Any Schultz listeners hear Jay Rockefeller talking about Iran's WMD?

[KoKo]

talking about how Iran was our #1 Terrorist Threat for training or harboring or maybe both...plus the nukes and oil and stabilization.? He said they were more of a threat than North Korea! He recited it all without emotion, like he was reading from a well rehearsed Talking Point. That's what was even more disturbing.

I thought I was listening to Condi or Cheney before we invaded Iraq or a PNAC'er. What's wrong with him. Why help the Bushies? I can't understand why Rockefeller would do that. Yes, I know about the Rockefellers but still what does this mean for Dem support of Bush or Israel starting something with Iran? How do the rest of our Democrats feel about this. Why keep talking this up?

I just can't see that something wouldn't blow here if we get involved with Iran and I don't know how we have the money or resources to do it unless the Saudi's give us the bucks. And why would they? I don't see Russia chipping in because they do business with Iran. Unless Bush and Pooty Poot have cooked up some deal..even then it makes no logical sense. :grr:

[PROGRESSIVE1]

1. I heard that!

:wtf:?

:argh:

[Supersedeas]

2. Any linkies to his discussion???

[KoKo]

3. I think he has a transcript but it won't be out until later. He really

didn't discuss it. He just let Rockefeller say his thing and then Rockefeller left. I turned it off so I don't know if Schultz commented about it, afterwards or just let the statement stand for what it was.

[blondeatlast]

6. He didn't comment at all. NONE. Break for a commercial,

then talk about the Super Bowl.

No kidding.

:puke:

[KoKo]

9. You know though....maybe he was as shocked as some of us were and

it was better to let the comment stand and "move on."

I think the best of Schultz is that he doesn't comment sometimes..because it draws the "wingers" in. The Limbaugh folks would like nothing better than to have Schultz start to froth at the mouth over that comment and confront Rockefeller about "BUSH LIED ABOUT WMD..AND YOU ARE LEADING US DOWN THE SAME ROAD???"

That Schultz didn't take the "Bait" might mean that more Limbaugh types give him "respect." (the old Mafia term..:D)

Look...I wish Schultz had pummeled Rockefeller to the ropes...but I know that he is supposed to be the "new Rush." So...I give him a pass on this. And, I know that Franken wouldn't have gotten "in Jay's face about this either."

BUT...OMG...what the HELL IS WRONG WITH ROCKEFELLER! He's the one the BLAME lies on...NOT those who interview him...IMHO..anyway..:shrug:

[blondeatlast]

12. I actually enjoy Ed most of the time. You make an interesting point.

I do recall he made a sort of "huh?" before they broke.

I found it interesting enough to remember it.

Schultz has the best chance of swaying r leaning fence-sitters. He speaks their language.

[On the Road]

4. Just For Once,

I would hope that partisanship does NOT stop at the shore. I just can't believe that people are buying into the "Iranian peril."

[blondeatlast]

5. Yes, I heard it. It made me ill and angry.

If I wanted to listen to RW spin, I have plenty of stations to choose from.

[blondeatlast]

7. The most left thing Rockefeller said is that we'd better be damn sure

of our intelligence. :eyes:

Uh, thanks, I needed you to take up time on the only progressive radio in Phoenix to tell me that.

[KoKo]

10. I thought he even "copped" on that point.. saying it wan't so good

with Iraq...but you did have to take it all into consideration...or some such blather...that, too, was really weird. I'm laying this on Rockefeller's doorstep not Schults...here.

If Rockefeller is PNAC then by Golly we should know this...but in the end it's his voters from WVA who make the decision. But, Rockefeller is NO BYRD...and Rockefeller doesn't seem to support Byrd...which from that small state he SHOULD!!!!!

[JohnOneillsMemory]

8. Lots of Dems want the same oil the neocons are going for, no surprise.

And they are paving the way in public opinion in the good cop/bad cop dance of 'national interest.'

Permanent war until we are on solar or free energy, folks. Get used to it.

[KoKo]

11. Well, maybe at least we are getting to the point of "OUTING" where

the "Lieberman Dems stand against the "Progressive Dems." How are we supposed to know? WE are just CITIZENS? :-(

[springhill]

13. I agree......

They pretend to disagree, all the while making it possible to occur.