Lincoln, Douglas, Gibson and Stephanopoulos — two statesmen and two doofuses
April 19th, 2008 at 10:04am Pat Cunningham
In the wake of the so-called debate on ABC the other night, I had occasion to MENTION the historic Lincoln-Douglas debates, the 150th anniversary of which will be observed this year.
There’s a more apt comparison from Publius, who writes for the blog site OBSIDIAN WINGS. He’s come up with this hilarious parody in which Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos are moderators at one of the Lincoln-Douglas debates:
MR. GIBSON: So we’re going to begin with opening statements, and we had a flip of the coin, and the brief opening statement first from Mr. Lincoln.
LINCOLN: Thank you very much, Charlie and George, and thanks to all in the audience and who are out there. I appear before you today for the purpose of discussing the leading political topics which now agitate the public mind.
We are now far into the fifth year since a policy was initiated with the avowed object, and confident promise, of putting an end to slavery agitation. Under the operation of that policy, that agitation has not only not ceased, but has constantly augmented.
STEPHANOPOULOS: I’m sorry to interrupt, but do you think Mr. Douglas loves America as much you do?
LINCOLN: Sure I do.
STEPHANOPOULOS: But who loves America more?
LINCOLN: I’d prefer to get on with my opening statement George.
STEPHANOPOULOS: If your love for America were eight apples, how many apples would Senator Douglas’s love be?
LINCOLN: Eight.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Proceed.
LINCOLN: In my opinion, slavery will not cease, until a crisis shall have been reached and passed. “A house divided against itself cannot stand.” I believe this government cannot endure permanently half slave and half free.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Excuse me, did an Elijah H. Johnson attend your church?
LINCOLN: When I was a boy in Illinois forty years ago, yes. I think he was a deacon.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Are you aware that he regularly called Kentucky “a land of swine and whores”?
LINCOLN: Sounds right — his ex-wife was from Kentucky.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Why did you remain in the church after hearing those statements?
LINCOLN: I was eight.
DOUGLAS: This is an important question George — it’s an issue that certainly will be raised in the fall.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Do you denounce him?
LINCOLN: I’d like to get back to the divided house if I may.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Do you denounce and reject him?
LINCOLN: If it will make you shut up, yes, I denounce and reject him.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Do you denounce and reject him with sugar on top?
LINCOLN: Yes.
STEPHANOPOULOS: No takesies-backsies?
LINCOLN: Yes.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Whoa, so you would consider a takesie-backsie?
LINCOLN: That’s not what I meant…
DOUGLAS: When I was 11, my grandpappy and I chopped wood and shot bears.
LINCOLN: Ahem, I do not expect the Union to be dissolved — I do not expect the house to fall — but I do expect slavery will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing, or all the other…
STEPHANOPOULOS: Do you love America this much (extending fingers), this much (extending hands slightly), or thiiiiiis much (extending hands broadly)?
LINCOLN: I think we covered this…
GIBSON: If I may interrupt…
LINCOLN: Please.
GIBSON: I noticed, Mr. Lincoln, that your American flag pin was upside down…
LINCOLN: Yes, the wind caught it. Now, as I was saying…
GIBSON: We get questions about this all the time over at Powerline and on Hannity’s talk show. Mr. Douglas has said this is a major vulnerability for you in the fall. So I’ll ask again – do you love America?
LINCOLN: (scowling with a forced smile). Yes.
GIBSON: If your love for America were ice cream, what flavor would it be?
LINCOLN: (pausing with disgust and turning back to camera) Either the opponents of slavery will arrest the further spread of it; or its advocates will push it forward, till it shall become alike lawful in all the States, old as well as new — North as well as South.
DOUGLAS: He didn’t answer the question Charlie. This fall, that question is going to be on the minds of the American public. I’ve proudly stated that my love for America is Very Berry Strawberry.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Let me ask it another way. If Elijah Johnson were chocolate chip cookie dough ice cream, would you eat it? Or would you decline to eat it?
DOUGLAS: Personally, as for me, I would decline to eat it.
LINCOLN (shaking his head): Let any one who doubts, carefully contemplate that now almost complete legal combination — piece of machinery, so to speak — compounded of the Nebraska doctrine, and the Dred Scott decision.
STEPHANOPOULOS: We’ll get to Dred Scott in the second hour, time willing, but I want to get back to the ice cream question. And that’s what we’ll do, after the break.
Entry Filed under: Lincoln-Douglas debates, George Stephanopoulos, Charles Gibson
14 Comments Add your own
1. Chad Lincoln | April 19th, 2008 at 11:00 am
I did not take the time to watch this debate, but it seems like the media and newspapers have turned this \"blemish\" into a perfect skit for Saturday Night Live. I\’m not sure if it is too many debates or putting the intentions of said debate in the wrong perspective, but this debate was for the sake of the Pennsylvania Primary. In my opinion, this debate should have been shown on all local stations in Pennsylvania only, whether that be Local broadcast ABC,NBC or CBS, or even PBS. I feel the media is inundating us with too many debates covering the same issues that we are seeing and hearing on an everyday basis in this 24-hour newscycle society that we live in now.
