Discussing Obama, KHOW guest co-host Beauprez cited Mussolini, Hitler as examples of those who "come along and create this fervor for change"
Summary: As guest co-host of The Caplis & Silverman Show on April 4, former gubernatorial candidate Bob Beauprez (R) told co-host Craig Silverman regarding Sen. Barack Obama, "[P]lease don't take offense at this characterization. But if you study history, the people that have created great excitement with the masses, whether that's Mussolini or Hitler -- they come along and create this fervor for change."
Substituting for Dan Caplis as co-host of 630 KHOW-AM's The Caplis & Silverman Show on April 4, failed Colorado Republican gubernatorial candidate Bob Beauprez during a discussion of Sen. Barack Obama told co-host Craig Silverman, "[P]lease don't take offense at this characterization. But if you study history, the people that have created great excitement with the masses, whether that's Mussolini or Hitler -- they come along and create this fervor for change." After Silverman stated, "I do object to a comparison of Barack Obama to Mussolini or Hitler," Beauprez replied, "Thought you might."
From the April 4 broadcast of 630 KHOW-AM's The Caplis & Silverman Show, with guest co-host Bob Beauprez:
SILVERMAN: Not just smart enough, extremely smart. I heard John McCain say that to Greta Van Susteren on the "Straight Talk Express." He was telling Barack Obama to stop saying that he wants to fight a hundred-year war. He said Barack Obama is very smart. He knows what he's saying is wrong. His colleagues in the legislature, a lot of those senators are backing him. People you wouldn't necessarily expect -- [Sen.] Bob Casey, prominent Catholic politician from Pennsylvania, backing him. The senator from Minnesota [Sen. Amy Klobuchar] threw down, [Sen.] Claire McCaskill [D-MO]. Smart people backing Barack Obama. I see kind of party people backing Hillary Clinton. Doesn't that say something to you about Barack Obama? And you hear Republicans say good things about him. So, doesn't he have a capacity to work with people? He's smart and a leader. Aren't those three attributes right there?
BEAUPREZ: I think he's got a good, gifted intelligence, maybe. I would put him more in the clever category than smart. I don't know if his instincts yet, his judgment, falls in the category of really smart. And a president of the United States ought to be that. They ought to have great judgment, great instincts. That I -- you know, let's be fair; I think it's still an unknown. You know, and -- please don't take offense at this characterization. But if you study history, the people that have created great excitement with the masses, whether that's Mussolini or Hitler -- they come along and create this fervor for change. I mean, we had enough of that goin' on in the '60s around here. You know, "We're gonna change the world." But what direction do we want to change to? Don't we wanna -- there's something, I hope, admittedly magical about "The Greatest Generation." What did we like about them? They worked hard, they were committed to family, to neighborhood, to their faith, typically, or at least something bigger than themselves; they loved this country, they were wiling to roll up their sleeves, go volunteer as you said earlier, and fight the enemy and defeat the enemy, and then come back home and build the greatest nation that has ever inhabited planet Earth. Is that so bad? I think we ought to look over our shoulder a little bit and say, "Maybe we have strayed from our values a little bit." You're a Jew, I'm a Catholic. I think what we are somewhat lacking -- you've been playing clips from [Rev.] Martin Luther King, and one of the things I admire about him is that foundation of Judeo-Christian principle without going across the line of mixing religion and state. He's not doing that, but he's leaning on the values that made the nation so great to make his point of his judgment. And I think that's where we ought to go, is what made us the nation that we are, and let's go ahead and cling to that. What's so out of sorts with tradition?
SILVERMAN: First of all, I do object to a comparison of Barack Obama to Mussolini or Hitler, and if you read --
BEAUPREZ: Thought you might.
SILVERMAN: Yeah, well, I think that's terrible, and I think that Republicans go way too far in demonizing Barack Obama, and I think it's wrong and counterproductive.
—E.B. & J.F.B.
to listen to this audio clip
Comments (8) Show
1 - 8 |
I'm shocked this guy didn't win the Governor's race...
The "Bleeding Ulcer" pontificates. What a crock of bull shi.. coming form this draft dodging republican has been. Benito and Adolph are your type Bob.
So bothways is admitting that the reds are now down to the "Alamo" defense. Basically they acknowledge that the last 8 years have been a disaster, but the strategy is "better the devil you know". The very idea that bothways admits the current environment is that bad betrays his hokey and incompetent political style. What a goober! Great job NATE. You nailed this one.
Bo-Pray ? C'mon, who puts this lame brain dingo back on the air ? Isn't it time media folk begin to show a little class - or doesn't "classy" serve their (obviously) flawed and subversive agenda ?
It's too bad there is no requirement that a president be "really smart" and have "great judgement." We wouldn't be stuck with the moron currently inhabiting the oval office.
