Left Wing Blogs Upset Over Debate Questions

[red states rule]

The left wing nuts are pissed at ABC, and the debate mods over the hard questions asked Barry Obama and Hillary

Here are some examples

*********OFFICIAL FUCK YOU ABC THREAD **********
Worst fucking debate ever. Gibson and Stephanopoulos should be fired.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5535620



ABC'S GOTCHA DEBATE: RATINGS UP... REPUTATION DOWN

BIO
Bob Cesca: The Very Serious Debate, Starring The Very Serious George & CharlieThe nation has witnessed, firsthand, George Stephanopoulos and Charlie Gibson for who they really are: pandering yellow journalists. Carnival barkers. They're Penn & Teller without the talent or insight. Here we had two members of the very serious traditional media going after two Democrats in ways which they have never challenged members of the Bush administration. George and Charlie made the FOX News Channel debates, with all of their Love American Style graphics and fire alarms and wacky fart sound effects, look like the Continental Congress.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/


It seems Republicans can be asked loaded and slanted questions - but Dems can not be asked tough but reasonable questions

[mundame]

The left wing nuts are pissed at ABC, and the debate mods over the hard questions asked Barry Obama and Hillary

Here are some examples

*********OFFICIAL FUCK YOU ABC THREAD **********
Worst fucking debate ever. Gibson and Stephanopoulos should be fired.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5535620



ABC'S GOTCHA DEBATE: RATINGS UP... REPUTATION DOWN



People MUST be angry --- I've been trying to get to the story on the WaPo about "Clear Loser is ABC," but I can't get in! Too many people clicking the link, maybe.

[red states rule]

People MUST be angry --- I've been trying to get to the story on the WaPo about "Clear Loser is ABC," but I can't get in! Too many people clicking the link, maybe.

Mundame, most liberals are angry. It has been their natural state of mind since the 2000 election

They have been running on hate ever since

[stephanie]

Man this is RICH...I'm rather enjoying it all..

:dance:

[red states rule]

Man this is RICH...I'm rather enjoying it all..

:dance:

Make sure to give some credit to Operation Chaos and Sean hannity

It is fun to wath Stephanie

[Gaffer]

I'm more bothered by the insult to Penn and Teller. How dare she compare those yahoo's to the great P&T. I call Bullshit!

[gabosaurus]

RSR, you must have nothing to do all day except pore over internet blogs and post your favorites on this board. You post more absolute crap anyone else here.
You really need a hobby. Or least a job.

[red states rule]

RSR, you must have nothing to do all day except pore over internet blogs and post your favorites on this board. You post more absolute crap anyone else here.
You really need a hobby. Or least a job.

No comment on your fellow libs having a fit over Hillary and Obama being asked hard questions?

No, you have to attack me for posting their temper tanturm

Or could it be you are mad because I blew you out of the water on your own thread "Why Hillary won't get the nomination"?

[gabosaurus]

Thanks for affirming my point. Do you monitor this board every minute of the day? :laugh2:

[red states rule]

Thanks for affirming my point. Do you monitor this board every minute of the day? :laugh2:

Still ducking the topic of the thread?

[gabosaurus]

You are using DU as an example of "outrage"? Come on...

Still ducking my question?

[red states rule]

You are using DU as an example of "outrage"? Come on...

Still ducking my question?

Also the Daily Kos, and many liberal commentaters are in a tizzy

They do not expect their candidates to be asked hard questions, as they expect Republican candidates to be asked

Barry was humilated over raising the capital gains tax, It showed his total lack of knowledge of economics

This is what the left wing is pissed at

[stephanie]

Poor Obambam...He didn't exactly show himself to be the brightest bulb to come out of Harvard....

It's a real gas..watching all the left whining about his treatment by the lame-stream media, when Republicans have been saying this FOR YRS...they never had a problem with it then...what were we told.........suck it up, quit yer bitching...........

I'm :laugh2::laugh2::dance:

[midcan5]

In Pa. Debate, The Clear Loser Is ABC By Tom Shales

"For the first 52 minutes of the two-hour, commercial-crammed show, Gibson and Stephanopoulos dwelled entirely on specious and gossipy trivia that already has been hashed and rehashed, in the hope of getting the candidates to claw at one another over disputes that are no longer news. Some were barely news to begin with...

Obama was right on the money when he complained about the campaign being bogged down in media-driven inanities and obsessiveness over any misstatement a candidate might make along the way, whether in a speech or while being eavesdropped upon by the opposition. The tactic has been to "take one statement and beat it to death," he said."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/17/AR2008041700013.html?sub=AR


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6oGF3cyHE7M

[red states rule]

In Pa. Debate, The Clear Loser Is ABC By Tom Shales

"For the first 52 minutes of the two-hour, commercial-crammed show, Gibson and Stephanopoulos dwelled entirely on specious and gossipy trivia that already has been hashed and rehashed, in the hope of getting the candidates to claw at one another over disputes that are no longer news. Some were barely news to begin with...

Obama was right on the money when he complained about the campaign being bogged down in media-driven inanities and obsessiveness over any misstatement a candidate might make along the way, whether in a speech or while being eavesdropped upon by the opposition. The tactic has been to "take one statement and beat it to death," he said."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/17/AR2008041700013.html?sub=AR


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6oGF3cyHE7M

So now asking questions about Barry's judgement is off limits

I love seeing the libs whining over the nerve of asking hard questions to thier candidates

Clinton-Obama Debate: ABC Hit on Focus on Minor Issues

By Greg Mitchell

Published: April 16, 2008 10:15 PM ET

NEW YORK In perhaps the most embarrassing performance by the media in a major presidential debate in years, ABC News hosts Charles Gibson and George Stephanopolous focused mainly on trivial issues as Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama faced off in Philadelphia.

Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the health care and mortgage crises, the overall state of the economy and dozens of other pressing issues had to wait for their few moments in the sun as Obama was pressed to explain his recent "bitter" gaffe and relationship with Rev. Wright (seemingly a dead issue) and not wearing a flag pin while Clinton had to answer again for her Bosnia trip exaggerations.

Then it was back to Obama to defend his slim association with a former '60s radical -- a question that came out of rightwing talk radio and Sean Hannity on TV, but delivered by former Bill Clinton aide Stephanopolous. This approach led to a claim that Clinton's husband pardoned two other '60s radicals. And so on.

More time was spent on all of this than segments on getting out of Iraq and keeping people from losing their homes and other key issues. Gibson only got excited when he complained about anyone daring to raise taxes on his capital gains.

Yet neither candidate had the courage to ask the moderators to turn to those far more important issues. But some in the crowd did -- booing Gibson near the end.

Yet David Brooks' review at The New York Times concluded: "I thought the questions were excellent." He gave ABC an "A."

But Tom Shales of The Washington Post had an opposite view: "Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos, turned in shoddy, despicable performances." Walter Shapiro, the former USA Today political writer, declared in Salon, "Broadcast to a prime-time network audience on ABC and devoid of a single policy question during its opening 50 minutes, the debate easily could have convinced the uninitiated that American politics has all the substance of a Beavis and Butt-Head marathon."
*

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003790556



The ABC Democratic Debate: An American Disgrace

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anyone who had an hour to kill before American Idol on Wed. night might have caught some of the Obama/Hillary debate on ABC. If so, they may now believe this election is about what Barack Obama's pastor and some guy he knows in Chicago said, whether or not Obama will wear a flag pin, and whether either candidate will raise investor's capital gains taxes. After 7 years of the worst, most corrupt mismanagement this country has known, moderators Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos chose those topics among the most pressing to put in front of the first network audience of this election.

