digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at crooksandliars.com

ABC gets slammed for tonights debate.

crooksandliars.com — Nearly seven thousand comments on ABC's website, mostly complaining about a lack of substantive discussion. If you watched it and felt the same let them know. WE'VE GOT TO HOLD OUR MEDIA TO THE FIRE.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • CSBPRS, on 04/17/2008, -7/+207George Stephanopolous? Talk about a conflict of interest...this was like watching a f***ing SNL skit
    • theuniversal, on 04/17/2008, -5/+56The debate wasn't funny AT ALL and the subject matter was entirely based on Clinton campaign talking points. In other words ... you're right, it was EXACTLY like an SNL skit.
      • Proxenus, on 04/17/2008, -32/+4 Dear Libs.... thank you for choking at the right time.....
        • forgottenhope, on 04/17/2008, -7/+2oh a mccain supporter who thinks that just the democrats are corrupt? are you a ***** idiot. Just like abc is a ***** job ***** company, the candidates know it too, except they get paid to ***** the american people every 4 years.

          The libs, give me a break, all these ***** idiots will raise 150 million dollars for a job that only pays 400$a year. Go figure, someone is getting rich, its not the people. The government is doing all it can to kill off the parts of the poppulation who disagree with a one world government.

          ***** george bush, ***** people who think elections matter and ***** proxenus for thinking there is a difference between the 2 sold out parties of the united fake ass states of america
          • jabbar, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2bitter much? somebody get him his soma, STAT
    • schrankage, on 04/17/2008, -4/+26Stuphacockinus couldn't journalise his way out of a paper bag.
      • ParanoydAndroid, on 04/17/2008, -16/+9Not that I necessarily disagree with you, but does anyone else find it childish and annoying when people change the names of those they dislike into what they must assume is some sort of incredibly biting social commentary. It just really strikes a nerve in me, because it seems to be exactly the sort of idiotic name-calling (literally in this case) that we want our politicians to avoid.
        • krets, on 04/17/2008, -2/+10I dunno, I thought it was kinda funny.
        • chrissku, on 04/17/2008, -2/+14Why? Did you not laugh Paranoydcockdroid?
        • forgottenhope, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3***** georgeisonhillaryspayrollnofocuss
      • republicker, on 04/17/2008, -3/+6Boxers or briefs, Mr Obama?
        • thepuma77, on 04/17/2008, -1/+4republicker,
          Why are you so fascinated with Obama's underwear?
          Not that there is anything wrong with preference in men, but I think Obama is just a little bit out of your league.
        • brandon81211, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3So I suppose your not old enough to remember this. I THINK it was a joke referring to when Bill Clinton was running for president and was on MTV. Teens were asking him questions, and one girl asked, "Mr Clinton. The whole world wants to know. Boxers or Briefs."
      • Pstall, on 04/17/2008, -3/+1Hm... funny when he asks republican candidates hard questions its okay and wonderful... he asks democrat candidates hard questions and its an OMG BAD JOURNALIST SO BIASED AGAINST DEMOCRATS!!!!!
    • chrissku, on 04/17/2008, -1/+13Gibson and Stephanopolous debased themselves, ABC, and the profession of journalism last night. They contributed to the media's deepening failure to play its important role in our democracy.
    • Futile, on 04/17/2008, -0/+28For those who don't know this about Stephanopolous:

      "Prior to joining ABC News, he was a senior political adviser to the 1992 U.S. presidential campaign of Bill Clinton and later became Clinton's communications director."

      Yeah...
      • Dartos, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2For those who don't know this about Stephanopolous:

        in 1999 he wrote a memoir entitle "All too Human" about his experiences with the Clintons. It portrays the Clintons in a very unfavorable light, and was the cause of their falling out.

        It's okay to post info suggesting bias, but get the whole picture.
      • joeanon, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Why IS THIS POST the TOP POST on ALL THE ARTICLES about ABC.

        That cannot be a statistical coincidence.

        Nobody cars about Stephanopolous THAT MUCH.

        They care about corrupt and manipulative media.

        The BIG 4 media stations define truth at their leisure.

        THINK PEOPLE..

        ABC made this happen... not these two simple reporters.

        This is a Fox/ABC conspiracy to help out the GOP. Fox is still pissed they invested into and lost Guiliani. Now they have to find a way to back McCain without looking like total idiots and since they can't get dems on their channel...

        HEY ABC.... Rupert Murdock wants to talk to you.
  • killbert24, on 04/17/2008, -11/+71Did you know that these "debates" aren't even really "debates" at all? These things are all fluff.
    • Hangly, on 04/17/2008, -1/+8At least none of the candidates are wearing radios this time around.

      Probably.
    • sadfly, on 04/17/2008, -11/+2But think who ABC was trying to cater to. Who watches ABC on a regular basis? Small town folks, no internet access, no cable, on average probably have fewer years of education. Unfortunately, these people are not informed on the issues and probably don't care about the issues as much as someone on digg. ABC was trying to attract the casual viewer who unfortunately cares more about the fluff.
      • Nitesmoke, on 04/17/2008, -1/+8This is a pretty offensive statement, and completely wrong. First, most small towns have cable and internet, only the most rural places don't. Second, just because you live in a small town doesn't mean you are any less informed than someone from an urban area. This attitude that people who don't live in major cities are somehow simpletons is a ***** stereotype, and by spewing this crap you just make yourself look stupid. BTW, I checked your profile, you're from ***** Wisconsin, why do you have the internet?
        • Kyan, on 04/17/2008, -7/+1Bitter much?
        • sadfly, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Ok fair enough. But ABC was still pandering to its viewers. Most people, from cities or from small towns, would rather hear garbage, controversial questions more than substantive questions. BTW we do have the internet here. + beer and cheese which makes it pretty much an awesome state to live in.
      • Timetheos, on 04/17/2008, -2/+1Elitist!
    • jilseng4, on 04/17/2008, -3/+2fluff, as opposed to the serious news reporting on digg???
      • MacEnvy, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3Did you seriously just compare the front page of social news site digg.com to the final Democratic Primary Debate that aired on one of the original national networks, ABC?
        • jilseng4, on 04/17/2008, -0/+0Obama supporters seem to spend more time on digg and reddit than actually watching the news or reading a book...so, yes, I did...theoretically, digg should be an actual news source and forum...but it has morphed into a perfidiously biased medium that disgusts me almost as much as the MSM...go read a book, if they still do that in college...
  • frankwit, on 04/17/2008, -10/+133I am simply appalled by tonights debate... it was a complete hit job
    • sassip, on 04/17/2008, -5/+2They Don't want to BE BETTER... Tim Robins at National Association of Broadcasters. Why does the "Main Steam" media continue to Pander to prurient and "Jerry Springer" interests of Tabloid Journalism. We're better than that!
      http://adage.com/brightcove/single.php?title=15065 ...
    • misguidedmonkey, on 04/17/2008, -15/+2RON PAUL


      Hey remember when you school of fish loved Ron Paul and bitched about how the media did the exact same thing to him?
      And then one fish changed directions and the rest of you followed. Why are you so upset about this happening to Obama? You knew they were going to do this.
    • nepdogg, on 04/17/2008, -1/+8George and Charlie have only reinforced the general philosophy around the election coverage by US media is much more about ratings and advertising dollars than about the real issues that concern the American people. What a waste of millions of Americans' time. I would go so far as to call this another pathetic display of diluted, superficial journalism, and further proof that America's education system is horribly broken. I won't ever watch another ABC debate. At least Russert TRIES to talk about real issues. Absolute garbage and a waste of our time.
  • MadCactus, on 04/17/2008, -5/+113Worst. Debate. Ever.
    • jbenson2, on 04/17/2008, -18/+2After watching the debate - just one more question:
      Who's bitter now, O-man?
      • neognostic, on 04/17/2008, -0/+12You have made the same comment 10 times, are you too ignorant to come up with a second one or just an *****?
        • jbenson2, on 04/17/2008, -18/+2The O-man fan boys have wax in their ears and need to hear the story over and over about his disastrous performance in the Pennsylvania debate.
          • Marshalrusty, on 04/17/2008, -0/+8I think you're taking things a bit personally.

            I also wouldn't call a few stumbles "disastrous performance". Clinton didn't even bother to readdress her blatant lies about the Bosnian Snipers, simply stating "I've already apologized".
          • Mejari, on 04/17/2008, -0/+4Yeah that was hilarious. "What I said previously and what I said recently do not match up" Um, did she just admit to lying?
      • Linkin4, on 04/17/2008, -2/+2And your icon is really ugly. Oh wait that's you. Ugly.
      • deltron, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3Is i t just me or is digg getting filled with more old people every day?
    • wendelgee2, on 04/17/2008, -0/+4Don't get mad.
      Get donatey!

      What's troubling is the gap between the magnitude of our challenges and the smallness of our politics.... - Obama
    • jabberwolf, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1Is this the reaction that people get when Obama doesnt win a debate? HAHA
    • loneBoat, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1You mean "Evar".

      Remember, we're on Digg.
  • rudyntrudy, on 04/17/2008, -5/+99Yup, the real story is that a friggin' Clinton sidekick was somehow slotted to "moderate" a Clinton/Obama debate.
    http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/WTF_TV_Moderator ...
  • buhbyebot, on 04/17/2008, -9/+58Epic Fail.
    • montroller, on 04/17/2008, -3/+5This is the real world not the internet... it is much more than an epic fail. This is disgusting attack on our democratic candidates.
      Can somebody say ratings?
  • Oktoeatfish, on 04/17/2008, -13/+42I heard Sean Hannity requested the Bill Ares question be asked. Figures.
    Well, Sean Hannity should be under investigation for his association with George W. Bush.
    • ogbar, on 04/17/2008, -12/+5Bwawhawhawh you idiots are so fun to read
    • apraxia, on 04/17/2008, -10/+9Sean Hannity is a *****!
      • Digger1218, on 04/17/2008, -3/+2and you know because you sucked his *****?
      • Pstall, on 04/17/2008, -4/+3Last time I checked sean hannity did not bomb any buildings and make comments like "I wish I could of bombed some more" after 9/11 happened.
        • apraxia, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Yøu are a misinformed douche bagger.
  • Eiknujrac, on 04/17/2008, -9/+200Is this what passes for journalism these days?

    I have no problem with Obama being asked tough questions, but did you really just ask him a question about american flag lapel pins!?!?!? Are you serious? Americans are dying overseas, people are losing their homes, and you ask him a question on whether Rev. Wright loves America? Get the f*** out ABC, go back to bed with the National Enquirer.
    • bjornski, on 04/17/2008, -4/+23It's the AIPAC Broadcasting Company.

      What do you expect?
      • DevilInPgh, on 04/17/2008, -25/+3Buried as irrelevant and reported for reading "Protocols of Zion"
        • bjornski, on 04/17/2008, -4/+22Where did you read that anywhere in thee?

          Boy, you're hypersensitive. ANYTHING mentioning Israel without kissing their ass is "anti-Semitic", huh?
          • DevilInPgh, on 04/17/2008, -4/+1Hmm, let's see...

            Oh, AIPAC!!! You were trying to say that Jews control the media, dipstick! So, once again, what does that have to do with anything unless you were trying to bring up a non-sequitur just to bolster your own ego of hatred? Again, buried and reported.
        • DevilInPgh, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1Oh, right. Bjornski says an antisemitic non-sequitur, and I'm the one getting dugg down? Maybe I should call CNN the CAIR News Network, then I can get dugg up. Yeah. Doesn't matter that I'm an Obama supporter, just keep ripping on the Jew.
      • jilseng4, on 04/17/2008, -1/+0http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/832668.html

        your argument has been negated...Obama supports AIPAC and the continued funding of Israel to kill Palestinian babies, commit terrorist acts in Lebanon, and remain as the most perfidious perpetrator of hostile aggression in the middle east, must pertain to his membership in the CFR...in addition, ***** everyone that associates Judaism with Israel and Zionists...they are not the same...
        • DevilInPgh, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Gee, those charges are pretty harsh. Care to back them up?

          Oh, and for the record, I'm glad Obama supports the only true democracy in the Middle East, where treasonous bastards like Ahmed Tibi and Azmi Bishara enjoy parliamentary immunity (or, in the case of Bishara, enjoyed, before he resigned and left the country).
          • jilseng4, on 04/18/2008, -0/+0Did you even read the article??? Most Obama people refuse to face the facts. However, you apparently agree with Obama's pledge to continue the funding of Israel, militarily, economically, and diplomatically. Shame. Considering the fact that we supply the PLO with weapons and money too. Ethically speaking, giving two parties money and guns to kill each other seems slightly nebulous. Heard of Iran-Contra??? All the while, we are in a recession, the value of the dollar is plummeting while interest rates aggrandize daily, and you want to continue to ask the Fed to print more money from thin air, further the American economic blight, and then turn and hand the money off to someone else???!!! Furthmore, Israel is far from a democracy. The primary example of this resides in their herding of the Palestinian people into the West Bank and Gaza, essentially putting them into refugee camps, then stealing even more of their land over time, and then wondering why the Palestinians are so pissed...Wow, sort of reminiscent the Native American plight. The examples are equally insidious, multifarious, and incessant. How about Israel's complete trashing of Lebanon last year over two soldiers that were taken by Hezbollah??? All the while, the Lebanese government was pleading for Israel to end their annihilation of Lebanon's infrastructure so that they could help in the recovery of Israel's soldiers. This also helped to sway Lebanese public opinion in favor of Syria and Hezbollah while crippling the democratically elected Lebanese government. Ever heard of the Golan Heights. Yeah, Israel stole that too. Fairly significant water supply in the middle east. And yet, Americans and even Obama support these actions. And then Americans wonder why so many radical Muslims hate us.

            Besides, we support and give away money to dictatorships within the Middle East as well, Saudi Arabia being a prime example. So don't throw out the word Democracy and expect to woo the world. That neo-con trick is complete *****...

    • LukasSmith, on 04/17/2008, -12/+4Umm have you been to a place called Digg.com? I think you just described it.
    • jilseng4, on 04/17/2008, -11/+2agreed...but I am sick of all these cry baby kids who have suddenly realized what a sham American politics and media are...half the ones crying over Obama are the ones who railed the supporters of the candidates who were actually worth two ***** (gravel, kucinich, and Paul)...besides, Obama and Clinton essentially agree on most issues, ideologically speaking...and both ***** lie when they say they will bring the troops home from Iraq...***** them and ***** abc
    • mbraynard, on 04/17/2008, -12/+2I'm kind of glad they brought the flap pin up. When you ask Democrats in PA why they aren't voting for Barack, that is one of the issues they bring up. Further, there are really close to zero actual policy differences between Barack and Hillary, so because it is a beauty contest, most of the questions are going to be on non-policy issues.
      • renegadeafk, on 04/17/2008, -0/+10"When you ask Democrats in PA why they aren't voting for Barack, that is one of the issues they bring up."

        People who bring that up as a reason not to vote for someone are RETARDED
        • Pstall, on 04/17/2008, -4/+2People who vote for someone that is good friends with a known terrorist and lets that terrorist raise money for them are RETARDED.
      • StarlessKnight, on 04/17/2008, -0/+4"Do you believe in the America flag?" Are you a pinko commie nazi fascist islam terrorist elitist traitor Democrat that believes America SHOULD BURN IN THE ETERNAL FLAMES OF HELL and live under Islamic Law?

        Rebuttal question: Are you a moron?

        "Why don't you wear the flag?"

