Posts with the tag Meet the Press

Oh Please!

James — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 11:34:55 EST

Gag Me With A Spoon. An old 'Valley Girl' saying, but so applicable as I watched Tom Brokaw hand over the reigns of Meet The Press this morning to Gregory. The two of them together worked to compliment one another in almost a "who can top this' routine. Gregory just thinks Brokaw is so wonderful, a mentor and he is going to lean on him so much for support as he takes over. Broakaw, meanwhile, going on and on about his 'exclusive' interview earlier with Obama and just how great he himself is. The cutting edge of the greatest generation (his, of course). These two clowns remind me of CNN's insufferable line about that how they are the greatest newscasting crew ever put together on television. What a load of crap. But we watch and listen because we have no choice. I could turn it off but then I would be stuck with only my New York Times and Chicago Tribune. And they get stale and old, especially in their weekend products. About all you can say, with respect to the characters we get shoved in front of us on the tube, is that they are famous. They really don't have much to say but that is neither here nor there. They are up there and I am here in my library (because that is where Harvey chooses to sun himself in the morning).

I was in this wonderful restaurant up in Green Bay, Wisconsin, sometime back. One of those storefront places that serves 'tubs' for drinks at four o'clock sharp every day (happy hour still exists up there). The place is called Maricques on University. We go there because it is about the only place in the world where you can order perch, and have it served with the bones still in (thereby making the fish moister and better tasting, or so we think after a couple of tubs of Whiskey Manhattens!). Anyway, the place has big flat screens up in all four corners of the dining area. There is no volume and there are different programs on every television. Mostly sports junk or Packer related things. We went in at four-thirty, because my parents are very old and must eat at the earliest minute that food is to be served, and there was only one other filled table in the room. All four of those people were as old as my parents (And I mean old). They were playing cards, drinking tubs of gold stuff and talking loudly (because they can't hear). My father did not like the flicker of the television which was situated just above the table we had chosen. We could not move to another table (there are twenty, or so) because that is not done once one roosts. To get rid of Dad's complaints, I reached over and pulled the plug controlling the power to the television just above. Instantly, the four happy codgers interrupted their game to complain. When we ignored them, they went to the bar to complain that I had pulled the plug on one of the establishment televisions. The bartender (with his 'Milwaukee Tumor' of some significant size, proceeding him, stepped over to let us know that the television was his, and that we were not entitled to unplug it. He plugged it back in, after looking intently at me, to let me know that the knives they use to carve the fish in the back room were all available to him, then turned generous and allowed us to leave the set off.

Why am I recounting this story? Because we have become accustomed to having the visual of the moving lights from our televisions as backdrops to our lives. The television has become a comfort. Not for anything that is said by the 'talking heads' or any meaningful action that might be up on the screen. No, it is part of the necessary wallpaper of our lives. It just makes us feel not alone, not out of the loop and not without meaning. Those old coots did, probably, have some of that Germanic stuff going inside them, as well (you know, the rules thing that is so important in this part of the country) but I don't think that is what caused them to rat us out to management.

And so it is with Meet the Press, and all of the other programs we have up there on the screen. Those two over-effusing creeps (Brokaw and Gregory) could say whatever they wanted to and nobody was going to complain. I am probably the only person this side of Lake Geneva that has the volume turned up. This article does qualify for the Obama site because I did slip him in there, once, somewhere.

Barack Obama, "A Transformational Figure"

Cris — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 12:06:11 EDT

Obama is quoted saying, "If you're walking down the right path and you're willing to keep walking, eventually you'll make progress." As I've observed him over the past couple years, I've been impressed by his walk, his progress. He's remained steady and calm no matter what challenges have presented themselves. Not only has Barack matured during his campaign to exude even greater poise and diplomacy, but he's proven himself to be unflappable under fire by his opponents. I think Colin Powell's well-balanced perception of Obama, given during his interview with Meet the Press, stated eloquently what people all over the world are observing about Barack's walk, his talk and his confidence in running mate for VP, Joe Biden:

"...he (Obama) displayed a steadiness, an intellectual curiosity, a depth of knowledge, and an approach to looking at problems like this, picking a Vice President that I think is ready to be President on Day One. And also in – not just in jumping in and changing every day – but showing intellectual vigor, I think that he has a definitive way of doing business that would serve us well."

Powell concludes that segment of his interview by saying:

"I think he is a transformational figure. He is a new generation coming into the ... onto the world stage and on the American stage...."

I choose to put my trust in the leadership of Barack Obama and Joe Biden. I trust they will both prove to be trustworthy servants and continue to walk their talk all the way to the White House and for the length of their term(s) in office.

May God give them discernment and wisdom to administer sound advice and judgement in all matters, keep them from harm and from doing harm as they serve the American people and negotiate with world leaders to work toward protecting our freedom, ensuring peace, improving humanitarian and environmental health, and spearheading economic, education and political reforms.

General Colin Powell endorses Barack!

Josh In Michigan — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 16:01:49 EDT

This morning on Meet the Press, General Colin Powell (ret.) endorsed Barack Obama. Powell has served his country with distinction as a member of the Army for 35 years (including service for Presidents Reagan, Bush, and Clinton as National Security Advisor and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff), and as Secretary of State under President George W. Bush. A Republican, Powell endorsed Barack saying:

I come to the conclusion that because of his ability to inspire, because of the inclusive nature of his campaign, because he is reaching out all across America, because of who he is and his rhetorical abilities--and we have to take that into account--as well as his substance--he has both style and substance--he has met the standard of being a successful president, being an exceptional president. I think he is a transformational figure. He is a new generation coming into the world--onto the world stage, onto the American stage, and for that reason I'll be voting for Senator Barack Obama.

Michigan: with sixteen days left until the most important election in our lifetimes, our time is now! Join with General Powell to create real change we can believe in. Stop by your local Campaign for Change office today to get active in your community, or visit our online action center. Together, we can create the government we deserve - but only with your help!

Colin Powell

Naomi — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 13:23:28 EDT

Oh, I am so so happy Colin Powell endorsed Obama! Take a look at this: http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/19/powell-endorses-obama/?hp

Enjoy!

Naomi

Practice What You Preach, Governor Palin

Robin Z — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 14:07:14 EDT

Please practice what you preach, Governor.

This afternoon in your stump speech you beg for the mainstream media to ask Barack Obama the tough questions. Last I checked, Barack and Joe haven't run from a single question yet.

Yet when YOU are asked ANY questions from the mainstream media you protest that you're being asked GOTCHA questions.

Please stop talking out of both sides of your mouth.

How about booking yourself on MEET THE PRESS this Sunday? Or are you too afraid they'll GETCHA?

