Debbie Wasserman Schultz Guts David Gregory’s GOP Cheerleading On Meet The Press

[babylonsister]

http://www.politicususa.com/2014/04/20/debbie-wasserman-schultz-guts-david-gregorys-gop-cheerleading-meet-press.html

Debbie Wasserman Schultz Guts David Gregory’s GOP Cheerleading On Meet The Press
By: Jason Easley
Sunday, April, 20th, 2014, 12:24 pm



David Gregory’s endless cheerleading for Republicans was gutted with a dose of reality from DNC Chair Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) on Meet The Press today.

Video @ link~

Transcript:

DAVID GREGORY: We’ve been talking about health care, and here’s the challenge. The president’s out there making the case that, “Run on this. Make the argument. Accuse the Republicans of trying to take this away.” But you have vulnerable Democrats who are saying something else. They’re basically saying, “The law is flawed and we should fix it.”

This is Jeanne Shaheen in a radio news interview in New Hampshire. She said, in part, the following: “I think there are important things about the Affordable Care Act that are working, and working very well. I think we need to fix the things that are not working, and that’s what I’m committed to. I would have designed it differently if I had been designing it; unfortunately I wasn’t the person who was writing the law. I think hindsight is always 20/20. You always know that you could have done better.” To me, that’s not a ringing endorsement to get people out there to vote.

REP. DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: Well, that’s Legislation 101. I mean, that is how we have handled laws and their evolution throughout American history. The president is right, and Jeanne Shaheen is right. We have a law that is working: 8 million people have gained health care coverage as a result of signing up for the Affordable Care Act plans. 129 people with pre-existing conditions no longer have to be worried about being dropped or denied coverage; I’m one of them, as a breast cancer survivor. You have millions of seniors who are paying lower costs on their prescription drugs.

And these are the things that Republicans are obsessed with taking away, and focused on doing everything they can to block President Obama at every turn, even if it means hurting the middle class. While, at the same time, you have our candidates, our incumbents, like Jeanne Shaheen, like Mary Landrieu, who understand that this is a law that’s working for millions of people. And as we discover there are problems, we should work together–

DAVID GREGORY: But you’re making an argument–

REP. DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: –to solve those problems.

DAVID GREGORY: –on the merits, as the president is doing. But what you’ve got is something that’s opaque, as David Shribman was saying, the publisher in Pittsburgh. A lot of people simply don’t understand it, and they don’t understand fully what the impact is going to be. Jonathan Martin, writing in The New York Times this morning, writes this: “Democrats could ultimately see some political benefit from the law. But in this midterm election, they’re confronting a vexing reality: Many of those helped by the health care law, notably young people and minorities, are the least likely to cast votes that could preserve it.

“Even though millions have gained health insurance and millions more will benefit from some of its people, provisions, quote, ‘The angry opponents are more mobilized than the beneficiaries,’ said David Axelrod, long-time advisor to Mr. Obama.” Midterm fall off, sixth year of his presidency: This has got to be an urgent issue for you, as the chair of the party, making sure Democrats get out and vote, who are excited about this law.

REP. DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: Well, there are millions of people who understand the benefits of the health care law, particularly women who I’ve spoken to who are breast cancer patients, who no longer have to choose between the chemotherapy or the radiation.

DAVID GREGORY: You’re arguing the merits, Chairman–

REP. DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: No, I’m–

DAVID GREGORY: –which I understand. But do you not have a turnout problem that you’re worried about?

REP. DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: Every election it is critical that we turn out vote out. And I would, and will, match up ground game and our turnout operation, which ran circles around the Republicans in 2012 and in 2008, any day of the week. We have senators across this country, House members– there’s 14 open seats in the House, 11 of which Democrats have an advantage; only three of which you would lean more to the G.O.P. in terms of advantage.

You have the Republican Party who is strangled by the Tea Party. They are weighed down by Republican primaries in which the Tea Party candidates are the likely winners. And we have countless elections now that Democrats have won because the Republicans have nominated extremists that their voters reject.