O/T:Fellow Proud Coloradoans: After yesterday’s show, we can all breathe a little easier now. Caplis may embarrass us all running for Senate, but thankfully he’ll never run for President! And all the bad mouthing and blanket statements about guys in robes legislating from the bench seems to rule out the supreme court for Dan, too. Good. It seems idiotic to even mention these power positions and Caplis in the same breath, but just look at the posturing and pandering to the Republican Party that he engages in. He has said that it is OK for politicians to lie; using the example that it would be acceptable or even preferable for George Bush to lie and say that he won’t nominate supreme court judges using their abortion stance as the subject as a litmus test, when he in fact should, in Caplis’ opinion. We’ve witnessed how Caplis will distort and obfuscate his arguments for personal and political gain, in my opinion. It is hard to imagine the lengths and slickly-presented deception Caplis would go to in garnering political influence in office. Now Caplis says that if he was president he would threaten to wipe Iran off the map if they attacked Israel, but it would be a bluff(lie), and he wouldn’t actually do it. Way to go, Dan: Threaten another country with nuclear destruction, sounding similar to the ‘nut jobs’ you decry, and force them into more ardent attempts to go nuclear as a defense. With all the drumbeating of nuclear war on Monday’s show, one wondered if Caplis was advocating killing all the innocent unborn fertilized eggs in Iraq, never mind the rest of the population. But he bailed himself out later, and at the same time removed himself from presidential material as an ineffectual bluffer. Fhhewww! Caplis says he never bluffs in the practice of law, but would bluff about nuclear war. I’m glad any potential ‘Caplis Missile Crisis’ has been averted before it could ever start. It is hard to believe that Caplis doesn’t bluff like crazy in his law practice, actually. How else can you settle 95 or 98 percent of your cases out of court without a big dose of ‘bluff’? Although maybe ‘I’ll see you in court’ isn’t a very good bluff for Caplis, with that record. I know in one case, Caplis said he would take a defamation case essentially all the way to vindication, his honor was at stake, he would not back down, and he could absolutely clear up the factual argument that Caplis said was false. Funny thing is, Caplis dropped the case by simply implying honor-be-damned, saying the claim hadn’t been brought up again, and he dropped the case and settled. Caplis never bluffs in the practice of law? Nice bluff about your bluffs, Dan, and good if subtle aggrandizing plugola, as well. But back to politics and as Caplis has said, the worst of the worst are politicians who think we are stupid. All his deceptions and distortions are done while he wants to portray himself as some kind of model of family virtue and light, when all the time it is a model of self-absorbed viciousness and special interest. Think of the damage such deception could do in political office. Seriously. His one-sided, often illogical arguments are a frightening preview of what’s to come if he holds true to his senate run in 2010—you know—the campaign he could mount after free, unethical air time he’ll milk to the last possible moment? And To paraphrase Caplis, the real Caplis needs to be revealed, as he is not what he appears. QUESTION DAN: Are you running for political office? That is a yes or no question, but a ‘yes’ or even a ‘maybe’ means you are UNETHICAL, and a ‘no’ probably just means you are a LIAR. Live with it Dan, because the citizens of Colorado shouldn’t. Just my opinion.
Oh, and more nice and very blaytant personal plugola, Dan! Does Chevy know you pull this stuff? I just love the way you tap dance around the rolling tank safety issue of others on the road, and the actual fuel economy of your Tahoe and the vast amount of non-hyprid Tahoe’s on the road. But they look good, right Dan? And nary is a mention of the inefficiency of ethanol production and the damage flex fuel doing to everyone’s food prices, but really, more plugola? On at least two occasions several days ago, Dan worked in a direct reference to his law office/practice in an outlying city in a Chevy commercial. He plugged his law practice in the commercial time paid for by Chevy. This isn’t just an innocent reference by a loud mouth. He is too deliberate in every other way, and he’s a flippin’ lawyer, ‘ta boot. And this isn’t his usual effusive use of public airwaves to tell Danecdotes about all things Caplis, like Cody and Cassidy, huh, I mean Joe and Carolyn. Touting your law practice on other people’s dime?…Nothing new, but what arrogance. Just my opinion.
Great work NEWMAN. It's been too long since your last post. Truth be told, I last listened to sniffer the day before Senator Obama's legendary speech on race and about Pastor Wright. Senator Obama rendered sniffer irrelevant with his answering of the red critics. But I know about the law suit you're talking about that he dropped, or at least I think I do. Wasn't he suing over the accusation that he battered a pregnant woman over the head with a flagpole at a 1977 Boulder campus melee.....a melee that he reportedly started? And as I remember, he kept lowering the "settlement out of court" sum he'd be willing to accept until it was.........and I think that's right......nothing. In the end the person who he was suing refused to recant, but said they wouldn't repeat the accusation any more, and sniffer tucked his tail between his legs, declared victory, and dropped the suit. Any way please keep me informed NEWMAN. That sniffer voice is like finger nails on a black board to me. I'd rather hear about him from you and CMM.
1 - 20 |