Massive backlash against ABC News' Pennsylvania debate marks a turning point

I like that ABC has been covering the 'story' of their craptastic debate by offering 'exclusives', copied and pasted from their feedback emails.

I'm sorry, but I fail to see what was wrong with ABC's debate. You're just upset because Obama was EXPOSED.

Jawnynsc,

Who was really exposed, Obama was jumped on , an attempted beat down by 3 1 hilliary and 2 journalist for ABC, what does that say about the 3 of them in the eyes of millions. Because you are not obviously for Obama, it was ok? I will consider the source on that comment, because evidently you must have some issues with FAIRNESS, the Government have dupped you so much that you forgot what FAIRNESS is. Nothing more informative than what has already been played. It was not Fair no matter who you do not like. That is where Love and harmony comes in, I guess you do play fair, no Love huh.

How was he exposed? What new information was revealed? I tend to agree that the backlash over the debate is being overblown, but I think the word "exposed" reveals some serious wishful thinking.

What was he supposed to be exposed of, jawnybnsc? lying to get us into a war? shredding of our constitution? torture? letting mortgage companies run ponzi schemes that kick millions of Americans out of their homes? Letting big corporations ship jobs overseas? Oh wait. THAT WAS BUSH!

Obama merely told the truth about America's situation. The elitist reporters just think its hell.

georgie was communications director for Clinton in 92. i find it a little strange that he would moderate a debate after having worked so closely with (for) one of the candidates.

george sthephonopolus and charlie gibson need to be ashamed of themselves that is journalism at it's worse no wonder why the news media like ABC news and fox news channel can't be trusted because of their bias way america don't care about rev.wright comments or him not wearing a flag pin america care about real issues like healthcare,education,job and why american soldiers getting killed for nothing.they just tried to make barack obama look bad they did'nt exposed obama but they exposed themselves now see who charlie and george really are and who they are going for and that will be hillary.

Hillary seemed exposed to me. She made outlandish claims that the Weather Underground "killed people" when they only ever killed themselves accidentally. She was doing some serious manipulation of the facts there, and she got called on it when Obama remarked that it was her white house that pardoned the Underground members in question.

ABC = asinine boneheaded clowns

The outrage over the debate has very little to do with the target of the petty negativity and more to do with the fact that the topics were petty, inconsequential , and devoid of any meaningful substance when this country and its citizens face very real, very serious issues that effect Americans' lives every day that ABC, Gibson, and Stephanopolis apparently think don't matter..

I find it heartening that so much is being said about poor journalism techniques. It's harder to hide that way. :)

Obama's rounding third......

He's gonna face tougher questions than this. He's also going to face a very different opponent in the general election. When I say exposed, what I mean is that his response revealed a great deal about his character. Do we really want a whiner in the Oval Office? Is that who we're going to send to negotiate with Ahmahdinejad?

As for fairness . . . when did that become an operative concept in politics? Are we only being fair when we ask candidates questions that they've been endlessly prepped for? What do we learn from such "questions and responses"? Don't we want to catch the candidates off guard? Don't we want them to have to think on their feet? Don't we want to see how they'll react when challenged? Grow up folks. This is just getting started and the majority of us aren't quite ready to coronate your messiah.

You know, this wasn't an Obama or Clinton thing when the first hour was devoted to recapping the highlights fo the last six weeks of Silly Season.... Where every gaffe was brought up against and given the limelight.

With alllllllllllllll the crap that's people need to know stances on -- they brought back Wright, Tuzla, the lapel pins, etc?

You're a Pennsylvania voter and you want to know about both candidates and their stances on X issue. You haven't been paying that close attention up until recently and still had questions. This debate was like seeing Ken Starr investigate Bill's extrimarital affair... It had no bearing on the future course fo the country. There was nothign that should tell people more about the candidates.

It was an overglorified soap opera for the first hour. A boring one at that if you're used to steamy soap operas.

I wrote an email to ABC -- and I bring this up because even with 20k online comments, ABC Executuives were also inundated with loads of emails -- saying they shamed the legacy of ABC News. That and they failed America along with themselves for that farce of a debate.

The questions were stupid no doubt, plus they were asked in a very stupid manner by two stupid people and it obviously bothered/pissed off Obama, he stumbled over his words more in this one debate then he has all campaign long.

In the long run what did it do? Not much, both candidates still seem like great choices to me and I'll be proud of my party no matter who gets the nod.

Nothing new there.

First there was I invented the Internet Love Story and Love Canal.
Then James Lee Witt, the dog and the mother-in-law, that lullaby and that girl in the Florida classroom.
And now Wright and Ayres.

Between the those two waves more than 4000 troops died in Iraq.

About 112% of political journalists are idiots.

Boycott Disney. Seems pretty simple to me.

Well, to me, ABC news just seems too elitest. I remember, before the debate was off, they were doing their final goodbyes and thank yous, which is where I came in from work.

Anyways, they were thanking various people, and they got to the point where they mentioned the local station, and people, understandably, cheered. Charles Gibson made some remark like, "I have never heard such a response about a LOCAL station". That, to me, rubbed off on me as a slightly sarcastic remark.

I know if my local station had some national event on tv like the debate, I would be proud and cheer too, but with a remark like that, I would lose a ton of respect for that national news. Again, I am not commenting on the actual debate, but the snippit I caught at the end.

Yes, but first watch and see who sponsors them. Then write the sponsors and tell them you aren't watching and why. Stop buying the newspaper. You can find the news Online. I meant what I said, don't visit Disney theme parks. They need to feel it in the pocket just like we do when they don't report the actual news and people are ignorant about who to vote for. They sold people Bush, and look what that has cost us.

I think in terms of fairness.

McCain was part of the Keating five, a famous lobying scandal involving five legislators who helped to halt legislation for the savings and loan industry that ripped of seniors to the tunes of billions before a crash in the eighties. And has lobyists on his campaign staff. This being said, he promised in writing to utelize public financing and did recieve public funds which he used in a critical juncture in his campaign when he was so far behind in financing compared to his republican competitors that there were calls for him to drop out of the race as he had no chance. He then used this money to finance a loan which saved his candidacy, then broke campaign finance law and exceeded to matching funds limit. He was unrepentant despite having violated the law. Shouldn't that get as much atention as Rezko with Obama or Clintons lobyist ties? No, it should get far more! Its a violation of the law and it may have charachter implications as well. How a candidate conducts themselves during thier campaign has a lot to say about how they will perform in the whitehouse and those elements say alot more about McCain than Reverend Wright, or Rezko, or Geraldine Feraro, or Stephanie Powers combined say about Hillary Clinton, or Barack Obama.

The point of saying that this was a poor or unbalanced debate is that the media's job while covering candidates is to help us make informed judgements on them. How they cover those candidates matters. Perhaps now more than ever. To say that Gaffe's or charachter questions are on par with policy is simply wrong. After a certain point they become nothing more than a distraction from the purpose of our elections and our media simply fails us. Especialy things as trivial as flagpins! McCain refusing to vote on the new G.I. bill or the bill ensuring survivors benefits can't be taken away from sole survivors within the military conequently writen by a veteran with a son in Iraq, is perhaps the least patriotic thing he could do especialy while on a tour toutuing his own military service. He hasn't had any flack for it. That says something apaling about the conduct of our media .when comparing this to the coverage of the flagpins non issue.

Let's not go into McCain's baggage until after the actually nominate him. I'd hate to drag out everything and have them choose someone else that doesn't have all that just waiting to be exposed. He's a senile, dishonest, bad tempered, old fool, just what we want to run against.

Jawnybnsc,

You seem to be the only one with any brains in this whole group. ABC and George Sthephanopolus I believe went after the real issues that needed to be asked. The truth is these questions are on everyones minds it is just that he had the guts to ask them and Obama has the gaul to think as do most of these Obamanations that he will not have to face these type of questions that some how he will be able to avoid them.

Not a chance. Obama has no experience for this job and he thinks he can deal with foreign leaders of Communist countries. And those that hate the United States, does he think you can whine your way of deaking with these issues. Hillary knows that can not be done you have to be able to handle the Heat.

And you all who defend him ( or try to make it look like you are going after ABC) when he does not ask for your protection do you even know what type of person you are defending?

Do you believe he will come up riding on a horse to save you from you various debts. Keep wishing not going to happen! WHY!

READ THIS! BREAKING NEWS!

THIS WILL SOON BE COMING TO A DEBATE NEAR YOU!

ANOTHER ONE OF THOSE QUESTIONS THAT YOU OBAMA SUPPORTS DO NOT WANT TO HEAR ASKED!

OH AND IF AFTER READING THIS YOU REMAIN AN OBAMA SUPPORTER.

ALL I CAN SAY IS YOU MUST AGREE TO THIS DOCTRINE OR TEACHING.

THIS WILL BE A PART OF THE GENERAL ELECTION IF HILLARY IS NOT NOMINATED AND ALL OF US DO NOT WANT ANYONE BUT HILLARY TO BE NOMINATED!

READ THIS FOR YOURSELF, DO NOT BELIEVE ME PLEASE READ THIS FOR YOURSELF!

REMEMBER ONE THIS IS THE INTERNET AND LARGE COMPANIES SAVE OLD WEB SITES ON THERE DATA FILES ALL THE TIME.

crop80227, ohh_Donna,

crop80227,

Yes, Hillary won and the people in Pennsylvania are very well educated. If your candidate had won you would be signing his praises and kissing his ass all day long leaving comments on here about what smart people are in Pennsylvania. BUT you are scared now you are shaking in your boots. You should be. Because you are one of them who has yet to see the latest News that the Republicans have been holding back on.
Yes this they were planning to spring on him (Obama) and wipe the floor with him.

This would turn any person with a piece of human dignity in their body to McCain if Hillary was not running.

At the end of this comment I will place a link. This link and the info before it is what will guide you to the most breaking story since Hilter's Storm Troopers.

ohh_Donna,

I understand that YOU STATED! I reject the notion that if Obama becomes the candidate the lemmings will instantly and in unision vote for McCain. YA! I SAY AGAIN YA!

I'm a Democrat and I would rather vote for a stupid wish washie, doesn't know what he is doing and can not remember sh#t person then to vote for someone with 31/2 years experience, a Lier, someone who takes advice from people who hate the United States, Does not salute the American Flag. Who allows their own children to be subject to a non family member who speaks and teaches hate for the United States, Is friends and associates himself or herself with Louis Farrakhan. And Pledges himself or herself to the Allegiance of a Racial Extremist System Called The Black Value System.

I hate to jump into the lynch mob, that really that debate was pretty terrible. Didn't seem professional.

That debate was pathetic and I am an undecided voter until November 4, 2008. Even some of my conservative/Republican friends thought it was pathetic. Did anyone know that Sean Hannity was advising Stephanopolis before the debate took place (Stephanopolis was a guest on one of Hannity's shows - either the Radio or TV one prior to Wed's debate. Ref: NPR's On The Media program 4/18/08)? It was the FOX News debate that never was, but was snuck in anyway. ABC should indeed be ashamed. Debates are supposed to inform and educate, not play out like "Entertainment Tonight." By the way, can there be a way to control the "trolling" that's occurring in some of these comment areas? Trolling is NOT constructive criticism. These posts should be of constructive criticisms, not self-serving, argumentive, disrespectful trolling.

To aschneider - thanks for mentioning the VERY IMPORTANT National Conference on Media Reform that's coming up in June. Perhaps someone from Current should also be attending this?? Al Gore, perhaps??

thanks for the novel, maltese. I read 1 word, your name.

wisegrrl, you can flag posts by clicking 'flag' on the lower right of a post.

for some posts, that means you'll have to scroll down a lot ;-)

Maltese.... capitalizing all the letters in your post does not make it any more important. It does not make your point any more valid. It does make you look like an idiot. I've read the PDF, and I'm not particularly outraged or incensed. It does not say anything about hating "whitey" or any other group, it just promotes the idea of community building. It's part of liberation theology, which is a recognized and respected form of the Christian faith.

Back to the original point of this thread:
The questions asked by George and Charlie were out of line and completely unnecessary to the political discussion. Unless they murdered an underage hooked that was addicted to heroin, meth, and crack on the floor of the senate, then I really don't care about their personal lives or what beliefs their reverend, priest, imam, or rabbi hold. I just care about what political positions they have, and how they intend to implement them.

You don't think who a candidate for president associates himself with is relevant? You don't think his judgment in that regard has any bearing? You are aware that the president selects a cabinet and makes a whole lot of political appointments, aren't you? Maybe you don't care, but I can promise you that the American electorate cares. I can promise you that voters care about the politics and attitudes of people who a candidate has associations with. I can promise you that all this stuff is going to come up again in the general election and I can promise you that if all you and Obama can do is whine about it that you'll be going down in flames. You can take that to the bank.

This why some people hate politics. I wish the fight would stop and the issues get corrected.

There is no magic wand. Issues just "get corrected" in dictatorships . . . not in republican democracies. If you want to live somewhere where issues just "get corrected", might I suggest China or North Korea.

Maybe I should have been a little clearer by what I meant when I said I didn't care about all of those things. As long as a candidate's spiritual leader or his/her close advisers do not preach or promote open or passive bigotry, then I have no problem with them performing their jobs. These charges are ill-founded, superfluous, and obfuscate the real issues of this campaign. To call this "whining" means to me that you really don't care about politics and just want to be an antagonistic thread troll.

There is one thing that we do agree on, though, and that is that there is no magic wand to wave and instantly cure all of our woes. However, they can be worked on and be set on a path that will benefit the people of this great country. We, in our republican democracy, vote on who best represents our vision for a better nation and has the best chance at bringing these ideas into reality. Technically, this is "correcting the issues", although it is done in increments.

In the future, please do not write such platitudes as they do not add anything worthwhile to a legitimate debate.

Much like a couple of people here, ABC itself doesn't get what went horribly wrong with the debacle they called a debate. They (ABC) are using the same "spin" the Clinton campaign is using to try and deflect the heat they are justly receiving by claiming it's just the Obama supporters upset about their candidates performance.

The fact is by and large the vast number of complaints and dissenting remarks are about the questions themselves as well as there order and time spent on each topic. It was the poor execution and apparent lack of basic journa