Okay - who saw Tony Blankley on Tweety Last Night?????

I tried to post this earlier but have had problems with DU all day - just now got back in - maybe its been discussed and I just don't have time to go back through the threads. I checked this morning and saw nothing about it.

But Tweety was questioning Tony Blankley last night - and Blankley stated "Oh they were never going to get Bin Laden anyway" - then turned his head & looked down like he was about ready to shit himself - and then changed the subject quickly. Anybody else see this? Anybody else wondering exactly WHAT Tony (a Republican columnist) meant by that statement and WHAT DOES HE KNOW?? The minute he said that - I think he gave up some goods that he didn't want to be giving up. Drip, drip, drip. Again.

Mods - if dupe, sorry, please delete.

Maybe LiveOakTx has video?

exactly as you describe him, so that passage might have been very revealing.

I wish I could have seen him say it.

because the Bin Laden family and the Bush family are such close, longtime allies.

Blakley as well. Just looking at these clowns piss me off!

check outhis site, it might have it

The OP had it correct, it's Blankley and he pisses me off everytime he opens his mouth.

your astuteness?

I'm sorry, I'll try hard hard not to let it happen again kind Sir.


Tony Blakley

I was just trying to help.

You sir, took it the wrong way.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200406040004

I've quit watching Hardball because Tweety just seemed drunk and crazy, but I woke up and there it was.

The interesting thing about that program to me was his interview with Jack Murtha.

His questions were excellent - - complex and incisive - - and he was most respectful of Murtha.

He showed a segment of the SOTU speech in which bush said we were going to eradicate tyranny from the Earth (paraphrasing) after which Tweety asked "Where in the Constitution does it say the United States can go and and remove tyranny from the rest of the world" or words to that effect.

My husband and I looked at each other and asked almost in unison, "Who is that man and what have they done with Tweety?"

It was a really, really good interview and I didn't hear Matthews say a single outrageous thing.

I wish he'd stay on his meds.

Shoot - I forgot to mention that in this post (I had in the ones I tried to post this morning) - Tweety must be feeling some heat - because he wanted to make it clear that his brother was running as a "republican" but that did not reflect him and Murtha WAS BEYOND OUTSTANDING!!!!! Tweety did ask him some great questions and said WHY DIDN'T YOU GIVE THE DEM RESPONSE!!! THAT'S WHAT PEOPLE NEEDED TO HEAR!

about the Democratic response from Kaine. "Was this the best they could come up with? Why was he afraid to mention Iraq?"

Tweety mentioned that bush had referred to Murtha in the SOTU by calling his opponents "defeatists".

Murtha responded that " They always answer a substantive proposal with rhetoric".

I'm sure someone could punch that sentence up so it's meaning is more clear, more obvious, but that is something we ought to be saying about republicans every single day.

Murtha proposes a staged withdrawal from Iraq.

In response, republicans call him "quitter" and "defeatist".

* * *
Democrats on the judiciary committee ask Alito substantive question after substantive question.

The republican echo chamber calls Dems "mean" "unfair" "out of control" and all the rest.

* * *

This is exactly how they handle every single issue. A Dem says something substantive, the republicans come back with campaign rhetoric.

If we became more aware of this tactic, we could anticipate every single thing they were going to use, and we could co-opt it.

Maybe all the rest of you had noticed this tactic of theirs but I hadn't until Murtha articulated it.

For once, I'm glad I woke up in the middle of the night.

and his other point was - isn't it interesting that bush only interested in tyrannies that have OIL.

very negative, as was his panel except for some freeper from newsweek and norah o'donnell who were both sent away quickly.

thanks for link Catwoman!

relevant. can you imagine. kill one in u.s. and they will hunt you down and execute you. kill 3k and you can be irrelevant

if not immediately apparent and clear at least it will be a lot less cryptic.

Al-Quaeda wasn't attacked in Tora Bora by our forces because the Al-Quaeda monster is nothing like it's portrayed. There was nothing up there in those mountain caves--no elaborate bunker complexes, no hidden armies of Al Quaeda fighters.
That is why our army was told to sit on its ass down in the valley, and after dropping a lot of expensive as shit bombs, we only sent in the "natives" (northern alliance bandits). Later we allowed the British to comb the whole area and they, too, came up with nothing.
That's because there was really nothing to get, and at the top levels of our government and even perhaps at the top level of the Pentagon they know this.

OBL was a peripheral figure --a useful financier for the various Islamist groups that gathered in Afghanistan, but in no way their leader. The strategy of "Al Quaeda" of attacking the United States was not shared by the Taliban or the vast majority of Islamist militants whom they sheltered and trained. The goal of these groups was to inspire Islamic Revolution in their own countries.

If OBL and his few followers who could be legitimately labelled "Al Quaeda" were really up there, then it was better to let them escape. If he was caught or killed in place and there was no massive defensive complex and no loyal army of fighters who died to protect him, then the largely fictional nature of Al Quaeda would become too obvious for even the US media to ignore. If OBL escaped Tora Bora, on the other hand (assuming he had ever been there in the first place), then he could live on to be useful to the terror-coordinators and death merchants on the Potomac another day--or rather the myth of OBL and Al Quaeda could live on.

Blankley understands at some level and in some way that the drive to "get Al-Quaeda and OBL" in Afghanistan didn't just fail by accident or the miraculous intervention of God; it was intentional and expedient just as the overall invasion of Afghanistan was just an obligatory prelude to the conquest of Iraq.

However we do get a dose of "Fat Tony, the lying Brit bastard"* every Saturday night because we are faithful watchers of the McLaughlin Group.

* = Mr. Wonderful's epithet every time that slimeball opens his mouth.

"Fat Tony, the lying Brit bastard"

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Because I can't find it in the transcript..

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/11145879/

Maybe it was on another show? It'd be quite incredible if they decided to scrub it from the transcript..

shrub lied in response. The next day only a couple of Corp. TV clips showed shrub's Osama statement.

Osama Bin Laden

BUSH WANTS OSAMA DEAD OR ALIVE...

"I want justice. And there's an old poster out West, I recall, that says, 'Wanted: Dead or Alive.'"

...BUSH DOESN'T CARE ABOUT OSAMA

"I don't know where he is.You know, I just don't spend that much time on him... I truly am not that concerned about him."

I thiink his first guest was that woman who is a White House mouthpiece - - the one who smiles all the time, but lies while she's doing it.

Then came a Time Magazine correspondent (Carney) who talked about the Santorum/ Casey Senatorial race.

Then came Murtha for two segments, and finally someone I didn't know from the Washington Post against Fat Tony Blankley. :)

Can anyone find it?

He knows something. He let the cat out of the bag and then, like you say, nearly crapped his pants.

Obviously more than one person heard Tony Blankley say this.

Yet I read every word of his in the Hardball trancript from Wednesday, and no such words about bin Laden appeared. So just to clarify: this was on Hardball? Or Chris Matthews' other show? Someone help me find it in the transcripts because I'd like to blog about this -- and need some evidence -- and can't find a thing other than hearsay..

Maybe a DUer Tivo'd the show. That's the ONLY way we'll have PROOF of it.