A tale of two 60 Minutes intreviews

[DarrinS]

Compare these interviews and keep in mind, there's no media bias.


Scott Pelley interviews Bush (2007)

1aEjvF7x-9s


Steve Kroft gushing interview with Obama/Clinton (2013)

OidKuc6ZuW8



Here are the questions, for those who hate yootooobs





The war on terror, in a sense, began in this room, began in this cabin where your Cabinet meeting was held. Back then the whole country was with you. And now you seem to have lost them. Why do you think so?
Most Americans at this point in time don’t believe in this war in Iraq. They want you to get us out of there.
You actually thought about that?

You think the whole region could be in play? Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait?
Instability in Iraq threatens the entire region?

But wasn’t it your administration that created the instability in Iraq?
It’s much more unstable now, Mr. President.

You mention mistakes having been made in your speech. What mistakes are you talking about?
The troop levels . . .
Could have been a mistake?
Fair to say there are not enough American troops on the ground to provide security for Iraq?

Do you think you owe the Iraqi people an apology for not doing a better job?
Well, that the United States did not do a better job in providing security after the invasion.

Americans wonder whether . . .
You are gambling a lot, Mr. President, on the [Iraqi] Prime Minister [Nouri] al-Maliki. Why do you think that’s a gamble worth making?

Let’s be blunt. You’re a plain speaker. Let’s be blunt. What have you told Maliki he has to do?

Is Muqtada al-Sadr an enemy of the United States?

I was on the battlefield in Najaf when al-Sadr’s people killed your United States Marines.
Is Muqtada al-Sadr an enemy of the United States?

Without al-Sadr, there’s no Maliki government.

You don’t fear that al-Sadr’s actually running the show?

Did you see the video of Saddam Hussein’s execution?
What did you think when you saw that?
I wonder if there was also some sense of satisfaction. You’ve had this guy in your sights for a long time.
I’m curious. How did you see the video?
You called it up on the internet and watched it?
Well, you keep saying “parts of it.” What do you mean you didn’t wanna watch the whole thing?
You didn’t wanna see him go through the trapdoor.

Do you believe that the House has the constitutional authority to prevent you from the troop build-up? Can they stop you?
That would be one . . .

The Democrat leadership says, “We wanna support the troops who are on the ground. We just wanna redline the extra 20,000.”
There’s no Democrat plan.

Do you believe as commander-in-chief you have the authority to put the troops in there no matter what the Congress wants to do?
You know better than I do that many Americans feel that your administration has not been straight with the country, has not been honest. To those people you say what?
Well, sir . . .

No weapons of mass destruction.
No credible connection between 9/11 and Iraq.

The Office of Management and Budget said this war would cost somewhere between $50 billion and $60 billion and now we’re over 400.
The perception, sir, more than any one of those points, is that the administration has not been straight with . . .

You seem to be saying that you may have been wrong but you weren’t dishonest
When was it that you first found out or it dawned on you that, indeed, there were no weapons of mass destruction? And I wonder, did you think, “What have I done?”
You had to be angry as hell.

What should the American people look for in this war plan? When will they know whether it’s working or not?
We’ll know in weeks?

Your military officers say that Iranian agents today are killing American troops on the ground in Iraq. Is that an act of war on the part of Iran against the United States?
Is that an act of war against the United States on the part of the Iranian government?

What would you say right now in this interview to the Iranian president about the meddling in Iraq?

I wonder if you feel like you’ve been ill-served by your Cabinet members, [Defense Secretary] Mr. [Donald] Rumsfeld, perhaps even Vice-President [Dick] Cheney. Wrong on WMD. Wrong on the connection between 9/11 and Iraq. And now you’re in a fix. And I wonder if you look back and wonder who let you down.

The vice-president suggested there was a connection, not necessarily 9/11, but certainly to al-Qaeda.
Yes, sir.

Vice-president involved in these war plans?
As much as he ever has been?

Final question. How can you escalate the war when so many people in this country seem to be against it?









This is very improbable. This is not an interview I ever expected to be doing. But I understand, Mr. President, this was your idea. Why did you want to do this together, a joint interview?
There’s no political tea leaves to be read here?

It’s no secret that your aides cautioned you against– actually were against you offering Secretary Clinton this job. And you were just as determined not to take it. And you avoided taking her phone calls for awhile because you were afraid she was going to say no. Why were you so insistent about wanting her to be secretary of state?

