Tom Brokaw had his Pauline Kael moment on MSNBC this morning. Though the story might be apocryphal, the late New Yorker film critic is famously credited with saying she was shocked by Nixon's 1972 victory, since everybody she knew had voted for McGovern.
Here's Brokaw on today's "Morning Joe," discussing the importance of the upcoming debates.
TOM BROKAW: Debates should be judged on two big counts: tonal and substance. You know, are you comfortable with this person? Look, everybody believes that on debating points, John Kerry probably beat George Bush, the 43rd, the last time around. But people liked Bush.Everybody? Everybody in MSNBC's newsroom, perhaps? You know: the folks who booed a Bush State of the Union? Or was Brokaw's reference broader, meant to encompass everybody on the DC cocktail circuit?Story Continues Below Ad ↓
There was a real "tell" as to where Brokaw stands on the issues on which he was so certain Kerry beat Bush. Brokaw did the Today/Morning Joe double-header this morning.
Brokaw on Today: "There is kind of a sisterhood that has developed around Sarah Palin. I don't think there's any question about it. A lot of women are willing to set aside some of their beliefs that they disagree with her on, for example on choice."
Brokaw on Morning Joe: "I think it's indisputable that there's kind of a sisterhood that has grown up around her very quickly. And I think a lot of women out there who are for her may disagree with her on some fundamental issues, like choice."
Give Brokaw full marks for consistency. But note his use of "choice": the favored euphemism for "abortion" of the pro-abortion rights crowd.
—Mark Finkelstein is a NewsBusters contributing editor and host of Right Angle. Contact him at mark@gunhill.net.



















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
When you walk around with pink sunglasses on...
September 9, 2008 - 07:43 ET by c5thenEverything looks like varying shades of pink to you.
Tom, take the sunglasses off every now and again and see what the real world looks like.
The abortionists love to use the word 'choice' but do not recognize any choice as valid other than killing the baby.
I refer to the two sides as pro-life and pro-death. Maybe anti-life is vaiable too.
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Alan Keyes '08.
you are right
September 9, 2008 - 08:40 ET by mbuelBut, Abortion is NOT going to be an issue this election.
http://www.sfgate.co...
The whole article is good, but here is the relevant portion that absolutely will kick the liberals in the pants this cycle:
So, yes Brokaw they don't appeal on the issue of "choice". But they do appeal in getting rid of government waste, and kicking corruption and wasteful spending out of Washington.
Palin has accomplished great things, while Obama has continued to make empty promises that the world owes you a living.
Brokaw knows they did the
September 9, 2008 - 07:44 ET by Hunter12Brokaw knows they did the best they could last time. They're trying again, by not investigating any topic that will make their current candidate look bad. If there had been any coverage of the medal-throwing and Paris "honeymoon" trip in 2004, President Bush woul have beaten Kerry by 20 million votes.
"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last." - Sir Winston Churchill
What about ACORN?
September 9, 2008 - 08:42 ET by mbuelI think if you take away the ACORN registered voters, Bush would have landslided Kerry.
Palin has accomplished great things, while Obama has continued to make empty promises that the world owes you a living.
Oops, I have to agree with
September 9, 2008 - 07:45 ET by mitchfloridaOops, I have to agree with Tom Brokaw on this one. On pure debating points, John Kerry outdid George W. Bush.
I am by no means a Brokaw fan, but he is right here in that voters didn't care about debate technique as much as the two candidates' positions on the issues.
Not to be disagreeable, but
September 9, 2008 - 07:49 ET by Mark FinkelsteinMitch, not to be disagreeable, but the fact you feel Kerry beat Bush doesn't mean you agree with Brokaw. Brokaw said "everybody" felt that way: surely you don't believe that, do you?
Weasel words
September 9, 2008 - 08:26 ET by KC MulvilleAfter all, Brokaw's weasel words alone do him in:
What a weasel, trying to advance the idea that Kerry was smarter, and yet reserving the 'probably' just to sound even-handed!
Not only that, but he says
September 9, 2008 - 08:59 ET by motherbeltNot only that, but he says everybody believes the Kerry probably beat Bush.
Way to go out on a limb, there, Tom!
The only thing Kerry did in
September 9, 2008 - 08:42 ET by kgThe only thing Kerry did in the debates was bash Bush and then promise to do "it better and smarter". What "it" was we will never know because he had a secret plan. His plans were so good that he made several proposals in the senate these last 4 years, right? Wrong, he has proposed nothing. That goes to show you he was NOT on the side of the American people.
"Forget change, I want improvement!"
Too bad for Kerry that this
September 9, 2008 - 07:48 ET by Free ThinkerToo bad for Kerry that this Everybody guy must not have voted.
Brokaw the Elitist
September 9, 2008 - 07:54 ET by V the KHow arrogant and elitist of a middle aged white man to assume that all women should agree with his stance on abortion.
Brokaw's right
September 9, 2008 - 08:10 ET by Adam_MEKerry did beat Bush in the debates. Particularly the first one. Bush was borderline terrible in that one.
But Kerry did make a few gaffes(that "global test" remark for one) that kept the race close.
I've got a feeling McCain vs. Obama will be a different story.
With respect, you might
September 9, 2008 - 08:18 ET by Mark FinkelsteinWith respect, you might agree with Brokaw about Kerry having beaten Bush, but surely Brokaw's wrong in saying "everybody" felt that way.
Give it up, Mark. They are
September 9, 2008 - 09:03 ET by motherbeltGive it up, Mark. They are determined to change the premise of the argument.
Obama will be prepped for debates by ABC, PBS in advance
September 9, 2008 - 08:18 ET by Hunter12It won't be as glaring in a debate, because I'm betting George Snuffalupagus will have all the questions to Obama in advance, so he can be programmed. That's probably not a bad thing. Otherwise the audience will be subjected to 5-minute long answers while Obama searches his memory banks for the proper word to fit who's listening.
"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last." - Sir Winston Churchill
He should be prepped
September 9, 2008 - 08:32 ET by Adam_MEBy his own people, that is. If Obama and McCain aren't ready for any question that comes their way, then they have no one to blame but themselves.
Now the townhall debate is a different matter. I could see both candidates(especially Obama) stumbling since those questions come from people in the audience.
ABC, CBS, NBC...
September 9, 2008 - 09:13 ET by ontheright...MSNBC, MSM et. al. ARE his people!
Haven't you been watching for the last 19 months?
haven't you been watching for the last 19 months?
September 9, 2008 - 12:08 ET by larry on LIme thinks he sees what he wants to see,could be wrong.
Adam, If You Believe That...
September 9, 2008 - 12:04 ET by Secret ConservativeIf you believe that the Town Hall discussions are truly unscripted, spontaneous questions from an audience of regular people you are really naive. The moderators know who has which questions, and the moderators choose who gets the microphone, hence what is asked. That said, all of these highly paid campaign experts on both sides ought to be able to prepare their candidates for either kind of appearance. The only true Town Hall format would be one with no cameras and real people.
Questions in advanced
September 9, 2008 - 08:59 ET by foiI have felt that in all the debates after the Quayle and Bentsen, the dems have had unusual advantage. Another was the town hall debate between Bush and Clinton. Of course the the October 15th "town hall" format debate was moderated by Carole Simpson and she did not even try to hide her dislike of Bush. I think it will be very hard for McCain having to debate not only Obama but also the moderater.
I can't believe McCain agreed to let Brokaw and NBC
September 9, 2008 - 08:14 ET by Dee Bunkmoderate one of the debates with the other two going to PBS and CBS. It was a huge mistake. They will all be very biased towards Obama and this election will be decided by those debates.
Making it Up as One Goes Along
September 9, 2008 - 08:15 ET by allanfKerry's ability to take completely new and disingenuous. position on the fly (the Times calls it nuanced) helps him score debating points.
I remember the gem he put forward debating Mitt Romney. Kerry said he opposed capital punishment because other nations would not extradite murders to us.
Conservatism has the edge
September 9, 2008 - 08:28 ET by KC MulvilleI wouldn't bet the house on this, but I'd guess that in this country, liberal and conservative ideologies don't start from scratch. This country is more conservative than liberal. It may not be by much, but in close elections, a little is a lot. That's why, for all of Bush's mannerisms and futility with the English language, all Bush had to do during the debates was advertise himself as a conservative. That meant that Kerry had to talk uphill. So while Kerry may have made a few more points during the debates, it would be disingenuous to say that he beat Bush in debate, because Bush's conservatism gave him some extra points before they even started.
I think that's important, because the media is trying to convince the public that Palin is popular because she's a woman, not because she's a conservative. Brokaw is even claiming that women must be joining the sisterhood, despite (he asserts) their own rejection of conservatism. But the opposite is much more likely to be true. They aren't rejecting conservatism, they're embracing it. People are loving Palin because she's the only true conservative in the race. Her gender is a bonus, but she represents the small-town conservatism that dominates most of the country, and that's why she's popular.
