Georgia Gang – Now In Moth Ball Odor-rama!

Ok, I’ve gone from being mildly pissed-off to darn near furious with the churlish little-media gnats swarming around saying the CNN credibility/sky is falling. Falling up apparently, given the ratings for the Republican YouTube debate.

Today on Georgia Gang, Dick Williams, a person who hasn’t had a fresh idea since he wrapped

34 comments

  1. rugby_fan says:

    Spacey:

    It is interesting how you say that the YouTube debate was not a success but then criticize Dick Williams by pointing that out.

    Also interesting how even though the Georgia Gang screws up “EVERYTHING” they do, individually, they still have more knowledge and expertise on Georgia politics than most of us on Peach Pundit.

    Give it a rest.

  2. SpaceyG says:

    Hon, I could sit here and write all day about today’s Gangsta Show! They mentioned Peach Pudit, they mentioned Erick, they mentioned Andy Young and Matt Towery. They talked about Buzz. Heck, before you know it they’re gonna find out there are, like, totally awesome amounts of new media, like blogs and stuff, right here in GA! Bless their hearts.

    And who’d have thought one of ’em was even on Facebook?! The sky really must be falling.

  3. SpaceyG says:

    Huh Rugby? At what point do I say the YouTube debate was not a success??? The whole point of the freakin’ post was to point out (follow the link) that it was indeed a blazing sucess. You need another cup of coffee. And more rest before you comment again, hon.

  4. rugby_fan says:

    Spacey:

    I have a brilliant idea to solve the AIDS crisis, end poverty, bring rugby to every man and woman throughout the world, and quite possibly (this is the one I am least confident about) get Paul Broun sworn in.

    But the plan will fail horribly.

    So does that still make me a genius?

  5. SpaceyG says:

    Rugby, on second thought, just go back to bed. You’re just not firing on any cylinder right now. Please re-read the post a little more carefully before you start to appear even more dim. Right now, you are simply unable to recognize a HYPOTHETICAL situation when you read one. Let me repeat carefully for you:

    “As for the swarming media moth balls attempting to brighten-up lackluster, unleavened careers by spitting into the wind of the tectonic media shift, just sit back and watch

  6. Paul Shuford says:

    I think the CNN/Youtube debates are a brilliant idea. Making the candidates answer questions from the public, that aren’t canned reporter-style plays to their base? Amazing, and it should happen far more often. I think that we don’t hold politicians’ feet to the fire often enough, and I think that the main thing that should be done to improve the format of the Youtube debates is that the public vote on what questions are going to be asked – with CNN getting no say in deciding which questions go on and which don’t.

    That being said, I still think that it was a tremendous mistake on CNN’s part to allow a Hillary Clinton operative to ask questions in the Republican debate (although I think the question asked was a legitimate one). In the interests of fairness, are they going to allow a Giuliani or Romney operative to ask questions designed specifically to make the Democrats look bad in the Democrats’ Youtube debate? Somehow, I doubt it.

  7. StevePerkins says:

    THINGS I DON’T UNDERSTAND:

    1) SpaceyG’s constant promotion of the Georgia Gang. I seriously wonder whether she’s on their payroll sometimes. I mean, I don’t care for John Suggs over at Creative Loafing, but I’m not compelled to blog about him EVERY week.

    2) What makes the YouTube debate format “groundbreaking”? In every campaign cycle as far back as I can recall, there have been debates where the questions were asked by audience members. In the YouTube format, those audience questions are pre-recorded. That’s it. That’s your “innovation”. Oh yeah, and those audience questioners are occasionally dressed in costumes or singing songs or otherwise making the whole thing look like a dumb joke. Groundbreaking.

    3) What does good ratings for one Presidential debate have to do with CNN’s overall decline in ratings (and relevance) over the past decade?

    3) Why do people so passionately attack or defend CNN or Fox News? If you’re going to criticize them, don’t do so because they pander to the Dems or the GOP. Do so because the entire 24-hour cable news format has devolved into trashy tabloid time-filler… a never ending barrage of reports about Anna Nicole Smith still being dead, who-be-the-baby-daddy, etc. In 2007, with the Internet as widely adopted as it is, anyone who still uses CNN or Fox as their news source is brain dead.

  8. boyreporter says:

    Way to go, SpaceyG. The rightwing nuts on PP and GG will never give in to logic, reason and sensibility, though. Keep it up as long as your stomache and nostrils can take it.

  9. juliobarrios says:

    The whole CNN Youtube debate was a complete joke, but not unexpected. The problem with the CNN / Youtube debate was the CNN, which made the thing completely unoriginal with their set-up questions. I know, I know folks like Buzz got in there, but for the most part it was a complete set-up. The Dems got the typical softball questions like, “What’s your favorite color” and the Repubs got the hard questions that tried to enforce old stereotypes.

    There was nothing groundbreaking about having some shills ask loaded questions. Don’t get me wrong I don’t mind tough questions, but not when the Dems are allowed to skate. How about hammering Hillary on illegal immigration or her flip-flopping on the war, etc..

    I know there was talk about some Repubs boycotting the debates, like the Dems boycotted the Fox debate – I wasn’t for that at the time but in hindsight I wish we had as we were swindled by the most liberal network ever created.

  10. lawstudent says:

    Spacey-
    If the GG is so outmoded and no one pays attention to it, then why don’t you just ignore it? No one else on PP seems to post on it. So if you don’t talk about it, it will just fade away. If you don’t like the show, I don’t understand why you watch it each week.

  11. JRM2016 says:

    I think the CNN/You Tube debate was great…if you were a Democrat looking to find out where Republican Presidential candidates are on Democrat issues (e.g. Gays in the Military). Now when can we get the Democrats on Fox and Thompson, Giuliani and McCain supporters can ask them questions about issues important to Republican Primary voters?

  12. GodHatesTrash says:

    Back in the good ol’ days of the Clinton Presidency, Mr. Williams was with the AJC, and, despite his rather effeminate demeanor and get-up, used to refer to The Greatest President of All Time as William Rodham Clinton.

    I wrote a letter to the editorial staff of the AJC suggesting that in the interest of the truth that Mr. Williams change his byline to Dick Less Williams.

    He didn’t adopt that suggestion, but I noted no further references to William Rodham Clinton in his columns…

  13. SpaceyG says:

    Why do I continue to post about GG? Guess it has something to do with the fact that doing so gets 23 comments in an hour, on a Sunday, not historically heavy traffic times here on PP, albeit with a third of those today from Rugby spazzing out. Seems I’m not the only one who still watches.

    Also… I forgot to go to church. Again.

  14. StevePerkins says:

    I don’t think I’ve ever seen an episode of the Georgia Gang. I just jump at the chance to comment whenever we get any thread not related to the GREAT Plan or college football these days.

  15. Rogue109 says:

    “Why do I continue to post about GG? Guess it has something to do with the fact that doing so gets 23 comments in an hour, on a Sunday, not historically heavy traffic times here on PP, albeit with a third of those today from Rugby spazzing out. Seems I

  16. Chris says:

    I think the YouTube Debates were a perfect example of the problems with the old media. Anderson Cooper and his producers selected the 35 or so questions (from over 5k submitted) that fit their pre-conceived notions of what issues were important. There was nothing “new” about it. Technology doesn’t make something new.

    Few of the questions did anything to answer the questions that _Republicans_ want asked of Republican candidates that Republicans will vote for in the Republican Primary. (Sorry Buzz)

  17. Mark Rountree says:

    Spacey, you write that questionning CNN’s handling of the debate constitutes “near insanity”.

    In an industry which editorially determines “everything from make up shades to dress color, it seems unlikely that CNN didn’t know what it was doing. Remember: this is a company which admitted to censoring it’s own news reporting of civilian massacres in order to get more interview access to Saddam Hussein.

    So I disagree. And quite strongly.

    Please respond to this, by the LA Times:

    “CNN: Corrupt News Network”
    http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/la-et-rutten1dec01,0,4122002.column?coll=la-home-center

  18. GodHatesTrash says:

    Now you neo-kkkons need to remember – you morons get most of your news filtered through the sewer called Fox.

  19. Still Looking says:

    I have never heard so many people whine about about a debate. This is politics, not beanbag. Answer the questions and quit bitchin’. Notice that Huckabee, the apparent winner didn’t complain. The You Tube format is refreshing and the it had the highest ratings yet. That’s a good thing in a country where a 40% turnout of registered voters is normal.

  20. atlantaman says:

    What’s refreshing about having CNN filter some debate video questions, versus the previous townhall format where the questioner asks his/her question live?

  21. JRM2016 says:

    The reason the ratings were up is that the Fox News viewers switched over to CNN to see GOP candidates. O’Reilly, Sean and the rest will continue to dominate cable news…

  22. Still Looking says:

    The average age of O’Reilly’s viewer is deceased. He is totally unresponsible:

    “The situation that Hearst found herself in was exciting. She had a boring life, she was a child of privilege, all of a sudden she’s in with a bunch of charismatic thugs, and she enjoyed it. The situation here, for this kid, looks to me to be a lot more fun than what he had under his ‘old’ parents. He didn’t have to go to school, he could run around and do whatever he wanted…And I think, when it all comes down, what’s gonna happen is, there was an element here that this kid liked about his circumstances”. – Dr. Bill O’Reilly, O’Reilly Factor, 1/15/07

Comments are closed.