Obama flack Robert Gibbs and Fox News weasel Sean Hannity go at it on Ayers, and Gibbs — in a rare Fox moment — hijacks the show. The perfect end to a perfect evening of debate.
« OPEN THREAD: who won the debate? | Main | KIRO gets it... radio jocks live-blog the debates »
The comments to this entry are closed.
Jeez, what will BW blog about once the election is over. No more political bias BS. Time will tell.
Posted by: DD | October 08, 2008 at 05:12 AM
why does barack obama have to answer for jeremiah wright and william ayres. john mccain doesn't answer for john mccain and his votes against the martin luther king jr. holiday?
Posted by: Gibbs | October 08, 2008 at 07:13 AM
Or why doesn't Sara Palin have to answer for the Alaskan Secessionist movement, of which her husband is a member and to whom she spoke on numerous occasions? Or the pastor that performed a "witch-out" on her?
Because people DONT CARE. They dont care about Rev. Wright. They DONT CARE about Ayers. Because they know it is all garbage! People are losing their retirement, their homes, their jobs. They want answers on how that will change.
The GOP knows they have nothing positive to bring to the table, so the game plan from here on out will be to try to stick as much of this other crap on Obama as they can.
Posted by: sparky | October 08, 2008 at 08:53 AM
Hannity got exposed as a phony and a fraud. He invited a virulent anti Jewish scumbag on his show. Not once did Hannity confront Andy Martin about his bigotry and hatred of Jews. He presented that scumbag as a legit journalist to validate and endorse Hannity's anti-Obama agenda. Hannity is a douchebag.
Posted by: orcas | October 08, 2008 at 10:05 AM
People Hannity isn't running for president...Obama is and he has track record of associating with people with checkered pasts.
Posted by: coachv | October 08, 2008 at 11:28 AM
No he doesn't. All of the right wing claims of this have been debunked. All of them. Even by prominent Republicans. It is people like you and Hannity who keep spewing this garbage, hoping to convince one or two more people. Even the stupid anti-Obama emails have dried up.
Just now, at a rally in Pennsylvania, McCain was talking about what he's gonna do to fix the economy. After laying out a few (lame as usual) details, he said this:
"You and I together will confront the $10 trillion debt that the federal government has run up, and balance the federal budget by the end of my term in office. Across this country this is the agenda I've set before my fellow prisoners, and the same standards of clarity and candor must now be applied to my opponent."
Palin standing right behind Grampie as he said this. She never batted an eye. And the crowd? Well, they hesitated for a second, but then they cheered like the good little sheep they are.
Posted by: sparky | October 08, 2008 at 12:27 PM
Oh dear. McCain's statement about "fellow prisoners" clearly shows that he has finally succumbed to Thripshaw's disease. (Google it!) Very sad.
Posted by: ExPatBrit | October 08, 2008 at 03:42 PM
I hear that KIRO has changed their tag from "97.3 FM and 710 AM" to just "97.3 FM", no mention of the AM at all, and they are bribing people with $1000 (a taunt perhaps?) to switch to the FM band. Why won't they tell us listeners why they wish for us to abandon the AM broadcast? Is the truth really that bad?
I realize they likely want to shut down the 710 AM broadcast sooner than later, and that's OK, it won't hurt our feelings. Why are the hosts (obviously) not allowed to state outright the reason for the switch?
Posted by: AuthenticAndrew | October 08, 2008 at 06:04 PM
Isn't that because 710 is going all sports and they want listeners to be able to find their news/talk programming? Has KIRO started publicizing the Mariners yet? Didn't we read earlier that they'd only be on AM?
Posted by: keitho | October 08, 2008 at 09:18 PM
A left wing ideologue vs. a right wing ideologue. Take your pick - if you side with neither you are objective, if you side with either one - look at yourself in the mirror - you are an ideologue yourself.
In this case, a left wing campaign spokesman vs. a right wing talk show host. They both have axes to grind.
Posted by: KS | October 08, 2008 at 10:32 PM
It's over.
From here on out, the Palin-McCain ticket is simply providing fodder for late-night comedians and SNL graduates.
It's over.
:) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)
(Dedicated to Duff.)
Posted by: joanie | October 08, 2008 at 10:39 PM
What he did was to let Hannity know what its like to be the victim of baseless accusations of proximity to people you dont agree with--it "must" mean you DO agree with them. This is what Hannity, and others, have done all along to Obama. Now he got to feel what it was like to have people say the same about him, and not be allowed to explain or defend himself.
It was an excellent example...too bad it went over Hannity's head.
Posted by: sparky | October 08, 2008 at 10:41 PM
If that was true Sparky, why isn't Hannity doing the same thing about Oprah, and some of the guest she has had on her show. Or Donahue, and those he might have had on his show back in the day. What Gibbs did is a act like Joanie, tried to be a smartass, talked in circles, and turn a blind eye on all information that might make his candidate look un-presidential, But in reallity, all he did was make himself look like a fool. Now, if Hannity ever runs for President, then you can bring it up. Hussein clearly knew what he ws getting for being friends with Ayers. And Ayers clearly knows what he will get if Hussein becomes President.
Posted by: nevets | October 09, 2008 at 07:23 AM
Steven, please tell us what Ayers will "get" when Obama is elected? A life-time supply of molitov cocktails? A barn full of fertilizer so he can mix up a bomb or two?
The Gibbs exchange was obviously over your head, too!
Posted by: sparky | October 09, 2008 at 10:08 AM
Wow Sparky, the first two things you can think of was,,,
"A life-time supply of molitov cocktails? A barn full of fertilizer so he can mix up a bomb or two?"
Now why is that? You must think he is/was a terrorist and still hates America. If that is true, why not question Husseins association with this guy?
Would you sit on a board with a child molester/rapist after he was released and reformed. Yes?/no? Personalize it. Say the one he molested/raped was your sister, brother, son, daughter. Would you still sit on that board. Thats what Ayers did. He raped America.
Posted by: nevets | October 09, 2008 at 05:44 PM
Well that means Sara Palin will make us pay for our own rape kits, I bet!
Posted by: sparky | October 09, 2008 at 06:03 PM
Steven...You are all so upset that Obama served on a board with someone who did something wrong when he was 8 years old. Somehow your side has turned that into them being BFF, and that is a lie. Even many Republicans are admitting that its "off the rails." ( ie George Will.)
Meanwhile, it apparently means nothing to you that Palin's husband belongs to that group that wants to make Alaska into its own country, stating that they HATE the US? She ran for mayor of Wasilla at their behest, and appointed several members to city government jobs.
And what about Grampy? This was released today:
As a freshman congressman in the early 1980s, John McCain did not disclose his connections to a controversial group that was implicated in a secretive plot to supply arms to Nicaraguan militia groups during the Iran-Contra affair.
McCain did not list his service on the board of the U.S. Council for World Freedom on mandatory congressional disclosure forms asking about positions he held outside government.
McCain’s aides said he wasn’t required to report the affiliation.
...
A review of the personal financial disclosure forms McCain filed after his election to the U.S. House in 1982 show that he did not list the group in the section of his 1982, 1983 and 1984 reports in which he was required to disclose all positions he held outside of government.
The instructions on the form require filers to report "the identity of all positions held on or before the date of the filing during the current calendar year as an officer, director, trustee, partner, proprietor, representative, employee, or consultant of any corporation, firm, partnership, or other business enterprise, any nonprofit organization, any labor organization, or any educational or other institution."
And in a prelude to the released report on TrooperGate tomorrow:
Ms. Palin has denied that anyone told Mr. Monegan to dismiss Mr. Wooten, or that the commissioner’s ouster had anything to do with the trooper. But an examination of the case, based on interviews with Mr. Monegan and several top aides, indicates that, to a far greater degree than was previously known, the governor, her husband and her administration pressed the commissioner and his staff to get Mr. Wooten off the force, though without directly ordering it.
In all, the commissioner and his aides were contacted about Mr. Wooten three dozen times over 19 months by the governor, her husband and seven administration officials, interviews and documents show.
"To all of us, it was a campaign to get rid of him as a trooper and, at the very least, to smear the guy and give him a desk job somewhere," said Kim Peterson, Mr. Monegan’s special assistant, who like several other aides spoke publicly about the matter for the first time.
So, the thing is Steven, trying to divert attention from the fact that the stock market dropped another 670 points today by trying to stir up hate and discontent about Obama with your side's base is a foolish undertaking. Your side's white sheets are not exactly clean.
Posted by: sparky | October 09, 2008 at 06:28 PM
The dialogue in an interview with Jon Voight; Angelina Jolie's dad. He says it well. At this time Jolie has said she is undecided about who she will support. She has more sense than Joanie, Sparky and Re-coil combined. You all are the Lunatics for Obama - foaming at the mouth with spittle, for whom the truth doesn't matter and free speech only applies when it's the opinion of the rabid left.
(Transcript of an interview with Ed Henry, CNN)
JON VOIGHT, ACTOR: She was wonderful in the debate. My deepest concern, you know. Let me just say -- can I say something honestly about the debate? The thing that concerned me about the debate, all these people, 70 to 80 million people watching this debate, and I found so many things that I found Joe Biden said that were - that I recognized as out-right lies. So I'm saying, isn't anybody on this? And of course, we're talking to CNN and I know where you guys stand. And I'm saying, guys, we've got to not have a partisan press. We've got to have real journalism here. And it's a sad event for me to witness this.
HENRY: Let me ask you, you mentioned republicans are pointing out that there were a lot of things that Joe Biden said that were not true. One thing that Sarah Palin stressed was that Barack Obama has voted 94 times to raise taxes. When you peel that back that's not exactly true.
VOIGHT: Of course, you're going to give me that side of it.
HENRY: I want to give you --
VOIGHT: Absolutely the truth. But the larger things for me which struck me was this whole thing -- the thing about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and talking about how the democrats -- he's saying that the democrats wanted regulations. The democrats did not want regulations. That was the whole thing about this big fight between Barney Franks and Bill O'Reilly yesterday.
