Video: Billy Jeff’s flip-flop on Iraq knocked by … David Gregory?

posted at 5:41 pm on December 2, 2007 by Allahpundit

No, not every NBC employee is a discredited sycophant. Noel Sheppard noticed this morning; Iowa voters seem to be noticing en masse. Exit question: Are we looking at Huckabee vs. Obama? And if so, are you planning to vote Huck anyway?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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

No way would I be voting for that kid. Huck would suck but as always it comes down to the lesser of two evils.That being said I don;t see Huck getting the nomination.

bbz123 on December 2, 2007 at 5:49 PM

Dude, he’s getting it.

Allahpundit on December 2, 2007 at 5:49 PM

Dude, he’s getting it.

Fred had a good run.
/not really

Free Constitution on December 2, 2007 at 5:52 PM

The term “Clintonian” will haunt me for years (especially if she gets voted into office and re-elected).

terryannonline on December 2, 2007 at 5:52 PM

Dude, he’s getting it.

Allahpundit on December 2, 2007 at 5:49 PM

Blech. We have a choice between a guy who thinks DC is a mission church and a guy who people think is the Messiah…great.

Bad Candy on December 2, 2007 at 5:53 PM

rudy is getting the nomination, huck is veep at best and he knows it or he wouldn’t have a ceasefire with rudy right now.

lorien1973 on December 2, 2007 at 5:53 PM

How delicious.

Mhhhhh.

Messrs. Russert and Gregory will be filleted by the Clinton camp, HuffPo, etc. Schnitzels, with breadcrums et all. But I like ‘em with a slice of lemon. How delicious this is. Mhhhh!

Entelechy on December 2, 2007 at 5:54 PM

Allahpundit on December 2, 2007 at 5:49 PM

Dude, nothing is certain except for death and taxes.

That said, let’s stop with the inevitability and defeatism here.

Michael in MI on December 2, 2007 at 5:54 PM

Does anybody know what where the head-to-head polls are for Obama vs Republican? I just have this feeling that we should encourage Hillary’s defeat in the primaries, despite her high negatives.

Free Constitution on December 2, 2007 at 5:55 PM

I just have this feeling that we should encourage Hillary’s defeat in the primaries, despite her high negatives

We do better against Hillary than against him.

Allahpundit on December 2, 2007 at 5:56 PM

We do better against Hillary than against him.

Allahpundit on December 2, 2007 at 5:56 PM

GO HILLARY!

Free Constitution on December 2, 2007 at 5:57 PM

I so want her to be nominated in the primary. Her statement of absolute certainty, of her presidency, to Catie, who was smarter than the Glacier in that interview, which is big, as Mr. Bean would say, will not play well. No way!

Entelechy on December 2, 2007 at 5:57 PM

We do better against Hillary than against him.

Allahpundit on December 2, 2007 at 5:56 PM

Agreed.

amerpundit on December 2, 2007 at 5:58 PM

Allahpundit on December 2, 2007 at 5:56 PM

I agree. Because they’re moderates like me who would consider Obama if he is the nominee but wouldn’t consider Hillary. I already know Hillary and it’s a no go.

terryannonline on December 2, 2007 at 5:58 PM

Blech. We have a choice between a guy who thinks DC is a mission church and a guy who people think is the Messiah…great.

Bad Candy on December 2, 2007 at 5:53 PM

Hmmm, is today 02 DEC 2007 or 02 MAY 2008 and the Primaries are over and we have the nominees chosen?

Nothing is inevitable unless we all take on this defeatist attitude.

Do people here believe this country and our ideals and principles are worth working for? Then let’s stop with “oh great, it’s over” and let’s take this as more reason to work to get out the message of our chosen candidate and our principles and values we feel this country needs.

Geez just change “the 2008 Presidential campaign” to “Iraq” and this blog and its commenters sometimes sound just like Democrats and the Left.

Most people here admire and respect Michelle Malkin right? Do you think she’s giving up? Eff no. So no one else should either.

Michael in MI on December 2, 2007 at 5:59 PM

We do better against Hillary than against him.

Allahpundit on December 2, 2007 at 5:56 PM

Yes, Sir, how right you are. She’s a known, and full of it. He’s an unknown empty, who can be filled with all sorts of imaginary niceties.

