04/17/2008
ABC Criticized for Lack of Substance at Democratic Debate
ABC is being roundly criticized for the line of questioning at last night's Democratic debate, with 11,032 comments on ABC's website, the majority of which criticize the network for not dealing with substantive issues.
Above, a clip of some of the questions (these are questions only, not answers), via Crooks and Liars and Pam's House Blend (she also has a transcript of these questions) regarding electability, Reverend Jeremiah Wright (3 questions!), Clinton's Bosnia trip, flag lapel pins, and radicals from the 1970's. Below, Talking Points Memo's round-up:
A transcript of the debate can be found here.
I didn't watch the debate, but I'm not upset I didn't at this point. I'll add any interesting clips I come across to this post as they come in.
AFTER THE JUMP, Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos are turned on by an audience who wants to know, 'where's the beef?' as they go to yet another commercial break...
The HuffPo writes: "Reflecting what seemed to be the main consensus of the night - that ABC botched this debate, big time - Charlie Gibson tells the crowd there will be one more, superfluous commercial break of the night and is subsequently jeered."
Sphere: Related ContentPosted 7:53 AM EST by Andy in Barack Obama, Democratic Party, Election 2008, Hillary Clinton, News | Permalink
Comments
It was the worst thing I have seen on TV in a long time, except maybe Sandra Lee on the Food Network. At least Sandra admits that most of her stuff is prepackaged.
ABC, not Obama or Clinton, was the loser of the night.
Posted by: Jon-Marc | Apr 17, 2008 8:09:50 AM
After twenty debates, it's hard to come up with new and interesting questions. But, I think if ABC had just asked questions sent in from voters, there would not have been one that focused on lapel pins, Wright, Bosnia, or anything else that they focused on.
ABC news in run by the entertainment president, which explains the lack of focus in the news division. This is just another example of how ABC gladly waddles in fluff, and thinks it is news. Since Peter Jennings died, that network has lost all credibility.
Posted by: Cadence | Apr 17, 2008 8:24:11 AM
All of the debates have been a joke ever since there control and moderation were taken away from the leaque of women voters.
In what country does 1 of the moderators of a debate happen to be the former employee of your husband? Russia? China? Iran? Nope.....America
52 minutes in before they even got to a real issue.
Posted by: Jimmyboyo | Apr 17, 2008 8:27:58 AM
I've boycotted the "debates" since day one. Aside from the matter that no candidate is going to say something substantial, modern-day political debates are nothing more than fodder for sound bites to be analyzed by pundits whom I have little to no respect or regard for.
My vote is on the fence right now. I like Obama, I like McCain. Depends on whom either selects as their running mate.
Posted by: Rad | Apr 17, 2008 9:05:12 AM
"Reflecting what seemed to be the main consensus of the night - that ABC botched this debate, big time - Charlie Gibson tells the crowd there will be one more, superfluous commercial break of the night and is subsequently jeered."
That was the best part! They were in Philly, you know! ;-)
Posted by: virgoboy | Apr 17, 2008 9:05:27 AM
For the record, there is no love loss between stephanopoulos and Bill Clinton. Read George's book and you will find that George is not a fan of the Clinton's.
Posted by: The Realist | Apr 17, 2008 9:10:53 AM
I saw it and thought it was well done..ABC let them both comment on the recent past mini controversies("bitter" comment, sniper fire), when they got that out of the way..they hit their plans on Iraq, taxes, gun control, affirmative action etc. I also liked the 'no applause' rule..This was the first debate I've seen when they weren't actually KISSING OBAMA'S ASS and they threw him some curve balls..I think that really pissed off the Hillary hating media, so what do you do? You blame ABC of course...
Posted by: daveynyc | Apr 17, 2008 9:15:29 AM
The Realist
I haven't read that but I do remember something about Hillary and George not being on good terms. Something about her saying, "That little F....t" or some such.
How did they ever come up with allowing the candidate from the other party to ask a question?
That was big time crazy
Does anyone believe the repubs would have allowed Hillary or Obama to have a question presented to the repub nominees when they were running? Hell, the repubs would have never answered said hypothetical question and just droned on and on about Hillary being the wife of the devil or the killer of baby Jesus or some such crazy right wing rant.
Posted by: Jimmyboyo | Apr 17, 2008 9:18:14 AM
Nope. I didn't vote for Obama, but I thought the debate was appalling. I disagree that they were asked legitimate quesions. I can go on and on about the questions not asked. This was not about kissing anyone's ass, and I don't have to invent any reason to criticize ABC. It's pretty simple, this was the worst debate I've ever seen, and ABC sucked. It was a hit job, centering on issues that don't matter, issues that we have been told by the media matter.
Goerge and Charlie should hang their heads in shame.
Posted by: David | Apr 17, 2008 9:25:10 AM
DAVENYC
Gov Ed Rendell of Penn. a HUGE Hillary supporter even said last night that it was a mess.
I say, bring back the Leaque of Women Voters to handle and moderate all debates.
Posted by: Jimmyboyo | Apr 17, 2008 9:29:12 AM
Barack looks sexier and sexier...wit' his skinny self. (At this point, why be serious about this frickin' never ending primary campaign).
Hillary was likable enough. I thought George Stepha...whatever, was gay. Why did Hillary call him a faggot, JIMMYBOYO? Maybe she was thinking of ancient Greeks. (According to Bill, she does get confused.)
Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Apr 17, 2008 10:01:49 AM
And when Hillary did not think the ABC so-called moderators were doing a sufficient political hit job on Obama she further impugned his patriotism with snide innuedo and association. She never had my vote but my disgust with her Roy Cohn-style politics now has caused me not to support any LGBT group associated with the Clinton machine. It's not as if Hillary has ever done anything for the LGBT community anyhow -- except for her silly marches down Fifth Avenue -- and LGBT ties to the Clinton machine are now enough for me to say the hell with them, too. Integrity matters.
Posted by: History of Gay Bars | Apr 17, 2008 10:10:20 AM
It was a joke. Charlie Gibson is a windbag more concerned about how people who make over $200,000 might be affected by a capital gains tax than on the housing crisis, education, defense policy, or the economy. Flag pins? Come on, how many Americans wear flag pins? I don't know of anyone who wears them. Neither Steph or Gibson wore a pin.
Tom Shales of Washingtonpost.com:
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. (SOURCE)
Posted by: noah | Apr 17, 2008 10:17:36 AM
That was a joke, it made Fox News actually seem fair and balanced and was more of a low brow attack than even Fox would do. Not one real issue was discussed, like home forecloses, the ridiculous price of gas, all that time spent on wearing a cheap, made in China flag pin to show your patriotism, gag me with a spoon. And, they made sure that MCCain will be elcted without having once had to address any real issue.
Posted by: Sebastian | Apr 17, 2008 10:20:56 AM
These big media boobs claim they speak for “average” Americans or know what “most” Americans are interested in but it couldn’t be further from the truth. Charlie and George are millionaires, they pal around with other millionaires in places like Dupont Circle, Bucks County and Martha’s Vineyard. If an “average” American came anywhere near them they’d call security. They live very insulated and privileged lives with a staff of people doing everything for them so they never have to mingle with the masses. Just like the courtiers of Louis the XIV, they live to kiss the ass of anyone perceived as more important than they are and scorn anyone without their same social clout and money.
Posted by: ggreen | Apr 17, 2008 10:26:12 AM
ABC is getting a MUCH DESERVED tongue lashing from last night's viewers. Of the 11,000+ and rising number of comments to their website on this topic, 95% are from people outraged with the focus on sensationalism and the shameful lack of substance.
It seems that, without exception, the comments on the ABC site that are supportive of debate moderating fiasco are coming from people who declare their support for Senator Clinton or declare their hatred of Obama. I find it strange that ANYONE could say that spending almost an hour of a 90 minute debate on silly things that have already been rehashed and rehashed in the media, and talked about by the candidates, ad infinitum while ignoring REAL issues and REAL policy discussions, was a GOOD thing.
Fox News used to be the biggest joke in television journalism. It seems that ABC is determined to give them a run for their money.
I think ABC, Stephanopolis and Gibson ALL owe the American people an apology.
Posted by: Zeke | Apr 17, 2008 11:03:55 AM
Wow, Zeke,GGreen and Sebastian well, put, it was a travesty and like watching the National Enquirer live, bleech.
Posted by: Juan Pablo | Apr 17, 2008 11:06:46 AM
DERRICK,
I think his last name is Snuffleupagus. Yeah, that's it, George Snuffleupagus.
You know, it is kind of hard for me to get my manties in a knot over this primary, anymore. Whatever happens, happens. I like them both. I can live with either.
I still deplore the invective toward Hillary, though. It's good to know that some of us can be adult about this. You too, Jimmyboyo (and Zeke).
Posted by: nic | Apr 17, 2008 11:14:45 AM
It's too bad that the kid gloves did not come off in the treatment of Obama until it's really too late to matter. The unfair, Limbaugh-inspired, misogynist treatment Clinton has gotten from the press and debate moderators has done its damage. I do not deny the anti-Obama slant last night, but it cannot touch the obscenely preferential treatment he has gotten on the whole.
Stop whining, Obama-heads. He has the nomination sewn up, right, Jimmyboyo? Last night proved that he is not able to perform in a hostile situation. It's much better for him to implode and look ridiculous against Clinton than it would be for him to do the same against McCain.
Posted by: Landon Bryce | Apr 17, 2008 11:34:59 AM
Try again, Landon. According to the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll, Clinton's negatives are currently a whopping 54% (the highest of any candidate) and rising... She'd be utterly obliterated by McCain in the fall, as both the true left and the right hates her guts.
Posted by: Esteban | Apr 17, 2008 11:51:01 AM
Did you see Obama sweating and stumbling last night from softball questions from ABC?? Imagine what the republicans will do to him if he's the nominee?? I'm so sick of these polls that don't mean anything. I can't tell you how many polls have counted Clinton out from almost every past primary..and guess what?..she's won them and I have no doubt that she will continue to win..we all know she will take Pennsylvania but she will also take the others. I have no doubt the super-delegates will back her over Obama..she can ACTUALLY win. I think the democrats are so self hating that they are backing this man who has no integrity, or any TRUE love for his country becuase they love to lose and love being the victims of the rich republicans. I am not a victim and I am sick of losing..I want a democrat in the white house with passion, good solid ATTAINABLE ideas, intelligence and grace. What this country needs is a woman's view and compassion to get us back on track. Hillary '08!!
Posted by: daveynyc | Apr 17, 2008 12:36:55 PM
Lordy, DAVEYNYC:
That was one of the most emotionally charged comments I've ever read on Towleroad. It almost brought tears to my eyes. You want her to win so bad. Well, I guess you can pray on it, darlin'...the Pope is here.
Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Apr 17, 2008 12:45:57 PM
I think this travesty is a painful demonstration of what a conflict of interest it is to allow media COMPANIES (whose ONLY goals are to get high ratings and make money) to host and moderate political debates.
To allow a shareholder-owned News COMPANY to be in charge of a debate when they have a vested financial interest in manipulating the outcome to keep the primary race going so that they can keep their viewership up and thereby increase their profits, is akin to (as we would say in Mississippi) leaving the fox in charge of the henhouse.
I agree with JIMMYBOYO. It's time to get back to the real and fair debates of substance that were sponsored by the League of Women voters and moderated by Jim Lehrer. As long as we let profit oriented media companies run the show we are going to get results that are good for THEIR bottom line, regardless of whether it's good for the country or not.
If anyone doubts this, just look back to the 2000 election between Bush and Gore or the 2004 election between Bush and Kerry. In BOTH instances the media manipulated the information that the public was fed in order to keep the races tight so that the media would seem more relevant, would attract more viewers and would make them more money. We ALL know how that worked out for America. Well, they're doing it again and they'll succeed if we let them. I am SO glad to see that America is finally waking up, calling them on their sh*t and DEMANDING better with THOUSANDS of angry comments on their website. Now we can only wait and see how they respond. I'm not gonna hold my breath for a major change over this single outrage but I believe that they will have to change if we continue to let them know that we are no longer willing to let them get away with this screwing of America.
To read the comments at the ABC News website, or to add a comment of your own, go to:
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/DemocraticDebate/comments?type=story&id=4666956
or leave them a voicemail message at:
(818) 460-7477
Posted by: Zeke | Apr 17, 2008 12:50:49 PM
DAVENYC reflects 100% of the 2-5% of the comments at the ABC News website that supported Charle and George's flag lapel pin and Bosnia sniper obsessed debate. It seems that the rank and file Clinton supporters are as outraged as anyone by the debate farce but the "anything to win" wing of her supporters are just fine and dandy with it. Unfortunately it's this small minority within her campaign that are tarnishing the whole campaign, and the majority of her supporters who are thoughtful and reasonable, with the "anything to win" reputation.
Posted by: Zeke | Apr 17, 2008 1:01:04 PM
DAVENYC, the country could use a woman as commander in chief, just not the one who is trying to steal the nomination, HRC, who has all but assured that McCain will be in the WH because of her own selfishness and who more than anything else wants McCain and the repugnanats in office, anybody but the guy who showed her for what she is a fake and fruad.
Posted by: Sebastian | Apr 17, 2008 1:02:18 PM
Derrick
You know, I probably was repeating a right wing talking point.
After you asked, I tried to look it up on the internet and couldn't find anything.
Sorry to Hillary, George Stephenopolous, and Hillary supporters if I indeed was repeating some old right wing shit. Even us obamaheads can admit that the right threw a lot of shit at the Clintons.
This debate between which candidate should lead us is in house and it is a good debate.
But I will defend Hillary and Bill against Rush limbaugh types any day. She might not be my candidate but she is part of my family.
Zeke
:-)
I also want the fairness doctrine brought back.
Can you imagine some right wing religous nut railing against gays on TV and federal law forcing equal time for a pro gay xtian from the UCC, a Jewish rabbi to fairly balance the discussion on religion, and an atheist to counterbalance on the whole god thing to begin with.
Posted by: Jimmyboyo | Apr 17, 2008 1:04:30 PM
DAVENYC, Hilary is not your fag hag! Get over it.
Posted by: Jason | Apr 17, 2008 1:08:25 PM
As someone who generally tries to be fair despite your stated preference I'm very disappointed Jimmy that you are feeding the Hillary Hate Industry by claiming that she called George S. a faggot. I'm not saying she didn't, though I doubt it. I'm just saying that documentation is appropriate whenever such a serious charge is made about anyone.
In any case, anyone who thinks George is a Clinton fan or opposed to Obama simply hasn't been watching him moderate his own Sunday morning show on ABC where he consistently highlights any bad news for Sen. Clinton and mostly ignores or underplays anything bad for Obama.
Plus, he frequently has on DNC power player and super delegate Donna Brazile and totally plays along with her "I've not decided" charade when the truth is Obama can't defecate without pulling her head out of his ass first. If elected he should make her Secretary of the Navy for helping steer the shameful Swift Boating of the Clintons as racists. But then Brazile, who as his campaign manager, helped Gore lose, is not new to playing the race card. She once extorted rehires of some surplus DNC employees after screeching that they were only let go because they were black.
The debate may have missed the mark in many ways but deserves accolades for being one of the few not to offer Barack a pillow. His face was an illustrated textbook on "Indignation, Defensiveness, Anger, and Just Plain Being Pissed Off."
Dear Sen. Obama: the Republicans are coming! The Republicans are coming!
Posted by: Michael Bedwell | Apr 17, 2008 1:29:53 PM
Our posts crossed in the ethernet. Thank you for your apology, Jimmy! :- )
Posted by: Michael Bedwell | Apr 17, 2008 1:31:54 PM
Haha. Sorry your candidate finally got grilled. Boohoo.
