Stephanopoulos defends his questions to Obama

Amid a storm of criticism that Wednesday’s Democratic presidential debate focused too heavily on “gotcha” questions and not enough on substance, ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos defended his decision to ask Illinois Sen. Barack Obama about his relationship with former political radical William Ayers. Stephanopoulos denied he’d been spoon-fed the question by Fox News host Sean Hannity.

“We have been researching this for a while,” Stephanopoulos said in a phone interview from New York. ABC News political correspondent Jake Tapper, he said, had blogged about the issue April 10, after it was first reported by Politico, the political news website. “Part of what we discovered is that Sen. Obama had never been asked directly about it, even though it’s being written about and talked about and Republicans are signaling that this is gonna be an issue in the general election.”

(A spokesman for Obama did not immediately respond to a request for a comment.)

On Tuesday, as a guest on Hannity’s radio program, Stephanopoulos said, “Well, I’m taking notes now, Sean” when Hannity suggested he raise the topic of Ayers with Obama.

In Wednesday’s prime-time debate, co-moderated with Charles Gibson, Stephanopoulos asked Obama: “…On this issue, general theme of patriotism, in your relationships. A gentleman named William Ayers. He was part of the Weather Underground in the 1970s. They bombed the Pentagon, the Capitol, and other buildings. He's never apologized for that…. An early organizing meeting for your state Senate campaign was held at his house, and your campaign has said you are ‘friendly.’ Can you explain that relationship for the voters and explain to Democrats why it won't be a problem?”

Obama replied, “This is a guy who lives in my neighborhood, who's a professor of English in Chicago who I know and who I have not received some official endorsement from. He's not somebody who I exchange ideas from on a regular basis. And the notion that somehow as a consequence of me knowing somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago, when I was 8 years old, somehow reflects on me and my values doesn't make much sense, George.”

Progressives pounced. “The real story of this debate,” said MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann, may be “where one of the moderators found his questions.”

Stephanopoulos dismissed the idea that he was doing Hannity’s bidding.

“The questions we asked were tough and fair and appropriate and relevant and what you would expect to be asked in a presidential debate at this point,” he said. “The questions we asked…are being debated around the political world every day.”

By this morning, more than 14,000 viewer comments had been posted on the ABC News website, the overwhelming majority critical of the debate moderators, who spent most of the first hour on what Stephanopoulous called “electability questions.”

“The way we thought about it was, it made sense to hit the electability questions first, then move on,” he said. “I can see where reasonable people would differ with that.”

The debate, broadcast in prime time, was the 21st and probably final matchup between the two Democratic contenders, Obama and New York Sen. Hillary Clinton. It was, according to ABC News spokesman Jeffrey Schneider, the most watched debate of this campaign cycle, with 10.7 million viewers. The previous record, also held by ABC News, was 9.3 million viewers of the Jan. 5 debate between Democrats in New Hampshire.

As the critical Pennsylvania primary looms on Tuesday, both candidates have been dogged by controversies unrelated to the issues that voters say are topmost on their minds.

Clinton apologized for making up a story that she was under sniper fire on a tarmac while visiting Bosnia in 1996. Obama said he had “mangled up” what he meant to say after implying to supporters at a San Francisco fundraiser that some blue-collar voters are “bitter” and as a result “cling” to religion and guns.

Updated with more after the jump...    

Stephanopoulos asked Obama about his former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, whose impassioned denunciations of the American government were widely disseminated on the Web last month.

“But do you believe he’s as patriotic as you are?” Stephanopoulos asked.

Obama replied, “This is somebody who's a former Marine. So, I believe that he loves this country. But I also believe that he’s somebody who, because of the experiences he’s had over the course of a lifetime, is also angry about the injustices he’s had.”

Stephanopoulos, who was a senior advisor to Bill Clinton in his first term, also pressed Clinton about her character, telling her that an ABC News poll found that “six in 10 voters that we talk to say they don’t believe you’re honest and trustworthy.”

Washington Post television critic Tom Shales accused Stephanopoulos and Gibson of turning in “shoddy, despicable performances.” They dwelled, he added, “entirely on specious and gossipy trivia that has already been hashed and rehashed, in the hope of getting the candidates to claw at one another over disputes that are no longer news.”

However, New York Times political columnist David Brooks blogged his approval. “I understand the complaints,” he wrote, “but I thought the questions were excellent. The journalist’s job is to make politicians uncomfortable, to explore evasions, contradictions and vulnerabilities. Almost every question tonight did that.”

An outtake from the end of the debate, which appeared instantly on the Huffington Post, showed Gibson being heckled by audience members as he introduced a final commercial break. “The crowd is turning on me,” he said with a thin smile.

Some who watched thought the anger stemmed from the caliber of the debate. But Schneider, the ABC News spokesman, was in the hall and said he believed some in the audience were angry that they had to sit through yet more commercials before being allowed to leave the venue.

“I have no doubt other people may wish to spin that,” he said. 