Entelechy on December 2, 2007 at 5:59 PM

I dunno the answer to that FC, but I’d like to see that. The problem is whether early polls, which are usually based on shallowest of opinions. Obama’s likeable, but would his lack of substance tank him.

Bad Candy on December 2, 2007 at 6:00 PM

Yeah, I guess I need to perk up a bit. I just think Huck will be a disaster.

Bad Candy on December 2, 2007 at 6:01 PM

Exit answer: I suspect that if a socialist is elected, the socialist party will make a major move in shifting our once great and free nation to a nearly locked up socialist nation. I believe this for a many of reasons, to mention a few: 1)Soros is getting old 2) I am hearing rumors that our youngest generation tend to to be antisocialist (wow this shocks me I pray it is true though) 3)They simply do not have the patience to wait another 8 years. 4)Their demand that health care be socialised NOW! 5) Their demand for extreme tax increases and pork to destroy our economy 6) Aiding and abetting the enemy to further demoralize our culture.

No I will not vote for a socialist.

To see Americas future observe Venezuela.

allrsn on December 2, 2007 at 6:03 PM

Most people here admire and respect Michelle Malkin right? Do you think she’s giving up? Eff no. So no one else should either.

Michael in MI on December 2, 2007 at 5:59 PM

MiM, the certitude here lasts only until the next poll or opinion comes out, or the next thread. Don’t let that bother you.

Entelechy on December 2, 2007 at 6:04 PM

O crap, I forgot their attack on freedom of speech.

allrsn on December 2, 2007 at 6:05 PM

Exit question: Are we looking at Huckabee vs. Obama? And if so, are you planning to vote Huck anyway?

I would not vote for Huck.

Let the nation labor under an unqualified nanny state liberal. Obama would grant amnesty and a large number of Blacks, I’d say 30% would turn on him immediately. He would not ioncrease the imperative to assimilate and continue multiculturalist polices, polarizing the U.S. culturally.
When Hispanics start displacing Blacks wholesale, the other 70% would turn against him.

I call it the nuclear option. If we do not get a real conservative remind the country what liberalism is, Obama can do that. Actually the reverse could happen. To avoid such a label he might track right. Democrats do tend to swing their policies around polls. John Kerry never would have gone as far a Bush did with immigration. Kerry would have run from that issue like Eliot Spitzer…

Theworldisnotenough on December 2, 2007 at 6:07 PM

I want to see Fred! in a Lincoln – Douglas debate format with Hillary or Obama or Edwards. He is, literally and figuratively, head and shoulders above them.

That is my wish anyway.

CrimsonFisted on December 2, 2007 at 6:08 PM

Obama’s likeable, but would his lack of substance tank him.

Bad Candy on December 2, 2007 at 6:00 PM

That’s why I felt Hillary should be defeated early on. He sucks in the debates, heck, even I could beat him. He has big L liberal written all over him, lacks the Clinton machine, lacks experience, etc. The only thing going for his electability are his looks, and somehow, charisma (which I just don’t see, despite being told otherwise). But what do I know, I just majored in poli sci.

Free Constitution on December 2, 2007 at 6:08 PM

Free Constitution on December 2, 2007 at 6:08 PM

I think he is charasmatic but for some reason during the debates that really doesn’t shine through.

terryannonline on December 2, 2007 at 6:14 PM

When Hispanics start displacing Blacks wholesale, the other 70% would turn against him.

What are you talking about?

terryannonline on December 2, 2007 at 6:15 PM

I agree. Because they’re moderates like me who would consider Obama if he is the nominee but wouldn’t consider Hillary. I already know Hillary and it’s a no go.

Whoa, Nellie. Back up the horse. Obama is no moderate. I can’t stand Hillary Clinton, but I’d argue she’s a helluva lot more moderate than Obama is (or at least she’ll govern that way to try and rack up a few legislative successes like her husband did). Obama polls better with Republicans because they’re afraid to tell a pollster they wouldn’t vote for a black guy because, you know, the headline the next day would say “Majority of Republicans say they won’t vote for a black guy” rather than “Majority of Republicans say they won’t vote for Obama.”

Now there’s a lot — and I mean a lot — I don’t like about McCain, but if it goes McCain-Obama, don’t you think Obama would suffer a pretty nasty shellacking in the general? I mean his neophyte status would just be so obvious standing there on the stage next to McCain. Wouldn’t it?

Rational Thought on December 2, 2007 at 6:16 PM

Are we looking at Huckabee vs. Obama? And if so, are you planning to vote Huck anyway?

Nah. Huck is surging, and he has a chance at the top of the ticket, but more likely is the Rudy/Huck ticket I think.

Clinton/Obama is harder to figure. Clinton has regressed so anything is possible. Obama has the money to stay in no matter what. He certainly still has a chance, but at the end of the day I think Obama is going to be the flirtation with change, without commitment.

Spirit of 1776 on December 2, 2007 at 6:16 PM

Are we looking at Huckabee vs. Obama?

If those are the choices, then for the first time since I’ve been eligible to vote, I’ll skip the election. Huckabee can do his Christian candidate routine all day long, but as a devout Christian all I can say is it completely backfired for me. When he played that “I’m a better Christian than you because I’m willing to give your tax money to illegal aliens” card, that finished him as far as I’m concerned.

Laura on December 2, 2007 at 6:18 PM

Come November, every wife or girlfriend who is angry with their S.O. will be tempted to pull the level for the Bitch just to get even. On the other hand, B.O. will get 90% of the black vote anyway, just for being a D, so he has no advantage there.

The sooner the Bitch goes down, the better. Plus if she does win she would be better at actually getting her socialist agenda accomplished than Mr. Empty Suit.

pedestrian on December 2, 2007 at 6:20 PM

Rational Thought on December 2, 2007 at 6:16 PM

I didn’t say Obama was a moderate. I said I was. He’s obviously a liberal. And I think Obama polls better with some Republicans because they don’t really like the candidate on their side and wouldn’t vote for Hillary. And, yes, Hillary portrays herself as a moderate but we know better.

terryannonline on December 2, 2007 at 6:21 PM

Exit question: Are we looking at Huckabee vs. Obama? And if so, are you planning to vote Huck anyway?

Michelle said it several weeks ago on UstreamTV, to paraphrase, I’ll vote for the republican who gets the nomination. Even though all of the candidates are underwhelming, I will do the same.

Zorro on December 2, 2007 at 6:23 PM

And I think Obama polls better with some Republicans because they don’t really like the candidate on their side and wouldn’t vote for Hillary

There is also the hope that they can use his inexperience to avert/derail things that Clinton’s political calculations might manipulate through.

Spirit of 1776 on December 2, 2007 at 6:24 PM

Laura on December 2, 2007 at 6:18 PM

You MUST, WE ALL MUST vote! This is to important of a election.

We can stop huckabee by jamming congress again. We cannot stop the socialist movement if a true socialist is elected.

allrsn on December 2, 2007 at 6:27 PM

We cannot stop the socialist movement if a true socialist is elected.

Even by jamming Congress again?

Laura on December 2, 2007 at 6:28 PM

Yes Laura we jammed their phones, faxes, and e mail during thier last attemt to give amasty to the illegals.

allrsn on December 2, 2007 at 6:30 PM

Their bill was killed, if need be we can do it again.

allrsn on December 2, 2007 at 6:31 PM

allrsn – Besides, it wasn’t entirely about his position on treating illegals better than citizens – we’ve had so much of that from Bush, McCain, and a host of others that I’m pretty acclimated to that by now. What really frosted me was the way he played the Christian card, as if that made it okay. As far as I’m concerned, it showed a huge lack of understanding of both how government should work, and how Christianity should work. I may cool off about it before the election, but it’s not looking good because he’s proud of it and won’t recant.

Laura on December 2, 2007 at 6:32 PM

OPPS I think I misread you Laura. Sorry.

allrsn on December 2, 2007 at 6:32 PM

Let me try again. If a socialist is elected and they keep control of the house and senate, NO we cannot stop them!

allrsn on December 2, 2007 at 6:33 PM

Laura on December 2, 2007 at 6:32 PM

For the most part I agree with that statement. The point I am trying to make is that socialism is a very real and serious threat in this election. Our freedom is truly at stake.

I repeat: to see our futrue ovserve Venezuela.

allrsn on December 2, 2007 at 6:37 PM

What are you talking about?

terryannonline on December 2, 2007 at 6:15 PM

I’m talking about congressional districts in which Blacks have a majority because illegal alines cannot vote and their children are not old enough. Amnesty and a few more years and those districts will see Hispanic elected officials and Blacks will not be a part of that political process.