Clearly the prime directive was to make the candidates squirm rather than conduct anything resembling a valid interview for the most powerful position in the world. There are a lot of things any and every candidate should be drilled on, especially if both parties had been represented. But the petty crap these two focused on makes me think this was brought to us by the producers of Desperate Housewives. If I was in charge at ABC and their questioning wasn't endorsed by the network, the next job for both of those assclowns would be scrapping gum from the underside of audience chairs at the Jimmy Kimmel Show.

Ironically, the theme of this debate was the Constitution. There is no meatier issue than the current assaults on our Constitution and who can restore it, however, ABC would have you believe the flag is the main course and our rights are the garnish on the plate.

The real theme of this debate was
"How Do You Respond to Every Bad Thing Republicans Say About You?"

The subtheme was
"Let's Hold the Black Guy to a Standard No Candidate Could Live Up To"
with an occasional redirection to
"Let's See If We Can Make Hillary More Menopausal Then She Already Is".

I found it particularly interesting that Obama didn't take the bait to pounce on Hillary after she admitted to lying about the sniper fire. Meanwhile, Hillary was relentless in following up on every Obama attack. (Memo to Obama: If you want to play hardball too and be done with this thing, run an ad noting that if she admits to lying now because she may "need more sleep" how is she's going to handle that 3am call as President.)

I'm sure a large chunk of viewers tuned out of "American Disgrace" on ABC when American Idol started and many of them will be sure to vote on which singer does a better job with a Mariah Carey song but will never see the inside of a voting booth when it comes to who would do a better job running this country.

Just when I was beginning to think cable news has really hit bottom, along comes this network news production. On my scorecard ABC is now DEF.

http://progressivesonline.com/showthread.php?t=1369

[theHawk]

Liberals are going apeshit that Stephanopoulos actually asked a hardball question to their liberal goldenboy. Stephanopoulos actually got the question from Sean Hannity on April 15th when he called into Hannity's radio show.

The liberals wanted this to be kept under the lid, now its national news. All they can do is say its a "smear attack" and say its not about the issues. The only problem is, Obama's character is an issue. If it didn't have the balls to protest Ayers being on that Woods board after what he said on 9/11, then Americans are not going to want him as their leader.

[red states rule]

Liberals are going apeshit that Stephanopoulos actually asked a hardball question to their liberal goldenboy. Stephanopoulos actually got the question from Sean Hannity on April 15th when he called into Hannity's radio show.

The liberals wanted this to be kept under the lid, now its national news. All they can do is say its a "smear attack" and say its not about the issues. The only problem is, Obama's character is an issue. If it didn't have the balls to protest Ayers being on that Woods board after what he said on 9/11, then Americans are not going to want him as their leader.

It is fun to watch, isn't it?

I am loving it.

[actsnoblemartin]

boo

way to hurl cheap shots, and not stickto the pont of the thread


RSR, you must have nothing to do all day except pore over internet blogs and post your favorites on this board. You post more absolute crap anyone else here.
You really need a hobby. Or least a job.

[red states rule]

The Washington Compost is in a tizzy over Barry having to answer some real questions

In Pa. Debate, The Clear Loser Is ABC

By Tom Shales
Thursday, April 17, 2008; C01



When Barack Obama met Hillary Clinton for another televised Democratic candidates' debate last night, it was more than a step forward in the 2008 presidential election. It was another step downward for network news -- in particular ABC News, which hosted the debate from Philadelphia and whose usually dependable anchors, Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos, turned in shoddy, despicable performances.

For the first 52 minutes of the two-hour, commercial-crammed show, Gibson and Stephanopoulos dwelled entirely on specious and gossipy trivia that already has been hashed and rehashed, in the hope of getting the candidates to claw at one another over disputes that are no longer news. Some were barely news to begin with.

The fact is, cable networks CNN and MSNBC both did better jobs with earlier candidate debates. Also, neither of those cable networks, if memory serves, rushed to a commercial break just five minutes into the proceedings, after giving each candidate a tiny, token moment to make an opening statement. Cable news is indeed taking over from network news, and merely by being competent.

