Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Wall Street Journal)   Forty-one different "journalists" have independently decided it was totally unfair for Barack Obama to get some questions at the debate that weren't softballs   (online.wsj.com) divider line
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

1327 clicks; posted to Politics » on 21 Apr 2008 at 6:32 PM (14 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



126 Comments     (+0 »)


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2008-04-21 4:34:35 PM  
Haven't we been over this a hundred times since last Wednesday already?!
 
2008-04-21 4:35:01 PM  
Let the record show that this journalist thought the Ayers question was a good one and that Obama's evasive answer was revealing. (We don't have an opinion on the debate as a whole, as we were out Wednesday night and neglected to set our TiVo.)

so he didn't watch it, yet he insists that his opinion supersedes that of 41 of his peers. got it.
 
2008-04-21 4:36:36 PM  
There are precious few of what would normally be considered actual journalists, and many, many left wing bloggers and advocates passing themselves, for today's purposes, as "media analysts."

Yea, because being a real media analyst is such a distinguished position. If some "actual journalists" would actually start acting like journalists, then bloggers wouldn't even have a niche. Sounds like the old guard is just pissed that "outsiders" are cutting into their bullshiat-spewing racket.
 
2008-04-21 4:41:25 PM  
Questions about flag pins are stupid questions.... ABC wouldn't be getting the shiat it's getting if they actually threw a couple of hardball questions at the candidates.
 
2008-04-21 4:41:46 PM  
Fark user image

Owned by FoxNews now, right?

I dropped my subscription 2 years ago when I couldn't stand it any more. I will resume the subscription when the editorial page stops reeking of Rupert Murdoch and Paul Gigot.
 
2008-04-21 4:44:27 PM  
How stupid do readers have to be to conclude the 41 signatories objected to the Ayers question, as implied by this column.

God. They're logic is getting as bad as Boortz's.
 
2008-04-21 4:45:35 PM  
Car_Ramrod: Yea, because being a real media analyst is such a distinguished position. If some "actual journalists" would actually start acting like journalists, then bloggers wouldn't even have a niche. Sounds like the old guard is just pissed that "outsiders" are cutting into their bullshiat-spewing racket.

well, like i pointed out, considering he wrote this entire editorial and admitted he didn't even watch the debate, i wouldn't hold my breath on him starting to act like a real journalist any time soon.
 
2008-04-21 4:46:00 PM  
Well, yes, I suppose you could argue that a wet turd with a sharp rock inside isn't a softball. Doesn't make it any better to throw it, though.
 
2008-04-21 4:46:14 PM  
So, they stop calling the online WSJ editorial OpinionJournal and then go after bloggers. Delicious.

Editorial = blog. Actually, newspaper editorial is to buggy whip as blog is to car key.
 
2008-04-21 4:47:31 PM  
Asking about tenuous relationships, the number of pieces of flair worn, or if they have ever been shot at by snipers do not count as hard ball questions.

Try asking them questions about how they plan to reform immigration or social security.
 
2008-04-21 4:48:25 PM  
burndtdan: so he didn't watch it, yet he insists that his opinion supersedes that of 41 of his peers. got it.

Ever heard of transcripts?
 
2008-04-21 4:48:37 PM  
Code_Archeologist: the number of pieces of flair worn

you know who else had flair?

/you know who they made wear it?
 
2008-04-21 4:48:45 PM  
Hah. Policy questions are softballs now are they?

Tabloid gossip? Hard hitting political discourse! Substance questions requiring knowledge and thought? Liberal pansy-ass softballs!

You guys are too funny. You actually WANT the political discourse in this country to be a big pile of shiat. You actually WANT the distractions.

Well, like I've said here a million times, it isn't like McCain can possibly win on his merits (hah!) so I guess slimeball games are all you've got. Bring it on.
 
2008-04-21 4:49:58 PM  
So let me get this straight: James Taranto, a blogger for the Wall Street Journal who consistently decries the insidiously influential yet at the same time completely irrelevant mainstream media, a man who believes in the power of the blogosphere to fact check the "media elite", is outraged because 41 people who aren't "real" journalists, just irrelevant bloggers, signed a letter condemning the mainstream media?

How does this guy keep his farking head from exploding?
 
2008-04-21 4:52:04 PM  
Trolltastic headline there, subhuman...

Is this like piece work for the Hillary campaign, or do you have a whole shiatload of money invested in the stagnation of the electoral process? Because those are the only two groups of people I could come up with who would rather hear sniper/Rev. Wright/lapel pin questions than actual policy discussion.

...unless you're a retard. I mean, I don't wanna be accused of presenting a false dichotomy. It COULD be that.
 
2008-04-21 4:52:13 PM  
sigdiamond2000: How does this guy keep his farking head from exploding?

It helps to have a giant vacuum where your brain should be. All that pressure just goes down the ole' rabbit hole.
 
2008-04-21 4:53:57 PM  
stargazer101
Haven't we been over this a hundred times since last Wednesday already?!


Yes.
For the eleventy billionth time, we're not pissed that the questions were "hard". We're pissed that so many of the questions were stupid and irrelevant.
 
2008-04-21 4:55:00 PM  
SquirrelsOfDoom: burndtdan: so he didn't watch it, yet he insists that his opinion supersedes that of 41 of his peers. got it.

Ever heard of transcripts?


ever heard of reading what i quoted?

(We don't have an opinion on the debate as a whole, as we were out Wednesday night and neglected to set our TiVo.)

he didn't read the transcript, or he'd have an opinion on the debate as a whole.

beyond that, his entire argument is ludicrous. he makes the bare assertion that the questions were valid (which he then admits he has no basis for), and spends the rest of his time trying to attack the credibility of those holding the opposing viewpoint, instead of actually attacking their argument or defending his own. and even his attacks against the other reporters are nebulous, comprised of regurgitated opinion from someone else and criteria for credibility that are questionable at best (he argues that only 2 of them are with major media outlets... who cares... and then says that they don't "do journalism" without supporting that claim in any way).
 
2008-04-21 4:55:19 PM  
SquirrelsOfDoom: Ever heard of transcripts?

yes, because text conveys the full meaning of our words. Nothing is conveyed by the way someone says something, nor their facial expressions.
 
2008-04-21 4:55:22 PM  
Right wing world:

Where everything you don't agree with is a liberal conspiracy.
 
2008-04-21 4:55:52 PM  
mediaho: Actually, newspaper editorial is to buggy whip as blog is to car key.

Excellent analogy.
 
2008-04-21 4:56:57 PM  
Skleenar: Right wing world:

Where everything you don't agree with is a liberal conspiracy.


Oh, so you think asking if Obama believes in the flag ISN'T a fair question? I mean, it's not like she was questioning his patriotism! She said it herself, that's how you can tell she wasn't!
 
2008-04-21 4:57:50 PM  
I would guess that most people who were upset with the Ayers questioning don't remember (or were not alive) when Ayers' group was bombing the hell out of our country or their declaration of war on the US.
 
2008-04-21 5:06:01 PM  
Hillary will win PA by about 11%, and she'll declare a total moral victory.

On to Denver and the birth of the 2008 meme: "The Denver Riots".
 
2008-04-21 5:09:49 PM  
I don't think the question is about whether a candidate should get "softballs" or "hardballs", the real issue is that many of those questions do not have any business in a debate. For one, some of the questions were nothing short of character attacks in the form of questions. Secondly, debates should be an opportunity for candidates to declare, elaborate, and justify their policy perspectives while engaging in reasoned arguments with their opponent in criticizing the opposing candidate's policies and defending one's own. Questions should focus explicitly on the policy issues that Americans care about. Instead, you have the moderators trying to make a candidate sweat what many have justly called fake-controversies that don't matter but still sway the average uneducated registered voter. The difficulty of the question is only determined by the complexity of the issue.

On the flip side, even when the moderators do ask appropriate questions that require a candidate to explain their policy position and in the process indicate their level of expertise on the issue in question, candidates get away with failing to address the specific question and just using the time to recite some talking points that they had pre-rehearsed that is related to the topic, perhaps tailoring the response ever so slightly to sound like they are actually answering the question. I don't buy it but the moderators and the American public lets them get away with this. Plus it is clear that when addressing the masses Candidates tend to be intentionally ambiguous about the details of their policies so that they can maintain a wider appeal. It seems that in some cases they would rather seem ignorant of things like economics than actually reveal their intended policy with any accuracy.
 
2008-04-21 5:11:35 PM  
RobsterCraw: For one, some of the questions were nothing short of character attacks in the form of questions.

do you feel that way because you are a terrorist, or because you are a child molester?
 
2008-04-21 5:11:49 PM  
DarthBrooks:

On to Denver and the birth of the 2008 meme: "The Denver Riots".

Just because you keep saying that doesn't make it come true.

[image from travel-stop.co.uk too old to be available]
 
2008-04-21 5:21:21 PM  
burndtdan:

Do you still beat your wife?
 
2008-04-21 5:26:29 PM  
minoridiot: I would guess that most people who were upset with the Ayers questioning don't remember (or were not alive) when Ayers' group was bombing the hell out of our country or their declaration of war on the US.

I was alive, and I thought it was a retarded question because it had absolutely nothing to do with Obama's qualifications for office or stance on the issues. It made about as much sense as something like this: "Mr. McCain, in 1968 in the village of My Lai in Viet Nam, Lt. William Calley was in command of a unit and ordered and oversaw the systematic slaughter of 500 villagers, mostly women, children, infants and elderly. He was later court-martialed and convicted of murder, and is commonly considered a war criminal. My question is this: Given that you were a member of that same military and also in Viet Nam at the time, can you explain your relationship to Lt. Calley, and explain to Republicans why it won't be a problem?"
 
2008-04-21 5:26:58 PM  
RobsterCraw: burndtdan:

Do you still beat your wife?


WHAT THE FARK IS A ROBSTER CRAW?

/I know it's not in the spirit.
//Couldn't help myself. ;)
 
2008-04-21 5:31:01 PM  
BKITU:
WHAT THE FARK IS A ROBSTER CRAW?


I really, really, really, really wish that a presidential debate moderator would ask this question.

An unrelated question, is your hatred for America something you've always felt?
 
2008-04-21 5:32:13 PM  
RobsterCraw: burndtdan:

Do you still beat your wife?


only when she's being a coont

thewashingtonnote.comView Full Size
 
2008-04-21 5:32:59 PM  
RobsterCraw: BKITU:
WHAT THE FARK IS A ROBSTER CRAW?


I really, really, really, really wish that a presidential debate moderator would ask this question.

An unrelated question, is your hatred for America something you've always felt?


does BKITU hate america as much as you?
 
2008-04-21 5:34:56 PM  
RobsterCraw: BKITU:
WHAT THE FARK IS A ROBSTER CRAW?


I really, really, really, really wish that a presidential debate moderator would ask this question.

An unrelated question, is your hatred for America something you've always felt?


I'm afraid I can't answer that until you make it perfectly clear to the American public why you have never felt the need to stop sodomizing dead puppies.
 
2008-04-21 5:38:26 PM  
madmann: It COULD be that.

This stupid primary really is going on forever isn't it? Its going to be alright though. Money talks and Obama is rolling in it. Hillary and McCain are so clearly out of touch. November will be here soon.
 
2008-04-21 5:39:16 PM  
BKITU:
I'm afraid I can't answer that until you make it perfectly clear to the American public why you have never felt the need to stop sodomizing dead puppies.


A: Well I can answer that question quite readily, it just so happens that I am a methodist.

Q: If elected will you be willing to meet with leaders of Hamas, or other terrorist groups, and tell them where you've buried all the hookers?
 
2008-04-21 5:39:46 PM  
mediaho: Actually, newspaper editorial is to buggy whip as blog is to car key.

King Something: Excellent analogy.


Yeah. Except for the part where most newspaper editorialists have made journalism their entire careers, as opposed to bloggers who have generally been at it professionally for how long?
 
2008-04-21 5:40:19 PM  
burndtdan: RobsterCraw: BKITU:
WHAT THE FARK IS A ROBSTER CRAW?


I really, really, really, really wish that a presidential debate moderator would ask this question.

An unrelated question, is your hatred for America something you've always felt?

does BKITU hate america as much as you?


Isn't it true burndtdan that you repeatedly frequent an online discussion forum with BKITU, a known America-hater? How much of his hate do you agree with?
 
2008-04-21 5:44:36 PM  
burndtdan: he didn't read the transcript, or he'd have an opinion on the debate as a whole.