HENRY: Let me ask you, you mentioned the economy, an important issue, without going back and forth. Let's just talk broadly. How do you think the economy, the financial crisis is affecting the campaign trail. (INAUDIBLE) Barack Obama.
VOIGHT: Let me just say this, look, if you checked Barack Obama -- I'm going to just say this and it'll get rid of it. Check Barack Obama's record, what he did in the -- with the William Ayers, with his alliance with Alinsky, Sol Alinsky, tactics and philosophy. With his work with ACORN, know all that stuff before you ask a question like that. Let's get off this for a second and let's just talk about something else because after all I'm an actor here, I have these -- we're going to have a nice little cheerleading section for Sarah, who I'm crazy about. And I'm not really the fellow that should be talking about this. But the real journalists should be getting into this thing.
HENRY: The issue number one for Americans right now is the economy. That's why I asked about it. Last thing, on Tuesday, what does John McCain need to say in the second presidential debate? What do you expect him to do?
VOIGHT: You see, you're asking me all these questions. You think that I'm the fellow that I should be answering these kinds of questions?
HENRY: What are you doing here with Sarah Palin then? I thought you were ready.
VOIGHT: I'm ready to talk to you. But let me just say this, John McCain will handle himself just fine, just as Sarah Palin handled herself just fine. And it's not for me to coach them. But I'll be tuning in and I'll be rooting for my fellow. But a lot of this stuff has to be on the board. What I would like to see done is that these things are handled in the press, that the press put partisanship aside. It's become a partisan press. And this is almost criminal because it doesn't allow people to make an informed vote.
HENRY: Thank you for your opinions. We appreciate it Jon Voight. You heard the take from Jon Voight, he clearly thinks that Sarah Palin did very well in that vice presidential debate, thank you sir.
(Oops, maybe he made a mistake by exposing their lemming viewers to Jon Voight - who sees through the media's a-hole agenda)
Posted by: KS | October 09, 2008 at 07:22 PM
No links.
Hypothetical now Sparky, if your sister was raped when you were 8 years old and today you were asked to sit on a board with the rapist, you would? Thats how I read your response. You would sit on the same board with a member who raped your sister?
What I am saying Spakky, It was bad judgement. Like it would be for you if you to sat on a board with that person who raped your sister. We are Americans. Ayers raped America. He put fear in citizens of this country like a rapist does to a neighborhood when he strikes.
Now I dont think you would sit on that Board, you would be disgusted that the guy was out of prison in the first place. But Hussein did and stayed there even after knowing what Ayers did. He was someone in the neighborhood. Someone...
I have read stories of German Soldiers who are still being tried for thier acts during WWII. Most of the people trying these individuals were not even born when those atrocities were committed. Should they stop prosocuting these monsters and claim the same? Would that be okay to you?
Posted by: nevets | October 09, 2008 at 10:17 PM
Oh, and dont think I didn't see the "you are a racist" remark. Not in so many words but thats what you implied. You get that from Senator Reid today. Is everyone who has an opposing view of those of Husseins a racist. I thought you were better than that. Maybe its time to take the gloves off.
And why did you not include this little tidbit.
"Singlaub said McCain was a supporter but not an active member."
Thats retired Army Maj. Gen. John Singlaub.
And this...
"I didn't know whether [the group's activity] was legal or illegal, but I didn't think I wanted to be associated with them," McCain said in a 1986 newspaper interview."
If Hussein had done the same, then his association with Ayers would not be a big deal. But no, Hussein wanted what Ayers could give him. Votes. And only time will tell Sparky what Hussein will repay Ayers with.
Posted by: nevets | October 09, 2008 at 10:50 PM
October 10, 2008
Letter to the Editor, NYTimes
To the Editor:
Re “Politics of Attack” (editorial, Oct. 8) and “Obama and ’60s Bomber: A Look Into Crossed Paths” (front page, Oct. 4):
As the lead federal prosecutor of the Weathermen in the 1970s (I was then chief of the criminal division in the Eastern District of Michigan and took over the Weathermen prosecution in 1972), I am amazed and outraged that Senator Barack Obama is being linked to William Ayers’s terrorist activities 40 years ago when Mr. Obama was, as he has noted, just a child.
Although I dearly wanted to obtain convictions against all the Weathermen, including Bill Ayers, I am very pleased to learn that he has become a responsible citizen.
Because Senator Obama recently served on a board of a charitable organization with Mr. Ayers cannot possibly link the senator to acts perpetrated by Mr. Ayers so many years ago.
I do take issue with the statement in your news article that the Weathermen indictment was dismissed because of “prosecutorial misconduct.” It was dismissed because of illegal activities, including wiretaps, break-ins and mail interceptions, initiated by John N. Mitchell, attorney general at that time, and W. Mark Felt, an F.B.I. assistant director.
William C. Ibershof
Mill Valley, Calif., Oct. 8, 2008
Posted by: sparky | October 10, 2008 at 10:40 AM