Posts Tagged ‘morning joe’

Joe Scarborough just got through going on how Joe Sestak use of Bill Clinton instead of Obama or Rendell is a “sign of his independence”.

You know and I know that it is actually a sign that President Barack “Obamacare” Obama is political death this election cycle.

Maybe due to Jetlag you missed the LA Times story:

In an effort coordinated with the White House, congressional leaders are urging Democrats to focus less on bragging about what they have done — a landmark healthcare law, a sweeping overhaul of Wall Street regulation and other far-reaching policy changes — and more on efforts to fix the economy and on the perils of Republican control of Congress.

One year after many town hall meetings were upended by raucous anti-government protesters, congressional Democrats are trying to ensure that this summer’s debate sheds a more flattering light on their party as they navigate a bruising midterm election campaign.

And what they have done apparently doesn’t shed a flattering light. So Joe please don’t insult our intelligence that this means a democrat is “independent minded” , the avoidance of Obama means they are fighting for their political lives. It’s embarrassing to watch you do it.

On Morning Joe again today Joe Scarborough brought out his favorite number “50 Al qaeda” when talking about Afghanistan and if we should be there. (it was not the most ridiculous statement of the show as a guest talked how it costs $1 mil per GI there saying we should spend it on their people instead as if a ten man medical team was not just slaughtered there two days ago) Every time the subject of Afghanistan is brought up the 50 al-Qaeda number is trumpeted by Joe in his argument that we should cut and run withdraw.

By an odd coincidence I was re-reading about the Battle of Spotsylvania Court House this weekend. It was a seminal moment in the war because Grant after being defeated soundly at the Wilderness instead of retreating as other Union generals did raced for Spotsylvania to get around Lee by the left. Grant’s troops raced for the courthouse in the hope of getting there first.

James Longstreet had been badly wounded and his division was now under the command of the unexciting Richard Anderson. Anderson’s division, not renowned for speed, raced for the same point on a road that was being cleared even as he marched

At Spotsylvania the Cavalry of course got there first. There was a clash at a rail pile where Confederates defended against the Union Cavalry trying to dislodge them but the infantry was just behind them. When the first Union elements arrived General Warren (one of the heroes of Gettysburg told his Brigadier John Robinson to attack informing him that there was nothing but dismounted cavalry ahead of him.
It was true at the time he said it but between that moment and the time of attack, the first infantry brigades made it to the line, beating the union troops there by less than a minutes and insuring that the massive bloodshed that the country had gone through for 3 years would be prolonged for at least one more.

Under the Joe Scarborough theory of warfare there will never be anything more than Fitz Lee’s dismounted cavalry in front of the rail piles and all decisions to be made should be on that basis. There will always be just 50 Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and the Taliban are not our business.

I like Joe but lucky for us the tactical and strategic decisions in Afghanistan are not his.

I really like Morning Joe, I like Joe, I like Mika, I like Barnicle. They drive me nuts a lot because I DO like them. If I didn’t I wouldn’t care. (its the same way with Andrew Sullivan, he was one of the first blogs I ever read and when he went over the hill it hurt because I remember how great he used to be)

Today on Twitter he is doing a pubic service in a series of tweets explaining the political stunt used by Democrats who rather have a political point than help for 9/11 responders.

His tweets in sequence:

first

For those who don’t understand King/Weiner debate, here are the facts….

second

JoeNBC

1. You need 218 votes to pass a bill under regular order in the House of Representatives.

third

JoeNBC

2. Pelosi had over 250 votes to pass the 9/11 bill to help NY firefighters and cops.

fourth

JoeNBC

3. Pelosi and Democrats chose to bring up the bill in a way that would require a 2/3rds vote, effectively killing the bill.

fifth

JoeNBC

4. This procedure is called a “suspension” vote and is for non-controversial measures like naming post offices.

sixth

JoeNBC

5. Pelosi could have ruled Republican amendments out of order and still taken the majority-wins vote.

seventh

JoeNBC

I know many rabid ideologues don’t let facts get in the way, but House leaders chose to kill a 9/11 relief bill they could have passed.

Some might think this is unnecessary, but you should never assume that just because you know something other people do as well. People have to be constantly reminded by nature.

More please.

over the 14th amendment. There are actually 5 sections to this amendment. The irony here of course is the “why not just enforce the existing laws” instead of such “foolishness”

Why? For the same reason why Arizona felt compelled to pass their law, because the Federal Government hasn’t done it, and these same people who now say: “Just enforce the laws” Don’t favor them and don’t want them enforced.

To pretend that one side is playing politics with this issue and the other is not is disingenuous to say the least.

For those people in congress afraid of talking points memo might I suggest offering a new clean 28th Amendment as follows:

Section 1: Any child born after the adoption of this amendment of two non-citizens, those non-citizens being in the United States in violation of federal law, shall not be considered “born in the United States” for the purpose of determining citizenship.

Section 2: The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

Simple direct and to the point. Anybody want to sign on?

Memeorandum thread here.