Republican Candidates Afraid of YouTube Debates
GW Chimpzilla's Eye-Rack Neocon Utopia
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Four days after the Democratic debate in Charleston, S.C,. more than 400
questions directed to the GOP presidential field have been uploaded on YouTube
-- targeted at Republicans scheduled to get their turn at videopopulism on
Sept. 17.
But so far, only Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) and Rep. Ron Paul (Tex.) have agreed
to participate in the debate, co-hosted by Republican Party of Florida in St.
Petersburg.
[more]
<http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2007/07/26/but_dont_ask_him_on_youtube_1.html#more>
--
There are only two kinds of Republicans: Millionaires and fools.
Richardson-Obama in 08
news:%Ceqi.41738$Fc.4559@attbi_s21...
>
> Because they aren't as canned as debates on Faux News?
Somebody is bound to come up with the bright idea of having Jeff Gannon
submit thousands of softball questions.
Geo
<g...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Because they aren't as canned as debates on Faux News?
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> Four days after the Democratic debate in Charleston, S.C,. more than 400
> questions directed to the GOP presidential field have been uploaded on YouTube
> -- targeted at Republicans scheduled to get their turn at videopopulism on
> Sept. 17.
>
> But so far, only Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) and Rep. Ron Paul (Tex.) have agreed
> to participate in the debate, co-hosted by Republican Party of Florida in St.
> Petersburg.
>
> [more]
> --
> There are only two kinds of Republicans: Millionaires and fools.
Accusing the gop of being afraid to engage in a youtube debate is like
the gop accusing the dems of being afraid to engage in a fox debate.
At least with a fox debate you don't have the debacle of snowmen
asking questions.
cuts success @dc.gov DOW UP 20 % in 12 Months : Another Bush Tax Cut Success
Democraps will die !.
Lamont Cranston
"Geo" <taxpa...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1185546985.9...@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
I don't think that it was a real snowman. On Fox, however, you do
have the debacle of having known idiots asking questions such as,
"Senator Obama, how long did you attend the Islamic madrassa and what
did you learn from the experience?"
To accusing the GOP of being afraid to engage in a YouTube debate is
to accuse them of being out of touch with mainstream America. Both
accusations are true.
P.Henry
Please provide evidence that Democrats are afraid of FOX.
mordacp...@hotmail.com
The rightards will claim Dems are afraid of Faux when the truth is
that they don't want to give credibility to a rightwing controlled
uncredible outlet.
Sid9
Ball-less FOX has NO reporters in Iraq....
Too dangerous.
Richardson-Obama in 08
@ DC . gov> wrote in message
news:EuSdncHhnbYslzfb...@comcast.com...
>
> Imagine how they are going to react when confronted with the Taliban !
> Democraps will die !.
Had a Democrat been in the White House, the Taliban would have been wiped
out by 2003. Any clue as to who we can thank for them to be allowed to make
a comeback? Perhaps the guy who refused to finish the job in Afghanistan,
choosing instead to invade a country that had done us no harm, and was in no
position to do us any harm? Now, who might THAT be?
GW Chimpzilla's Eye-Rack Neocon Utopia
One of the readers of Talking Points Memo writew this:
------------------
One of the thoughts that occurred to me with regards to the Democratic Youtube
debate was how weird the questions for the GOP candidates could potentially be.
For the Democratic debates, most of the issues that are on the table are pretty
mainstream, like healthcare and Iraq and poverty and global warming, and thus
its pretty difficult for the standard rank-and-file member of the democratic
base to ask them in an amusing viral format like Youtube and still come out as
looking too bizarre (unless they happen to be a talking snowman).
As far as issues like illegal immigration and "coercive interrogation
techniques" go, how does one ask questions like this in a Youtube format in an
amusing way?
The differences between the GOP base and the political mainstream can seem less
extreme when asked by someone like Wolf Blitzer, but if presented from the
standard GOP rank-and-file member of the base, it seemed like a great way to
show how *unhinged* *the* *GOP* *has* *become* on some of these issues.
Personally, I'm surprised the GOP ever got close to agreeing to this format, and
once the Democratic debate happened and showed the format in action, I didn't
see how it could have been pulled off by the GOP.
---------------
cuts success @dc.gov DOW UP 20 % in 12 Months : Another Bush Tax Cut Success
"P.Henry" <P.He...@revolution.org> wrote in message
news:t5dlew2bde22$.qt9mjik93wy8.dlg@40tude.net...
March 9, 2007, 9:40 pm
Nevada Democrats Cancel Debate With Fox
By Kate Phillips
Well, it's truly official now. The top Nevada Democrats shipped a letter off
tonight to Marty Ryan, executive producer of political programs for Fox
News.
After much pressure from the liberal blogosphere as well as comments made by
Roger Ailes, chairman of Fox News, about Senator Barack Obama, the two
ranking Democrats from Nevada - Tom Collins, head of the state party, and
Senate majority leader Harry Reid - decided tonight to cancel an Aug. 14
debate with Fox. Here's their letter:
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/03/09/nevada-democrats-cancel-debate-with-fox/
cuts success @dc.gov DOW UP 20 % in 12 Months : Another Bush Tax Cut Success
liberals asking lisping questions from a Snowman Cartoon character with
some panty waist girlyman behind it?
cuts success @dc.gov DOW UP 20 % in 12 Months : Another Bush Tax Cut Success
"Richardson-Obama in 08" <NoTh...@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
news:D5idncD_uaHUhTfb...@comcast.com...
> "DOW UP 20 % in 12 Months : Another Bush Tax Cut Success" <Tax cuts
> success
> @ DC . gov> wrote in message
> news:EuSdncHhnbYslzfb...@comcast.com...
>>
>> Imagine how they are going to react when confronted with the Taliban !
>> Democraps will die !.
>
> Had a Democrat been in the White House, the Taliban would have been wiped
> out by 2003.
We had a Democrap in the White house and he let those 20 taliban Hijackers
into the US to plan their 9-11 Attack. You lose again skank maggot.
P.Henry
Once again , the cons show us that they're a bunch of pussies...typical
Upgrading Nym - Back Soon
"DOW UP 20 % in 12 Months : Another Bush Tax Cut Success" <Tax cuts success
@ DC . gov> wrote in message
> What Republican would lower himself to answering questions from Faggot
> liberals asking lisping questions from a Snowman Cartoon character with
> some panty waist girlyman behind it?
Uh ohhhhhhhh.........
Babs is off her meds in the trailer by herself.
Call the Socialist County Mental Hospital.
Lamont Cranston
"DOW UP 20 % in 12 Months : Another Bush Tax Cut Success" <Tax cuts
success @ DC . gov> wrote in message
There is no mention of anybody being afraid. You lose again, smegma.
Lamont Cranston
"DOW UP 20 % in 12 Months : Another Bush Tax Cut Success" <Tax cuts
success @ DC . gov> wrote in message
> What Republican would lower himself to answering questions from
> Faggot liberals asking lisping questions from a Snowman Cartoon
> character with some panty waist girlyman behind it?
Yeah, it would be like caring about mainstream America.
P.Henry
Tax Cut Success wrote:
> "P.Henry" <P.He...@revolution.org> wrote in message
> news:t5dlew2bde22$.qt9mjik93wy8.dlg@40tude.net...
>> On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 11:09:36 -0400, DOW UP 20 % in 12 Months : Another
>> Bush
>> Tax Cut Success wrote:
>>
>>> Imagine how they are going to react when confronted with the Taliban !
>>> Democraps will die !.
>>
>> Please provide evidence that Democrats are afraid of FOX.
> ==========================
>
> March 9, 2007, 9:40 pm
> Nevada Democrats Cancel Debate With Fox
> By Kate Phillips
>
> Well, it's truly official now. The top Nevada Democrats shipped a letter off
> tonight to Marty Ryan, executive producer of political programs for Fox
> News.