It's interesting how debates are framed
September 9, 2008 - 08:35 ET by FastEdby the "media" - " . . tonal and substance . ." - I was under the impression that the debates were to learn the candidates' position(s) on substance, and that an educated voter would overlook the tonal characteristics of the speakers. Therefore, using Tommies analysis, everyone will be voting for the O'Bidden ticket, based on heavy tax substance and a very tonal speaking. Me thinks that the change everyone is talking about should be the replacement of our media spokesmen.
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
Is Brokaw's "everybody" like
September 9, 2008 - 08:41 ET by suzycreamcheeseIs Brokaw's "everybody" like Chris Matthews' "million balloons"? Nobody does hyperbole like the liberals.
Brokaw
September 9, 2008 - 08:49 ET by well99Newsflash.Everybody didnt think Kerry won the debates.Who are you to talk for me.Who are you to talk for everyone else.Write this down and then staple it to your head.
"I talk for Tom Brokaw and the left"
Everytime you go by a mirror take a look and remember that.You damn sure dont talk for eveyone.
Well, I believe Bush's
September 9, 2008 - 08:53 ET by marpelWell, I believe Bush's sincerity and genuine attitude won him the debates and the election twice. He was my Governor, and he was tremendously popular. I had had the opportunity to meet him once while he was Governor, and his sincerity and kindness will stay with me always. One day, we will all see what a great President he truly was. Sure there were mistakes, but history will tell the tale. This morning, the elitists, once again, stuck that knife just a little deeper with the Brokaw remarks. It's never going to be enough for them. They will never get over the 2000 election as they were so sure that reptile, Gore, had won.
Their bitterness does not flatter them.
Tom's the reason
September 9, 2008 - 09:03 ET by Mica the MagnificentBrokow is the reason his generation was not the greatest.
Everybody believes MSNBC is in the tank for the libs.
didn't watch the debates.
September 9, 2008 - 09:16 ET by JWFdidn't need to.
Kerry went before congress and passed along 3rd hand lies about veterans while we were still at war.
Won't watch these debates either.
Obama wanted to cut and run from a war we are winning.
Oh, and Brokaw - tool.
Could it be that they like her because they agree with her?
September 9, 2008 - 09:31 ET by superdoughIf she's popular, it's because we're ignorant and don't understand what she stands for. If Obama is popular, it's because we're intelligent and agree with him on the issues...
needs more cowbell
Super, I agree with you. As
September 9, 2008 - 09:40 ET by marpelSuper, I agree with you. As a smug Andrea Mitchell said the other day, (paraphrasing), "Only the uneducated will vote for Palin".
We're too busy clinging to our guns and religion to be educated in the superiority of the Obama ticket....
They're all jerk-offs!
I see old man Brokaw's been
September 9, 2008 - 09:33 ET by fitzfongI see old man Brokaw's been inhaling his hairspray again. Admittedly, Kerry won the first debate...in large part because he was at a low ebb and nobody expected much from him...and Bush was flat. Bush clobbered an extremely overconfident Kerry in the 2nd debate. Bush won the 3rd debate, and you knew Kerry/Edwards were getting desperate as they both resorted to sneaking in cynical references to Cheney's daughter. As for the VP debate, Cheney took the slick shyster behind the woodshed for a good old-fashioned flogging. I guess Edwards doesn't look so smart when his audience is the American people rather than 12 imbeciles who were too dumb to get out of jury duty.
"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it." -Ronald Reagan
fitzfong.blogspot.com
also...
September 9, 2008 - 09:33 ET by superdoughIt seems like he's already preparing for a defeat in the debates. he's setting up the excuse that an Obama loss in the debates only means that people 'feel' better about McCain. Obviously, we don't understand the issues or we would like Obama more.
needs more cowbell
And Brokaw will moderate one of the upcoming debates
September 9, 2008 - 09:36 ET by krendlerHave to agree with Brokaw that Kerry generally had the upper hand with Bush in 04. At the same time, Cheney completely mopped up the floor with Edwards during their debate.
Unbelievable thaat Brokaw was actually selected to moderate one of the Obama/McCain debates.
I disagree. The media
September 9, 2008 - 09:43 ET by fitzfongI disagree. The media portrayed Kerry as having won the debates since the first one was kind of a blowout. If you look it as a three-game series, however, Bush took two of the three. And Cheney pounded Edwards in the undercard.
"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it." -Ronald Reagan
fitzfong.blogspot.com
When you say in a debate
September 9, 2008 - 13:00 ET by ckc1227When you say in a debate that the U.S. has to get permission from other countries before she can act in her own interests, you have lost the debate.
