would get out of the business.
Getting rid of the federal level of enforcement would not necessarily be bad. Actually, getting rid of the FDA and DEA would not necessarily be bad. Right now it takes 7-10 years to get a product to market in the USA. It is a lot shorter time in other countries. Without that extra layer of government interference, the cost of drugs might go down. The DEA is mostly a joke to my mind. Drug issues can be handled locally or with interstate agreements. We might have fewer big druggers if they spent time in state prisons instead of club fed.
Our real problem, then, is not our strength today; it is rather the vital necessity of action today to ensure our strength tomorrow. Dwight Eisenhower
Health care rant again
December 15, 2006 - 22:06 ET by UnsaneUnlike you, TT, I don't run crying to the government everytime I have an issue. Indeed, due to demographic weight alone, I have assumed that there WON'T be Medicare or Social Security for me when I turn 65. You, on the other hand, cannot imagine life without less government and hop and pray that it can completely take over your life to make your life easier. But what you refuse to see is that these things have COSTS.
So, if I am hearing you correctly, if we close the government cookie jar in regards to health care, everyone in America will begin dropping dead instantly, and we will overnight have Third World medical standards. Well, TT, read this little blast I have crafted for the economically naive Leftists like yourself who think NOTHING can be done without government, and that all we need in health care is MORE government.
Universal health care violates a very simple principle: "There is no such thing as a free lunch." It will merely delude people into thinking there is one. To illustrate: why are we all striving to drive less right about now? Because the price of gasoline is rather high right now. If the government subsidized the price so that it always cost, say, 25 cents a gallon, would you be so keen on restricting your driving? No, because there would be no incentive to. But in the meantime, the cost to the government of the subsidy would continually shoot through the roof, causing them to spend more and more money to keep the price at 25 cents.
The same thing will happen when you remove the price mechanism from health care, which universal health care plans seek to do. Right now people don't visit the doctor nearly as often for things they can easily treat at home, because who wants to spend the money on something they can easily take care of themselves? Once the price mechanism is removed, because health care is "free" at that point, people will hit the emergency room for paper cuts. This is human nature, and indeed happened (and is happening) in nations with "universal health coverage".
The idea of universal health care is indeed a good idea - on paper only. In practice it is a raging disaster that governments are loathe to get rid of because the electorate will scream at the proposal to re-introduce economic realities (i.e., prices) to the system. (And if you think the debt is bad now, just wait until the government nationalizes health care. France and Germany cannot meet the strictures of the Growth and Stability Pact they signed to join the euro; in fact, I don't think they've done it a single time! This due to the deficits they run to fund their nanny states, to include health care.) Take a look at the history of Britain's NHS for an example. Currently, the NHS’s budget is LARGER than the GDPs of every nation on earth except the top ten!
That dispensed with, let’s take a look at those north of the 49th.
One thing to bear in mind is that one of the biggest motivating factors to a Canadian is to be different from the Americans, for their biggest fear is being like their neighbors to the south. Canada owes its existence to the Declaration of Independence as much as we do, for they represent the reaction against it.
I would be willing to bet that one of the reasons they love their health care system so much is that Americans do not have such a program. (And if we adopt such a system, they will say with much snootiness that they inspired the Americans into getting such a system.) But in reality, their socialistic approaches to many problems is only hurting them. While the Canadian economy has expanded, it has not expanded NEARLY as fast as the U.S. economy. And the Canadian economy has expanded due to their blessings of natural resources, not due to what even the governments prefer the driving engine to be - namely, manufacturing and industrial activity. The gap between the U.S. and Canada continues to grow and expand, in the U.S.'s favor. The Economist reports in their survey of Canada published in December 2005 that Americans made C$1800 more per person than Canadians back in 1981; but in 2003, this gap widened to C$7200. The British publication further reports that Canadians are happy to be poorer if it means keeping their social model, for they see it is better than the heartless version of capitalism to the south. I contend again that this points to the issue of national identity that Canadians continually struggle with.
Here's an admittedly unscientific measure of progression in health care: a listing of the nationalities of those who won the Nobel Prizes in Medicine from 1977 to 2004 in reverse order.
2004: U.S.
2003: U.S. /U.K.
2002: U.S. /U.K.
2001: U.K.
2000: Sweden/U.S.
1999: U.S.
1998: U.S.
1997: U.S.
1996: Australia/Switzerland (no socialized health care in Switzerland)
1995: U.S./Germany
1994: U.S.
1993: U.S./U.K.
1992: U.S.
1991: Germany
1990: U.S.
1989: U.S.
1988: U.S./U.K.
1987: Japan
1986: Italy/U.S.
1985: U.S.
1984: U.K./Argentina/Denmark
1983: U.S.
1982: Sweden/U.K.
1981: U.S.
1980: France/U.S.
1979: U.S./U.K.
1978: U.S/ Switzerland
1977: U.S.
Between 1977 and 2004, U.S. doctors won 22 Nobel Prizes in Medicine - more than the other countries shown combined. To save server space I did not list ALL the recipients, but I noticed that the Nobel prize winners in the early going were from many assorted European countries. This began to change in the 1960s, when the listing of winners trended sharply American.
I wonder what motivated all of these doctors. Pure altruism? The commitment to doing work for free? Did any of these doctors give away their prize money or refuse it?
And why are all of these Nobel prize winners hailing from the United States? Could it be that the system of health care here favors innovation and different approaches, due to the market-oriented system that exists here? (And rewards such innovation?) Why do I not see any Canadians listed here? Why did the last French recipient get his or her prize in 1980?
Yet more evidence that gives me pause to wonder why there are so many in the United States dedicated to killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.
"Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel of envy." -Sir Winston Churchill, British statesman (1874-1965)
telemarktumalo
December 15, 2006 - 14:11 ET by misterbilltelemarktumalo Excuse me sir, but you got off at the wrong stop. Please jump on the next leftbound bus and don't get off untill the last stop. There will probably be a sign "kos" or "libtard" or somewhat similar, or possibly "whiner , sniveler, appeaser Avenue". And now that you know where to go, it is no longer necessary for you to get off at this stop!
hashmarktumor PS
December 15, 2006 - 14:14 ET by misterbillPS I believe you are not using your shovel for "digging a well". Rather you are shovelling something else.
May he get well soon. My, G
December 15, 2006 - 06:12 ET by Andrew H.May he get well soon. My, God--Franken says the dems are more sincere??? He would know that--how? No, sir. I hope he recovers fine and returns. I would rather beat them at the ballot box any day--it's the only way--we either win or lose. I do not see a medical situation being good for anyone.
Never relent.
Well, Andrew, I think Franken means Democrats have more to lose.
December 15, 2006 - 07:48 ET by acaiguanaWell, Andrew, I think Franken means Democrats have more to lose.
All in all a pretty cynical approach to a man's illness.
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "Ya can't win if ya don't play."
Acaiguana--agree it is cynica
December 15, 2006 - 08:21 ET by Andrew H.Acaiguana--agree it is cynical--horribly cynical of Franken also to suggest Republicans aren't as sincere in wishing the senator good health. I suspect it's a projection of how shallow many dems are--many would probably be in a celebrative mood if the same thing happened to a conservative--but they would try to hide it I guess--
People of good heart take no joy in another's problems regardless of what s/he stands for politically. Something obvious, something true... it sure seems it's all about power to the dems. Sad.
Liberalism is a convenient lie.
You know if Johnson were a
December 15, 2006 - 06:34 ET by motherbeltYou know if Johnson were a Republican, the media would be excoriating them for making this a political issue. They would claim it should be all about "his family".
The media (in support of the Democrats) have politicized this to the point that HARRY REID is the person they go to for updates on Johnson's condition!!!
I think it's a mixed bag on &
December 14, 2006 - 16:42 ET by ForeverOnTheRightI think it's a mixed bag on "both sides of the isle" when it comes to expressing concern. Some Republicans will hope that he does have to resign while outwardly expressing their concern. Other Republicans will be sincere in thier concern, being decent human beings. Democrats on the other hand will be afraid that he will have to resign, and thus the Democrats lose control, while outwardly expressing thier concern. While other Democrats will be sincere in their concern, being decent human beings. The ratio on both sides of who is sincere will be different.
From a Home state guy
December 14, 2006 - 23:01 ET by SD CycloneI live in SD. I have talked to a lot of people in the last couple days (7 counties, 5 towns) and all they want is for him to be healthy. We are a red state, but this shows me that we are concerned for the person and family first. Unfortunately, our largest city Newspaper-owned by Gannett (ala USA Today) had a similar headline.
"...but I've got to say that
December 14, 2006 - 16:58 ET by Stonefingers"...but I've got to say that the ones from the Democrats, Miles, are even more sincere."
Linus' pumpkin patch was sincere too, but the Great Pumpkin passed it by.
What arrogant, air-headed nonsense. Whenever Al Franken speaks, I picture him in his starring role in the movie "Trading Places."
That was the pinnacle of his career...it's been all downhill since then.
Mr. Fingers,I don't disagree
December 14, 2006 - 17:22 ET by Chris Normanfingers,
I don't disagree with your view, but Bob Franken, not Al, is the guy here. Now, maybe they're related...
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
- Arabian Proverb
My initial impression from
December 14, 2006 - 18:41 ET by JDWMy initial impression from the headline was Gore's charitable giving. After reading about their superior sincerity I was convinced what loving feeling people they are.
JDW
Kerry: "You know, education, if you make the most of it ... you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."
o'brien is a walking talking
December 14, 2006 - 17:35 ET by buddyco'brien is a walking talking example of "empty suit".
where to begin? flounder, franken, dobbs, j woodruff, blitzer, cooper, etc. who is the worst? it is too close to call. one nice thing is that they are consistent in their views.
CNN doesn't even want to try
December 14, 2006 - 19:01 ET by RightOfMostCNN doesn't even want to try to be truthful. From what I've heard today, it's the Democrat Drive-by-Media who's saying "how will this affect the balance of power?" while the conservative hosts and callers are concerned about the man and praying from Sen. Johnson's full recovery.
'Shows everyone pretty much what we're like...and what they're like. At this point, no one should give a rip about power. Let's use the power of prayer.
Bob Franken's idiocies; a tale of two senators
December 14, 2006 - 19:41 ET by Mary Louise TurnerFirst of all, we all know the cheese slipped off CNN's cracker years ago, but Bob Franken's little tantrum this morning placed him and his network in the "certifiable" category.
Did you folks realize that two senators have fallen ill since the elections? I only found out this afternoon that Sen. Wayne Thomas (R-WY) has leukemia, in addition to Sen. Tim Johnson's serious illness. The coverage of the two illnesses is very stark indeed and is telling in its own right.
There has hardly been a peep about Mr. Thomas' cancer in the media, while the press has gone absolutely bananas about Mr. Johnson's disease. The reason is simple: Mr. Johnson is a Democrat, and if he is forced out due to his health, the Senate could return to Republican hands! Both men's illnesses should have been reported fairly and with some modicum of decency. But you know the MSM.
Democrat senate wet dreams
December 14, 2006 - 19:46 ET by M_StuartI say that we must win everything we can today and worry about tomorrow later. We have to confront the immigration fiasco and the runaway courts. Just please don't let me have to see Specter any more. Thank God that stab-in-the-back Chaffee is gone!
I happened to catch this stor
December 14, 2006 - 23:24 ET by Indiana JoeI happened to catch this story on ABC last night while at a restaurant. And what struck me most about it was, after one sentence announcing Tim Johnson's stroke, the very next sentence included questions about the "balance of power" or somesuch. Kind of an "oh, by the way, he's resting comfortably, but...." type of thing. Very crass, I thought.
Whether one or the other party is "more sincere" in their concern is a ridiculous point to debate. But it was VERY obvious to me that the MSM cared much more about the "political ramifications" than they did about Johnson's condition.
What a pack of putrid vultures.....
Putrid Vultures
December 15, 2006 - 17:37 ET by Six String Spiff"What a pack of putrid vultures..."
You forgot "That need an intimate date with a shotgun"
Hey, "If it bleeds it leads", right?
That's how I feel. These media folks deserve anything horrible that happens to them. How sick and twisted can these f*ckers be? THere should be a POLL asking people "Do you think the media is too sensational?" It won't happen though. We'll always see the talking heads explaining to us how one of their opinions, or conspiracies "could be true"... There are not enough words in every language to describe my deep hatred for these peices of human debris. Imagine, making your living off of everybody elses downfall.... how can they sleep at night? Hey F*ckers, I hope you enjoy your "Holdiay" dinner with your millions of dollars that you didn't have to lift a bloody finger for. We'll just keep on working hard so you can pee on our foreheads...
I HATE YOU ALL.
"And he's a Republican,
December 15, 2006 - 00:45 ET by Airforce_5_O"And he's a Republican, of course, and that would mean that suddenly the majority, the majority power would go back to the Republicans which would be a major, major disruption."
I didn't get to see, thank God, because of my work. Thats why I have good old NB araound to keep me informed.
Did they have to break out the old paper bags over there at CNN this morning for everybody to breath into? Was there screaming and nashing of teeth in the old news room over this?
I wish Sen Johnson and his family well because this is a very serious matter but please CNN quit pushing the panic button because (Oh no) They is a split congress. The USA will survive this (We survived Bill Clinton for 8 years) and lets us hope and pray this man a full and speedy recovery.
The new world order is in power. God help us all. Airforce_5_O, 2330, November 7, 2006
I had a different perspective
December 15, 2006 - 10:34 ET by amberI had a different perspective. I hope God's will be done, if God wants him to be healed, then I pray that happens. At the same time, I pray for the family to be comforted and encouraged.
That said, I hope he ragains full mental and physical abilities, in time to take his position. I believe a lot of people have strokes because they are arswipes and God needs to have a little one on one with them. Ever notice how people who recover from a major stroke or physical event are changed? I pray his brain improves and he learned the truth throughout his terrible ordeal and becomes a man of God who wants to serve the people of this wonderful nation....he comes back and becomes a real conservative Republican Christian man of God. I say that in all sincerity and not for personal reasons.