Time for ABC to Send George Stephanopoulos Packing

Will Malven

One of the most critical aspects of a journalist's credibility is his ability to at least appear to be objective. So what happens when one of the biggest names in network journalism George Stephanopoulos host of ABC's "This Week with George Stephanopoulos" is revealed to be in constant contact with other former Clinton Administration advisors using their collective knowledge and political acumen to aid President Obama's Chief of Staff in performing his job?

The answer to that question will reveal just how dedicated the management of ABC is to the basic tenets of objective journalism; dedicated or contemptuous.

This is the story as reported in the Politico:

By: John F. Harris
Editor in Chief of the Politico

The conversations don’t begin with hello. They don’t end with goodbye. Most often they pick up with a low, drawling voice uttering something between a sentence and a grunt.

“Wahzgoanawn?”

For those accustomed to hearing James Carville only when he is trying to enunciate more clearly for television, that translates to: "What's going on?"

So begins another morning in what may count as Washington’s longest-running conversation — a street-corner bull session between four old friends who suddenly find themselves standing once more at the busiest intersection of politics and media in Washington.

Carville calls White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel.

Emanuel calls ABC News Chief Washington Correspondent George Stephanopoulos.

A bit later, CNN commentator Paul Begala, who is not quite the early bird that his friends are, will complete the circle with a rapid set of calls to all three.

Different versions of this round-robin chatter have been taking place, with few interruptions, every workday for nearly a generation.

With this story and its disturbing revelation that far from severing his ties as a political operative for the Democrat Party, Mr. Stephanopoulos continues to use them to Democrat advantage, even as he positions himself as an objective interlocutor on ABC's Sunday morning Political round up.

Clearly the program needs to be labeled as a clearly biased opinion program (as we already know it to be) rather than the objective journalistic program it claims to be. Just as one cannot serve both God and Mammon, Stephanopoulos cannot serve both his masters in the Democrat hierarchy and the Obama Administration and the basic tenets of his chosen profession, journalism.

The Politico article further states the following about this issue:

It is a sensitive point for Stephanopoulos, who shot to fame as a Bill Clinton retainer and has worked hard to fashion a reputation as an independent journalist.

He said he does not surrender that role when he gets on the calls, nor does he surrender personal feelings that go back nearly 20 years.

“We are all good friends,” he said. “We just like talking to each other, and I learn a lot from it ... and that’s why we have been doing it for so long.”

What a cozy...and innocent picture he paints.

Allow me to put this into perspective for a moment by dredging up an incident that Liberals would now like to forget as it applies very well to this case. Does the name James Dale Guckert ring a bell? Maybe you know him better by his Nome de plume, Jeff Gannon.

Jeff Gannon was the unfortunate individual who made the mistake of asking what some White House reporters believed to be a "softball question" of President Bush during a White House press conference on January 26, 2005. As a result of his actions, Mr. Guckert's entire career and his personal life were placed under a Liberal microscope.

While it is true that Mr. Guckert had a rather sordid and checkered past, the attacks and scrutiny to which he was subjected went well beyond the pale. Those same Liberals who endlessly claim to be supportive of "gay rights" immediately began to ridicule Mr. Guckert for being gay. They published nude pictures of him he had posted when he was a gay prostitute (are you paying attention Congressman Barney Frank?) on their Left-wing websites and used every means at their disposal to destroy him...simply because he asked the President a "friendly question" during a press conference.

Now, as George Stephanopoulos was, himself, a prostitute of sort; selling his services as a political operative to whatever Democrat candidate desired them, perhaps he deserves the same scrutiny as he performs his duties at ABC.

I, in no way, defend Mr. Guckert/Gannon's past, but I do believe that "fair is fair" and if one individual's credentials as a journalist are rendered questionable by a mere question, then shouldn't an individual who still functions as an unofficial advisor to the Chief of Staff of the sitting president be subjected to the same journalistic standards?

Watching Mr. Stephanopoulos's program should relieve any doubt that he is about as biased a mediator as there is in television news, short of those programs clearly offered as editorial in intent. Even the journalists and commentators Mr. Stephanopoulos invites to his round-table discussions reflect his pro-Democrat biases. It is very rare indeed that there are more who are sympathetic to Republicans than those who sympathize with Democrat...it is even rare if there is a balanced panel.

Nope, I believe the jury is in on Mr. Stephanopoulos. The only question remaining is what, if anything is the network management going to do about it. If they wish to maintain any credibility at all, they have no choice but to find a different host for their program. To do otherwise will reveal them to be the Leftward biased network we Conservatives have known them to be for decades.

Time to go George.

Long Live Our American Republic!!!!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below