You’ve been quoted as thinking or telling people that there was no way you were going to take this job and you weren’t going to let anybody talk you into it.
What did he say that night that made you—
What did he promise you? And has he kept the promises?

Has she had much influence—
–in this administration?

How would you characterize your relationship right now?

It’s one thing to have disagreements between cabinet people. I spent time with both of you in the 2008 campaign. That was a very tough, bitter race. And I’m going to spare you reading some of the things that you said about each other during that campaign.
But how long did it take you to get over that? And when did it happen?

You said the staff took a little longer to ignore, to forget the campaign stuff. What about the spouses? Is that an impertinent question?

This administration, I mean, you’ve generally gotten high marks. You’ve generally gotten very high marks, particularly from the voters for your handling of foreign policy. But there’s no big, singular achievement that– in the first four years– that you can put your names on. What do you think the biggest success has been, foreign policy success, of the first term?

What’s the, I have to ask you, what’s the date of expiration on this endorsement?
No, no, I have to ask that question. I mean, come on. You’re– I mean, you’re sitting here together. Everybody in town is talking about it already and the inter– and this is– it’s taking place.

I want to talk about the hearings this week. You had a very long day. Also, how is your health?
Right, I noticed your glasses are—

You said during the hearings, I mean, you’ve accepted responsibility. You’ve accepted the very critical findings of Admiral Mullen and Ambassador Pickering. As the New York Times put it, you accepted responsibility, but not blame. Do you feel guilty in any way, in– at a personal level? Do you blame yourself that you didn’t know or that you should have known?

The biggest criticism of this team in the U.S. foreign policy from your political opposition has been what they say is an abdication of the United States on the world stage, sort of a reluctance to become involved in another entanglement, an unwillingness or what seems/appears to be an unwillingness to gauge big issues. Syria, for example.

I mean, that—
Thank you very much.

[TeyshaBlue]

2 interviews, 6 years apart, by two completely different people are somehow markedly different. Shocking.

[DarrinS]

2 interviews, 6 years apart, by two completely different people are somehow markedly different. Shocking.


Every Kroft interview of Obama is softball city.

[DarrinS]

Kroft explains it best.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/01/29/steve_kroft_on_why_obama_appears_on_60_minutes_i_t hink_he_knows_that_were_not_going_to_play_gotcha_w ith_him.html


PIERS MORGAN: Let me ask you at the top, why do you think he keeps coming to you? Because there’s two schools of thought. One, is that you're the most brilliant, penetrating interviewer on American television. And the other one is that you give him a soft time. Neither of which I suspect is entirely the true picture.

STEVE KROFT, "60 MINUTES" CORRESPONDENT: No, I think that first of all, I think he likes "60 Minutes." It’s, you know, we have a huge audience. We have a format that suits him, it's long. We can do 12 minutes or 24 minutes. We do, you know, we do a good job of editing. And I’ve been doing these interviews with him since a few weeks before he declared his candidacy. So I covered him during the campaign and have kept doing it in the White House.

But I think it's a question of fairness. We have not -- I think he knows that we're not going to play gotcha with him, that we're not going to go out of our way to make him look bad or stupid and we'll let him answer the questions. (Piers Morgan Tonight, January 28, 2013)

[ChumpDumper]

So Darrin, which interviewer plays gotcha with Obama and goes out of his or her way to make him look bad or stupid and doesn't let him answer questions -- you know, the things you look for?

[DarrinS]

So Darrin, which interviewer plays gotcha with Obama and goes out of his or her way to make him look bad or stupid and doesn't let him answer questions -- you know, the things you look for?


Does journalism serve a purpose anymore? If not, it's okay for a 60 Minutes interview to be like something you'd see on Ellen.

[ChumpDumper]

Does journalism serve a purpose anymore? If not, it's okay for a 60 Minutes interview to be like something you'd see on Ellen.How much Ellen do you watch to be able to make that comparison?

[DMC]

You're wasting your time trying to tell worshipers that the pastor is crooked.

[ChumpDumper]

And I'll also ask you how many of the Obama 60 Minutes interviews you have watched.

[DMC]

And I'll also ask you how many of the Obama 60 Minutes interviews you have watched.

Do you sit at your PC hitting the refresh button? Ever smell under your arm? When is the last time you bathed? Do you consume a lot of caffeine? Ever had a sexual partner? Have you had one leave you because you never looked away from the monitor when she/he was talking to you?

[Spurminator]

Does journalism serve a purpose anymore? If not, it's okay for a 60 Minutes interview to be like something you'd see on Ellen.

Do you think that Bush and Obama walked into these interviews with no idea what they were going to be asked? Do you think they had no part of organizing the interviews in the first place, and no agenda to discuss certain things? Do you think any of the questions they were asked was a surprise?

Who are you to talk about journalism when you obviously have no idea how these things work? If the questions to Bush seemed tougher in the example view you chose, it's because President Bush wanted to discuss some controversial topics in front of the nation.

[ChumpDumper]

Do you sit at your PC hitting the refresh button?No.
Ever smell under your arm?No.
When is the last time you bathed?Today.
Do you consume a lot of caffeine?No.
Ever had a sexual partner?No.
Have you had one leave you because you never looked away from the monitor when she/he was talking to you?Never happened.

Why are you so interested in me personally?

[ElNono]

One interview is at the 'lame duck' stage of the presidency (Bush), the other is right after winning a new term (Barry).

They both won re-election, which means people voted for them twice to be president regardless of evil MSM...

Barry will get to the lame duck stage too in a couple of years...

[Wild Cobra]

That's right liberals. Defend your team.

[ChumpDumper]

One interview is at the 'lame duck' stage of the presidency (Bush), the other is right after winning a new term (Barry).

They both won re-election, which means people voted for them twice to president regardless of evil MSM...Well, the 2013 interview is really more about Clinton than Obama. Darrin could easily find very different tone and content in an Kroft/Obama interview if he looked beyond the links that were spoon fed to him, but that's expecting far too much of him.

[ChumpDumper]

That's right liberals. Defend your team.No one would expect you to look either.

[ElNono]

:lol I like how capt libertarian (:rolleyes) comes into a strictly partisan thread, starts pointing fingers and goes to bat for the red teamer...

[Wild Cobra]

No one would expect you to look either.
I looked at both. The bias is clear from the start. You guys are defending the bias with unknown suggestion, without acknowledging the OP just might be right.

[ChumpDumper]

I looked at both. The bias is clear from the start. You guys are defending the bias with unknown suggestion, without acknowledging the OP just might be right.No one would expect you to actually read post #15 correctly either.

[spursncowboys]

You're wasting your time trying to tell worshipers that the pastor is crooked.
This

[spursncowboys]

:lol I like how capt libertarian (:rolleyes) comes into a strictly partisan thread, starts pointing fingers and goes to bat for the red teamer...

Here you are defending, once again, journalist-Who have somehow defied human behavior and not let their biases interfere with their job. :toast

[spursncowboys]

Got your lol too. You should live a long life arguing politics with such an amused attitude.

[clambake]

he had a hard on for saddam long before he lied his way to get him.

[ChumpDumper]

ThisYou wouldn't look either.

[ElNono]

Here you are defending, once again, journalist-Who have somehow defied human behavior and not let their biases interfere with their job. :toast

what journalist I defended? :lol

Another instance of snc playing...
http://i46.tinypic.com/14d3pqo.png

And yeah, red team fake outrage is just as amusing as blue team fake outrage...

Teysha got it, is he an MSM apologist too? :rolleyes

[DMC]

No.No.Today.No.No.Never happened.

Why are you so interested in me personally?

Wow so you've never had a sexual partner?

That explains a lot.

[spursncowboys]

what journalist I defended? :lol

Another instance of snc playing...
http://i46.tinypic.com/14d3pqo.png

And yeah, red team fake outrage is just as amusing as blue team fake outrage...

Teysha got it, is he an MSM apologist too? :rolleyes
Oh yeah blue/red team. Because you are so middle ground? :rolleyes

[ElNono]

Oh yeah blue/red team. Because you are so middle ground? :rolleyes


what journalist I defended? :lol

[DarrinS]

jFkRgL7dnvM

[ElNono]

And yeah, I don't particularly like boutons/NBADan retarded posts any more than I like DarrinS/WC retarded posts... that probably does put me somewhere in the middle...

The view from the red ledge might not look the same, but hey, not my problem...

[ChumpDumper]

Wow so you've never had a sexual partner?

That explains a lot.You misunderstand. Then again you are asking so many personal questions, one can only conclude you want to be my sex partner, so it's understandable you would delude yourself into thinking I never had one.

No thanks, btw.

[clambake]

it is a rather curious interest.

hey chump, feel like posting a picture of your driveway?

[ChumpDumper]

it is a rather curious interest.It's not the first time someone has had a crush on me.


hey chump, feel like posting a picture of your driveway?:lol

[DarrinS]

0aVZvQhVS8U

X_ZUTVESJPk


Don't forget to bow your head

YLYtHHxTTmc



Even Obama has to joke about it

v1PWR7dSMmo

[ChumpDumper]

So men were rough on your bush.

[DarrinS]

the videos speak for themselves, so I'm resorting to 6th grade jokes.

Fify

[DarrinS]

Lol

Bslprigph5M

[ChumpDumper]

I never answer any questions because I know I'd look like an idiot.You're a coward, Darrin.

[ElNono]

You would think the MSM didn't exist when dubya won his two elections...

[DarrinS]

So Darrin, which interviewer plays gotcha with Obama and goes out of his or her way to make him look bad or stupid and doesn't let him answer questions -- you know, the things you look for?

I haven't seen many ask him tough questions -- he doesn't like that

[ChumpDumper]

I haven't seen many ask him tough questions -- he doesn't like thatWell, when you cherry pick interviews with the sole purpose of confirming your bias, you end up with stupid observations like that.

[DarrinS]

Well, when you cherry pick interviews with the sole purpose of confirming your bias, you end up with stupid observations like that.

You know what? You're right. Univision asked him some hard questions -- as did this guy (don't know who he is)


Might this have been an interview people would want to see?

GX-2SK4LqGU

[Wild Cobra]

Wow...

What a tough question. Sidesteps it, and not pursued...

[ChumpDumper]

A politician avoided a question?

Wow.

You guys must be outraged.

[Wild Cobra]

A politician avoided a question?

Wow.

You guys must be outraged.
It happens all the time. That is not the outrage.

Typical ChumpMonkey...

Changing the goal post.

[DMC]

You misunderstand. Then again you are asking so many personal questions, one can only conclude you want to be my sex partner, so it's understandable you would delude yourself into thinking I never had one.

No thanks, btw.
I asked "ever had a sexual partner?" and you answered "no".

[ElNono]

He was asked tough questions during the presidential debates (which happen to coincide with some pretty high stakes), and he gave the non-answers you get from every politician...

Different media always caters to whatever audience they're targeting. There's obvious bias on any outlet. There's also just as many outlets that cater to almost every political base out there.

What's hilarious is the "woe is us" act that it's easily solved by changing the channel on your remote control. The whole demanding somebody else do what you want is incredibly naive (if not flat out stupid).

[ChumpDumper]

I asked "ever had a sexual partner?" and you answered "no".You expressed personal interest in being my sex partner, and I rejected your advances.

[DMC]

A politician avoided a question?

Wow.

You guys must be outraged.

Wow, you've posted 15 times in this one thread? No one here is shocked.

[Wild Cobra]

It's all the ChumpMonkey knows how to do.

[ChumpDumper]

Wow, you've posted 15 times in this one thread? No one here is shocked.Wow, you really keep close tabs on what I do.

No driveway pictures for you.

[DMC]

You came onto me, and I rejected your advances.

You've never had a sexual partner. lol

[ChumpDumper]

It's all the ChumpMonkey knows how to do.Outrage!

[Wild Cobra]

Wow, you really keep close tabs on what I do.

No driveway pictures for you.
Chump, we all know that you are unhappy if you don't get your 25%+ posts in a thread, that are nothing but sill arguments.

[ChumpDumper]

You've never had a sexual partner. lolYou want to be my sexual partner. lol

[ChumpDumper]

Chump, we all know that you are unhappy if you don't get your 25%+ posts in a thread, that are nothing but sill arguments.WC, we all know you want to make this about me as badly as anyone else who has felt the sting of humiliation and failure like Darrin and SnC and DMC here.

It's fine.

Now everyone keep posting about me.

[Wild Cobra]

I don't need to make it about you. You always come along just for that purpose.

[ChumpDumper]

I don't need to make it about you. You always come along just for that purpose.But you are now posting exclusively about me.

Keep it up.

[Wild Cobra]

That's OK, I said my piece. I know you wi9ll continue though.

[mouse]

If you really think the president sits down to do an interview without knowing what questions are going to be asked ahead of time then you must beilve Taco bell and Burger King use "real" beef.

Softball questions insures you to get the interview every time.

[Spurminator]

Do you think that Bush and Obama walked into these interviews with no idea what they were going to be asked? Do you think they had no part of organizing the interviews in the first place, and no agenda to discuss certain things? Do you think any of the questions they were asked was a surprise?

Who are you to talk about journalism when you obviously have no idea how these things work? If the questions to Bush seemed tougher in the example view you chose, it's because President Bush wanted to discuss some controversial topics in front of the nation.

Sidestepped again.

[DMX7]

Remember when people said we would miss Bush? What a fucking idiot he is and they are...

[vy65]

Am I crazy or is Foxnews not a mainstream media outlet?

[ChumpDumper]

Am I crazy or is Foxnews not a mainstream media outlet?The definition is as varied as the posters who complain about it.

[vy65]

What's the driveway joke tbh?

[ChumpDumper]

What's the driveway joke tbh?Should really be enshrined in the Classic Threads IMO:

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=117205

[vy65]

Dear god. What a fucking freak show

Lol myspace hookups
Lol summer solstice
Lol mailing pictures

[Oh, Gee!!]

More victimization from darrin. Boo fuckin hoo

[spursncowboys]

Remember when people said we would miss Bush? What a fucking idiot he is and they are...

Jobs created are a negative to the amount of people who left the workforce.

In what area is Obama doing such a great job that they are idiots.

Why the Bush hate still? You would think four years of aging would equal four years of growing up

[ElNono]

Bush Sr is missed, tbh... he was a good prez...

[Winehole23]

Bush Sr is missed, tbh... he was a good prez...I didn't think so at the time, but I think so now.

[DarrinS]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323452204578290363744516632.html?m od=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop





So God Made a Fawner

Paul Harvey's ad was terrific. Steve Kroft's interview was shameful.


So many people this week mentioned Dodge's great Super Bowl spot, "So God Made a Farmer," from a 1978 speech by the late Paul Harvey.

Here are some reasons it was great:

• Because it spoke respectfully and even reverently of others. We don't do that so much anymore. We're afraid of looking corny or naive, and we fear that to praise one group is to suggest another group is less worthy of admiration. So we keep things bland and nonspecific. Harvey wasn't afraid to valorize, and his specificity had the effect of reminding us there's a lot of uncelebrated valor out there. It would be nice to hear someone do "So God Created Firemen," or "So God Created Doctors," but I'm not sure our culture has the requisite earnestness and respect. We do irony, sarcasm and spoofs: "So God Created Hedge Fund Managers." Anyway, it was nice—a real refreshment—to hear the sound of authentic respect.

• Because it spoke un-self-consciously in praise of certain virtues—commitment, compassion, hard work, a sense of local responsibility. The most moving reference, to me, was when Harvey has the farmer get up before dawn, work all day, and "then go to town and stay past midnight at a meeting of the school board." Notice the old word "town," not "community"—that blight of a word that is used more and more as it means less and less.

• Because it explicitly put God as maker of life and governor of reality, again un-self-consciously, and with a tone that anticipated no pushback. God, you could say anything in Paul Harvey's day.

• Because it was Paul Harvey, a great broadcaster and a clear, clean writer for the ear, who knew exactly what he was saying and why, and who was confident of the values he asserted. He wasn't a hidden person, he wasn't smuggling an agenda, he was conservative and Christian and made these things clear through the virtues and values he praised and the things he criticized. You could like him or not, but you understood that by his lights he was giving it to you straight as he could. He was often criticized as hokey, sentimental and overly dramatic, and sometimes he was. But mostly he was a pro who hit his mark every day, and it says something about his gifts that since he died in 2009, the ABC radio network has appointed a number of successors, but Harvey never really was replaced. Because he was irreplaceable.

***

Which gets us to another story involving a media figure and a media institution. I refer to Steve Kroft's interview, on "60 Minutes," with Barack Obama and departing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. That made a big impression too. It didn't remind us of a style or approach for which we feel nostalgia, but one about which we are feeling increased apprehension, and that is the mainstream media fawn-a-thon toward the current president.

The Kroft interview was a truly scandalous example of the genre. It was so soft, so dazzled, so supportive, so embarrassing. And it was that way from the beginning, when Mr. Kroft breathlessly noted, "The White House granted us 30 minutes." Granted. Like kings.

