Political Punch
Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper
RECENT POSTS
- The Health Care Reform Price Tag
- President Obama: It's Getting Hot In Here
- President Obama Continues Questionable “You Can Keep Your Health Care” Promise
- Should They Have Called It The 'Stabilization' Act?
- Welcome to the Garden State, Mr. President
- Snowe Dampens President Obama’s Timeline on Health Care Reform
- Study: House Democrats’ Health Care Bill Pushes Top Tax Rates to Over 50% in Most States
- What's the Rush? Asks Moderate GOPer Snowe
- President Obama's Full Court Press on Health Care Reform
- Obama’s Global Reach via Movie Theaters, Bikes Messengers, Text and Mobile Networks
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Unanswered Question Watch, Day 14: Are McCain-Palin Endorsing Sen. Ted Stevens' Re-election?
September 23, 2008 10:10 AM
You may recall that, two weeks ago today, I asked the McCain-Palin campaign a very simple question.
To wit:
*
From: Jake Tapper
To: McCain-Palin Campaign
Tuesday, September 09, 2008 8:38 AM
Subject: Question
Are McCain/Palin endorsing Sen. Stevens' re-election?
*
A simple and fair question, right?
Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, is up for re-election this year. He's been indicted on corruption-related charges, and how McCain and Palin feel about whether the self-proclaimed King of Pork should return to the U.S. Senate would do a lot to say whether the two are reformers, or partisans, first.
The response from the McCain-Palin campaign was as simple as the question I'd asked:
*
From: McCain-Palin Campaign
To: Tapper, Jake
Sent: Tue Sep 09 09:02:41 2008
Subject: RE: Question
Will get back to you.
*
It has now been more than two weeks. I have re-sent the question several times. They do not want to answer the question.
Combine that with the facts that Sen. McCain, R-Ariz., has gone 41 days without taking questions from the press corps following him around, and that Gov. Palin, R-Alaska, has gone every one of the 25 days, since she was introduced to the nation as McCain's running mate, without holding a press conference.
It all adds up to a campaign that seems to think it should be handed over the keys to leadership of the Free World without having to answer straightforward, substantive, tough questions from the Fourth Estate.
That's called lack of accountability.
Which begs the question if a McCain-Palin administration would even hold press conferences.
- jpt
September 23, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (145)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
I reckon if they were asked the same kinds of questions as Obama they'd be a lot keener to do it.
Eg. "Senator McCain, do you think that the historic nature of your campaign will help heal the divisions in our nation?"
The press is too soft of Obama. Try digging up HIS skeletons and see if he's just as keen to talk to you. I doubt it. He can blacklist press he doesn't like and no one notices because he's still got so many reporters in his corner cheering.
How often is Obama interviewed on Fox?
Posted by: Rob P | Sep 24, 2008 4:54:40 AM
Jake, simple answer for you! IGNORE the McShrub/Stalin campaign. This should go for ALL networks.
They want to be treated according to the "fairness doctrine". Well guess what, if they don't answer questions, then simply STOP covering them! It's as easy as that. If they want "Equal" coverage....then DO YOUR JOBS and dig up crap they don't want you digging into. It is then and ONLY then that you will get the information that you seek out of them.
Posted by: Dave | Sep 24, 2008 1:58:24 AM
Simple really, McCaine/Pallin won't take questions because they know that they have no answers.
Posted by: Maxx1 | Sep 24, 2008 12:55:08 AM
The press has been SO fair to Gov. Palin and her family so far. For crying out loud, your network got the first interview with her. Is Charlie Gibson incompetent? Did he go easy on Gov. Palin? To me, it looked like he was a lot tougher on Gov. Palin than ANY reporter (save O'Reilly) has been questioning Sen. Obama in interviews. Seriously, do you honestly believe that the coverage of this campaign has been down the middle fair? Just asking...
Posted by: Stevereno | Sep 23, 2008 9:31:17 PM
What's the difference between Ahmadinejad and Palin?
Lipstick?
No.
Ahmadinejad speaks to reporters.
Posted by: maria | Sep 23, 2008 7:56:41 PM
Even if you support McCain, there's no good reason to support or defend the McCain-Palin disdain for our national press.
Remember that it was John McCain whopromised to hold weekly Q&A sessions with the press if he's elected.
That, we know for sure by now, was a bold lie.
Same is true for Palin's call for transparency in government.
Posted by: herta | Sep 23, 2008 7:14:39 PM
Reagan proved that deficits don't matter.
And now Bush has proven that the mainstream media doesn't matter.
Does anything matter anymore?
Posted by: cvcobb01 | Sep 23, 2008 6:55:39 PM
This Stevens is a crook from Alaska, taking bribes from oil companies. The key word is “Alaska” the state Palin is from. What are the people of Alaska thinking? This is the senator that was over the sub-committee in 05 when oil company CEO’s were called in about price gouging, he REFUSED to swear them in. Had they been swore in then anything they said un-truthful could come back to haunt them. Now indicted for taking kickbacks from an oil company and lying about it, who would have thought! We “The People” should have zero tolerance for corruption!
Posted by: rickyt1234 | Sep 23, 2008 6:47:05 PM
Jake is crushed that he isn't #1 on the candidates speed dial.
Posted by: notafool | Sep 23, 2008 6:40:31 PM
This Stevens is a crook from Alaska, taking bribes from oil companies. The key word is “Alaska” the state Palin is from. What are the people of Alaska thinking? This is the senator that was over the sub-committee in 05 when oil company CEO’s were called in about price gouging, he REFUSED to swear them in. Had they been swore in then anything they said un-truthful could come back to haunt them. Now indicted for taking kickbacks from an oil company and lying about it, who would have thought! We “The People” should have zero tolerance for corruption!
Posted by: rickyt1234 | Sep 23, 2008 6:38:41 PM
They just want you to want it. They are taking access away so people go after it. It is reverse psychology. And further proof that they prefer trivial games to dealing with issues that concern voters.
Posted by: MARTY | Sep 23, 2008 5:08:14 PM
Could you ask Obama these questions:
- What was your final GPA at
Occidental College (attended 2 years), Columbia University (attended 2 years), Harvard Law School (attended 3 years).
(The average GPA of someone being accepted into Harvard is 3.9 and LSAT score of 176.)
Obama was 5 years out of college when he went to Harvard Law School. Only about 8% of those acccepted into Harvard are 5 or more years out of college
- Did you receive any special treatment in getting accepted into Harvard? Such as affirmative action plans, insider help, political connections or other influences.
- Did any one in Chicago help to get you accepted into Harvard?
- At the time did you apply to any other law schools other than Harvard? Were you accepted at those schools?
- Harvard is very expensive. Yet just before starting Harvard in 1988 you went on a 3-week trip to Europe and a 5-week trip to Kenya. How could you afford all those traveling expenses, plus pay the Harvard tuition and living costs on the salary of a Chicago community organizer?
-Did you receive any scholarships or funding of any kind to pay for your tuition and expenses at Harvard? What were they, how much and who provided the money?
- Did you every meet or have acquaintance with Bill Ayers and/or people associated with Bill Ayers from 1985 to 1988?
Posted by: Zank | Sep 23, 2008 3:44:34 PM
"It all adds up to a campaign that seems to think it should be handed over the keys to leadership of the Free World without having to answer straight-forward, substantive, tough questions from the Fourth Estate."
No, it all add us to a Fourth Estate that thinks it should annoint our next President without having the voters make the choice.
Posted by: geevill | Sep 23, 2008 3:07:38 PM
The question is broader than whether McCain/Palin support Senator Stevens. It should include if their commitment to overturn the status quo and clean up DC includes supporting the defeat of the McConnell, Kyl,Boehner et al congressional leadership team. How can you reform Washington if you support the current leaders who have failed to "put the country first"?
Posted by: DjK | Sep 23, 2008 2:48:33 PM
Obama has no character witnesses outside of Michelle, Ayers, Emil Jones, Wright, Pfleger and Axelrod.
Posted by: geevill | Sep 23, 2008 2:27:25 PM
OBAMA HAS RELEASED HIS MEDICAL RECORDS, IT WAS ONE PARAGRAPH, THAT SAID: HE IS IN PERFECT HEALTH, IF NOT A LITTLE TOO THIN.
YOU DON'T CARE, WHY WON'T MCLAME RELEASE HIS 1,100 PAGE MEDICAL REPORT. APPARENTLY HIS MELANOMA IS B A C K!
Posted by: Andrea D | Sep 23, 2008 2:12:30 PM
Obviously they can't answer questions, because if they do, they will lose. But what the hell--they're going to lose anyway, so why not give it a shot?
Posted by: Mark F | Sep 23, 2008 1:50:51 PM
"Palin was well known to McCain supporters and regular folks who vetted her and pushed for her selection"
McCain met her once in person and they had 1 phone call. The vetting team went to Alaska a day before she was announced.
The roll out of Palin has included lie after stupid lie about her record.
BTW when did high powered DC lawyers and lobbyists become "regular folks"?
Posted by: Ryan C | Sep 23, 2008 1:43:16 PM
Keep asking! It is entirely relevant. You can't campaign on a platform of reform if you support one of the good old boys who you claim you will take on. Ted Stevens is hugely popular and powerful in Alaska. Palin knows she needs his support, whichever side of the deal he comes out on. I'm sure she'll save the reforming zeal for those in Washington who are not as politically helpful to her.
Posted by: Laura | Sep 23, 2008 1:32:08 PM
Obamabots,
How about doing your own research for a change? Do you rely on Obama and the media to tell you what to think?
Palin was well known to McCain supporters and regular folks who vetted her and pushed for her selection.
Posted by: geevill | Sep 23, 2008 1:29:49 PM
Post a comment

