Video: Liberals hammer Katie for “interrogat[ing]” the Edwardses
posted at 6:00 pm on March 26, 2007 by Ian
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Below is a compilation of the so-called “grilling” Katie Couric gave to John and Elizabeth Edwards:
Liberal bloggers have turned on Katie, in fact some are comparing her to Rush Limbaugh! The blog Faithful Progressive called Katie “souless” for daring to question the Edwardses in an interview on 60 Minutes, a television newsmagazine known for grilling its guests. David Sirota at Working for a Change called the interview an “interrogat[ion].” (Aside: If this is an interrogation, it explains quite a bit about the liberals’ ever-shifting definition of “torture.”) Taylor Mash complained the Edwardses weren’t asked about anything but Elizabeth’s cancer.
Show some sympathy, Katie!
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
bad liberal bad!
Defector01 on March 26, 2007 at 6:08 PM
Katie, welcome to the dark side.
Rick on March 26, 2007 at 6:10 PM
Does anybody like her at this point? Bueller? Bueller……?
bbz123 on March 26, 2007 at 6:10 PM
Fake controversy. MSM blah blah blah to create endless permutations to talk about NOTHING. Now, we get to hear them using up broadcast time pretending to castigate Katie, but Katie needs better ratings, so instead of real news and real analysis about current event sin the world, she and CBS engineer nothing news, just gossip. This is gossip about gossip. Katie thinks a “drama” will translate into ratings improvements. Yawn. Yo, CBS! Not watching!
naliaka on March 26, 2007 at 6:16 PM
Who are these “others” and “some people” that she kept referring to in the interview?
Rick on March 26, 2007 at 6:20 PM
this is like how the portland tribune refused to publisize the effigy burning which they captured on video and in photographs, but later released a statement saying that they didn’t want the images to get out because it would make the antiwar movement look bad only after the story broke on the internet.
under that statement, are dozens of lefty commenters calling them rightwing shills because they copped to having witnessed it at all.
jummy on March 26, 2007 at 6:23 PM
Wow!, that was harsh. She should have tossed him at least one softball like…
“So Senator, which accomplishment -the millions you made suing OB/GYN’s, or the one term you served in the Senate- actually prepares you to be the leader of the most powerful nation on Earth?”
billy on March 26, 2007 at 6:26 PM
I actually saw this on Sunday, god help me, and attributed the interrogation to the fact that the media want the Magic Negro to win. They’ll throw Silky and anyone else under the bus if it helps Barry win the nomination.
jaleach on March 26, 2007 at 6:27 PM
And the libs wonder why they’re refered to as wimps.
- The Cat
MirCat on March 26, 2007 at 6:30 PM
Katie compared to Rush Limbaugh?
That would be tantamount to comparing Carmen Diaz to Marilyn vos Savant, or comparing a ten year old Tae Kwon Do student to Bruce Lee.
William
William2006 on March 26, 2007 at 6:46 PM
Is this Edwards guy the gay lawyer from Nawrth Carlina with the huge house?
The one that speaks to dead people?
benrand on March 26, 2007 at 6:52 PM
I actually watched this in its entirety. I went to CBS.com to watch the video of the British ex-terrorist talking about why he left the jihad, and the Edwards interview started automatically when the other video was done.
Anyway, while I wouldn’t characterize it as an “interrogation” or a “grilling,” I do have to say that Katie was uncharacteristically persistent in her questions to the Edwards about how John could possibly be effective on the campaign trail or in the Oval Office with Elizabeth essentially dying. She also pushed them hard about not spending enough time with their young kids when they might lose their mother at any time. She was pretty blunt for Katie.
Bottom line: I think Elizabeth is a better politician than John is. I’m totally serious. I’ve never seen a death sentence spun so positively in my life.
aero on March 26, 2007 at 6:58 PM
Hehe, well it is pretty clear that her love affair with the Clintons was causing her to come off as really condescending to Edwards IMO.
I hope the liberals get mad enough at her that she loses what little audience she has and fades away into obscurity.
Benaiah on March 26, 2007 at 7:00 PM
So when did she join the Gestapo? What a waterboarding! I’m offended!
stonemeister on March 26, 2007 at 7:09 PM
Actually, if Katie would do more of this and do it consistently, with everyone she interviews, I would have to re-evaluate my opinion of her and might actually have to give her credit as an actual journalist. She brought up all the questions and challenges that real people want to know about concerning John Edwards’ candidacy and how Elizabeth’s illness figures into that. The guy’s running for the most important job in the world, after all. He should expect hard questions and be able to answer them to voters’ satisfaction. To his and Elizabeth’s credit, I actually think they answered most of the questions quite well. I still wouldn’t vote for him if I were a Dem, but he wouldn’t have lost any points.
aero on March 26, 2007 at 7:10 PM
I don’t see this as anything but asking the pertinent questions — something that seems to be missing in the MSM. Instead of asking him an open question and letting him stump, she directly questioned him about how he can expect to lead the country with a huge distraction going on in his family life.
If she had been asking for details about how they found out or more about the likelihood of treatment success, that would be gossip. In my opinion, the questions about why he would choose job over family and the distraction topics are the most current and relevant questions I have about him as a potential future leader.
Sure, there are other political questions to ask… but those come in time. With his announcement about his wife’s health, he opened the door to exactly these types of questions. I’m just surprised Couric, who has been tagged pretty liberal, was the one to go through that door.
Ferris on March 26, 2007 at 7:11 PM
I thought it was a fair interview, not overly larded with softballs.
