Bernie’s Q&A: Djokovic, Biden, Terrorism in Texas, and more! (1/21) — Premium Interactive ($4 members)
Welcome to this week’s Premium Q&A session for Premium Interactive members. I appreciate you all signing up and joining me. Thank you.
Editor’s note: If you enjoy these sessions (along with the weekly columns and audio commentaries), please use the Facebook and Twitter buttons to share this page with your friends and family. Thank you!
Now, let’s get to your questions (and my answers):
I wonder what you think about Novak Djokovic being denied a visa by Australia because he didn’t get the COVID vaccine? Djokovic says he had COVID last year and recovered, so he should have some natural immunity. Are the unvaccinated the new lepers to governments? — John R.
The Djokovic story did not interest me. Maybe it’s because I’m not a tennis fan. Who knows? As to your question: If you mean it literally, then no the unvaccinated are not the new lepers — for a whole bunch of fairly obvious reasons. One big reason: Lepers didn’t have a choice as to whether they’d be lepers or not. The unvaccinated have made a choice — and they have to live with the consequences of that choice. Whatever they are, they’re nothing like how lepers were treated. But I’m guessing, John, you were exaggerating to make a point.
I see you and I see eye to eye on Jesse Watters. When Bill O’Reilly had him on his show close to a decade ago, “I said to myself, “Who’s this dope? How did he get on television?” I never envisioned he’d get his own TV show. And now he’s got two, in addition to being on the Five, which they say is the highest-rated show in its time-slot.
Jesse and Geraldo Rivera, who repulses me to no end with his misguided egotism, are a perfect counterbalance on The Five. Both say ridiculous things, usually from opposite ends of the political spectrum. And both love themselves far too much, much more than the viewers actually do. They both wrote books displaying this extremely annoying trait. Jesse wrote “How I Saved the World,” and Geraldo wrote “Exposing Myself.” I had the good sense not to read Jesse’s book. But about 25 years ago, I had the misfortune to read Geraldo’s, which basically said he had sex with every woman who ever lived except maybe Joan of Arc and Marie Antoinette. And I can never forget the egg Geraldo had on his face when he opened “Al Capone’s Vault” and found nothing but a couple of broken bottles and a lot of dirt. But he somehow always rises from his own ashes.
It’s a good thing “The Five” has common sense people like Dana Perino and Harold Ford Jr to inject some sanity into the program. Jessica Tarlov, too. As for Gutfeld, he’s smart and funny, and he comes up with some great lines, but I can’t get over the fact that he looks like a chipmunk high on speed.
Bernie, what are your feelings on “The Five? — Joe B.
I try not to watch. And if I’m channel surfing and land on The Five, I may watch for a few seconds. But if Watters is talking, I’m changing the channel.
A friend of mine used to be a big fan of The Five. I asked for his take, and here was his reply:
“The Five was a fun show in the pre-Trump era, but I find it unwatchable these days. Gutfeld and Perino were my favorites because they were honest, principled brokers (even when Gutfeld was cracking jokes) who challenged the more partisan co-hosts (on both sides) when they strolled too far into base-pandering or other unfair positions. After the 2016 election, however, Gutfeld (who had been an outspoken Trump critic for all the right reasons) quickly went full MAGA (I believe to save his weekend show), and Perino — while still an honest broker — turned gun-shy when it came to saying anything negative about Trump and Trumpism; she instead started approaching Trump-critical topics from a neutral communications perspective, which wasn’t nearly as interesting. And of course, Watters is just a blissfully smug know-nothing with no more political insight than a bumper-sticker. The show has lost a lot of its independent thinking and earnestness, but there’s certainly an audience for what it has become, as the ratings demonstrate.”
Bernie, I enjoyed the Monday column regarding the likely strategy of Dems trying to make the midterms all about the Jan 6 events. I am curious as to your thoughts as to what the GOP might do in response and perhaps more importantly how the media may react to such rebuttals. For example, what are the odds that the GOP will craft commercials using footage of the various riots that have occurred during the past 18 months in various cities? And how would the major media players respond beyond their predictable rhetoric? Could ABC for example run commercials featuring the Jan 6 DC riot/insurrection/coup/ ( everyone gets to choose their favorite word) while refusing to run commercials depicting the riots in Minneapolis, Portland or elsewhere? — Mike F.
I think the GOP will play up Biden’s failures — inflation, Covid (“I’ll shut it down”), the border, Afghanistan, crime. And it’s possible that a liberal TV network would run Democratic Party ads and shun those from the other side. But TV stations make a lot of money running political ads. And so I don’t think they run ads from only one party.