        Rebuttal question: Why don't you? 24/7/365. What? Aren't you patriotic? APPARENTLY you can't be a TRUE American if you don't wear a flag made in China. You know, your patriotism is contained in a minuscule piece of tin/aluminum/nickel/steel/lead and not--as some might laughingly suggest--inside the heart and mind of someone that cares for what their country stands for.
        • mbraynard, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1It's just a topic on people's minds. It was an opportunity for him to clear the air on the issue and put the issue to rest. Remember: he made it a story in the first place not just by taking it off but giving a long-winded explanation of why.
    • DeadFox1, on 04/17/2008, -3/+3Just for that comment, I was going to add you as a friend. But you already WERE! Damn, i know how to pick-em!
    • moush, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1Is this what passes for comments these days?
  • kemp34, on 04/17/2008, -6/+64Time to realize the corporate-controlled one way media are a total sham and joke at this point. Anyone with any sense whatsoever has seen for quite some time that the American media are totally lacking any depth, awareness, or sensibility. They are leading the American people down the tubes. Time for an ADULT debate featuring serious questions and HONEST answers to true POLICY questions. Get Obama, Clinton, Paul and McCain together (heck, add Barr, Gravel and Nader) and really talk ISSUES. Enough of the joke that is the corporate-controlled idiot media.
    • Stavrosian, on 04/17/2008, -2/+2Not so much leading them down the tubes as leading them to the series of tubes.
    • juanchopancho, on 04/17/2008, -2/+1The Telecommunications Act signed by yours truly. Billy Clinton.
    • Pstall, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1If they were asked just policy questions then both Obama and Clinton would not have much to debate about. They are both very liberal (Obama being the #1 liberal in the country based off his voting record) and have very similar views on many issues. Hence they are both running as democrats.
      • kemp34, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1That's why they should merge the debates into a larger group at this point.
  • drjekelmrhyde, on 04/17/2008, -8/+58Post your comments here 9000+ and counting
    http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/DemocraticDebate/co ...
    • unearth, on 04/17/2008, -2/+18What 9000?!
    • bjornski, on 04/17/2008, -3/+22IT'S OVER 9000!
    • schroeder, on 04/17/2008, -3/+12Check out this guy:
      http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/DemocraticDebate/co ...
      29 comments so far praising Hillary and the quality of the debate. Like Hilary or not, the debate was an obvious joke and a mockery of the election process.
      • arjung, on 04/17/2008, -0/+5link doesnt load?
        • bjornski, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3Interesting. It did a few hours ago. I checked it now, and the ABC page loads, but no comments come up at all.

          I think ABC caught a little heat for their actions, so they took it down.
        • MacEnvy, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1That guy was reported for spamming, and his comments were removed. At least ABC did something right today (or their web team did anyway).
      • Timetheos, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1A lot of the blogs are filtering the comments. I tried to post the Brooks site at the NYT and it was filtered out.

        The whole MSM and ConM is trying to spin this crap.
    • montroller, on 04/17/2008, -0/+615000 wow.... I guess ABC can't ignore us now
  • MindyB, on 04/17/2008, -7/+43I will never watch ABC news again (well I didn't really watch them before this anyway!) :-)
    Seriously, people need to let them know what a despicable display of obvious bias that sham of a debate was. It was a total hit job on Obama by Clinton's close buddies. Anybody with even a little intelligence could see that they couldn't have tried harder to slant the questions against him and in favor of her. What the heck was spending nearly 45 minutes on the gaffes of the past several months against Obama? and only one week Bosnia question for Clinton.
    I was so disgusted! They should not have the right to call themselves a news organization since that has a connotation to ethics and integrity--something ABC clearly has proven not to posses.
  • AlKo, on 04/17/2008, -4/+28Still waiting for more debates with Jim Lehrer as moderator...
    • unicronband, on 04/17/2008, -1/+13No chance. He's got too much of an agenda for being radically objective and fair.
  • zephyear, on 04/17/2008, -11/+50apparently george was getting his questions from sean hannity

    sean hannity

    and george was also an advisor for bill clinton

    jesus christ, i hope this ***** gets fired
    • Pstall, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1Its pretty common for the moderators get get questions from a bunch of different people. Just because he asked tough questions about who the candidates surround themselves with does not make him biased.

      I am sure if John McCain and Bin Laden were best friends and Bin Laden was raising money for McCain you wouldn't be crying out about unfair questions if someone asked McCain about a friendship with Bin Laden.

      This debate just goes to show how truly biased the liberal media has made people. For once it is NOT biased and does not ask softball questions to the democratic candidates and people cry bloody murder. Its pathetic.
    • Idolatry, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1That's because Obama and HRC won't go on Fox to debate. Rightfully so.

      Wait. That's what ABC ran yesterday.
  • Pherdnut, on 04/17/2008, -6/+4210,000 comments. Awesome. NOW can we talk about the issues?

    Good job America. It's time to remind these jagoffs what their job is.
    • Pstall, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Ask softball questions about how wonderful they are going to make the united states?
  • mbonzo531, on 04/17/2008, -5/+21Why do they talk about Obama's pin being all over the internet and not talk about Hilary being a liar and one of the most corrupt ***** politicians ever. I think I've seen a ***** load more blog posts pointing to Hilary taking in money illegally and lying to the general public than posts on a stupid pin made in China. I ***** hate the media...
    • Jenadae, on 04/17/2008, -4/+10Results in Google

      Hillary Clinton Liar = 301000
      Barack Obama Pin = 293000

      Whats really interesting though is looking at the sites on the list. The whole pin ordeal is mostly covered by news outlets while Hillary's are mostly blogs and small websites.

      One tells the people, while the other is from the people
  • Genshinx, on 04/17/2008, -5/+28I sent an email expressing my concern, even if it's just one more angry letter they won't read that's fine.
    Any American that doesn't vote a certain way because of a god damn flag pin needs to have their voting privileges taken away.
    • Timetheos, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2Write to your local affiliates and the sponsors.
    • Pstall, on 04/17/2008, -2/+1Apparently you have no idea what a free country is... Your voting for a candidate that is friends with, and is supported by a known terrorist and I think thats dumb, I don't go around saying you should have your voting rights taken away.
      • Genshinx, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1I'm sorry did I say I was voting for Obama? I only said if a little symbol really means more than their political stance or integrity as a human being than yes, you don't deserve the right to vote.
  • Arcueid01, on 04/17/2008, -3/+20The MSM in this country blows. The sad ***** is that they call themselves journalists, but they don't expose corruption or tell us what really happened. They "spin" and convolute. What is sad is that most people watch this trash and are too busy trying to pay bills that they don't want to have to figure out for themselves. News stations are supposed to give us both sides of the story without personal bias from the journalists ( I won't call these clowns journalists either, hacks maybe). I don't know how it is that this ***** was able to succeed. However, we have a serious anti trust problem with the media in this country. Massive conglomerates which are personally owned hinder the flow of ideas. To argue that there isn't a virtual monopoly would be insane. It is like saying that the big 3 auto companies don't have a virtual monopoly. They do. Sure it isn't a monopoly because there are 3 rather than 1, however, in essence it is the same thing. They all produce the same thing and call them different names and sell them at the same price. Then you have the few media companies that all say the same thing and call them different names.
    • mcnasby, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2Well said!
    • tannerpetry, on 04/17/2008, -0/+4Oligolopy...that's the word you're looking for.
    • Pstall, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1I totally agree with you, why don't the expose more of Hilliary's lies or more of Obamas associations and the fact that he has money raised for him by known terrorists?
  • Vileputrid, on 04/17/2008, -32/+7OUR media? Last I checked ABC was a private company. They have a right to express whatever they please.
    You diggers are all Internet Serious Business and also all serious and outraged about other stuff real individuals don't give a damn about but anything is justified when it's for your cause. You're not better than /b/tards spamming a message board.
    • the6thReplicant, on 04/17/2008, -3/+16Actually that is not correct. Their license is to broadcast content that is "beneficial to the community" during certain times of days. This was meant to be one of them.

      http://www.fcc.gov/mb/policy/classa.html
      • Vileputrid, on 04/17/2008, -11/+2Can you prove this was detrimental to the community as a whole?
        • neognostic, on 04/17/2008, -1/+10This was detrimental to the country as a whole.
    • slearwig, on 04/17/2008, -3/+8By all Rights, Freedom of the Press should not be allowed to protect biased journalism or misrepresentation. Our freedoms are designed to protect honesty and the truth.
      • Vileputrid, on 04/17/2008, -8/+3See that way you'd be opening the door to censor whatever can be somehow labeled as "bias" or "misrepresentative". Why not just accept the fact that people will say things you don't like or, gee I don't know, change the channel?
        • Acewrap, on 04/17/2008, -0/+6Media consolidation killed the idea of changing channels and getting anything different.
      • jilseng4, on 04/17/2008, -2/+0you have obviously NOT read the political rhetoric from the days of the "American Revolution..." your statement only reinforces the Bushian way of thinking and the aggrandizement of American Fascism...which only proves, once again, to myself that a majority of Obama supporters really have no substantial reasons for supporting Barrack...aside from the fact that he isn't Bush nor Clinton...all these Obama band wagon college freshmen are getting so upset that their candidate wasn't treated fairly, as if this is nascent media behavior...time to grow up...in addition, Barrack has gotten unsurmountable media support...he IS and WAS a media golden boy...the root of the problem in a debate such as this is that both parties essentially agree, ideologically, on just about every issue...so questions pertaining to nebulous topics such as patriotism are asked...also, if you want "honesty and truth," both candidates represent perfidious roads...read both of their plans for Iraq...there are inherent references to a "privatized" force to remain within Iraq for an undetermined amount of time in addition to American military troops to remain for security purposes, also for an undetermined amount of time...which, when the research and math is done, both support approximately 60,000-120,000 troops to remain in Iraq...and they tell us, along with the media, that they support the withdrawal...***** liars...god, where did gravel, kicinich and Paul go???
    • AvidPreatorian, on 04/17/2008, -0/+7you're either naive or stupid
    • chrissku, on 04/17/2008, -0/+4Then why are you here?
    • mondster, on 04/17/2008, -2/+2I was thinking the same thing!!!! It's not our media by any stretch. They are OWNED by whomever is paying them. It is what it is y'all!
  • inobla, on 04/17/2008, -5/+15Vote NO on Billary!!
  • hollyminkowski, on 04/17/2008, -4/+19It was a very sad debate, dealing mostly in trivialities.
  • Vileputrid, on 04/17/2008, -5/+8Requesting link to watch the debate online.
  • artliquide, on 04/17/2008, -3/+8At least Billary was somewhat civil, for once. Yeah, who chooses a debate moderator who so vocally supports one of the debaters?