Couric did lose her husband, Jay Monahan, to cancer some years ago, so she has some familiarity with the subject at hand.
For people to whine about this shows they just can’t handle anything resembling a tough question to a Democrat.
JammieWearingFool on March 26, 2007 at 7:27 PM
This outrage coming from the same people who wished death on Laura Bush and Dick Cheney?
PUHLEEZE!
SouthernGent on March 26, 2007 at 7:50 PM
Give that man a see-gar!
nukemhill on March 26, 2007 at 7:52 PM
I’d love to see Katie sign off with…
“… and that’s all I have to say ’bout that…”
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on March 26, 2007 at 7:57 PM
I don’t remember Katie staying home when her husband was so very ill!
NEMETI IN SYRACUSE on March 26, 2007 at 8:18 PM
The White Armies attack the Bolsheviks. And so it begins….
ronsfi on March 26, 2007 at 8:44 PM
Lets be honest here. No matter who the interviewer would have been, any attempt to ask a true hard hitting question ( as KC surprisingly did ) is the same as being a right wing nutcase smear merchant that is part of the vast right wing conspiracy. They are delusional, self serving and show more hypocrisy by their behavior every day. Look at their leader…the Goreacle!
They are just doing as they are shown….
lsutiger on March 26, 2007 at 8:51 PM
John Edwards thought they were tough but fair.
http://johnedwards.com/news/headlines/20070326-couric/
Ripclawe on March 26, 2007 at 8:51 PM
Honestly, I think Katie was pretty ridiculous in the interview… but for the libs to think she’s part of the vast right-wing conspiracy is just ridiculous.
I hesitate to use the word “grilling”, because that would imply a tough interview, with tough questions on things that matter. What she did was just repeatedly say “some might say” and obsess over how they are handling Mrs. Edwards’ health issues, which was stupid and pointless.
There are a number of reasons this could have happened. 1. Katie is a failure at CBS, and getting crappier ratings all the time. She needed to “toughen up” her image as a real hard news reporter, because clearly America hasn’t been buying it, but she chose to do it over something stupid. 2. She’s shilling for Hillary. 3. The whole thing was basically scripted to elicit the reaction it got from the media and particularly Democrats. It stirred up the nutroots to go full force for Edwards, etc. etc. Edwards comes out as a “victim” of outrageous grilling over personal issues, and passes the test with flying colors.
My opinion? It’s a combo of 1 and 3. She needs to try to do the tough reporter thing (but no one is buying it), but I think it’s likely that the questions, while probably not submitted by the Edwards campaign, were reviewed by campaign staff before the interview went forward. And this isn’t conspiracy thinking, campaigns and politicians attempt to get a list of questions from interviewers ahead of time regularly. In fact O’Reilly has lost big interviews because certain potential guests refused to appear without getting the questions in advance.
RightWinged on March 26, 2007 at 9:50 PM
btw, I love this comment at HuffPo
RightWinged on March 26, 2007 at 9:51 PM
That was a lot of ’some say’, though..
Reaps on March 26, 2007 at 9:52 PM
Dear Katie,
I so much enjoyed your hard-hitting interview with Democrat presidential candidate John Edwards, and his wife, with her horrible disfigurement.
So, I assume, in your patented “Fair and Balanced” way, you’ll be interviewing Rush Limbaugh, who forges ahead in the face of unprecedented pain, anguish, and humiliation, with cysts on his ass.
I look forward to this, with much anticipation.
Your devoted fan,
Frank
franksalterego on March 26, 2007 at 10:06 PM
Wow. At least she asked the right questions, possibly because she was there before with her own husband.
But when John was asked about his two youngest children, still in the nest at ages 6 and 8, he said they’ll ‘need to learn to fly’. The way he said it was telling, to say the least.
If John hadn’t wanted this kind of scrutiny, he shouldn’t have called a press conference to publicize the matter.
petefrt on March 26, 2007 at 10:44 PM
I agree. That was an extremely off-putting answer to this devoted mom. They’re six and eight years old, for Heaven’s sake! They shouldn’t have to “learn to fly” yet! I interpreted this statement by Edwards as, “They’re on their own. I’m too important to coddle them, and they’re gonna have to deal with the fact that their mom’s gonna die. No room for snot-nosed brats in the Oval Office, baby!”
aero on March 26, 2007 at 11:10 PM
That’s the way I heard it too, aero. Exactly.
petefrt on March 26, 2007 at 11:22 PM
I did think she was weaselly with the “Some might think” jazz, and I think just one or two questions about the situation would have been enough. Hardly an interrogation or hit piece, though.
She does creep me out a bit. I think it was Gloria Steinem who once said Playboy Bunnies had fixed, glittering, maniacal smiles. Katie Couric to a T.
JimC on March 26, 2007 at 11:56 PM
Hah!
Couric being attacked by liberals over the Edwards’ interview.
Couldn’t happen to a nicer leftist shill.
georgej on March 27, 2007 at 3:37 AM
HER HAIR has finally become its own entity. With its own zip code.
Bbblllllleeeeeeeeeeeeeeccccch…
seejanemom on March 27, 2007 at 9:23 AM
“John! If Elizabeth don’t respond to whatever treatment they are recommending, how long will it be before we can date? In public I mean!”
Dread Pirate Roberts VI on March 27, 2007 at 9:57 AM
Yeah, but she looked a couple of times like she was tearing up…so it’s all okay. I CANNOT STAND HER!
Glynn on March 27, 2007 at 12:18 PM
Comment pages: