Stephen A. Smith’s Turn as a Political Expert
ESPN, Media Gossip/Musings, Politics January 17th. 2008, 10:38am
We’ve already put out a request for video of ESPN’s Dana Jacobson three sheets to the wind at the Mike & Mike Roast and please allow us to apologize in advance for requesting another: Stephen A. Smith on Hardball with Chris Matthews on Jan. 9. The memorable transcript is available, and we’ll get to the fantastic quotes in a minute, but first, we must ask … how out-of-control is this guy’s ego? It’s the middle of the NBA season, and yet Screamin’ A feels the need to go on Hardball and offer his unqualified opinions about the voters, Barry Obama and Mike Huckabee’s honesty?
If that alone doesn’t make you shake your head in bewilderment, please do follow the jump for the transcript. [UPDATE: Here's 2007 video from SAS on Paula Zahn, talking about atheists. Still looking for the column in which he mentioned religion that helped book him for this segment. There is video from the aforementioned Hardball appearance, and we should have it soon.]
It starts out better than you could have imagined – Smith (the transcript spells his first name with a ‘v’ and not a ‘ph‘) is referred to as a “sports columnist at the Philadelphia Inquirer.” Somebody’s not reading their blogs or fact checking – he hasn’t written for the paper in at least five months.
If you take umbrage with us calling Smith “unqualified,” then please answer this: Has Smith ever written about politics at ESPN? In Philly? Anywhere? (If the man has a political blog somewhere, and nobody has told us about this until now, we’re going to be very upset.) What in the name of Cheese Doodles is going on here? We’ve never seen Hardball, but how can anyone take a show seriously if it’s going to have Smith opine about politics … simply because he follows politics on TV and reads about it? That would be akin to … adding Rush Limbaugh to the Countdown cast!
SMITH: And then also you have to take into account, you have an abundance of African American voters out there who really are questioning how viable he was. At least, up to this point. That may not be the case now, but it was certainly something that a lot of African Americans were concerned about, because as an African American, I can tell you I was concerned it. I looked at it and I said to myself, how viable is it that Barack Obama can end up really challenging for the presidency of the United States? Because I didn’t want to put somebody as a representative of the Democrats to go up against the Republican that has absolutely no shot of doing it. That is still an issue to a lot of African-Americans in this country.
SMITH: Well I have the pleasure of meeting him. He actually came on my television show about a year ago. I have a lot of respect for John McCain. I think he’s got a lot of potential. But the guy that I would pick is Huckabee. I don’t want to talk about Giuliani. Please don’t bring him up. He’s the man in New York City we are from. I think that he is the worst possible candidate imaginable considering the fact that you have a president in George W. Bush in office right now who is considered a bit of a dictator. Imagine following that up with Giuliani in terms of international relations and foreign relations.
SMITH: I think about Huckabee and what he stands for. I think Huckabee comes across as more honest. He is constantly preaching about the importance to following the constitution. I think he represents the values that Republicans try to live off of, where Giuliani certainly doesn’t do that. Mitt Romney, you don’t know whether he is telling the truth from day to day because of that fake smile on his face. Fred Thompson, he’s got the picture. McCain, we love him, but he is a bit older now and you just don’t know if he has the durability to really do what’s right over the long road. I think Huckabee is the obvious choice.
82 Responses to “Stephen A. Smith’s Turn as a Political Expert”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.


January 17th, 2008 at 10:44 am
Wow. This man is indescribably stupid. No surprise he likes Mike.
January 17th, 2008 at 10:46 am
This is from a blog that slobs the knob of Jason Whitlock every time he writes an article blaming whatever ails Black America on hip hop. Man, that’s funny!!!!!
January 17th, 2008 at 10:46 am
If its Obama or Huckabee atleast SOMETHING will change. Whether it falls in my favor or not, I wouldnt complain. Who knows what kind of shit the Huckster might try. Wait, I’m on Hardball. Why? Oh, I’m black and speak for all african-american voters? Thats wierd.
January 17th, 2008 at 10:47 am
@cool_rick: I thought you were only allowed to post about Butler hoops?
January 17th, 2008 at 10:49 am
Ah. Knew somebody would mention Whitlock. Except that he’s written about society as it pertains to sports. Often, actually.
Can anyone find a SAS mention of politics in a column? Anywhere?
January 17th, 2008 at 10:49 am
That’s hard to read. My eyes go funny after a couple sentences.
“That may not be the case now, but it was certainly something that a lot of African Americans were concerned about, because as an African American, I can tell you I was concerned it.” Smith
Well, that settles it. Screaming A. Smith speaks for all black people.
January 17th, 2008 at 10:50 am
Nick P – I watch the news and read newspapers, thus I am able to post expert insight into politics. I also watch a lot of porn and play video/board games, so I think I am an expert on those topics as well.