To Joe Biden

Oblogama from San Francisco, CA — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 03:42:44 EDT

When you make appearances, especially as a guest on Meet The Press or any other news show, DO NOT do the following: (1) refer to John McCain as John - that's too chummy and viewers need to know it is the Republican candidate that you are speaking about; and, (2) When asked what your thoughts are about Joe Lieberman's speech at the RNC, do not chuckle and refer to him as a friend, and that your children are friends - that's too chummy and a lost opportunity to state that he betrayed the Democratic party and 51 MILLION voters in 2000.

You are in the big leagues now - senatorial congenialty rules DO NOT APPLY. Your supporters deserve better and demand better!

Oprah's Decision not to have Palin On

FiredUpInCA — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 00:41:54 EDT

After she endorsed Barack, Oprah said that she wouldn't have any other candidates on--including Hillary during the primaries. Hillary actually went through a grueling 19-month test to nearly become the first female President. That is a human interest story worthy of Oprah's show. Sarah Palin has been on the national scene for a about a week and happened to win the Republican Idol contest, as part of a cynical plot to energize social conservatives. If Sarah Palin fans really want to see her being interviewed on television, they should organize and send emails to get her on Meet the Press. But they shouldn't organize as a community because we know how Sarah and the Republicans feel about organized communities.

Shame On You, John McCain

Robin Z — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 18:35:08 EDT

I just watched a fascinating exchange on MSNBC between David Gregory of Race To The White House and two of John McCain's representatives. The conversation centered around David Gregory asking McCain's reps if they were planning to put Sarah Palin on news shows like Meet The Press, so that she could establish her Bona Fides with both the press and the American people.

No, came the answer. We will put her on whatever shows we need to put her on TO WIN.

John McCain and the Republicans don't care about us. They care about POWER.

Don't forget that each one of us has tremendous POWER as well --- OUR VOTE.

Make sure you think your conscience and vote for the team who will truly look out for the future of the American people, and not the future of an elite few.

I am so disgusted, I've turned the television off.

Republicans: Good at Marketing, Terrible at Governing

Robin Z — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 14:18:29 EDT

The Republicans are extremely talented at marketing, and terrible at governing. We must remember this as the campaigns heat up.

In the past two elections, Karl Rove found a way to market George W. Bush into the White House by appealing to the Republican conservative right. Then they gave us Dick Cheney to cement the deal. As a result, we have spent the past eight years watching self-interest at its worst while all the basic tenets of peace and prosperity in our nation crack and crumble at a frightening pace. That, along with our declining standing in the world.

In the 2008 presidential race we once again see sleight of hand from the Republicans. They show one side of Sarah Palin to the conservative right base of the party to shore up that faction. Then they show another side of her to the rest of the world --- a closely guarded, well-scripted side, designed to make us believe she is a young, hip, family-oriented, successful career woman with a special needs child and the interests of America truly in her heart.

Sounds like a perfect contrast to nullify Barack Obama, doesn't it? But she isn't anything like Barack Obama. She may be bright person, but she's a 2-term local mayor of a tiny town in a remote state, and now governor of said remote state. Her interests are extreme: Pro-life despite rape and incest, pro-oil, pro-NRA, pro-conservatism. She is not interested in the problems that face the American people, like healthcare, education, jobs, and cost of living. She is interested first and foremost in the ideals that serve the Republican right.

Are you aware that they let her talk to People Magazine --- BUT NOT MEET THE PRESS, HARDBALL, COUNTDOWN, or 60 MINUTES?! If they have nothing to hide, why are they hiding her?

Let's remember who Barack Obama is and what he stands for. He's worked hard in community service. He's been the head of Harvard Law Review, a law professor, and both a state senator and a U.S. Senator. He is versed in the workings of Washington, DC, and he is well known in the Congress and Senate. He record is well known, his ideals are well known, and he's been working to establish himself with world leaders. He has been preparing for the role of President all his adult life. No on-the-job-training here.

Don't be fooled by the Republican sleight of hand. Ask more questions about Sarah Palin and what she truly believes. Then ask yourself if this is the person you want potentially running our country if something happens to John McCain, age 72.

John McCain's Secret Line of Attack

Darrick — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 21:47:50 EDT

John McCain is going to select Sen. Joe Lieberman (I) CT as his Vice-Presidential running mate. There are two reason for this selection. It display's McCain's bi-partisanship muscle. The second reason requires some set up. First, John McCain's been dropping Judeo-Christian like it's hot lately. He's planning to paint Sen. Obama as a Muslim v. the Christian and the Jew. Secondly, Mike Huckabee is dispatched to Israel to rally the troops. That is the master plan and it must be defeated now.

Is Chucky T. getting vetted?

Obamanizer — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 19:02:27 EDT

I only heard about it but didn't see it yesterday that Chuck Todd got a full one hour on MSNBC yesterday afternoon. Could it be that they're testing the waters for him to become the next "Meet the Press" host?

Sure enough he seems to show the same sports like fanatism and enthusiasm as Tim Russert had about the politics game (whitout the obvious partisan approach Olberman has).

Go Chucky, go!

Tom Brokaw, July 27 Meet The Press Obama Interview, Shameless

Steve Sulkin — Mon, 28 Jul 2008 02:37:16 EDT

Disguising itself as "tough", Tom Brokaw's July 27, 2008 interview with Senator Obama was shameless, blatantly partisan and unnecessarily malevolent. But the worst of it, is that it represents a shift in the way the press is starting to treat Obama. Unlike what has been reported, Obama has not been treated with undue kindness over the last year. But I believe the press feels he might have been and they are collectively going to try to swing the pendulum the other way now. The real problem is, that the pendulum should always be in the middle. But, it’s moving now.

Over the last few days, Obama has had harsher and more unfair criticism then ever before, ironically, while at the same time giving his most meaningful and important speeches and making enormous strides around the world that is already re-shaping their opinion of America.

But that is being lost in the press attack.

Mr. Brokaw, a respected journalist, for example, has made it respectable to treat Obama with disdain and disrespect. He has opened the floodgates and made it acceptable to be blatantly partisan and debate, rather then question, his guest as he did on Meet the Press on July 27.

The press is supposed to ask questions, not offer answers, and not harass their guest. Even the most ardent McCain fan would have to admit that Mr. Brokaw was attempting to embarrass Obama, trip him up, get him to crack. Amazingly, Obama remained outwardly calm. But one senses that he was seething inside. And for Barack Obama to seethe, my guess is that the attack has to be grossly unfair.

The crude journalistic technique of reading a negative article written by someone else, while the interviewee squirms, is a common attack tactic. It doesn't take intelligence, it's an unrefined way to dodge having to think of, or ask, a more thought out question. It's effective, but it's wrong because it has an agenda to create pain and sensationalism.

But Mr. Brokaw did not merely read an excerpt to try to illicit anger from Obama. Mr. Brokaw took this tired technique to new heights and read a large portion of the article as a way to simply repeat the negativity about Obama from the NY Times written word to TV, where it could do even more harm.