>
> After much pressure from the liberal blogosphere as well as comments made by
> Roger Ailes, chairman of Fox News, about Senator Barack Obama, the two
> ranking Democrats from Nevada - Tom Collins, head of the state party, and
> Senate majority leader Harry Reid - decided tonight to cancel an Aug. 14
> debate with Fox. Here's their letter:
>
> http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/03/09/nevada-democrats-cancel-debate-with-fox/
Nothing in the article about the Dems being cared of FOX. Put up or shut up
, twit.
Lies are you have
Geo
What does that make demorats who wussed out of a fox debate?
Lamont Cranston
Very smart.
Geo
<Lamont.Crans...@NeoConEvilFighter.com> wrote:
> "Geo" <taxpayer...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
LOL, they won't answer a question from a news reporter but will answer
one from a freaking snowman. Yeah, that's smart all right. The dem
party freak show cruises onward.
GW Chimpzilla's Eye-Rack Neocon Utopia
>
> "P.Henry" <P.He...@revolution.org> wrote in message
> news:t5dlew2bde22$.qt9mjik93wy8.dlg@40tude.net...
>> On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 11:09:36 -0400, DOW UP 20 % in 12 Months : Another
>> Bush
>> Tax Cut Success wrote:
>>
>>> Imagine how they are going to react when confronted with the Taliban !
>>> Democraps will die !.
>>
>> Please provide evidence that Democrats are afraid of FOX.
> ==========================
>
> March 9, 2007, 9:40 pm
> Nevada Democrats Cancel Debate With Fox
Democrats to Fox: FUCK YOU
That's what all the fuss was about. I think it's funny that Goat Boy doesn't get
it!
> By Kate Phillips
>
> Well, it's truly official now. The top Nevada Democrats shipped a letter off
> tonight to Marty Ryan, executive producer of political programs for Fox
> News.
>
> After much pressure from the liberal blogosphere as well as comments made by
> Roger Ailes, chairman of Fox News, about Senator Barack Obama, the two
> ranking Democrats from Nevada - Tom Collins, head of the state party, and
> Senate majority leader Harry Reid - decided tonight to cancel an Aug. 14
> debate with Fox. Here's their letter:
>
>
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/03/09/nevada-democrats-cancel-debate-with-fox/
--
cuts success @dc.gov DOW UP 20 % in 12 Months : Another Bush Tax Cut Success
"Lamont Cranston" <Lamont....@NeoConEvilFighter.com> wrote in message
news:f8ddaq$db$1...@news.albasani.net...
> i see.
===============
I know. So easy to do . Like shooting you in a welfare line
cuts success @dc.gov DOW UP 20 % in 12 Months : Another Bush Tax Cut Success
"GW Chimpzilla's Eye-Rack Neocon Utopia" <g...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:uRrqi.25184$Xa3.17800@attbi_s22...
> Jeff Gannon's Pet Goat Boy wrote:
>
>>
>> "P.Henry" <P.He...@revolution.org> wrote in message
>> news:t5dlew2bde22$.qt9mjik93wy8.dlg@40tude.net...
>>> On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 11:09:36 -0400, DOW UP 20 % in 12 Months : Another
>>> Bush
>>> Tax Cut Success wrote:
>>>
>>>> Imagine how they are going to react when confronted with the Taliban !
>>>> Democraps will die !.
>>>
>>> Please provide evidence that Democrats are afraid of FOX.
>> ==========================
>>
>> March 9, 2007, 9:40 pm
>> Nevada Democrats Cancel Debate With Fox
>
> Democrats to Fox: FUCK YOU
democraps so scared of FOX TV. No wonder tey wat to cut & Run from
terrorists . They shit in their panites when a taliban goes " boo".
cuts success @dc.gov DOW UP 20 % in 12 Months : Another Bush Tax Cut Success
> On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 14:18:42 -0400, DOW UP 20 % in 12 Months : Another
> Bush
> Tax Cut Success wrote:
>
>> What Republican would lower himself to answering questions from Faggot
>> liberals asking lisping questions from a Snowman Cartoon character with
>> some panty waist girlyman behind it?
>
> from. http://www.drudgereport.com/snow.jpg
============
What fucking losers Democraps are
Sid9
"DOW UP 20 % in 12 Months : Another Bush Tax Cut Success" <Tax cuts success
@ DC . gov> wrote in message
New nym, same old shit
Tim Crowley
Success" <Tax
> democraps
democraps? are you 6 years old?
Tim Crowley
Success" <Tax
> ============
>
> What fucking losers Democraps are
let me guess. You have NO idea how retarded you look?
Steve
On 27-Jul-2007, "DOW UP 20 % in 12 Months : Another Bush Tax Cut Success"
AWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW now you go to rehab with the rest of the
fagg.....uhhhhh.......losers.
Richardson-Obama in 08
@ DC . gov> wrote in message
Really? I was unaware of the fact that George W. Bush was a "Democrap". Or
are you implying that Bill Clinton was still in the White House . . .
perhaps hiding somewhere in the basement . . . during the April 23rd to June
29th period in 2001 when the 9/11 terrorists were entering the U.S.?
Richardson-Obama in 08
@ DC . gov> wrote in message
>
> What Republican would lower himself to answering questions from Faggot
> liberals asking lisping questions from a Snowman Cartoon character with
> some panty waist girlyman behind it?
Perhaps a Republican who would like to receive more than the votes carried
by the 20% of the country that makes up the rabid extreme right-wing of the
Republican Party? For a Republican to win election they need to get 50%
plus one vote in enough states with enough electoral votes to win the
election. Pandering strictly to the brain-dead hillbillies and
self-righteous religious conservatives that make up the "base" of the GOP
won't get the job done.
Richardson-Obama in 08
When did Fox hire a news reporter?
Richardson-Obama in 08
Opting out of a debate sponsored by the opposing party's propaganda wing
isn't "wussing out". It's "acting intelligently".
Sid9
Wow, he's really into the soup now!
SteelersFanInTx
Fox isn't news. If the Democrats wanted a debate on an entertainment
station, Comedy Central would be more prudent than the rhetoric wing
of the GOP (Faux Noise)
BibsBro
"Richardson-Obama in 08" <NoTh...@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
news:D5idncD_uaHUhTfb...@comcast.com...
> "DOW UP 20 % in 12 Months : Another Bush Tax Cut Success" <Tax cuts
> success
> @ DC . gov> wrote in message
> news:EuSdncHhnbYslzfb...@comcast.com...
>>
>> Imagine how they are going to react when confronted with the Taliban !
>> Democraps will die !.
>
> Had a Democrat been in the White House, the Taliban would have been wiped
> make
> a comeback? Perhaps the guy who refused to finish the job in Afghanistan,
> choosing instead to invade a country that had done us no harm, and was in
> no
> position to do us any harm? Now, who might THAT be?
>
>
Why did Slick Willie let Bin Ladin go free?
Gregg Luze
him but for some reason Bush is still acting Bitch Slapped.
G
Richardson-Obama in 08
news:dUuqi.12489$MW6....@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
Nah. He's like a frog. If he's dropped into hot water he'll hop right out.
I got impatient. I should have waited, and heated up the water gradually.
He'll just start ignoring this thread and start posting the same absurdities
in another thread.
Richardson-Obama in 08
news:13al457...@news.supernews.com...
You can't free something you never had, and Clinton never had bin Laden.
Why did Bush reject the Taliban's offer to turn bin Laden over? Why did he
pull back when we had the sonofabitch trapped at Tora Bora?
J Carroll
> "Richardson-Obama in 08" <NoTh...@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
> news:D5idncD_uaHUhTfb...@comcast.com...
>> "DOW UP 20 % in 12 Months : Another Bush Tax Cut Success" <Tax cuts
>> success
>> @ DC . gov> wrote in message
>> news:EuSdncHhnbYslzfb...@comcast.com...
>>>
>>> Imagine how they are going to react when confronted with the
>>> Taliban ! Democraps will die !.
>>
>> Had a Democrat been in the White House, the Taliban would have been
>> wiped out by 2003.
>
> We had a Democrap in the White house and he let those 20 taliban
> Hijackers into the US to plan their 9-11 Attack.
EARLY 2001 - WHITE HOUSE DEPARTS FROM EFFORTS TO TRACK TERRORIST
MONEY: The new Bush Treasury Department "disapproved of the Clinton
Administration's approach to money laundering issues, which had been an
important part of the drive to cut off the money flow to bin Laden."
