Hillary supporter Hilary Rosen belittles Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry, and Dems on SFRC on MSNBC Tucker

[beachmom]

This person, who is given the role as "Democrat" on Tucker Carlson does not know how to defend Democrats. Read this transcript which is just shameful. Somebody get this woman OFF TV, or teach her how you stand up for our values and our Dems:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17982233

CARLSON: President Bush scolded House Speaker Nancy Pelosi this week for her freelance diplomatic trip to Syria. But it didn‘t take Bush to make Pelosi look bad. She did that herself.

Mrs. Pelosi appears to have misstated Israel‘s position on Syria so badly that the Israeli government had to correct officially and in public.

Ooh, embarrassing.

Here to talk about Pelosi‘s adventure in Middle East diplomacy, we welcome MSNBC political analyst and Democratic strategist Hilary Rosen, and writer of “The Sleuth” at WashingtonPost.com, Mary Ann Akers.

Welcome to you both.

Amazing. Here—you know, here—I can‘t resist. Here is “The Washington Post” editorial on Nancy Pelosi. Now, “The Washington Post,” for those who don‘t live here, don‘t read it, it‘s a pretty liberal paper. I think it‘s sensible. It‘s not—you know, it‘s not a Daily Kos. But it‘s liberal, yes.

(CROSSTALK)

CARLSON: Here is what they say.

(LAUGHTER)

CARLSON: Jump right all over her.

They say: “Any diplomat with any knowledge of the region could have told her Mrs. Pelosi that Mr. Assad,” the president of Syria, “is a corrupt thug, whose overriding priority at the moment is not peace with Israel, but heading off U.N. charges that he orchestrated the murder of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. The really striking development here is the attempt by a Democratic congressional leader to substitute her own foreign policy for that of a sitting president.”

Now, one point at a time. Hilary, doesn‘t this make her kind of look like a lightweight?

HILARY ROSEN, NBC ANALYST: It wasn‘t Nancy Pelosi‘s finest moment.

(LAUGHTER)

Oh, isn't that funny, laughing at OUR Democratic House Speaker. Gee what's next? Oh, yes, let's make fun of Democrats of the SFRC and our last nominee, John Kerry:

CARLSON: President Bush yesterday appointed St. Louis businessman Sam Fox to be U.S. ambassador to Belgium. It has been decades since Belgium was a key player on the international scene. That‘s not counting, of course, that country‘s excellent waffles, beers and particularly French Fries.

The rub is that Mr. Fox gave a lot of money to see Mr. Bush reelected in 2004 and some of that money helped finance the so-called Swift Boat ads, aimed at Democratic nominee John Kerry. Well Congress was prepared to reject Mr. Fox‘s appointment on those grounds. So President Bush waited for a recess and sneaked Fox into the key position of ambassador to Belgium. Will there be any price to pay for that move?

Back to discuss it, MSNBC political analyst Hillary Rosen and writer of “The Sleuth” on WashingtonPost.com, Mary Ann Akers. Mary Ann, tell me if I‘m missing something. I don‘t think anybody has shown that Fox is somehow not equipped to be ambassador to Belgium, whatever qualifies you for that job, apart from giving money. The opposition to Fox seems to be based entirely upon his contributions to the Swift Boat ads.

AKERS: Absolutely. That was the initial opposition, because he give 50,000 dollars to the Swift Boat ads to the campaign that helped doom Kerry‘s presidential ambitions in 2004. So democrats on the Foreign Relations Committee rallied around John Kerry. They all decided they would vote against him. Bush withdrew his nomination just about 45 minutes before the committee sat down to vote on him.

So the nomination was withdrawn. The reason Democrats are so upset right now: one, they would be upset if Bush were going to use a recess appointment, no matter what. They are doubly upset, and they say it is illegal what Bush is doing because the nomination was withdrawn. In other words, it wasn‘t pending. And they are citing law that says it is illegal for the president to do a recess appointment when the nomination is not pending.

CARLSON: Let‘s get back to the core of this. And that debate will continue, there‘s no doubt, Hillary. But it turns out, I guess, and this is the part of the constitution that I‘m not that familiar with, but it‘s unconstitutional to appoint someone ambassador to Belgium if he‘s hurt John Kerry‘s feelings. That is the single criterion here, have you hurt John Kerry‘s feelings.

ROSEN: This is sort of a silly fight for Democrats. You know, Bill Clinton made several recess appointments for people that the Senate wouldn‘t approve for these kinds of important posts. My friend, Jim Hormel, was recess appointed as ambassador to Luxembourg. It‘s a prerogative of the presidency to do these thing things for people. I think it‘s a little disingenuous for them to object.

CARLSON: But can you just say, I don‘t like how you voted in the last campaign? I don‘t like who you supported, and that‘s you‘re not fit because you were my enemy in the last campaign to represent our nation in the all important nation state of Belgium?

ROSEN: Well, I think John Kerry and his colleagues on the committee are perfectly entitled to vote against this guy.

CARLSON: Of course they are. But they usually dress it up. They‘re like, you know, he‘s just unfit. Now they are just like, you know what, he contributed to ads that made us mad.

ROSEN: Well, they didn‘t say that‘s the reason. They said they thought that Belgium was potentially a hot bed of some future—

CARLSON: Belgium deserves better.

AKERS: But they didn‘t hide the fact that they were upset about his role.

(CROSS TALK)

AKERS: The bigger issue is 527 groups, in general, 527 groups, such as Swift Boat Veterans, that don‘t have to disclose their donors, their funding, anything, and that became the big debate in the Foreign Relations Committee. You know, look, you were part of something that was destructive government and politics. Sam Fox said he thought 527s were destructive.

CARLSON: Destructive? It‘s destructive to air your political views on television? It‘s destructive to have political views that the majority doesn‘t agree with. I mean, what the hell does that mean? The Swift Boats were a bunch of Vietnam veterans who had a view about John Kerry that was totally legitimate, and some how it‘s destructive. I know that‘s not your argument. That‘s theirs.

ROSEN: Regardless of—we don‘t have to redebate—

(CROSS TALK)

ROSEN: But they are just ridiculously untrue. But John Kerry would be wise to stick with the folklore that the Swift Votes was an unfair attack on him, and the more he brings up this issue this week, the more people are going to say, you know what guys, stop wining.

So let me get this straight:

1. Democrats are silly to fight this
2. Democrats are being disingenuous fighting this
3. The Swift Boat attacks were ridiculous and untrue BUT
4. It's actually only "folklore" that Kerry was attacked unfairly
5. Oh, stop whining, John Kerry. Suck it up. Just accept every sleezy unqualified nominee that comes your way. Don't be such a cry baby.

Now somebody tell me with a straight face that THIS is the Democrat we want on TV to defend our Democrats and party?

I didn't think so.

On the Fox recess appointment, I thought the DNC really hit it right:

On the same day the Democratic National Committee issued a report chronicling the Bush Administration's consistent pattern of putting partisanship ahead of good government, President Bush did it again. Today, the president put his political party ahead of the American people by using a recess appointment to install Republican political contributor Sam Fox as Ambassador to Belgium.

Fox contributed $50,000 to Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, which was responsible for notoriously brutal and utterly false attack ads smearing Senator John Kerry and his Vietnam crewmates during the 2004 election. In response to Fox's nomination, 11 of Kerry's crewmates sent the Senate Foreign Relations Committee a letter saying that "those who finance smears and lies of combat veterans don't deserve to represent America on the world stage." President Bush withdrew Fox's nomination last week when it became clear he would not survive a vote in the Committee.

"Faced with serious and principled objections over a nominee who funded some of the ugliest attack ads in a generation, President Bush had a choice between honoring the veterans who have served this country by distancing himself from these despicable ads and rewarding the donors who served his political goals," said Democratic National Committee Press Secretary Stacie Paxton. "Sadly, President Bush once again put the interests of his Party ahead of the American people by circumventing the Senate in a clear abuse of his power."

Now let's get some Democrats on the Boob Tube to talk like that.