New Ad From Cheney's 'Keep America Safe' Attacks MSNBC Hosts as 'Afraid' to Debate Her
By Heather Sunday Oct 18, 2009 6:00am
This one had me chuckling. After all of the air time Liz Cheney has been given on Morning Joe and some of the other MSNBC daytime programs, her new group, the ironically named "Keep America Safe" is running an ad saying that Chris Matthews, Ed Schultz and Keith Olbermann are afraid to debate her.
From The Plum Line-New Ad From Liz Cheney’s Group Bashes Olbermann, Matthews As “Afraid” To Debate Her:
The implication being, of course, that the MSNBC gang is running scared from Ms. Cheney. If memory serves, though, Ms. Cheney has repeatedly been granted a platform on … MSNBC, again and again and again, to defend her pop’s legacy and champion policies that don’t even exist anymore.
Looking forward to the lily-livered liberal network crew’s response to this one. Maybe they’ll invite her on again a bunch more times to discuss her contempt for them.
And from Benen:
Earlier this year, Liz Cheney spent so much time on the cable news networks, I think she had her mail forwarded to the green rooms on N. Capitol. At one point, the "liberal media" had the former State Department official on 22 times in 24 days. Not only were many of these appearances on MSNBC, but when people like me started complaining about the news networks turning Cheney into a right-wing celebrity, Liz Cheney's biggest defender was ... MSNBC.
And now Cheney wants to turn the network into a punching bag?
Also, I couldn't help but notice that Liz Cheney's ad targets Olbermann, Matthews, and Schultz, but seems to have left out one high-profile MSNBC host: Rachel Maddow. Indeed, Rachel has invited Liz Cheney onto her show many, many times, and yet, Cheney has declined every opportunity.
To borrow a phrase, why doesn't Liz Cheney want to talk substance? Why doesn't she want to debate the issues?
I would be surprised if Cheney hasn't been invited to appear on all of those shows, although I'm not sure why any of them would want to give the likes of her some air time so she can spend the segment interrupting and talking over them. She doesn't debate anyone. She filibusters and talks over anyone she's on the air with so she can get her talking points out without actually answering any questions. If they put her in a debate box off the set with a mute button they might get a word in edgewise.
I wonder if her cohort Bloody Bill Kristol wants some face time during prime time on MSNBC as well? I'd absolutely love to see him come on Rachel or Keith's shows.
Login or Register to post comments.
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA !!!!!!!!!!!!
no one is afraid of her---They just know that the bobblehead/talking heads can not control her--crosstalk and ovetalking-! If anyone is afraid it is the Geo/David/John K MSM crew...
She does not 'debate'..she spews which does not bring a discussion to the table!
She , Cheney, would never go on the Rachel show...talk about afraid...major wet socks on that one!
Like father like daughter...both got egos the size of Kansas with no meat to back it up..just hot air....BUT, docb here made a great point..She doesn't have the chutzpah to go on a show with Rachael Maddow....She would get eaten alive....but that won't keep her from flapping her lips and the neonut hate machine from generating more of their swill...
ever speak in front of anything other than a hand-picked audience? This is NeoCon 101, stack the audience and have a 'fair and balanced' debate. Even people with rational but counter questions were removed from Bush campaign speeches.
But let's not forget, the neocon base doesn't watch Keith or Rachel and they believe as they're told. Karl Rove figured out a long time ago how to exploit ignorance and sadly it's a constitutional right in America to be misinformed and malleable.
I think that this spawn of the monster Cheney is actually more evil than her war criminal father.
Dickless does seem to have gotten more of the Maul genes than the Leia genes.
about the danger we're in is like listening to Jack the Ripper's daughter give advice about the danger of talking to strangers.
Bill Maher On The Year In Ridiculous Republicans (VIDEO)
last night.
Never argue with an idiot.
They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience.
That's why.
Rachel has invited Liz Cheney onto her show many, many times, and yet, Cheney has declined every opportunity
chicken lizard, bwak, bwak, bwak
come on mini dick, what are you afraid of?
Keep America Safe From The Cheneys.
Is more like it.
At least during the debates she was up front about the fact that she wasn’t going to answer the questions.
wanna bet? anyone? Kristol has his next candidate, it'll be the black man vs. the woman. he thought he'd give the reps some credibility with no-brains Palin and it didn't work. He's grasping for straws again but he knows his first choice was a bust. He's got three years to get her in shape.
Update----make that vice president, Reps would never let anyone other than a White man be pres.
Has anybody seen Olbermann debating anyone face to face? Maddow, Schultz and Matthews are not afraid of getting in the rink with these guys, but Olbermann? Can anyone point me to a video where he does that? He is the typical Limbaugh, too coward to get out of the comfort zone.
They try to represent news not wacko right wing bizarro world faux nit wit news.
Yes Maddow took the racist Buchann down a few months ago.
Schultz has been challenging since he is on the air but the right wing nuts think they should be able to pose the questions they want asked and rehearse the answers. This also applies to Olbermann.
The right has NO backbone so they will not go on these shows so rather then crying and making false assumptions just turn on brain dead nit wit news the no fact station of HATE and FEAR, then you will be told what when and how to think, feel and be.
...
I don't want Olbermann to change his format. I hate the shows like tweety's with all the stupid yelling and the giving of calm quiet stretches of nasal talking time to non-entities like Ron Christie. Olbermann says there are not two sides to every issue. I like it.
Coward.
careful where you click, nyguy. People might think you're talking to a fellow commenter, and I don't think you are. - Sitemonitor
Rachel or Keith would, either one of them, wipe the floor with Liz Cheney, if they could get a word in edgewise. LC thinks that if you say something loud enough, long enough, it becomes the truth. Sad.
The American TRAITOR and COWARD is now using his brainless parroting daughter to mouth his hatred and twist his lies.
Why doesn't this COWARD stand on his own two feet and answer the questions CONGRESS is asking.
As for security I will never feel safe with a Traitorous republican in charge, in fact as it stands now I am betting they are behind the scenes engineering a attack on this Country, because with these HATE MONGERS it is NOT about America it is about Fascist, Socialist and Nazis. republicans are TRAITORS as can be PROVEN by their lack of standing up and calling for the Prosecution, Conviction and Imprisonment of those in and in support of their party.
To me this poses a serious question of Loyalty and the republican has NO loyalty to America only to his party this in my mind makes them very questionable to represent me and their other constituents, as they hold a secret agenda. A republican can not be TRUSTED, they are self serving and traitors.
Until the republicans start calling for the prosecution of the violators of the US Constitution, the Liars and manipulators of the US Treasury and the Congressmen and women and the Us Senates men and women for criminal, ethical and Constitutional violations I shall not listen nor ever trust a republican.
When they use siblings with no experience no back ground and try to make every moron that is a criminal a martyr they have no credibility.
using this dim wit anal I must protect my Spineless, Gutless, Coward of a father who is also a TRAITOR to this Country, she can say nothing except to inform me when is she and the republicans planning their attack on this country to provide proof to their statements.
I have stated before, that if we are attacked again - I would be looking inside this Country for the perpetrators. The Chaney rallying cry is that Obama cannot keep us safe and can you imagine how he would gloat if an attack should come to pass.
As an aside, I was totally against the Iraq War (The Pearl Harbor that the signers of the PNAC wanted so desperately - even before 9/11)and I am totally against this unwinnable War in Afghanistan.
Can someone tell me exactly what is meant by "We have to stay there until the "Job" is done. What exactly is the "Job" and will we sacrifice another 4,000 troops. The Country is corrupt and we cannot change it!
I don't know, if you compare this with the times all the other former State Department officials are given air time...
Oh, wait...
Nevermind.
I don't understand why this babbling creepy woman is on tv so mucy. He ugly face and annoying voice and more that I can bear. I don't know how people can cope with her, I have to turn the channel every time her repulsive face and whiney voice come up...
What does Lizard bring to the table? Her claim to fame is telling everybody that torture is not torture. That's it.
... worm-and-maggot-infested fruit didn't fall far from the tree, did it?
What a wretched wench. A chip off the old cyborg.
BID
New Ad From Cheney's 'Keep America Safe' Attacks MSNBC Hosts as 'Afraid' to Debate Her
___________________________________________________________
Why, she gonna cry?
and unborn child ( dont know if it was lizzie) to stay outta Vietnam and he's hiding behind her now.
should debate her.
I think Liz and her team took this satire video about rebranding the GOP too seriously:
http://******/fxv3G
Should be renamed, "Keep America Afraid....and Stupid"......
so we can fleece them.
Cheney and Bush had their chance to keep America safe,
that would have been in Aug 2001..."Bin-Laden determined to strike America" memo....
THEY BLEW IT!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OUTYQz9LnI&fe...
They've never served America, only themselves.
They have "other priorities".
out or something? She's just trying to be Ann Coulter Jr to get in on the obtrusive rhetoric gravy train
PRISON TERMS !
All the shows are looking to improve their ratings and sex sells. Why interview the daughter of darkness when you can line up some real eyeball magnets like Meghan McCain and her famous twittered ta-tas?
What the hell are they talking about?Norah O'donnell destroyed cheney's lame torture talking points a few months back.
Right, so the MSNBC crew have been accused of running scared of Miss Cheney. They are accused of being cowards. Well, I am an evidence-based person so I want to show you the evidence for whether Chris Matthews, Ed Schultz and Keith Olbermann are cowards or not...
First of all, Chris Matthews has had dozens of conservatives on his show. It is simply ridiculous to suggest otherwise. In fact, some of the most entertaining Youtube videos are when Tweety kicks the teeth out of all sort of conservative figures. Search for his confrontations with the following examples for ample evidence of his actual GLEE in confronting wingnuts: Pat Buchanan, Rep. John Campbell, Ari Fleischer, Eric Cantor, Michelle Malkin. So, I think we can dismiss the idea that Chris is a coward right now. End of debate.
Ed Schultz - well, to accuse Ed of being a coward is a bit rich. He may be many things - loud, aggressive, a bull in a china shop of upset Republicans - but a coward is not one of them! Remember his throw down to Rush Limbaugh to come and debate him? He issued it live on air and Rush ran/slithered scared. Now that's a coward! Additionally, Ed has all sorts of oppositional voices on his show on a daily basis. Similarly, he goes on shows like Bill O'Reilly and other shows when the time is right. Indeed, if you go Youtube and type in "Ed Schultz vs", you will find plenty of examples of Ed debating rightwing figures far more effective and tricky than Little Miss Cheney could ever claim to be. So the idea that he is a coward is both laughable and a lie. Next...
However, this is where the problem occurs...
As I am an evidence-based individual, I can simply not ignore the fact that Keith Olbermann has seemingly never once debated a rightwinger on his show. Not that I can find anyway. This is troubling.
To my friends on the left who will rush to defend Keith, don't get me wrong - I value Keith and his commentary. I just don't like how he never has any dissenting voices on his show. I believe in confrontation of lies head on. I would love someone to explain the Keith situation to me. In fact, his apparent refusal to debate any rightwingers is so total that when the ferocious and extremely effective debater (and personal hero of mine), Lawrence O'Donnell sits in for Keith, even he is seemingly neutered from having anyone from the other side on, presumably lest it set a precedent that Keith must deal with upon his return. This to me is a sign of weakness which leaves you vulnerable to the accusations of cowardice by the other side. Be that as it may though, I cannot find any counter evidence to suggest Keith is anything other than running scared. Why am I wrong (and, trust me, I am happy to be proven wrong here)? Remember - evidence, not rethoric.
Also, despite her not being mentioned by Little Miss Cheney, Rachel Maddow is also worth mentioning here. Rachel has debated all sorts of figures from the right and she clearly is not afraid of them (and, as the original article on this issue points out, Rachel has challenged Little Miss Cheney to come on her show to debate numerous times). Rachel is very effective in debate and is a credit to MSNBC. Anyone from the right reading this, just go to Youtube for ample evidence of this. Three examples of rightwingers Rachel has debated on her show that you can find easily on YT: Rim Phillips, Pat Buchanan, Tom Ridge.
