newsobserver.com projects - Katie Couric - Comments

Re: The debate is on?

markjohnson — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 21:45:44 -0400

Comment used as advertising for a retail outlet deleted. MJ

Re: Thirty seconds of "60 Minutes"

FFC1304 — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 12:18:01 -0500

march 25, 2007 .... huh? my how things have changed.

Re: What Edwards said in 2007

dahedgehog — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 10:28:56 -0400

Now would seem like a good time to point out to your readers that we have two candidates for president: one who is an adulterer (McCain), and one who is not (Obama).

The definition of "fair play" is.....

domewatcher — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 10:06:19 -0400

"Fair play" is like beauty……it is in the eye of the beholder.

And the News and Observer…… being the bastion of information in the Carolinas…….being a beacon of light on a stormy sea…………being the bulwark of freedom of speech in the Southeastern United States……being the great hope of Carolinians……………well, they had a responsibility to report on our favorite son, our former Senator, our former Vice Presidential candidate, our former Presidential candidate.

And the News and Observer stepped up to the plate. They reported the story through the hail of arrows of panged indifference, or something. The News and Observer showed why they are the pride of the southeast.

The N & O:
“They may never win another race but they will always be my nag,
They may never print another newspaper but they will always be my rag.”

It is news. Pretty big news coming just before the convention. The story will probably stop dead in it’s tracks when we can all agree on what the definition of “fair play” is…….....

Re: Edwards: Personal life relevant

dahedgehog — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 09:26:11 -0400

RTB, I've got a news flash for you: John Edwards is no longer a candidate for president. "But, I think every single candidate for president, Republican and Democratic have lives, personal lives, that indicate something about what kind of human being they are."

Call me when you find a quote saying that the personal lives of private citizens are fair play. Then, I want you to begin reporting on other private citizens with the same zest and zeal that you have displayed when reporting on the life of private citizen John Edwards.

Edwards' personal life IRRELEVANT

Isaac136 — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 17:12:14 -0400

It was relevant when he was a candidate. It would be relevant if he occupied a political position. He isn't. He doesn't. Next?

Re: The debate is on?

tayiestv — Sat, 26 Apr 2008 07:57:22 -0400

America has enough from the useless and non productive empty talks. Debate can be very informative, engaging and invigorating when it focused on issues that directly will effect the American people. I don't care what Barak Obama had for breakfast or what his breacher had preached. But I do care if he is trust wordy therefor I ask can we trust the next president? which one of the three candidates you think is trust wordy?

Tayie Rehem
http://www.soultv.net

Re: The debate is on?

rojo7449 — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 19:29:23 -0400

Delightful. Obama scheduling was intended to mess with PA, but also to put enough distance between the NC Debate and the NC Primary. He wanted the additional time to undo the damage she would do to his lead because she's so much more effective debating. He won't get away with anymore of his "what she said" responses with the tact this campaign has taken of late.

His politics isn't only as bad as politics have ever been, he's taken it to a new LOW.

Re: The debate is on?

captsfufp — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 08:12:15 -0400

I'm not saying this is the reason, but, from my perspective, the appearance from the Obama campaign is that the point of having their first proposed debate was to take Sen. Clinton out of Penn. before the April 22 primary, to ensure she doesn't further increase her lead in that huge state, especially in regards to her popular vote.

Now that a post-April 22 debate has been proposed, suddenly the Obama campaign has schedule problems. That's politics, and that's strategy. And that's fine. But no more of this "new kind of politics" and "we can win anywhere" message, since both are obviously not true.

Re: The debate is on?

FFC1304 — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 06:47:41 -0400

Hmmm, I guess NC is not as 'important' in this election as they led us to believe. I'd appreciate both of them just staying the hell out of our already democrat corrupted state. STRIVE to be SMARTER than a democrat.

Re: The debate is on?

SamuelWait — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 21:28:27 -0400

Why won't he agree to debate? Come on. We deserve to have them debate in NC!

Re: The debate is on

natdug — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 17:36:22 -0400

Where does one go for tickets?

Also, why is there no local media representative among the moderators?

Re: N.C. debate sounding debatable

FFC1304 — Sun, 16 Mar 2008 08:06:22 -0400

nah, just enlightened and smarter than a democrat, thats all...Oh yeah, and I take blood thinner, so bursting blood vessel liability is greatly reduced. thanks for your concern, are you a government employee?

Re: N.C. debate sounding debatable

Isaac136 — Sat, 15 Mar 2008 17:45:04 -0400

FCC, I don't mean this in a terrible way, but sometimes I think you're just bonkers. And, as I've pointed out before, I'm concerned that you're going to bust a blood vessel at your keyboard.

Take it easy now.

yer friend
Isaac

Re: N.C. debate sounding debatable

captsfufp — Sat, 15 Mar 2008 13:41:05 -0400

It certainly seems that having the debate scheduled before the Penn. primary shows that Sen. Obama has effectively conceded Penn., a state that is a MUST WIN for a Democrat in the general election, and is hoping to use NC as a counter-balance to Sen. Clinton winning Penn. He can also spin that Sen. Clinton doesn't "care" about NC by forcing her to not agree to such an early debate date.

It's certainly valid campaign strategy, but it's a short-term strategy that does not consider the longer view of the general election. There's no reason a NC debate can't be scheduled a day or two after the Penn. primary. It would be fair to everyone.