George Stephanopoulos Responds To Obama, Defends Handling Of Debate
At some point amid the hailstorm of criticism that greeted ABC's handling of yesterday's Dem debate, moderator George Stephanopoulos received an email -- one of the many, many missives about the debate he's received -- from an Obama adviser.
"Feel like a candidate today?" the adviser asked.
In an interview with me moments ago, Stephanopoulos strongly defended his handling of the debate. He dismissed criticism that it had focused too heavily on "gotcha" questions, arguing that they had gone to the heart of the "electability" that, he said, is forefront in the minds of voters evaluating the two Dems.
"Overall, the questions were tough, fair, relevant, and appropriate," Stephanopoulos argued. And he rejected the claim by many Obama supporters that the debate had been stacked against him, saying Hillary had faced sharp questioning, too.
Today on the campaign trail Obama criticized ABC's handling of the debate, characterizing it as "the roll out of the Republican campaign against me in November."
Asked to respond, Stephanopoulos said that getting criticized "comes with the territory."
"Our job is to ask the questions," he said. "His job is to go out and win votes."
Asked to defend the fact that policy didn't come up for the first 40 or so minutes of the debate, Stephanopoulos said:
"We decided to focus at the top on the issues that had been at the center of the debate since the last debate. Everything we brought up in that front section had not come up since the last debate. And they all focused on the same theme -- which candidate would be a stronger Democratic candidate in Novembber."
"This is the core question for the campaigns, and a lot of Democratic voters right now. That's why we decided to lead with it."
Asked why we should presume that electability, rather than issues, was the dominant concern of many Dems right now, Stephanopoulos argued that it was a frequent topic of discussion on the campaign trail.
"People also take into account...how candidates handle controversy," he said. "That's what campaigns are about, as well."
Asked why the moderators had chosen to spend time on Wright, when Obama has repeatedly responded to questions about him, Stephanopoulos defended it by saying that Wright's most incendiary comments had come to light, and Obama's speech in response, had both come after the previous debate.
When I asked him whether asking about Obama's derelict approach to his flag lapel pin risked making it look like right-wing frames were dictating the line of questioning, Stephanopoulos said:
"Sure, there's a risk." But he added: "If you look at the fall campaign, there are some clear signals from Senator Obama's opponents that all of these issues are going to be put together in a general argument. They all go back to that same theme."
Stephanopoulos rejected the contention of many Obama supporters that the debate, with its focus on Wright and William Ayers -- not to mention that flag-pin -- was unduly stacked against Obama.
"The first series of questions to Senator Clinton were not questions she wanted to answer," he said. "The second series of questions were on credibility and honesty."
Asked whether his background as a political operative had resulted in too much of a focus on electability and on the candidates' handling of media "scandals," Stephanopoulos said:
"You can't help but be shaped by your experience," but he added: "I don't think it's unique to me. This is a conversation that Democrats and some Republicans are having every single day. It's not only, who will be the best president, but who has the best chance of winning."
Comments (383)
Wanker.
April 17, 2008 3:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Stephanopoulos lies.
Lapel pins have not been on voters minds since the last debate. Wright was covered in it and nothing new was asked or answered last night.
The issue that is new since the last debate are Clinton's taxes, Bill and Penn's sell-out to Colombia and so forth.
They aren't half as clever as they believe.
At least Stephanopoulos won't be called a Judas by Carville.
April 17, 2008 4:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
This was a terrible showing by ABC journos. They went out of their way to dress this event up in the constitution-- quoting from the document after every commercial break, and surrounding the candidates with "We the people" banners. But they ran the debate more like an episode of Dancing With The Stars. Non-issues, superfluous questioning, and not a single word on timely constitutional issues: TORTURE, ILLEGAL SURVEILLANCE, SIGNING STATEMENTS, THE SPECTRE OF THE MILITARY TRAMPLING THE FOURTH AMENDMENT, and on and on and on. Bring back the League of Women Voters.
Oh, and enough already with the commercial breaks. It is ABC's civic duty to carry this kind of thing without trying to turn a profit. The fact that they can't find it within themselves to eat the cost of something as important as this makes me wonder just how much influence their corporate owners and advertisers have upon the content of their dismal broadcasts. Bring back Koppel. These guys are making a mockery of the profession.
April 18, 2008 7:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
To Steve LaBonne
Perfect description.
April 17, 2008 4:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just your typical MSM pundit Babbitry. Only cloying morons and empty suits really thrive in the MSM market of flash graphics, commercials continually insulting to the viewer's intelligence, and everything reduced to a 10 second sound bite, if that.
Btw, look at the morons here who thought the debate was great. Hooting clothed apes. Unk unk.
April 17, 2008 8:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Even if Steph believes his questions were in some way new or recent, he should be ashamed of himself for their pettiness because, if for no other reason, by focusing on knee-jerk questions like flag-waving, the discourse is dummied down to the point of complete impotence.
Stupid Americans who care about petty, meaningless issues help guarantee this country will never be run by anything but jabbering monkeys.
But at least the flag-pin crowd definitely has their candidate of choice: G. Stephanopoulos!
April 18, 2008 4:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why didn't you ask him why is took his cues from Hannity?
April 17, 2008 3:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Seriously.
Or present him with the facts.
Hillary: Bosnia, Truthworthiness
Obama: Bitter-gate, Wright, Is Wright Patriotic, Lapel pin, Believing in the flag, Ayers.
That doesn't seem even.
April 17, 2008 3:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think you mean "trustworthiness." ^^ LOL
Is Hillary Clinton worthy of the truth??"
"SHE CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!!!"
April 17, 2008 4:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
haha, dammit. Yeah.
April 17, 2008 4:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your candidate just has more to answer for maybe?
April 17, 2008 8:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Should've asked him why he wasn't wearing a lapel pin
April 17, 2008 3:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Or asking after he says, "You can't help but be shaped by your experience"...
"Do you think working for the Clintons 'shaped' your line of questioning last night?"
April 17, 2008 4:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
So the excuse by Clinton's former paid staffer is that because the GOP are going to (again) try and distract voters with bullshit smears and non-issues instead of focussing on the real problems we face in the nation, we are going to do the same thing?
That is really the justification GS is going to hang his hat on?
"Do you love the flag"...? Are you shitting me?
April 17, 2008 4:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah,
"STEPHANOPOULOS: Senator, two questions. Number one, do you think Reverend Wright loves America as much as you do?"
What a douchebag hack.
April 17, 2008 4:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
sure, it only took about 50 minutes to get to a policy question. tool.
April 17, 2008 3:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
You probably thought this was supposed to be a debate between the candidates on issues and policies. You didn't realize this was going to be a news show / press conference with reporters playing gotcha rather than asking questions that lead to candidates debating each other's position on things that matter.
April 17, 2008 4:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
"We decided to focus at the top on the issues that had been at the center of the debate since the last debate."
very Clinton of you, keep on doing what YOU think important for the republican party.
April 17, 2008 3:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Funny, I don't remember a single question about Columbia or Mark Penn, I wonder why that is?
April 17, 2008 3:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Clearly Penn and Bill shilling for Colombia is not important.
Whether or not Obama thinks Wright is as patriotic as him is, though.
April 17, 2008 3:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, I see.
A huge conflict of interest by the #1 campaign operative coupled with a huge conflict of interest by the husband of a candidate pale in comparison to something someone Obama knows said.
Golly, now that I put it like that it all makes sense.
April 17, 2008 3:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Aren't you glad you have George Stephanopoulos to tell you what you care about?
April 17, 2008 4:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Aren't you glad you have George Stephanopoulos to tell you what you care about?
April 17, 2008 4:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly.
The MSM is filled with people just like Hillary. Extremely wealthy sellouts and triangulators who favor token social liberalism but are otherwise Wall Street Republicans on economic issues.
Hillary's chief campaign adviser is working for the Columbians to pass a trade deal Hillary is supposedly against, after Hillary claims she was against NAFTA even though Bill wrote it, pushed it on other Dems, and they both praised it for over a decade. The debate is in PA, a state hard hit by the lack of trade protections for the middle class.
But, hey, that's not important. Not to your MSM multi-millionaire pundit whores.
ABC is owned by Disney, a multinational conglomerate that owns several movie studios, cruise lines, hotels, and amusement parks around the world, and whose wealthiest shareholders benefit enormously from "free" trade deals. But I'm sure that has nothing to do with any large media conglomerates complete refusal to address middle class issues except in the most pandering and lowbrow ways around socially divisive sensationalism.
April 17, 2008 9:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
That is the crux of it. Because there was not Columbia question the idea of balance is out the window. It was a hit job on Obama and everyone knows it. If you wanted to know what a Faux News debate would have been like, now you do.
April 17, 2008 4:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Our job is to ask the questions," he said.
What "job" is it you are talking about Georgie? As campaign spokesman for the Clinton cmapaign perhaps?
Worst.
Debate.
Ever.
April 17, 2008 3:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
And why did bush never get that kind of grilling?
April 17, 2008 3:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well because Bush could do nothing wrong, even when he was lying us into a war that has destroyed our military and our economy.
Duh.
April 17, 2008 3:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yup... their job is to ask the questions... but some people get a pass. And others get nonsensical questions. Proves how poorly he does his job!
April 17, 2008 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Look at the bright side though: Now that these no talent ass clowns have asked about lapel pins and Obama's neighbors the Iraqis are finally greeting us with the flowers we were promised. Also the war is finally paying for itself. Finally.
April 17, 2008 4:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, I missed that part! Or perhaps you're thinking of the funeral flowers the Iraqis have needed....
April 17, 2008 4:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Because Bush didn't have fund raisers at the house of admitted terrorists and never went to church and sang "GOD DAMN AMERICA!"
April 17, 2008 4:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bush's grandfather was a traitor who did business with the nazis, but nobody asked him about it, did they?
April 17, 2008 4:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Really?
So the Bush clan never had shindigs with the bin Ladin clan in Saudi Arabia?
And FYI, nobody sang God Damn America.
April 17, 2008 4:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
pretty sure SFC is a parody. i mean, we got stupid trolls here, but not that stupid.
April 17, 2008 4:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're right. He was too busy deserting.
April 17, 2008 4:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Setting aside the fact that it's a silly attack point, please show where that 1995 meeting at the Ayers house was a fundraiser for Obama. It was the meeting Alice Palmer called to tell folks she was going to run for Congress; she introduced Obama as her preferred successor. I've seen nothing saying it was a fundraiser for Obama.
April 17, 2008 5:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dancing Bear, there is a WHOLE LOT MORE to the William Ayers story than came out at the debate. This story has been circulating on the internet for almost 2 months, but no one in the MSM has deigned to mention it until ABC did last night. I say "BRAVO" to George & ABC-- it's about time this smooth-talkin' pretender was vetted.
For the full Ayers story, go to: http://www.commonvoice.com/article.asp?colid=8310
April 17, 2008 5:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh you mean the Rev Wright who gave up his College deferral and served 2 years in the Marine Corps? Which he followed up by becoming a Navy Corpsman for 4 years. He received letters of commendation from the president for his service. Yeah, what a prick!
April 18, 2008 9:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
Why didnt you ask him about going on Hannity? That is the question I think most of us Obama supporters want to know.
April 17, 2008 3:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
ditto
April 17, 2008 6:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wonder how he'd like to do that on prime time tv! Have to stand up and take the heat for his behavior. With clips of his interruptions and so on. Questions about the whereabouts of his own flag pin!
How easy to just defend yourself on a phone call! I challenge the guy to defend himself on TV!!! With 2 questioners!
April 17, 2008 3:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Stephanopoulos disconnect from the needs of Americans is just scary. We want to know about healthcare, education, Iraq, Iran, FISS and torture. He is a elitist.
April 17, 2008 3:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Elitist, exactly! NO humility at all! Such a sense of entitlement!
April 17, 2008 4:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's interesting how you phrase that...very "campaign commercial" like... exactly what do you want to know about healthcare, education, Iraq, Iran, FISS and torture, that they haven't already repeated 1000 times on the campaign trail? You prefer a debate where they spout 1 minute campaign ads and cuts from their stump speaches?
April 17, 2008 4:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
You could have 90 minutes and ask them specifics on how they would address K-12 and higher education reform alone.
What is their positions and governing philosophies on how much federal vs. state, vs. local on education. Get into he nitty gritty about how you pay for improving education, the pros and cons of standards, block grants vs. targeted programs, etc.
We could go for days about education alone on substance if the moderators chose to (and knew what they were talking about instead of being media hairdos).
April 17, 2008 4:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
No one is going to do that, they won't sit down and spell everything out. Hell they don't even know how they'll pay for it. They'll just re-recite the same platitudes they do on the campaign trail...have you never seen one of these before?
April 24, 2008 2:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
So in other words, the right-wing smear machine says "jump", and you say "how high". Pathetic.
April 17, 2008 3:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Couldn't agree more! When Obama is attacked by a fellow democrat, it lends credence to what would normally appear as bitter partisan attacks from the right-wing, come fall.
Not only do we make "the republicans" the center of our own debate, above Iraq, above the economy, above healthcare... but we give credibility in advance to their empty blather. Enough hiding behind the "he needs to be vetted" argument already!!!
April 17, 2008 4:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
George Stephanapolous is in the business of trying to make himself look good.
Last night, by most accounts, he failed that mission, miserably.
Now he's resorting to the type of Clintonian tactics he learned so well to justify his piss-poor moderating last night.
LOL!
April 17, 2008 3:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
HOW THE FUCK IS A LAPEL PIN RELEVANT YOU STINKING GASBAG?!
Yeah, I'm pissed at that puff-haired slime ball. Sorry everyone.
April 17, 2008 3:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Do you believe in the flag"?!?!?!
April 17, 2008 3:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is the flag now in the same league as the Easter Bunny?
April 17, 2008 4:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL touché
April 17, 2008 4:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Believe in it? Hell, I've seen it!
April 17, 2008 5:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
"We decided to focus at the top on the issues that had been at the center of the debate since the last debate."
Dude, that crap has "been at the center of the debate" because you jackasses make it so!
A reminder of this seems appropriate:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=aFQFB5YpDZE
April 17, 2008 3:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
He's not that wrong. For decades, there has been the perception that nonsense 'identity' issues have real power. Not surprisingly these 'issues' dominating the 'reporting' of the chattering classes. However, for the first time in years, the underlying fundamentals (botched war, recession) are so bad that the old rules might no longer apply. It usually takes the Washington CW 5 years to catch up with reality on the ground.
The best thing to come out of this debate would be if NOTHING changed in the polls, rendering these issues truly irrelevant. Plus, it doesn't bother me so much that Obama got an opportunity to respond to bogus garbage that was going to b dredged up in the general anyway. Let's show the Giggly High Schoolers (journalists) how completely out of touch they are by voting on issues that matter.
April 17, 2008 3:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Still, it was utter incompetence on the part of Gibson and Stephanopolous. The ABC political news team appears to be trying to do to political news what reality TV has done to prime time TV. This year's political coverage is analogous to replacing "Law and Order" with "Cops". Last night amounted to a nasty political version of E! - with no cute women.
April 17, 2008 4:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Utter incompetence? Er, isn't that what was said about GWB, all the while his buddies are making their fortunes off the Iraq misadventure and his other 'misgoverning'?
Try on the idea that these two moderators have prostituted themselves within some covert personal or shared power political games of their own, with parent ABC being complicit.
What they did, and called it a debate, smells really vile. And the root of evil still is what it has always been.
April 17, 2008 5:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
What
an
Embarrassment.... I am done with ABC news.
April 17, 2008 3:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Surely you don't think Katie Couric could have done better - although her syrupy voice sounds like a customer "service" agent on the phone trying to politely tell you they cut off your utilities by accident and aren't going to bother to send out a crew to get them going again.
And NBC? The three of what used to be real channels are now dumb, dumber and dumbest and they're fighting it out for the bottom rung. Every day they waste the public airways for a profit they steal money from us all.
April 17, 2008 4:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Surely you don't think Katie Couric could have done better"
Before last night I'd have said, "No." Now, I'm not so sure. The real question is, "Could she do worse."
April 17, 2008 4:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
"You can't help but be shaped by your experience"-GS
Apparently Charlie Gibson wasn't shaped by any journalistic experience. But then maybe he's just a script reader. I'm not really an insider. I just think they might find moderators with a different set of priorities.
April 17, 2008 3:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
"You can't help but be shaped by your experience"-GS
So because James Carville gouged out your eyes and had intercourse with your skull (metephorically speaking) in the 90s you feel the responsibility to pass on the skull fucking to 10 million viewers?
April 17, 2008 4:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
EEEEYYYAAAAGGGHHH! Bad visuals!
Are you sure this acid is clean?
April 17, 2008 4:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOLOLOL! Wow that just made me want to puke.
April 17, 2008 4:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Excuse Me . . .
That was Prescott Bush. The skull was Gerionomo's. The skull-fucking was an initiation into Skull and Bones.
Let us not be confused!
April 21, 2008 3:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Excuse me . . .
Make that Geronimo.
April 21, 2008 3:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Excuse Me . . .
That was Prescott Bush. The skull was Geronimo's. The skull-fucking was an initiation into Skull and Bones.
Let us not be confused!
April 21, 2008 3:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Everything we brought up in that front section had not come up since the last debate."
Huh? I'm sorry, but wasn't the VERY FIRST question about the "dream ticket?" Wasn't that question asked by Wolf Blitzer in the last debate?
Maybe my memory is bad...
April 17, 2008 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Embarassing. It was an embarassing debate last night, and George just doesn't get it.
I don't think there should be term limits on politicians. That's what elections are for. But I do think there ought to be term limits on political talking and writing hairdoes like George. Five years, then you have to go back to life in the actual world, rather than that fantasy land so many seem to be living in.
Then, possibly, George might be able to appreciate how shallow and superficial he actually is as a political commentator.
April 17, 2008 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
"We decided to focus at the top on the issues that had been at the center of the debate since the last debate. Everything we brought up in that front section had not come up since the last debate. And they all focused on the same theme -- which candidate would be a stronger Democratic candidate in Novembber."
"This is the core question for the campaigns, and a lot of Democratic voters right now. That's why we decided to lead with it."
"Also, Sean Hannity told me to bring up the all-important Bill Ayers question that's on the lips of every real American, and to keep pressing on this critical issue. And I took notes from Sean. That's my job. Getting criticized for playing stenographer to Hannity just comes with the territory."
April 17, 2008 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
I, for one, am delighted that they brought up the timely topic of someone who did something bad, or wanted to do something bad, forty freaking years ago. We needed that addressed, pronto.
That was two hours of my life I'm never getting back, and I'm never going to forgive ABC for that.
April 17, 2008 3:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
You forget, CT voter, that Obama once went to his house, only seven years ago. And seven years ago was 2001, when 9/11 happened, which reminds me about Jeremiah Wright.
April 17, 2008 3:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Holy crap! You're onto something...Let's see. Bill Ayers was bad. At some point. Somewhere. Obama knew him. And Jeremiah Wright. And then 9/11 happened. Therefore, Obama, Ayers and Wright were actually co-conspirators with the 9/11 attackers.
And none of them, and I mean NOT ONE, wears a flag pin. Q.E.D.
I think I could get work on Fox or ABC News now.
April 17, 2008 4:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
See how easy it is??? Just unhinge your mind a little. And you too can be on prime time teevee!!
April 17, 2008 4:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Think you could deal with the stench?
April 17, 2008 4:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I could deal with it if I used the millions I made on LOTS of air freshener.
But I don't think I could buy enough not take it to Hell with me after being LIKE him.
April 17, 2008 10:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, if we could just get to the bottom of the Ayers issue, we would solve once and for all the issue of high gas prices. Whew.
April 17, 2008 3:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Anyone have his email address?
April 17, 2008 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sure, none of the Democratic issues were discussed, just "gotcha" questions. Fuck you, George.
April 17, 2008 3:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
You never asked him about taking notes from Hannity, as a previous poster notes.
Also, I don't think you can really expect him to disown this performance, seeing as how he worked for the Clintons in the past. The interview you really should have had here was with the head of ABC News.
April 17, 2008 3:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
What a douchebag. Whatever his background, he has become just like the rest of the MSM -- ego-driven, self-absorbed, into money and out-of-touch.
April 17, 2008 3:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Tell ABC your opinion if you like (sorry for posting this on several threads, just want more people to give feedback if they want to)
April 17, 2008 3:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
I feel your pain...way to go ABC. No MSNBC poor babies...
April 17, 2008 3:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
know what really sucks?
The only thing that came out of the debate is that Hillary concedes Obama can beat McCain.
LOL, even when she "wins", she loses.
April 17, 2008 3:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Aryan Nation Troll loved watching the high tech lynching.
April 17, 2008 3:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's funny that you put the hammer and sickle in Obama's campaign logo, trying to imply he associates with communists.
Speaking of communists: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marc-cooper/hillary-and-the-commies_b_97131.html
Her connection to ACTUAL commies is a whole lot more credible than what you're trying to imply in regards to Obama.
If we're going to play this guilt by association game, where's the outrage that Bush's family is hip-deep involved with the Bin Laden family???
This faux outrage that Obama knows someone 40 years after their radical years is so hypocritical, especially taken into consideration that EVERY national politician at somepoint or another has been at a party with 'questionable' folk.
For example, there's no denying that Hillary did shots with someone that called his own wife a c*nt. Do you deny it? There's no denying that Hillary has stood side-by-side with someone that use a firearm (perhaps while intoxicated) and shot a friend in the face.
Does anyone believe that Hillary is a gutter-level sexist or supports drunken firearm use?
No...
...yet you're dumb enough to think that Obama isn't adult enough to discern his own views, that he HAS to support the views of everyone he's ever shaken hands with. At some point the realization is going to sink in that Hillary and Obama have campaigned together for 15 months now...and that if he's guilty by association, so is she.
Your double-standard sucks ass...
April 17, 2008 4:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
You'll feel the pain all right, when you witness Hillary Clinton out campaigning (through clenched teeth and muddy pantsuit, of course) on behalf of Barack Obama for president!
April 17, 2008 5:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Simple answer to his BS.
If the goal was to explore all the silly controversies that arose since the last debate, there should have been a question about Mark Penn and Colombia.
Since there was not, I feel absolutely entitled to consider Stephanopoulos either incompetent or biased
April 17, 2008 3:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good point. Mark Penn would have been a hell of a lot more relevant question to ask about than 90 percent of the shit they threw up there.
I don't know much about the Clinton/Stephanopoulos dynamics but it must have been strange for him to find himself questioning her as a journalist after the years they worked together side by side. My vague sense is that the Clintons viewed Stephanopoulos' book after he left the White House a betrayal. Could it be he was trying to get back in their good graces, whether consciously or subconsciously? Like I said, I don't know much about this, but there must be some weird dynamic going on.
April 17, 2008 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow. After an avalanche of serious criticism (and not just from Obama supporters), all GS can offer is self-justification? Not even, "You know, maybe I need to review the tape."
Maybe these "players" need to be sent off to retreats from time to time, and especially right after they do these big "public service" gigs.
April 17, 2008 3:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Retreats? Maybe - if they are the kind of retreats where they are sent to farms to do real manual labor for a few weeks at a time and not be allowed to wear $1000 suits.
April 17, 2008 4:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Methinks you forget the first rule of politics. Never apologize. Stephanopoulous (not even attempting to get his name right) admits that he is shaped by his background: a political operative.
April 17, 2008 4:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Republican and former Nixon administration official Ruckelshaus endorses Obama:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/04/17/watergate-era-republican-backs-obama/#more-6511
April 17, 2008 3:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ruckelshaus is one of the last of a dying breed: an honest Republican. He refused to obey Nixon's order during the "Saturday Night Massacre," and he restored some dignity to EPA after the scandals there early in the Reagan Administration. He's still doing environmental work at the age of 76.
April 17, 2008 4:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Asshat.
April 17, 2008 3:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Doesn't "Electability" mean "which candidate would you rather have a beer with?" Isn't that how Bush got elected? Look at how well that turned out.
All these talking heads just love the sound of their own voices. I could give a rat's ass if someone wears a lapel pin or not. In an election race that's been marred by shitty reporting, Stephanopoulos and Gibson outdid the rest of the sorry bunch.
April 17, 2008 3:55 PM |