ABC Ambushes Obama
- Thread starter blackascoal
- Start date
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
I didn't watch last night for two reasons....
1) Obama already has the nomination. He is simply politely waiting for Hillary to realize it.
2) It was on ABC. It was damn near a given that they were going to focus on the "lets see if we can get them to fight" approach. Second point on ABC... how the hell do you let someone who worked for Bill Clinton be one of the moderators? Especially Snuffalupagos.
Liberals complaining about media bias. Gotta love it. How does it feel, fellas, to be treated like Republicans?
There is a bias, of course. If there weren't, we would have had questions directed at both candidates such as, "Senator, you have advocated the Federal government controlling health care. However, no authority for such control can be found in the Constitution, and the 10th amendment specifically states that any power not found in the Constitution is reserved to the states or the people, meaning it's forbidden to the Fed. How do you explain your advocacy for Federal health care programs, in light of this?"
They could then move on to similar questions about Social Security, the EPA, OSHA, etc., and whether the candidates favored amending the Constitution to include any powers to legislate in these areas.
But for some reason, such fundamental questions were never asked. Would you like to guess why?
Because very very very few people are in favor of abolishing Social Security, OSHA, the EPA and both candidates have fairly specific healthcare proposals that do not involve the federal government controlling healthcare. Alternatively, these questions appear to be policy questions. Debates aren't for policy discussions, they're for trivia and gossip.
What do I win?
evince
Truthmatters
I think they did pick on President O a bit last night.
He took it well I think.
I could see him standing there and steaming a little but his answers were measured and he contained any affront he held and came out looking even better for it I think.
I think when they throw this kind of stupid stuff at him he just rises to the occation.
I saw a little hint of how this man would be a president. People will be reading his physical stance and parsing the lack of smile on his fase to try and tell what he really thinks of Putin or another leader he is meeting with.
I just like this guy more every time I see him in action.
YES WE CAN!
He took it well I think.
I could see him standing there and steaming a little but his answers were measured and he contained any affront he held and came out looking even better for it I think.
I think when they throw this kind of stupid stuff at him he just rises to the occation.
I saw a little hint of how this man would be a president. People will be reading his physical stance and parsing the lack of smile on his fase to try and tell what he really thinks of Putin or another leader he is meeting with.
I just like this guy more every time I see him in action.
YES WE CAN!
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
I don't disagree with this .. just pointing out the obvious about the debate.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
Good points.
Little-Acorn
New member
No more than usual.
I didn't watch it, there is only so many times I can hear the same questions answered over and over without starting to look for dumb things like ticks of the eye or something. Or sighs and eye-rolling... You know, that important stuff that made Gore lose.
Just look at what I did to Titanic while watching it one time.
Obama is the nominee, it's time to start watching him and McCain in some Debates.
Just look at what I did to Titanic while watching it one time.
Obama is the nominee, it's time to start watching him and McCain in some Debates.
Sorry; I should have put a "sarcasm" note for you. The fact is, not one of the current Democratic contenders for President has a proposal for the Federal gov't "controlling" healthcare.
This is just the usual right-wing fearmongering tactic. I believe you would probably use the word "hysterical" to describe it.
evince
Truthmatters
They did bring up the Clinton lie about the airport sniper spray and I thought she answered badly. There is no good answer for her on that one but they mentioned her not trustworthy numbers and everything in it. She basically said I said something that was not true...translation I lied.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
As I said, the tabloid debate raises as many questions about ABC as it has about the candidates.
What If ABC Held a Debate, but Forgot to Show Up?
All night long, every time I'd think about the ABC "debate" (sic), three reactions rose up - 1) grind my teeth to an angry pulp, 2) let my head explode, or 3) type something to let the steam out.
This morning, I still can't believe I was able to make it through 45 minutes of the broadcast.
