Kender,

Don't ask questions you know the answer
to.

Amitabh_Bachchan "pia's videos are a luxury, not a right?" What the
hell does that even mean?

>>That's not doing the same thing?>>

Different than being
asked specifically about one's colleagues? Absolutely. One is a
general question while the other, well, isn't.

C'mon, I
know the Ivy League isn't what it used to be, Kato (few college
campuses are), but you know the difference without trying to be
cutesy.

Kender should thank Pluribus for distracting us from his,
"never ask a question you don't know the answer to" comment. />
Pia's videos are a luxury, not a right.

"Why do you think so many conservative politicians get
corrupted or lose their
principles after they're in office?" -
Mr. E Pluribus

That's not doing the same thing?

Good, bad or indifferent, it's suppositional, Kato. Nobody can speak
for those Republicans except themselves.

at 4:28 Chuck says, 'if the Republicans grow a spine and
stand firm . . . ' sounds like Chuck is the one that brought it up.
He calls for 'no compromise,' which is when Pia inquires as to why
Republicans WOULD compromise. Are they principled? Or are they
RINO's? Are they John McCain Republicans? Are they afraid to stand
up to the majority? Seems like she was simply following Chuck's lead.
This is a wonderful and timely conversation about principles and
compromise that couldn't have been better if it was scripted. />
And there was nothing 'unintelligible' or even inaudible. She
just paused and clarified, 'the Party's principles,' giving Chuck the
opportunity to discuss the party's principles. Where else could she
have gone from there? Ask how 'they get CORRUPTED?' or how they
'LOSE their principles?' That's not loaded? that's like asking if
you've stopped beating your wife.

I'm also glad one of my comments to a different Pia interview was
heard -- much better lighting this time. If only I'd follow my own
constructive criticisms... ;-)

Nothing rouses controversy and emotions like a Pia Varma
interview.

Everyone with a Masters Degree in Communications from the
Ivy League and did so with a Conservative viewpoint please raise your
hand.

(and proudly show your faux-hawk :)

Pia did a perfectly reasonable interview with the exception of that
one question. There is a reason lawyers live by the old adage "never
ask a question you don't know the answer to" and it is often wise to
apply that to other areas of your life.

As for the
"Everyone with a Masters Degree in Communications from the Ivy League
please raise your hand" bit, puh-leeze....(and no offense Pia, I know
you came out of Columbia, and how you did so with a conservative
viewpoint is beyond me) if what is coming out of the Ivy League is any
indication you can keep 'em....they no longer teach critical thinking
there and I routinely eat those kids for lunch.

Fortunately, JF, Chuck's a consummate professional and he handled the
question with grace, where the only other -- for lack of a better word
-- proper answer would have been, "I can't speak for my colleagues,
but..." Another way the question could have been formed -- and please
pardon the constructive criticism -- might have been, "Why do you
think so many conservative politicians get corrupted or lose their
principles after they're in office?"

As I mentioned,
though, it's a learning curve moment and it will happen, less and less
as learning curves are constant for anyone honing their craft. Pia's
quickly getting better with her interviewing skills, too, which is
great since, as I also mentioned before, we need more
conservative-minded reporters on the front lines.

Keep it
up, Pia, we're all in this -- and we all rise -- together!

I agree with Mr. E . . . you never want to make someone
look bad who is 110% on the side of Conservatism. We need to support
those who put themselves out there on our behalf. And we certainly
shouldn't try to advance ourselves at their expense.

Shooting the breeze is one thing, Thomas. Putting a respected
politician, especially someone who is on our side 100% of the way,
with such a loaded -- not to mention supposition-laced -- question
crossed a line in a tricky direction.

Am I condemning? God
no. It happens, you chalk it up to a learning curve moment and move on
down the line. However, there's no reason why it should have remained
in the segment. The producer wants to be edgy, it's one thing.
Inappropriate, as the questions assuredly is, a whole other.

I think home girl is just shooting the breeze with Chuck,
not auditioning for CNN.

(Fox News, maybe)

Everyone who thinks the Ivy League is overrated, elitist and a hella
expensive piece of diploma paper, proudly show your 'fros. ;-)

Everyone with a Masters Degree in Communications from the
Ivy League please raise your hand.

I'm sincerely liking Pia's maturation as an interviewer (we need more
of us out there on the front lines), but did she really ask, "You deal
with Republicans in the legislature, are these Republicans principled
or are they just kind of afraid or do you think it's an issue of,
like...why are they going [unintelligible]?" Seems a little too of the
"gotcha" variety employed by the likes of Charlie Gibson.
/>Otherwise, some good to great stuff, Pia!

At 7:28 does she say "film actor's guild?" That's F.A.G.
from Team America. :)

Chuck is a real Environmentalist. Boxer reminds me of the
cabal in Atlas Shrugged that just wants things to 'stand still.'
That's all their ideology has to offer.

Boxer and Obama
vowed to raise $20 million for her campaign. So, yes, google Chuck
DeVore and you'll see why we need to support him.

Google Chuck Devore. He's an American hero. Vision,
character and conviction.