Why should we respect politicians who don't answer the questions they are asked?

By Richard K. Barry

Among the many things wrong with how the media covers politics is the way they so often give up on fairly simple "yes or no" / "A or B" type questions when their first attempt to get a straight answer from a politician is batted aside.

Recently, CNN's Wolf Blitzer was interviewing Nikki Haley, the Republican Governor of South Carolina, about the current field of contenders for the GOP presidential nomination. One of the questions was about the "disagreement" between Mitt Romney and Rick Perry on whether or not climate change is man made.

As the Washington Post reports the divide:

Apparent front-runner Mitt Romney believes the world is getting warmer and that humans contribute to the pattern. Texas Gov. Rick Perry on Wednesday called that "a scientific theory that has not been proven."

Okay, Perry doesn't like science. He knows this view will appeal to a lot of idiots who also call themselves Republicans. I don't care.

But when Governor Haley was asked which side of this debate she came down on, she did what many politicians, of all stripes, do all too often. The way she answered was to say something like "what Americans really care about are jobs."

I know why she avoided the question. Giving a direct answer would have perhaps suggested support for either Romney or Perry, and she's not ready to go there. I don't even know if she has a stated opinion on the matter, which, if she did, would only make her answer more foolish.

It is well known that politicians are trained to say whatever they want to say no matter what question is asked. It even has a name. It's called "message discipline." I'm not sure, though, why any self-respecting journalist would embarrass himself by having a direct question ignored.

Think about how you'd feel if in the real world you asked someone what time it was and they answered by saying that it was supposed to rain this afternoon. Welcome to the world of politics.

Perversely, we even consider good message discipline to be the mark of a talented politician and the approach of answering questions too directly the sign of a political neophyte.

When Haley dodged the question, Blizter should have quickly said, "would you mind answering my question?" And then, every time she failed to answer, he should have stopped and respectfully asked that she try again.

I think we could even give this approach a name. It would be called "question discipline." Whenever a politician came on an interview program they would be told what to expect, that they answer direct questions or the interview would not move on.

I know some in the media already do this, but not nearly enough.

I also know I'm dreaming and that this will never happen, but our political discourse would be better if it did. And the only way it will ever change is if journalists start doing their jobs differently.

(Cross-posted at Lippmann's Ghost.)

Bush's brain

By Creature

Karl Rove thinks the GOP's "repeal, replace and reform" strategy is an election winner. Karl Rove needs to have the same epiphany Wolf Blitzer had yesterday. Preaching to the same, vocal 38% who are against HCR will only get you the same, vocal 38% come November. Not that I'm complaining.

Dear Mr. Blitzer

By Capt. Fogg

If you would kindly stop "looking for the fingerprints of al Qaeda" and limit your wild speculations about who is doing this, we might have a better chance of understanding what is actually going on in Mumbai and taking you to be a serious journalist.

At this point there is no evidence that points more toward al Qaeda than toward the enemies of India, yet you go on and on and on trying to coerce an endless string of experts into backing up your obsessive conjecture while "Possible Al Qaeda connection" scrolls across the screen. It's quite possible that this is not primarily about us at all.

Please remember that it isn't terrorism unless we are terrified and your hysteria serves only to blow this incident up disproportionately. Were you screaming about the human tragedy while we were blowing the hell out of Baghdad? No, you were like an excited schoolboy asking "Is this the shockinaw? Are we in the shockinaw yet?" Your credibility with regard to the dramatic lament over lost American lives has long since been sullied.

When you have nothing to say, which is a good deal of the time, please shut up.

John McCain, impetuous child

By Michael J.W. Stickings

In case you missed it, McCain cancelled a scheduled appearance on CNN's Larry King Live last night because, according to Wolf Blitzer, his campaign thought that a recent Campbell Brown interview of McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds went "over the line." (You can watch the interview here.)

Was it McCain or was it his campaign? It doesn't matter. He's the nominee. He's responsible.

And what is clear is that when he doesn't get what he wants, he behaves like an impetuous child.

Seriously, this man shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the Oval Office, let alone with his twitching finger on the button.