I’m talking about illegal aliens and their children easing into job sectors,illegals were used to break the mostly white and Black hotel workers union in the 80′s, now unions are outright recruiting illegal aliens and putting a premium on being bilingual and by default promoting Hispanics over non-bilingual Blacks.

The pattern already exists, an amnesty would only accelerate and exacerbate the trend.

The problem with identity politics is that all the identities need to get along.

Theworldisnotenough on December 2, 2007 at 6:45 PM

Yes, I would vote for Huck over Obama on the war issue alone. However, both would be nanny presidents.

packsoldier on December 2, 2007 at 6:46 PM

Huck v Obama hmmmm….
I’ll go Obama. The worst thing that can be elected is a man who thinks my tax dollars should go to his personal beliefs, while denying freedoms that are not his to deny. Social conservatism has run its course. I like to drink, gamble and…well you get the idea. If you don’t want to do these things, don’t! But don’t tell me not to.
And stop taking my money to pay health care expenses to children of families making $60K a year!
Or prescription drugs for people who have reached a coveted age.

Tell you what, my vote is for sale. Vow to end the internet ban on online poker and I will vote for you!
(and leave the good people of HotAir at peace)

sweeper on December 2, 2007 at 6:49 PM

“I’m a better Christian than you because I’m willing to give your tax money to illegal aliens” card, that finished him as far as I’m concerned.
Laura on December 2, 2007 at 6:18 PM

I hear ya….
Huck needs to understand how important the RULE OF LAW is for Americans. I don’t think I can trust the guy.

shooter on December 2, 2007 at 6:50 PM

Theworldisnotenough on December 2, 2007 at 6:45 PM

Just because certain areas have a majority of Hispanics that doesn’t automatically mean that other groups are entirely left out. I live in South Texas where the majority is Hispanic that doesn’t people who aren’t Hispanic have no say in the political process.

terryannonline on December 2, 2007 at 6:56 PM

Don’t think David Gregory won’t be sleeping with the lights on from now on lest he awaken to find a horse’s *ss head in his bed…

Captain Scarlet on December 2, 2007 at 6:57 PM

Our freedom is truly at stake.

I agree, but not by any individual candidate. The threat is the media’s influence on the people. Plato said, “Those who tell the story rule society.” The liberal media sets the narrative and we either live by it or spend all our time pushing back against it. Staying on defense all the time means we cannot ever win.

People are deliberately voting in socialists/nanny staters because they honestly believe it’s the best thing to do. Stopping any individual candidate is a weak, stopgap measure. I still vote, because I’m interested in slowing the process down, but I don’t kid myself that it changes much. You need a whole new paradigm, because failure to correctly identify the problem means you’ll never solve it.

Laura on December 2, 2007 at 6:57 PM

Laura on December 2, 2007 at 6:57 PM

The threat is the media’s influence on the people. Plato said, “Those who tell the story rule society.” The liberal media sets the narrative and we either live by it or spend all our time pushing back against it

To a degree, but remember we have talk radio and blogs starting to work. Yes I constantly push back.

Staying on defense all the time means we cannot ever win.

I disagree a strong offense is the best defense.

People are deliberately voting in socialists/nanny staters because they honestly believe it’s the best thing to do.

I am convinced that the followers do not understrand they are voting socialist. They need to belong somwhere, so they find and follow a cool subculture and they speak and vote (and dress) as the subculture leaders tell them too.

Stopping any individual candidate is a weak, stopgap measure. I still vote, because I’m interested in slowing the process down, but I don’t kid myself that it changes much.

Agreed.

failure to correctly identify the problem means you’ll never solve it.

I agree, and anyone who studies the left in depth has learned, we are in a culture war freedom/socialism.

dm, the quotes worked backwards for some reason but I am not going to redo it now.

allrsn on December 2, 2007 at 7:12 PM

Easiest way to use the quotes – type it out, select it, then hit the quote button.

Laura on December 2, 2007 at 7:30 PM

ok ty

allrsn on December 2, 2007 at 7:34 PM

Just because certain areas have a majority of Hispanics that doesn’t automatically mean that other groups are entirely left out. I live in South Texas where the majority is Hispanic that doesn’t people who aren’t Hispanic have no say in the political process.

terryannonline on December 2, 2007 at 6:56 PM

South Texas huh?

