Lawrence serves the comfort food!

SATURDAY, OCTOBER 27, 2012

Matthews keeps praising McCain: On the political side, John Sununu has been one of the grimiest players in Campaign 2012.

The fellow has been very grimy.

On the journalistic side, Lawrence has been one of the dumbest. That’s pretty much what happened last night when Lawrence discussed Sununu’s latest, then said that Sununu had lied:
O’DONNELL (10/26/12): Today, Mitt Romney did not address what his campaign national co-chair John Sununu said last night about Colin Powell's endorsement of President Obama.

(Begin videotape)
SUNUNU: We have to wonder whether that’s an endorsement based on issues or whether he’s got a slightly different reason for preferring President Obama.
PIERS MORGAN: What reason would that be?
SUNUNU: Well, I think when you have somebody of your own race that you’re proud of being president of the United States, I applaud Colin for standing with him.
(End videotape)

O’DONNELL: “What reason would that be” was the question. And John Sununu issued this lie today:

"Colin Powell is a friend and I respect the endorsement decision that he made today and I do not doubt that it was based on anything but his support of the president’s policies. Piers Morgan’s question was whether Colin Powell should leave the party, and I don’t think he should.”
Sununu’s a very grimy player—but Lawrence loves to serve comfort food. In fact, Piers Morgan did ask Sununu if Powell should leave the GOP, not that it's really relevant.

This was the full exchange. It’s part of a longer story:
MORGAN (10/25/12): Final question: Colin Powell decided to opt for President Obama again, despite apparently still being a Republican. Is it time he left the party, do you think?

SUNUNU: I'm not sure how important that is. I do like the fact that Colin Powell's boss, George Herbert Walker Bush, has endorsed Mitt Romney all along. And frankly, when you take a look at Colin Powell, you have to wonder whether that's an endorsement based on issues or whether he's got a slightly different reason for preferring President Obama.

MORGAN: What reason would that be?

SUNUNU: Well, I think when you have somebody of your own race that you are proud of being president of the United States, I applaud Colin for standing with him.

MORGAN: John Sununu, nice to talk to you.

SUNUNU: Thank you.
Why did Morgan ask that strange leading question? He got it from the upright fellow we saw praised on MSNBC last night, for perhaps the three millionth time.

Before Sununu appeared with Morgan this Thursday, John McCain did a segment. McCain was the one who first suggested that Powell should leave the party:
MORGAN (10/25/12): You've been spitting blood all morning about Colin Powell endorsing Barack Obama again. Why are you so angry about it?

MCCAIN: I'm not angry about it. I just wish that he wouldn't call himself a Republican. I mean we Republicans have a habit of supporting Republicans. So that's all. I mean everybody's entitled to their views. Frankly, I don't think it will change one vote.
McCain said Powell shouldn’t call himself a Republican. Morgan took the comment and ran. Sununu then added the race angle.

One night later, Lawrence semi-misrepresented what Morgan actually said. On the brighter side, this let him use the word “lie.”

Lawrence loves the L-word.

Earlier last evening, on Hardball, Saint McCain was praised once again for his wonderful moral brilliance. In fact, McCain has been playing the ugly angry fool for at least the past six weeks now.

McCain has repeatedly misstated basic facts about Benghazi, often in highly poisonous ways. Unless you watch The One True Channel, where this saint gets praised for the wonderful way he conducted himself in the past.

This election may turn out to be very close. Benghazi could turn out to be the difference. Plainly, that's what the GOP thinks.

In a highly poisonous way, McCain keeps driving the Benghazi truck.

Lawrence and Chris don't know this.

21 comments:

  1. just for the record, i would not call john sydney mccain a man of much, if any, irish-catholic heritage.

    admittedly, the surname name is somewhat irish-y sounding, and definitely gaelic in origin (the two are not mutually inclusive).

    btw, buchanan is also gaelic in origin, but you wont find many irish-catholics(i.e. born and raised in ireland) now or historically with that name. . . . mccain im not as positive about, but it doesnt have an irish-catholic ring to my ear. but looking back *9* generations, its about the greenest sounding name on his ancestral tree.

    http://www.wargs.com/political/mccain.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh octoroonist, thanks so much for your latest nugget of racial wisdom:

      "i would not call john sydney mccain a man of much, if any, irish-catholic heritage"

      We are hanging on your every word!

      Delete
    2. defending ones 'group' ( as though 'we' are a coherent group) against bigotry is not itself bigotry.

      somerby has been flamboyantly anti americans-with-irish-catholic-heritage on this site, despite himself apparently having some of that same background.

      he has used both techniques of the bigot. he has explicitly espoused that americans with iriish-catholic heritage have various bad characteristics. . . . second, he has repeatedly named people who have or appear to have irish-catholic heritage as the culprit of some misdeed, real or not, all out of proportion to their numbers in that group (such as the media); in the second method without mentioning their heritage.

      google his old site (no comment box), which lasted into late 2011, in order to get the strongest bigotry:

      *** site:dailyhowler.com irish catholic *** (old site)


      the new site has its share of bigotry as well, although not usually as raw. heres a couple of examples from the new site. in the first one, note particularly the responses of “lonely eyes” and “quickdraw” to somerbys column and to some of his more outspokenly bigoted readers, or somerby himself perhaps:

      http://dailyhowler.blogspot.com/2012/05/gail-collins-cares-and-wastes-time-and.html


      ---second example, note particularly the comments of “hugh mann”:

      http://dailyhowler.blogspot.com/2012/06/collins-rules-bit-of-regional-bigot.html



      site:dailyhowler.blogspot.com irish catholic (new site)

      Delete
  2. Quaker in a BasementOctober 27, 2012 at 7:46 PM

    One assumes that Mr. McCain has never met Zell Miller.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. McCain is Zell Miller in most ways. Pure shill, hack, and grade A douche nozzle.

      Delete
  3. If I understand correctly, O'Donnell called Sununu a liar because he gave two different reasons for Powell to support Obama. First Sununu said it was because of race. Later he said it was because of agreement on policies. O'Donnell ignored the fact that Powell could have more than one reason to support Obama.

    However, I actually agree with O'Donnell. Obama's policies are not particularly congenial to a moderate Republican. It's obvious that Powell supports Obama on account of race.

    Still, I symthize with Sununu. He switched to a politically correct reason. I wonder if O'Donnell would have the guts to flatly say that a lot of Obama's black support was due to blacks supporting their own.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "I wonder if O'Donnell would have the guts to flatly say that a lot of Obama's black support was due to blacks supporting their own." - david in cal

      your premise is wrong when you say "a lot". 'a little', yes. blacks have been voting at very high percentages for the democrat presidential nominee since fdr.

      scroll down to the graph:

      http://www.factcheck.org/2008/04/blacks-and-the-democratic-party/

      Delete
    2. youknowwho -- Yes, blacks have voted mostly Dem for a long time. Still, not only did Obama get 95% of the black vote vs. 88% Democratic in the prior election, also more blacks voted in 2012. The New York Times reported in 2009:

      In last year’s presidential election, younger blacks voted in greater proportions than whites for the first time and black women turned out at a higher rate than any other racial, ethnic and gender group, a census analysis released Monday confirmed.

      As a result, in the election that produced the nation’s first black president, the historic gap between black and white voter participation rates over all virtually evaporated.


      The combined impact of greater participation and greater Democratic vote amounted to around 1.8 percentage points. (Pew says black participation rate increased from 8.2% to 9.5%. The difference between 88% of 8.2% and 95% of 9.5% is 1.8%.) http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1209/racial-ethnic-voters-presidential-election

      Unknown, yes of course there are many non-blacks who wouldn't vote for a black on account of racial prejudice, and many others who might vote for a black, but whose prejudice leads them to see blacks negatively. Mormons today suffer from a similar prejudice, without the offsetting benefit a big increase in support from Mormon voters.

      IMHO Obama also benefited from his race. I think many non-black voters supported him in order to help elect the first black President. I think many Obama voters would not have supported a non-black candidate with such limited experience.

      Delete
    3. "Obama's policies are not particularly congenial to a moderate Republican".

      To a casual observer like me, Obama's policies reflect very much what the views of a moderate Republican might be, if such a creature still exists.

      Delete
    4. any candidate will receive a boost from his own identity group(s) so long as as he has not offended them and they dont feel embarrassed by him/her.

      for example, i can see the same dynamic playing out should an american of hispanic heritage gain the dem nomination for president.

      i dont know how many more americans of greek heritage voted for the dem candidate in 1988 as compared to 1984, but i would bet it was at least as big a percentage increase as the increase of blacks voting for obama in 2008.

      Delete
  4. I wonder if you would have the guts to flatly say that a lot of Romney's white support was due to whites who would never ever ever ever consider voting for a black for president.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Whites vote 55/45 GOP/Dem

      Blacks 5/95
      Jews 20/80
      Hispanics 30/70

      These minority groups are clearly voting in a bloc. It's amazing that whites DON'T vote in the lopsided way that other ethnics and races do.

      Liberals ought to be aware that it might happen here.

      Delete
    2. "It's amazing that whites DON'T vote in the lopsided way that other ethnics and races do."

      >>> you talk like the outcomes in november have all the consequence of a high school most popular election. like its all a matter of pride with no real life effects.

      Delete
    3. Highschool? Wtf?

      It's all high school.

      Delete
  5. "Why did Morgan ask that strange leading question?"

    Right. The previous GOP nominee for president says Powell should leave the party. Why on earth would Piers Morgan want know what another man who worked closely with Powell in the highest levels of the executive department thought about that?

    Obviously, vile and shrewd Morgan was "leading" Sununu into a patently racist answer: Black guys stick together.

    Good grief, Somerby. You are having a terrible election season if you are now down to spinning what Sununu said into something to bash O'Donnell with.




    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's pretty clear that Powell favors a fellow black. Perfectly natural. He may even support the FP Obama has created.

      However, Sununu is perfectly right to point it out. Then the word police come out spouting their PC rubbish, pretending that Powell has no racial motivation.


      Delete
    2. The question isn't whether Powell favors a "fellow black."

      The question is why. And it is incredibly insulting to Colin Powell to dismiss him with the suggestion that the ONLY reason is that he "favors a fellow black."

      Delete
    3. Powell is a political shit.

      All the way back to the Vietnam era and Calley.

      Delete
  6. "It's pretty clear that Powell favors a fellow black."

    my guess is that powell is embarrassed by his service to the bush administration and wished to atone by helping to keep "bomb bomb bomb iran" john mccain and the neocon-surrounded mitt romney *out* of the whitehouse --- not so much to elect barak obama.

    ReplyDelete
  7. McCain, republican MSM strategy re Benghazi, gosh golly gee maybe Daily Howler is on to something?

    excerpt: "Only Bob Schieffer of CBS gave it serious consideration, and only after it was raised by Sen. John McCain."

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/10/28/Media-Cover-Up-Aside-from-FOX-Sunday-Shows-Fail-to-Raise-Benghazi

    ReplyDelete
  8. ... seems like 2nd cousin to Joe the Plumber is certain the "evidence" shows "Ambassador Rice appeared on five Sunday talks shows on September 16th to spin an obvious lie."

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/10/benghazi-a-reader-assesses-the-evidence.php

    ...gosh golly gee could it be that Daily Howler actually noticed something?

    ReplyDelete