According to the AP, here is the lineup for this week’s Sunday news shows:
Austan Goolsbee (Image via Wikipedia)
John Prendergast (Image via Wikipedia)
This Week (ABC) — Austan Goolsbee, chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers; actor George Clooney and John Prendergast, co-founder of the Enough Project, an initiative to end genocide.
Face the Nation (CBS) — Reps. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn.; Darrell Issa, R-Calif.; Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla.; and Anthony Weiner, D-N.Y.; Rep.-elect Mike Kelly, R-Pa.
Pat Toomey (Image via Wikipedia)
Steve Israel (Image via Wikipedia)
Meet the Press (NBC) — Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Sen.-elect Pat Toomey, R-Pa.
State of the Union (CNN) — Issa; Reps. Steve Israel, D-N.Y.; Elijah Cummings, D-Md.; Rep. Jason Altmire, D-Pa.; Tim Kaine, Democratic National Committee chairman.
Fox News Sunday — Issa; Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich.; Reps.-elect Mike Lee, R-Utah, and Allen West, R-Fla.
After watching the shows, or getting the rundown on the shows from secondary sources like CNN, come around here to discuss what was said.
Related Articles
- Sunday TV show tip sheet (politico.com)
- Elijah Cummings Elected Top Democrat on House’s Principle Investigative Panel (theroot.com)
- Cummings Gets Oversight Committee Ranking Membership (news.firedoglake.com)
538 Refugees 
On MTP, Lindsay Graham finally puts it on the table: Reform SS by raising retirement age, means-testing older Americans currently receiving SS, renegotiate benefits for people under 55 and means-test all people receiving prescription drug benefits.
This is going to be interesting. I always think American politics is like a game of musical chairs… the loser is the one who’s in power whenever the music stops, and is then forced to introduce unpopular fiscal policies. For decades now, Republicans have had an uncanny knack for dancing to the music but making sure the Dems get stuck with the mess when the music stops.
The humungousenormoustransformativerealignment tsunami of 2010 changed all that… and this time it’s the GOP who look like they will be hung out to dry. It’s especially delicious that they are talking about infuriating seniors by walking back Dubya’s prescription drug plan that THEY rammed through to buy votes.
Karma, karma… 🙂
MTP panel discusses the 2012 GOP field.
David Brooks says the field divides into “populists” and “managers” (an astute observation) and that a fiery populist can draw 38% of the voting public, while an effective manager can get 55%.
I think that’s true for the general … but it doesn’t reflect the make-up in the Republican primary where a populist has a much better chance than a manager.
Which is, of course, the big, big problem for this current, badly fractured GOP.
Fili:
The GOP conservatives did not leave the Dems with any SS or Medicare mess. Medicare Part D was a Bush/Kennedy production and the Obamacare additions to that spending were a completely Dem production. Thus, it should be unsurprising that Medicare taxes set back in the 80s no longer cover Medicare expenditures. Indeed, Obama is running a national television campaign trying to get more retirees to spend more of their kids money on Medicare Part D.
Never fear, the GOP is not going to offer any legislation to reform SS and Medicare without a deal in place with and cosponsorship by the Dems in fear of being demagogued by the Dems in 2012. We will continued down the road to the insolvency of SS and Medicare until the very last minute.
@Bart… We will continued down the road to the insolvency of SS and Medicare until the very last minute
Or until you can push through reforms and tag some Dem administration with the ensuing carnage… whichever comes first 😉
Darrel Issa on State of the Union… “Obama is the most corrupt president in modern times.”
Why, asks Ed Henry, startled.
Because of TARP, says Issa.
Good grief! Beam me up, says Fili….
fili said: …..badly fractured GOP.
I’m still trying to figure out how the GOP is badly fractured. Two months ago they won control of the House, gained over 700 state legislature slots, and 6 governorships in one of the biggest party vicotories in the history of American elections.
And yet the left is touting the 111th as one of the greatest ever despite the historic Nov. 2nd defeat and a 13% approval rating.
GROG… if you have a party where half the members want Romney as their candidate, half want Huckabee and the third half wants Sarah Palin… you have a party that is not only terminally fractured, it doesn’t even know where the hell it wants to go, let alone how to get there.
GROG wrote:
“I’m still trying to figure out how the GOP is badly fractured“.
The RNC is in pretty bad shape right now.
Their power has been dramatically reduced, and their ability to enforce a unified message is virtually gone. Corporations now have unlimited ‘free speech’, and they skip the middleman (the Party) and donate directly to candidates. Individuals are also doing the same thing.
The Party exercises control two ways: funding campaigns, and running the primaries.
We saw how well the Party controlled the primary process in the last election, and we already know that the campaign funding role has diminished.
The Party has no carrot and no stick. In fact, a significant number of the newly-elected are fairly eager to demonstrate their independence from the Party.
Republicans obtained their gains by promising that they would bring back jobs. The Right would be wise to remember that. The swing voters are waiting for Republicans to work that magic spell that will induce employers to hire large numbers. Instead, those swing voters will see endless investigations into nebulous evils, and hand-wringing over “uncertainty”.
fili:
Just wait and see. Issa is going to have a field day applying the first congressional oversight of the Porkulus Bill. The bill was nearly $800 billion of payoffs to Dem constituency groups with little or no oversight. Things were so bad that the Administration listed dozens of obviously fictional entries on their own public “oversight” (sic) website.
The only question is whether the Dem justice department will issue indictments or whether Issa will be calling for a special prosecutor.
This is just the beginning. Grilling the Obama regulators about their secret operations and blackmail of the industries they regulate will be just as fun. I wonder if Obama was stupid enough to tape his personal threats against the business leaders with which he met in 2009 at the White House.
Bart said: “______________”
You’re a proven liar.
Fo’shizzle, ya got no cred, man!
fili,
I don’t think any of those 3 will be the Republican nominee in 2012 anyway. Even if one of them is, the GOP should set it’s sights on 2016. I see someone like a Christie or a Rubio emerging as the leader of the party in the long run.
Todd:
The GOP is divided between their establishment and the conservative rebels who were there and the several dozen new reinforcements. So far, the establishment knows they are on probation with the voters and are mostly doing the right things (pun intended). The establishment will be put to the test when Paul Ryan takes advantage of the new House rules to set a spending cap and offers the first budget with true cuts in our lifetimes. Gingrich only slowed the rate of spending growth.
The GOP did NOT campaign on bringing back jobs, they campaigned on no tax increases, cutting spending and repealing Obamacare. They are not that stupid given that they have no power to enact policy, only to cut spending and conduct oversight. The GOP will be hanging the economy around Obama’s neck at every opportunity.
I agree with Grog, the nominee will be somebody we don’t hear too much about. maybe the gov. of Indiana or someone even more obscure. But the other three are has beens.
Barted:
“The GOP conservatives did not leave the Dems with any SS or Medicare mess. Medicare Part D was a Bush/Kennedy production”
Your Bush is not a conservative meme is shear idiocy.
Nice try though.
“The Bush administration was initial [sic] defined by a right-wing agenda which saw the US withdraw from a number of international treaty processes, notably the Kyoto protocol on global warming.” -wikipedia
GROG,
re: Even if one of them is, the GOP should set it’s sights on 2016.
Good thinking. I think credible Republican candidates are smart enough to recognize that they don’t want to be the sacrificial lamb running against an incumbent President, so why not wait until 2016 when President Obama will not be running.
drfundude:
Apart from the tax reforms, Bush could easily have been mistaken for Steny Hoyer in his domestic policy. Only Hugo Chevez could mistake Medicarer Part D as anything approaching conservative policy.
So Barf
Bush was not conservative except for his tax reforms.
And except for his domestic policy re. abortion, capitol punishment, energy policy, environmental policy, supreme court appointments, gay rights, and almost any other policy of substance.
Except for all of that he was not conservative.
And except for his foreign policy too.
Thanks for the clarification barfdude.
I think we’re actually going to see a three-way split in the Republican Party.
First are the establishment Republicans, embodied by Boehner and McConnell, dedicated to simply opposing Democrats, with no actual policies and no actual principles.
Second are the Teapers, who claim quasi-Libertarian rhetoric, and who want to tear everything down, including the Republican establishment, These two will fight for power, and the most destructive battle will come in the 2012 Presidential primaries.
Third is the small but emerging faction that wants to actually, you know, govern. The Republicans had gains int eh House and Senate and at the local level because voters were unhappy about the state of the economy, mostly about loss of jobs. If the Republicans don’t deliver on their promise to improve the economy — most importantly, to add jobs — the voters will have a tremendous backlash. A few Republicans in Congress are beginning to realize this, which is why they cooperated on so much in the lame duck session.
The first two factions will soon turn viciously on this third faction, condemn them as RINOs, and may well force several of them out of the party. As Issa and his other hoodlums do their best to simply stall Congress and prevent the Federal Government from doing the work We the People sent them there to do, the third faction will see the danger to Republican 2012 chances. But their warnings will fall on mostly deaf ears.
The Republicans will be immensely entertaining over the next two years as they shred what’s left of their party.
drfunion:
Bush did not enact any laws changing capital punishment or gay issues.
Bush enacted the partial birth abortion ban with huge bipartisan majorities. Banning this ghastly form of infanticide was not a conservative issue, it was a human rights issue.
Supreme Court appointments are not domestic policy legislation.
I agree that Bush was a conservative in his foreign policy. Like Clinton, Gore would not have gone to war against al Qaeda. This is why I restricted my comment to domestic policy.
Conservative policy since Reagan has been to run up as huge a debt as possible, in the hope that it will crowd out domestic spending. Bush’s position on the economy followed the classic Reagan spend-spend-borrow-and-spend model.
Bush withdrew from the ABM treaty, the Test-Ban Treaty, thumbed his nose at the international community on climate, thumbed his nose at them again on military issues as he insisted on invading Iraq to seize their oil. “Homeland Security” and The Patriot Act are classic conservative totalitarian powergrabs.
In domestic policy, economic policy, military policy, foreign policy, Bush was a classic neocon conservative. Yes, the Republicans have been trying to run away from him ever since his popularity dropped to the low 20’s, trying to tar him has not have been conservative enough. Which is to show only how insanely right-wing the modern GOteaPart has become.
Republicans should change their mascot from an elephant to a woolly mammoth.
Let’s not forget the premier demonstration of his conservative philosophy, in George W. Bush’s rejection of and ignorance of science and rationality over wishful thinking. By that measure, Bart and Bush are far more alike than they are to anything human.
woolly mammoth? I say they should change their emblem to the dodo bird.
Let the record show that BDP maintains that Bush is not conservative on capitol punishment despite presiding over more than 150 executions while Governor of Texas.
Apparently he was even too conservative on this issue for Gary Bauer:
“Republican presidential candidate Gary Bauer criticized Gov. George W. Bush for making fun of an executed Texas woman in an interview Bush gave to Talk magazine. “I think it is nothing short of unbelievable that the governor of a major state running for president thought it was acceptable to mock a woman he decided to put to death.” Just before her execution date, Tucker appealed for clemency on the grounds that she had become a born-again Christian. Bush’s reply: ” `Please,’ Bush whimpers, his lips pursed in mock desperation, `don’t kill me,’ ”
http://www.texecutions.com/
When was the last time a Rep presidential nominee was an unknown ?!?
2008 ~ McCain
2000/04 ~ Bush
1996 ~ Dole
1988/92 ~ Bush
1980/84 ~ Reagan
1976 ~ Ford
1968/72 ~ Nixon
1964 ~ Goldwater
1960 ~ Nixon
1952/56 ~ Ike
1944/48 ~ Dewey
1940 ~ Wilkie
1936 ~ Landon
1928/32 ~ Hoover
1924 ~ Coolidge
1920 ~ Harding
1916 ~ Hughes
1908/12 ~ Taft
1904 ~ Roosevelt
1896/1900 ~ McKinley
(4) Bush’s, (3) Nixon’s, (2) Bonzo’s professor and a partridge in a pear tree 😛
Trivia: Dewey’s v-p in ’48 ~ California Governor Earl Warren
>
2012 either mittens or Huckabee ~ book it, Danno … re: cheney/bush ~ book ’em, Danno! 😀
Republicans fall in line … period, end of story!
Aloha !!!
drfunion:
What the hell does Bush’ time in Texas have to do with his presidential domestic policies? In any case, arch liberal Bob Graham used to be known as Electric Chair Bob when he was FL governor before taking a hard turn left when he went to DC.
Bart:
I agree that Bush was a conservative in his foreign policy. Like Clinton, Gore would not have gone to war against al Qaeda.
Bush, being a surrender monkey, walked out of the war on al Qaeda — which was being waged in Afghanistan — and instead invaded Iraq in an effort to seize the oil.
It took a Democrat, Barack Obama, to continue the actual war on al Qaeda by raising troop levels in Afghanistan after more than six years of Republican surrender-monkey neglect.
Bart DeLiar said “____________”
DC: It took a Democrat, Barack Obama, to continue the actual war on al Qaeda by raising troop levels in Afghanistan after more than six years of Republican surrender-monkey neglect.
LMAO! You might want to read Woodward’s book Obama’s Wars about your hero’s dithering in Afghanistan. As the NYT reported:
The book, “Obama’s Wars,” by the journalist Bob Woodward, depicts an administration deeply torn over the war in Afghanistan even as the president agreed to triple troop levels there amid suspicion that he was being boxed in by the military. Mr. Obama’s top White House adviser on Afghanistan and his special envoy for the region are described as believing the strategy will not work.
The president concluded from the start that “I have two years with the public on this” and pressed advisers for ways to avoid a big escalation, the book says. “I want an exit strategy,” he implored at one meeting. Privately, he told Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. to push his alternative strategy opposing a big troop buildup in meetings, and while Mr. Obama ultimately rejected it, he set a withdrawal timetable because, “I can’t lose the whole Democratic Party.”
Obama is a complete coward on Afghanistan. The President wants out ASAP, but he is scared of the being blamed for a Vietnam style lost war and he is scared of his surrender monkey base. Thankfully for the country, he is more scared of being tarred with a lost war, so he is giving Petreaus what he wants.
Bart said: “____________”
Gosh, Obama wanted an “exit strategy” from Afghanistan. Just as Colin Powell recommended. He wanted a definition of goals, a clear statement of why we’re there and what we have to achieve. Conservatives think that’s a Bad Thing?
Conservatives are very absurd people! No wonder surrender monkey Bush wandered aimlessly through two senseless wars for seven years while American soldiers died.
Barf,
You keep saying that Bush is not a conservative.
Yet another lie from yet another conservative.
Your moving the goalposts and diverting don’t change that fact that dispite your (new-found) dislike for the guy, he was and is conservative.
No sane person disputes this.
I don’t understand why conservatives run away from the guy; he was just like Reagan in many ways. He was into foreign adventures, inflated the federal payroll, and raised the deficit just like the gipper. He’s your guy, get over it.
DC:
There is only one exit strategy in a war – victory.
Looks like the GOP will keep its two promises immediately – offering a public bill to repeal Obamacare, which should be online tonight, followed by a vote next week rather than at midnight tomorrow.
The Dems are already squealing like little piglets and are promising to bury the bill in the Senate. With around 60% of LVs supporting repeal, no wonder they are running from a vote.
The chances of the Dems repealing the filibuster are about nil.
Bart DeLiar said: “___________________”
So let me get this right. It was wrong for the Democants to spend time on health care in 2008 when jobs were the real issue but it is ok for the Public Cons to try to ruin what few health care improvments we got passed and to ignore the lack of job creation in the US now?
I so want to see Bart debate a thread on the Two Santa theory, please please?
Barted ~ The Dems are already squealing like little piglets
“Our Republic Has Stumbled, But Has Not Yet Fallen”
My descriptive phrases do not begin to do justice to the damage these policies are doing to the country.
April 23, 2010 10:46 AM
I wonder whether I live in America anymore when the government imposes its will in opposition to the people. That is what ruling classes do, not representatives of the people.
May 2, 2010 4:21 PM
~~~~~
Indeed Bartles as you are the expert on squealing er whining er sniffling …
Waaaahhhh! :::sniffle::: Waaaahhhh!
‘nuf said!
btw, Bart has disappeared from the Climate Change thread after being hammered er embarrassed er makin’ a fool of himself as per usual …
Go figure!
and (((cowardly))) runs er escapes to this thread to (((sheepishly))) change the subject er deflect!
rinse, lather, repeat
Again, Bart do you never get tired of being an asshole?
Barted:
There is only one exit strategy in a war – victory.
Well, yes. But you have to define “victory,” don’t you?
Surrender monkey Bush and the Republican wimps didn’t bother to do that.
followed by a vote next week rather than at midnight tomorrow.
Nonsense. We need hearings. Months of them. And town hall meetings. And long speeches in the House Well.
No? You mean the Republicans are going to ram this bill down America’s throat?
Bart,
re: With around 60% of LVs supporting repeal, no wonder they are running from a vote.
You lie and you are well aware you are lying.
Opinion Research Corporation for CNN. 12/17-19. 1,000 American adults. MoE 3%.
As you may know, a bill that makes major changes to the country’s health care system became law earlier this year. Based on what you have read or heard about that legislation, do you generally favor or generally oppose it?
Favor: 43%
Oppose: 54%
(IF OPPOSE) Do you oppose that legislation because you think its approach toward health care is too liberal, or because you think it is not liberal enough?
Favor (from previous question): 43%
Oppose, too liberal: 37%
Oppose, not liberal enough: 13%
So 56% percent now either favor or think ACA wasn’t liberal enough, with 37% opposing, saying it is too liberal.
And interestingly the “opposed, too liberal” has decreased from 43% in March of 2010 to 37% in December 2010.
Click to access rel17h.pdf
Republican attempts to repeal PPACA will give the Democrats a second chance to combat the Republican lies about it. And by now, people are starting to see actual benefits.
* Children (up to age 26) are now on their parents’ health insurance, and cannot be denied due to pre-existing conditions.
* Seniors not only got checks to help cover the Bush doughnut hole in prescription meds, but are seeing the price of those meds dropping.
* No one lost his or her doctor, as the Republicans said would happen, and there are no jack-booted federal officials standing in the doctors’ offices.
* There are no longer maximum limits on annual or lifetime benefits.
* There are no death panels.
Republicans lied. And Americans are seeing positive results from PPACA. Yes, insurance rates went up — because insurance companies are out to screw the consumers, and rates went up even more the year before. If anything, this points out the need for more regulation, not to go backwards.
And on top of everything else, this question was settled almost a year ago when the bill was finally enacted. For the Republicans to raise the issue again will make them look like sore losers and crybabies. The public is tired of the Republican propaganda on this issue. This will definitely backfire on them.
Hey, wait a minute. Didn’t the GOP write this repeal bill behind closed doors?
BD: With around 60% of LVs supporting repeal, no wonder they are running from a vote.
Jean: You lie and you are well aware you are lying. Opinion Research Corporation for CNN. 12/17-19. 1,000 American adults. MoE 3%.
Which part of likely voters do you not understand?
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/health_care_law
dcpetterson says: Republican attempts to repeal PPACA will give the Democrats a second chance to combat the Republican lies about it…
Then the Dems will have no problem with a vote in the Senate. Oooops…
DC: Well, yes. But you have to define “victory,” don’t you?
The establishment of a friendly indigenous military who can deny sanctuary to the enemy. See Iraq.
Obamacare wreaks more destruction…
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obamacare-ends-construction-doctor-owned-hospitals_525950.html
Only an idiot can imagine for a moment that the Iraqi military will remain friendly to the US beyond the moment when US air supremacy ceases.
Since there’s never been a clear demarcation in Iraq who “the enemy” is — it shifts with the political winds — “denying sanctuary to the enemy” is a fool’s hope.
Again, 30/40 years from now “we” will know (for sure) ie 100% certainty if cheney/bush/bart’s fiasco in Iraq was a complete and total waste of blood and treasure …
Now we can only be about 90% sure! Bartles constantly moving the goal posts notwithstanding.
take care, blessings
Barted:
The establishment of a friendly indigenous military who can deny sanctuary to the enemy. See Iraq.
Oh, please. Using Iraq as a model for “victory” is one of the most foolish ways to run foreign policy imaginable. al Qaeda was not in Iraq until we invaded. It was Bush who altered Iraq such that it allowed sanctuary to “the enemy”.
Create an enemy then spend a trillion (borrowed) dollars and thousands of American lives to establish a government that doesn’t like us? That’s “victory?” No, that’s idiocy and madness.