This was topflight journalism at its worst. This was ABC's old, flimsy history with threadbare sizzle packaged as news. It was a tabloid debate with tabloid questions. Matt Drudge come to life on a respectable stage. From what I subsequently discovered, they actually, eventually got around to real issues -- after over an hour. But watching it for a mere 45 minutes made me feel almost seedy. I wanted to shower to get the smarm off. I love news, I admire professional journalists, I cherish the Mainstream Media, even when they flounder, because it is the core of democracy. But this was embarrassing. This was pathetic. This was just a cheesy press conference with cheesy questions.
Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos should be ashamed. I'm sure they have all of their reasons wrapped nicely with a bow, explaining why they asked what they asked and why it was proper and good and noble. Sorry, it wasn't. They put this on in prime time across the nation, and turned it into a slimy, Fox Network reality show. A cross between Who Wants to Marry a Millionaire? and Temptation Island. Something like, So, You Want to Be President?!
This was a disservice to America.
Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are running for President of the United States. It's a job that really, seriously matters. There are critically important issues facing the nation, right now. Last week, 81% of Americans said that they felt that the country had pretty seriously gotten off-track. There's the five-year Iraq War with 4,000 Americans dead and trillions spent. A national deficit pushing the country to recession. The G8 nations have expressed their tottering concern about the dollar. Global warming has put the entire globe at risk. The president and his top cabinet advisor are discovered in a memo to have discussed how to allow torture.
And for the first hour, the very first things these moderators could think of asking the two people in line to become the most powerful person in the world was -- what one of their pastors said? Who else also sat on a community board with him? Whether he used the best syntax in describing anger in America?
This was shameless. Hurtful.
And for all the post-debate commentators saying how "on the defensive" Barack Obama was -- most of them should be ashamed, as well, not pointing out how ghastly the questions were. They failed, as well.
What I saw during the "debate" (sic) made me completely agree with Senator Obama saying repeatedly that these questions are about things that don't matter in the lives of Americans. He wasn't "defensive." He was right. There's a difference. He answered the questions - same as he'd answered the questions before. But --
What his pastor said...Does Not Matter.
Who he served on a community board with...Does Not Matter.
Whether he is elitist for using the word "bitter"...Does Not Matter.
What matters is that there are angry people in Pennsylvania, and in America. What matters is what issues Barack Obama was dealing with on that community board he was a member of. What matters is what Barack Obama himself says.
What matters is the Iraq War. Torture. The Economy. Education. The price of gas. Domestic spying on Americans. Global warming. National security.
If Mr. Gibson and Mr. Stephanopoulos felt so-deeply compelled to toss in some of their Questions Lite -- even though they'd been asked and addressed repeatedly through the past weeks -- that's fine, ask them, at least the ones that dance on the edge of substance But have the decency to hold them to later, after you've established the gravitas of the debate. Because otherwise, when you start by throwing out chum for the first hour, what you establish is that these are the things that "matter." And what comes later, nah, that's just afterthought.
Republican pundits do themselves no good pushing these empty topics, which they do only because they have no platform to run on. And Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos bought into it.
And Hillary Clinton did herself no good either by repeating that these things matter -- saying that "the Republicans will bring them up." News Flash: the Republicans will bring up just as much about her. And those won't substantively matter either. Or even necessarily be true.
Hillary Clinton has much good in her abilities. She has qualities that could make her an excellent president. But we are watching a person disintegrate before our eyes, throwing out the quality of her past and risking her future.
But this isn't about Hillary Clinton. This is about Charles Gibson, George Stephanopoulos and ABC "News." They were given a high responsibility to broadcast in the public interest. Instead, they spent the time in the empty gutter.
For the network of Lost and Desperate, they were both.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-j-elisberg/what-if-abc-held-a-debate_b_97152.html
What If ABC Held a Debate, but Forgot to Show Up?
All night long, every time I'd think about the ABC "debate" (sic), three reactions rose up - 1) grind my teeth to an angry pulp, 2) let my head explode, or 3) type something to let the steam out.
This morning, I still can't believe I was able to make it through 45 minutes of the broadcast.
