Image 01 Image 03

RNC to NBC – Dump the Hillary promo or no 2016 debate for you (Update – CNN too)

RNC to NBC – Dump the Hillary promo or no 2016 debate for you (Update – CNN too)

NBC is preparing a Hillary Mini-Series.

While we don’t know the content, it’s predicted that it will be favorable to her.

The RNC is protesting, sending a letter (embedded below) to NBC threatening no cooperation with NBC as to 2016 presidential debates:

I’m writing to you to express my deep disappointment in your company’s decision to air a miniseries promoting former Secretary Hillary Clinton ahead of her likely candidacy for the Democratic nomination for president in 2016.

As an American company, you have every right to air programming of your choice. But as American citizens, certainly you recognize why many are astounded at your actions, which appear to be a major network’s thinly-veiled attempt at putting a thumb on the scales of the 2016 presidential election….

There’s ample cause for concern. Executives and employees of Com cast, NBC’s parent company have been generous supporters of Democrats and Secretary Clinton. David Cohen, Comcast’s EVP, raised over $1.4 million for President Obama’s reelection efforts and hosted a fundraiser for the president. Comcast Corp. employees have donated $522,996 to the president and donated $161,640 to Secretary
Clinton’s previous campaigns….

Out of a sense of fairness and decency and in the interest of the political process and your company’s reputation, I call on you to cancel this political ad masquerading as an unbiased production. If you have not agreed to pull this programming prior to the start of the RNC’s Summer Meeting on August 14, I will seek a binding vote of the RNC stating that the committee will neither partner with you in
2016 primary debates nor sanction primary debates which you sponsor.

According to, a similar letter was sent to CNN.  (Letter added below, h/t Andrew Kaczynski)

The RNC also has started a petition drive aimed at liberal media pro-Hillary bias:

RNC Website re Pro Hillary Media

Already the “waaahs” have started:

RNC Letter to NBC Re Hillary Mini-Series

RNC Letter to CNN Re Hillary Promo


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


2nd Ammendment Mother | August 5, 2013 at 12:15 pm

Gee – I’d be all for dumping CNN and NBC and any of the mainstream media being in control of the debates regardless…..

Is that from “The Onion?”

Midwest Rhino | August 5, 2013 at 12:27 pm

The narrative is fixed …
First woman president
It’s Hillary’s turn
The moderate and competent response to Obama

To resist Obama is racist
To resist Hillary is misogynist
Get out of history’s way you haters

Hollywood and Big Media present:
“Hillary the Screenplay”

The smiling waving Hillary will turn to frown and scold any that bring up her past crimes or failures: “What difference at this point, does it make? Resistance is futile!”

Lights … Camera … ACTION

But more Detroits, failed HillaryCare part Deux, Economic malaise or collapse, Middle East chaos … might impose on the script. But extracting equal time or fair treatment from CNN or NBC … good luck Reince. But the statement is worthwhile.

So to appease the GOP leaders NBC will produce retrospective on both Reagan and GW Bush. The first will be called “Father of Evil” and the second will be called “Idiot Son of Evil”.

The RNC will thank NBC for hearing their complaint and responding appropriately. NBC will then get to do the first debate of the 2016 race with David Gregory as moderator. It will be billed as “The Angel versus The Devil”…..

NBC, CNN? Does anyone really watch them? I gave up NBC when Johnny Carson retired.

I actually snorted out loud when I read the part about their reputation.

Greg Sargent is such a proggie hack shill. Really… gaming the media refs? You really want to go there after the presidential debates last fall?

The RNC will fold. They always do.

They shouldn’t “partner” with them anyway, on principle. They shouldn’t have partnered with them — or with ABC, CNN or CBS — in 2008, during the ritualistic partisan hazings and floggings masquerading as “debates.” Same in 2012. Incredible that not one Republican candidate objected to the self-abasing abuse as they stood on stages and endured the idiotic, insulting repetitions of the same questions entirely chosen and fashioned to embarrass them or limit their responses.

The GOP should insist on a debate run and moderated by C-Span to which networks could tie in for the feed but have NO ROLE IN WHATSOEVER. But that would entail the GOP start thinking like winners and not masochists and kept bi*ches of the Leftist media.

I’m not real impressed with this maneuver. It’s coming from the GOP after all. Ever since the GOP participated in the sliming of Sarah Palin, I lost all hope for, and respect of, the party.

What the GOP needs in 2016 is a true conservative with a steely spine, and that will never happen with all that RINO deadwood clogging the party.

    el polacko in reply to Kitty. | August 6, 2013 at 2:22 am

    it was this so-called “rino” name-calling and infighting that lost us the last presidential election. it’s time knock that crap off.
    what the GOP needs is to be seen as a BIG tent, not a tight little group of crabby ‘true conservatives’.

Rush said last week that Hill-larry won’t be the Deemocrat candidate in ’16.

Great minds…


    Musson in reply to Ragspierre. | August 5, 2013 at 3:31 pm

    Are the Obamas arrogant enough to run Michelle? They keept the organization together to do it.

      Ragspierre in reply to Musson. | August 5, 2013 at 3:57 pm

      I have predicted it. It would be the third Obama term, right?

      And she is WAY more dangerous than Pres. Snoop-Dog. Partly because she is mean as a snake.

      Milhouse in reply to Musson. | August 5, 2013 at 4:24 pm

      Absolutely. I’ve been predicting it for a while.

      (Then again, my prediction ability is worth zero. I was convinced, as far back as December 2008, that Clinton would challenge 0bama in 2012, and attempt do to him what Kennedy very nearly did to Carter; and that since, as far as we know, she hasn’t killed anyone, she would succeed. I was also predicting that Clinton, having defeated 0bama, would have to take a black running mate to appease black voters. In 2008 I was predicting Harold Ford for this role; after he spectacularly crashed and burned I thought she might make a bold move and recruit Michael Steele. Meanwhile, on the GOP side, I was predicting Palin and Jindal. Thus there would be no white men on either major party ticket. Of course none of this fantasy came to pass.)

        walls in reply to Milhouse. | August 5, 2013 at 4:33 pm

        “as far as we know, she hasn’t killed anyone”

        Speaking from the grave, Ron Brown and Vince Foster disagree.

RNC will cave and wimp out. Na na na na naaaaaa na. I won’t play with you any more. I won’t give you any more of my special kale treats.

Watching that miniseries would be like watching paint dry. Yet, some low information voters would like that kind of mind-numbing programming – The Real Housewives of DC.

How about the RNC create a TV series about American heros let down by Democrats.

OMG – the RNC finally found a PAIR !!!!!
(They must have borrowed them from Ted Cruz !)

This shouldn’t bother the DNC in the slightest. With the GOP out of the media, they’ll be able to do as they please in promoting Hillary.

MaggotAtBroadAndWall | August 5, 2013 at 1:42 pm

I think we need to demand the RNC sponsor at least one major televised primary debate moderated by Mark Levin with people like Mark Steyn, Rush, Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams and Larry Elders asking the questions.

I’m flexible on who the actual moderators/questioners are. The point is we need at least one of the debates to focus on issues important to conservatives and libertarians, and strong conservatives/libertarians will ask the questions that matter most to us.

It does not matter who the Republicans nominate in 2016, nor the Dems. The Democrat candidate will win. The fix is already in:



They shouldn’t be “partnering” with those networks in the first place.

It’s like letting the opposing team supply the umpires/referees for a game.

In fact, it’s EXACTLY like that.

People don’t realize how much elections mean to the networks in terms of money.

Time to cut off the spigot from our ideological enemies.

It’s not rocket science.

Why should Republicans allow ANY “mainstream” media involvement in debates?

Folks, the progressive (note, *progressive*, not liberal) media doesn’t “love” Hillary Clinton. They hate her. Even more so than the rightwingers. The only reason they would air a special series on Hillary is to deflect any criticism when they pitch a hissy fit if she decides to run in 2016.

Carol Herman | August 5, 2013 at 3:50 pm

Am I the only one who thinks hillary can lose?

What’s probably more problematical, is the way the republican label seems to be characterized by (how should I put this delicately)? A group that thinks it can finagle against abortion, if only they can pick the people who reach the “supreme’s?” What happens when you can’t modify something that tends to turn voters off?

I think hillary tends to turn off way more people than you can count. Let alone how she fails when she’s compared to her husband, Bill.

What a funny club is the “insider’s club” within both parties of politics.

The press isn’t going to give any mileage to Mitch Daniels. But oddly enough I think he’d have a better shot at getting elected … than fancy pants Romney. Or “is he still alive?” Bob Dole. And, McCain is the antithesis of a rational man.

But go ahead. Pick horses. When the race begins you can scream yourself horse. But hopefully someone will get picked that doesn’t look extreme. Or worse, gets scratched before he reaches the gate.

    I think Hillary has the same problem as Jeb Bush. While they are both popular with “average” Americans, neither is for sale. So, yes, I agree with you. Hillary can’t win. (But I don’t think she’s going to run either.) In late 2015, a stealth candidate will suddenly appear on the horizon and proceed to crush the opposition, to hell with what the voters say or want; and TPTB will have a new puppet installed. He will look a lot like the previous two puppets.

No wonder Hilly left the State Department – she had more important concerns – ‘make-up’ was calling for her mini-series. And she’s soooo disgustingly full of herself she’s at the whim of the Democratic Party’s PR saying “Ohhh, that was a great take, Hillary, YOU”RE A STAR!!!’ It is truly is nauseating.

IMO the DNC has to make it appear that Hillary is a shoo-in because if they are seen as shafting her AGAIN the backlash won’t be pretty. If they appear to support her they may be hoping that the GOP attacks her enough that “she steps aside for the good of the Party” and allows some better minority man to be the candidate.

Let the legacy media air the miniseries. Boycotting the legacy media will take away significant leverage they use in pushing certain GOP candidates towards the Republican primary and caucus goers.

Henry Hawkins | August 5, 2013 at 10:59 pm

Hillary Clinton has no record of success at any level and little of the intangible charisma required to overcome a resume blank of any presidency-worthy achievements. Far from it. Once riled, she comes off as a bit of a shrill harpy, which is off-putting. Lord knows how many enemies she must have made along the way. Her path to the White House is far from clear.

She will, however, carry the full blessing of the media simply for being a liberal. She’ll have the ‘first female president’ historical thing going for her, despite the fact that the ‘first black president’ historical thing was no charm.

No, for Hillary to win, she’ll need no derailing scandals rising out of her Sec of State days (Benghazi), no major gaffes, but mostly she’ll need a weak GOP opponent running on a toothless GOP platform designed to offend no one.

In other words, she’s practically a shoe-in for 2016.

you would think that the candy crowley performance at the last debates would have been ‘the last straw’. when will the GOP wake up to the fact that cnn is not their friend ?