Gibson sat there peering down at the candidates over glasses perched on the end of his nose, looking prosecutorial and at times portraying himself as a spokesman for the working class. Blunderingly he addressed an early question, about whether each would be willing to serve as the other's running mate, "to both of you," which is simple ineptitude or bad manners. It was his job to indicate which candidate should answer first. When, understandably, both waited politely for the other to talk, Gibson said snidely, "Don't all speak at once."

For that matter, the running-mate question that Gibson made such a big deal over was decidedly not a big deal -- especially since Wolf Blitzer asked it during a previous debate televised and produced by CNN.

The boyish Stephanopoulos, who has done wonders with the network's Sunday morning hour, "This Week" (as, indeed, has Gibson with the nightly "World News"), looked like an overly ambitious intern helping out at a subcommittee hearing, digging through notes for something smart-alecky and slimy. He came up with such tired tripe as a charge that Obama once associated with a nutty bomb-throwing anarchist. That was "40 years ago, when I was 8 years old," Obama said with exasperation.

Obama was right on the money when he complained about the campaign being bogged down in media-driven inanities and obsessiveness over any misstatement a candidate might make along the way, whether in a speech or while being eavesdropped upon by the opposition. The tactic has been to "take one statement and beat it to death," he said.

No sooner was that said than Gibson brought up, yet again, the controversial ravings of the pastor at a church attended by Obama. "Charlie, I've discussed this," he said, and indeed he has, ad infinitum. If he tried to avoid repeating himself when clarifying his position, the networks would accuse him of changing his story, or changing his tune, or some other baloney.

This is precisely what has happened with widely reported comments that Obama made about working-class people "clinging" to religion and guns during these times of cynicism about their federal government.

"It's not the first time I made a misstatement that was mangled up, and it won't be the last," said Obama, with refreshing candor. But candor is dangerous in a national campaign, what with network newsniks waiting for mistakes or foul-ups like dogs panting for treats after performing a trick. The networks' trick is covering an election with as little emphasis on issues as possible, then blaming everyone else for failing to focus on "the issues."

Some news may have come out of the debate (ABC News will pretend it did a great job on today's edition of its soppy, soap-operatic "Good Morning America"). Asked point-blank if she thought Obama could defeat presumptive Republican contender John McCain in the general election, Clinton said, "Yes, yes, yes," in apparent contrast to previous remarks in which she reportedly told other Democrats that Obama could never win. And in turn, Obama said that Clinton could "absolutely" win against McCain.

To this observer, ABC's coverage seemed slanted against Obama. The director cut several times to reaction shots of such Clinton supporters as her daughter, Chelsea, who sat in the audience at the Kimmel Theater in Philly's National Constitution Center. Obama supporters did not get equal screen time, giving the impression that there weren't any in the hall. The director also clumsily chose to pan the audience at the very start of the debate, when the candidates made their opening statements, so Obama and Clinton were barely seen before the first commercial break.

At the end, Gibson pompously thanked the candidates -- or was he really patting himself on the back? -- for "what I think has been a fascinating debate." He's entitled to his opinion, but the most fascinating aspect was waiting to see how low he and Stephanopoulos would go, and then being appalled at the answer.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/17/AR2008041700013_pf.html

[red states rule]

This is getting good folks. Now the Daily Kooks are going after ABC and Disney

All this because Barry was put on the spot with hard questions, and he got the deer in the headlights look


Tomorrow We Take On ABC, and Disney
by Dartagnan
Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 06:23:45 PM PDT
Well folks, you've witnessed it. I can't describe it any better than what you've already seen. I'm not sure what their motivation is. I really don't care. I've never seen anything quite like it in my life and I hope I never have to see it again.

My opinions on this are largely irrelevant. What matters to this network is money, and that is where we need to go. Starting tomorrow, my spare time, meager as it is, will be dedicated to revealing the advertisers of this network, for the purpose of organized boycotts.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/4/16/211134/946/171/497152

[red states rule]

Tom,

I hope this finds you doing well.

I read your piece with great curiosity this morning especially because I didn’t recall you ever having the same negative reaction to any of the multiple debates where the moderators were extremely tough on senator Clinton (much much tougher than either Stephanopoulos or Gibson were on either candidate last night). I did a lexis search to make sure I hadn’t missed you crying foul about any of these debates and my memory proved me correct. Msnbc was so tough on senator Clinton (including devoting over well over the first hour of two debates to tough questions to senator Clinton) that they were mocked and criticized by many for the imbalance of their coverage, though notably not you. In fact, you found their most recent debate to be “too tame and tepid.”

To be clear, I don’t think it is a bad thing for the press to be tough on presidential candidates (or their staff for that matter). These people are running for president after all, and if you cant handle a tv anchor how should the American people expect you to handle a hostile world leader? My only complaint is when a different standard exists for each candidate, which is the glaring issue with your piece. It is troubling to me that tough on one candidate is deserving of your outrage, and tough on another candidate is fair game, even “too tame.” I would posit that if one is going to be playing referee with media coverage it is all the more important not to have a double standard.

When you get a chance I would appreciate an explanation of how the various debates differed.

Best,

Jay
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0408/Clinton_spokesman_takes_aim_at_Shales.html

[PostmodernProphet]

RSR, you must have nothing to do all day except pore over internet blogs and post your favorites on this board. You post more absolute crap anyone else here.
You really need a hobby. Or least a job.

at least we agree that if you quote leftist blogs you end up with absolute crap......

[red states rule]

at least we agree that if you quote leftist blogs you end up with absolute crap......

If not for their double standards liberal would have no standards at all

McCain is getting a break here. he can campaign, raise money, and let the Dems destroy each other

With Operation Chaos, the Clinton machine can bloody Obama for him. Since McCain won't do it

[red states rule]

This from liberal moonbat Frank Rich. Why do liberals have such a huge problem with their Golden Boy being asked hard questions?


Shoddy! Tawdry! A Televised Train Wreck!

By FRANK RICH
Published: April 20, 2008
“THE crowd is turning on me,” said Charles Gibson, the ABC anchor, when the audience jeered him in the final moments of Wednesday night’s face-off between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

can’t remember a debate in which the only memorable moment was the audience’s heckling of a moderator. Then again, I can’t remember a debate that became such an instant national gag, earning reviews more appropriate to a slasher movie like “Prom Night” than a civic event held in Philadelphia’s National Constitution Center:

“Shoddy, despicable!” — The Washington Post

“A tawdry affair!” — The Boston Globe

“A televised train wreck!” — The Philadelphia Daily News

And those were the polite ones. Let’s not even go to the blogosphere.

Of course, Obama fans were angry because of the barrage of McCarthyesque guilt-by-association charges against their candidate, portraying him as a fellow traveler of bomb-throwing, America-hating, flag-denigrating terrorists. The debate’s co-moderator, George Stephanopoulos, second to no journalist in his firsthand knowledge of the Clinton White House, could have easily rectified the imbalance. All he had to do was draw on his expertise to ask similar questions about Bill Clinton’s check-bearing business and foundation associates circling a potential new Clinton administration. He did not.

But viewers of all political persuasions were affronted by the moderators’ failure to ask about the mortgage crisis, health care, the environment, torture, education, China policy, the pending G.I. bill to aid veterans, or the war we’re losing in Afghanistan. Those minutes were devoted not just to recycling the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Bosnian sniper fire and another lame question about a possible “dream ticket” but to the unseemly number of intrusive commercials and network promos that prompted the jeering at the end. The trashiest ads often bumped directly into an ABC announcer’s periodic recitations of quotations from the Constitution. Such defacing of American values is to be expected, I guess, from a network whose debate moderators refuse to wear flag pins.

for the complete article

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/opinion/20rich.html?_r=1&oref=slogin