This was topflight journalism at its worst. This was ABC's old, flimsy history with threadbare sizzle packaged as news. It was a tabloid debate with tabloid questions. Matt Drudge come to life on a respectable stage. From what I subsequently discovered, they actually, eventually got around to real issues -- after over an hour. But watching it for a mere 45 minutes made me feel almost seedy. I wanted to shower to get the smarm off. I love news, I admire professional journalists, I cherish the Mainstream Media, even when they flounder, because it is the core of democracy. But this was embarrassing. This was pathetic. This was just a cheesy press conference with cheesy questions.
Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos should be ashamed. I'm sure they have all of their reasons wrapped nicely with a bow, explaining why they asked what they asked and why it was proper and good and noble. Sorry, it wasn't. They put this on in prime time across the nation, and turned it into a slimy, Fox Network reality show. A cross between Who Wants to Marry a Millionaire? and Temptation Island. Something like, So, You Want to Be President?!
This was a disservice to America.
Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are running for President of the United States. It's a job that really, seriously matters. There are critically important issues facing the nation, right now. Last week, 81% of Americans said that they felt that the country had pretty seriously gotten off-track. There's the five-year Iraq War with 4,000 Americans dead and trillions spent. A national deficit pushing the country to recession. The G8 nations have expressed their tottering concern about the dollar. Global warming has put the entire globe at risk. The president and his top cabinet advisor are discovered in a memo to have discussed how to allow torture.
And for the first hour, the very first things these moderators could think of asking the two people in line to become the most powerful person in the world was -- what one of their pastors said? Who else also sat on a community board with him? Whether he used the best syntax in describing anger in America?
This was shameless. Hurtful.
And for all the post-debate commentators saying how "on the defensive" Barack Obama was -- most of them should be ashamed, as well, not pointing out how ghastly the questions were. They failed, as well.
What I saw during the "debate" (sic) made me completely agree with Senator Obama saying repeatedly that these questions are about things that don't matter in the lives of Americans. He wasn't "defensive." He was right. There's a difference. He answered the questions - same as he'd answered the questions before. But --
What his pastor said...Does Not Matter.
Who he served on a community board with...Does Not Matter.
Whether he is elitist for using the word "bitter"...Does Not Matter.
What matters is that there are angry people in Pennsylvania, and in America. What matters is what issues Barack Obama was dealing with on that community board he was a member of. What matters is what Barack Obama himself says.
What matters is the Iraq War. Torture. The Economy. Education. The price of gas. Domestic spying on Americans. Global warming. National security.
If Mr. Gibson and Mr. Stephanopoulos felt so-deeply compelled to toss in some of their Questions Lite -- even though they'd been asked and addressed repeatedly through the past weeks -- that's fine, ask them, at least the ones that dance on the edge of substance But have the decency to hold them to later, after you've established the gravitas of the debate. Because otherwise, when you start by throwing out chum for the first hour, what you establish is that these are the things that "matter." And what comes later, nah, that's just afterthought.
Republican pundits do themselves no good pushing these empty topics, which they do only because they have no platform to run on. And Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos bought into it.
And Hillary Clinton did herself no good either by repeating that these things matter -- saying that "the Republicans will bring them up." News Flash: the Republicans will bring up just as much about her. And those won't substantively matter either. Or even necessarily be true.
Hillary Clinton has much good in her abilities. She has qualities that could make her an excellent president. But we are watching a person disintegrate before our eyes, throwing out the quality of her past and risking her future.
But this isn't about Hillary Clinton. This is about Charles Gibson, George Stephanopoulos and ABC "News." They were given a high responsibility to broadcast in the public interest. Instead, they spent the time in the empty gutter.
For the network of Lost and Desperate, they were both.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-j-elisberg/what-if-abc-held-a-debate_b_97152.html
Yeah, then we can hear equally bad questions to McCain about his having left his seriously ill wife after having had multiple affairs, having been a member of the "Keating Five," having had a relationship with a much younger lobbyist that his staff felt the need to try and block, having intervened on behalf of the client of said young lobbyist with a federal agency, having denounced then embraced Jerry Falwell, having denounced then embraced the Bush tax cuts, having confused Shiite with Sunni, having confused Al Qaeda in Iraq with the Mahdi Army, having actively sought the endorsement and appeared on stage with a man who denounced the Catholic Church as a whore, and having stated that he knew next to nothing about economics.