2. Pat Cunningham | April 19th, 2008 at 11:28 am
Chad: We can always choose not to watch. Television offers countless alternatives to the political stuff. I’ll admit, in all honesty, that I opted for “Family Guy” or “South Park” during a few of the debates last year.
3. Greg | April 19th, 2008 at 12:12 pm
Mr. Cunningham,
May I suggest the book “Liberalism is a Mental Disorder” by Michael Savage. You should read it. Good luck with your disorder and I hope the medication works.
4. Kaus | April 19th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
And bias between Fox, CNN, NYT etc. is strikingly similar to those debates 150+ years ago!!! “Interestingly, newspapers that supported Douglas edited his speeches to remove any errors made by the stenographers and to correct grammatical errors, while they left Lincoln’s speeches in the rough form in which they had been transcribed. In the same way, Republican papers edited Lincoln’s speeches, but left the Douglas texts as reported”.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln-Douglas_debates_of_1858
5. Pat Cunningham | April 19th, 2008 at 12:43 pm
For once,Kaus, you’re absolutely right. I have a book containing press coverage of all the Lincoln-Douglas debates. The political bias was palpable. Of course, that was back when there was no notion of independent or “objective” newspapers. Most newpapers were organs of political parties. The Founding Fathers, when they wrote Freedom of the Press into the Constitution, had no expectation that newspapers would ever be anything but partisan. Most people today don’t know that.
By the way, in the piece I posted, Lincoln is quoted as referring to “when I was a boy in Illinois.” In reality, he never set foot in Illinois until he was 21 years old. Yet millions of Americans think he was born in Illinois.
6. Kaus | April 19th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
Ain’t it great when you can read Pat’s blog and expand your knowledge? I feel so much smarter today! I will now spend the rest of my weekend voiding thought of Larry Ayers and Jeremiah Wright. I will take a 48 hour sabbath from reading Little Green Footbals….
7. Pat Cunningham | April 19th, 2008 at 2:27 pm
Greg (Comment No. 3): Are you referring to Michael Savage, the self-loathing Jew who throws red meat to America’s knuckledragging young males? I didn’t know he could write. And I didn’t know his listeners could read. I’m reliably informed that Savage, whose real name is Michael Weiner, has called Arabs “non-humans” and “racist, fascist bigots”; asserted that Americans would like to “drop a nuclear weapon” on any Arab country; and that “these people” in the Middle East “need to be forcibly converted to Christianity” in order to “turn them into human beings.” Lovely guy. I can just see the callow youths who listen to him squirming like little pre-schoolers when he cuts loose. But no thanks, Greg, I think I’ll take a pass on this pathetic creature’s book.
8. Menlo Bob | April 19th, 2008 at 6:28 pm
I believe it would be pronounced Dr. Michael Weiner. The self-loathing Jew bit is just a wee bit presumptive without citing chapter and verse–trust me, you have none. Callow youths listen to talk radio? I’ll defer to your superior knowledge, but it would certainly surprise me to hear that there is such an audience.
9. Kaus | April 19th, 2008 at 6:42 pm
Hey Bob…I used to listen to the diatribes of Savage..and when he gets rolling, he almost sounds like an American version of Hitler back in the early 1930s. Frightening with his hatred…but at the same time, it feels great to stir up some nationalist sentiment in the good ole USA eh? In fact, when I see old Jimmy Carter kissing up to our favorite terrorist friends in the middle east, I feel like tuning in! But his schtick gets old very fast. Too far right is as bad as too far to the left. I’d be happy just to have a capitalistic President with half a brain (sorry Bush but you don’t cut it).
10. Pat Cunningham | April 19th, 2008 at 7:16 pm
Bob: At least I refrained from repeating the widespread reports that Weiner/Savage also is a self-loathing something else (which I won’t label here, but is sometimes referred to, in slang terms, as having to do with a closet). The funny thing about Savage is that he knows nothing about Islam and Arabs. He doesn’t want to know. He’s not a political commentator or a heavy thinker. He’s an entertainer. He probably doesn’t believe a word of what he says, but it sells well among the cretins who hang on his every growl and grunt. He’s a political pornographer. There’s always been a market for that garbage, dating back to Father Coughlin, the loony priest, in the 1930s.
11. Kaus | April 19th, 2008 at 7:31 pm
No arguments here. He is jsut making a fast buck appealing to cretins. I do believe Rhandi Rhodes is the left’s version of that loser.
12. Pat Cunningham | April 19th, 2008 at 7:47 pm
Menlo Bob: Regarding the demographics of Savage’s audience, I don’t have data related strictly to his program, but I saw a study that said this in general terms: “The talk radio audience is largely male, relatively young and ideologically conservative, although not necessarily Republican.” Besides, I’m officially a senior citizen, so almost everybody but John McCain seems young to me.
13. charlie | April 20th, 2008 at 5:30 am
this is why i read the paper on line. it does not clutter my front yard, it is free, and i do not have to “read” it if i choose. one more reason?? pat cunningham.
14. Pat Cunningham | April 20th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
Charlie: My stuff is NOT free. You’ll be receiving a bill by e-mail. And I’ve got goons who will break your legs if you don’t pay.
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed