[GOPJ]

Years ago I was a guest on a local TV show - back when I was a liberal - and the woman moderator started asking me "hard" questions. I was stunned - I knew she and I were on the same track. We had planned together, visited in each others homes, etc. So I asked her what was going on - she stopped the taping and explained that she had to act that way so she would look like she gave everyone a hard time. But that in fact, her questions would give me a chance to clarify my positions -- and she was right. We talked after the show - and the whole experience was fun. She looked tough and I looked great. When it fact, she wasn't "tough" and I wasn't "great". But it looked that way.

When I watch Russert I see the same thing. His "hardball questions" to Dems allow them to clear up misunderstandings. His hardball questions to Republicans take them on. It's subtle, but if you've ever been interview, you know the difference. That's the "lie" that's harder - and more frequent. That said, I still feel Russert is often an outstanding interviewer.

[Peach]

He is a good interviewer. What I don't appreciate is mis-quoting someone the way he did.

[nuconvert]

"His "hardball questions" to Dems allow them to clear up misunderstandings. His hardball questions to Republicans take them on."

exactly

[kabar]

That's the "lie" that's harder - and more frequent. That said, I still feel Russert is often an outstanding interviewer.

What Russert did here was more than just a confrontational interview. He deliberately took Powell's comments out of context and then used them to butress his question, "That’s the secretary of state. So why can’t Democrats now say that the administration deliberately misled the American people?"

This isn't a "hard" question, it is a deliberately misleading one. It is entirely different from the example you used, i.e., the "fun" experience you had on a local TV show. Russert is not/not an outstanding interviewer if the purpose of an interview is to ferret out the truth and not knowingly try to mislead the guest with bogus information. This isn't responsible journalism. Mehlman should demand an apology and a correction.

[rightinthemiddle]

Great observations! Very true and correct.

But they'll say it's only a "matter of opinion." Remember, with liberals, there's always "a gray area."

Always.

[Edit35]

That said, I still feel Russert is often an outstanding interviewer.

Russert does OCCASIONALLY get hard on left wing loonies like Dean, but NOT OFTEN.

Just enough so people like me (and probably you) nod our heads and say, 'yeah, Russert can be fair (when in fact he is anything but)."

But as a newspaper reporter, I can totally relate to your story about the TV interviewer seeming to ask "tough" questions to political friends while trying to embarass political enemies.

I see it practiced every day on TV, and occasionally in newspapers, etc.

Yes, it is very subtle like you said.

In the end, it is the reason the Bush Administration is declining in the polls, and I can only hope that someone in the White House and/or in the GOP power structure figures out a way to throw these deceiptful questions back in the reporters' faces during an interview.