That's the reality of the situation. Something Blonde Cheney Jnr clearly isn't acquainted with.
T
Bonus link: Lawrence O'Donnell smacks down Cheney Jnr in debate.
The press does this country a great disservice when they give credibility to ppl like this.
What makes me angry is they have the audacity to show their faces after what they have done to this country…have you no shame???
Why do we put up with this s***t ????
Be afraid Liz, be very afraid…
You and dear old dad are afraid, afraid of the truth .
You're not fooling anyone.
You are afraid (that evil dad of yours)will be exposed for the crimes he has committed- He should be behind bars thats where he belongs…….
You can stuff it!!
This is how it is so easy for a government to be overtaken by tyrants.
"If you lie, lie big, for a little of even the most outrageous lie will stick if you press it hard enough. Never hesitate, never qualify, never concede a shred of validity or even decency to the other side. Attack, attack, attack!" - Adolf Hitler
Liz Chuh is protecting her baby from growing up the grandkid of America's first convicted war criminal. She knows it is actually possible, because she knows what went on. She knows too much as a matter of fact. Who is she to have been so heavily included anyway? That's another war crime.
Why does this woman in her 40s walk around with a baby in her arms like some young thing just starting out in life? It looks so silly! Where'd she get that baby, and why doesn't it grow?
Olbermann doesn't debate on his show because that's not the format. His show is all commentary, information, humor, and interviews with people hand-picked to back that all up. I only ever started watching him because there IS no yelling, no invites issued to the sociopathic scum I see everywhere else (Ron Christie et al), the ICK that makes me bust my shin scrambling for the remote control. I like how when you watch Countdown, you know the guests on the show are going to be allowed to finish what they're saying, every time. I love the good manners and the funniness of Olbermann. The Lou Dobbs voice makes me laugh until I hurt! Even when Olby makes me really mad, which he has a couple of times, I go back.
Thanks for the response Carly. And I appreciate your points. However, I can't think of any other show that is so engaged in making fun and scoring political points against opponents (point I almost 100% have found myself in agreement by the way), and yet which does not invite those same people on to put forth their point of view. If you were discussing the history of watercolour painting or perhaps French tapestries, I would perhaps understand the purist "everyone must agree" approach, but as Keith is not doing this and is, in fact, commenting on current affairs, I don't think the sort of format that he follows (and of which you approve) is appropriate or even healthy. After all, Rachel has amply demonstrated that you can debate the opposition and yet remain polite and pleasant (and, in doing so, manage to drag at least some of them up to your level).
There is a deeper and more insidious point here however and that is, the other danger that presenting from inside of a perpetually protected bubble is that you start to become insulated from oppostion. You start to revile the very sight of those you disagree with and so you, as David Niewert has so eloquently and accurately discussed at length elsewhere, simply eliminate them from your world. You simply dismiss them out of hand and refuse to engage with them on any level, thereby leading to a permanent sense of entrenched alienation and spite. Now, based on the level of vitriol and insanity emanating from Republican quarters these days, this is surely a might tempting idea. However, it is not a good idea under any circumstances to shrink away from the opposition and to literally refuse to engage with them. I wish to engage with the opposition at all times and head on - not only in order to disabuse them of their ridiculous ideas and lies but also to ensure that the excercise of democracy is not merely reduced to a consumer choice of choosing a TV program in which you are guaranteed to be insulated from those political points of view you find upsetting. That is not how the big show works, regardless of how irritating, nonsensical or downright disgusting the so-called "opposition" increasingly appears to be.
As the great dissenting journalist, John Pilger, says, if you are in the business of dishing criticism out, you should then expect to receive it. I, for one, would hope that Keith would step up to the plate and get stuck in.
The practice of democracy and debate is almost as important as the outcome of those debates after all. Please consider that point. :)
Which format would you go with? Who would moderate?
You wouldn't last 30 seconds in a real debate with a sportscaster.
