Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

I wonder when George Steph decided to be harder on Democrats than on Rethugs?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-01-12 10:22 AM
Original message
I wonder when George Steph decided to be harder on Democrats than on Rethugs?
Does he even pretend to be a Democrat?

Does he even pretend he treats both sides the same?

Geez, Russert did a lot better at putting on a facade of treating both sides the same than Georgie does.

The above is a general comment that seems to me to apply every single Sunday that Steph hosts This Week.

My specific reason for logging in to make this post:

He was a total jerk to the WH spokesperson (Jack Lew) who was on this morning about Obama's having insisted the mandate was not a tax, about Obama having voting against Robert's confirmation and about whether--wait for it--Obama was going to thank Roberts.

:wtf:

Georgie would show clips of Obama, smirk, and ask the WH Rep. The Rep would give some non commital answer, then George would ask the question again and again and again.

Even on the clip of then Sen. Obama saying he did not believe Roberts would protect the vulnerable in our society, Obama added several times, "I hope I am wrong." So even that was a paper club Georgie was trying to beat down Lew with.

And Since when do Presidents thank any Justice for a SCOTTUS vote anyway? That would be inappropriate, IMO. George really had to stretch for that one. Question is, why did Georgie stretch to be a jerk?



Next the *!@*% Paul Ryan is up. Not ONE gotcha question from George. To the contrary, when Ryan pulls out of his ear that ACA never would have passed if the mandate had been presented to the public as a tax, Georgie grins ear to ear says, "I think you're right."

:wtf:

Does either of them actually think healthy 27 year olds were thrilled to have to buy health insurance to avoid a penalty, but would have rioted if the exact same dollar amount had been called a tax?

And even if Georgie believed that people would have drawn the line at calling the penalty a tax, it's pure speculation. Is it really the position of a moderator to voice agreement with pure speculation?

Georgie also consistently allows Rethugs to say things like "this DemocRAT legislation" without correcting them or even shaking his head.

Things like those I have detailed are even more damaging to Democrats because Georgie is allegedly a Democrat. If a Rethug were doing the same thing, people would discount it some on the ground of partisanship.

As far as I am concerned, Georgie porgie is now officially classified as a turd.
Refresh | +2 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
trueblue2007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-01-12 02:34 PM
Response to Original message
1. george steph is a jerk
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
rpannier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-01-12 06:54 PM
Response to Original message
2. Late 90's
He found that criticizing Democrats moved him up the ladder at ABC and made him more money.
Stuffenhorriblis is a dink
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Divine Discontent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-01-12 08:25 PM
Response to Original message
3. for years ive felt the same. he borderline disgusts me because of it
and the only reason I watched him a month or so ago was because Keith was on. but, yeah, he is more fair and easy on repubs...

Must pay well?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-02-12 02:26 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. Keith was on this past Sunday as well, but relatively subdued.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Divine Discontent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-02-12 01:08 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. thanks for the info about Keith! I wonder if he's minding his P's and Q's
to show CNN or whomever, that he can certainly get along just fine with multiple newsfolk.



Get it here --->>>
www.zazzle.com/youre_not_in_the_1_why_vote_like_you_are...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-01-12 09:17 PM
Response to Original message
4. My guess is that it's been as long as ABC has paid him big bucks to do just that
Hid moderating of a Democratic primary debate in 08 was nothing but a hit job. This is what I wrote about it at the time, before I became totally disenchanged with Obama:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-02-12 04:10 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. Everyone running for office or in office deserves objective journalism
Edited on Mon Jul-02-12 04:10 AM by No Elephants
whether or not we like the individual.

Much more than that, the American public deserves objective journalism.

"Objective" does not have sugar daddies and mommies, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-02-12 02:33 AM
Response to Original message
6. I guess "Follow the money" was good advice about U.S. politics when Deep Throat said it & before DT
Edited on Mon Jul-02-12 02:45 AM by No Elephants
said it and and is now, maybe more than ever.

Before Deep Throat summed it up so economically:

"Follow the money" was what led to "discovery" of the "New" "World," which had already been occupied for about 50,000 years before Magellan, Columbus and Vespucci (and perhaps a Viking or two).

"Follow the money" was also what led to financing of colonization of the New World, something to which an Original American friend referred as "infestation." We like to believe it was all about freedom of religion, but that was not the motivation nof the East India company and others like it.

IMO, when the U.S. Constitution was first presented to states for ratification, it was a very pro-business document, as well as being racist, protective of slavery and sexist.

The people rebelled against the total absence of protection for individual.

The Framers explained that the document was intended only to give the federal government certain powers. OF COURSE, the federal government was never going to interfere with individual rights because it had absolutely no power so to do. Hence the absence of provisions about individual rights, which would be and always remain between individuals and their respective states.

Thank God the colonists would have none of it. The states agreed to ratify only if both individual and states' rights were expressly protected. Hence, the states ratified only on the condition that the Constitution be amended ASAP. And it was.

Who knows whether that was because politicians kept their word back in the day, or because that same group of people had recently overthrown another government and therefore politicians had good reason to fear them.

If something similar happened today, would we be that smart and that insistent, I wonder?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
dtexdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-02-12 03:02 PM
Response to Original message
9. Uh,news flack in the employ of the corporate media.
Gee, I can't figure it out, either. ;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-03-12 09:03 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. Typical DLCer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Aug 20th 2014, 03:01 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC