Brian StittBefore he spoke to the College Democrats, political commentator and consultant Paul Begala spoke with Student Life about the climate of political debate, his debate with Jon Stewart and the importance of Iraq.
Student Life: You’ve worked as the host of Crossfire and as a political commentator in several other venues. What do you think is the role of political punditry in the current political landscape?
Paul Begala: I think both to inform and entertain. On TV, I want to engage people. Some people will, no matter what, watch-they follow politics very closely-those are people who watch C-SPAN. I want to engage them in politics, rather than on the latest body part that Paris Hilton shaved. I want to keep them on my stuff because its more important. Jim Fallow says this. He says the job of journalists-which I’m not, I’m a commentator-Fallows says the job of journalists is to make the important interesting. Too often, certainly in cable news, we do the opposite.
SL: What do you bring to that conversation?
PB: I’m like in a football game the ex-jock because I’ve actually been there. It’s good for commentators to have a varied background. It’s good for some of them to have been in journalism all their lives, but it’s good for others of us to have actually be on the field. To know what its like to write a State of the Union address, to know what it feels like to lose a primary.
SL: Most people in the college demographic know you from the time you spent hosting Crossfire, specifically the appearance that Jon Stewart made on the show. During that show you didn’t say too much; do you agree with the points he was making?
PB: The notion that a 30-minute debate show could hurt America is preposterous. My own view is that we helped America enormously. America should have listened to me. In the three years that I did Crossfire, more than fifty percent of the shows were about the war in Iraq. Every other thing else combined was less than that one thing, and every single day I on there and said the war was wrong and we shouldn’t have it. I didn’t care if Hillary was for it, my friend, or John Kerry or any of the people I love. And Carville did the same thing. Stewart was put off, justifiably, by my style or Tucker’s or something, but I wish I had yelled more.
SL: We’ve had a very vitriolic political debate over the last eight years. What do we do about that?
PB: We have more of it. I want more of it. It doesn’t have to be bitter, but if you believe as I do that the president of the United States lied to us to get us into a war then you should say so. I actually do think that civility matters, but I think that dissent matters more. I refuse to allow my deep patriotism-I wear the flag pin-or my own sense of good manners to get in the way of speaking out, particularly the,n when we were on a massive march to war.
SL: What do you do if the tone of the message is interfering with the content of the message?
PB: This should be rough, tough, fun, interesting, funny. We always did Crossfire in front of a live audience, which was a really good governor. People would say “Oooo” if you went too far. You would know right away-if they were saying that in the audience, so were folks at home. If you go to far it’s self-defeating. Ann Coulter is an example. I love seeing Ann Coulter on TV, because every time she’s on TV she brings converts to my side.
SL: You’ve spoken about your opinions about the war very passionately. Should Iraq be the defining issue of the next election?
PB: You know I think the economy is likely to surpass it. It’s terribly important to me-at Georgetown, half of my students are soldiers so I know a whole lot, including my cousin. One of my friends who I worked with at the White House is a Lt. Colonel who just got back, so I know a lot of people fighting this war, but again, that makes me really unusual in the media. Most people are much more affected by the economy, but they sort of meet.
Interview conducted, condensed and edited by Sam Guzik.