Specifically, the Bush Administration opposed Clinton
Administration-backed efforts by the G-7 and the Organization for
Economic Cooperation and Development that targeted countries with
"loose banking regulations" being abused by terrorist financiers.
Meanwhile, the Bush Administration provided "no funding for the new
National Terrorist Asset Tracking Center." [Source: The Age of Sacred
Terror, 2003]
APRIL 30, 2001 - BUSH ADMINISTRATION SAYS BIN LADEN FOCUS WAS
"MISTAKE": The Bush Administration released the government's annual
report on terrorism, but unlike previous Administrations, it decided to
specifically omit an "extensive mention of alleged terrorist mastermind
Osama bin Laden. A senior State Department official told CNN the U.S.
government made a mistake in focusing so much energy on bin Laden."
Similarly, AP reported in 2002 that the Bush Administration's "national
security leadership met formally nearly 100 times in the months prior
to the Sept. 11 attacks yet terrorism was the topic during only two of
those sessions." [Source: CNN, 4/30/01; AP, 6/29/01]
The federal government was rapidly increasing its counter-terrorism
efforts at the time President Bush took office. As the New York Times
reported, Attorney General Janet Reno ended her tenure as "perhaps the
strongest advocate" of counterterrorism spending. Similarly, Newsweek
and the Washington Post reported National Security Adviser Sandy Berger
was "totally preoccupied" with the prospect of a domestic terror
attack, telling his replacement that they need to be "spending more
time on this issue" than on any other. The focus changed dramatically
when the Bush Administration took office.
ADMINISTRATION SHIFTED LAW ENFORCEMENT'S FOCUS OFF OF
COUNTER-TERRORISM: The New York Times reported that in the lead-up to
9/11, Attorney General John Ashcroft "said fighting terrorism was a top
priority of his agency," yet upon entering office, "he identified more
than a dozen other objectives for greater emphasis within the Justice
Department before the attacks." On Aug. 9, the Administration
distributed a strategic plan to the Justice Department highlighting its
new goals from a list of Clinton Administration goals. The item that
referred to intelligence and investigation of terrorists was left
un-highlighted. [Source: NY Times, 2/28/02]
ASHCROFT OVERRULED EFFORTS FOCUSED ON COUNTER-TERROR: Newsweek reported
that "in the spring of 2001, the attorney general had an extraordinary
confrontation with the then FBI Director Louis Freeh at an annual
meeting of special agents." The two talked before appearing, and
Ashcroft laid out his priorities for Freeh: "basically violent crime
and drugs," recalls one participant. Freeh replied bluntly that those
were not his priorities, and began to talk about terror and
counterterrorism. "Ashcroft didn't want to hear about it," says a
former senior law-enforcement official." [Source: Newsweek, 5/27/02]
BUSH ADMINISTRATION TERMINATED PROGRAM THAT TRACKED AL QAEDA: "In the
months before 9/11, the U.S. Justice Department curtailed a highly
classified program called 'Catcher's Mitt' to monitor Al Qaeda suspects
in the United States." [Source: Newsweek, 3/21/04]
SO LITTLE CONCERN FOR COUNTER-TERROR THAT A WHITE HOUSE TASK FORCE
NEVER MET: In January of 2001, the U.S. Government's bipartisan
Commission on National Security gave the White House a report that
warned of an attack on the homeland and urged the new Administration to
implement its specific "recommendations to prevent acts of domestic
terrorism. The Administration rejected the Commission's report,
"preferring to put aside the recommendations." Instead, the
Administration waited until May of 2001 to appoint Vice President
Cheney to head a task force "to combat terrorist attacks on the United
States." But according to the Washington Post, neither "Cheney's review
nor Bush's took place." Meanwhile, Newsweek reported that when senators
"sent a copy of draft legislation on counterterrorism and homeland
defense to Cheney's office on July 20," they were told by Cheney's top
aide "that it might be another six months before he would be able to
review the material." [Source: Salon, 9/12/04; White House release,
5/8/01; Washington Post, 1/20/02; Newsweek, 5/27/02]
WHITE HOUSE BEGAN EFFORT TO CUT COUNTER-TERRORISM PROGRAMS: The New
York Times reported that in its final 2003 budget request, the
Administration "called for spending increases in 68 programs, none of
which directly involved counterterrorism...In his Sept. 10 submission
to the budget office, Ashcroft did not endorse FBI requests for $58
million for 149 new counterterrorism field agents, 200 intelligence
analysts and 54 additional translators. Ashcroft proposed a $65 million
cut for a program that gives states and localities counterterrorism
grants for equipment, including radios and decontamination suits and
training." By comparison, "Under Janet Reno, the department's
counterterrorism budget increased 13.6% in the fiscal year 1999, 7.1%
in 2000 and 22.7% in 2001." [Source: NY Times, 2/28/02]
ADMINISTRATION LEFT "GAPS" IN MILITARY'S REQUEST FOR COUNTER-TERROR
FUNDS: The Washington Post reported that in its first budget, the White
House left "gaps" between "what military commanders said they needed to
combat terrorists and what they got." Newsweek noted that, among other
things, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld elected not to re-launch a
Predator drone that had been tracking bin Laden. When the Senate Armed
Services Committee tried to fill those gaps, "Rumsfeld said he would
recommend a veto" on September 9. [Source: Washington Post, 1/20/02;
Newsweek, 5/27/02; NY Times, 2/28/02]
ADMINISTRATION STOPPED PREDATOR FLIGHTS TRACKING AL QAEDA IN
AFGHANISTAN: AP reported "though Predator drones spotted Osama bin
Laden as many as three times in late 2000, the Bush administration did
not fly the unmanned planes over Afghanistan during its first eight
months." Additionally, "the military successfully tested an armed
Predator throughout the first half of 2001" but the White House "failed
to resolve a debate over whether the CIA or Pentagon should operate the
armed Predators" and the armed Predator never got off the ground before
9/11. [Source: AP, 6/25/03]
WHILE CUTTING COUNTER-TERROR, THE WHITE HOUSE SENT FUNDING TO THE
TALIBAN: At the same time the White House was trying to cut
counter-terrorism funding, it gave "$43 million in drought aid to
Afghanistan after the Taliban began a campaign against poppy growers."
As the 5/29/01 edition of Newsday noted, the Taliban rulers of
Afghanistan "are a decidedly odd choice for an outright gift of $43
million from the Bush Administration. This is the same government
against which the United Nation imposes sanctions, at the behest of the
United States, for refusing to turn over the terrorist mastermind Osama
bin Laden." [Washington Post, 9/23/01; Newsday, 5/29/01]
MAY 2002 - BUSH ADMINISTRATION MOVES TO PREVENT INDEPENDENT INQUIRY
OF 9/11: Months after 9/11, Vice President Cheney went on Fox News to
announce the Administration's full opposition to an independent 9/11
commission. As CBS News noted, the White House "opposed a commission"
from the start, claiming "it would tie up officials waging the war on
terror - and endanger U.S. secrets." [Source: Fox News, 5/19/02; CBS,
9/20/02]
"The new administration seems to be paying no
attention to the problem of terrorism. What
they will do is stagger along until there's a
major incident and then suddenly say, 'Oh my
God, shouldn't we be organized to deal with
this?" - Paul Bremer, George W. Bush's future administrator in Iraq, Feb.
26, 2001.
Trent Lott Questioned by the Observer, London England, January 2001
Do you think it is fair that President Clinton is being accused of not
preventing the attack on the USS Cole?
LOTT: Well, in reality that is the way it is in America
and it is what makes us a great nation. True leaders must
handle difficult situations or have competent people
who handle those situations.
Sources did give information of a general nature to the
Administration and it is obvious that an attack still occured.
This is a more 'impeachable' offense than what was brought
before the Congress.
Fortunately, George Bush will in just a few days become
our President.
I can assure you that such situations will not be
mishandled by his Administration.
However general the information might be, the President-elect
will act with authority to prevent such tragedies.
--
John R. Carroll