Showing posts with label Meet the Press. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Meet the Press. Show all posts

Sunday, July 18, 2010

MTP: The GOP is ROE

You know that you are a completely hooked political wonk when you set your alarm clock on Saturday night so that you are sure that you wake up early enough on Sunday morning so that you don’t miss the 9 AM CDT live airing of NBC’s Meet the Press. That, sadly, has been the state of things in my life for several years now.

And you know that you are completely hooked on MTP when you find yourself missing the deep cuts that former MTP moderator Tim Russert used to apply to the bloviating orators of obfuscation, regulars that appeared on his show weekly.

I miss the "Russert Pounce."

Up until today that is.

Because today, David Gregory was channeling Tim Russert’s spirit. Either that or he has finally acquired the brass appendages that we have all been missing on our Sunday morning politics fix.

This morning, the entire program was devoted to a roundtable discussion between Gregory and the respective chairs of the NRSC, the DSCC, the NRCC and the DCCC. That is, the four gentlemen who are responsible for raising money for Democratic and Republican Senatorial and Congressional campaigns.

At issue was presidential press secretary Robert Gibbs’ unfortunate and unqualified comment that Democrats could lose the majority in November.

Of course they could. But the problem is, Gibbs never addressed the whole concept of “likelihood.”

At this moment of weakness Republicans pounced, and I saw the effect at the Pete Olson town hall meeting last Monday when conservatives in the meeting asked Olson what the plan was after the GOP retakes the House in November. The air sparked with the electricity of certain knowledge of a complete rout in November.

NRCC Chair Pete Sessions attempted to maintain the façade in his opening remark:

“I think the, the public sees this as a long-term debt issue of big government, more spending. The president and the House, at least, are two-tenths through a big government agenda. And the bottom line is, is that people back home see it where government is doing quite well and the free enterprise system and jobs back home are not doing so well. I think change is in the air.”
And it went on like that for the longest time. Gregory danced around the subject of a Republican agenda, but the discussion remained unfocused for what seemed an interminable amount of time.

Bob Menendez, chair of the DSCC and Chris Van Hollen, chair of the DCCC were being overly cautious, having been put there by a desire not to look like whiners that endlessly bemoan the fact that they and their party were put in that position by the policies of George Bush and the Republican Party.

So it looked like a stalemate was shaping up, if not a tilt toward a GOP victory in the debate.

Then at the beginning of the 2nd half hour, David Gregory pounced.

Addressing Pete Sessions (making this not a fair fight at all), Gregory posed this question:

“This has been a debate so far this morning about, you know, the relative merits of Republican rule during the Bush years and what this president has or has not accomplished so far. I think what a lot of people want to know is if Republicans do get back into power, what are they going to do?”
A very pointed question at which time Sessions executed the old Texas Two-Step when he replied [and believe me, I am only including the statements of substance here] 

“…we need to live within our own means…we need to make sure that we read the bills …”
To which Gregory responded (as nicely as he could, I think):

“But, Congressman, that's a, that's a pretty gauzy agenda so far.”
"So far."

Giving him credit that there was more to the GOP agenda than he actually revealed, and Sessions then gave lie to that idea, reasserting that the only two things that need to happen is to balance the budget and read the bills.And that’s it, I swear.

Appearing exasperated at this point, Gregory delved further. This is a questioning strategy not unlike that which 3rd grade teachers use to evoke some higher level critical thinking skills in their students.
“How do you do it? Tell me how you do it. Name a painful choice that Republicans are prepared to say we ought to make.”
Eliciting this response and subsequent exchange:
REP. SESSIONS: Well, first of all, we need to make sure that as we look at all that we are spending in Washington, D.C., with, not only the, the entitlement spending but also the bigger government, we cannot afford anymore. We have to empower the free enterprise system. See, this is where...

MR. GREGORY: Congressman, these are not specifics.

REP. SESSIONS: Oh, they...

MR. GREGORY: And voters get, get tired of that.

REP. SESSIONS: That, that...

MR. GREGORY: You want to deal with entitlement spending...

REP. SESSIONS: They are...

MR. GREGORY: ...will you raise the retirement age on Social Security, will you cut benefits in Social Security?

REP. SESSIONS: Let, let--let's go...
And so he went. Nowhere. Sessions never answered. He never stated specific policies that Republicans are willing to put out there to the American people. Policies that empower Americans to decide who they want to clean up the mess that George Bush left us.

So Gregory turned to RSCC chair John Cornyn. [Not fair really, Two Texas Republicans on the same side in the same room].

