Recent Appearances...

Warning: Undefined array key "rbname" in /data/rantburg.com/www/pgrecentorg.php on line 14
Hello !
Recent Appearances...

Home Front: Politix

The Nation Columnist Defends Joe Biden From Tara Reade: ‘I Would Vote For Joe Biden If He Boiled Babies And Ate Them’

2020-05-23

[DAILYCALLERNEWSFOUNDATION.ORG] A columnist for The Nation defended 2020 presidential candidate Joe Foreign Policy Whiz Kid Biden
Joe <q>Foreign Policy Whiz Kid</q> Biden

Joe <q>Foreign Policy Whiz Kid</q> Biden

...We hold these truths to be self-evident. All men and women created ... by the — you know — you know, the thing...
from allegations of sexual assault by his former senate staffer Tara Reade, saying, "I would vote for Joe Biden if he boiled babies and ate them."

Columnist Katha Pollitt would vote for Joe Biden even if she believed Reade’s allegations of sexual assault, she wrote in her Wednesday column. "Fortunately, I don’t have to sacrifice morality to political necessity," she wrote.

Reade has accused Biden of kissing her, touching her, and penetrating her without her consent in 1993 when she worked for him as a senate staffer in Washington, D.C. Biden has repeatedly denied these allegations.

The Nation writer listed several examples of horrible things that the former vice president could do that would not prevent her from voting for him and voting for President Donald Trump
...The tack in the backside of the Democratic Party...
— including eating boiled babies.

"I would vote for Joe Biden if he boiled babies and ate them," Pollitt wrote. "He wasn’t my candidate, but taking back the White House is that important. Four more years of Trump will replace what remains of our democracy with unchecked rule by kleptocrats, fascist
...anybody you disagree with, damn them...
s, religious fanatics, gun nuts, and know-nothings."

The Nation columnist, who has written for the publication since 1980, told the Daily Caller News Foundation that "some people didn’t like my dark humor and comic exaggeration," regarding the boiled babies comment.

Biden has previously said that voters should choose between voting for him and believing Reade’s allegations. "Well, I think they should vote their heart and if they believe Tara Reade, they probably shouldn’t vote for me," Biden said on MSNBC last week. "I wouldn’t vote for me if I believed Tara Reade."

Link

Home Front: Politix

FISA court judge demands info about FBI lawyer linked to Carter Page warrant

2019-12-22

[FOXNEWS] The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court’s presiding judge has sent another directive to the Justice Department, ordering officials to identify previous surveillance requests from an FBI lawyer linked to the 2016 warrant from former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page.

In an order unsealed Friday, Judge Rosemary Collyer asked the Justice Department to identify steps to ensure the accuracy of those filings and whether the unnamed DOJ lawyer was ever disciplined.

DOJ inspector general Michael Horowitz recently identified in a scathing public report numerous mistakes and omissions in the warrant used against Page that launched the FBI investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election.

Link

Home Front: Politix

Trump Tidbit: There May Be More Coming On Vindman

2019-11-04

Red State
Democrats and media have been trying to make a lot of the alleged testimony of Alexander Vindman, an Army lieutenant colonel and National Security official.

But his testimony, at least that which we know, appears to be little more than expressing his opinion. But we already have the transcript of what was said and the Ukraine President said he wasn’t pressured which is Democrats whole theory of the case. So as my colleague, Bonchie, has noted, Vindman’s testimony is largely irrelevant opinion.

But if we look at that opinion, it also reveals part of the problem that we also have seen from others.

...But the other problem with Vindman’s opinion, as journalist Brit Hume points out, is Vindman’s claim that he thought it might be an attempt by the president to "subvert foreign policy." The president is the one who sets foreign policy, of course, so by definition he cannot subvert it. But it isn’t the place of an Army colonel/NSC person to set policy, it is the job of the president. And you don’t try to take out the president because you’re unhappy with his approach to policy.

...But now Trump has suggested that there may also be something more interesting coming about Vindman.

According to Newsmax, Trump was asked if he regretted calling Vindman a "Never Trumper."

His response was, "Well, you’ll be seeing very soon what comes out and then you can ask the question in a different way."

Sounds like there’s more on the way.
General advice, if you're, basically, a military bureaucrat - don't pretend to be a war hero to add weight to your illegal actions

Link

Home Front: Culture Wars

Twitter User Techno Fog Blows Up CNN's Acosta For Propaganda

2019-01-13

[Twitter] HT Powerline/Brit Hume - Facts don't lie. Acosta does. Link
"I try not to get autobiographical, but I lived 5 minutes from that RV park (Chimney Park). I'm an expert on the area. Let me tell you why there's no fence."

Link

Home Front: Politix

Hume's Fumes at Faux News: 'Trump's unpopularity LOST the Virginia race' (Video)

2017-11-08

[Right Scoop] Brit Hume told Tucker Carlson something he definitely did not want to hear ‐ that it was Trump’s unpopularity that lost the Virginia race.
"Unpopularity" of a populist president? Total, poll hawking rubbish! Please have a look at the swamp map.

Northern Virginia is chock full of federal bureaucrats, who as a group hate and fear President Trump and his people -- with good reason, as their jobs are under threat. Thus Virginia is a special case.

Link

Home Front: Politix

Brit Hume on Trump Jr. Russia story: What's all the fuss about?

2017-07-11

[Right Scoop] Brit Hume wants to know why the story about Trump Jr. getting duped by a Russian woman who claimed she had dirt on Hillary is getting scandalous coverage when he says it’s "much ado about not much":

How was he duped? He met with a woman who claimed she had useful information, but concluded she did not. Surely that is the opposite of being duped.

Hume says there is no evidence of collusion with Russia anywhere in this story, yet the story is getting widespread coverage all over the MSM.

Hume also hits back at the argument that this woman has ’ties’ to the Kremlin:

Hume said this meeting appears to simply have been an attempt by someone to make some headway with the Trump campaign on the issue of adoption, which he believes hardly suggests improper behavior on her part or the Trump campaign’s part.
The Russia story is going flat. We'd better stop for air.

Link

Home Front: Politix

Hillary walks with Kaine

2016-07-23

Yes, that's the Drudge headline...

Hillary Clinton named Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia to be her running mate Friday, selecting a battleground state politician with working-class roots and a fluency in Spanish, traits that she believes can bolster her chances to defeat Donald J. Trump in November.

Mrs. Clinton’s choice, which she announced via text message to supporters, came after her advisers spent months poring over potential vice-presidential candidates who could lift the Democratic ticket in an unpredictable race against Mr. Trump. In the end, Mrs. Clinton decided Mr. Kaine, 58, a former governor of Virginia who sits on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and speaks fluent Spanish, had the qualifications and background and the personal chemistry with her to make the ticket a success.
"Kaine and UnAbel"
~ Brit Hume

Link

Home Front: Culture Wars

Still Rolling: Fox News Has Its Best January Ever

2010-02-03

Fox News had its best January in the history of the network, and was the only cable news network to grow year-to-year.

FNC also had the top 13 programs on cable news in total viewers for the fifth month in a row, and the top 13 programs in the A25-54 demographic for the first time in more than five years.

FNC grew in double digits in both total viewers and the A25-54 demographic from January 2009. In prime time, it was up 22% in total viewers and 51% in the demo. CNN was down 34% and 37% and MSNBC down 26% and 38%. In total day, FNC was up 16% and 28%. CNN was down 34% and 41% and MSNBC down 28% and 39%. Last January all networks performed while with the Inauguration coverage. This month, the big political event was Scott Brown's victory in Massachusetts, which FNC dominated in the ratings.

Special Report with Bret Baier/Brit Hume was #1 for the 100th consecutive month.

Fox Report #1 for 100th consecutive month.

Sean Hannity had his best month ever (since it launched as Hannity).

Link

Home Front: Culture Wars

Throwing Brit Hume to the lions

2010-01-07

If there were doubt that much of the media is hostile to traditional faith, especially traditional Christianity, that doubt has been drowned in the wake of a vicious verbal assault on Fox News analyst Brit Hume. Histrionic fulminations against Mr. Hume's inoffensive expression of faith expose an ugly strain of anti-religious bigotry that is spreading inside this country's liberal establishment.

Mr. Hume's sin against secular culture came Sunday when he offered, in humble and helpful tones, advice to golfer Tiger Woods to "turn to the Christian faith and you can make a total recovery and be a great example to the world." The advice might have sounded a little awkward in the setting of a news-talk roundtable. But even in the context of suggesting that Mr. Woods' apparent Buddhism doesn't offer the same "kind of forgiveness and redemption" as Christianity, the newsman's remarks were, at worst, harmless. Yet the reaction of critics gives the impression that Mr. Hume did something really awful like use the "N" word, or - as Montana Democratic Sen. Max Baucus did - push a government promotion for a girlfriend.

Washington Post TV critic Tom Shales took a pause from writing love letters to President Obama to aim nasty public hate mail at Mr. Hume, who is renowned as one of the rare true gentlemen in the nation's capital. "Brit Hume was certainly full of something," Mr. Shales ranted, adding that the Fox broadcast legend is "sinking into his own mouth-made mire," and that "darts of derision should be aimed at Hume" for "one of the most ridiculous [remarks] of the year." He instructed Mr. Hume to "first off, apologize," with a snide admonishment that "Hume ought to know that what people are saying right now is a whole lot worse than that he's fading."

On MSNBC, the preternaturally truculent Keith Olbermann said Mr. Hume should "keep religious advocacy out of public life since, you know, the worst examples of that are jihadists, not to mention, you know, guys who don't know their own religions or somebody else's religion like Brit Hume." His guest, homosexual activist Dan Savage, chimed in that, "American Christianity has been hijacked by the lunatics, by the Pat Robertsons ... and by people like Brit Hume, and it's an insult to Christianity, it's an insult to Christians." Also on MSNBC, news host David Shuster suggested that Mr. Hume somehow had "denigate* Christianity" by mentioning his faith on the air.

This is par for the course for a media in which Washington Post book reviewers suggest that the faith messages at the heart of the popular "Narnia" books amount to a "narrow Christian box," where HBO's Bill Maher calls the Catholic Church "the Bear Stearns of organized pedophilia," where the Nation's Katha Pollitt accuses the religious right of showing "tolerance of wife-battering," and where a major news magazine marvels at the supposedly "surprising unsecularity" of the American public.

Maybe these media mavens should take Mr. Hume's advice. Their own hatefulness puts them in obvious need of the "forgiveness and redemption" Mr. Hume kindly recommended. A little charity wouldn't hurt, either.

Link

Home Front: Politix

Bush: Refused to Bail Out Republicans With Iraq Withdrawal

2009-01-11

President Bush says he refused to "bail out my political party" by withdrawing troops "during the darkest days of Iraq," a decision now lauded by his father in an unprecedented joint interview of both presidents by Brit Hume on "FOX News Sunday."

"During the darkest days of Iraq, people came to me and said, 'You're creating incredible political difficulties for us,'" the current president said as his term draws to a close. "And I said, 'Oh, really? What do you suggest I do?' And some suggested retreat, pull out of Iraq.

"But I had faith that freedom exists in people's souls and therefore, if given a chance, democracy and Iraqi-style democracy could survive and work," the president said. "I didn't compromise that principle for the sake of trying to, you know, bail out my political party."

The president's father, former President George H.W. Bush, became emotional when assessing his son's tenure. "You can make a tough decision and stay with it," he told his son before turning to Hume in the White House Diplomatic Room. "And he's been tested unlike any other president with 9/11. So he passed the test."

He said political invective has "gotten worse" since his days in the White House, adding: "It's offensive, very offensive."

The younger Bush agreed. "The biggest disappointment in the political process, that's been this kind of bitterness by a few people to the point where they don't want to have a logical discussion or a civil discussion about policy," he said. "They just want to tear you down."

But with the war in Iraq nearly won after years of setbacks, the younger Bush exudes serenity as he wraps up his two terms in the White House. "I'm better than fine -- I am proud of the accomplishments of this administration," he said. "I know I gave it my all for eight years, and I did not sell my soul for the sake of popularity. And so when I get back home and look in the mirror, I will be proud of what I see."

Bush said he was also proud of the CIA, although he acknowledged the agency has leaked intelligence secrets. "There have been disappointing moments when information came out of the agency," he said. "You can't stop leaks. And you don't know how many people were leaking, but I can assure you, the vast majority of people in the CIA were very cooperative."

Bush said he is planning to write a book about his presidency. "I'm toying with the idea of maybe describing the toughest decisions I had to make as president, and the context in which I made them," he said. "It is very hard for people to remember what life was like a mere four or five years ago. And it's going to be very important for me to recreate the environment in which I had to make certain decisions, particularly the environment of right after September the 11th, 2001."

Bush conceded that his prosecution of an increasingly unpopular war contributed to the fact that the Republican Party "got whipped in 2008." And he warned that a comeback will be difficult "if the party is viewed as anti-immigrant."

But he said the GOP should remain anti-tax and pro-military. "We shouldn't change our philosophy," he said. "We may want to change our messaging. We definitely want to change messengers. We need a new group of leaders."

He added: "I had one in mind. But he evidently didn't agree with his older brother."

It was a reference to former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, who announced last week he would not run for a Senate seat.

Unlike his son, the elder President Bush served only one term, leaving him to wonder about "things I'd like to have done" on his "unfulfilled agenda." But he has remained active since leaving the White House, even skydiving well into his golden years. He plans another jump in June, when he will be 85.

"I think he's a nut to jump out of airplane at age 70, 75, 80 and 85," remarked his son, who added: "Actually, I think it's cool."

His dad, who now walks with a cane, agreed. "You don't want to sit around just because you're an old guy, drooling in the corner," the elder Bush said. "Old guys can still do stuff." To which his son quipped: "You can drool and jump at the same time."

Link

Home Front: Politix

Moonbat Fratricide: HuffPo writer calls for Obama to dump Biden for Hillary; hilarity ensues

2008-09-15

Andy Ostroy, Huffasnuffaluffagus Post

. . . It's time to dump Biden and replace him with Sen. Hillary Clinton. I don't care how it's done. Campaign chief David Axelrod can figure that out. And the sooner the better. Because I'm starting to think that if Team-Obama doesn't do something dramatic fast, it's gonna lose this election. There's a worrisome shift in momentum and in the polls. The Palin phenomenon, while truly unfathomable to Democrats, has energized McCain's campaign and allowed him like Houdini to snatch Obama's "change" theme right out from under him. It's time to snatch it back.

Conventional wisdom says replacing Biden with Clinton can't be done. That it's too late. That it'll make Obama appear indecisive,
(which he is)
impulsive
(which he is)
and lacking good judgement.
(which he is)
Many Democrats believe this would cause irreparable harm to the campaign, ringing Obama's death knell. But this couldn't be further from the truth. In fact, it'd be a freakin' coup for Obama, and would instantly melt Palin's undeserving outsize political ice cap.

To be sure, a Biden-Clinton switch would cause quite a stir in the media. They'd accuse him of all sorts of things, from being politically expedient
(which it would be)
and flip-flopping
(which it would be)
to being irrational
(which he is)
and ill-equipped to be president.
(which he is)
The talking heads on CNN, Fox and MSNBC would be locked in a non-stop frenzied orgy of derisive rhetoric.
(they already are)
But we also know that it would make about 18-million Hillary voters ecstatic at the same time. So, honestly, who really cares what Joe Scarborough, Keith Olbermann, Wolf Blitzer or Brit Hume thinks?
It would be fun to see Olbermann, who spent all spring condemning Hillary's very existence and calling her a racist and Republican, tie himself in knots rationalizing how he now supports Barack-Hillary 100,000%.
These pundits don't constitute an appreciable voting block. What they think and feel would be utterly dwarfed by the euphoria from Clinton's faithful supporters. It's a pretty safe bet that an Obama/Clinton ticket would capture virtually all of these loyal Clintonistas.
Don't be so sure. It would also give the campaign the smell of desperation--not that it isn't already smelling a little desperate.
It's also a safe bet that many of those highly coveted 18-49-year-old women who polls show migrated to McPalin this past week would drop the spunky little hockey mom in a heartbeat for Hillary. . . .
"And then Obama will ride in on his magical unicorn and give all the voters ice cream! We'll have peace, love, and fluffy bunnies!"

The HuffPo commenters are not nearly so enthusiastic:

McCain picked Palin as a gimmick. So now you think Obama should drop Biden??? THAT is ridiculous! It's not going to happen. Obama would be raked over the coals as indicisive and rightfully so. If I were Hillary, I wouldn't take it at this point. This article is counterproductive. I have supported Obama since Jan 2007 when he announced he was running. I could have accepted Hillary as VP if he picked her first. If he dropped Biden now, that would be the death knell for his campaign. Picking Hillary now would probably be the only thing that he could do to lose my support. IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN !!! GIVE IT A REST !!!

Andy Ostroy is coward for writing such a ridiculous article. Stop promoting division.

Did you not hear about the plane that Hillary loaned Obama and it almost crashed? Have you not paid attention to many of the Clinton opponents who have gone down in plane crashes? Don't you remember the Bobby Kennedy comment? Are you aware of the Clinton's legal troubles that they have been avoiding for years and the only way they can continue to avoid them is running and winning office? Did you know about them being fined for fraud? Did you read her Machiavelli type college thesis? Are you aware of her comment, "I'll do anything to win?" Did you hear about her getting fired for pursuing a strategy against Nixon which she knew was patently false? Don't make me bring up the paper shredding after somebody died? The claim of combat experience, such as "sniper fire", which again was untrue would get anybody kicked out of the military, and you want her to be second to commander in chief?

Link

Home Front: Politix

Oprah & The Governor

2008-09-06

Jonah Goldberg

I think Peter and others are right that Oprah's reported refusal to have Governor Palin on her show will be much discussed and may indeed cause headaches of one kind or another for Oprah. I even think Oprah should have her on for this or that reason. But none of my reasons rise to the level of civics, ethics, "fairness" or anything like that. Oprah's a private citizen, albeit a very public one. She&'s not the host of Meet the Press or even the host of Hardball. She's the queen of daytime TV or some other cliche. She's under no obligation to have anyone on her show she doesn't want to. I think it might be good for Winfrey, Palin and/or the country. Or it might not be. I agree that Gov. Palin seems like a perfectly natural fit for the show personality-wise. But at the end of the day she's a governor and vice presidential nominee. Oprah is an infotainment diva or some such. But some of the readers emailing me about this seem to think there should be more outrage about this. Outrage? About what? I'm far from a "who am I to judge" guy, but what standing do we have to express outrage over the fact that she's making a poor business decision or acting on her political preferences. I'm no more outraged that Oprah won't have the governor on her show than I would be if Brit Hume refused to interview the Dog Whisperer.

Update: A reader makes this excellent point:

Jonah:

While it is true that only Oprah suffers from a bad business decision it is enlightening that the very crowd pushing for reinstatement of the "fairness doctrine" fail to see the irony.

And, Abe Greenwald makes a case for Oprah's hypocrisy, which I must say I don't find very persuasive. It rests on the fact that Oprah has done a show(s) on special needs parenting and Down syndrome kids and whatnot. He goes on to say that Palin would make a perfect guest to further explore that theme. I agree absolutely. But I am at a complete loss why she has to do it before the election. Indeed, one could argue that trying to browbeat Oprah into having Palin on before the election approaches saying, "Oprah, you must let Palin use her baby as a political issue." Again, I agree Oprah should have Palin on, but I don't see why she should be bullied -- or we should be outraged by her refusal -- to lend support to a politician she doesn't support.

Indeed, Winfrey issued this a statement which says, in part, "I agree that Sarah Palin would be a fantastic interview, and I would love to have her on after the campaign is over."

I think it would have been better for Oprah business-wise if she'd stayed out of the election entirely and just had everyone on. I think that would have been better for the country too. But it's her show. And I still don't see why I should be outraged by any of this. Intrigued? Yes. Curious? Yes. Outraged, Nope.

Link

Warning: Undefined property: stdClass::$T in /data/rantburg.com/www/pgrecentorg.php on line 132
-12 More