polmaven
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-08-04 08:45 AM
Original message |
| My e-mail was just read on Washington Journal.. |
|
Barbara Slavin evidently feels that Russert is just a fair & balanced journalist, however, who would never let anyone but his own editors "suggest" questions...and if she were Bush, she would want to be coached too....Well, then, shouldn't all of the Democrats be allowed to pre-record and be coached by their own advisors??? What a sham this MTP will be!
|
| Malva Zebrina
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-08-04 08:52 AM
Response to Original message |
| 1. Barbara Slavin is not so bad |
|
She laughed under her breath when she said she was "sure Bush would be coached". She said Russert was "independant"
It makes no sense to me whatsoever this interview. Does anyone seriously believe we are going to get a real interview? Would Bush allow an interview that is not favorable to him? Not on your life--you know it and I know it and if
bush fixes the books by appearing "humble" or attempting to project whatever image his handlers have told him will resonate, Russert is not going to say a damn thing if he wants to keep his job. He is a fixture already and I am sure his "independance" is much like the vaunted John McCain's independance.
This is more dog and pony show as far as I am concerned.
|
| matcom
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-08-04 08:56 AM
Response to Original message |
|
she blew you off but GREAT EMAIL!!!
|
| rasputin1952
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-08-04 08:58 AM
Response to Original message |
| 3. Great!...That was you... |
|
I am impressed!
Slavin seemed somewhat 'amused' about the interview.
Let's not forget, this is "Live to tape", whatever the hell that means. Guess that is better than, "Dead to tape".
O8)
|
| rfranklin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-08-04 09:04 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
| 4. That is their way of saying... |
|
That the tape has not been edited. Whether it is true or not is another matter.
|
| Eric J in MN
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-08-04 09:09 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
| 6. Why don't they say "unedited" if they want to convince us? |
|
"Unedited" is a clear-term.
"Live to tape" means whatever they want it to mean.
|
| polmaven
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-08-04 09:18 AM
Response to Reply #6 |
|
and Steve skipped a couple of my questions, as well...I not only asked about the editing, but asked if we are to believe there are no re-takes....I wonder if their "Live to tape" term covers "mistakes" that needed to be "taped live" again.
|
| Eric J in MN
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-08-04 09:28 AM
Response to Reply #7 |
| 8. I can only speculate, but |
|
I can only speculate, but I think if Bush asked, "Can we tape that answer, again," Russert would say "sure."
|
| Eric J in MN
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-08-04 09:08 AM
Response to Original message |
| 5. I saw that. Nice going. I was thinking it sounded like something |
|
I saw that. Nice going. I was thinking it sounded like something a DU-er might write.
|
| RebelOne
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-08-04 09:49 AM
Response to Original message |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts)     |
Thu May 02nd 2024, 03:17 AM
Response to Original message |
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