MR. GREGORY: Senator, I'm sorry, I'm not hearing an answer here on specific--what painful choices to really deal with the deficit. Is Social Security on the table? What will Republicans do that, that, that would give them--like '94, there was a Contract With America. What are voters going to say, "Hey, this is what Republicans will say yes to"?
And guess what John Cornyn, my senator came up with? The Debt Commission. The commission assembled as a Democratic initiative to determine where cuts should be made. That is, the Republican agenda to revamp the economy is to do what the Democratic Debt Commission comes up with.
MR. GREGORY: But wait a minute, conservatives need a, a Democratic president's debt commission to figure out what it is they want to cut?
Cornyn, backed into a corner, fought his way out by attacking Obamacare. Gregory switched topics and asked about the recently-passed Financial Reform bill. And Cornyn started sputtering about how the bill was too long to read.

“Well, I think--I mean, this is a 2,300-page bill that not even Chris Dodd, the principal Senate author, knows--he said, "We don't know exactly how this will impact the economy or our financial systems for some time to come." I mean, that's part of the problem, as Pete said, passing legislation with unintended consequences and based on an ideological approach as opposed to, "Let's solve the problem" and to help encourage the growth of the economy. As the folks in the business roundtable said, the job-killing agenda of this administration is to make...”
Sigh.

Then the grownup in the room interrupted.

SEN. MENENDEZ: Well, I think, actually, when you look at the choice between where the president has taken the country from what he inherited vs. what our colleagues espouse, which is in essence the Bush voodoo economics, the reality is, in that choice, they have a very clear preference for the president's economic policies. Let me answer the question that my dear friend John wouldn't. Yes, they want to repeal health care, and they say replace. Well, you'll have a whole host of issues that you enjoy today that won't be enjoyed anymore. You won't see seniors closing that prescription drug gap that they have, you won't be able to have pre-existing conditions no longer be a bar to you getting insurance; you won't have a child born at birth who now will be able never--if they have a defect--to no longer be denied insurance. And yes, we have cost controls in that bill. On Wall Street reform, look, two weeks before, two weeks before the Wall Street reform bill was passed, you know, a hedge fund manager ultimately raised a million dollars for Republican candidates two weeks before the bill was being voted on, and they tried to stop us four times in the Senate before we got the Wall Street reform. I think that people in America believe in a free market as we as Democrats do, but there's a difference between a free market and a free fall market.
I’m sorry that this went overly long, but I think we all need to see this for what it is. Republicans are simply out of ideas. It has gone beyond having a knee-jerk reaction to every Democratic plan of “NO.” I think today we have been served a dish called the Republican agenda, a dish served on a silver platter with a silver cover to keep it warm.

And upon having the cover removed, we now see that there is nothing on the plate. There is nothing there. Not because Republicans are incapable of coming up with an idea, not at all. It has become all too clear to me why Republicans offer no new ideas anymore.

The Republicans have run out of fuel. They are running on empty.

Friday, June 13, 2008

Tim Russert: 1950-2008

I couldn’t believe my ears today as word drifted in from my TV set to me in another room, that Tim Russert, one of the greatest news commentators of our times, had suddenly died at the very young age of 58.

Tim Russert was a brilliant, brilliant news reporter who could put any given politician on the hotseat with his incisive and thorough research.

American politics will not be exactly the same ever again. No one can fill this guys’ shoes.

In memory of Tim Russert’s life and career, here, in all of its You Tube glory, is my salute to Tim Russert, husband to Maureen, father to Luke and son of Big Russ.

Sunday, July 15, 2007

Jim Webb: Stop Putting Political Words in [Our Soldiers’ Mouths]

Did you see Meet the Press today? I always miss it but I know I can watch it online after 1 pm. Today I got to watch two US Senators duke it out over Iraq, Senators Jim Webb (D-Va.) and Lindsey Graham (R- NC).

I hate Graham. He drones and repeats himself with identical talking points. Webb is spontaneous but he has trouble getting it out. He finally did get it out, slamming Graham for his political pandering, putting words in the mouths of our soldiers in Iraq.

Graham tried to use the staged reenlistment ceremony on the 4th as proof that the soldiers are all for continuing the war. A devious spin of an event clearly staged by the Bush regime.

Webb countered (finally) with “Don’t put political words in their mouth.” And then a few moments later: “Thirty-five percent of the United States military agrees with the policy of this president.”

I’ve excerpted the exchange below from the transcript available on MSNBC if you care to read through the entire excruciating altercation.

SEN. WEBB: The traditional operational policy has been if you’ve been gone for a year, you get two years back. We’re now in a situation where the soldiers and the Marines are having less than a one to one ratio, and somebody needs to speak up for them rather than simply defending what this president’s been doing.

SEN. GRAHAM: When they re-enlist in the highest numbers anywhere else in the military, they’re speaking...

SEN. WEBB: You know, this is one thing I really—this is one thing I really take objection to...

SEN. GRAHAM: ...the soldiers are speaking, my friend. Let them win.

SEN. WEBB: ...is politicians who—at the...

SEN. GRAHAM: Let them win.

SEN. WEBB: Politicians who—may I speak?

SEN. GRAHAM: They want to win, let them win.