Kerry was the more well-spoken of the two, no doubt. Only problem is what he was saying made no sense to most of the country.
Life/Death- choice
September 9, 2008 - 09:40 ET by kilrodThe "choice" has already been made, i am for the life of the unborn, i am Pro-Life. If you are in favor of the death of the unborn via abortion, you are Pro-Death.
kilrod
Remember, only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you, Jesus Christ and the American Soldier
Brokaw and Russert
September 9, 2008 - 10:23 ET by exLibI finally feel somewhat vindicated after being challenged numerous times on this site by liberals for saying the following:
Brokaw and Russert were doing an election analysis together after Bush beat Kerry, or it may even have been when Bush finally beat Gore.
Russert kept asserting that "the people" always picked Presidents based on like-ability and often put "the issues" aside, although Russert couldn't really understand that. He stated that "the people" really agreed with Carter, Dukakis and Gore "on the issues" but just "didn't feel 'comfortable' with them" and ended up really "liking" Reagan and Bush. Brokaw was right there nodding his head and agreeing all the way.
These reporters live in a bubble, a liberal bubble, and to them Democrats are always superior so whatever excuse floats the boat.
Right now, the thing that really ticks me off is that the MSM is totally unwilling to call out Obama's radical stance on abortion as far out of the mainstream yet takes every opportunity to point out that Palin is against "all kinds of abortions" "even in cases of rape and when the life of the mother is at stake". Never once a mention that Obama would leave a live-birthed baby in a corner to die.
Oh, no, it's not about
September 9, 2008 - 11:40 ET by fitzfongOh, no, it's not about abortion. According to Brokaw, Palin would be against all kinds of "choice". Guess I'm stuck with a vanilla shake, when I want chocolate. Apparently if I want a blue car, I can only get a white one...because Sarah Palin is supposedly against "choice".
"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it." -Ronald Reagan
fitzfong.blogspot.com
The greatest Debate
September 9, 2008 - 11:26 ET by CobraManMr. Brokaw, some people, like yourself, may believe that Kerry may have won a few televised "debates" as you claim, but everyone KNOWS that Kerry lost the greatest debate of all, the Presidential Election.
Obama: My job is above my pay grade
" TOM BROKAW: Debates
September 9, 2008 - 11:37 ET by celator" TOM BROKAW: Debates should be judged on two big counts: tonal and substance."
Surprisingly, Brokaw is missing a powerful aspect of televised debates: the visual. I've read studies that show about 90 percent of viewers forget 97 percent of what was said in televised debates in about 20 minutes. What they DO remember is how a debater "looked". Did the debater look confident? Did the debater have shifty eyes? Or seem angry, or awkward etc. The old saw that human communications is 95 percent visual is true particularly for television.
Which brings me to my point: Biden usually "looks" like he is about two exit ramps from a meltdown. He appears nervous, not centered, etc.
Palin goes over well with viewers not only because she is extremely clear, verbally, but she "looked" like she was supremely confident and centered (which I believe she is). Fearless, really. People like that in leaders.
Barack's "look" on television is more complicated (and confusing). When he's on teleprompter, he seems cool and collected. When he's off teleprompter, he "looks" like he is completely confused, BS'ing his way through an answer, hoping his words make sense. People do not like that in a leader. He usually fails miserably in this mode.
My conclusion: Palin will wipe the floor with Biden, no matter what "words" are spoken. He won't know what hit him.
The major media report only half the news. Why are they surprised they have only half the potential audience?
I know that this may be
September 9, 2008 - 11:53 ET by Chris NormanI know that this may be considered heresy, but what do debates actually prove? That some presidential candidate is a good debater? How does this skill aplly to the ability to serve? Why do we have put so much stock in debates? If a voter is so uninformed and uncommitted that he needs a debate to decide between a Republican and Democrat, one hour of debate ain't going to help too much at that point. I think the modern presidential debate has become just a national electoral game show with the big prize being four years in a big white house - and, oh yeah, our future.
McNotObama '08
Lump Us Together...
September 9, 2008 - 11:57 ET by Secret ConservativeLike most libs, Brokaw can't imagine that there is a woman in America who isn't pro-abortion, hence his comment about the "sisterhood" in spite of their differences with Palin. Plus, living in his rarified bubble world, he probably doesn't know anyone who isn't a lib Democrat. But, in a way, that's good, in light of this comment. It indicates that, of the women Brokaw knows, who were probably Hillary supporters, there is now a move to Palin. More votes for our side!