Could Meredith Vieira be emerging as one of the morning shows' most incisive inquisitioners? As we noted here, Katie Couric's replacement at "Today" recently gave Ted Kennedy a rather rough going-over regarding his legislative proposal to require the president to obtain congressional approval for a surge.
This morning, she took on the hitherto untouchable Barack Obama. And while her tone and line of questioning were not disrespectful, neither was there any hint of the kind of MSM cheerleading that the junior senator from IL has no doubt come to expect.
Before we get to Vieira's questions, take a good look at the screencap. By his super-serious mien and the marble-pillared setting he chose for the interview, Obama was clearly trying to project the image of a ready-for-prime-time Commander-in-Chief. Call him "Stone Cold Barack Obama."
From the get-go, it was clear that any MSM pom-poms had been carefully stowed. When Obama asserted that there's no evidence the Maliki government "is willing to make the political accomodations with Sunnis and other disaffected parties in Iraq that will lead to an end to the bloodshed," Meredith shot back: "but the President said last night that he had made it clear to the Prime Minister and other Iraqi leaders that America's committment is not open-ended and he said Maliki understood that and would make changes by November." She then squarely put Barack on the hot seat: "You do not believe that?"
View video here.
When Obama then claimed that the president had failed to answer his question as to the consequences for Iraqi failure to meet benchmarks, Meredith abruptly turned the tables on him: "What should they be, Senator?"
And a bit later: "But senator, what if the President is right and if we were to remove the troops, redeploy them, the country, Iraq, would fall into total chaos? We would lose total control of that country. Are you willing to face that possibility?"
Later still, Vieira effectively questioned whether Obama had the courage of his convictions: "The surge is starting. What can you do as a senator, what are you willing to do to stop the troops from going there if indeed you feel they should not go there?" Getting specific, she asked: "Would you support Senator Kennedy's resolution, then, that would force the President to go to Congress before authorizing any other troops to be sent there?"
The focus here has been on Vieira's questions rather than Obama's answers. But anyone imagining that Obama is a new, obfuscation-eschewing breed of politician should check his response: "Well, I think there are going to be a range of options that are going to be proposed. I believe the first order of business in the Senate is an up-or-down vote on a non-binding resolution." Dodge City!
NewsBusters' mission is that of exposing and combating liberal media bias. But fairness and enlightened self-interest oblige us to recognize a job well and fairly done by Meredith this morning, the second time in a row she's held a prominent Dem's tootsies to the toaster. Will she keep up the good work as the campaign season heats up?
Mark was in Iraq in November. Contact him at mark@gunhill.net
—Mark Finkelstein is a NewsBusters contributing editor and host of Right Angle. Contact him at mark@gunhill.net.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Pendulum?
January 11, 2007 - 09:42 ET by JimboLike I said in a previous thread on this topic – I don’t care what Merideth’s motives are – kudos to her. I’ll take honest and fair reporting by the MSM any way I can get it.
We should watch for any fallout from the lefties around her and see if she changes her tactic as a result.
Perhaps the MSM is part of the proverbial pendulum? If it swings to far one way, it invariably comes crashing back in the other direction. We all know they have been farther left lately than in recent memory. Could this be an indication that this is happening?
OK – I just smacked myself and I’m feeling better.
Yeah, jimbo, when you put the hammer down it feels better.
January 11, 2007 - 09:49 ET by acaiguanaYeah, jimbo, when you put the hammer down it feels better.
:-)
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "Which city is next?"
"Have you ever . . &q
January 11, 2007 - 09:52 ET by Mark Finkelstein"Have you ever . . "
"Stuck a screwdriver into my ear? Yeah, I hate it when I do that." ;-)
Obama
January 11, 2007 - 10:18 ET by Sugar LandI'm loving the fact that the more Obama-mania plays out, the more obvious it becomes this guy redefines lightweight. Please, oh please MSM... more Obama!
Also, kudos to Viera... but I won't believe it until she holds Madam Clinton to the same scrutiny.
