Are you asking too much? Are you kidding? This is why so many have so little faith, forget trust, in big media. It’s not journalism, it’s advertising. We deserve and need better. All last night accomplished is to demonstrate, again, collusion between the Democrat machine, left wing politics and big media. Shame on Dana Bash and CNN for a missed opportunity to create some trust and respect. Not of these comments should be construed as pro Trump. Journalism is absent in thoughtful and useful coverage of him as well. It’s an insult to the intelligence of the American public.
Joe: This is why those of us who are somewhat to your right pony up for a subscription. You call balls as balls and strikes as strikes. The interview was a farce. Bash pretended to ask questions about Harris' past utterances and Harris pretended to answer. It may be that you'd vote for a fence post over Trump; well, by golly, it looks like you've got a fence post, a left-tilting one. And her running mate looks less and less like Audie Murphy and more and more like Beetle Bailey. As por moi, I'm sitting this one out, as I did in 2016.
Joe, I agree with the what the goal of interviews could be, but I feel your preference over gotcha questions vs a conversation is, unfortunately, where we have come as a replacement for true journalism. And, in many cases, the areas are really none of our damn business. Like why did she go to Howard - qualified for tuition assistance; felt she needed to sample a unique part of the black experience; had a reputation for being the best in her area of interest; any of our business? It's what she's accomplished since graduating that tells us how she might govern, how strong, efficient, progressive, effective, ... she might be. And, as the investment reps say, "past performance does not guarantee future results". That goes for positions on fracking, nuclear power, diversity, etc. So-called journalists these days rely on press releases and sound bytes much more than seeking the truth or real reporting. All their work seems to be discussions of anticipated or predicted events, less what and why things have happened. And, speaking of getting the story right, why has no journalist seemed to have noticed that Afghanistan was lost the very day that T***p told the Taliban, in meetings without the Afghan government, that we were leaving. As soon as that meeting - that very meeting - was over all Afghanis knew they were in deep trouble and spent the next year trying to stay alive. It was already over when Biden took office. Again, the Democrats were left to clean up the utter messes left by the Republicans. Why doesn't anybody talk about that?
It's astonishing how journalists don't ask follow up questions, or often even ask obvious but hard questions. In the context of this election, where Trump is taking any position that he thinks people will like, regardless of feasibility of what he has said and done in the past, wouldn't that be nice? As to Waltz' answer on the guns, you are spot on. It's easy to answer. As to admitting being wrong, you are also spot on. It's incredibly aggravating that politicians don't do that when it's obvious that's what's behind a change of position - it's human, relatable, and people are attracted to honesty. Part of the answer might be that the media often will remove any context and just endlessly repeat "admit" and "wrong" to the detriment of the entire process of the evolution of thought.
"Part of the answer might be that the media often will remove any context and just endlessly repeat "admit" and "wrong" to the detriment of the entire process of the evolution of thought." Exactly.
If I am a concerned, conscientious citizen who happens to make a living as a journalist I would have a massive and constant internal conflict regarding reporting anything that would give a hint of doubt regarding voting for the only sane choice to lead my country. I would have no qualms about doing anything and everything I can right up to the edge of journalistic neutrality and quite possibly beyond, in the service of my conscience and country.
LOL! Joe, what did you expect? Word salad Harris isn’t capable of extemporaneous speaking as demonstrated by this one hour pre-recorded interview edited down to 18 minutes with her comfort running mate by her side to head nod like a puppy dog. Did you really expect any hard questions from mush for brains CNN’s Dana Lash, who J.D. Vance easily made look like the fool that she is and whose sole job was to carry the pail for Harris?
If you can’t tell by now that Harris/Walz are communist chameleons then you are on the bottom of the IQ curve.
The real question is how will Cackling Kamala do in a similarly rigged debate on similarly partisan ABC on Sept. 10 when everyone on the top half of the IQ curve knows that Harris will be feed the questions in advance (like Donna Brazile did for Hillary Clinton in 2016)? There is word that Hollywood actor coaches are already prepping Harris. The second real question is how many voters will actually believe the act? Well, it’s known that that TV is targeted to a 4th grade audience.
And by the way Joe, the US military uses automatic rifles, not semi-automatics. The uninformed refer to US sportsman’s semi-automatic rifles as “assault rifles” even though no military in the world uses them. They must look scary to low testosterone males and Karens similar to how the highly competent, true patriot alpha male Donald Trump scares them.
Calling Kamala "Cackling" and the use of the word "rigged" and, above all, calling Donald Trump qn "alpha male patriot" are the signs of an overly angry, third-rate intellect. Donald Trump is a traitor who tried to overthrow our democracy in 2020. You can ask more than 70 judges around the country about that. You should try to be a bit more thoughtful and judicious if you want to impress our wonderful Sanity community. You're not cutting it right now.
Joe, I’m not angry, I’m just obviously far more intelligent and knowledgeable than you. It entertains me to watch you squirm under the pressure of facts and logic. Prove that I’m wrong about “Cackling” Kamala, or how the debate will not be “rigged” like it was in 2016 or that Donald Trump isn’t an "alpha male patriot". You obviously aren’t an alpha male and President Trump has stated and demonstrated numerous times that he didn’t need to do this. President Trump is the greatest patriot of our time and I don’t care that you aren’t intelligent enough to understand that.
And Joe, the “big lie” is that there wasn’t widespread election fraud in 2020. That was the “threat to democracy” along with the government false flag operation on Jan. 6. There were 65, not 70, court cases in 2020 questioning the integrity of the election and none of them looked at the evidence, they were all dismissed on standing not merit. Joe, how many of the Senate hearings did you watch with dozens of witnesses and hundreds of sworn affidavits of election fraud?
Joe, I’m not trying to impress you or anyone in your community; I am here to torture you with facts and logic. It entertains me. Try to keep up.
I allow your inaccuracy and crudness in this space, even though it violates the rules of civility, because you have a right to be heard. But you are wrong: the M16 rifle has both automatic and semi-automatic modes. As for the rest, you're profoundly silly and entirely deluded.
Joe, what “inaccuracy and crudness [sic] and which of my comments “violates the rules of civility” and how so? The M16 is not available for purchase by US citizens. So why do the democrats keep calling semi-automatic rifles “assault rifles”? Is a semi-automatic 22 cal. long rifle an assault rifle? Do you even know why sportsmen prefer semi-automatic rifles for competitive shooting? So what did I say that was “profoundly sillly [sic] and entirely deluded” and why? I think that you just aren’t capable of engaging in an ideological discourse with someone who is capable of inductive critical thought. Prove me wrong by answering my questions.
Everybody knows what’s at stake here. In the age of Trump, Fox News, social media political mayhem and MAGA mentality, normal politics and idealistic journalism may have to wait. Biden’s election was seen as a necessary, temporary fix … Stop Trump. Has that much changed? Softball questions are fine under these circumstances. She still could lose those vital state indie votes with as much as a slip or stumble as the tough journalists get her in a gotcha vice. Hopefully after the MAGA fever breaks, should Harris win and run a competent, fair, sensible administration, hard assed journalism as the Founders expected may return.
The news media are for-profit businesses. They do not exist to create trust or respect but to generate income, which in this country requires neither. If the purpose of the interview was to "expose" Harris to the American public, it did that -- just not in the way that people who call reporters journalists were hoping -- with gotchas and inflammatory pushback. Harris answered the questions. She didn't stumble. She was in control of herself and the flow. You wanted more probing questions? Why? You know how you're voting. So does everyone who was watching. You want mea culpas and didn't get them. Will that change your vote? Of course not. Ask those questions during her first 100 days; if she isn't elected it won't matter. If I have a beef with the media it's with an overload of analysis. Dana Bash is not running for office yet the NYT reporter spent half of his column analyzing her -- and very complimentary, I might add. He was critical of one of Harris's sentences as too erudite, as if that's a critical issue for someone running against Mr. Word Salad. I thought it was refreshing to hear a politician speak a sentence that had the requisite parts of speech and in correct order with a period at the end. Kamala Harris is not an unknown, and neither is Tim Walz. This was a totally unnecessary interview for any purpose except to satisfy the press hungering for one. I am thrilled that an intelligent, empathetic, experienced, sane person is a major party candidate for the highest office in this country, especially one with a great laugh.
Substantive questions that happen to be tough are not gotcha questions. As I've written, I'd much prefer Harris to answer such questions from the public, at town meetings.
Are you asking too much? Are you kidding? This is why so many have so little faith, forget trust, in big media. It’s not journalism, it’s advertising. We deserve and need better. All last night accomplished is to demonstrate, again, collusion between the Democrat machine, left wing politics and big media. Shame on Dana Bash and CNN for a missed opportunity to create some trust and respect. Not of these comments should be construed as pro Trump. Journalism is absent in thoughtful and useful coverage of him as well. It’s an insult to the intelligence of the American public.
Joe: This is why those of us who are somewhat to your right pony up for a subscription. You call balls as balls and strikes as strikes. The interview was a farce. Bash pretended to ask questions about Harris' past utterances and Harris pretended to answer. It may be that you'd vote for a fence post over Trump; well, by golly, it looks like you've got a fence post, a left-tilting one. And her running mate looks less and less like Audie Murphy and more and more like Beetle Bailey. As por moi, I'm sitting this one out, as I did in 2016.
Thanks. What you tiptoe around is the tribalism that envelopes contemporary media.
Joe, I agree with the what the goal of interviews could be, but I feel your preference over gotcha questions vs a conversation is, unfortunately, where we have come as a replacement for true journalism. And, in many cases, the areas are really none of our damn business. Like why did she go to Howard - qualified for tuition assistance; felt she needed to sample a unique part of the black experience; had a reputation for being the best in her area of interest; any of our business? It's what she's accomplished since graduating that tells us how she might govern, how strong, efficient, progressive, effective, ... she might be. And, as the investment reps say, "past performance does not guarantee future results". That goes for positions on fracking, nuclear power, diversity, etc. So-called journalists these days rely on press releases and sound bytes much more than seeking the truth or real reporting. All their work seems to be discussions of anticipated or predicted events, less what and why things have happened. And, speaking of getting the story right, why has no journalist seemed to have noticed that Afghanistan was lost the very day that T***p told the Taliban, in meetings without the Afghan government, that we were leaving. As soon as that meeting - that very meeting - was over all Afghanis knew they were in deep trouble and spent the next year trying to stay alive. It was already over when Biden took office. Again, the Democrats were left to clean up the utter messes left by the Republicans. Why doesn't anybody talk about that?
Assuming no collusion between CNN and Harris/Walz, I put the failure of this interview entirely onto Dana Bash.
Where is Tim Russert when you need him or someone of equal quality in today's news world.
Find them and send them to interview both Harris and Trump.
The fourth estate has failed
It's astonishing how journalists don't ask follow up questions, or often even ask obvious but hard questions. In the context of this election, where Trump is taking any position that he thinks people will like, regardless of feasibility of what he has said and done in the past, wouldn't that be nice? As to Waltz' answer on the guns, you are spot on. It's easy to answer. As to admitting being wrong, you are also spot on. It's incredibly aggravating that politicians don't do that when it's obvious that's what's behind a change of position - it's human, relatable, and people are attracted to honesty. Part of the answer might be that the media often will remove any context and just endlessly repeat "admit" and "wrong" to the detriment of the entire process of the evolution of thought.
"Part of the answer might be that the media often will remove any context and just endlessly repeat "admit" and "wrong" to the detriment of the entire process of the evolution of thought." Exactly.
If I am a concerned, conscientious citizen who happens to make a living as a journalist I would have a massive and constant internal conflict regarding reporting anything that would give a hint of doubt regarding voting for the only sane choice to lead my country. I would have no qualms about doing anything and everything I can right up to the edge of journalistic neutrality and quite possibly beyond, in the service of my conscience and country.
I just can't do what you propose and look myself in the mirror.
LOL! Joe, what did you expect? Word salad Harris isn’t capable of extemporaneous speaking as demonstrated by this one hour pre-recorded interview edited down to 18 minutes with her comfort running mate by her side to head nod like a puppy dog. Did you really expect any hard questions from mush for brains CNN’s Dana Lash, who J.D. Vance easily made look like the fool that she is and whose sole job was to carry the pail for Harris?
If you can’t tell by now that Harris/Walz are communist chameleons then you are on the bottom of the IQ curve.
The real question is how will Cackling Kamala do in a similarly rigged debate on similarly partisan ABC on Sept. 10 when everyone on the top half of the IQ curve knows that Harris will be feed the questions in advance (like Donna Brazile did for Hillary Clinton in 2016)? There is word that Hollywood actor coaches are already prepping Harris. The second real question is how many voters will actually believe the act? Well, it’s known that that TV is targeted to a 4th grade audience.
And by the way Joe, the US military uses automatic rifles, not semi-automatics. The uninformed refer to US sportsman’s semi-automatic rifles as “assault rifles” even though no military in the world uses them. They must look scary to low testosterone males and Karens similar to how the highly competent, true patriot alpha male Donald Trump scares them.
Calling Kamala "Cackling" and the use of the word "rigged" and, above all, calling Donald Trump qn "alpha male patriot" are the signs of an overly angry, third-rate intellect. Donald Trump is a traitor who tried to overthrow our democracy in 2020. You can ask more than 70 judges around the country about that. You should try to be a bit more thoughtful and judicious if you want to impress our wonderful Sanity community. You're not cutting it right now.
Joe, I’m not angry, I’m just obviously far more intelligent and knowledgeable than you. It entertains me to watch you squirm under the pressure of facts and logic. Prove that I’m wrong about “Cackling” Kamala, or how the debate will not be “rigged” like it was in 2016 or that Donald Trump isn’t an "alpha male patriot". You obviously aren’t an alpha male and President Trump has stated and demonstrated numerous times that he didn’t need to do this. President Trump is the greatest patriot of our time and I don’t care that you aren’t intelligent enough to understand that.
And Joe, the “big lie” is that there wasn’t widespread election fraud in 2020. That was the “threat to democracy” along with the government false flag operation on Jan. 6. There were 65, not 70, court cases in 2020 questioning the integrity of the election and none of them looked at the evidence, they were all dismissed on standing not merit. Joe, how many of the Senate hearings did you watch with dozens of witnesses and hundreds of sworn affidavits of election fraud?
Joe, I’m not trying to impress you or anyone in your community; I am here to torture you with facts and logic. It entertains me. Try to keep up.
Anyone who brags about their intelligence is, by definition, an idiot. End of conversation.
Joe, I'm not bragging; I'm just commenting on your lack of intellegence. Thanks for proving my point.
I allow your inaccuracy and crudness in this space, even though it violates the rules of civility, because you have a right to be heard. But you are wrong: the M16 rifle has both automatic and semi-automatic modes. As for the rest, you're profoundly silly and entirely deluded.
Joe, what “inaccuracy and crudness [sic] and which of my comments “violates the rules of civility” and how so? The M16 is not available for purchase by US citizens. So why do the democrats keep calling semi-automatic rifles “assault rifles”? Is a semi-automatic 22 cal. long rifle an assault rifle? Do you even know why sportsmen prefer semi-automatic rifles for competitive shooting? So what did I say that was “profoundly sillly [sic] and entirely deluded” and why? I think that you just aren’t capable of engaging in an ideological discourse with someone who is capable of inductive critical thought. Prove me wrong by answering my questions.
See above.
Joe, try to keep up. You didn’t answer any of my questions.
Everybody knows what’s at stake here. In the age of Trump, Fox News, social media political mayhem and MAGA mentality, normal politics and idealistic journalism may have to wait. Biden’s election was seen as a necessary, temporary fix … Stop Trump. Has that much changed? Softball questions are fine under these circumstances. She still could lose those vital state indie votes with as much as a slip or stumble as the tough journalists get her in a gotcha vice. Hopefully after the MAGA fever breaks, should Harris win and run a competent, fair, sensible administration, hard assed journalism as the Founders expected may return.
The news media are for-profit businesses. They do not exist to create trust or respect but to generate income, which in this country requires neither. If the purpose of the interview was to "expose" Harris to the American public, it did that -- just not in the way that people who call reporters journalists were hoping -- with gotchas and inflammatory pushback. Harris answered the questions. She didn't stumble. She was in control of herself and the flow. You wanted more probing questions? Why? You know how you're voting. So does everyone who was watching. You want mea culpas and didn't get them. Will that change your vote? Of course not. Ask those questions during her first 100 days; if she isn't elected it won't matter. If I have a beef with the media it's with an overload of analysis. Dana Bash is not running for office yet the NYT reporter spent half of his column analyzing her -- and very complimentary, I might add. He was critical of one of Harris's sentences as too erudite, as if that's a critical issue for someone running against Mr. Word Salad. I thought it was refreshing to hear a politician speak a sentence that had the requisite parts of speech and in correct order with a period at the end. Kamala Harris is not an unknown, and neither is Tim Walz. This was a totally unnecessary interview for any purpose except to satisfy the press hungering for one. I am thrilled that an intelligent, empathetic, experienced, sane person is a major party candidate for the highest office in this country, especially one with a great laugh.
Substantive questions that happen to be tough are not gotcha questions. As I've written, I'd much prefer Harris to answer such questions from the public, at town meetings.