    I too was irritated by the focus on controversial personal topics rather than issues. Is this all Billary's camp has left to go on? She's lucky Obama doesn't go down that road with her.
  • MrTito, on 04/17/2008, -3/+17Fool me once... shame on you... If you fool me, we can't get fooled again!
    • rex84, on 04/17/2008, -1/+6OBGYNs across the country should be free to practice their love with women.
  • stinkymonkey, on 04/17/2008, -4/+17Just shameful on every level.
    But at least one question was asked correctly without a hidden agenda…“What are you going to do about gas prices?"...Unfortunately, Charlie and George forgot to ask every other question we want to know about, "What are you going to do about the Iraq Government, the economy (no, the question was not asked, although it seemed that way), torture, Iran, Israel, our trust in our government, the direction of the country, Healthcare, Mortgage Rates, World Conflicts, Tibet, anything about the Bush Administration , Executive Privilege, FISA, Wiretapping, Habeas Corpus, Guantanamo Bay…I could go on and on and on…
    But at least I got to understand if OBAMA is patriotic or if Clinton thinks she is a liar.
    • jdigg06, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1See those are the liberal questions that the liberal media would love to ask. Fortunately ABC changed things up a bit so we didn't have to hear O and C's take on getting the troops out or how bad of a job Bush has done. FOR ONCE, it wasn't about all of that and we were able to see a different side of the candidates.
    • Digger1218, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Gas prices: Commodity, out of the hands of government unless subsidies are instituted (retarded idea)
    • 180andback, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Dugg for listing the critical topics the debate didn't even touch upon.
  • KillaJazzBass, on 04/17/2008, -2/+8ABC feels Enturbulated now.
  • pontiac, on 04/17/2008, -5/+59I wish Obama would go Jon Stewart on these people and say something like "Is that really the question you're asking me? Really? There are so may important issues out there, people starving, people dying, and you're asking me about a pin? About what someone else said? Rev. Wright isn't running for president. I am. Seriously people." And then take off his mic and walk out. That would have been awesome. Too bad he has to "play the game" to get elected.
    • runCMD, on 04/17/2008, -19/+3LOL. Thinking John Stewart's cynical comedy is news .... Even he would laugh at that.
      Too bad he has to play the game ? Too bad we all have to.
      • mcnasby, on 04/17/2008, -1/+16His "cynical comedy" at least uncovers truths through parody/satire that never even touch most MSM outlets.
      • pontiac, on 04/17/2008, -0/+4You may not think it "news" but then again I think we need to start asking ourselves what is "news" anymore. When more people know about Brittney Spears than they do about what's going on in their own country is that really news being reported? But back to your point, I was referencing Jon Stewart's appearance on Cross-Fire where he wasn't presenting news, just making a point about how politicizing stupid things helps no-one and ultimately hurts the American people by causing such mass disinformation. Also, the only reason we have to all "play the game" is because people keep signing up. If everyone would just stop trying to have the most popular views and please everyone we might actually see some real changes made.
      • buckrogers1965, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1It is the only news program worth watching today. Isn't that sad that the only way we can hear the truth about what is going on in todays world is by watching a parody news program?
      • Timetheos, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1That's what is sad; it's more news than the crap ABC, Fox et al are spewing.
    • Rocketbird, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3That'd be amazing, but the people would HATE it. People love to be BSed, and it would most likely ruin him. They all have to put on that fake face, and keep from offending ANYBODY, even if that includes douchey moderators.
      • 180andback, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1You might be right, but if Obama did that, I'd certainly be impressed by his candor.
      • pontiac, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1I understand that. But the problem is that I am offended by people who try not to offend anybody. But unfortunately I'm not part of that loud minority that yells so loud that they drown out common sense.
  • Jenadae, on 04/17/2008, -2/+12NOTHING was covered here! It was a bicker about bickering...
  • l7oc, on 04/17/2008, -3/+15I couldn't figure out if I was watching Fox News or TMZ. I will never watch another program on ABC and suggest to everyone I know to get their news from the National Enquirer. It has more substance.

    They have FAILED as journalist and should be ashamed. We aren't that stupid and these tricks won't work 2 elections in a row.
  • synthaxx, on 04/17/2008, -5/+8"WE'VE GOT TO SET MEDIA ON FIRE."
    There, all fixed.
  • NanoHelix, on 04/17/2008, -2/+29ABC News went downhill after Peter Jennings (who would never have allowed such filth) passed away.
    Today, ABC dropped dead.
  • glibpaxman, on 04/17/2008, -2/+21i would really like to see a debate. A real one that doesnt hinge on personal attacks and is about ideas and execution. this thing tonight was a really long press conference. as far as im concerned the media is dead to me. i watch jon stewart for my tv news and keith olberman for entertainment. wow 5 years ago that would have been assbackwards.
    • artliquide, on 04/17/2008, -5/+2I took a debate class in high school. Those were real debates, even if the subjects were lame. Election debates are no more than "why you should elect me for class president" speeches, despite the efforts of some to actual debate real topics. It's so irritating.
    • mbraynard, on 04/17/2008, -5/+1If you get your TV news from a comedian, I do not need to wonder further why you support a joke for president. Please continue giving him money so he may enrich the same media you are criticizing here (Your money -> Barack Obama -> TV ads on ABC Muhahahahah)
      • StarlessKnight, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3Jon Stewart has more substance (news) in his worst show than the video clip attached to this thread has if you put it on loop a hundred time over.
  • lolbotomy, on 04/17/2008, -2/+37This was easily the worst presidential debate in national history. ABC should be stripped of any right to hosting debates in the future.
    • autoboy, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2It was the worst debate because you had two of the worst candidates ever. You've got a liar and a hater. Issues? Neither one deals much with issues even in their campaign. It was pretty much as I expected. A lot of nothingness.
  • Vileputrid, on 04/17/2008, -5/+2Requesting link to watch the debate online.
  • Gemfinder, on 04/17/2008, -2/+7There were two gem-moments:
    When Barack said, "You can't just whip out a credit card from the Bank of China..."
    And when Hillary said Dick Cheney was the fourth branch of the government unto himself.
    The rest, at least from the moderators' side, was pure toss-offage.
    No more debates on the main networks! No more journalist moderators!
    • artliquide, on 04/17/2008, -1/+18Maybe PBS or NPR should host them from now on.
      • Gemfinder, on 04/17/2008, -1/+5Bing-*****-O. Or C-SPAN.
        • artliquide, on 04/17/2008, -1/+6Yeah, maybe C-Span too, but then the question still arises: who moderates?
          • Gemfinder, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Find a professor of law, political science or similar, at a non-affiliated university. Someone who knows what's what and can ask intelligent questions.
            These debates are really run like two-pronged in-tandem interviews, and the art of the interview is for the questioner to joggle the questionee's elbow enough to get revealing answers.
          • artliquide, on 04/21/2008, -0/+2You know, it's impossible, I think to find a completely unbiased interviewer. Everyone has some kind of slant. But you're right, a professor might be a good choice (though I've known a lot of ***** professors too)
      • mancat, on 04/17/2008, -4/+4Yes, so NPR can ask the major candidates what they think about Jazz and apartheid in South Africa?
        • buckrogers1965, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2Naw, SA is so last decade and over now... now it is about the apartheid in Israel.
      • Efilnikufesin, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1I think comedy central should host them. Then we get Jon Stewart and Steven Colbert. Probably the best moderators ever.
    • mbraynard, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2What about the question on increasing the capital gains taxes?
  • tvfilm, on 04/17/2008, -24/+4HI, IM A STUPID OBAMA SUPPORTER, How are you?
    • buhbyebot, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1You are stupid, but you're no Obama supporter.
  • runCMD, on 04/17/2008, -0/+7Was it fluff - or an Obama hit job ? I'm seeing both types of comments ... I missed the debate.
    • MrTito, on 04/17/2008, -1/+14Both. They brought up Bosnia, Rev. Wright, etc. They even brought up dead issues like the flag lapel pin / patriotism controversy. The first question was fluff as in "Will either of you agree to pick the second place finisher as your V.P.?" Even when they got to substantive issues, the moderators would try to peg their positions as absolutes like, "so your saying you'd raise taxes?" They did that to both candidates. It was such a sham.
      • Gemfinder, on 04/17/2008, -2/+6I loved how, after the V.P. question, both of them gave Mr. Gibson this dead-cold "*****-you" smile. We were all yelling, "No! NO! No!! No!!! NO!!"
  • piratearggghhh, on 04/17/2008, -3/+14Let me remind everyone that American voters are largely stupid asses - yeah I'm looking at you Conservative dumb asses who thought the gays and abortionists were taking over our country and voted for Bush TWICE while Kerry called him out for REAL issuse like the bait and switch discourse from Afghanistan to WMDs and Iraq. So this is what people vote on...we saw the questions asked by "real" voters. Are we surprised? Now I see a lot of sexist comments aimed towards Hillary everywhere which have nothing to do with anything - yup this is how we vote.
  • kday, on 04/17/2008, -4/+11What are these news stations turning into? What a hack of a debate. Is lack of substance what sells in America? After watching a little bit of "news" on CNN, Fox News, MSNBC News, etc, I guess lack of substance (and lack of actual news) is the current formula.

    Congratulations ABC News, I crown you for hosting the worst debate of the year. Now can we move on to something a little intellectually stimulating?

    Wake up America! These stations ARE NOT news stations. They try to provide entertainment and controversy, but they fail miserably.

    The only station I can stand watching for news, debates, and speeches is C-SPAN. Although C-SPAN can be boring a lot of the time, it is real news, real speeches (not butchered), unedited government functions, and intelligent discussion. Discussion is civil (no yelling at and interrupting other reporters), and reporters cater to multiple viewpoints without showing favor to one side. Watch C-SPAN for a week, and if you have any intellectual/analytical capability, you will never trust any of these crappy news corps ever again.

    I sure hope this kind of media dies soon. I am so SICK OF IT!!!!!
    • Gemfinder, on 04/17/2008, -1/+4There's more substance in the Food Network and TLC than there is on the mainstream news organs.
    • Narcowski, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2Sadly, it won't be dying anytime soon. The average idiot doesn't care about the issues, they either fill in their party's bubble or don't vote at all... They want entertainment, not news, and that's what they'll get.
    • xsquirrel378x, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1yoiu know what i'm sick of? people who constantly feel the need of saying "wake up america!" you really have no idea how annoying it is
  • JAT0, on 04/17/2008, -2/+6Debates - hell I thought these were over months ago...nice to see ABC getting slammed though!
  • azznine9682, on 04/17/2008, -11/+2by 2009 it will be made by law that everyone will have to get a box to accept cable networking, getting rid of local broadcast. Sounds fishy to me. That way people will have no other TV but what they shove down American's throats and say its news. ITS ALL *****! The elections, and pretty much 80% of what we watch on TV. Back in the early 70's there was 40+ people who controlled what American's watch on TV. Now there are only 5! Media sucks
    • Narcowski, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3There's a difference between a HD box and a cable box. A HD box just receives what it currently analog TV in a more power-efficient and cheaper-to-broadcast digital form, it has nothing to do with cable. I have a HD box and not cable/satellite by the way.
      • azznine9682, on 04/18/2008, -0/+0Why does it say "By Law"? Before jumping off the gun and not hearing the message, you should take a look at the bigger picture in things. Sure it sounds like a good idea to maybe a person who isn't concerned with over powered government, or a corrupted media system. This post is about media asking retarded questions. I say the whole media is retarded in what they do to the average American public. Blinding them to the idea that what they say is right and the truth. Media is owned my large corporations that express and propagate to the public what they need you to hear and think. So their agendas go threw. Now with broadcast "analog" tv out of the way, they can do it much easier. Maybe I should have made my point more clear, as you can see I got -9 diggs at this point.
    • SpaceMonkeyZero, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2Idiot.
      • forgottenhope, on 04/17/2008, -2/+1***** you

        you two idiots missed the point. and yeah there is a reason the government is forcing digital over analog, but since your so smart, you cant vote for hillary.
        • Narcowski, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Indeed, I stated the reason quite clearly. Although, maybe requiring some slight power to infer was too much for your brain - you can't even put together a coherent sentence.
  • NanoHelix, on 04/17/2008, -3/+24Why the ***** aren't Charlie, George, or Hillary wearing a flag pin?
    ***** hypocrites.
  • superdoofus, on 04/17/2008, -2/+26hey abc, look at the buying demographic you just alienated here on digg. i bet your advertisers are thrilled they just lost the eyeballs of tens of thousands of single males between 18 and 35 with quite a bit of discretionary income.
    your treatment was ***** braindead and entered the realm of retarded.
  • insomniac8400, on 04/17/2008, -5/+16ABC isn't Fox News. They don't have super rich unamerican people and delusional old people supporting their network. They won't be able to survive this stunt. They are now below CBS in credibility.
  • drader, on 04/17/2008, -3/+3Its ABC, what do you expect?
  • SpaceMonkeyZero, on 04/17/2008, -18/+7This entire thread: "Waah"
    For once they don't get soft questions and everyone whines and complains. Wait til the debates with McCain...
    • jdenzer, on 04/17/2008, -3/+8Hannity is that you?
    • wild, on 04/17/2008, -2/+8I would love to see hardball question. Its not how they were asked, but what the subject was.

      A flag lapel pin is a tough question? Come the ***** on.
    • ssn697, on 04/17/2008, -2/+8The only tough question I heard was on payroll taxes. I heard a whole bunch of laugh out loud funny/stupid questions though. "Do you believe in the American flag?" was the funniest/most inane of the night, IMO.
  • Vote2008, on 04/17/2008, -3/+10I have one word to describe ABC's debate performance: pathetic. Even Rush Limbaugh would have asked more relevant questions than the tripe that came out of Stephanopolis' mouth.
  • chrissku, on 04/17/2008, -2/+8It was more of Hillary Clinton campaign ad than legitimate debate. (Obama still won!)
  • chrissku, on 04/17/2008, -3/+15Stephanopoulos and Gibson owe Senator Obama an apology for their despicable, abusive treatment in last night’s “debate”. A previously loyal viewer, I hereby denounce ABC, and will tune in to GMA or the evening news with Charlie Gibson no more. This was a sickening, pathetic display. Shame on you, ABC.
    • mbraynard, on 04/17/2008, -10/+2If B. Hussein Obama can't take a few tough questions from Stephy, how is he going to stand up to the R Machine as he heads to a 10+ point loss in November?
      • Mejari, on 04/17/2008, -1/+3Which of those questions were tough? "Are you patriotic"? "Do you like wearing little girly pins on your collar"? Yeah, tough reporting there.
      • StarlessKnight, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1The same way he deals and ignores people like you. "B. Hussein Obama" honestly, are people still not over this? "What? It's his name!" Yeah, and during an election I think George W. Bush's sentiment rings true... something about getting the propaganda out there. Thing is about propaganda is that it can't be too obvious; and, naturally, leaving an "out" is always beneficial to hide behind like a coward.
    • winampman2, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1You denounce ABC? Dude, you can't just say that. You have to denounce AND reject ABC!
  • Vote2008, on 04/17/2008, -6/+7I have one word to describe ABC's debate performance: pathetic. Even Rush Limbaugh would have asked more relevant questions than the tripe that came out of Stephanopolis' mouth.
  • TheDatabit, on 04/17/2008, -9/+3Holding a television station to the fire includes leaving them proof that you watched their station/commercials.
    That'll show em!
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 118 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.