Obama vs. Hillary in Philly: The Big Loser is ABC

North Star Writers Group ^ | April 17, 2008 | Stephen Silver

[Invisigoth]

PHILADELPHIA – At the gleaming new National Constitution Center here in Philadelphia, I attended Wednesday night’s presidential debate. It was the 21st Democratic debate of the cycle – held in the same building where Barack Obama delivered his famous “race” speech last month. The actual debate was held in a tiny, tiny room where I once saw a very affecting presentation about the Declaration of Independence. On posts and press passes alike, the event is billed as “Clinton vs. Obama,” as though it were a prize fight or something.

And as though the campaign hadn’t been trivialized enough, the story of the night was that the moderators, Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos, asked shamefully superficial and gotcha-oriented questions, which did not even begin to reach substantial policy issues until the debate was nearly an hour old.

The entire first half of the debate consisted almost entirely of rehashes of the nonsense non-stories of the past month – it was all-Wright, all-“bitter,” all-Bosnia sniper fire, all flag pin all the time. If policy or issues were discussed at all in the debate’s first 45 minutes, it came from the candidates, not the moderators. This was the first debate since those stories broke, so I knew they’d be brought up. But I had no idea that half the debate would be devoted to questions about nothing.

[samtheman]

I thought North Star Writers Group was generally pretty good. Have they suddenly decided they love lefties and they hate anyone who asks tough questions of lefties?

[sr4402]

But I had no idea that half the debate would be devoted to questions about nothing.

This is how the writer insults his audience. Those things would be nothing to some folks, and much to others, but it is not nothing to all folks.

This is why the MSM is in decline, because they repeatedly insult their audience.

[Neverforget01]

The entire first half of the debate consisted almost entirely of rehashes of the nonsense non-stories of the past month

Questions of character are non-stories. This is why the Dems didn't care that the President of the United States lied under oath. ABC did a great job. I was pleasantly surprised.

[Eurale]

FYA: “But I had no idea that half the debate would be devoted to questions about nothing.”

Hmmm. Questions of character come to mind.

[Vio24]

LOL, oh my how the lefty slime whine when the shoe is on the other foot!! If it were a Republican debate the press would be applauding these same questions as being an important part of the process of the voters getting to know all about the candidate.

This show keeps getting better and better. This is all being brought about by the willingness of the liberals to get in bed with ANY group just for the votes it will get them. Now their chickens are all coming home to roost and the Dems have been presented with a bill for payment by all the special interest groups they have aligned with.

[Ramcat]

Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos, asked shamefully superficial and gotcha-oriented questions, which did not even begin to reach substantial policy issues until the debate was nearly an hour old.

Maybe it's coming to light that unsubstantial candidates are incapable of dealing with substantial policy issues?

[Neverforget01]

The second half of the debate was handled slightly better, even though the capital gains tax was discussed more than anything else

Imagine pressing the candidates on which taxes they plan to raise: like capital gains and payroll. Better to keep voters in the dark?

[Huck]

the nonsense non-stories of the past month – it was all-Wright, all-“bitter,” all-Bosnia sniper fire

This was the spin on PMSNBC last nite. I didn't see the debate, but I caught a little post debate coverage. These are not nonstories. They are, in card playing terms, tells. And they tell us that O and H are lefty loons.

[Republic Rocker]

It became obvious last night the the liberal MSM that their candidates are in deep national doo-doo........ they are now all in full metal spin....

[Invisigoth]

North Star Writers Group is an equal opportunity syndicate with six liberal writers and six conservatives. They don’t push agendas, they put forth opinions.

[lakeman]

even when they did ask anything about policy the pat answer was “ Don’t ask for specifics just believe us when we say we will be better than Bush”. I mean come on!! Do they have to start every answer with bush or the current administration.

[Nervous Tick]

>> the moderators, Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos, asked shamefully superficial and gotcha-oriented questions

“Journalists” are pure garbage. They are supposed to be the public’s cynical watchdog (and attack dog!) against government. Instead, not only are they in the tank for a particular agenda, the overwhelming majority of them are shallow, and dumb as a box of rocks.

Can’t wait for the (R) vs (D) debates. Not!!

If McCain has any sense (can’t get a clear read on that), he will insist on at least a couple debates “French style”: no duplicitous moderators in the tank for the Dems at all. The candidates face off across a table from each other and they ask EACH OTHER questions. No time limit for the answers, talk over each other all you want, the public is watching!

Not only would that debate style be more informative — it would be more entertaining.

[Nick Thimmesch]

The Washington Compost’s Tom Shales — a hefty lefty who loves to trash people like Kathy Lee Gifford, rightfully so — wrote a stinging review, not of the candidates, but about Gibson & The Water Boy:

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

Worth the read!

[Malesherbes]

Drudge is headlining a Shales screed blaming Stephanopolos and Gibson for embarrassing BO. The BObots are now alarmed at ABC news.

[Nervous Tick]

Thanks for the link. I did indeed read the article.

Problem is — Shales has a dog in the fight (Obama) and is miffed that, “To this observer, ABC’s coverage seemed slanted against Obama. “.

He isn’t really complaining about the lack of hard hitting moderation, as much as whining that the shallowness “gotcha’d” HIS candidate too much.

Wait and see what Shales has to say in the REAL debates between the Donk convention and election day. He’ll be just fine with “shallow”, as long as the moderators are piling on the (R).

[Neverforget01]

Thanks for the link. The MSM hates it when the Dems get asked questions of character.

Ayers was a bomber 40 years ago but Obama served on a board with him for years as recently as 2002. I don't want a President who serves on boards with people who bomb the Pentagon and wish they'd done more; question of character and judgment.

[Nervous Tick]

>> These are not nonstories. They are, in card playing terms, tells. And they tell us that O and H are lefty loons.

Right.

And we’re being introduced to the new Demorat meme for dealing with their candidates’ multiple character problems:

It’s a smear. It’s hiding the “truth” about america. It’s the VRWC attack machine, again. Don’t talk about our character flaws, let’s get back to talking about W and his administration.

[N. Theknow]

But I had no idea that half the debate would be devoted to questions about nothing.

The author sounds bitter.

Must be a result of the new rifle range at his church.

Since both of them are running on the Wizard of Oz platform of promise them everything but give them nothing, it should be the first and foremost thing to see what is behind the curtain.

If they have to BS the little things, embellish their characters, spend half their time explaining what they "meant" to say and covering for their spouses' and acquaintances' lack of ethics; what does it matter how they would do anything else?

Questions about nothing sure showed a lot of something lacking in ZerObama and Hillliary.

[Dr. Scarpetta]

Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos, asked shamefully superficial and gotcha-oriented questions.

I sent ABC an E-mail to congratulate them. The best debate so far...