-- Robin Abcarian

Photo: ABC News moderators George Stephanopoulos, right, and Charles Gibson, left, are seen before the start of the Democratic Party debate at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia on Wednesday. (AP Photo/Matt Rourke)

Comments

[Ben]

Let's face it. Anytime that something negative or important about Obama comes up, the Obama supporters to rush to 'kill the messenger.' They do not like Obama being questioned too deeply or attacked in any way. Sorry, folks, but it is only going to get more so, and if you are an Obama supporter, you will be experiencing an angry summer. This is a race for president of the United States not a race for best actor at the Oscars, and tough questions need to be asked and answered of anyone who seeks to lead this country. If Obama is the right guy, he can withstand this questioning.

[graniteman]

Congratulations to ABC News! At long last, one of the mainstream media outlets has been willing to ask Senator Obama some tough questions instead of spray painting him with Teflon. I am so tired of hearing his empty mantra about "change, hope and unity." In fact, the very junior senator from Illinois has an ultra-liberal voting record that will be exposed by the Republicans during the fall campaign. If Democratic Partyactivists insist on his nomination, Senator McCain will seize the center of the political spectrum and, once again, the Democrats will let an election slip through their fingers.

[John]

Why do liberals complain when their candidates are asked real questions? We all know the policies of both candidates, raise taxes and lose the war. Obama should explain why he is friends with a terrorist, just like Clinton should explain her ties to Communists. Your candidate is not entitled to a free pass, no matter how liberal he or she is. Stop trying to hide the truth from the American people.

[peg]

Such a waste of time by the so called American Media! I guess Gibson has been taking journalism classes from Limbaugh. Shame, shame on ABC for wasting millions of hours of American time. Gibson should be fired. That is why American people have become so cynical. AB's behavior is unpatriotic.

[Bill Rush]

This should be the end of media debates. All debates in future presidential campaigns should be held at universities with professors and other instructors as moderators.

[Nick]

ABC needs to change their title to abc. They had a great opportunity last night to focus on real issues (um, $4 gas, health-care, recession....anyone ?) Instead, they chose to focus on "gotcha" questions. Small-minded and petty, drama instead of education. So, as punishment, change the label to abc -- and send those 2 back to Journalism 101.

Nick

[Bot]

Barack's judgment and patriotism are in question. Why did he remain with Jeremiah Wright for 20 years, and use Bill Ayers' home to launch his campaign. Would any sane person us the home of an anarchist who bombed the Pentagon, Capital and NY Police Headquarters to launch his campaign?

[rose]

Who is the RADICAL Hard Left Liberal? That is the label that pins the tail on the Donkey. It won't be hard for Republican's to make that claim STICK.

Will that win our presidency?

Not likely anytime soon. And for good reason it is slanted toward one side of the fence.

When we talk about change as a gray area then it is ambiguous. No one knows what that means so it is easy to say yes. Once it begins to take shape and form as taxes, sharp cuts or painful realizations then a different kind of reality fills that gray space. That is when disappointment sets in.

Change is overrated. Anyone who says we need a lot or sweeping changes is obviously one of the media beneficiaries of all the obama campaign FLUSH money.

Look at the man behind the curtain. Where is all the new money really coming from? Just some odd Internet artifact or is there something – someone driving cash into the trough?

I’ve never seen money cluster in this size and shape without an artificial stimulant. In the dotcom boom no one wanted to see that the lines of cash did not connect with any substance or reality. When it came crashing down then the disappointments of that LACK set in.

A smart leader can make small corrections to the big machine that will have a net positive benefit. They don't need to throw out everything and make wild claims that never really pan out.

We are still the worlds greatest super power. If people insist on BIG CHANGE then the radical change they employ will alter that forever.

At least Hilary can’t get caught with her pants down while someone is giving her something. But ALL men do at some point in time or another when they are idolized by hordes of groupies.

No insult to Cindy but she certainly looks like a trophy wife. Not someone who would know how women work to support their families come hell or high water... Only one candidate knows how to work that kind of magic, Hilary.

Obama's wife recently claimed that “we don't know her” yeah, and so when we do what will we know? This is not a secure image of our first lady.

How will Obama's wife shake out against Cindy?

Hilary is such an easy target. It is absurd for obama to say that his attacking a female opponent is going to be the same as coming up against the Republican's.

Republican’s like the idea of torture, they stay up for it. It is part of their recreational activities. Obama has no substance, grit or wisdom. He is untested and un-vetted. He really is a question mark.

He only has superlative qualities to his adoring fan base. Do we really want a rock star for president? He doesn't even play an instrument.

[Andrew]

George S. said: “The way we thought about it was, it made sense to hit the electability questions first, then move on,” he said. “I can see where reasonable people would differ with that.”

Everybody watching the debate was a reasonable person. Some reasonable people didn't even watch the debate. In fact, I'll just go out on a limb and assume, like Obama does, that we are ALL reasonable people.

I am so sick and tired of our politicians and media pundits thinking that we, the general public, is not able to comprehend the issues. We can and we do. We don't care about Clinton's "sniper fire", we don't care about Mr Ayers or Obama's reverend, we don't care about "bitter" voters. We want a President that understands the issues, understands the impact of their choices, makes the right choices, and is willing to stand by the choices they make.