Why am I not shocked the Obamamites are in a complete tizzy at this seemingly unfair treatment of their candidate by the media? I'm glad the media finally pulled his dick out of their mouths long enough to ask him a tough question.
If you think Rev. Wright, lapel pins and Ayers aren't legitimate issues to voters and together paint a pretty clear picture of how Obama will be painted between now and November, then you're all delusional. And we'll have the misfortune of another 4 - 8 years of Republican rule in the White House.
Posted by: Banne | Apr 17, 2008 1:32:30 PM
Michael Bedwell
:-)
Banne, I am all for a good grilling..............on ISSUES! like iraq, the economy, the environment, US jobs, the food supply, terrorism, education, gays, etc
A cheap flag pin that osama Bin laden himself could buy at any 7-11 and wear 24/7 is NOT an issue. It is crap.
All polls of voters show the top 2 issues are
1- iraq
2- The economy
They switch places depending on the poll but the top 2 are those 2 and nothing but those 2 real issues
Posted by: Jimmyboyo | Apr 17, 2008 1:37:03 PM
People in my building must have thought that I had lost my mind because I was SCREAMING with anger over this sham of a debate! It was absolutely nauseating to watch and ABC should be publicly taken to task. It reminded me of NBC moron Tim Russert's inane questioning of Obama on Farrakhan, but much worse.
Then Clinton has the fucking gall to say that Obama's associations need "deeper investigation", but when questioned about her outright LIE about Bosnia, she pooh-poohs it as some kinda brain fart!
Now more than ever, GO OBAMA '08!!!
Posted by: soulbrotha | Apr 17, 2008 1:42:51 PM
Wait, so Leland is posting as Michael Bedwell again? When they start talking to each other, you know the bitch done finally fell outta her rocker.
Posted by: crispy | Apr 17, 2008 1:42:52 PM
You mean Sybil Bedwell-Frances?
Posted by: 24play | Apr 17, 2008 1:58:03 PM
Oh poor baby Obama - he was not cuddled and given a blankie this time and people are not liking it.
The REAL issue is how unprepared Obama was. These issues have been in the media and he should have had a good response but no. This is the beginning of the end for Dems taking back the WH. The repubs are going to run all over his campaign. Weak, weak, weak.
Posted by: Mike | Apr 17, 2008 2:19:39 PM
MIKE
So the trotting out of a supposed Pennsylvania voter to ask Hillary Clinton about Tuzla with the admonishment that she'd lost her vote wasn't pointless melodrama but rather a great thing??!!??
It sucked all the way around. Yes it appears the suckfest was heavily tilted towards sucking for Obama but there were deffinetly sucky crap moments pulled on Hillary by ABC as well.
Tuzla Bosnia snipper fire sh@t has been played out in the media. It will change nobody's mind at this point.
To even bring it up while ignoring real issues is bad enough, but to have brought it up in such an over the top melodramatic way was pure crap.
Pure crap thrown and Hillary by ABC.
Are you sure you liked the debate as much as you earlier claimed?
Posted by: Jimmyboyo | Apr 17, 2008 2:28:19 PM
"and" should read "at"
pure crap thrown at Hillary by ABC
Posted by: Jimmyboyo | Apr 17, 2008 2:38:39 PM
The debate was a disgrace. I tried to leave a comment at abcnews.com earlier and the site was unreachable.
Ultimately though, I think Obama is staying above the fray. His comment to Hillary that she took the wrong lessons from the cookie episode in '92 got me to cast a vote with dollars at barackobama.com.
Posted by: Philip | Apr 17, 2008 2:41:46 PM
I want DAVENYC or anyone else to explain to me how it is that they feel that Obama has proven himself to be unable to withstand the "hard questions" or the "Republican mudslinging" in the general election when he survived two of the biggest media feeding frenzies that ANY candidate has faced this year and come out the other side STRONGER than he was before the onslaught began.
