Jump ahead to the 3:45 mark.  Check out the ABC News/Washington Post “poll” the panel is discussing – Who Americans trust to handle jobs… In October 49% said President Obama and 34% said the “GOP Congress.”  In November the numbers drew even at 40%.  Anyone else see a problem here?

Either the folks at ABC/The Washington Post are so blissfully ignorant that they overlooked the fact that we have a bicameral Legislative Branch or they’re simply helping sell the Obama administration’s narrative that Republicans are somehow stifling this President’s brilliance with their modest control of 1/2 of 1/3 of government.

While I know this sort of thing is anything but “new”; watch how Dowd just accepts it.  It isn’t until Will injects a sense of perspective back into the panel discussion that any of them even flirt with reading the poll’s shortcomings.

“The President needs this committee to fail because he’s already decided he’s going to run against a ‘Republican Congress.’  While he was lecturing in Constitutional Law, he missed that part of Article I that says there’s a Senate also.  The Democrats control that and as Boehner said, they’re holding up a lot of legislation.  If he’s going to run against a “Do-Nothing Congress” it has to do nothing.”

This one stings a little bit…

Remember the Herman Cain “Right of Return“… uhhh… Right of Return??? performance with Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday?  Remember the negotiating with terrorists for the release of prisoners at GITMO misstatement with Wolf Blitzer?  Yeah, this one dropkicks those out of the top spot of Herman Cain gaffes and would probably be threatening to derail his campaign if something else wasn’t already hard at work at accomplishing that objective.

In an interview with Judy Woodruff on PBS’s NewsHour, Herman Cain weighed in on China and the military threat the nation could potentially pose to our country.  (From ACE via Memeorandum)

Skip ahead to the 11:00 mark for the China discussion…

Watch Cain Confident He Can Win Nomination, Says Harassment Claims Are ‘Baseless’ on PBS. See more from PBS NewsHour.

They’ve indicated that they’re trying to develop nuclear capability…?  Really Herman?

There are times where I have to step back from the role of blogger and political enthusiast to ask myself – “Is this really something every candidate should really know?”  Not everyone running for political office has made a lifetime following every news story, so there are times when what can seem like common knowledge is really anything but.

This is not one of those times.

I know Cain supporters will be quick to come to his defense on this, and I’m fairly certain he will issue a statement or give an interview where he explains that his comments were taken out of context.  He may even come out and admit that he didn’t have a clue.  Either way, he will be forgiven and the Cain train will continue plugging along.  I suppose if being open to negotiating with terrorists and never having heard of a fundamental element of Israeli-Palestinian relations doesn’t kill a campaign these days, not knowing China has had nukes for half a century can only make you stronger.

Maybe it’s time to go back to playing the “I don’t have all the information at my disposal” card Mr. Cain?  What’s that old line?  Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and…

—

Some sound advice from The PJ Tattler:

Cain needs to learn to speak more clearly and authoritatively on foreign policy questions than he has so far. No one would have given a second look at that China quote if he hadn’t already shown a disturbing tendency to not know how to answer even the most basic questions about 101-level issues.

Did I miss something here?  Senator Kerry A) thinks the Media is “responsible”; and B) thinks said Media would be acting “responsibly” if they refuse to cover the Tea Party…?  Oh I get it.  Bat-shit crazy.  Next time just say bat-shit crazy.  Thanks.

From RCP: (John Kerry on MSNBC’s Morning Joe)

SEN. JOHN KERRY: “And I have to tell you, I say this to you politely. The media in America has a bigger responsibility than it’s exercising today. The media has got to begin to not give equal time or equal balance to an absolutely absurd notion just because somebody asserts it or simply because somebody says something which everybody knows is not factual.”

“It doesn’t deserve the same credit as a legitimate idea about what you do. And the problem is everything is put into this tit-for-tat equal battle and America is losing any sense of what’s real, of who’s accountable, of who is not accountable, of who’s real, who isn’t, who’s serious, who isn’t?”

Full Interview here…

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Are you ready for a nightly dose of racially-driven political banter?  If you happen to be one of the few desperate souls who happen to watch MSNBC, you’d better be because the Lefty cable network’s about to bring Reverend Al on board.  Mr. Sharpton will fill the 6PM slot according to the New York Times.  Set the DVR’s!!

There’s a very interesting report out from the Sunlight Foundation.  It seems that in spite of widespread attempts to paint News Corp. as a Right-Wing propaganda machine, the “news” empire is decidedly neutral-to-left-leaning at least in terms of it’s financial support for political campaigns.   In fact, President Obama – and not a Republican – is the largest beneficiary of News Corp. political contributions to date.

“President Obama the all-time leading recipient.” Whodathunkit?

“The top recipients from the firm’s political action committee, News America Holdings, in the 2009-10 election cycle were Reps. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Howard Berman (D-Calif.) and Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.).” Whodadreamedit?

I shared this video with you yesterday/this morning which featured Hardball host Chris Matthews playing the role of Supreme D-Bag in the television version D-Bags on Parade in an interview with GOP Freshman Representative Joe Walsh; and now this one has come across my desk from a reader courtesy of Ed Morrissey at Hot Air.

Cantessa Brewer throws out the “We were on the verge of a depression” argument: Brooks disagrees with it; she fires back with “Do you have an economics degree?”; and here’s his response….

Via The Daily Caller (Matt Lewis):

“Sh!#”!!

I thoroughly enjoyed this video for a variety of reasons.  First off, it’s hilarious.  Who doesn’t like seeing a smug little anchor face-plant after questioning a guest’s credentials?  A guest she and/or her producers invited mind you.

Second.  This video illustrates one of the most annoying aspects of debating politics – or anything else for that matter.  When all else fails, play the “what’s your degree in???” card to discredit your opponent/adversary.  While it’s annoying when it comes from someone with ten advanced degrees that’s assuming their education somehow imparts wisdom beyond reproach, it borders on something far more egregious when the person calling upon that strategy is a journalism major that’s an “expert” in nothing this side of journalism.

From Mr. Morrissey:

Brooks actually has three degrees: political science, economics, and law. As a lawyer, Brooks would have been experienced enough not to make Brewer’s mistake in a cross-examination, which is to ask a question without first knowing the answer. Not only that, but Brewer was being flat-out rude as well as foolish; MSNBC invited Brooks to appear to get his perspective on the issues. If their hosts respond by belittling them (whether it backfires or not), what does that say about MSNBC, its management, and the kind of invitations they make?

Since Brewer made an issue out of having an economics degree before engaging in economics debates, she must have a doctorate in the subject herself, right? Not exactly. According to her Wikipedia entry, Brewer has a baccalaureate in broadcast journalism (magna cum laude). Apparently they didn’t teach interviewing skills at Syracuse, or logic either, as a requisite for the degree.

Discussing released administration emails that illustrate the White House’s frustrations with and targeted “assaults” on the Fox News network, conservative columnist and Fox News contributor Charles Krauthammer shared a few thoughts from a psychological perspective on the administration’s revealed Fox complex.

“For the White House to think Brett Baier, one of the most level-headed people I know, is a lunatic, shows the psychosis in the White House.”

“It tells you a bit about the psychology of the people in the White House and how – I won’t use the word deranged – upset they are about Fox News.

The reason is that liberals – particularly liberals in government are very upset that Fox came along and broke the liberal monopoly on the news.  It not only shattered the monopoly, it did so well that it has to be accepted and that’s what the administration attempted to do early on… is to ostracize it.

It does show how much Fox gets under their skin that a new administration would have a strategy against a network.”

CNN has cancelled it’s 8PM program In the Arena hosted by former Governor/prostitution patron Eliot Spitzer.  The news network will move Anderson Cooper’s program from the 10PM slot to fill the “void.”  I’m certain there are a multitude of reasons for the switch, but I can’t help but believe at least one must have been the fact that the show was lame bordering on worthless.  Even the infusion of a token conservative as a co-host was nothing more than a cheap attempt at bringing in new viewers from the Fox News world.  What CNN seemed to overlook was that while some of its viewers may have been able to overlook the scandal that forced him out of public office, many could not overlook the fact that the dude was just downright boring.  CNN says they will use Spitzer in another capacity at the network.  I’d fully expect that show to tank as well.  I am however pulling for Blitzer and Spitzer.

“Rehabilitate his image since resigning from the New York Governorship in disgrace?”  - You think?  Is that what CNN was trying to do by offering him this gig in the first place?  Rehabilitate his image?

The cable news channel also said that Erin Burnett, a new hire from CNBC, would take over the 7 p.m. time slot on weekdays, replacing John King, who will move to 6 p.m. “The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer,” which currently runs from 5 to 7 p.m., will move to 4 to 6 p.m.

Talk about rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic…  Why not gut the whole thing and start over?

Oh, but they have a plan…

The shake-up is intended to stabilize CNN’s television ratings and create better transitions between shows. The only prime time show that is unaffected is “Piers Morgan Tonight,” the 9 p.m. interview show that was introduced six months ago.

Once Mr. Cooper’s newscast shifts to 8 p.m., it will be rebroadcast at 10 p.m., deepening the channel’s dependence on him.

Dare I say… brilliant?

If you’re at all like me, you’ve probably heard just about all the Casey Anthony talk that you can stomach – both because of the media attention the case received and because of the unfortunate outcome.  I’ve managed to stay away from that trial here at RR, but when I came across these comments by Rush Limbaugh; I simply had to share them for some perspective.

Full Audio Clip here….

Say what you want about Michele Bachmann, but you’d be a fool to call her timid, weak, or unwilling to take her message right into the belly of the beast that is the “Main Stream Media” and left-driven outlets.  The woman is fearless in that regard.  Having made a name for herself with appearances on MSNBC as a Congresswoman, she seems determined to take that model a step further as a “candidate” by agreeing to every interview that comes her way.  Tuesday morning, she made an appearance on The Today Show for an interview with host Matt Lauer.  I’ve posted the video below, so I’ll let you watch it for yourself and you can catch me on the other side for my reaction.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Three thoughts:

1.)  What’s with the “angry” business?  Is that going to be the new narrative?  She’s an angry hot-head unfit for the post because she’s got a short fuse and a quick right jab?

2.)  Palinized?  Cute phrase that Lauer was quick to make clear was not of his own creation.  Amy Kremer – and not Matt Lauer fears Bachmann will be “Palinized.”  Lauer wants to know if Bachmann “understands” what that term means.  Nice, right?  He threw it out there because everyone fully expects Bachmann to receive similar treatment to that which has been afforded Gov Palin.  What I don’t think he expected was for Bachmann to blow off Lauer’s attempt to cast her in the role of “poor innocent victim.”  Her answer was a resounding I’m in it to win it… bring it on. The reaction comes in stark contrast to that which has been the protocol response from Gov Palin.  She would have sent a message via Facebook saying “Reload” or something along those lines, and then added whatever media outlet offended her to the no-talk list.  Bachmann appears ready to play the role of fighter in this race and she looks ready to go toe-to-toe with any on-comer.  Notice at the end of the interview she says, “We’ll be back again soon.”  Translation?  Eat it Matt Lauer!!

I have to admit, I’ve not always been in the camp of Bachmann supporters for a number of reasons, but I respect that she’s taking this approach.  It’s a refreshing change.  Let’s just be real about one thing.  Call it sexist, call it chauvinist, call it what you will; but female candidates have a substantial hurdle to overcome in this regard.  Some feel the need – as they do with Gov Palin – to come to her defense when they would not make such an effort for a male candidate.  They turn the candidate or political figure into a “victim” rather than a leader.  They seem to forget that men too face scrutiny by assuming that women must be getting an extra dose of the unnecessary vetting just because they’re women.  Bachmann appears to be having none of that, and I commend her for it.  No one wants to vote for a victim – real, perceived, or otherwise.

3.)  At what point does Sarah Palin get in this race or simply go away for a while?  Her surfacing today in Iowa means a day full of Palin questions for Bachmann and the rest of the field.  The Bachmann team was smart to move the show to New Hampshire for the day to avoid the Mitt Romney overshadowing that Palin’s arrival will surely bring, but if Palin is not to be a candidate in this race, doesn’t she owe it to the rest of the field – and her Party – to step aside for a while?  If Bachmann is to emerge as a legitimate contender with any hope of winning the general election should she win the primary, she is going to need Sarah Palin’s assistance to make the Sarah Palin comparisons go away.  And the best thing Sarah Palin could do to further that end would be to simply go away; at least for a while.