Sunday, June 22, 2008

STFU Charlie Gibson!

The dynamic duo of the traditional media are back together again to wreak havoc on truth, objectivity and common sense. Yes, you may remember them from such follies as the ABC Presidential debate, where Gotcha! journalism trumped substantive questions and issues that people actually care about in their day to day lives. Now that Hillary Clinton has bowed out but the McCain-Obama debates are still far away, the two morons need something to talk about it, and boy is this 'unfair.'

From Crooks and Liars:

CHARLES GIBSON: Barack Obama announced today that he and Hillary Clinton will campaign together next Friday, their first joint appearance since he secured the nomination. The announcement comes a day after Obama said he is not going to take public campaign financing, a decision which has drawn a great deal of criticism, and our chief Washington correspondent, George Stephanopoulos, is joining us again to talk about this.

By opting out of the public financing system, George, he could have, depending on how much he raises, two times, three times, four times as much money as John McCain. What’s he going to do with all that money?

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, we’re already starting to see what he intends to do with this kind of money. Just today, just yesterday in fact, Barack Obama bought his first general election ads. I’m going to put up a map showing the states in which he’s bought those ads: 18 states overall, Charlie 14 of those 18 states are states won by George Bush in 2004. If he’s able to continue to raise money over the Internet, as he expects to over these next several months, it is conceivable that Senator Obama will be able to campaign and advertise in Republican states right up to election day.

GIBSON: George, I’ve heard a lot of political analysis today about his decision, but let me ask you a question about basic fairness. People in this country like to believe that people play on a level playing field and that a campaign will be about ideas and personality. If you start with that much more money, is it basically fair?


Fair? Fair?!? Charlie, I'll tell you whats fair. Having journalists that objectively look at the facts of the campaign would be good for starters, but you and George are clearly not cut out for that type of journalism. If you would have discussed why Obama has so much more money (3 million donations from 1.5 million donors averaging $91) then maybe that would have been a little bit fair, but you can't even begin to comprehend fair.

Why not just admit that you don't care about issues that concern people who makes less than $200,000 dollars and that horserace politics for the sake of ratings is sacrosanct, then just STFU, thanks!