What followed was a steady, targeted barrage of softballs. "Why did you want to do this together, a joint interview?" Because, said the president, she's been one of the best secretaries of state ever, and theirs has been one of the greatest collaborations in history. Also, "I'm gonna miss her." No reading of the tea leaves here, pressed Mr. Kroft. We don't have tea here, Hillary laughed.

Throughout the president and the secretary sat closely, shoulder to shoulder, leaning into each other, nodding as the other spoke, praising each other in a way that praised themselves. I don't blame them for doing propaganda—that's what White Houses do. But it's hard not blaming Mr. Kroft and "60 Minutes" for being part of it.

Why did you want her as secretary of state? Mr. Kroft asked. Because she's so wonderful, the president more or less responded, and not unlike me in the profundity of her seriousness.

Mr. Kroft noted that she had to be talked into taking the job. Mrs. Clinton said yes, she'd exhausted herself selflessly working to elect Mr. Obama in '08, she wasn't sure she wanted to take on a cabinet position. But he's so persuasive!

The president nodded, smiling. He noted that Mrs. Clinton travelled around the world carrying his forceful yet calibrated message.

"How would you characterize your relationship right now?" asked Mr. Kroft, the intrepid reporter. Hillary answered, "Very warm, close, I think there's a sense of understanding that doesn't even take words . . . a bond."

Mr. Kroft said he'd "spare you reading what was said" during the heated 2008 Democratic primary battles. And boy, did he spare them.

How did they overcome the tensions and hard words of that battle? "We're professionals," said Hillary.

"What do you think the biggest success has been, foreign-policy success, of the first term?"

The president could think of a number of them.

Really, access isn't worth this. The get isn't worth it. The entire interview reminded me of an old radio insult: When an interviewer didn't try to push and probe, didn't even try to get the story, the resulting interview was called "soft as a sneaker full of puppy excrement." No, they didn't say excrement.

***
We are living in the age of emergency—the economy, the Mideast, North Korea, Iran. The president has an utter and historic inability to forge a relationship with Congress. Unemployment seems intractable.

And the best Steve Kroft and "60 Minutes" could do was how wonderful are you?

The Obama-Clinton relationship is interesting, but here are some questions about it that might have elicited more than outtakes for a Hillary 2016 commercial:

Mr. President, does your foreign policy really come out of the White House, even out of its political office, and not the State Department? Has the department's ability to formulate policy and be a player in terms of the development of grand strategy been diminished? Her first year in office Mrs. Clinton looked like someone who'd been put on a plane and told to do interviews on "Good Morning Manila" about how she met Bill. What do you say?

Mrs. Clinton, some think you held your tongue, made the best of a bad situation, worked the areas you could, moved forward on issues of particular concern like women's rights; that you dummied up on Benghazi, demolished your congressional critics in one masterly day of testimony, and now have been rewarded for your loyalty and discretion with a joint presidential interview that amounts to an anointment for 2016. Can you comment?"

***
There is nothing wrong with being a declared liberal or conservative and conducting a sympathetic interview with a political figure who shares your views. Such interviews have their place and can be useful: a nondefensive, nonwary president elaborates on his thoughts, or commits accidental candor.

But Mr. Kroft is a reporter whose job it is to be impartial and nonpartisan, and who works for a towering journalistic institution, "60 Minutes."

People like him are supposed to approach political figures with no fear or favor.

Their job is to grill. What are they afraid of?

[ChumpDumper]

Seriously? Peggy Noonan?

:lmao

[DarrinS]

Even Leno recognizes how lame that interview was


t13Q5YKzsqs

[clambake]

Even Leno recognizes how lame that interview was

what do you mean "even"?

[George Gervin's Afro]

You're wasting your time trying to tell worshipers that the pastor is crooked.

lol copmparing Iraq war to benghazi..

[ChumpDumper]

Another YouTube!

[DarrinS]

I take time to respond to Darrin's youtubes

[ChumpDumper]

Takes less time than finding and watching and posting dozens and dozens of them.

[Spurminator]

It's basically a waste of time to expect Darrin to respond to anything that hasn't been addressed somewhere in YouTube form.

What do you do when you're having a discussion with someone face-to-face? When you're asked a question, do you pull out your phone and do a YouTube search for an answer? I've never seen anyone so incapable of original thought.