If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed or email alerts. Thanks for visiting!
When you have debated 21 times, questions are bound to get petty and stupid. So when Barack says there is no point debating further, he is a sore loser? Honestly are these debates even helpful anymore considering that Obama and Clinton differ so little in policy matters as we have seen in previous debates? People who haven’t made up their mind yet simply should not vote.
by Patrix | on Thursday, April 17th, 2008 at 5:39 pm | 
Asides, Politicking, United States . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
April 17th, 2008 at 7:47 pm reply
Patrix, difference between “is a sore loser” and “makes him look like a sore loser”. He did badly on the debate and is now complaining. So it makes him look thus.
And what is the magical thing about the number 21 that the 20 until then were ok and acceptable?
April 17th, 2008 at 8:05 pm reply
Gaurav, I guess appearances are just how you make them out to be, right? Doesn’t spin rule news networks these days. Didn’t see the debate hence wouldn’t know how he actually performed but the pundits skewered his performance. And we know how right they can be in their analysis.
And I lost interest in the debates long before No.21
April 17th, 2008 at 8:11 pm reply
I watched it. The way they ganged up on him and brought up utterly useless issues for the first 45 hours or so…. I doubt if anyone could have not performed badly.
He is well within his rights to criticize ABC and the debate format. But when you say “no more debates” after the 21st debate, the first one you “lost”…. does make you look like a sore loser. If he had said this after the 20th or 19th or 18th which he won, it would have sounded more credible.
April 17th, 2008 at 8:20 pm reply
Gaurav, probably he would have seemed credible if he had called out the media on the inanity of it all a bit sooner. But from what I heard, it definitely seemed like the media was trying to reverse its allegedly anti-Hillary bias.And Hillary surely knows how to play them right especially good ‘ol George. Remember her bringing up the SNL skit during one of the earlier debates? That was a genuinely WTF moment. And don’t get me started on her criticism of the caucuses just coz she is losing them.
April 17th, 2008 at 8:41 pm reply
From the same post of mine that you linked -
But the ABC moderators, Gibson and Stephanopoulos seemed intent on compensating for the alleged pro-Obama bias the media has displayed so far. Not satisfied with recent flaps like Rev. Wright and Bitter-gate, they dug up fossils like his not wearing an American flag lapel pin.
April 17th, 2008 at 10:42 pm reply
Gaurav, and that part I agree with. It was the Obama loser bit I didn’t. I caught Jon Stewart’s analysis and read debate analysis in other media reports. Considering that George was Clinton’s Communications Director, shouldn’t he have recused himself from moderating this debate?
April 18th, 2008 at 1:07 pm reply
The debate has turned out to be a blessing in disguise for Obama though. The media is suddenly focused on how biased and inane the ABC moderators were and how catty Hillary was. I also heard a couple of people discussing this very conflict of interest with stephanopoulos. Obama’s teflonicity persists!
April 19th, 2008 at 12:27 am reply
I’m glad that Obama came out and mentioned the “manufactured distractions” bit. Let’s hope he mentions “Manufacturing Consent” in the next debate. ;) :)
You might be interested in my review of George Farah’s book “No Debate” which was published a few years ago:
http://lotusnova.blogspot.com/2007/09/no-debate.html
and the website http://www.opendebates.org/
April 20th, 2008 at 11:47 am reply
Gaurav, I think it finally brought the chickens home to roost for the media and Charlie & George just helped hasten the onslaught of criticism of the media for this inane coverage. That said, Obama still must work on his debating skills and do less of ummms and simplifying his lines. Regular Americans (or voters elsewhere) can’t process nuance, subtlety, and complex responses. As for the flag lapel pin, I suggest he rent a American Flag suit from Pimps R’ Us and put the matter to rest once and for all :)
Amit, thanks for that link. I was aware of the monopoly in the debate process which makes competing for third-party candidates almost impossible. The documentary on Nader, An Unreasonable Man is quite revealing in that regards.
April 20th, 2008 at 3:57 pm reply
:) Exactly. I think Colbert sells American flags that buyers can drape around themselves. Obama should just appear draped in one during the next debate. Maybe even wear an American flag underwear. :)
Glad you saw An Unreasonable Man - I reviewed that too :), and it is one of my favorite documentaries.