For those who have seen the Morgan/O'Donnell interview on CNN

For those who HAVE seen it----------------

Oh, boy. Talk about a talk between two people who seemed to get along quickly degenerating to the guest walking out.
I can see both sides of the issue. I think Piers was fair in asking those questions about her views on sexuality. And she is NO longer running for office. And those views are ARE in the book. OTOH, I sort of see where she was coming from. I guess she felt that whatever she said regarding her Roman Catholic views would be used by CNN against her. OTOH, I guess Piers felt he had a right to ask those questions since they were in the book.

Ultimately, I think BOTH sides came out looking bad in the program.
I don't understand why O'Donnell would not want to discuss her views----that would have awesome. She calls herself a devout Catholic---------that would have been her chance to defend the faith against secular attacks. She didn't.

I guess she felt she was there to defend the Tea Party and put forward her own views as to what Obama is doing to the country only. She should have specified to Piers before the interview that she would not want certain things discussed. I can see Piers, though, saying "I should be able to ask whatver I want." I guess he also would have felt she was there only to push the Tea Party ideology forward. The question is----other people have pushed their ideology forward (both left and right) on his show---and he has allowed it. Why can't she? I guess he didn't want to be accused by folks of being "soft" on her.

I ultimately believe in what O'Donnell stands for and what she is supporting---------but I also think theywere acting according to "script." The bottom line is, neither of them came out good on the interview.
What do you guys think?

For those of us (such as myself) who are confused about what this thread concerns, it is about this evening's interview between a CNN host (Piers Morgan) and Christine O'Donnell (who unsuccessfully ran as Tea Party favorite for Senator of the US state of Delaware.)

A three minute clip of the exchange leading to the walk off can be viewed here:
piersmorgan.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/17/christine-odonnell-walks-off-piers-morgan-tonight-interview-during-gay-marriage-questions/?hpt=pm_mid

Understandably, O'Donnell wants to discuss her book. However, if her views on gay policy issues are discussed in the book, they would seem topical. I think it is unfortunate that Morgan didn't mention that they were in the book until after she had ended the interview.

[quote="Dale_M, post:2, topic:252611"]
For those of us (such as myself) who are confused about what this thread concerns, it is about the interview between a CNN host (Piers Morgan) and Christine O'Donnell (who unsuccessfully ran as Tea Party favorite for Senator of the US state of Delaware.)

A three minute clip of the exchange leading to the walk off can be viewed here:
piersmorgan.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/17/christine-odonnell-walks-off-piers-morgan-tonight-interview-during-gay-marriage-questions/?hpt=pm_mid

Understandably, O'Donnell wants to discuss her book. However, if her views on gay policy issues are discussed in the book, they would seem topical. I think it is unfortunate that Morgan didn't mention that they were in the book until she had ended the interview.

[/quote]

Thanks for that. I guess I should have been slightly more clear about the purpose of the thread. however, I DID say it was for people who had SEEN the interview.

Again, thanks for the link, though. And O'Donnell DID make it clear the views were in the book way before the three minute snippet you saw. The whole interview does pu the whole thing in perspective. :thumbsup:

[quote="Dale_M, post:2, topic:252611"]
For those of us (such as myself) who are confused about what this thread concerns, it is about the interview between a CNN host (Piers Morgan) and Christine O'Donnell (who unsuccessfully ran as Tea Party favorite for Senator of the US state of Delaware.)

A three minute clip of the exchange leading to the walk off can be viewed here:
piersmorgan.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/17/christine-odonnell-walks-off-piers-morgan-tonight-interview-during-gay-marriage-questions/?hpt=pm_mid

Understandably, O'Donnell wants to discuss her book. However, if her views on gay policy issues are discussed in the book, they would seem topical. I think it is unfortunate that Morgan didn't mention that they were in the book until she had ended the interview.

