Olbermann Poses Challenging Questions to Dem Candidates

  • Bookmark and Share

Keith Olbermann a "fair and balanced" journalist for a day? Did the sweltering Chicago temperatures somehow get to him? The MSNBC host who is notorious for anti-Bush, anti-conservative rants employed a more balanced approach when he moderated Tuesday's Democratic presidential debate, hosted by the AFL-CIO. While audience members posed numerous left-leaning questions to the candidates, Olbermann asked a number of challenging questions, a few even posed from the right. Olbermann not only asked "what should we not be funding" to find the money for repairs to infrastructure, without even suggesting a tax increase, but the MSNBC host also asked about the possibility of an al-Qaeda takeover in Iraq. Olbermann: "If you get us out of Iraq and somehow al-Qaeda takes over anyway, what will you do then?" (Transcripts follow)

On Friday's Countdown show, Olbermann had blamed the Minneapolis bridge collapse on Iraq war spending and the unwillingness of conservatives to raise taxes to repair infrastructure. But, as Olbermann began Tuesday's debate with a series of questions about repairing the nation's infrastructure, his very first question, posed to Senator Chris Dodd, seemed to come from the right: "What should we not build? What should we not be funding to see to it that our highways and our bridges and our tunnels and our mines are all properly maintained?"

Noting that every candidate had spent time as a member of Congress, the MSNBC host further queried whether they had "dropped the ball" on the issue of infrastructure funding during their time in Congress.

At the beginning of the second half hour, Olbermann turned to the subject of Iraq, and posed his first question from the right, directed to all the candidates. Olbermann: "Here is something that an Iowa voter has asked answered: If you get us out of Iraq and somehow al-Qaeda takes over anyway, what will you do then?" Olbermann later rephrased the question by referring to the possibility of an al-Qaeda takeover as being "against all prediction." Olbermann: "Senator Dodd, how do you handle this situation where we get out, you get us out of Iraq, and al-Qaeda does, against all prediction, take over?"

Near the end of the debate, Olbermann asked questions to Senators Clinton and Obama regarding their views on and relationships with lobbyists, and to Senator Edwards about the trial lawyers who have contributed to his campaign.

The only questions Olbermann asked that came close to inviting attacks on President Bush were his question to Governor Richardson about what kind of person he would choose for Vice President, and his question to Senator Biden about whether he would stop no-bid contracts. He also asked about NAFTA and China, which gave the candidates the chance to sound off on the trade issue.

Below is a transcript of some of the more notable questions Olbermann asked that challenged the candidates during the Tuesday August 7 Democratic debate on MSNBC:

7:03 p.m.
KEITH OLBERMANN, first question, to Senator Chris Dodd: Obviously, in the light of what happened in Minnesota last week, maintaining infrastructure requires spending. And how tax dollars are spent is a matter of priorities. What should we not build? What should we not be funding to see to it that our highways and our bridges and our tunnels and our mines are all properly maintained?
...

7:08 p.m.
OLBERMANN, to Senator Joe Biden: This is not to direct this personally to you, but the case could be made that the nation's bridges, perhaps particularly that one in Minnesota, have been deteriorating for more or less the period of time you've spent in the Senate and all of your colleagues have spent with you there. Every member of this panel is either a current or former member of our legislative branch. You have personally voted on hundreds of funding bills. Did you guys drop the ball on infrastructure?
...

7:37 p.m.
OLBERMANN, to all the candidates: Here is something that an Iowa voter has asked answered: If you get us out of Iraq and somehow al-Qaeda takes over anyway, what will you do then?

OLBERMANN, rephrased to Dodd: Senator Dodd, how do you handle this situation where we get out, you get us out of Iraq, and al-Qaeda does, against all prediction, take over?
...

8:21 p.m.
OLBERMANN: Senator Clinton, this past Saturday, you defended taking money from lobbyists, and the quote was this: "A lot of those lobbyists, whether you like it or not, represent real Americans. They actually do." Why, though, do these lobbyists make more money, by and large, than average Americans?

OLBERMANN: Senator Obama, I know you and Senator Edwards have taken a firm stand against accepting money from lobbyists, yet you allow them to raise money for you and, as the phrase goes, bundle it. What's the difference between those things?

OLBERMANN: Senator Edwards, I have a question for you. You made your substantial fortune as a trial lawyer. Trial lawyers are now contributing significantly to your campaign. How is that any better than lobbyists?

—Brad Wilmouth is a news analyst at the Media Research Center.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Color me shocked. It this

Color me shocked. It this weren't August, I would ask if this were some sort of belated April Fool's day joke.<insert something clever>

LOL... I watched the

LOL...

I watched the whole thing...the commentary afterwards too...

Will post later as I am still laughing too hard.

Night all.

Crazy times

I too was quite surprised at old Obie. But then I started thinking about what if his show is nothing more than hype for slim ratings. His daily show is like Morton Downey Jr. without the guests to rip on. He is trying to be shocking, then goes home each night and cries himself to sleep wondering how his life ended up this way. I know I couldn't sleep well if my whole career was based on sucking up to liberals. Personally, I am against both "sides" as far as politicians go. Neither side cares about the people, they only care about their party and their checks. Whether it is Olbermann or O'Reilly, both sides have these guys who love to sensationalize the most trivial of things to make the other side look crazy or evil. I like to think that these guys, when you get down to it, can be truly fair. Tonight was the light at the end of the tunnel that may bring my hopes to life. I just hope that light isn't a train.

Olberman likes kicking all Poodles

As I had better things to do today with family, I was not paying attention to the latest DNP (democratic national party) love festering boil and was puzzled in reading leftist blogs who the monderator was they were taking swipes at.

Of course this site once again made it all clear in Olberman provided not another BOHICA, but proved he likes kicking all poodles no matter party if they get to smelling to close to the White House fire hydrant.

I would hope Keeter (a name of affection for dolts named Keith) might actually lurch into such questions he might answer himself:

What if Keeter is wrong about hammering Bush?

Has Keeter's rants actually caused terrorists to go on murder sprees in Iraq?

When Keeter goes home at night does the guy he sees in the mirror like knowing he is a leech who latched upon Bill O'Reilly's fame all so he could have a program not of substance but like a croc feeder at a low class animal park throwing red meat to the leftist blogger masses.

Maybe Keeter will be on the Dr. Phil sofa confessing his sins.....that he is a closet happy reporter who sold his soul to an MSNBC pimp for the heady drug of being just like Bill O'Reilly without the substance.

Tune in tomorrow and Olberman will be bouncing on Oprah's couch announcing he is in love with Katie Holmes.

 

*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS

I didn't see the debate,

I didn't see the debate, but now I'd like to.  I'm not buying any theory that Olbermann somehow found a conscience and decided to ask critical questions of the democrats.  There's an angle involved somewhere.

I'm still TO'd from yesterday, when I found out firsthand that Olbermann's MSNBC blog won't allow any comments to be posted that that might be interpreted as critical of Keith. 

Keith Olbermann is just pure evil.

Think Keith O has started

Think Keith O has started moving to the Center/Right with Hillary when it comes to Iraq and foreign policy.  The domestic policy will stay Left, but when mid-September rolls around, all that has been negative about Iraq will rest solidly on the President’s shoulders (“Mr. Bush”), and General Petraeus will be embraced/co-opted by the MSM, Keith O and the Clintonistas.  Then what do the conservatives say…….. “Uh, we liked the General first.”  Hillary will be attacking from the right and the left (socialism).  At least that's how I see it.

Yes. Hillary's campaign is

Yes. Hillary's campaign is more about garnering votes than it is honest foreign policy. She would just as soon do an about-face on that policy if it meant greater public acceptance --- which is why you have to admire Bush, who has deferred public approval ratings for a consistent strategy in the WoT.

I have always believed that the Democrat's secret strategy is and always has been, to win in Iraq despite all the vicious rhetoric and pompous finger-pointing. The catch is --- Iraq is to be won with a Democrat in the White House.  Democrats know they can  growl and rebuke Bush at will because of the flat-out alliance they have with the MSM. Therefore, any unexpected positive turnabouts in the war (like this latest one) will not harm Democrats because the media will not do their job and call them on it. Democrats are, to put it bluntly, half-assed patriots. The war is only worth fighting and winning if Democrats are in control and can take all the credit. If however a Republican is in the White House and stands to get the credit, well ----- .    And that's why we are witnessing a slowly evolving storyline in the MSM, they now realize two things -- Hillary has a serious shot at the White House and the war really can be won. Thus it is now necessary to legitimize the war again so that if Hillary wins in '08 (God help us) while the war is winding down and the GOP is appearing vindicated, Hillary can take the credit for the win with the MSM backing her up (of course).  The icing on the cake would be "a woman" in the White House who won in Iraq and maybe even mainstream southern/fly-over Democrats coming back to the fold. Then they could eventually lose their kook-left fringe supporters and become a mainstream party once again.  Don't think for a moment that the Democrats haven't considered this strategy. The fact that the MSM would back them up no matter what direction they decide to go makes  such a strategy all the more inticing. You see how some elements of the fringe left are starting to leave the fold, Hillary needs to get moderate --- and FAST! The Democrats have too much to lose by not following this strategy-- of which we are likely seeing the inception of at this moment.

Good Post Winston, but...

I would say the flaw in you post is that : 1 the Dems will become mainstream, 2 the Media want them to become mainstream.

The media, it seems, has a great system of portraying even the lefty frindge as "middle" and sweeping under the rug overly-left comments by Dems.  

I think the MSM likes the lefty tendencies but realizes that they loose elections.  So it seeks to hide the left-leanings of canidates.   Once they are elected, they can then be free to show their liberal sides, much like Clinton did in the 90s.  

Right, what I should have

Right, what I should have written is that they will appear to have become mainstream and the MSM will be their faithful accomplice in helping them create that appearance. Remember, it's all about getting the votes by any means necessary. Saying whatever whomever wishes to hear. Then once she's in, she can procede to vacate the trojan horse.

OLBERMANN, to all the

OLBERMANN, to all the candidates: Here is something that an Iowa voter has asked answered: If you get us out of Iraq and somehow al-Qaeda takes over anyway, what will you do then?

DEMONCRAT CANDIDATES reply:  We will offer our most humble dhimmitude, and hope they don't blow us all to kingdom come.  Then we will silently watch as  al-Qaeda Muslims enter en masse and take over our court system and our legislative system.  But at least we'll able to conveniently wash our feet at airports, schools, and all public buildings!

Blame it on ROVE, GWB, GW or something!

Must be Global Warming, George Bush's fault, or Karl Rove Machine-maybe it was a clone there put by ROVE!!

Iraq cannot be won with a

Iraq cannot be won with a demoCrack or republican president, because those Iraqis refuse to live harmoniously. Every Al-queda or Taliban member that dies, 2 or 3 will replace them. As long as there are Madrassas on each tribe (and mosques that teaches hatred), the war goes on. You can kill Osama, 2 or 3 will sprang up- it's part of their way of life. We cannot afford to leave Iraq, or they will follow us- eventually the war will be fought in our backyard.

The democracks understands the implications of surrerder, but they have to cave in to the leftoids' demands. The leftoids wants their agendas pushed or else, these candidates will be gutted alive.

As for olbermann, he has to present himself as "centrist" (whatever that means) in a wider audience- to attract future viewers. Tomorrow, he'll be back to be himself, guaranteed! 

"Riddle Me this Barrackman!

Olbermann: "If you get us out of Iraq and somehow al-Qaeda takes over anyway, what will you do then?" 

Barrackman: "Well. I already SAID! I'd go to the heart of it all ... Pocky-stan. Also, let me rimind you and this wonderful audience who seems to applaud when I hit key words like 'cute cuddly puppies.' [Applause] Nukes are off the table! Like my granny once said from the back of the bus, "if it ain't Barrack don't fix it." Thank you, thank you all!"  

Obama the Cowardly Lion

I'd wrap 'em up in celephant.

You forgot one other thing about Olbie

Brad, You forgot to mention one other time Olbie gave the Dems a chance to bash Bush, although I am not sure it was intentional.

He asked the canidates if they were concerned that the Election cycle was starting too early and, after one of their potential victories, may start in 2008 for 2012.

More than 1/2 of them said the reason they were starting so early was because of extreme BDS.  Which is garbage but got some applause.

PS - The Cheney answer by Richardson was the "Duh" moment of the night.  It was a serious case of gratuitous pandering and was completely pointless otherwise.

OMG, Whoda thunk it? LOL

OMG, Whoda thunk it? LOL

New Anti Global Warming Tactic?

Apparently Keith Olbedoodle, in an attempt to curb global warming, was complicit in freezing hell over by asking a real question of a defeatocrat!!!

You can't save the Earth unless You're willing to make other people sacrifice. Dogbert the Green Consultant summing up the elite left.

Who is Keith Olberman?  Is

Who is Keith Olberman?  Is he Jonoathan Liebowitz Stewarts domestic partner?

983?

WTF - Why is this MAROON still allowed to wander in media circles? 

"Interum faeces et urinam nascimur"

Tried for about ten seconds, couldn't do it, watch Olbermouth.

Life is too short for me to watch this swine master, glad for those of you that could.  I donot however see the questions listed here as challenging or "fair and balanced", but rather teed up balls to be knocked out of the park with only the standard democrap talking points.  You didn't transcribe the candidates’ replies (thank God) but somehow I'm sure I know what they were.  If there was anything note worthy we'll see it on the MSM a million times before the next Peoples Party presentation.

Analogy:  Tony Snow, in

Analogy:  Tony Snow, in his capacity as political pundit, columnist, GOP speechwriter, talk show host, and former Limbaugh guest host, was a partisan conservative ideologue.  However, during his tenure as moderator of Fox News Sunday, I found his questions to Republican guests were generally just as tough and probing as those posed to Democrats.

It's known as responsible journalism--a good thing.

This is hilarious...Rush

This is hilarious...

Rush has just reported that last night's carny panel of Dwarfocrats (including the Elephant Man and Zelda the Bearded Lady) each had their own Personal Air Conditioning system around their individiul podium.

Mmmm, wonder what their carbon buttprint was for the event?

The poor union schlubs in the audience were left to possibly die of heat stroke, thanks to the climatic genius who decided to hold this event in Chicago, outdoors, at the height of summer.

Check out my latest YouTube...but only if you support the troops and their mission: Better Men Than Me/The Battle For Fallujah

Wow, I missed that part.

Wow, I missed that part of the debate. That's pretty funny, and pretty hypocritical.

For my money, one of the best lines was when Osama Obama said we had to go "into the hills between Afghanistan and Pakistan" to catch the bad guys. Some of those "hills" are nearly 20,000 feet tall.