Vieira
January 11, 2007 - 10:04 ET by iveseenitallVieira is just in a bad mood. Rosie's pig pen is getting all the attention.
NEVER,NEVER trust a liberal
Vieira
January 11, 2007 - 10:08 ET by whodatFunny how according to Obama after the Democrat victory Operation Iraqi Freedom is not a republican or democrat problem it is suddenly an America problem...
Dems have an elephant in the room
January 11, 2007 - 10:05 ET by blackrain4xmasIt's actually a single word that leaves Democratic Party leadership dumbfounded and left standing (as demonstrated by poster boy rock star Barack Obama in this vid).
When they rant and rave about the President doing something wrong, now they have power-in fact they have power over the President. So all one has to do is ask, "HOW"
HOW would you do it
HOW should it be done
HOW will you deal with a chaotic Iraq sans US forces in 2009 if elected
If a tree falls in the woods, does anyone hear it?
If a pin drops on the floor near a Dem who's been asked, "HOW....xyz" does it make a sound, or does it deafen like a horn of David and bring down the walls of pure partisan rhetoric-the policy of complaining without offering better solutions.
The only thing worse than having power is the responsibility that comes with it.
And so, Barack Obama is a f
January 11, 2007 - 10:09 ET by Red JeepAnd so, Barack Obama is a foreign policy expert because....? He has a foreign sounding name...? He's African-American, Hawaiian, a muslim and former drug addict....? He is better than Dick Turbin...?
Obama is another reason to repeal the 17th Amendment and make Senators their state's appointed ambassadors to Washington, DC as the Founders intended and was done until 1913. What makes him or any of the other 99 demi-gods experts on anything?
On Basset and the 17th Amendment
January 11, 2007 - 10:30 ET by UnsaneConsidering that Basset Obama came from the IL Senate, I don't think that repealing the 17th Amendment would have helped in his case.
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
Yes, it would. If Obama was
January 11, 2007 - 11:07 ET by Red JeepYes, it would. If Obama was his state’s ambassador to Washington, DC his concerns would be protecting his state from unfunded mandates from DC, not international policy. He would not be considered an expert on anything other than the needs of his state.
Whether or not the 17th Amend
January 11, 2007 - 15:50 ET by UnsaneWhether or not the 17th Amendment exists, Leftists are Leftists, and the media is the media. The gushing over Obama would go on regardless.
(Also, consult a biography of Sam Houston, one of the first Senators from TX. Sure, he was representing state government, but he was still talked about as a Presidential candidate. Of course, he was a head-of-state once, so he had international experience in that sense. But the point is that he was a Senator and was still a politician like anyone else.)
Before you say anything, I don't care about the 17th Amendment the way you do. It's not on my list of priorities nor do I think it will change anything other than procedure.
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
Don't read this then....
January 12, 2007 - 07:59 ET by Red JeepDon't read this then....
What? Am I supposed to shut
January 13, 2007 - 04:21 ET by UnsaneWhat? Am I supposed to shut up, roll over and die because you want to restrict my right to vote via term limits? And I merely said the 17th Amendment is not a burning, raging concern of mine. Apparently with you it's some sort of priority. And just because it's not a burning issue of mine, doesn't mean that I can't point out what I think will happen (not a damn thing, with the exception of making state legislative races even more important than they are now).
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
OK. Then why the passion? I
January 13, 2007 - 11:24 ET by Red JeepOK. Then why the passion? If you don't care about the original intent of the founders that was subverted by the 17th Amendment, fine. Why the protest?
I certainly don't want to restrict any of your rights, but I don't think the Founders ever foresaw 40+ year servong Senators acting as ruling royalty in this country nor partys not doing their jobs.
It seems with Kennedy, Clinton , Nelson and other Senators the Republicans think like you why bother running a candidate, spending the money, "not a damn thing" will happen. Term limits would make sure something would happen.
