How a good question becomes a softball
We in the elite media (umm, that was meant to be self-mocking, not presumptuous) are often characterized as acolytes of the Left, the Man, Corporate America -- pick your demon. In our defense, we often assemble these conflicting critiques as proof that we're unbiased. I mean, how can we not be when liberals and conservatives alike denounce us? To borrow a phrase, we wear your scorn as a badge of honor! Oh, wait -- we didn't like that guy.
Anyway, what seems like slant can sometimes simply be a case of a reporter being pwned by a spinmeister. Such was the case this morning, when NPR Morning Edition's Steve Inskeep interviewed Robert Gibbs, a senior strategist for Barack Obama's campaign. Inskeep opened the piece with an intriguing question: "When you listened to John McCain's speech last night, what, if anything, did you hear -- speak to me as a professional here -- what if anything did you hear that made your job harder?" It's a subtle way of asking what McCain did right politically. But as Inskeep should have known, people like Gibbs don't answer questions like that. And Gibbs didn't. Instead, he trotted out a now-familiar line of attack, one that Democrats have been repeating ad nauseum in recent days: McCain's ignoring the plight of Real American Voters!
Well look, I think obviously John McCain always starts out with a very compelling life story and biography. But I tell you what I think isn't going to help those that are experiencing their lives getting harder out there in America. And that is, the fact that John McCain, and quite frankly this was true throughout the Republican Convention, outlined very little about what they wanted to do to help people get through their tough lives, help them get back up on their feet, find a job -- all those sorts of things I thought were really lacking. I'm not sure this speech did what John McCain wanted it to do.
When one of these guys says "quite frankly," you know he's about to launch in something that's anything but frank. I'm only surprised Gibbs didn't bring up McCain's seven houses. Oh wait -- he did, later in the segment. In short, no matter what Inskeep was trying to do with this segment, it played as a commercial for Obama's campaign. And you though NPR was commercial-free....
2002 Photo of Steve Inskeep courtesy of NPR
The real question is, why interview a strategist from someone's campaign if you want them to be impartial about the race? It's their job to defend their candidate and negatively spin the other. Republican and Democrat alike.
Posted by: J | September 08, 2008 at 05:08 AM
I am a bitter American, clinging to my gun and my religion. What the left wing Croc wearing, merlot sipping Libs is that I have common sense and I when I read outright lies on blogs, it sickens me and scares me, because you will do anything and everything to have Obama elected. I think Obama is a great speaker and a good person, but he is not qualified to run this country. It's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when, and America will be attacked again by terrorists and I want someone who can stand up for this country, not someone who wants to talk with our enemies. It's time to stand up America. I wished Palin was running for President instead of McCain, but I know she will make a great President in 2012. We need to rid ourselves of Nasty Pelosi too.
Posted by: steveJJ | September 07, 2008 at 07:23 PM
Phil Gramm (former Republican senator from Texas), one of the financial advisers for the McCain campaign, is a lead architect of the changes in legislation that led to the current financial situation in the U.S. He and his wife benefited from the generosity of Enron. Recently he said the U.S. is "a nation of whiners."
Vote for McBush and Pitbull for more of the same.
Posted by: cinnamon barks | September 07, 2008 at 02:08 AM
I read this in today's paper.
Among the key issues: whether the two executives and perhaps their boards of directors would step aside in return for federal aid.
Doubts about the stability of Fannie and Freddie, which own or guarantee more than $5 trillion worth of mortgages -- about half of all U.S. home loans -- have dogged investors since the U.S. housing finance market began to unravel a year ago.
My question, is why are these people, who did the same thing as Enron, only with 25 times more money, are not looking at Prison?
Why is it that Congress isn't calling them in to explain themselves, and their accounting practices?
Could it be that an investigation would find Congress largely at fault for this?
Ten years ago, Congress raked the Banks and other loan agencies over the hotest coals found about not making loans for low income families.
Now, Morgage Companies are facing big problems as more and more low income families are being forclosed.
Yes, I know, some crooks have also got into the mix, qualifing people for houses they couldn't afford, but still, had Congress hadn't ten years ago made Banks, and others to write risky loans, would we be here today?
Posted by: David Molinero | September 06, 2008 at 03:29 AM
Great point. Yay Hockey & Soccer Moms for Sarah Palin!!!
Posted by: Hockey Moms for Sarah Palin | September 05, 2008 at 06:59 PM