Then again, that won't happen.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
This is why McCain wants Obama to pledge to play nice.
They'll all pledge away and then claim no control over the 527s.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
That is true, but the 527's will only further educate Americans about the absolute silliness of what we call politics.
Like Obama, I have faith that Americans aren't as dumb as we have appeared to be over the last 8 years.
I believe that we aren't either. However, I don't necessarily believe that means that Obama will be elected in the General.
Of course, it doesn't matter to me that much. I'll likely vote Libertarian.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
BOB BARR ??????????????????
Damo .. step away from the sharp objects .. call 911 NOW.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
As I stated earlier ...
ABC criticized for handling of Democratic debate
The morning after the latest Democratic debate, the talk doesn't seem to be about which candidate -- New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton or Illinois Sen. Barack Obama -- would make a more-formidable foe to run against Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain.
The talk seems to be about which of the two ABC News moderators -- Charles Gibson or George Stephanopoulos -- did the worst job, which one was sillier in Philadelphia.
"In Pa. Debate, The Clear Loser Is ABC" is the headline over the piece by style columnist Tom Shales in The Washington Post. "The Debate: A Shameful Night for the U.S. Media," read one headline on the Web site "The Huffington Post" -- while another called it "Worst. Debate. Ever."
"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," Huffington Post analyst Greg Mitchell wrote on the site Thursday. "They, and their network, should hang their collective heads in shame.
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/politics/ny-lideba0417,0,2555993.story
Blogtalk: Bloggers Turn Up Heat on ABC
The major gripe among the blogosphere today: ABC News spent way, way too much time drilling Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama about their stumbles on the campaign trail instead of focusing on policy issues.
Bloggers at the liberal Daily Kos (which has a heavy Obama following) dedicated the most electronic ink against ABC’s Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos, the debate moderators.
One of the writers, Hunter, went so far as to say their handling of the debate was “so deeply embarrassing to the nation that it will be pointed to, in future books and documentary works, as a prime example of the collapse of the American media into utter and complete substanceless, into self-celebrated vapidity, and into a now-complete inability or unwillingness to cover the most important affairs of the nation to any but the most shallow of depths.”
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/17/blogtalk-bloggers-turn-up-heat-on-abc/
ABC criticized for handling of Democratic debate
The morning after the latest Democratic debate, the talk doesn't seem to be about which candidate -- New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton or Illinois Sen. Barack Obama -- would make a more-formidable foe to run against Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain.
The talk seems to be about which of the two ABC News moderators -- Charles Gibson or George Stephanopoulos -- did the worst job, which one was sillier in Philadelphia.
"In Pa. Debate, The Clear Loser Is ABC" is the headline over the piece by style columnist Tom Shales in The Washington Post. "The Debate: A Shameful Night for the U.S. Media," read one headline on the Web site "The Huffington Post" -- while another called it "Worst. Debate. Ever."
"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," Huffington Post analyst Greg Mitchell wrote on the site Thursday. "They, and their network, should hang their collective heads in shame.
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/politics/ny-lideba0417,0,2555993.story
Blogtalk: Bloggers Turn Up Heat on ABC
The major gripe among the blogosphere today: ABC News spent way, way too much time drilling Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama about their stumbles on the campaign trail instead of focusing on policy issues.
Bloggers at the liberal Daily Kos (which has a heavy Obama following) dedicated the most electronic ink against ABC’s Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos, the debate moderators.
One of the writers, Hunter, went so far as to say their handling of the debate was “so deeply embarrassing to the nation that it will be pointed to, in future books and documentary works, as a prime example of the collapse of the American media into utter and complete substanceless, into self-celebrated vapidity, and into a now-complete inability or unwillingness to cover the most important affairs of the nation to any but the most shallow of depths.”
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/17/blogtalk-bloggers-turn-up-heat-on-abc/