[/quote]

Actually, she stated a few times that her views on gay marriage were in her book - well before she got up and left. After a few times of her stating it was in the book, he asked her to comment on don't-ask-don't-tell. It that wasn't being intentionally provoking, I don't know what is. Then he asked her what Bachmann thought of somethng (forgot what the question was), and she said, she's not running, ask Bachmann. She wanted to discuss her book, and not politics, and kept stating over and over that she was not running. He kept persisting, and I have no clue why.

I can see her perspective: she had two interviews scheduled and decided to be late to the second one in order to be on Morgan's program. Both to discuss the book. He gave her such a hard time, and yes, she left and went on to the second interview...wouldn't anyone? It was a waste of her time. She could have already been at that second interview...discussing her book.

What I wanna know is: who else saw Anderson Cooper's giggle fit? Poor dude... LOL

[quote="OrdinaryMelkite, post:3, topic:252611"]
Thanks for that. I guess I should have been slightly more clear about the purpose of the thread. however, I DID say it was for people who had SEEN the interview. '

[/quote]

Yeah, I just like sticking my nose everywhere. :blush:

I dunno... I can't evaluate how Morgan treats other guests, because I don't watch his show. But his persistence in pursuing a line of questioning didn't seem unreasonable, even if she didn't want to discuss that particular topic. I think she could have handled it better, either by giving a bland non-answer or by minimizing the topic and referring people to her book for fuller explanation. And then change the topic and start talking about what she wanted to focus on.

[quote="Rence, post:4, topic:252611"]
Actually, she stated a few times that her views on gay marriage were in her book - well before she got up and left. After a few times of her stating it was in the book, he asked her to comment on don't-ask-don't-tell. It that wasn't being intentionally provoking, I don't know what is. Then he asked her what Bachmann thought of somethng (forgot what the question was), and she said, she's not running, ask Bachmann. She wanted to discuss her book, and not politics, and kept stating over and over that she was not running. He kept persisting, and I have no clue why.

I can see her perspective: she had two interviews scheduled and decided to be late to the second one in order to be on Morgan's program. Both to discuss the book. He gave her such a hard time, and yes, she left and went on to the second interview...wouldn't anyone? It was a waste of her time. She could have already been at that second interview...discussing her book.

What I wanna know is: who else saw Anderson Cooper's giggle fit? Poor dude... LOL

[/quote]

I do agree the "don't ask, don't tell" question was sort of "provocative," but OTOH, her views on gay marriage WERE in the book (among other things), so if she doesn't want to discuss what was in the book, then what is she saying that "I'm here to discuss the book?"

But I see what you are saying. I guess she felt that if she discussed the things, that it would be used by Morgan and CNN to make fun of her again.
And like I said, he's allowed people on the show to spout other idologies on the show, whether left or right----why not now?

This should have been straightened out before the show.
But yes, I do see what you are saying. He came off too aggressive.

[quote="OrdinaryMelkite, post:6, topic:252611"]
I do agree the "don't ask, don't tell" question was sort of "provocative," but OTOH, her views on gay marriage WERE in the book (among other things), so if she doesn't want to discuss what was in the book, then what is she saying that "I'm here to discuss the book?"

[/quote]

From what I gathered, she didn't want to discuss what was in the book (she said, people can read what's in the book). She wanted to discuss the book...as in how and why it was written, etc. It was to discuss and pimp her book.

[quote="OrdinaryMelkite, post:6, topic:252611"]

But I see what you are saying. I guess she felt that if she discussed the things, that it would be used by Morgan and CNN to make fun of her again.
And like I said, he's allowed people on the show to spout other idologies on the show, whether left or right----why not now?

[/quote]

Yeah, I felt that he was poking at her devoutness and wanted to draw that out so he could make fun of her again.

[quote="OrdinaryMelkite, post:6, topic:252611"]

This should have been straightened out before the show.
But yes, I do see what you are saying. He came off too aggressive.

[/quote]

But did you see Anderson Cooper's giggle fit? :p

[quote="Dale_M, post:5, topic:252611"]
Yeah, I just like sticking my nose everywhere. :blush:

I dunno... I can't evaluate how Morgan treats other guests, because I don't watch his show. But his persistence in pursuing a line of questioning didn't seem unreasonable, even if she didn't want to discuss that particular topic.

[/quote]

Hope you did not take my comment the wrong way, Dale. You happen to be one of my favorite posters. :thumbsup:
In other words, I was not being "snarky.":)

I guess it depends on what you mean by "unreasonable." I guess she interpreted his persistence in asking the question as beasically his attempt at somehow using her views as fodder for CNN's "agenda." I don't, of course, presume to know what was inside O'Donnell and Morgan's mind---just guessing what how she might have interpreted the line of questioning he was pursuing. And I guess Morgan MAY have thought he was just "doing his job" and that he had the right to take this any way he wanted.

You can look at this in a myriad of ways. It can range from "This was an attempt to 'get' Christine O'Donnell" to "O'Donnell wanted to control the direction of the interview and morgan was just doing his job and asking her about the book." Or it can come somewhere in between. Take your pick.
Like I said------I think they BOTH came out bad in the interview.

[quote="Rence, post:7, topic:252611"]
From what I gathered, she didn't want to discuss what was in the book (she said, people can read what's in the book). She wanted to discuss the book...as in how and why it was written, etc. It was to discuss and pimp her book.

Yeah, I felt that he was poking at her devoutness and wanted to draw that out so he could make fun of her again.

But did you see Anderson Cooper's giggle fit? :p

[/quote]

Yeah, I saw Anderson giggle...............................................................:rolleyes:
I guess he thought "here comes another religious nut making fun of my sexuality." (And yes, most people say Anderson is Gay.):)

I see definitely what you are saying.
Like I said, I think both came out badly in the interview. What I would have done is answered his questions and told in no uncertain terms to move on and that I felt that his line and tone of questioning was inappropriate and designed to advance what I thought was CNN's political and moral agenda. That would have put him on the defensive, or at least the "explanatory" mode.

[quote="OrdinaryMelkite, post:9, topic:252611"]

Like I said, i think both came out badly in the interview. What I would have done is answered his questions and told in no uncertain terms to move on and that I felt that his line and tone of questioning was inappropriate and designed to advance what I thought was CNN's political and moral agenda. That would have put him on the defensive, or at least the "explanatory" mode.

[/quote]

I get what you're saying. I can see both sides :)

FYI, I don’t know if anyone in this thread knows this or if it makes any difference in this thread, but Morgan is Catholic.

[quote="PatriceA, post:11, topic:252611"]
FYI, I don't know if anyone in this thread knows this or if it makes any difference in this thread, but Morgan is Catholic.

[/quote]

I happen to know that----however, by his actions, past spoken beliefs, and the very fact that he works for an overtly secular, liberal network like CNN, he has made it very clear that he is NOT a "devout, believing" Catholic. Most of the time he's been there, he has supported the "party line" of the network, being VERY Pro-Obama and almost contemptous of most Republicans and conservatives. He has all but said he supports abortion on demand and same-sex marriage. :thumbsup:

BTW-----I personally feel Morgan has a right to say what he wants to on a network which is openly liberal----just like I think the people on Fox have a right to say what they want to on an openly conservative network----------------I think there is a"myth" of objectivity which networks can't realistically live up to----you can be fair and balanced, but NOT really "objective"--------------
I was simply commenting on Morgan's true adherence to the beliefs and morals of Holy Mother Church. He can think what he wants-----but DON'T consider yourself a True Catholic.
Good point, though. :thumbsup::thumbsup:

[quote="PatriceA, post:11, topic:252611"]
FYI, I don't know if anyone in this thread knows this or if it makes any difference in this thread, but Morgan is Catholic.

[/quote]

That's intereresting. It sounded to me like he wanted to turn the interview away from a discussion of O'Donnel's view's on government to one where he could make fun of Catholic sexual morality.

I don't understand why she didn't answer the question about gay marriage. I feel she made her self look bad. There is no reason why a person who ran for office should walk out of an interview because of a question about a relevant topic. I would have voted for her and am somewhat in her camp, but feel she made her self look very strange.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.