Video: Lou Dobbs salutes John Bolton
posted at 9:04 pm on November 15, 2006 by Allahpundit
Charming and unexpected, particularly from someone at CNN. Well done.
Bush is going to try to get him a floor vote before the new Congress is seated, but even if Chafee caved and they moved him through committee, the Dems have votes to spare for a filibuster. Two congressmen have suggested outgoing Rep. Jim Leach, a Republican from Iowa, as a possible compromise candidate to replace Bolton. Leach voted against the resolution authorizing war in 2002, supports bilateral talks with North Korea, and had not a single harsh word to say about a National Intelligence Estimate being leaked to the Times in October. Where, exactly, is the “compromise”?
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
In light of recent events in the RNC and Senate, I’ll bet dollars to doughnuts that Bolton is finished.
By the way, did anyone watch the Glenn Beck special following in the footsteps of “Obsession?”
Troy Rasmussen on November 15, 2006 at 9:11 PM
The ‘stache ’08
lorien1973 on November 15, 2006 at 9:11 PM
He’s toast, but at least not French toast.
SouthernGent on November 15, 2006 at 9:14 PM
yeah THE STACHE Rock Solid
sonnyspats1 on November 15, 2006 at 9:17 PM
THE STACHE has Malkins
sonnyspats1 on November 15, 2006 at 9:17 PM
What if John Bolton runs for congress in 2008? Do you think he will win?
Ouabam on November 15, 2006 at 9:32 PM
Valadiction? I’m afraid so Allah. Bolton outshines anyone in recent memory, on the international scene. The sad thing is I think he is a dying breed. We are doomed to mediocraty at best.
sonnyspats1 on November 15, 2006 at 9:43 PM
Lou has always been a straight up guy. He carries the guilt of a limosine liberal but beyond that he’s a patriot.
Griz on November 15, 2006 at 9:45 PM
So much for liberal bias. Beck and Dobbs (who isnt exactly a Republican anymore, but certainly not a liberal) get their fair shot to say what they want. They don’t get muzzled the way the opposition does on FNC.
I see no reasont to lament Bolton’s demise. He hasn’t really accomplished anything. Just a lot of “don’t you dare…” toward North Korea and Iran, to which they’ve responded by calling his bluff, and so far nothing has happened.
United Nations diplomacy is overrated. It isn’t going to make an impact whether it’s a “liberal” or “conservative” arguing for the U.S. in the U.N. The Israelis are going to bomb Iran either way.
Grebrook on November 15, 2006 at 9:45 PM
THE STACHE!–The next best thing to dismantling the U.N.
Free Kurdistan on November 15, 2006 at 9:47 PM
Grebrook,
I have a question for you. Why do you think that in the last, say five years, that most of the cable news networks have implemented programs with conservative commentators?
Troy Rasmussen on November 15, 2006 at 10:00 PM
Because Republicans tend to have higher incomes in general than Democratic voters, and have much more access to cable, and therefore watch more cable, and therefore the cable media tailors itself to that.
Now, I have a question. If you admit that most have done this, how do you oppositely claim that CNN and MSNBC have a “liberal” bias?
Grebrook on November 15, 2006 at 10:06 PM
Stats show that liberals do not get their news online either. The top 5 “liberal” blogs do not get near the traffic that the top 5 “conservative” blogs do. Having debated with many liberals, I find they are sadly uninformed about issues and do not even care that they are. As long as they have glib replies, they are content to be ignorant.
lorien1973 on November 15, 2006 at 10:10 PM
…and somebody just happening by here would have to wonder “What the *HELL* did he just say!”
…Go, ‘STACHE, go…go, ‘STACHE, go….
Puritan1648 on November 15, 2006 at 10:11 PM
…I asked my Mom — back in the days when “cable” was a metal rope — “What are Democrats?”.
Remembering FDR, as she did, she told me:
“DUMMY! Take that kitten out of your mouth!”
…then she said, “Republicans are for the rich people…and Democrats are for the working folks like us.”
While she took a dim view of Eleanor Roosevelt’s views on blacks, I think that she believed this.
…now, we have Kerry, Kennedy, Pelosi and (if he can swing a deal) Murtha. So much for “poor”.
The Republicans are richer…have cable…and all Mexicans sound like Ricky Ricardo, all blacks have rhythm, all Jews are stingy and all people with “eyes too close together” are up to no good.
You can dish out the stats when it suits you, but you can break out with the generalities when it suits you.
Now…quote me some stats….
Puritan1648 on November 15, 2006 at 10:18 PM
Yay, Lou.
Alex K on November 15, 2006 at 10:28 PM
Just because a cable news network has one or two token conservatives on their shows, or even with their own show, doesn’t make them “fair” or “balanced.” In order to decide if a network is slanted one way or the other, you must examine the over all content of their coverage, not how many democrats or republicans, liberals or conservatives, are on the pay roll.
Also, the “rich” republican line is old. To be honest, I don’t know anyone who cannot afford cable, and I’m in school with people who live on student loans!
Troy Rasmussen on November 15, 2006 at 10:50 PM
Bolton for Prez, dammit.
Good Lt on November 15, 2006 at 10:53 PM
Don;t you run some sort of polling place too? Rasmussen? Tryin’ to fit in with the little guy, eh? :P
lorien1973 on November 15, 2006 at 10:55 PM
Grebrook — and I feed you with the greatest reluctance — you can’t possibly still be arguing against liberal bias in the media. I honestly didn’t think you are that stupid and delusional.
Every.Single.Voluntary.Survey of the network media and print press has identified a Dem saturation of 80 to 100%. (The 100% figure might seem to be hyperbole, and I suppose it is, but off-the-record comments by liberals have repeatedly revealed that they simply don’t know anyone in their environment who is a Republican).
No one with a real name denies this; they simply deny that their political hatred of Republicans in general and conservatives in particular in any way colors their journalism.
Oddly, most of the conservative commentators start the conversation by claiming that they view the entire world through the “prism of a conservative”, as Beck said tonight.
Do you really not get this, or is it a point that you cannot concede, because it undermines everything else you want to say?
Jaibones on November 15, 2006 at 11:05 PM
“Now, I have a question. If you admit that most have done this, how do you oppositely claim that CNN and MSNBC have a “liberal” bias?”
Probably because even the liberal guy at NPR told O’reilly that CNN is liberally biased. Its not a matter of CNN letting Dobbs talk. Dobbs would talk anyway.
I give Lou a lot of credit. He does seem to be somewhat independent, in his ability to attack or praise both parties. Unlike his colleagues at CNN, I think he really does care.
americanpundit on November 15, 2006 at 11:11 PM
Grebrook, you troll, as usual, ‘You Just Don’t Get It’, probably because your head is so far up your ass. Having you mis-use and misrepresent stats and other data is becoming very, very tiresome.
Dobbs quit CNN, then came back only when Turner guaranteed him editorial control of his one-hour program. Dobbs is a Democrat and a liberal who dresses himself up as a ‘populist’, but ‘popullist’ can mean just about anything.
Proof: Dobbs always finds a way to criticise conservatives and Republicans–from his ‘populist’ platform, of course. There’s always an agenda, and it’s always to find fault with Republicans. Even when he also criticises Demos, Republicans get a disproportionate share
Janos Hunyadi on November 15, 2006 at 11:12 PM
No, he’s an ex-Republican who left the party over immigration. So essentially he’s just Pat Buchanan. Socially conservative, against free trade, against illegal immigration.
Liberal my ass.
Yeah, and Bill O’Reilly really is a “centrist”, right? I love it. You people on Hot Air, FR, CU, etc… you always love to trash Dobbs and claim that he’s really a “Democrat”, but then turn around and claim that O’Reilly “is not a conservative” and HE’S really the independent one. Which I why I don’t take you seriously.
Dobbs is a Buchananite ex-Republican. He is many things. A liberal is not one of them.
And this is where you enlighten me that Fox is really fair and balanced, right?
Grebrook on November 15, 2006 at 11:24 PM
Cable is only for the rich now?…lol
EnochCain on November 15, 2006 at 11:34 PM
“Grebrook”, it is not possible to ‘enlighten’ you, partly because you’re too busy wanking….
Doesn’t your wrist get tired?
Janos Hunyadi on November 15, 2006 at 11:35 PM
Bwaaaahahahaha!!! Wouldn’t that be freaking hilarious–the Libs kick Bolton out of the UN and he runs for president! I would love to see it happen. Wouldn’t they be horrified if their little power play gave the ‘Stache superhuman powers and popularity?!
aero on November 15, 2006 at 11:43 PM
lorien, jaibones, Puritan and others got the grebrook stuttering tonight. funny. you know he’s runnin’ scared when he resorts to putting words in your mouth by the 2nd sentence. and then starts with his you people…. ROFL
Griz on November 15, 2006 at 11:58 PM
oh and grebrook. i’ve worked with LD. He’s a god fearing Democrat. blue. he’s just a bit smarter than most. that must be why you thought of him as a republican.
Griz on November 16, 2006 at 12:01 AM
Grazzi, Griz.
Grebe, one last counterpoint. Why do “you people” always bring up Bill O’Reilly and Rush Limbaugh? O’Reilly’s show has nothing to do with journalism or news. His show is Oprah for prime time politics junkies; it’s junk; it’s candy.
The fact that Fox has a guy with more viewers in the bathroom at any given moment than Olbermann can muster in a week of hysterical rants seems to make you lose focus and go a little wobbly.
Stay on topic: liberal media generally refers to news and newspapers, not one-sided opinion shows or silly late night pap. (OK, we rant a little about nitwit Letterman, but that’s because he’s such a schwanzlicher).
Would you like to have all elections be decided by staffers at the Washington Post? Sure you would. And you leftists should have the Malkins to admit it.
Jaibones on November 16, 2006 at 12:36 AM
And another thing: the left keeps trotting out veterans lately, as some sort of proof that Bush is this or that, and Rumsfeld is a chickenhawk.
But, I’d love to have the next ten elections decided only by the votes of veterans and active duty servicemen, just as an experiment in Democracy. How about you?
Care to have a referendum on your favorite civilian defense leader, Donald Rumsfeld, where only his charges get an opinion? They’d elect him President, and then invade Iran.
You lefties need to be a little more honest about who you are. Trust America, Grebrook.
Jaibones on November 16, 2006 at 12:40 AM
OK guys… lets set a decent tone here…
I was wondering why the Iranians, Iraqis, the pakis and everybody else trys to make Nukes the hard way? Anybody got that answer?
Check this link out and tell me why the jihadi’s are not just interested in killing all of us, but destroying everything we built too!
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/6583/project024.html
and this one too:
http://www.manuelsweb.com/sam_cohen.htm
Lee on November 16, 2006 at 1:31 AM
No, this is why I thought of him as a Republican:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0610/10/lkl.01.html
Thus, you are a liar, you probably never worked for Dobbs at all. And if you did, you made up the part about him being a Democrat.
Grebrook on November 16, 2006 at 3:09 AM
O’Reilly isn’t a conservative. He takes a conservative stance on exactly two issues. War, and pedophilia.
Other than that, his entire existence is geared to flaming anyone with a view different than his as one brand of extremist or another. On every issue but the two stated above, he spends almost no time on the substance of the topic, almost all of it quoting and bashing the opinions of both the left and right, labeling them equally invalid. Don’t ever call him a conservative.
I was taught that you find two things in the middle of the road. Yellow stripes, and dead skunks. Both have rubbed off on O’Reilly.
Dobbs is much more likeable, and shows more integrity than many of the commentators on the air. Yes, he is harsh on Republicans, but never without cause, and I don’t have a problem with that.
For anyone over 40, your parents were always harsher on you than a visiting friend when trouble happened, right? It was because they had a stronger interest in you, and were more concerned that you behaved responsibly. The other kid was some other adult’s problem. Apply that analogy when you hear Dobbs busting on the right, and you’ll see it fits. He wants the right to do well, and it irks him when they blow it. Now name for me a commentator who identifies with the left, who is willing to chastise his own when they need it?
::crickets::
Freelancer on November 16, 2006 at 5:58 AM
I went back, thinking that buttboy referred to O’Reilly as a Republican, not a conservative. I was wrong. This guy’s got George Galloway so far up his arse he thinks O’Reilly is a conservative.
End.Discussion.
Jaibones on November 16, 2006 at 9:21 AM
LEACH for UN ambassador?!!1
My late father graduated from high school with ole Jim (class of 1960)-and was less than enthralled. He thought Leach was a bit spineless.
My old man must be churning in his urn that his useless former classmate might be headed to the UN!(He died in ’01 but I’m sure he would’ve liked Bolton.)
annoyinglittletwerp on November 16, 2006 at 9:21 AM
All I know grebrook is that he promoted Democrats as well as Democrat policy the two years I was around him. Isn’t it so very convenient for you that everything a conservative says is up for review whereas everything a liberal says is the god’s honest truth and always will be. You’re boring people to death grebrook.
Griz on November 16, 2006 at 10:24 AM
I think this is a good point and I think it illustrates the difference between Fox News and CNN, MSNBC, etc. CNN and company clearly have a liberal bias and most of their on staff probably vote democratic. However they still give conservatives and liberals both an opportunity to get their point across and they still ask questions of democrats they don’t want answer. Fox news on the other hand loves to stack the deck and put the loudest, most outspoken conservatives head to head against soft spoken, rather subdued liberals in attempt to make them look weak. (Hannity and Colmes, I mean come on, poor Alan, no matter what you think of his politics how can you not feel bad for the guy.) Then the liberals get shouted down and told to shut up while Hannity/O’Reily, etc. and the conservative guest stroke each others,um…egos. Say what you will about the politics of someone like Chris Matthews but he asks his guests fair questions, gives them an opportunity to answer, and doesn’t gang up and act like a d-bag to them.
JaHerer22 on November 16, 2006 at 10:25 AM
Kids, can someone tell me, succinctly why the Dems (and apparently quite a few Reps) don’t like this guy? I must have been absent picture day, but I don’t have a clear understanding of this. From what I see, he’s been good–at what is, let’s face it, a pretty thankless job. (Please no editorializing, I know you can do it!!)
honora on November 16, 2006 at 1:59 PM
Fair and balanced AND…after NBC (of the heinous MSM turned it down) Fox jumped on the upcoming “If I Did It” hypothetical drama from O J Simpson, wherein he reveals how he would have killed his wife and her friend, hypothetically doncha know. Rupert Murdoch: the man who brought us family values via FoxNews reveals his ultimate value: anything for a buck.
You really can fool some of the people all of the time.
honora on November 16, 2006 at 2:08 PM
Feel sorry for Colmes? Egads, he’s like a teenage girl PMS’ing for the first time. Shrill, whiny, and angry all at once. He does his absolute best to NEVER let someone with an opposing view finish an answer. And if they manage that, he still gives no credit for a reasonable answer if it’s not in agreement with his talking points.
Really?
What do you know that Slate doesn’t know?
Freelancer on November 16, 2006 at 2:08 PM
Cause he’s a hard-nose that won’t play games. You know they all love playing their games. Plus he enacts conservative policy. Won’t support bi-lateral talks, etc.
Griz on November 16, 2006 at 2:09 PM
Yeah, he’s been seen hanging around some pretty sketchy people.
Conservative bias, my foot!
Pablo on November 16, 2006 at 2:26 PM
Oh. My. God.
Pablo on November 16, 2006 at 2:28 PM
Family values? The same man that brings us:
American Dad
Family Guy
King of the Hill
MADtv
The OC
The Simpsons
Stacked
Trading Spouses
The War At Home
24, House, and Bones are interesting shows, the rest is utter filth.
FoxNews is just Murdoch’s attempt to attract the demographics that are repulsed by the primary Fox broadcast fare. And since he isn’t stupid, FoxNews then HAS to appeal, however marginally, to the “family values” types.
Of course it’s anything for a buck. That’s what corporations are about. It’s up to the buying public to make bad corporate choices unprofitable. But for years society has been trained that it’s the evil corporations that are at fault, and you have no say, so shut up and watch. In that respect, it’s much like the political landscape. If citizens don’t speak up, they get what they deserve.
Freelancer on November 16, 2006 at 4:22 PM