The irony is that the article and Mr. Brokaw were attacking Obama for his inspiring Berlin speech. The article referred to Obama's visions for how we can have a more peaceful future, a more unified world, as "Disney." Our world is shocking to me when optimism and unification are considered the wrong path. Detractors try to paint Obama, who is a visionary, as a dreamer. Martin Luther King had a dream as well and no one now feels his ideas were “Disney.”

When Mr. Brokaw finished his re-reading of the NY Times article (essentially a rant written by a known conservative, supporting McCain), he interrupted Obama when he tried to respond and defend himself. Obama had to actually interrupt back just to make his point.

Journalism is supposed to have some semblance of objectivity. Fox News or Rush Limbaugh, I could imagine speaking so subjectively and cruelly. But from Meet the Press? From Tom Brokaw? I would expect more.

I believe the press is feeling that they've been too nice to Barack and now that he has became a super star, climaxed in his overseas trip, it is as though the press wants to correct what they believe was previous undue adulation of Senator Obama. They genuinely like him because he's intelligent and charming. But they are now out to tear him down because they feel that maybe they liked him too much. Build him up, tear him down, build him up, a pattern that's sure to sell a lot of news, but do very little to inform a voting audience.

Barack Obama is on a downhill slide with the press and the voters will follow. And it will only get worse for Mr. Obama over the next 100 days. We must reunite now, push harder then we pushed during the primary and wake up the U.S voting public, that what we need is a President with judgment. Judgment, for instance, to understand that debating whether the "surge" worked or not, is secondary to debating why we ever went into a war with Iraq in the first place, why we attacked a country that did not attack us, why we focused on Iraq when it was Afghanistan that attacked us, why we spent over 600 billion dollars of our tax earned money to fight this war and why our soldiers are dying unnecessarily in a country that we have no business being in or trying to run. How our country could be so fooled, as to potentially once again elect the very people that got our world in this mess is beyond my comprehension.

If you want McCain (who is clearly confused and over his head) as your next President, do nothing. If you don't, do something.

Barack's Position on the US Military Surge in Iraq...Right On Target

A from Germantown, MD — Sun, 27 Jul 2008 17:20:55 EDT

This message is about Barack's position on the US military surge in Iraq. I think Barack was absolutely right.

The points I would like to see/hear him make repeatedly are as follows:

1.) Iraq still has a major sectarian divide, for which there is no military solution.

2.) Only a political solution by Iraqis can bring Iraq together. Powell and others said the same thing.

3.) Without resolving the sectarian divide politically, but maintaining the US military surge, the US could inadvertently be perceived as occupiers in Iraq that would be siding with the most powerful sectarian group in the Iraqi government. This could also undermine the sense of urgency for such a group to make political overtures to other Iraqi groups in order to stabilize the country; as the most powerful group would have little incentive to do so because it may perceive itself as being supported by the US military that keeps the violence down. The most powerful sectarian group could even adopt the position of willingly not making political overtures to other groups, while “hiding behind the shield" of a US military surge. That would be clear manipulation of our military by a foreign government.

4.) Decreasing US troop presence in Iraq, placing the responsibility squarely on the shoulders of Iraqis to bring their country together, is the right thing. The people of Iraq have to learn that violence is not the solution for bringing their country together. Many Iraqis probably already realize this.

5.) It wasn't just the US military surge that led to a reduction in violence, and without other Iraqi involvement independent of the surge strategy, violence across Iraq and in the captial could still be higher.

6.) John McCain's campaign, and the conservative media, are trying to over simplify a complex issue, without giving full credit to all the factors (particularly groups of cooperating Iraqis) involved that led to the lower level of violence in Iraq.

Aaron Rae Douglas

Obama on Meet The Press

Jim — Sun, 27 Jul 2008 16:04:15 EDT

Barack looked and sounded great on Meet The Press this morning. Brokaw (sp) is no Tim Russert and his questions were in general pretty lame. I was glad to hear Obama mention the fact that the quotes that Brokaw was using were either written by conservatives, McCain or in one case only one part of the poll.

Barack explained why being right or wrong on the surge was not the issue, he doesn't have to "apologize" for his position, since it is still valid. The "Surge," is only part of the equation. I'd like to hear McCain apologize for voting to get us in to this mess in the first place.

McCain needs to apologize for the 7 plus years of the Bush Administration, and his own record in the Senate. He voted against things like benefits for Veterans. I hope the campaign starts pushing the list of things Mccain has voted for and against out to the public. He's no "Maverick" or "Independent" he's a big time "Bushy."

The press needs to start asking McCain some hard questions. McCain, his talking point surrogates and campaign hacks have intimidated the press with false claims of bias toward Obama. In fact the opposite is true. It isn't necessarily the amount of coverage but the type of coverage. Many times we see coverage of Obama and hear a bunch of McCain/Republican talking points at the same time.

Obama is out making news, talking about issues, proposing ideas and looking to the future and all McCain can do is make snide remarks, complain and get is facts wrong.

It's pretty obvious that McCain and his campaign are desperate and have already thrown in the "kitchen sink." I guess next it'll be the toilet.

JRM

The political use of polling

Patrick Frank — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 08:32:47 EDT

NBC's handling of their recent poll suggests how numbers can be manipulated or used for or against a candidate. Some numbers from the poll were headlined and highlighted, others were ignored. Some of these problems with reporting may be unintentional and a result of time constraints. But we need we need to be aware and willing to respond to media outlets that convey a distorted impression of Barack or the current state of the race. I have copied, below, the email I sent to Meet the Press and Chuck Todd, with whom I have had frequent correspondence, regarding this matter...

I am a grassroots Obama volunteer from Kingstree, South Carolina.

If you utilize the recent NBC/WSJ poll results on Meet the Press, I hope you and Chuck Todd (if he is on) will have time to present a balanced view of the data with respect to Obama and McCain.

In the NBC reporting of this poll that I have seen, some significant positives for Obama in the poll have not been mentioned.

For example, in this poll a majority of voters perceived Obama as more...

Easygoing and likeable, offering hope and optimism, being compassionate enough to understand the people, and improving America's standing in the world

As Chuck Todd has reported, if Obama were pitted against McCain today, Obama would receive 47% of the vote, McCain would receive 41% of the vote. But I have not heard it mentioned that if Bob Barr and Ralph Nader were thrown into the mix, Obama would garner 48% of the vote, while McCain would garner 35. So the third party candidates could make a huge difference, at least in terms of the popular vote.

44% of Obama voters are excited about him, while only 14% of McCain voters are excited. I have also not heard this mentioned in broadcasts. This finding could be significant in terms of election-day turnout.

Chuck Todd did say on Nightly News that voters surveyed consider Obama the more mainstream candidate, though I could not find that data in the poll, posted on RealClear.

Finally, voters, by a 60-30 margin, said they favor a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq, in effect agreeing with Obama's position.