Questions should get at those issues so us voters can make the most informed decision when the time comes, not at who hangs out with who. Stephanopoulos must think we are all still in High School. Electability issues?? I think he means popularity issues.

[sunny florida]

What on earth is all this "indignant" reaction to ABC's debate about? Please people, we are talking about looking at hiring someone (and it is that) to do the toughest job in the world and we are afraid to ask the really tough questions that linger in the minds of many, many people? I can read about the plans of both people on their websites, ad nauseum, and I can read the opinions of those plans or things less tangible about the candidates in columns, but I want to see how these people can handle the really tough, revealing questions that show a person's character, on pointe, without a speech or teleprompter. This was a very tough, stark (no applause - love that!) debate that pushed issues we have with both candidates and those that will certainly be pushed by the Republicans. This is not a job for the faint of heart, or light of spirit, otherwise we all would be applying.

I sat thru the entire debate and tried very hard to keep an open mind. Afterall, one of these two people could be the next President. The only problem I had with the moderators was not nailing the candidates on a direct answer to a specific question, or even an indirect answer would have been nice. All in all, I think Hillary won this one. She seemed to maintain her composure (a good thing when times are tough as a President) and answer most of the questions, more so than Obama. She did loft a few bombs his way and one can argue it was personal, but I thought maybe there's another reason: maybe she really knows that if he is the nominee, that the Republicans will make mincemeat of him with his questionable ties to Rezko, Ayers, Wright, and his revealing comments behind closed doors when cameras aren't rolling and teleprompter is off. If the Republicans can destroy the character of two very good, credible men (Gore, Kerry) without much to work with, what on earth will they do to this guy? Afterall, isn't it MOST important that we elect anyone except a Republican who still thinks Sunni's and Shiites are reversed and thinks GWB's policies are "OK"?!

[Jeff Elijah]

For all those offended and disgusted by ABC''s fiasco last night, you can take constructive action by boycotting Walt Disney World, Disneyland and all things Disney. The Disney company owns ABC.

[Sharon]

ABC can explain all they want. It was shameful. They should have steered clear of this just because George is connected with the Clintons. They set themselves up, they made the bad choices and now they have to take the heat. Let's hope it is a lot of heat. Disney should be ashamed of themselves. They rank right up there with the George W. The worse in the history of the country.

[Fred]

I thought the debate was good, everybody is Barack as if he is untouchable, if he is to be our nominee he needs to be tested. Policy wise we should know by now where they stand, this was their 20th debate come on folks. People don't want to criticized Mr. O before someone acusses them of being racist, come during the real election it will be fair game. Also yesterday USA today carried a story about Mr. O lying about his lobbyist connection, why it wasn't brought up that would have been a fair question especially when Mr. O is boasting that he is not tie to any lobbyist.

[John]

ABC News is clearly a republican shill. What hacks. Wonder who their horse is in this race.

[rabbit]

It really doesn't matter who asks "the question" when it comes to tabloid media .. .why are Americans so obsessed with wedge issues and not more concerned about the future of America? I am not voting for the person that John, Hillary or Obama knows . .I am gonna vote on the issues . ..When I hear people talk about "guilt by association" It makes me realize how stupid people really are . .Yes I said stupid because if all you care about are issues like this . .Then America is destined to have another president who knows that he can just throw out wedge issues and do as he pleases.

[Tee]

The truth is none of the news media or goverment officals care about what is happening in the real world. They have no trouble purchasing gas, or sending their children to private schools. They don't have children in the service. These people on most of the news shows are getting paid a great deal of money and could care less about the middle class hard working people. Obama is trying to stay focused on the issues. PEOPLE are losing there jobs and homes. He is the only one that seems interested. Hillary is only interested in power.

[MarkD]

George Stephanopolous should have recused himself as a moderator due to his ties with the Clinton administration and ABC should be ashamed for treating the audience to a tabloid debate. It sure would have been more helpful to hear what a Clinton or Obama presidency would be like. You've become a spin-off of a SNL bit.

[Ron]

Was last night's debate supposed to be a joke or did it just turn out that way because of the incompetent moderators ? Charlie Gibson and George ( can't enough of those good years that I worked for the Clintons ) Stephanoupolis. How can McCain possibly lose this election. He has such a commanding grasp of economical issues . His way to fix the problem of soaring gas prices is " Let's give the people a tax holiday." I am afraid that it is John McCain who needs a holiday

[BAM!]

you know you've hit rock bottom in debate questions when a moderator asks "who loves the country more?"

ABC and George Stephanopoulos (thankfully not the public) showed their third grade understanding of the issues last night.

[Matt of NYC]

Wow. The outrage from the Obama people is insane. He's gotten a pass throughout and has always been given questions that he can answer from his stump talking points. Make him have to actually answer something on the fly and he stumbles a bit and its the questioner's fault? I don't think so. Honestly, I like Obama al ot, but the paranoia of the (vocal) people who like him really creeps me out, With friends like that, who needs enemies. You all are doing more damage than good with this... and you really remind me of the Right in the late 1990s - mean and creepy is a bad combo.