SEN. WEBB: Is politicians who try to put their political views into the mouths of soldiers. You can look at poll after poll, and the political views of the United States military are no different than the country at large. Go take a look at The New York Times today.

SEN. GRAHAM: The soldiers...

SEN. WEBB: Less than half of the military believes that we should be in Iraq in the first place.

SEN. GRAHAM: Have you been to Iraq? Have you ever been and talked to them? I’ve been seven times.

SEN. WEBB: You know, have you ever been to these—I’ve been—I’ve covered two wars as a correspondent...

SEN. GRAHAM: Have you been to Iraq?

SEN. WEBB: I have been to Afghanistan as a journalist.

SEN. GRAHAM: Have you been to Iraq and—have you been to Iraq and talked to the soldiers?

SEN. WEBB: You know, you haven’t been to Iraq.

SEN. GRAHAM: I’ve been to—I’ve been there seven times.

SEN. WEBB: You know, you go see the dog and pony shows.

SEN. GRAHAM: I’ve been there as a reservist, I have been there and I’m going back in August.

SEN. WEBB: That’s what congressmen do. Yeah, I have, I have—I’ve been a member of the military when the senators come in.

SEN. GRAHAM: Well, all—listen, something we can agree on, we both admire the men and women in uniform. I don’t doubt your patriotism.

SEN. WEBB: Don’t put political words in their mouth.

SEN. GRAHAM: You know, my election...

SEN. WEBB: You do it—you’ve been doing it ever since I’ve been in Congress.

SEN. GRAHAM: I’m up for re-election. Every Republican who’s supporting this position is doing it against the polls.

SEN. WEBB: You know, you said on the floor, “Let them win. They want it.”

SEN. GRAHAM: This is not about my election, my friend...

SEN. WEBB: They want it, my friend.

SEN. GRAHAM: ...this is about the next generation.

SEN. WEBB: No, you said on the floor this week, “Let them win.”

SEN. GRAHAM: The troops are not the problem. The troops can win. I...

SEN. WEBB: Thirty-five percent of the United States military agrees with the policy of this president.

SEN. GRAHAM: Well, why do they keep...

SEN. WEBB: By poll. By poll.

SEN. GRAHAM: ...re-enlisting? Why do they go back?

SEN. WEBB: Because they love their country.

SEN. GRAHAM: That’s not the problem. No, because...

SEN. WEBB: Because they love their country, they do not do it for political reasons.

SEN. GRAHAM: And they...

SEN. WEBB: My family’s been doing this since the Revolutionary war.

SEN. GRAHAM: Yeah, well, so, so has my family.

SEN. WEBB: They do it for—they do it because they love their country, because they have a tradition, and it is the responsibility of our national leaders to make sure that they are used properly.

SEN. GRAHAM: In conclusion, I think they go back because they see the face of the enemy that we’re fighting. They don’t want their...

SEN. WEBB: Well, you got to look at the polls, Lindsey, instead of...

SEN. GRAHAM: ...kids to go back, they don’t want their grandkids to go back.

SEN. WEBB: ...instead of the seven or eight people they bring in line when you make your congressional visit.

SEN. GRAHAM: Bin Laden said this is the third world war in Iraq. They go back because they know the consequences of losing. God bless them, and let’s make sure they can win, because they can.

SEN. WEBB: I’ll let them judge what you said.

Sunday, March 18, 2007

DeLay on Meet the Press – The Smirk Returns

I had hoped that with the inevitable first day of sales of former Texas Congressman Tom DeLay’s book that he would not be given talk show air time so I wouldn't have to put up with the little cockroach again. After all, we have all moved on even if he has not. But no, because his book has gone on sale he got invited to be on Meet the Press today and sat in with a panel to discuss the war in Iraq.

I watched the podcast that you can find here.

Ol’ Tom had himself a great time. They were discussing a truly tragic situation – the carnage in Baghdad, women and children killed, and he just couldn’t stop smiling and laughing. And that smirk.

The smirk hasn’t gone away either.

It appeared midway through this sentence, the words of former Congressman Tom Andrews:

“What's happened is, as a result, hundreds of our kids have died only because they didn't have the necessary protective equipment [SMIRK] that would otherwise have kept them alive.”

I couldn’t figure out then why he smirked at that remark, but now, having reviewed the podcast in a few places, I conclude that DeLay, as well as his conservative co-panelist Richard Perle, used smiles, laughter and smirks to belittle the earnest observations of Tom Andrews and Congressman Joe Sestack.

DeLay’s book was plugged toward the end by Tim Russert. In what I suspect was going to be a tongue-in-cheek remark, Russert said this of Tom’s words:

“To, to, to be continued. No Retreat, No Surrender is your book, Congressman DeLay. Some interesting things about Newt Gingrich, Dick Armey, George Bush in this book that...”

To which Tom interrupted at a well-chosen moment: “It's history as I lived it.”

History as he lived it? If that is true, then Tom DeLay's life has been a fantasy.