DAVID GREGORY: Do you–

REP. DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: And that’s the advantage we will have going into this election.

DAVID GREGORY: Right. But do you have an historic disadvantage? Because a president in his second term, in midterms, historically has a difficult time. You have a president with a low approval rating. And, let’s be honest, you have vulnerable Democrats who are, in effect, running against this White House.

David Gregory repeatedly told Rep. Wasserman Schultz that he wasn’t interested in facts, or the merits as he called them. Gregory made it clear that he was only interested in pushing the Republican fantasy that Democrats are doomed because of Obamacare.

Wasserman-Schultz put him in his place by explaining reality. Millions of people do understand the ACA, because they now have health insurance, or they aren’t getting dropped because they have a preexisting condition. As far as the 2014 electoral map is concerned, Democratic Senate incumbents are leading in places like Arkansas and Louisiana, and they could easily pick up two more seats in Kentucky and Georgia.

The sleaziest part of the whole segment was Gregory’s quoting of a radio interview with Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) from nearly 4 MONTHS AGO. To David Gregory, the 8 million signups never happened. The increasing public approval of the ACA isn’t real. Nobody cares about how the ACA is helping people.

This kind of lazy one sided interviewing is what has made Meet The Press unwatchable. There is a reason why Meet The Press has sunk to third place in the Sunday show ratings, and that reason’s name is David Gregory.

[sheshe2]

1. Good old David Gregory...

You can always count on him to be the GOP's water boy!

[Cha]

23. Yes, that's a given, she.. but at what point will nbc change to show's title to

"Meet the goPropaganda"?!.. starring david Gregory as head gopropagandist?

This is from 2009!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6321335

[sheshe2]

25. He is indeed a media whore, Cha

As you point out, he has been for years. I always hated that man!

[liberalmike27]

37. Too me a While

Everyone told me "I don't watch that anymore." Finally one day Gregory got so bad, I just took it off the DVR, and stopped watching it. He had become so obviously right-wing, 4/5 guests were usually right-wing, the Democrats were often right-of-center, even the more right-of-center than the Democrats in general.

I had had enough, and I stopped.

[roguevalley]

54. NBC is having a psychologist interview his family and friends about him:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/21/nbc-news-david-gregory_n_5184924.html

[sheshe2]

55. Thanks for the link...

he is indeed in need of a psych evaluation!

Begone David Gregory!

[NYtoBush-Drop Dead]

57. This is why NBC is having psyche evaluations of this clown...

IF NBC wants to get out of the toilet, they should hire someone who possesses critical thinking. Like Tim Russert did.

[Boomerproud]

2. David Gregory, ask your Republican guests what their answer is to the health care crisis.

You never do. You never will because they do not have a solution. Go dance with Rove, Gregory.

[Dawson Leery]

3. Dances with Rove strikes again.

[badgolfer]

4. Gregory

She should have asked him if he watches Fox News all day and night.

[spanone]

5. david gregory is a partisan in a job that should be neutral. shame on nbc.

i used to watch this show in anticipation of a balanced debate. i no longer watch.

democratic guests have to get past the host to make their points. shameless.

[lsewpershad]

13. Every time the dick

sorry the David is on I switch channel or turn off the sound.

[DallasNE]

6. For Over A Month I Have Been Saying "Watch The South"

And here the article talks about the Democrat leading in Arkansas and Louisiana with good shots in Kentucky and Georgia. I might add North Carolina to that list.

But Gregory did bring up one good point and that is how may voters are prepared to vote against their own self interest. Too many of those are doing it because a black man is sitting in the Whitehouse. And it is not just over the issue of the Affordable Care Act as Gregory alludes but also the populist message of income inequality. Why do all of these white, male voters think Sheldon Addleson deserves more money shoveled his direction -- or that Mitt Romney should only pay 14% on his $20 million annual earnings and GE should pay absolutely nothing.