There is no passion. Repeal
January 13, 2007 - 18:51 ET by UnsaneThere is no passion. Repeal the 17th Amendment, and you'll get the same Senators, and they'll act the same. The only thing you will change is the procedure with which they are selected. It's as if I go out to by a new truck, I buy a red one instead of a blue one. Sure, its colored different, but both have the same features and same purpose, so in that sense it doesn't matter.
Repeal the 17th Amendment, huh? Watch me shrug my shoulders. That I decided to cite some examples for you to look at was just something I offered that you are 100% free not to look at.
And it seems that your whole attempt to infringe upon my right to vote for whoever I want by advocating that lazy cop-out called "term limits" is more of a way to force Kennedy, et al, out of power, rather than selecting candidates that might have a shot of ousting them from power. Another thing you have failed to consider is, especially in the case of the Senate, the possibility of the damage caused by unresponsive lame ducks (in the case of the Senate, a lame duck empowered for three-fifths of a decade).
Instead of term limits, why not demand MORE of our politicians? Oh, I forgot. That's just too hard.
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
Well, I will put you down a
January 13, 2007 - 19:53 ET by Red JeepWell, I will put you down as voting nay. But if Senators and Representatives could only serve one, 5 year term your lame duck argument is irrelevant. They would all be lame ducks from day one and not worry about reelection. Might help graft.
Sniff sniff....mmmm......P.U!
January 11, 2007 - 10:50 ET by Dave RSniff sniff....mmmm......P.U!
Yeah, I detect the maloderous stench of The Hildebeast all over this one. First Teddy departs an interview with The Perky One with a few grill marks on his behind-and we all know there is no lost love between Sen. Aqua Man and St. Hillary. After all, The Hidebeast has designs on becoming the CIC herself someday, a position Ted can never hope to attain, and and she is probably not interested in the type of congressional meddling that Ted is proposing.
Now that Barack Hussein Osama Obama guy gets a good going over by MV. It appears the word has gone forth from the "War Room" that this guy has been getting a little too much attention by the MSM here lately and maybe it is time to knock him down a few notches on the dim totem pole.
Or, maybe I haven't gotten close enough to the bottom of my 24 oz. coffee mug this morning. :-(
Benefit of the Doubt
January 11, 2007 - 10:59 ET by JimboI am fearful that this change of heart by MV may be the result of the MSM’s feeling of betrayal by the Democrats. After all, the MSM did more for the Democratic takeover than the Democrats did for themselves, and now they feel like they’ve been cheated. Getting a little tough with them may be a form of payback. Or maybe MV saw the light and is trying to be a good reporter. I’m willing to give her the benefit of the doubt until she proves me wrong.
Jimbo,You may have a point, b
January 11, 2007 - 11:30 ET by Dave RJimbo,
You may have a point, but I'm guessing that whatever ill will there may be between the MSM and the Dims will be short lived as the media has been feeding at the trough of the DNC far too long to abandon them now.
Maybe they are just delivering a mild spanking.
I'm going with Dave R on this
January 11, 2007 - 11:36 ET by The Real TonyI'm going with Dave R on this one. I couldn't agree more. The Viera thing is direction from Hillary. She may have also been more willing to smack him down as hopefully it will lift interest and./or ratings as all the mindless drones have been talking about is the Rosie-Trump feud on that yenta-fest, the View.
Fight Terrorism at home - defeat a liberal!
RT,This is what I believe is
January 11, 2007 - 14:20 ET by Dave RRT,
This is what I believe is behind it.
I think she's being tough o
January 11, 2007 - 11:04 ET by steviep831I think she's being tough on Obama-Osama because he's taking so much limelight away from Billary. And probably because he looks better in a bikini than she does.
... looks better in a bikin
January 11, 2007 - 11:23 ET by Tom1969caI did not need that image before I've had my morning coffee, thank you...
~~~
VOTE DEMOCRAT!
(It's easier than thinking)
Tom, How can you not have yo
January 11, 2007 - 14:27 ET by bigtimerTom,
How can you not have your morning coffee before coming here?
Impossible for me!
LOL!
"If we ever forget that we are a Nation Under God....then we will be a Nation Gone Under." Ronald Reagan
Could it be that the MSM is
January 11, 2007 - 11:21 ET by Tom1969caCould it be that the MSM is asking serious questions in order to make Obama "look Presidential"?
~~~
VOTE DEMOCRAT!
(It's easier than thinking)
Obama crossed the threashold..
January 11, 2007 - 12:08 ET by Gary HallObama crossed the threashold.. Mark, I think what happened last night is that on a couple of occassions, he crossed a line - that line where the MSM goes - hey wait a moment, we want you not to go there - you're supposed to be completly wildly liberal.
I'm taking this out of context a bit - but to the MSM, certain concepts just don't fly. Obama said: "I think there's nothing wrong with us as part of a broader military strategy making sure that iran and syria aren't engaging in mischief in iraq."
Broader military strategy combined with Iraq and Syria - well, he's going to get few body checks from the media. That's all that happened. He won't screw up again.
Does this mean?
January 11, 2007 - 12:20 ET by Michael M. BatesDoes this mean that, unlike at least one of her MSM sidekicks, Meredith doesn't want to follow BO into the locker room?
Or is it just she's fearful he could be competition for Hillary? Regardless of the reason, I'm glad to see someone not giving him an automatic pass. The more people see of BO, the more they'll realize he's an empty suit. Not that it would hurt him in the Dem primaries, but in a general election . . ..
meredith neglected one thing
January 11, 2007 - 14:47 ET by tumbler_2007Did Viera forget, or remember to forget;
The cocaine part of this tough interview? "COKE, Sir; what about the recent brou-ha ha? Some people say you were an addict." (Objection! Nobody said Sen. Obama was ever an addict!) "--Oh; no one means to imply------ " Objection sustained.
"The cocaine, Senator;-- where were you obtaining this cocaine?" (Shucks! Does she HAVE to ask me this?)
Or, "Senator Obama. Did you finally just say NO to drugs? Oh, you didn't?" (Republican lingo, mustn't go there.)
Maybe Chris Matthews will throw these hardballs at the Gentleman from Illinois, we wonder. At some future meeting?
He didn't inhale!
January 11, 2007 - 16:32 ET by Gary HallHe didn't inhale!
Look, Obama didn't actually sniff the coke - he just wasn't aware that his smack had been laced wih cocaine.
give him the benefit of the doubt
January 11, 2007 - 18:30 ET by tumbler_2007Obama has the benefit of the doubt. Sure, and we know the Left didn't care about that, when they piled on W, during a similar bump in the road.
But Viera wasn't even interested. So let's not say she was fearless and daring. She played the game.
Yikes... this just in...Hil
January 11, 2007 - 12:53 ET by Jack BauerYikes... this just in...
Hillary is really worried that the photo of the bare-chested ( and big-eared) Obamsama emerging from the water is going to scoop up the Democrat metrosexual vote (that's most Democrats who aren't homosexual, bi-sexual, transexual and monosexual).
So... she plans a similar bare-chested exit from the cool waters of the Black Lagoon.
For the sake of modesty, she will be wearing her signature "pants suit."
Which is surgically grafted on anyway.
And I, for one, welcome her chutzpah.
Proud member of the all-powerful and vast militarist/industrialist/capitalist/zionist-bagelist complex
Go to your room, Jack.
January 11, 2007 - 12:56 ET by acaiguanaGo to your room, Jack.
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "Which city is next?"
Wooaaaah haha!!!
January 11, 2007 - 12:57 ET by tumbler_2007Jack the power meat-grinder. Is that a RR engine, Jocko?
Meredith is way spooky. She
January 11, 2007 - 23:00 ET by KalihiwaiBeachMeredith is way spooky. She propositioned Madonna "you can kiss me if you want" backstage today on the way outside. Seen the video? Drudge had a link earlier today.