[lbo-talk] Re: Gawker on Hitch

Seth Kulick skulick at linc.cis.upenn.edu
Wed Aug 11 11:36:00 PDT 2004



> Message: 6
> Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 09:28:28 -0400
> From: Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com>
> Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Gawker on Hitch
> To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
> Message-ID: <p05200f02bd3fcf48a8c4@[192.168.1.100]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
>
> C. G. Estabrook wrote:
>
> >A "well-marshaled argument"?! A series of campaign talking-points from the
> >man who did more to dismantle the New Deal than Reagan-Bush I could.
>
> I didn't say he was right or good - my point is that the guy knows
> how to debate. If Goodman knew more about policy and politics, she
> could have challenged his claims.
>
> Doug

On 11/24/00 Goodman had an "Annotated Interview with President Clinton", in which she played the interview again but interspersed with comments from various people responding to Clinton's comments. It definitely had the flavor of "these are the things I wish I had said."

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=03/04/07/0246216

I vaguely remember that she introduced this by saying something like "some people have expressed concerns over the interview with Clinton", but I don't see that on the intro that is on the web page.

Despite my admiration for what she has done with Democracy Now!, I don't think that interview was one of her finest moments. I have no doubt that to a neutral observer, Clinton comes out far better than Goodman.



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list