[liberalmike27]

38. Thank God

Reagan got rid of the "Fairness Doctrine," so they could have wildly right-wing, anti-factual hosts and guests on network television, all the live-long day, and not worry about their right-wing biased opinions. Hell, they'll bring on ten or twelve guests to say "liberal media," and everything will be fine. Then they'll set about being incredibly conservative, and trying to discourage democrats from even voting.

Seriously, you can hardly get what poses as a lefty on television to even call for its return. I remember when we still had "the doctrine" in place, and you know what? It worked. You actually heard both sides more equally, as the law was designed, and they had a much closer to center media.

[lolly]

63. And where do they get those stupid ideas?

From people like Dick Gregory!

It would be laughable if there weren't such serious consequences.

Gregory keeps admitting that reality is on the side of ACA, but grills Wasserman-Schultz about how she's going to deal with the "perception" that it's a bad deal.

Where the hell does Gregory think they GET those perceptions?

[Samantha]

7. Believe it or not, I have watched Meet the Press since I was 8 years old

It was part of my Sunday ritual.

I have grown so disgusted with David Gregory, I have not watched in over a year or so. It saddens me. But watching and listening to HIM angers me.

I do hope Gregory is replaced and a suitable replacement rides to the rescue and makes the show watchable again.

Sam

[YOHABLO]

8. Yes David we understand the ACA .. and we understand that they're looking for your replacement.

[JanetLovesObama]

9. David Gregory's ass is

getting ready to be fired from Meet the Press so he is continuing to pimp for the Repukes hoping the COCK brothers will save his worthless ass.

[Gman]

10. He won't be on the air much longer

Don't know who or what will replace him, but he's got weeks left before he's gone. The interesting thing us he doesn't have a clue why.

[eepatt]

11. Replaced by whom?

The best commentator in the business and the hardest working: Rachel Maddow.

Watch the ratings soar and watch the frequent republican guests suddenly find that they are now too busy to be on Meet the Press.

[monmouth3]

39. Phil Griffin is the boss, he's a repub and I get the feeling he tolerates Rachel and the other

lefties 'cause he has to. No way will Rachel be asked to do that job...

[Fla Dem]

48. Sincerely, as much as I like Rachel, she is not the person for the job.

She is an avowed Progressive, and as such she would be seen to be as tilted to the left as Gregory is to the right. They need a journalist whose resume only has them being news reporters. Two NBC correspondents I would most definitely watch are Kristen Welker, currently the White House Correspondent and Kelly O'Donnell, Capitol Hill Correspondent. It's about time a woman filled a slot on the Sunday morning talk programs and these two are more than capable.

[passiveporcupine]

50. We need a younger Charlie Rose

I know he is conservative, but he does not shut down, overtalk, or redirect speech on his show. He listens and engages fairly. Is there a younger Charlie Rose in the system somewhere? It would be even better if he leaned slightly to the left, as most Americans do, but the press and our politicians don't reflect that.

[SheilaT]

12. 129 people with pre-existing conditions no longer have to be worried

about being dropped or denied coverage.

Doesn't sound like very many out of 8 million to me. Is there a word missing after the 129?

[NewJeffCT]

33. That's what I was thinking as well

Is it 129,000? 1.29 million?

[SheilaT]

35. 1.29 million is a number that makes sense.

But I've become increasingly frustrated and annoyed at the growing trend not to include some important word after a number of some kind. And to not bother to give a time frame. Statements like (I'm making this up) "3 million has been saved." Three million dollars is often clear in the context, but over what period of time? A week? A month? A year? A decade? It's just a number, floating out there in the ether and a bit more context is required.

[Moosepoop]

40. 129 million.

http://www.abilitymagazine.com/PreExisting-Ill.html

New report: 129 million Americans with a pre-existing condition could be denied coverage without new health reform law

Without Affordable Care Act protections, in 2014, 1 in 2 non-elderly Americans could be denied coverage or charged more due to a pre-existing condition

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius released a new analysis showing that, without the Affordable Care Act, up to 129 million non-elderly Americans who have some type of pre-existing health condition, like heart disease, high blood pressure, arthritis or cancer, would be at risk of losing health insurance when they need it most, or be denied coverage altogether. Under the full range of policies in the Affordable Care Act to be enacted by 2014, Americans living with pre-existing conditions are free from discrimination and can get the health coverage they need, and families are free from the worry of having their insurance cancelled or capped when a family member gets sick, or going broke because of the medical costs of an accident or disease. Repealing the law would once again leave millions of Americans worrying about whether coverage will be there when they need it.

“The Affordable Care Act is stopping insurance companies from discriminating against Americans with pre-existing conditions and is giving us all more freedom and control over our health care decisions,” said Secretary Sebelius. “The new law is already helping to free Americans from the fear that an insurer will drop, limit or cap their coverage when they need it most. And Americans living with pre-existing conditions are being freed from discrimination in order to get the health coverage they need.”

http://aspe.hhs.gov/health/reports/2012/pre-existing/

According to a new analysis by the Department of Health and Human Services, 50 to 129 million (19 to 50 percent of) non-elderly Americans have some type of pre-existing health condition. Up to one in five non-elderly Americans with a pre-existing condition — 25 million individuals — is uninsured. Under the Affordable Care Act, starting in 2014, these Americans cannot be denied coverage, be charged significantly higher premiums, be subjected to an extended waiting period, or have their benefits curtailed by insurance companies.

As many as 82 million Americans with employer-based coverage have a pre-existing condition, ranging from life-threatening illnesses like cancer to chronic conditions like diabetes, asthma, or heart disease. Without the Affordable Care Act, such conditions limit the ability to obtain affordable health insurance if they become self-employed, take a job with a company that does not offer coverage, or experience a change in life circumstance, such as divorce, retirement, or moving to a different state. Older Americans between ages 55 and 64 are at particular risk: 48 to 86 percent of people in that age bracket have some type of pre-existing condition. And 15 to 30 percent of people in perfectly good health today are likely to develop a pre-existing condition over the next eight years, severely limiting their choices without the protections of the Affordable Care Act.

Yes, there is a very important word missing.

[Leith]

14. Very Frustrating

David Gregory's own words:

DAVID GREGORY: You’re arguing the merits, Chairman – which I understand. But do you not have a turnout problem that you’re worried about?

But do you have an historic disadvantage? Because a president in his second term, in midterms, historically has a difficult time. You have a president with a low approval rating. And, let’s be honest, you have vulnerable Democrats who are, in effect, running against this White House.

Posted by babylonsister:

David Gregory repeatedly told Rep. Wasserman Schultz that he wasn’t interested in facts, or the merits as he called them. Gregory made it clear that he was only interested in pushing the Republican fantasy that Democrats are doomed because of Obamacare.

Exactly! Gregory hears from Wasserman Schultz about the ACA and how good people are finding it - and all he cares about is the political horse race!! He seemed to not want the congresswoman to say anything but his own talking points.

btw, Gregory, you like to talk about the president's numbers. How about mentioning congress's even lower numbers?

[riverbendviewgal]

15. Could he have been bought

See the Doonsbury cartoon for today.

Gregory is a puppet.

[Historic NY]

16. "Meet the Prick with dick Gregory"....

it time to kick his butt down the road he isn't interested in facts just playing the partisan poltics game.

[Demoiselle]

17. She's ARGUING ON THE MERITS?

Oh my GOD.
How COULD she!!!!

[WinkyDink]

30. DG wanted her to mention DEmerits.

[uponit7771]

46. +1, that made no sense coming from DG unless DG wants to argue no other stupid shit

[AAO]

18. I can no longer attribute it to "lazy" journalism.

Gregory is bought and payed for, lock, stock, and barrel, by first the BFEE, and now by the Koch brothers. He should be fired, but he won't be because he is doing his bosses bidding, and they answer directly to the 1%.

[barbtries]

19. the video at the link

is the wrong one.

[zwyziec]

20. NBC should hire David Letterman as Gregory's replacement.....

.......that way the show's IQ and Entertainment value would be doubled! I sent an email to NBC Corporate management with this message. It's time to PILE ON! Get this guy canned!

[saidsimplesimon]

21. baby sis, it's stupid of me to reply, yet,

I can't stop myself from doing all the "unwise" things about which I've been warned.

Mr. Gregory, and Andrea Mitchell Greenspan are tools of the Republicans who want to divide this nation.

They want US to fund, and support the regime of bibi. His hatred, and violence is not in the best interests of Israel or the US, imho.

[elias7]

22. What does he expect?

That she and other Dems will counter the repub depiction of ACA as a "disaster" (before it has even started) with our own bullshit hyperbole? Of how superlative superlative ACA is? Dems don't talk like that because we actually care about the veracity and fairness of our statements.

[butterfly77]

24. Alex Witt..

on msnbc said isn't it a fools errand for the President to try to get out the voters like he did in 2012, she would never ask that of a CONservative she was talking to a panel of Dems and CONS

[McCamy Taylor]

26. Hmmm. Midterm elections favor the party out of power. And so the GOP is planning to frame

that as a referendum against people having health insurance in order to create a myth that the American people hate having health insurance to give themselves an excuse to dismantle the ACA

Hmmm.

Between you and me, this is a real dumb ass strategy.

They tried this in 1998. They were trying to impeach Clinton over a cum stained dress. Midterm elections always favor the party out of power, so the GOP knew they would pick up seats, so they foolishly framed the midterms as a referendum about Clinton. Huge mistake. The midterms did not favor the GOP by nearly the margin that they should have had that been an ordinary midterm election---I referred to it as the year "The GOP took aim at its own foot." Newt fell from grace, Clinton soared to heights he had never known before, his wife became Saint Hillary for standing beside him....

So, yeah, I say the GOP should definitely frame this fall's midterm elections as a referendum on the ACA. Better yet, call it Obamacare. Whenever Obama is at the head of the ticket, his base comes out in record numbers to support him. If his name is the official referendum of the midterm elections, it ought to bring Dems out in droves, the way the Clinton impeachment brought out Clinton's supporters.

Let's make 2014 "The Year the Republicans took aim at their own foot...again!"

You know, if it wasn't for their willingness to break the law---and by that I mean election laws----the GOP would never win any elections in this country. They are just too plain dumb.

[freshwest]

27. "You gotta dance with the one who brung ya"

Always faithful to his masters.

Good doggie!

[jaysunb]

28. The last Democratic Presidents 6th year in office got "what"

results ? Or the one before that ? or before that ???? It's been a while since this supposedly "historical event" happened to a democratic President.

Look it up David.

[grahamhgreen]

29. The entire first half was dedicated to selling war with Ukraine.

[WinkyDink]

31. Republican "reality" is whatever lies they are peddling at the time. And some voters are gulls.

[12kbush]

32. Not Good

He`s Doing His Best To Save MTP and doing a lousy job at it Kudos for Wasserman!

[mfcorey1]

34. Since he seems to continue his biased behavior, the network must condone

him. They have made no attempt to replace him. His broadcast has become "Jackass Sunday" with David Gregory.

[tom_kelly]

36. I used to look forward

to that show. I stopped watching after maybe 2 months of that goofball and haven't watched it since.

[2banon]

41. This is the reason why I refuse to include a Cable or Satellite bill in my hard pressed Budget

And now that I've been living without cable "news" on my tv, I don't have to listen to this sleazy bullshit anymore. Gregory, Todd, Blitzer, Mitchell et al, they're all GOP whores, every last one of them. 24/7 GOP propaganda. Frankly I don't understand why there isn't more direct action on the "4th Estate" from grassroots here on du. scratching my head on that one.

[Tsiyu]

42. No matter whom they put there as host

he or she will be spewing kochsucker logic.

These are paid salesmen and saleswomen. They aren't paid to tell the truth, seek knowledge or help find solutions to problems.

Gregory is there only to read the sales pitch and no more.

This IS US mainstream media all the way around

[Spitfire of ATJ]

43. Gregory is doing a lousy job at trying to appear neutral....

He attacks every Democrat and helps every Republican get their sales pitch out.

He starts out by claiming, "The President's bad approval ratings are casting a deep shadow on the Democrats." with a big shit grin.

Meanwhile his beloved Republican run House has a 10% approval rating. And that 10% is thrilled the Republicans are stopping the commie takeover.

[KansDem]

44. "42,000 jobs"

Gregory used that statistic to argue why the Keystone XL pipeline should be approved. He needs to be reminded that these are temporary jobs. Even the WP acknowledges this:

5) The Keystone XL project, if built, would support 42,000 jobs over its two-year construction period. "Including direct, indirect, and induced effects, the proposed Project would potentially support approximately 42,100 average annual jobs across the United States over a 1-to 2-year construction period (of which, approximately 3,900 would be directly employed in construction activities)." As with all construction projects, these jobs would be temporary.

WP

The response to Gregory misinformation should be that these jobs are temporary and once the Koch Bros have their new source for billion$ and billion$ more in wealth, the workers will be let go to return to the unemployment line.

[Ccarmona]

45. NBC was Concerned Enough

to hire a psychologist to find out why MTP was losing viewers.
They could have paid me and I would have told them that DG is a lame-ass, dumb-shit whipping boy for the Right without any credibility; so who wants to watch that?

T. Russert must be spinning seeing what a sham his show has become.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/21/nbc-news-david-gregory_n_5184924.html

[TheKentuckian]

56. The concern is why they can't sell right wing hackery. They might swap out ol Stretch or play with

the format, the set, or any damn thing but the propaganda they are shoving.

The whole point is to spread right wing lies as fact or at least prop them up enough to be painted as reasonable difference in opinion. FACTS BE DAMNED!

I think the best thing to do is let it die and cut off the respected label as cover for a bunch of lies and nonsense.

[Snotcicles]

47. I like that idea of Joy Reid hosting Meet The Press. nt

[olegramps]

49. Who would watch that dip shit ignoramus? Hell, who would watch MSM?

[DFW]

51. Seems to be a common disease among second-rate "news" hosts

When you show out as an ineffective interviewer, lean to the right, and hope for a spot on Fox when your dismal ratings mark you for extinction where you are. No one exemplifies this more than David Gregory and Chuck Todd. Crowley doesn't have the right color hair or (seemingly) figure to meet the Fox requirements. Her IQ might well be too high, too, even if her cold right wing heart is in the right place.

[Blue Idaho]

52. No One Is Watching...

Gregory has turned MTP into a joke and no one is watching anymore. He is such a transparently heavy handed promoter of teapublican talking points he has screwed his own career into the ground and taken MTP's ratings with him. I would not be the least bit surprised to see NBC pulling the plug on MTP and Gregory in the near future.

Lets face it - Gregory belongs on FOX noise and everybody knows it.

[DeSwiss]

53. K&R

NBC Hires Expert To Figure Out Mystery of Why David Gregory’s Show Sucks So Hard

[LiberalFighter]

58. They are focusing on voter turnout the wrong way.

What the idiots don't realize and I do hope Democratic leaders do is that those damn voters that Republicans counted on to vote come hell or high water are dying off. Remember the demographics. Republicans are losing their support and that means in order to maintain control they need an even higher turnout out from their supporters. But that is not likely when they are turning off many of those they counted for their wins.

[Demsrule86]

59. David Gregory makes meet the press unwatchable; loved Tim Russert but David is a GOP cheerleader

NBC has a choice get rid of Gregory or cancel the show...terrible ratings which won't improve as long as that guy is there.

[kairos12]

60. Gregory is a useful idiot for the Rethugs whose star moment was rapping with Karl Rove.

[stonecutter357]

61. K&R

[George II]

62. I haven't been able to stomach that "News" show for a few years now, and I'm also....

....having difficulty watching many of the shows on MSNBC these days, either.