I wouldn't agree. He could very well have read the entire transcript, yet deferred from a full opinion because of the nuances from facial expressions, tone of voice, etc. IOW, he's aware of what was actually said but nothing else.
 
2008-04-21 5:46:29 PM  
Zalan: yes, because text conveys the full meaning of our words. Nothing is conveyed by the way someone says something, nor their facial expressions.

Actually, you're confirming what I said a few minutes ago: Not seeing it doesn't mean he's totally ignorant, but having read a transcript doesn't make up for not seeing the actual video.
 
2008-04-21 5:47:52 PM  
One of the "Journalists" that they describe:

Robert Greenwald (Link goes to his wikipedia entry)

Greenwald's films have garnered 25 Emmy Award nominations, four CableACE Award nominations, two Golden Globe nominations, the Peabody Award, the Robert Wood Johnson Award, and eight Awards of Excellence from the Film Advisory Board. He was awarded the 2002 Producer of the Year Award by the American Film Institute.

I guess that because Bill O'Reilly hates the guy, he shouldn't be considered a journalist.
 
2008-04-21 5:49:32 PM  
SquirrelsOfDoom:

I wouldn't agree. He could very well have read the entire transcript, yet deferred from a full opinion because of the nuances from facial expressions, tone of voice, etc. IOW, he's aware of what was actually said but nothing else.


You seriously believe that is the likeliest scenario? Then why would he feel comfortable in discussing any aspect of it at all?
 
2008-04-21 5:49:35 PM  
This? Again?

Really?
 
2008-04-21 5:49:57 PM  
Unright: burndtdan: RobsterCraw: BKITU:
WHAT THE FARK IS A ROBSTER CRAW?


I really, really, really, really wish that a presidential debate moderator would ask this question.

An unrelated question, is your hatred for America something you've always felt?

does BKITU hate america as much as you?

Isn't it true burndtdan that you repeatedly frequent an online discussion forum with BKITU, a known America-hater? How much of his hate do you agree with?



It's been all over the Internet--sources are suggesting that you've, on more than one occasion, collaborated on altering political and Presidential photographs--sometimes referred to as "Photoshop Contests"--with known Palestinian and Hamas symapathizers.

In a general election, Unright, how are you going to defend yourself against constant attacks based on what has become known as Photogate?
 
2008-04-21 5:58:26 PM  
RobsterCraw: A: Well I can answer that question quite readily, it just so happens that I am a methodist.

And since Methodists are a sect that has historically been in favor of teetotaling, indeed they use grape juice for Communion purposes instead of wine, it really raises as a legitimate question--how long have you been in favor of re-establishing Prohibition?


Q: If elected will you be willing to meet with leaders of Hamas, or other terrorist groups, and tell them where you've buried all the hookers?

Now we're in the silly season again. Those "Hookers" were all of the "John Lee" variety. We've been over this a million times, a-how-how-how-how.
 
2008-04-21 6:03:28 PM  
quickdraw: madmann: It COULD be that.

This stupid primary really is going on forever isn't it? Its going to be alright though. Money talks and Obama is rolling in it. Hillary and McCain are so clearly out of touch. November will be here soon.


You always have a way of making me feel better. Ok, calmer, anyway...

Relatively Obscure: In a general election, Unright, how are you going to defend yourself against constant attacks based on what has become known as Photogate?

I know for fact that Unright did not participate in Photogate. I have pictures that show that this, in fact, is not the case. I have examined them and they appear to be genuine. I say this without fear of reprisal, as I can tell from some of the pixels and from having seen quite a few shops in my time.
 
2008-04-21 6:09:47 PM  
I know the question hasn't been raised but I think it is important to point out that I still wet my bed.
 
2008-04-21 6:11:16 PM  
RobsterCraw: I know the question hasn't been raised but I think it is important to point out that I still wet my bed.

omg... FLOODGATE!
 
2008-04-21 6:15:35 PM  
RobsterCraw:

I know the question hasn't been raised but I think it is important to point out that I still wet my bed.


Well, it's always good to get out in front of a story like that.
 
2008-04-21 6:47:45 PM  
Relatively Obscure: In a general election, Unright, how are you going to defend yourself against constant attacks based on what has become known as Photogate?

He'll put a little bit of a post-it note over the phototransistor.

/Filterowned?
 
Displayed 50 of 126 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.