Are we really surprised about Biden’s Atlanta speech last week? As for articulating, encouraging and stoking racial divisiveness, he learned from the best – his old boss President Obama. Many of us who didn’t vote for Obama in 2008 were genuinely hopeful for his unique and stated position to move into a post-racial American society. Sadly, as The Who wrote and sang many years ago: “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.” — Steve R.
Should we be surprised by Biden’s nasty speech in Atlanta. In a word, No. Check out my column that goes up on Monday. It’s about the real Joe.
I see that there was a hostage situation at a left leaning congregation’s synagogue in Texas. Odd, but when the initial FALSE narrative news reports came out about Jussie Smollet, the Covington Catholics, and Kyle Rittenhouse, the mainstream media members AND the Biden/Harris Administration were quick to foolishly condemn all those situations as the result of Trump inspired white supremacist hate-mongers. However in the incident at the Colleyville Texas synagogue, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris rightfully condemned this as a terrorist attack, but they neglected to give the editorial comments in this case (unlike how they did with Smollet and Rittenhouse), even going so far to claim that they have to wait and see what the criminal’s motives were. I find that especially odd since the hostage taker was pretty up front about what his motives were. Well Jeepers Sir Bernie, whaddya think was different about THIS particular situation that made the usual commentators more…uhhh…discretionary…about commenting? Sarcasm ON—-we already know the answer to that one. What I do want to ask you to do is to speculate: what do you think goes on in the minds of a left wing congregation and woke political leaders when the anti Semitic threat comes from a member one of the “victimized hierarchy” instead of the traditional white supremacist Boogeyman? — “Oh Darn! We Can’t Blame This One On White Supremacy!” Regards from The Emperor
I have no reason to believe the people held hostage in that synagogue said — or thought — anything like, “Well we can’t condemn this the way we would if it were a skinhead who held us hostage.” It may be a liberal congregation, but that doesn’t mean it’s so woke that they actually believe that the ethnicity of the man who was holding the gun was irrelevant. Come on Emperor man … cut the Chosen People some slack.
Dear Bernie, Once again I find myself agreeing but also disagreeing with you. I am sure you would agree that all Americans are guaranteed freedom of speech, even Donald Trump. However, it is unfair to characterize Trump’s allegation of widespread election fraud as frivolous. There is enough evidence of fraud and there were enough irregularities in the 2020 election such that it is not irresponsible to raise these issues. From Mark Zuckerberg funding of Democratic operatives to huge mail in voting. For your information, the NY Times ran a focused group of democratic party voters and were shocked when the participants expressed frustration and sympathy for what motivated the people to go to Washington on January 6. What is really needed is an audit of the 2020 election so that changes in the election laws can be recommended and made. It is therefore simplistic and wrong to state that Donald Trump is “perpetuating a dangerous lie”. The 2020 election was marred and if we want future elections to be fair Trump’s allegations of election fraud should not simply be dismissed. — Frederic N.
Frederick, my friend, let’s not dwell on this topic going forward. You want to know why? Because while there may have been voting irregulars, there was no evidence presented by Donald Trump’s legal team that it changed the outcome of the election. As for Donald Trump — who by the way, doesn’t give a flying F about you or any of his other acolytes; he cares only about Donald Trump — he is “perpetuating a dangerous lie” by continuing to say the Democrats stole the election. When he casts doubt on something so fundamental to our system as an election– because he’s too insecure to admit defeat — he’s doing harm. And in this sense, he’s also a threat to democracy. And he’s playing his most loyal fans for suckers!
Thank you for the excellent summary of the Biden Show thus far [in this week’s “Off the Cuff”]. You brought up a increasingly broached thought that, due to his endemic deficiencies, he is, in fact, being “handled” by others, thus furthering the disconnect from reality in the Democratic Party. That he is someone’s hand puppet is disturbing enough. That the world order is beginning to seethe and heave toward some kind of long overdue explosion while this dog and pony dance is going on is more than discomfiting. It’s downright frightening. The question is, will Americans wake up to one-rail ride we are currently taking? And if we, do what are the alternatives? With more Trumpian buffoonery waiting in the wings, I am more than skeptical. I guess I am scouring the horizon for an encouraging word. Looking for a friend…. — Jesse B.
Will Americans wake up, you ask. I think they will. Next November. But if Donald decides to run again in 2024, I think there’s a good chance he could lose — to almost anybody except Kamala Harris. I’m taking up a collection to raise enough money to send him to Fiji until the 2024 election is over.
Bernie you crack me up sometimes & I love it. When you gave the answer [in last week’s Q&A] about trying to blame Bill O’Reilly for something & you said only for Jesse Watters, I laughed out loud because it’s so true. Jesse is so arrogant that he has never given Bill any credit for putting him on his show every Thursday night & at that time I liked Jesse & loved how he could keep a straight face asking people those questions & getting back the dumbest answers. I knew Watters World, but only because of Bill who took him on his tour with Dennis Miller, and I went to that show. Jesse was a nobody, and he has thanked all these people except Bill, and I see him as so ungrateful and it really bothers me that he can’t thank Bill who helped him so much. Now we all wish he hadn’t. Thanks for the laughs! –Jean G.
I accidentally stumbled on to something Watters recently said and he did give credit to “The Factor.” I changed the channel because more than 2 or 3 seconds of Watters makes me get sick so I don’t know if he then went on to thank Bill personally. But O’Reilly committed a crime against humanity by giving Watters a platform.
Bernie, good afternoon. And do you know why it is so? Because I haven’t watched an iota of “news” today. And why, you ask? Because it isn’t news. It’s whatever they spew forth for the chosen few who choose to listen and nod there heads as though what they were fed was manna from the gods. Many a moon ago I received my first BA in Broadcast Journalism. I was a news major being taught by some very hard professors who all had been at one time or another news people. And one of the things they emphasized was the difference between opinion and a news story. Although they also said said news would always have some slant to it, but to try and keep your viewpoints as neutral as possible. Also, verify what you are reporting on through some source other then your own creative juices. But that isn’t what we get today. Not even close. And it doesn’t matter which team you’re swinging for, it’s all done about the same. A minute or so of a talking head giving you a sound bite of what someone on the other team said then gathering one or several other like minded babbling fools eager to ride this slimy slope of partisanship to its inevitable conclusion. The only thing that protects my sanity is the fact that there really aren’t many watching this incessant blathering. My question, after much opining, when do you think we might get back to that point of just giving us the facts, ma’am, just the facts? My guess it will only be when advertisers finally look at those abysmal ratings and decide to pull their products. Oh, and by the way, I’d watch that John D. fellow. As the Irishman said in “Braveheart”, “‘e isn’t right in the ‘ead!” — Rod A.
First let me assure ALL of you who are reading this: I did not write what you just read above. It sounds like I wrote it. I agree with all of it. But it really did come from the pen and mind of Rod, whom I thank for his wise observations. As to your question: I don’t see cable changing its business model anytime soon. Opinion brings in more money than hard news; that’s what viewers tune in for. My problem with cable isn’t simply that the opinion hosts are ideologues and not honest observers. It’s that the line between opinion shows and hard news shows has been obliterated. We now have a kind of hybrid — not opinion like the prime time talking heads, but not hard news like a real hard news show. But, as you say, if ratings sink so low that advertisers won’t pay what they’ve been paying for airtime, then maybe things will change. But I don’t think so. Finally, John D is a fine, intelligent fellow — as long as he’s on his meds.
I think the two worst Biden answers during his press conference were his suggestion that the midterm elections may not be legitimate unless his “voting rights” bill is passed, and the line about a “minor incursion” by Russia into Ukraine possibly not warranting a U.S. response. Trying to delegitamize our elections and kowtowing to Putin were legit criticisms of Trump, and yet there was Biden going down that same path. Embarrassing. — Ben G.
I agree with you, Ben … one million percent!
Mr. G., After watching the Biden presser, I lost almost all of my energy for giving a crap for either side. But why do think Doocey asked possibly the vaguest and the worst thought out question of the day when he had a perfect moment to hold Biden accountable for so many other things? Swing and a miss in the ultimate clutch Situation! Bonus question: Do you think the James Rosen question was personal retaliation against the treatment he received back in the Obama days? Boy was he dispatched embarrassingly, I cringed for him. What a mess that was. –ScottyG
This is scary. It’s like we had a Vulcan mind melt. I also thought Doocey’s question was not framed right. It sounded so partisan, so Fox NOT NEWS but Fox OPINION. He should have said something like: “CRITICS SAY you have moved to the left. Here are a few examples… What is your response?” Instead, he simply gave ammo to lefties who have a knee jerk negative reaction to ALL of Fox News.
As for Rosen: He’s very good. Smart. I have no idea what motivated the question.
Bernie, a couple weeks ago, AOC explained that the people who criticize her are just mad that they can’t date her. Do you think this is the same reason people criticize you? — John D.
Yes I do. It’s a curse I have to live with.
Thanks, everyone! You can send me questions for next week using the form below! You can also read previous Q&A sessions by clicking here.