There are positives for McCain in the poll, too, of course. For example, a majority saw McCain as having stronger leadership qualities, being consistent and standing up for his beliefs, being more honest and straightforward (by a narrow margin), and being a good commander in chief. And, as has been widely reported by NBC, a majority of voters surveyed consider Obama to be the riskier choice.

I just ask, if this poll is cited, that a balanced view of the findings be given. Also, it should be noted that polling is only a snapshot. For example, the full impact of Obama’s trip overseas has not been yet been seen.

Chuck Todd does an excellent job of crunching the numbers, but I hope that he is given time and takes the opportunity to present a balanced picture, though I understand that time is a strong limiting factor in the presentation of network news.

Thank you,

Patrick Frank

Meet the Press

Gail Clute — Sun, 29 Jun 2008 10:56:58 EDT

Just watched Meet The Press. I miss Tim Russart! Obama will win the west!!

I know it's a little thing...

Fabien — Sun, 22 Jun 2008 22:23:09 EDT

I'm reading a new book called: "Just how stupid are we?". It's an interesting reflection on the responsibility of the People in the Bush presidency debacle, and a refreshing look into a famous issue. I recommend the reading. But I digress.

In 2001, Dick Cheney said on Meet The Press that it was pretty well confirmed that Mohammed Atta had met with a Senior Iraqi offical in Czechoslovakia "last April". Now, I am no more interested in speculating than most of us, but if that information has actually been communicated to Cheney by the CIA, can we please find the person who wrote it and fire him/her right away? Czechoslovakia, as a country, was dissolved in 1993!

Now if you were Dick Cheney and you didn't pay much attention to the Eastern European political revolution of the 90's, which is already bad in itself, and you read a report that said "Czech Republic". I am sure it would trigger your interest just enough not to make the mistake on Meet The Press. The fact that the story went that way and that I can't seem to even find a story online that highlights this error is quite surprising to me.

Anyway, it was time for me to sleep and I had to say it before going to bed.

His final interview...

Mikeystyle — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 09:59:40 EDT

Sundays won't be the same without Tim Russert

Charles Penny — Sun, 15 Jun 2008 18:04:57 EDT

I was very saddened by the news of Tim Russert’s sudden passing away on Friday, June 13. Russert was an exceptional journalist who put his heart and soul into getting the truth from people in leadership roles in politics and carefully analyzing political events as they developed.

Most American viewers of ‘Meet the Press’, moderated by Russert over the past 17 years, see this program on their TVs on Sunday mornings. As an American abroad in Spain and with Spain being 6 hours ahead of Eastern Standard Time, I wait with anticipation until Sunday evening each week to see the netcast of this always insightful program. It has been my best cure for the end-of-the weekend blues that can come in gearing up for the work week ahead. ‘Meet the Press’ will go on, but it won’t be the same without Russert at the helm.

In addition to ‘Meet the Press’, I also looked to Tim Russert first for his analysis of ongoing developments in politics and, especially, of this historic election of 2008. Living abroad, I got great comfort from being connected by Russert to events and people back home who have been part of this election all through the primary season. As Barack Obama said in his observations on Friday upon hearing of Russert’s sudden death, “Tim is irreplaceable.” I hope that the role he played as a “standard-bearer” of high-quality, balanced and ethical journalism will be heeded by those who survive him in reporting political news. I notice that many of my fellow Obama supporters are also fans of Russert, given the more than 1000 responses here on this website to Barack Obama's statement on our common loss of Russert's presence.

We could always count on Russert to get to the bottom of the issues and provide well-researched analysis. Furthermore, his own family background, coming from a blue-collar background of modest means is a great example of American Dream come true. The way Russert lived serves as an inspiration to do our best and put the same kind of enthusiastic energy into our own pursuits as he did into his. Above all, in everything he did and the down-to-earth way he presented himself, Russert's viewers always saw what a fine and decent human being on and off camera he was.

As Obama shifts gear from the primaries to the general election campaign, I am grateful for having had Russert’s reporting on the events in this election which I could see his genuine enthusiasm for in ‘Meet the Press’ and the debates he moderated, and the day-to-day political analysis he gave. Tim Russert will be sorely missed and never forgotten. My deepest condolences go out to his family, friends and colleagues.

Tim Russert on Obama

Karen — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 14:30:56 EDT

Sunday morning will never be the same. For many of us Meet The Press was like going to church on Sunday. There will never be another like Tim. He will be greatly missed, but I will especially feel the loss on election night in November. This election was so important to him. You could see how he lit up when he was on TV talking about it, that twinkle in his eye that said this is what I live for..

Although no one knew who Tim voted for, one thing I found so telling about the charachter of the man is that he was greatly impressed with Senator Obama, not becuase of policy isuues or the Senator's position on the war or economy, but becuase he felt Barack is such a genuine and honest man. That is what Tim was, and he was able to recogonize that same sense of honesty, integrity, and humility in Senator Obama that was so evident in himself.

God bless you Tim. There will be a void tomorrow morning and every Sunday morning to come.

Sundays Will Never be the Same

Tim — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 12:37:27 EDT

I was in Dulles yesterday watching the breaking news that Tim Russert died. For many years now, like many of you, I have tuned in to Meet the Press as a normal part of my Sunday mornings (or afternoon or evening thanks to Tivo).

Following the Don Imus comments on the Rutgers Women's basketball team, on April 15, 2007 Tim Russert had a panel on that was supposed to talk about Imus's hateful commentary as well as the presidential primaries. The panel consisted of John Harwood, Glen Ifill, Gene Robinson, and David Brooks. Russert saw that the discussion among the two black and two white commentators was so important and insightful that he skipped the primary conversation and stayed with the race in America conversation. Russert also stayed out of the way and allowed the conversation to flow naturally.

To my mind this was the best 20 minutes of television commentary I have ever seen. I still have it recorded and hope to continue to watch it for the rest of my life. I'm grateful to Tim Russert for having the ability to see that the conversation between Ifill, Robinson, Harwood, and Brooks was important to the country and to allow it to continue. The transcript can be found here. The full text is below.

We've lost a truly compassionate, thoughtful, and principled human being. Sundays will never be the same for me.

Goodbye, Tim

Terryana — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 00:08:22 EDT

I am, as I am sure everyone reading this is, saddened by the untimely passing of Tim Russert. He was one of the few journalists that really knew his stuff and was not afraid to ask the tough questions. He seemed the type not to let his personal opinions or views shadow his interviews. I was looking forward to his coverage of the Democratic Convention in Denver and, more importantly, watching him with his white board showing how McCain had no chance in hell of winning then declaring Barack Obama the next President of the United States of America. Today is indeed a sad day.

Hillary Clinton on Meet the Press Sunday

Hans from SE PDX — Sat, 24 May 2008 09:41:51 EDT

Here's my prediction, MtP funny man Tim Russert will have Hillary Clinton on this Sunday so they can joke around about Assassination gaffs. What is even more ridiculous, Russert is probably on vacation this weekend, but he would go into work just to do this!

you all do remember last week joking around with our favorite baptist funny man preacher, Mike Huckleberry? youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYHHGlvVkhk&hl=en

Sad reflection upon our leaders, even sadder commentary on the journalists!

Poor Focus on Meet The Press

ZapDuff — Sun, 04 May 2008 12:19:42 EDT

The following is the message I sent to Tim.Russert@nbcuni.com. Feel free to send your own observations via: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6872152/

The Vritual 22nd Debate

Obamanizer — Sun, 04 May 2008 12:13:51 EDT

And there we had it at "This Week" with George Stephanopoulos and Hillary Clinton. Towards the end of the show, George Stephanopoulos allows Senator Clinton to answer on a accusation about her Iran policy by Senator Obama on "Meet the Press" which was being broadcasted parallel to the show. He had claimed that the kind of talk Senator Clinton had introduced would just be the same kind or policy and talk as we have been dealing with under the Bush administration.

Save the Best for Last

Obamanizer — Sun, 04 May 2008 12:05:22 EDT

At the end of "This Week", the exclusive town hall interview by George Stephanopoulos with Senator Clinton, he mentions that invitations were also sent out to Senator Obama and Senator McCain and that he hopes that they will take him on.

Though following the foreplay that lead to the Sunday Morning Talkshow War with democratic contestants it appears more as it was Senator Obama first who agreed on to appear on Meet the Press with Tim Russert and then Senator Clinton had to find herself a platform.

So when should Senator McCain or Senator Obama take on the invitation? Just before the South Dakota or the Puerto Rico primaries?

This Strange Week

Obamanizer — Sun, 04 May 2008 11:32:38 EDT

Watching "This Week" with Senator Clinton, there are strange moments when she mentions to George Stephanopoulos discussions they had during his prior life before becoming a objective journalist - as a member of the Clinton administration. But who is watching Senator Obama's "Meet the Press" appearance or Senator Clinton at "This Week" who hasn't made up his mind anyway?

David Axelrod is hot

globalcitizen — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 10:09:57 EDT

I think David Axelrod is hot. Ok, I will admit it- I am a news, politics, and history buff. "Meet the Press", "Hardball with Chris", This Week with George", and "Morning Joe" are a few of my guilty pleasures. "America's Next Top Model", "Gossip Girl", and "The Young and the Restless" are a few of my others. Now I am a surburban woman, early thirties with a demeanor more like Elle Woods of Legally Blond than Aunt Bee from The Andy Griffith Show. My youth governs my desire to know about pop culture whereas my sense of civic responsibility contributes to my passion to understand the state of the union. I am not a wealthy american but average Joe in terms of having been effected by the high gas prices and the sky-rocketing food costs. So let me offer a tiny distraction from the mundane gossip of government and give you the kind of entertaining distraction that shouldn't be delivered by a viable news source.

I remember watching "Meet the Press" which featured a chair to chair discussion with David Axelrod and with Senator Clinton's replacement for Mark Penn (Geoff Garin), I have come to the conclusion that "David Axelrod is officially hot". Axelrod did such an amazing job pointing out the differences between the positive "hope" campaign of Obama vs the negetive, kitchen sink strategy of Hillary Clinton. He didnt allow her campaign to dodge and distract the people (or the Moderator for that matter) from the failures, turmoils, and misleading practices of the Clinton campaign. Axelrod was tough and was the first Obama spokesperson I've seen that has said "no, I do not think Hillary Clinton can win the general election against McCain." In my opinion, he is right and he is sexy. He offered a brutal truth supported by data, dates, and facts delivered with a tone that showed a genuine concern for americans. Finally, I'm seeing a surrogate for Obama (other than Governor Richardson and John Kerry) who challenged the Clinton camp without letting them change the subject or deter from the issues. Axelrod offered a brutal truth in a manner that was not taken as negetive but exemplified the campaign's commitment and support of the people. His statements were factual whereas Clinton's statements are usually misleading and opinion-based. Axelrod was poised, eloquent, and delivered brash truth with facts, data, and dates. It was attractive to me, kind of like the first time I really looked into the eyes of Einstein.

Hillary's Nuclear Umbrella In Middle East - STORY?

Coonsey — Sun, 20 Apr 2008 12:55:33 EDT

Where is the BIG story on Hillary's comment druing last weeks debate about the U.S. providing a Nuclear Umbrella, sort of speak, over ALL of the Middle East, when she discussed Iran?

Why isn't Obama going after this comment she made?

Today on Meet the Press

Cindy in Salt Lake — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 19:24:24 EDT

Today on Meet the Press, the following was said in discussing who should be Obama's choice as VP. Discussion participants were Democratic strategists James Carville and Bob Shrum. Republican strategists were Mary Matalin and Mike Murphy. At one point, Murphy nominates Carville for VP:

MR. MURPHY: I, I think one of the political rules of running-mate picking is to be sure not to choose somebody who looks like a signal by your weaknesses. You know, where you choose what you're not to remind everybody what you're not, because generally the VP doesn't do a lot for you. I think he needs a small town, gun owning pro-Christian now--so I nominate Carville--who's also valuable.
MR. CARVILLE: (Unintelligible). Does that count? I could shoot a gun before I could ride a bike.
...
MR. RUSSERT: On the Democrat side?
MR. MURPHY: You know, I think Obama might try the--either the anti-war general, which is great on paper, really hard to do. Or maybe a reform male--Bloomberg, a Tom Kean, some Republican to do the bipartisan thing. I don't know, but it will be awful clever.
MR. RUSSERT: McCain with Romney or...
MR. SHRUM: Rob Portman, the former congressman from Ohio. I think you have to bet that Obama's going to be the nominee, and I think under those circumstances he'll pick someone with a military background despite what he said, and I think Wes Clark might be it.
MR. CARVILLE: By a long-shot and I don't know if it's even a Democrat, but I think General James Jones. General Zinni, maybe a four-star Marine general, NATO commander. I mean it might not even be, but somebody like that would be--I'm a former Marine. Let's get somebody from the corps there.

(Read full transcript here)

meet the press today

Molly LaCombe — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 13:23:59 EDT

Oh God, I am watching Meet the Press right now and James Carville was just called on his "Judas" comment about Bill Richardson. His excuse is that he was misquoted but then went on to say that there were things behind the scenes that caused him to feel that way about Bill. So, he chose to not talk about those as if it were a private thing between him and Bill, saying that Bill knows why he said it. He said he was "happy" he said it. What a high school girl!! Come on Carville! That's what high school girls do. :-) But it's ok for him to say Bill's a Judas knowing that this comment will make national news. Ladies and Gents, these are the kinds of people "advising" our politicians...in the Clinton campaign (and McCain too, I think). Guess Hill's teaching him high school girl's tricks.

So speaking of Hillary, I was so proud of Tim Russert that he showed every single time that Hillary talked about being under sniper fire...all of them...not at 11 pm, but at 3 other times of day: 9 am, 2 pm and 7:30 pm. Carville, with his glossy head, looked a bit "pink" all over...couldn't look anyone in the eyes, and couldn't get that embarrassed "oh s___ what do I say to this?" look off his face. I thought I would die laughing.

I am bothered, however, that this isn't more of an issue of discussion in the press. I mean, when a presidential candidate lies about going into a war zone, pretends to have been a real brave trooper, at a time when we have men and women living in such conditions DAILY for years now, that's a bit over the top. Yet, the press isn't really going after her on this...or not very hard. They've just chuckled at her lies.

On Meet the Press, when Tim showed this and started the conversation, Mary Matalin, and the other three guys just sat there laughing at Carville, and laughing at how the Clintons do all this lying, or I guess the Clintons would call it "stretching the truth for a good story". But in politics "Gee, this is so Clintonesque..." and isn't it funny that they lie so blatantly to us!? I am sure the soldiers wouldn't be laughing, or the parents of people who had a son or daughter die by sniper fire. Then they went on to talk about how the Clintons know that when the campaign focuses on them THEY LOSE, so they insist on turning it around to THE PEOPLE because they know that's how THEY WIN.

I want to turn this back to the Clintons, who the press is giving a free pass to a certain extent....not completely, but Obama wouldn't live this down EVER in the press. And it certainly wouldn't be laughed at...nope. He would be massacred by the press. Why is that?

And doesn't it bother anyone that Hillary is in league with McCain? Both sniping at the word "bitter" to try to make Obama look like an elitist? McCain comes out of his campaign to join her in this? Only Chris Matthews has discussed this and only at a superficial level. I just wonder how much Clinton supporters would like to know she's in cahoots with Bush, I mean, McCain?

Good grief.

For Busy People, Here is what Sen. Obama has to say about the PA voter comments

A Goner — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 10:29:04 EDT

It takes only 2 minutes to see Sen. Obama's response as he is speaking to folks here in Terre Haute, Indiana. I have been watching the pundits this morning on Fox with Chris Wallace and Meet the Press with James Carville and his wife Mary Maitlin trying to discredit Sen. Obama. They are definitely misrepresenting the context, the intent and the meaning of his comments as IF PENNSYLVANIA VOTERS WON'T BE SMART, INTELLIGENT AND SPIRITUALLY DISCERNING ENOUGH to see through their manipulative tactics of mass disinformation about Sen. Obama. The Mayor of Philadelphia is definitely a democratic machine operative for Sen. Clinton and his blinded, bias is very obvious... but he is just doing his job, just like James Carville.

Well from what I see in this video, in spite of all the above,

Sen. OBAMA is a MAN, who can take a STAND, for us and himself and do it very well.

Thank You!

Check it out!!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sc9PepjyDow

YouTube - Obama videos - Terre Haute, IN if the link doesn't work you can search for it!

Keep HOPE Alive!

BARACK the Vote!!

Katloverindy

Yet Another "Reason" Superdelegates Should Choose Hillary Clinton

Cindy in Salt Lake — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 18:21:30 EDT

What's the latest reason superdelegates should choose Hillary Clinton? Opinion polls could favor her to win against McCain in the big electoral states in the fall. As we saw in Iowa, Clinton was favored to win but ended up in third place. Choosing a candidate based on opinion polls is very unreliable.

Today on Meet the Press, Gov. Ed Rendell was pushing this idea saying that, in June, superdelegates will have to look at which candidate is favored to win against McCain in the big electoral states. Senator Casey did a great job of keeping it positive and responding that he feels superdelegates will go with Obama who will more than likely be ahead in the popular vote, and most definitely ahead in the number of pledged delegates and states won.

Clinton's campaign is desperate to find reasons to convince pledged delegates and superdelegates to choose her over Obama. Let's just hope that those who are yet to vote will see through their faulty logic. Voters, not polls, should influence superdelegates’ candidate choice.

GOV. RENDELL: ...Bob says polls don't matter and to some extent he's right, but the superdelegates are going to look at the polls, who runs better against John McCain in the crucial electoral states. And if, in late June, Hillary Clinton is still running far more strongly against McCain in those states than Barack Obama, then I think the superdelegates have to, to look long and hard at making her the nominee.
MR. RUSSERT: But if, at the convention, there are more elected delegates for Obama and the popular--not counting Michigan and Florida, because it is contested--is Obama, and more state contests for Obama, what do you think? You've been in politics a long time. What would African-American delegates, young delegates, Obama delegates, do in Denver if the nomination went to Hillary Clinton after they had won more delegates, more states in the cumulative popular vote?
GOV. RENDELL: Well, again, it would depend on where the popular vote was, what percentage it was. It would depend on what the electoral college map looked like...
...
MR. RUSSERT: But this is risky. If Obama was denied the nomination, if he had more elected delegates, cumulative popular vote and contests won, what would happen in Denver and what would happen to the Democratic Party?
SEN. CASEY: Oh, I think it's, it's a real concern. But I don't think it's going to happen, Tim. Superdelegates, elected officials like me are not going to decide this. The people have been deciding it, and they will.
MR. RUSSERT: And so they--superdelegates will side with the candidate with the most elected delegates?
SEN. CASEY: I think they will.

Bill Bradley Raises Questions About More Clinton Skeletons

Chip Roberson in Sonoma, CA — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 00:29:09 EDT

I missed this on Wednesday's edition of the News Hour on PBS but Tim Russert replayed it on Sunday's edition of Meet the Press, which I think everyone should watch. It's a great show this week. However, the second great nugget coming out of this show (see my last post) is the comments by Bill Bradley -- someone for whom I think many, many people have very high regard. You can watch the video at:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/23547550#23547550

but I've included the relative segment below. It's good reading and it raises a great question that must all consider looking past the primaries.

Gov. Rendell admits: "Obama is qualified"

Chip Roberson in Sonoma, CA — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 00:10:20 EDT

Some times Tim Russert really comes through with a great one-two punch. On today's edition of Meet the Press, he raised the question of the Clinton/Obama ticket and then turned it on Governor Rendell. You can read the transcript at:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23546011/

or watch the video at:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/23547550#23547550

but I've included the relative segment below.

Why Barack Obama is like a hula hoop

Helen from Hampden, ME — Sun, 02 Mar 2008 11:39:57 EST

On this morning's Meet The Press on NBC (March 2, 2008) one of Tim Russert's Round table Commentators admitted that Barack Obama was popular. "But what if he's a fad?" mused the commentator.(I am paraphrasing. The show is not online yet to watch again and get the words exactly, but this is a close approximation.)The panelist went on, "What if he's like the HULA HOOP?"

Now, I knew what the commentator meant. He was trying to say that the popularity for Obama could be as short-lived as the fad for hula hoops that swept out of nowhere across the country in the 1950s and swept away just as suddenly leaving the hoop a nearly forgotten example of crazy mass obsession. BUT WAIT!

Hoops are incredibly popular among high school and college age young people right now. You can't go to the Burning Man Festival or any of the hundreds of other concerts and festivals held outside every year without seeing groups of hoopers undulating at the edge of the crowd. And the modern hoops are light-years away from the mass-produced toys made popular by the Wham-o company in the 1950s. Today's hoops are works of art, often individually made or decorated to reflect the tastes and personality of the owner. They can be covered with colorful tape in complex designs or they can hold water, sand, bells or water. They can sport ribbons, feather and fringe. They can even be lit on fire, hoops of spinning flame- combining elements of danger and beauty into a spectacular night-time dance.

Hoops did not spring into existence in the 1950s, nor did they cease to exist after the height of their popularity. Evidence of toy hoops has been found going back as far as 3000 B.C. in ancient Egypt. Hoops have been popular in cultures around the world ever since, but it wasn't until the 1700's that sailors returning from Hawaii applied the word "Hula" to hoops spun around the middle. The name caught on. In the early 1960s, after the supposed fad had died away, competitions began which continue, in one form or another right up to the present. World records for various aspects of hooping -spinning the highest number of hoops simultaneously, or running the longest distance while spinning hoops on the arms, and so-on- continue to be set into the 21st Century.

So lets take a second look at what that Meet the Press Round Table panelist actually said when he compared Senator Obama to the hula hoop: Barack Obama is like the hula hoop because he is a phenomenon arising out of long tradition, having roots on the African Continent with ties to Hawaii. They are both energetic and participatory, easy to watch but hard to imitate. They both appeal to young people, and they are both ...FUN! I do believe he's right! Looking at it in this way, I think Senator Obama's popularity is a lot like the popularity of hula hoop, and that critical commentator was right, for once, despite himself.

Nader is about to make his move.

EMK — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 16:34:18 EST

Here are the stories from CNN and MSNBC. He may be running this year if he announces on Tim Russert's Meet the Press.

EMK

Obama is only choice to win the White House

C Dornfeld — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 12:17:22 EST

Over the past several days there has been growing recognition by democrats that the best and possibly only chance to take back the White House is Obama.

As discussed on Meet the Press on Sunday, Obama's ability to draw young, minority and independent voters gives him a significant advantage over any other candidate. In direct contrast to this fact is Hillary's ability to divide the electorate and motivate the GOP anti-clinton base. The outbursts over the last month by Bill only emphasize this point.

The South Carolina results show just how much impactObama can have - his votes equaled that of all democratic voters in 2004! More data and results from South Carolina. Does anyone not think the democratic chances go way up if voter turnout is up 10, 20 or 30%?

A nice editorial in the NY Times also speaks to this point and the need to give Obama the Democratic nomination.

It is nice to see the democratic establishment (Kennedys) finally seeing the light and showing their support at this critical point in the campaign. Bravo!

Link to Sunday's (1/20) Meet The press, worth reading/watching

Obama for President — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 13:16:36 EST

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3898804/

Addresses good points about:

- How was Bill Clinton distorting facts about NV Union workers being forced to vote for Obama

- How is Hillary distorting what Obama said about Ronald Reagan's transfrmative ideas, something that Bill Clinton imself said in 2002 and Hillary was quoted in her book and other places praising Ronald Reagan - something the campaign can use to level the criticisam on these issues.

- Opening comment from John Meecham that what will unite Republicans in November - it will be Hillary if she became the nominee

Campaign needs to address some off these issues head on before SC as Clintons and Edward are trying to spin these comments for their benefit.

BTW, great victory in NV with delegates and coming in so close from 25 points behind.

Fired up.

Hillary will say anything. Anything.

Flame — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 14:15:36 EST

Friends, I'm still trying to pick my jaw up off the floor after listening to the affrontery Hillary Clinton managed to spin this past Sunday in her Meet the Press interview with Tim Russert. I encourage everyone to be their own judge, but to my ears, I am hearing the boldest of lies as she gives a brand new spin to her vote to authorize the use of force in Iraq. Strangely, this is receiving very little attention. If you missed the interview, Sen. Clinton is now claiming that she actually believed that she was voting to allow for the return of weapons inspectors to Iraq. Since the legislative proposal -THE Iraq war authorization- that she voted in favor of contained in it's title that it is clearly and unmistakably an "authorization for the use of force in Iraq", I am mystified as to why she would now (and only now) have us somehow believe that she didn't understand what it was she was voting to support. Moreover, her lie is not even logical. If she wanted to support the continuation of weapons inspections, wouldn't that be all the more reason for her to have opposed legislation that would actually "authorize use of military force"? You don't have to be an expert of any kind to know that weapons inspections could hardly be expected to continue in an environment where military force could, by her very approval, be expected to occur. Clearly, inspections could not occur in such an environment. So she is lying and doing so badly.

I encourage you to check out the original interview as well as this post on Huffington's site. Warning: your head may explode when you hear Hillary go on to spin her lie into an unwarranted and unfounded condemnation of Barack Obama. It's stunning.

Obama on "Meet the Press"

YesWeCan Carol — Mon, 31 Dec 2007 07:04:21 EST

December 30th interview with Tim Russert on Meet the Press:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video_log/2007/12/obama_on_meet_the_press.html

Any comments?

Barack on MTP Today

CarolJ — Sun, 30 Dec 2007 11:49:08 EST

Obama is on NBC's Meet the Press today. The first half of the show is devoted to an interview with Mike Huckabee that is quite interesting, and the second half of the show is the Russert interview of Barack. The Obama interview is worth watching if you have questions about his executive and foreign policy experience, the differences between his health care plan proposal and those of Hillary Clinton and John Edwards, or the basic reasons why Barack feels that he is the right candidate for America at this particular time. Click on the link above for more information about the interview and airtimes in your area.

Close race in Iowa as Obama goes on Meet the Press

Benjamin Vos, Nashville — Sun, 30 Dec 2007 11:37:19 EST

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/10005061#10005061

Let's discuss Obama's appearance this a.m. on Meet the Press. Obama appears at about 30 minutes into this program. Open discussion.

SUGGESTION FOR BARACK OF TOMORROWS DEBATE

'Wale — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 15:16:11 EST

Already Senator Clintons surrogates have come out to start attacking Barack for an answer he gave on "Meet The Press" last Sunday: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/11/14/466224.aspx

On Sunday, Tim "Timmeh" Russert never read the full answer Barack gave in a previous interview they had in 2004 at the Democratic Convention, but instead used an incomplete quote to try and stump Barack with his question. Barack inturn (through no fault of his) gave what might be a mis-construed answer.

I have a feeling that Hillary Clinton will try to bring this up in the debate tomorrow night and I want Barack to be ready for it. Personally I would put the entire answer he gave Tim Russert (back in 2004) on an mini-audiotape player and play it live when Hillary brings it up. This was his answer and I quote:

'But, I'm not privy to Senate intelligence reports,' Mr. Obama said. 'What would I have done? I don't know. What I know is that from my vantage point the case was not made.' But Mr. Obama said he did fault Democratic leaders for failing to ask enough tough questions of the Bush administration to force it to prove its case for war. 'What I don't think was appropriate was the degree to which Congress gave the president a pass on this,'

So as you can see, although Barack was obviously protecting John Kerry and Edwards as best he could, he still stressed that he felt the case for War had not been made, and still critisized congress for giving Bush a free pass by authorizing the war.

SOMEONE PLEASE PASS THIS ON TO BARACK!

Meet The Press

Clarise Mason — Sun, 11 Nov 2007 21:26:51 EST

Just a wonderful hour. A calm cool, collected statesman. Press so often by Tim Russert.

Barack just answers in a straightforward way and is absolutely unflappable.

Sit Up Straight!!

I'm not Political, I'm GRASSROOTS! — Sun, 11 Nov 2007 11:47:15 EST

Somebody needs to tell Barack he needs to NOT cock his head so much while being interviewed!! It looks like an invisible person is sitting on his shoulder.

Just an observation...it's very distracting.

Obama on Meet the Press!

Lucia - Team Coordinator for OBAMAWOOD — Sat, 10 Nov 2007 21:58:52 EST

5 PM central on MSNBC, Senator Obama will be interviewed!

Nov. 11, Sunday

Image: Sen. Barack Obama speaks on

This Sunday:
Exclusive!
Barack Obama

Our Meet the Candidates series continues as we celebrate the 60th anniversary of Meet the Press, Presidential contender Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) joins us exclusively for the full hour.

Obama on Meet the Press!

Lucia - Team Coordinator for OBAMAWOOD — Sat, 10 Nov 2007 21:58:04 EST

5 PM central on MSNBC, Senator Obama will be interviewed!

Nov. 11, Sunday

This Sunday:
Exclusive!
Barack Obama

Our Meet the Candidates series continues as we celebrate the 60th anniversary of Meet the Press, Presidential contender Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) joins us exclusively for the full hour.

Obama on Meet the Press!

Lucia - Team Coordinator for OBAMAWOOD — Sat, 10 Nov 2007 21:57:10 EST

Obama on Meet the Press!

Lucia - Team Coordinator for OBAMAWOOD — Sat, 10 Nov 2007 21:55:51 EST

5 PM central on MSNBC, Senator Obama will be interviewed! Nov. 11, Sunday Image: Sen. Barack Obama speaks on This Sunday: Exclusive! Barack Obama Our Meet the Candidates series continues as we celebrate the 60th anniversary of Meet the Press, Presidential contender Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) joins us exclusively for the full hour.

Obama on Meet the Press!

Lucia - Team Coordinator for OBAMAWOOD — Sat, 10 Nov 2007 21:53:42 EST

Obama on Meet the Press!

Lucia - Team Coordinator for OBAMAWOOD — Sat, 10 Nov 2007 21:52:33 EST

Obama on Meet the Press!

Lucia - Team Coordinator for OBAMAWOOD — Sat, 10 Nov 2007 21:49:09 EST

Obama on Meet the Press!

Lucia - Team Coordinator for OBAMAWOOD — Sat, 10 Nov 2007 21:46:53 EST

Obama on Meet the Press!

Lucia - Team Coordinator for OBAMAWOOD — Sat, 10 Nov 2007 21:43:19 EST

Obama on Meet the Press!

Lucia - Team Coordinator for OBAMAWOOD — Sat, 10 Nov 2007 21:42:18 EST

Obama on Meet the Press!

Lucia - Team Coordinator for OBAMAWOOD — Sat, 10 Nov 2007 21:40:47 EST

OBAMA MEETS THE PRESS

Mike — Fri, 09 Nov 2007 18:22:47 EST

Attention: This Sunday Obama will be on Meet the Press with Tim Russert. Tune in! I believe the Sunday morning shows will benefit our candidate and help further introduce him to the American people and primary voters. He should be reinforcing his judgment, ability to bring America together, and his electibility. Have a good weekend all...

NBC TV "Meet The Press" interviews Barack Obama Sunday morning November 11, 2007.

lionanimal — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 11:07:06 EST

NBC TV's Sunday monring show "Meet The Press" will have an interview of Senator Barack Obama on November 11, 2007. Check local TV listings for broadcast time in your local area. http://www.suntimes.com/news/sweet/638110,CST-NWS-sweet07.article

John Edwards Has Strong Performance on Meet The Press

Don — Sun, 07 Oct 2007 23:09:04 EDT

I was very impressed by John Edwards' performance on Meet The Press this morning (Oct. 7). He was very clear in his comments, refused to be distracted by side issues, and made a number of excellent points in a very effective way. I don't expect the cynical press will give him much credit, but he made a very valuable contribution to the dialogue we're having about this election. I feel even more strongly than before that, if John Edwards wins the nomination and is elected President in 2008, that would be a very positive thing for America.

Before you start telling me to go join the Edwards campaign, let me explain. First, I reserve the right to award points when they're earned. John Edwards earned a lot of points with me this morning, and I expect with many others as well. But he also earned a lot of points in the minds of a lot of Americans for many of the issues we care about most in support of Barack Obama's campaign. Don't be ashamed to accept help whenever it's offered. John Edwards did us a lot of good this morning.

We're supporting a candidate whose qualities compare very favorably with John Edwards, but who happens also to have been correct on the big issues right from the beginning. It's unfortunate that Edwards will always have to defend his error in 2002, but it underscores the importance of being ready to make the right choices before it's too late.

I recommend we congratulate John Edwards for his excellent interview on Meet The Press, and continue to wish him every success -- except for one -- as we go forward.

Meet The Press...were they serious?

Karon O. — Mon, 09 Jul 2007 00:15:51 EDT

I was just watching my Tivo'd edition of this morning's Meet The Press and they were discussing why they felt Barack Obama is raising so much money but still has 2nd place poll numbers. When I heard someone say that they felt that it seems to be a disappointment to people that Mr. Obama does NOT take the cheap shots at other politicians. My response was "What?!" I don't know about everybody else but I am soooo happy that the senator is above all that. If that were true, I'd feel even worse about where this country is headed. Before the last election, I grew much closer to my family and friends because I was so sick to death of the negative politics that we stopped watching television. Do we really want to watch politicians bashing each other...people saying hateful, hurtful things, and/or candidates focusing on how bad the other guy is and not what makes them the right person to vote for? I'm tired of that and that is another reason I am supporting Barack Obama...he IS a leader!