Ruben Hinjosa

Silvestre Reyes

Charlie Gonzalez

Ciro Rodriguez

Henry Cuellar

I love the nuance. Not “entirely” left out. Just because Hispanics are a majority does not mean others have “no say” in the political process. You gotta love that, “no say”. As long as non-Hispanics have “some say”, are allowed in a meeting or two they are part of the process.

What do you think non-Hispanics thought of LA mayor Villaregosa’s plan to put WIC offices in the Mexican consulate? Do you think non-Hispanic interests were considered?

Terry Ann you, are, dreaming,(notice that this incident was in ’97 and ten years later Hispanics in chicago are still at it, once the majority is gained all non-Hispanics are marginalized) the trend is very obvious and it will come to pass. Amnesty will only speed the process.

Theworldisnotenough on December 2, 2007 at 7:35 PM

That is a difficult exit question.

km on December 2, 2007 at 8:55 PM

Theworldisnotenough on December 2, 2007 at 7:35 PM

What is your point with naming Hispanic congressmen?
It shouldn’t be a surprise that a heavily populated Hispanic area produces Hispanic politicians. So what, big deal.

I only used the term “entirely” because your previous post made it seem like everyone that’s not Hispanic will be left out of the political process, which I don’t agree with.

We are going off topic so we should continue this conversation on another related thread.

terryannonline on December 2, 2007 at 9:15 PM

terryannonline, a little fact-check – here is Mr. Rove’s first article, before he gave advice to Mr. Obama, in his 2nd article for Newsweek.

Entelechy on December 2, 2007 at 9:55 PM

Entelechy on December 2, 2007 at 9:55 PM

Thanks, I’ll fix that on my blog:)

terryannonline on December 2, 2007 at 10:16 PM

Maybe I’m missing something, but doesn’t Obama get killed when the debates are one on one? As Rationalthgought speculated above, McCain shellacks Obama in the general. I would say ditto, Romney, Guliani, or Fred. Obama doesn’t stand a chance again them–he has no experience. Once he gets onto a topic he’s not super prepared on, HAMMERTIME!

smellthecoffee on December 2, 2007 at 10:45 PM

I’m trying to figure who annoys me more:

A) Bill Clinton
B) David Gregory

It’s really close.

Remember when ex-presidents just faded away? I guess the Dems just don’t have that kind of class.

Hening on December 2, 2007 at 11:36 PM

Dude, he’s getting it.

Allah, sometimes you are so pessimistic, it’s funny.

Huckabee might win Iowa, but that’s it.

This is the big leagues baby and Huckabee is a little league player.

Rightwingsparkle on December 2, 2007 at 11:58 PM

terryannonline on December 2, 2007 at 9:15 PM

Heh.

I’ll leave you alone. Post a thread on your blog. I’d love to duke it out.

Theworldisnotenough on December 3, 2007 at 12:11 AM

This is the big leagues baby and Huckabee is a little league player.

Pardon me for saying so, but that reads like wishful thinking. Iowa is the big leagues. Especially consider if he gets a bounce from Iowa going into NH and knocks McCain out. He is a factor.

Not only is he on the field in the bigs, he is the topic of conversation. He outperforms his peers in every debate and the media love him. I doubt he gets the nomination, but he is a force to be dealt with now.

Spirit of 1776 on December 3, 2007 at 12:33 AM

In the General election, I’ve voting for whomever the Republican is.

That being said, a Hillary presidencey scares the pee pee outta me.

That being said, I need a cup cake.

- The Cat

P.S. The Gregorey had to knock it, there wasn’t ANY Plausible Deniability.

or

You can’t get paid off if you are already on their side

or

I still need a cupcake.

MirCat on December 3, 2007 at 1:43 AM

Huckabee=jimmy carter

peacenprosperity on December 3, 2007 at 7:51 AM

We do better against Hillary than against him.

Allahpundit on December 2, 2007 at 5:56 PM
Agreed.

amerpundit on December 2, 2007 at 5:58 PM

Absolutely correct.

drjohn on December 3, 2007 at 8:32 AM

The Dems are saying they won’t count Michigan, so how will Michigan Dems vote?

Will they go ahead and vote for Clinton, who is just about alone on the ballot?
Will they vote for a Rep like Rudy, who many of them would actually support for Pres?
Will the vote for Huck to mess up Republicans?

MayBee on December 3, 2007 at 1:53 PM