Now if you mean what you're used to, where you hold forth
for 5 minutesuntil it's time for an ad, and the talking head nods in agreement at every treasured word that issues forth from your piehole, treating you with such reverence they are totally unaware of what it is you are saying ("Dad LOVES kittens. He thinks they're delicious!"), you would be also very disappointed with an outfit other than FOX.Outside of FOX they all know the Dick eats kittens for breakfast, and they are not impressed with your lineage. In fact, it's probably disgusting to them, as it is to every thinking human being, that your daddy knocked up your mommy to avoid the draft yet again...
http://bilia.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/geor...
Rachael would have her bawling like Beck.
Ed would give it his best shot.
Matthews would.... Oh, who the hell knows or cares what Tweety would do. He'll go after a couple nameless, under-educated tea-baggers, but let Tom Delay come on and spin to his heart's content.
Tweety would dub her Joan of Arc right to her face. After the commercials, he would remind us all that Liz Cheney knows her stuff and goes to Iraq "every few months" like he did over Libndsay Graham, who DOES NOT go to Iraq every few months, who went to Iraq with his doddering friend McSame and cheated Iraqi merchants out of rugs by only paying a dollar and bragged in a toe-dancer's drawl about it, and had cover of like 200 choppers overhead the whole time, costing us taxpapers more $$$$$$ than we can picture in our heads. That was Lindsay Graham, wasn't it?
"Cheney & BUSHIE" are the ones afraid (of PROSECUTION).
Hey, I'll go on these shows any day of the week and debate Liz Cheney. But they don't want me. Why?
What are they afraid of?
and like most bullies she wouldn't show up on any of their shows even if they invited her personally.
It's show business for her and her ilk.
Liz isn't "Dick's" first surrogate. Remember how he sent wifey onto The Daily Show since he wouldn't dare appear anywhere other than Fox?
Who's the coward in this picture?
They're claiming that the MSNBC hosts are afraid of her, and yet there are very few hosts on MSNBC that Liz Cheney will appear with. Norah O'Donnell, Morning Joe, Andrea Mitchell... in fact, on that last one, Liz Cheney openly claimed that Mitchell was not fair because at the end of the interview, she asked Cheney to come back after they had some time to fact check her claims...! And, if memory serves me correctly, Cheney hasn't been back since!
Something else that's important to note: David Shuster's constantly requested an interview with Liz Cheney, and has been rebuffed every single time. I think the only time Cheney ever reached out to him was to say that his portrayal of her in Hypocrisy Watch was wrong... but she ignored Shuster when he stood his ground on that claim and asked, on-air, for an interview so Cheney could try to defend her comments or correct the record.
Now, why is Liz Cheney so afraid of David Shuster?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8UuX94Gi4ME
Since watching Norah O'Donnel do this, I can't look at her without just about needing to black out.
Shouldn't the organization be called Keep the Cheney's profits from the military industrial complex safe?
Liz, Meg, and the Bush twin. Do you actually have to be related to someone or just have the same last name as a Republican politician to become a pundit for national news?
What are her qualifications again? Oh - that's right - she doesn't have any. Maybe this is "why" Keith, Ed, etc., don't bother with her.
Did she mention Rachel -- So - she's afraid of Rachel? Rachel would dice and slice her so fast she wouldn't know what hit her.
*
... Barf.
*
I'm personally glad Keith Olbermann doesn't invite right-wingers on his show. They have a whole network on Fox. If you want to hear what the right-wing thinks just turn to Fox, it's that easy. There is nothing to debate with the other side, their regressive ideology is wrong period. I don't want Keith changing his format of his show and turning into Chris Matthews or the Ed Shultz show for the sake of having on right-wingers to spew. Thank God for the ideological purity of Keith's show. Rachel can have on right-wingers if she wants to.
The "ideological purity" of a tv show sponsored by adverts and run by a large corporation? Hmmm... I like Keith - though I disagree with you on the issue of whether or not he should have opposition on - but I wouldn't get too excited about the implications of what you say...
I come from Ireland but I lived in England for many years. I am used to shows in which you have a host who you actually don't know his political allegiances (for the most part). Then he gets members from all sides of the debate to come on and put forth their points of view on the subjects of the day and battle it out. That way all of the people can see all of the points of view all at once. After all, not everyone is as "ideologically pure" as Keith or Bill O'Reilly's viewers may be. Maybe they aren't interested in the predictability of either Fox or MSNBC and instead wish for something less predictable and less loaded.
