Dem Debate Blues

If you were lucky enough to have missed Wednesday's debate, then, yes, it really was as bad as everyone is saying. Here's the transcript and here's a good video summary prepared by TPMtv.

The ABC moderators did a notably bad job by avoiding substantive issues and focusing their energies on a trivial and "relentless stream of 'gotcha' questions," in the words of my boss, Katrina vanden Heuvel. That's why Editor & Publisher called this debate "perhaps the most embarrassing performance by the media in a major presidential debate in years."

During the first half of the conversation, moderators George Stephanopoulos and Charles Gibson avoided any mention of real issues. As the Los Angeles Times noted yesterday,"With the moderators and Clinton raising assorted questions about Obama's past for the first half of the debate, issues received relatively short shrift. Not until 50 minutes in was a policy issue--Iraq--asked about by the moderators."

The insipid line of questioning took us through tired campaign non-issues like Clinton's Bosnia gaffe, Obama's talk about "bitter" small-town voters, the rhetoric of the Illinois Senator's former pastor Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and the fact that Obama rarely wears an American flag lapel pin. The most irrelevant line of questioning came from Stephanopoulos who tried to interrogate Obama on his glancing relationship with University of Illinois at Chicago professor and former Weather Underground leader William Ayers. Obama's "ties" to Ayers have been an obsession of Fox News host Sean Hannity,who according to Salon reportedly pressed Stephanopoulos to ask about Ayers at the debate.

In the eloquent words of an open letter to ABC written by an ad-hoc group of journalists and media analysts, including many Nation writers, "The debate was a revolting descent into tabloid journalism and a gross disservice to Americans concerned about the great issues facing the nation and the world...ABC seemed less interested in provoking serious discussion than in trying to generate cheap shot sound-bites for later rebroadcast. The questions asked by Mr. Stephanopoulos and Mr. Gibson were a disgrace, and the subsequent attempts to justify them by claiming that they reflect citizens' interest are an insult to the intelligence of those citizens and ABC's viewers."

If you agree, please sign on to MoveOn.org's new petition demanding that ABC and other networks focus their resources on the issues that affect people's lives, and support FAIR's efforts to keep up the pressure on ABC and other outlets.

Comments (31)

1. Ahhh, PETER....now....

   You've had some petitions and "activism" in the past whose efficacy I'd call dubious....but this?

   A week from now, we (and Move On and FAIR) will have "Moved On" to something else and the networks won't have moved one iota on "focus(ing) their resources on the issues that affect people's lives".

   Posted by Mask at 04/18/2008 @ 1:44pm

2. Now we see why Hillary doesn't like the cable networks sponsoring debates, as ABC was about as openly biased against Obama as one could imagine. I counted 6 questions that favored Clinton, and only one (the sniper fire incident) that favored Obama. No wonder these networks are losing their ratings as more voters are turning to alternative sources of news to escape this obvious bias.

   Obama stayed above the fray, and used the negative questions against him to further advance his candidacy. Even when confronted with a chance to blow Hillary out of the water with her blatant lie about the sniper fire story, Obama gave Hillary the benefit of the doubt. It is this "above the fray" attitude that is attracting more new voters to Obama, and these are new voters Hillary can't get in November because she is tied to the corrupt and divisive politics of the past that has kept these voters on the sidelines in previous presidential elections.

   The winning argument with the undecided superdelegates, and even Hillary delegates on a second ballot if it comes to that, is "OBAMA CAN BRING IN NEW VOTERS THAT HILLARY CANT GET IN NOVEMBER AND THIS IS WHY THE DEMOCRATS WILL WIN WITH OBAMA AND LOSE AGAIN IF THEY NOMINATE HILLARY CLINTON".

   Posted by Metteyya at 04/18/2008 @ 1:45pm

3. Posted by METTEYYA 04/18/2008 @ 1:45pm

   OPTIMUS Prime!!!!

   Posted by Mask at 04/18/2008 @ 1:49pm

4. I am sure the next debate the moderators will get back to normal type questions for Obama,

   such as "How's it goin'dude?" or How 'bout them Cubbies?"?

   Posted by dscott at 04/18/2008 @ 2:45pm

5. Posted by DSCOTT 04/18/2008 @ 2:45pm

   How about "Could we hear about your plans for comprehensive energy strategy" or "Who should be held responsible for the home loan debacle"?

   Posted by leftofcenter at 04/18/2008 @ 3:03pm

6. AUTOBOTS! ROLL OUT!

   Posted by frosty zoom at 04/18/2008 @ 3:09pm

7. Katha Pollitt Posted 6 January 2008 @ 1:42pm TheNation.com

   'Obama, the black candidate who never mentions his race, gets to smile his mile-wide smile and be a rock star. Somehow he has made himself a great big humongous hope object. People can project on him what they want him to be. It may not be fair, but then, that's show business.'

   Posted by HonestLiberal at 04/18/2008 @ 3:10pm

8. "Who should be held responsible for the home loan debacle"?

   Posted by LEFTOFCENTER 04/18/2008 @ 3:03pm

   trace the twisted roots back to carter. same with the persian gulf.

   oh what a twisted root we weave when we set out to do stupid things....

   Posted by frosty zoom at 04/18/2008 @ 3:13pm

9. Posted by HONESTLIBERAL

   DUCK! DECEPTICON! TAKE THAT PASTEATRON!

   ZZZZZZZZOOOOORRRRRRPPPPPPP!

   Posted by frosty zoom at 04/18/2008 @ 3:14pm

10. the flesh creatures will speak.

    obama will be the autobot's nominee.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/18/2008 @ 3:17pm

11. my favorite line was from stephanopolous, one hour into the "debate": "now, a question about the #1 issue on americans minds, the Economy".

    well, george, if it's the #1 issue, why did you spend the first hour talking about innuendos, misstatements, flag pins......or my favorite question of the night: "does rev wright love america as much as you?"

    can words help us describe how utterly inane questions about patriotism are? does anyone actually believe that it's even possible to be "anti-american"?

    how could any american effectively be "anti-american"?

    what does it even mean to be "anti-american"?

    how does one work against one's country (unless, of course, as debate moderator for ABC, you ask meaningless questions for 60 minutes )?

    Posted by darladoon at 04/18/2008 @ 3:32pm

12. Posted by HONESTLIBERAL 04/18/2008 @ 3:10pm

    Darmok and Jalad, on the ocean.

    Posted by Mask at 04/18/2008 @ 3:35pm

13. BTW, I understand that FRANKGRITS finally has his MySpace page up...

    link [generalzod.net]

    Posted by Mask at 04/18/2008 @ 3:36pm

14. how shallow is an individual who actually believes that there americans who are somehow conspiring against the government?

    the only americans who are "anti-american" in my mind are the ones advocating for:

    privatized social security

    permanent military presence in the ME

    torture

    wiretapping

    etc, etc

    the biggest irony in all of this is that the ones who are discussing the possibility of ant-americanism in this country are the same ones who proposing wars, privatization, torture, etc....

    this, my friends, is text book authoritarianism, and its greatest practitioners are right under our noses.

    Posted by darladoon at 04/18/2008 @ 3:37pm

15. those whose patriotism we should be questioning are the ones who are actively and radically subverting the precise legal, ethical and democratic framework upon which this nation was founded.

    what else is America (really) except that original framework? sure, there is society, culture, etc.....but the set of rules we all follow, and expect others to follow, is the only tangible reality from which we can derive what it means to be American.

    "certain, unalienable rights"

    Posted by darladoon at 04/18/2008 @ 4:10pm

16. the attacks on obama, vis a vis rev wright, are, in and of themselves, signs of authoritarianism....

    why is fox news sending out reporters to ambush supporters of wright?

    gee, do you think it's 'cuz fox news is a fascist bunch of thugs? or because they really, really love america?

    Posted by darladoon at 04/18/2008 @ 4:32pm

17. fascist thugs who love america?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/18/2008 @ 4:54pm

18. Posted by FDR42 04/18/2008 @ 3:50pm

    FDR42, the 10th amendment does not grant Habeas Corpus rights to foreigners. Nor will Congress make any changes to said amendment to grant that right.

    Right now, it sucks to be those guys at Gitmo.

    Posted by ACook at 04/18/2008 @ 5:12pm

19. You can't even call these moderated events "debates". At best you get scripted answers that are rehearsed over and over again.

    Debates now just give politicians face time so they can read a table of contents to the audience, rather than give substantive information. They aren't even allowed to ask questions to each other.

    I'm sorry, but ABC's "debate" was just par for the course.

    Posted by Zeddmen at 04/18/2008 @ 5:15pm

20. the democratic debase.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/18/2008 @ 5:36pm

21. I am dissapointed they did not ask Obama why he hates America? Or better yet why does he hate freedom?

    Posted by Extraneous at 04/18/2008 @ 6:29pm

22. I am dissapointed they did not ask Obama why he hates America? Or better yet why does he hate freedom?

    i think they did, only with different words. and that's the authoritarian modus operandi, they speak in prevarications (if i may say so).....

    Posted by darladoon at 04/18/2008 @ 6:50pm

23. Poor Obamabots....their candidate can't take the heat? It's only gonna get hotter..Like when Barry Oh! has to answer questions like, How will we pay for all your lofty, expensive programs, and others like those pointed out by my esteemed associate, JOMAMMA.....

    Posted by TransitDave at 04/18/2008 @ 11:41pm

24. gee, rio, i guess you're right. oh well, i guess i can't vote for obama now. if it weren't for your in-depth analysis on this issue of vital importance, i would have mindlessly voted for obama. without a lapel, i'm certain he's a marxist, muslim, fundamentalist, jihadist terrorist. will be looking out for more lapel pins on the collars of the other candidates.

    p.s. just got back from walgreens, where i purchased a dozen lapel pins. i'm going to put one on my cat and my dog, just to be sure they aren't terrorists as well.

    Posted by darladoon at 04/19/2008 @ 12:11am

25. hey peter, i don't see a lapel pin on your sweater in your headshot.

    just curious why not?

    are you........one of them?

    i'm not sure i can read any more of your blogs in the future without that pin........walgreens is having a sale on them, just in case you were wondering.

    Posted by darladoon at 04/19/2008 @ 12:12am

26. Sick of crap that passes for political debate in US?

    Check these, get real, be amazed & deeply satisfied, maybe even moved to, pssst, do something:

    Switch on your computer speakers & check out these two video links (about 20 minutes each).

    http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/92

    http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/140

    Hans Rosling is a remarkably compelling speaker; he & his Swedish colleagues have developed some new animated software that's really quite amazing (Google has bought it). And it's all available FREE. Rosling's ongoing work is accessible at www.gapminder.com, where still more examples of this exciting software can be viewed. This is really compelling discussion. A marvelous diversion into reality & away from nonsense & crap.

    Posted by sloper at 04/19/2008 @ 12:43am

27. Nice posts,Darla. Simple, sweet, yet utterly profound. Too bad most Americans just don't get it. Nonetheless, let's keep plugging away! Something has to give--hopefully, not the last remnants of democracy.

    Posted by bobforer at 04/19/2008 @ 10:56am

28. also known as B.Hussian Obama.

    Posted by RIO BRAVO 04/19/2008 @ 12:43am

    you can't spell.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/19/2008 @ 10:36pm

29. How DARE ABC ask probing questions of Obama! I am outraged! It's bias, I tell yas!

    Posted by pontificus at 04/20/2008 @ 08:20am

30. heheheh. he said "probe"...... heheheh.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/20/2008 @ 2:16pm

31. Could it be that left is unhappy because Obama did not get the royale treatment. I am sure there would have no protestation if the such questions were only foisted at Clinton. The hypocrisy of the left is becoming more notable in this campaign.

    Posted by kevin99999 at 04/20/2008 @ 8:32pm