I would also like for someone to explain to me how Senator Clinton will be BETTER equipped to withstand these attacks and win in November when she can't even manage to get through the attack's on OBAMA (which she joined in) without sinking further in the polls (national and Pennsylvania) and at the same time having the number of people who think she's dishonest skyrocket (based not on what Obama's said about her but based on SHE'S said about him)?
Please explain to me how this adds up.
Let's also keep in mind that the Republicans haven't unleashed their barrage on Senator Clinton because they WANT her to be the nominee so that they can unleash it all on her in the general. There is absolutely NO benefit to them unleashing the hounds on her now. That's why they are digging up all of this stuff on Obama now. I think they will have shot their wad by the time the general gets here and the fact that they can't make anything stick to him is making them VERY nervous.
Posted by: Zeke | Apr 17, 2008 3:02:43 PM
LOL@CRISPY & 24PLAY:
No one on this earth can "read" or "throw shade" like a gay man. Ruthless!
Y'all need to stop. Just stop. Remember your Christian upbringings! Leland Francis & Mr Bedwell have both promised to vote for Obama in November. There's no conflict between the two entities...unless they don't know each other (all of a sudden I'm seeing a young Sally Field in my mind). Unfortunately, they may have persuaded hundreds of Towleroad visitors not to vote for Barack. It's BANNE, MIKE &DAVEYNYC who worry me. They actually hate Barack. Why? He can't help it if he's beautiful. Well, fellas, it's either Barack or John McCain--that'll be your choice.
DAVEYNYC, you keepa' prayin', brotha'.
Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Apr 17, 2008 3:16:57 PM
"digging up all this stuff on Obama"?
One doesn't need a shovel to expose Obama's weaknesses. You just have to be willing to see what's mostly been there all along. Diamonds [or fool's gold, depending on how one looks at it] all over the ground. But the media have been in high See No Evil, Hear No Evil, Say No Evil mode for so long that straying from it now can so easily—and irrationally—be denounced as being unfair. "What do you MEAN Obama's not PERFECT?!"
Based on what I wrote above about the velvet glove hand job George Stephanopoulos has been giving Obama for the last year, I was shocked that the question about his friendship with the Weathermen bombers came from George even if he did also pillory Hillary about being "trustworthy" and Bosnia.
RE the latter, are there statements from the pollsters, Zeke, that "the number of people who think she's dishonest skyrocket [is] based not on what Obama's said about her but based on SHE'S said about him" or is that your interpretation?
Having seen only a few minutes of the debate, I have no opinion on it overall or the performance of the moderators [while TOTALLY agreeing that all future debates SHOULD be scripted by a respected nonpartisan group like LWV].
But we do smell a familiar theme: those who don't like the message but can't dispute it frequently try to shoot the messenger instead. For a high profile example, check out the cold doghouse black writer and media star Tavis Smiley now finds himself in for having failed to be willingly assimilated by the Obama Borg [or as 24 Play once put it, to "get with the program"].
Posted by: Michael Bedwell | Apr 17, 2008 3:34:46 PM
Well, Derrick, in this forum, if you don't throw shade and read these posters like a drag queen who has lost her wig and broke a heel and eye liner running, they will trounce all over you in a shrill, negative tone that's uncalled for in a civil debate! I think that those who hate Obama, HRC included, have a much bigger problem and its not that she is geatting mauled by him in the polls and with voters, and, I'm sure that MCCain will be more than happy to help them with it. None of the HRC fans, or herself cares about this country, its all about them, and, sadly, in the end, we will all suffer with another 4 years of a dimwit just like the current ones in office, disgusting.
Posted by: Kevin | Apr 17, 2008 3:40:01 PM
It's being reported that as of this morning Obama has had a net gain of 7 superdelegates over the last week whereas Senator Clinton has had a net loss of one.
It's really time for the Democrats to face the reality of the situation and come together behind our prohibitive nominee. If we want to win in November we better start acting like a united party now. Senator Clinton, love her or hate her, is moving in the wrong direction in every indicator of her ability to win the nomination; much less the general election. That reality may be hard for some people to swallow but I can't imagine how anyone living in the real world can see any way that she can pull this off.
It's time to take a deep breath, get behind our nominee and start focusing our time, energy and anger at our true opponents who want to continue with eight more years of the Bush administration, which will certainly include appointing at least one new Supreme Court justice that would very well tip the balance for our life time.
Posted by: Zeke | Apr 17, 2008 3:44:55 PM
It's time to get with the program.
Posted by: 24play | Apr 17, 2008 3:54:30 PM
I'm praying Derrick- but I DO have faith in the intelligence of my fellow Americans. There's no need to be scared or hateful of Hillary..yes she may be a woman and yes she may not be what the majority of Americans think a woman should be..she's not scared of a man, she's not afraid to get her hands dirty and she's not afraid to fight to be President of a country she loves so much. Obama lacks moral fiber, he lacks ideas that can be planned and executed. This man is not an innovator..he's a wolf in sheep's clothing. If anyone can withstand what the republicans can dish out-it's Hillary, she's done it for years. God bless Hillary and her unwillingness to stop fighting, to stop caring. Don't be scared of her, embrace her. She's not just "a woman", she's not her husband, she's a proud American and a fighter and she WILL fight for us, you just have to let her...Hillary '08!!!
Posted by: daveynyc | Apr 17, 2008 4:19:41 PM
The Kool Aid obviously comes in both flavors.
Posted by: 24play | Apr 17, 2008 4:25:14 PM
Gotta love the smell of bullshit.
Posted by: Silverskreen | Apr 17, 2008 5:00:06 PM
Yeah, but wait till you smell the elephant shit, that's more smelly than two donkeys.
Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Apr 17, 2008 5:07:37 PM
AMEN
Derrick
I'll take the bullshit of two donkeys kicking each other in the head anyday over the smell of elephant bullshit
Posted by: Jimmyboyo | Apr 17, 2008 5:12:28 PM
Please, when was the last time anyone in the last 8 years, on either side, has done something that wasn't at least tainted in crap.
Posted by: silverskreen | Apr 17, 2008 5:19:42 PM
Shame on you silverskreen
Shame on you for trying to keep it real.
:-)
Sadly you are right, but let some of us enjoy or delusions of utopia coming for just a little longer.
Posted by: Jimmyboyo | Apr 17, 2008 5:22:40 PM
Absolutely, SILVERSKEEN. But who was the smelliest: Nixon, Reagan or Baby Bush? It's a 3 way tie. Gerald Ford and Papa Bush look like saints compared to the top three crap artists.
Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Apr 17, 2008 5:25:56 PM
This was the best *gathering* they have had yet. These are nothing to do with debates, so stop calling them that.
Finally, someone started asking Obama to fill in the blanks about his charecter, and personality and got to the way he handles these little crisis that pop up. Maybe some of you can't handle finding out that your particular favorite isn't really so good at dealing with reality. But thats something that needs to be out in the open BEFORE you elect them President.
These two have very little difference in their actual policies(at least the ones Obama has actually said something other than platitudes about) so going over for the 21 st. time the same tired ground is boring.
Obama has nver answered the real questions about Rev. Wright, and that is how could you have sat in the pews and listened to this man spew hatred and bigotry and racisit crap for 20 years and still claim that you didn't know what he had been preaching. Or, how could you have worked with an anarchist for 4 years that admitted on 9/11 that he had no regrets for bombing innocents and killing them? They didn't ask enough of these questions for many of us.
They are important when you have a man who popped up after 103 days in the Senate and announced for the Presidency.....but has no real public record or anyway to know how and what he thinks.
Clinton is a known quality, we know all we need to know about her and her husband, but Obama isn't and we need to know now, not in November whats in his mind and what he means with all of his feel good empty speech's.
Good for ABC.....they finally stood up and made Obama answer the tough questions.
Posted by: Joshua | Apr 17, 2008 6:10:33 PM
Derrick:
Baby Bush takes the cake.
Jimmyboyo:
Click, click, click! It ain't workin'! and I'm really tryin' 'ere. :)
Posted by: silverskreen | Apr 17, 2008 6:10:46 PM
:-)
silverskreen
LOL
Posted by: Jimmyboyo | Apr 17, 2008 7:00:49 PM
"uh, uh, uh, uh....,"
A quote made famous by Obama when he doesn't have a pre-written script infront of him.
Michelle Obama is even worse with a pre-written speach.
Posted by: z | Apr 17, 2008 8:03:46 PM
DAVENYC, I take great offense to your insinuation that anyone who isn't a supporter of Senator Clinton's campaign is a misogynist. That is as silly as claiming that anyone who doesn't support Obama is a racist. It's ludicris.
I personally don't support Senator Clinton's campaign for the nomination but her being a woman has absolutely nothing to do with it. I would be happy to support a woman who I thought was the best candidate in a race. To act as if people should support a woman that they don't feel is the best candidate just because she is a woman is insulting to women and completely contrary to the tenets of feminism.
If Senator Clinton were to be the Democratic nominee I would certainly support her in the general election because against McCain I would consider her the best candidate for President.
Posted by: Zeke | Apr 17, 2008 8:14:19 PM
Well, Nancy Pelosi better get used to saying:
"Members of Congress, it is my honor and privilege to present to you the President of the United States, John McCain"
(bangs gavel, cue Vice President Condoleezza Rice in the chair next to her)
Because the way things are going for the Democrats, she's going to be saying it for the next four years. Five months ago, either Hillary or Obama would mop the floor with any of the Republicans. Now, it's a statistical tie. It's beginning to look like deja vu for 2000 and 2004. And regardless of whether you support Obama or Hillary, if you're a Democrat, you should be pissing in your pants right now.
Posted by: John | Apr 17, 2008 8:44:13 PM
Does Obama lose talking seconds when he starts off each sentence with, "uh, uh, uh...."?
Posted by: z | Apr 17, 2008 8:47:20 PM
Laugh on Hillary fans, when you have McCain to deal with for 8 years and the relegious zealots who will put him in and have him owing them, laugh on! You and she have wanted to win by any means necessary, and, she hand her supporters have all but assured McCain a victory, so, enjoy and, please, no complaints about how he is so bad, he's what you wanted, and, he is what you'll get! ABC News taking questions and getting ideas from how to run that debacle from FOX News, and, people think this was a real debate???
Posted by: Luke | Apr 17, 2008 9:02:38 PM
fair enough zeke ;)
Posted by: daveynyc | Apr 17, 2008 10:01:10 PM
DAVENYC, It's all good.
:)
It looks like Howard Dean has had enough. He's publicly calling for Super Delegates to declare their intentions NOW.
http://www.americablog.com/2008/04/how-dean-superdelegates-need-to-decide.html
I think the writing's on the wall.
Posted by: Zeke | Apr 17, 2008 11:26:39 PM
As to the confusing comments by "Cadence": First of all, Russia doesn't even bother with debates in its fake democracy - in fact, the dominant media do not even acknowledge any opposition candidates, so your selection of Russia as a comparison to make the US look bad is at best incoherent. Second, as has been pointed out, there have been nearly 20 of these Dem debates, so we are not exactly suffering for a lack of varied venues and formats for these things, nor from a lack of media interaction with the candidates outside of the debates. The suggestion that somehow America is just so painfully stupid that it can't get decent exposure for Presidential candidates to make their points is ridiculous. Also, that "former employee" of the husband - Stephawhathishname - hates Hillary, and frankly I am surprised he let her off as easily as he did. And since the relationship was no secret, there is nothing inherently wrong with him being a questioner - except that he chose to ask dumb questions.
That said, the overall performance by ABC was indeed stupid. If it were possible to have an effective boycott of ABC, I would support it, but that would be a waste of time. Just remember that Gibson always has been an idiot, and if a future opportunity ever comes to pressure ABC to fire him, go for it.
Posted by: Jonathan | Apr 20, 2008 3:09:05 PM
Recent Comments