In fact, those shows - on the BBC - seemed to work pretty damn well. The news over here, with some honourable exceptions in print and online (The Nation, Salon etc) is frankly ridiculous.
Even though I agree with much that Keith says, watching his show comes across to me as being like a consumer choice: you know what you will get (opinions you agree with) and you know what you won't get (opinions that promote cognitive dissonance). And so you choose Keith for an evening of righteous indignation at the stupidity of the Republicans (and boy are they dumb!) But, what this does to the idea of news gathering is another issue. The sale of opinions is rapidly replacing journalism (of the type I grew up watching on the BBC).
Talking points, opinions and quoting from reports is no substitute for investigative journalism. Yet it is clearly the standard to which cable news is sinking.
But here the is thing so many on the left here don't get: Rupert Murdoch loves MSNBC. Again, he LOVES MSNBC. He loves the decline of real journalism and he loves it's replacement by the talking head syndrome. Murdoch is a clever snake because he knows that, if you tweak the right populist and/or ideological buttons, you will play with people's emotions. Emotion leads to sales. He did it first with the Sun newspaper in Britain. He bought up that tabloid and that used it as a platform to methodically drag the rest of his competitors down to his level. He turned it into a scandal sheet and in doing so (for whatever dark reasons reside in the public design), the sales sky rocketed. Then the competitor newspapers, including the once progressive and pioneering Daily Mirror newspaper, followed suit. British journalism has never recovered (despite some honourable exceptions remaining, such as certain journalistic standards being upheld by the not perfect but still worthy BBC).
So it goes with America - Murdoch kicks off Fox with a rightwing agenda to be sure. But, behind the ideological garnish, his real agenda has always remained the same - to sell products, to make money, to spread his influence. And I am not suggesting he is some conspiracy mastermind behind all that goes on in the world: indeed, he is just one of many capitalist scumbags who realised the power of emotion and how it could be used to manipulate the public into docile behaviour. He was the pioneer - but corporations will always follow the patterns of lucrative pioneers and drive their idea into the collective head. That is his legacy - the rape of journalism and the (willing) information-enslavement of large swathes of the population.
The pattern was simple in England and so it proved to be in the US - he launches Fox and it makes waves. Outrage ensues from the left and confusion from the so-called moderates. And yet, despite this outrage, similar broadcasting styles and techniques soon started to spread across the land. Talking heads and "values based" opinion started to take precedence over the cold, steely facts. And so we have arrived at a position where otherwise intelligent people are having "ideologically pure" tv shows beamed into their homes as a consumer choice, in which people are assured that they know precisely which points of view and what types of information they are going to consume. Gone is the notion of having your points of view challenged or questioned. Instead, we have point-men to tell us how right and how decent we are. The opposition have the same.
And Rupert Murdoch and his ilk? They have the power, the money and the influence. They have won. They have turned journalism into a game. A lifestyle choice that consumers can pick and choose from. A religion that you pick from a catalogue and which soothes your soul and then you dial your pledge in and pray you won't get fooled again.
That is exactly what he wanted. We gave it to him.
The right has been exposed, there Lobbying and Astro-Turf-fed/fake grass roots, there tactic of infiltrating Town Halls didn't work, there tactic (on going) attack everything and everything Obama, the tactic of fixed fox, (holly owned arm of the GOP/RNC) fact checking every Democrat and but letting every Conservative Republican and Surrogate, Analyst and Republican Strategist run on and off at the mouth, then posing these frivolous, falsehoods and real questions of interest, all have failed and been exposed.
There’s more here than supposed fear. Now the RIGHT want to come muddy the successful few, fact checked, left leaning shows… why, because they have been effective in turning back and around all the Right’s efforts to fear monger, lie about the factual truths, that have been exposed and shared with the viewers and when Obama refused to come on fixed fox, they knew why, there tactics have and had failed miserably.
They also knew, they lost the ability to emasculate the President with their brand of losse factless attacks, that gone they had to cross, no-mans land in the face of factual fire.
In Football, your Defense, or your Offences wants to get on the others side of ball in the middle of your play and disrupt, your Plan/Play and if you execute your Offense and Defense, you will be successful, the Right Dick, Hannity, Beck, all the Astro Lobbying, fixed fox, Liz (family business) Cheney and the Republican Congress combined, want on that successful turf, to spread they false information INTO the factual, truthful dissimination of information.
This is a short explanation of the oppositions, advance with this lie on TV, Liz has been ask on each show and the shows host have not called her out, she’ll be called out and exposed for her million$ lie, this is going to be good.
Liz lives in stark fear of Rachel Maddow and John Stewart and Keith would decimate her as well, Chris would enjoy asking question like Tim Russert did and rolling the Tape and Ed would just disembowel her, but be it known.
They all would EAT HER HAMBERS AND DRINK HER MILK SHAKES.
Keep AmuriKa safe from Cheney.
excuse me while i puke..
I would love to see Rachel go one on one with her. Why didn't she take on Rachel-perhaps it is she that is afraid. Her arguments are so weak, even Tweety could demolish her. Ed, and Keith would have no problem either, although Rachel would be my choice. Rachel prepares for her interviews like no one else on TV.
about the danger we're in is like listening to Jack the Ripper's daughter give advice about the danger of talking to strangers.
Makes me miss the Bush girls - at least they partied. Whatever it is that gives Liz Cheney a good time, I don't want to know about.
does go on any of these shows , for security reasons please let KBR wire her mic and ear plug , please , please ! .
Panicky? Afraid of what?
Oh never mind. Go **ck yourself cheney!
of her to presume that she has a stature or an opinion worthy of debate, especially since her sole reason to being is to keep her father our of jail.
wouldn't DARE go on the air with Rachel Maddow.
I don't think Olbermann would waste any time even having her on.
(Of course, that would probably be hilarious...)
Why even waste five seconds with these clowns?
They got FuckNews...what else do they need?
Oh....perhaps PEOPLE WHO AREN'T DROOLING IDIOTS?
Maybe.
Run around saying all kinds of easily disprovable lies and when your critics call you on it, ignore their valid points, keep making your talking points and then accuse your critics of being cowards not willing to debate you. If any do challenge you to a debate, ignore them or pretend you never heard the challenge and keep calling them cowards.
This woman has the same amount of personal courage as her cowardly daddy, a man who had her just so he did not have to go to war, her whole existance is based on a cowards motivation.
just saying?
it has me gnashing my teeth at the shallow ploys people will fall for. Didn't we just get done with an election cycle? Is this ever going to end? Are we now at a point in which every day sparks election politics over news, news commentators, and elected officials? Why not advertise for movies that way as well? If this is the future of American popular culture, please count me out.
Alright dragon puss pull your head out from daddy's ass and go on MSNBC. I see she didnt mention Rachel Maddow or Lawerence Odonnell. What is this delusional vermon afraid of? She is so smart and brave going on shows that never challenge her. Bring it and bring daddy too. I dont recall him having the balls to go MSNBC either
Lizard Cheney is proof that sometimes abortion is a good thing .
She barely let James Carville get a word in. Once was enough for me. Don't flatter yourself Liz.
Didn't Daddums do enough war profiteering while he was pres-- er, vice president to keep his spawn and her spawn wallowing in enough dough to rule the world by the next generation?
Come on, terrorists. Help this family out.
to seeing Rachel kick her ass around the block.
What's pathetic, is all the little Foxbots and Rushons will see that and say "See MSNBC is scurred". Not one of them is aware that Liz and Dick have a standing invite to appear on Rachel's show. They will never go on because they're not going to be able to spout their far right talking points unchallenged. Look what Rachel did to Tim Phillips last week. He turned gray by the end. She estimates only 1 in 10 repubs agree to go on her show although she asks daily. No one is more prepared for an interview than this woman. Maybe Poppy should go debate the female half of the "sick puppies" too. Rachel will have him cowering in a corner by the end and she'll do it with facts. And at the end she'll thank him for being a good sport...lol!
Login or Register to post comments.