January 17th, 2008 at 10:51 am
Bush, the guy who can’t string words together and form a coherent sentence, is a dictator? Wow, thanks for the insight, Screamin A!
January 17th, 2008 at 10:52 am
Is he essentially arguing that Barack shouldn’t be the democratic candidate because, as an African American, he’s afraid he’ll lose?
January 17th, 2008 at 10:53 am
Shouldn’t Stephen A’s part be in all caps?
January 17th, 2008 at 10:54 am
“a blog that slobs the knob”
Don’t know if I agree, but it does roll off the tongue nicely…
January 17th, 2008 at 10:54 am
Where does Mariotti come down on this?
January 17th, 2008 at 10:55 am
I hate it when black people get on tv and say “Black people feel this way. And most black people feel that way.” Then the media starts thinking he has his finger on the pulse of Black America. Stop speaking for the entire race! We’re individuals! We’re all different! Case in point, I think Stephen A is a Total Fucking Douchebag. But, I wouldn’t dare speak for black America.
January 17th, 2008 at 10:55 am
I hate to say this…I really do…but he brings up the valid concerns about voting for Obama, not in the political context, but in the social context that is a legitimate concern. Look what happened to Harold Ford Jr in Tennessee. He was ahead by a good margin in the polls. The RNC puts out the call me Harold Playboy party commercial and he loses. I don’t really get his support of Huckabee, but he is likable, he does speak well and he is on point that he resonates with the real conservative base of the party. And coming from NY…Giuliani is a dick and ran this city like a dictator. What he did as the NY face after 9/11 was great but what about the 7 years before that? Did he clean up Times Square? Sure he also caused Racial tension, would not pay the cops fireman and teachers what they deserved and then to cap it off wanted to give the Mets and Yankees brand new stadiums on the public dime before he left office. Now would I look to Stephen A as a political expert? No but his points weren’t asinine, they were legit and I could say he actually gives a good everyman perspective on things….no I need to hose myself off in a cold shower.
January 17th, 2008 at 10:57 am
If he is “writing about society as it pertains to sports”, he is still writing about society. What are his qualifications in doing so?
January 17th, 2008 at 10:57 am
I’m black, and I don’t like the looks of this.
January 17th, 2008 at 10:58 am
Not a big fan of Chris Matthews, but I am not shocked that he would have SAS as a guest. I was shocked at the guy SAS is endorsing. I never pictured him as a Republican AND endorsing Mike. I would have picked him as a Mccain or Clinton guy.
January 17th, 2008 at 11:00 am
RWH – You do realize that Huckabee is not a conservative, right? Have you taken a hard look at that record?
January 17th, 2008 at 11:02 am
STEPHEN A. SMITH APPROVES THIS MESSAGE
January 17th, 2008 at 11:07 am
i love how he contradicts almost every bold statement he makes. SAS, my hat’s off to you…
January 17th, 2008 at 11:08 am
Huckabbe also doesn’t believe in evolution.
Can we at least have a president that’s reasonably intelligent? Someone who attended a real college? I think all the other candidates in both parties qualify.
January 17th, 2008 at 11:08 am
I meant his Christian Conservative base..my bad…I know…none of the Rebublicans running are true conservatives in that sense…McCain and Huckabee being the farthest from the platform. In a weird way Ron Paul is what Barry Goldwater had in mind as a conservative.
January 17th, 2008 at 11:13 am
“If he is “writing about society as it pertains to sportsâ€, he is still writing about society. What are his qualifications in doing so?”
What are his qualifications for writing about sports?
January 17th, 2008 at 11:13 am
RWH – I actually like what Ron Paul has to say about fiscal policy. For that matter, Mitt Romney sounds as though he gets it as well.
Ah…damnit. I come here for snarky sports talk and pictures of chicks and end up in a SAS thread!
January 17th, 2008 at 11:14 am
Are we sure this is the same SAS? Name spelled differently… no yelling or screaming… no intermissions in the discussion for blackberry entries to be sent to a newspaper??
January 17th, 2008 at 11:14 am
@h8r
HA, I never knew that! Good to know. Thanks for that.
January 17th, 2008 at 11:17 am
just when you thought it was safe to turn off bsnp…
January 17th, 2008 at 11:18 am
in regards to huckabee and evolution…does separation of church and state exist anymore? it just seems that he’s really banging on his christian drum and, personally, i find it pretty obnoxious.
god i hate politics.
derek anderson for president.
January 17th, 2008 at 11:18 am
I think about Huckabee and what he stands for. I think Huckabee comes across as more honest. He is constantly preaching about the importance to following the constitution.
“I think Huckabee comes across as more honest. He is constantly preaching about the importance to following the constitution.”
I think, SAS, what you meant to say was the exact opposite. Didn’t Huck just screw any chance he had of winning by claiming the constitution should be amended to reflect the Bible?
Good stuff, TBL, and though they both may be blowhards, don’t think SAS and Whitlock are even remotely similar in their styles of journalism.
Whitlock actually says things. SAS just annunciates really, really well.
January 17th, 2008 at 11:21 am
412..I want my sports talk too…but yes..I dig Ron Paul’s campaign just because he does have a lot of good ideas (and some I am not into) but any candidate on either side could cherry pick what he has to say and be better for it…and I am a democrat (not hardcore, I try to listen to reason) and this came up the other night in a discussion with a few people who like different sides. Its funny Paul is the Republican version of Nader (not on campaign effect but in actual ideas that are of a populist nature)…One more thing..I like the occasional political talk here only because it is not like a screaming match over nothing. I would think and hope people will actually try their best to learn about candidates and issues because unfortunately we are not getting the best candidates on either side because anyone who is half same would never put him or herself through the dog and pony show that is the Electoral process…and I am now off my soap box..damn it is high.
January 17th, 2008 at 11:22 am
Other SAS political topics:
1) Due to the declining dollar, SAS prefers American economy operate strictly on Cheese Doodles.
2) Slava Med-ve-den-ko now foreign ambassador to Ukraine
3) Quite Frankly now required to be carried on all major networks a minimum of 6 hours a day.
January 17th, 2008 at 11:24 am
D – You don’t need qualifications to weave larger societal issues into sports.
The question here – how would Hardball find SAS? Has he written a moving political column? Ever? Or even about this election? If he wrote something interesting and they decided to call him on to talk about his piece, that’s fine.
But if you’re a Hardball segment producer, how on earth do you come up with SAS for this panel? What is the basis?
January 17th, 2008 at 11:28 am
TBL- shocked as well because I like Chris Matthews, the only link I can think of is that Screamin Willie Beamin is from Philly. Mathews is from Philly.
January 17th, 2008 at 11:29 am
To be honest, what “qualifies” someone to go on Hardball and give their opinion about the candidates? Maybe he’s not a so-called expert, like the ones who wrote off Hillary as dead in NH or ordained Rudy as the man to beat on the Republican side, but I’m not going to throw bricks at the TV if I see SAS on there giving his two cents without screaming and busting out a bunch of HOWEVAS.
January 17th, 2008 at 11:31 am
im sure the hardball producers heard stephen a while he was shouting for some nba telecast in times square. i heard him in jersey.
January 17th, 2008 at 11:31 am
BUTLER COACH ON ESPN. I just got an email saying that Butler is being hyped, TBL better not catch on.
January 17th, 2008 at 11:32 am
Are we really talking college football polls already?
January 17th, 2008 at 11:33 am
TBL…I don’t know this but my gut feeling is he knows Matthews or someone at NBC and they said he he would be interesting to put on…He has a radio show in NYC (not a very good one) but on it he does talk race and sports and has taken different sides to the issue (once again I don’t call this good or his forte)so there is something there. But my question to you is what makes anyone qualified to give social commentary…we all do it all day long. I never heard of a social commentary profession. He writes (sometimes) for ESPN and has a radio show in which he comments on all sorts of things..to me that makes him as qualified as anyone…and by that I feel no one is qualified to provide social commentary because no one could ever make the case case for everyone…God I hate sticking up for him but..Whay are you doing this to me WHY!!!!!
January 17th, 2008 at 11:36 am
Just found another gem from the Hardball transcript:
“Certainly, again, I would go with Barack Obama from the standpoint that he certainly the person that I would go, you know, likely that I would vote for.”
So, to paraphrase for Mr. Smith: He would go with Obama from the standpoint that he is certainly the person that he would likely vote for.
Wow. So that’s why ESPN Radio promoted his show to national syndication.
January 17th, 2008 at 11:37 am
Just another reason for me to support Rudy.
Rudy, Rudy, Rudy!
January 17th, 2008 at 11:38 am
@ RWH – Yeah, I do appreciate the political talk as well. I do come here for other things, but a pretty good cast of characters show up here…so I’m always interested in hearing what they have to say. And, I’m not terribly pleased with the choices we get on either side. I’m a Rudy guy first, a Thompson supporter second. However, both campaigns have been abysmal…and I won’t be shocked if I’m left w/ Mitt (who, it turns out, isn’t as bad as I originally thought).
Okay, I’m off politics for the day. Look, it’s Kristen Bell!
January 17th, 2008 at 11:39 am
+1 The412
January 17th, 2008 at 11:40 am
I am not so sure Huck wants to keep the constitution. In fact here is a quote from Huck on Monday.
“I have opponents in this race who do not want to change the Constitution,” Huckabee told a Michigan audience on Monday. “But I believe it’s a lot easier to change the Constitution than it would be to change the word of the living god. And that’s what we need to do — to amend the Constitution so it’s in God’s standards rather than try to change God’s standards so it lines up with some contemporary view.”
This is what scares me. I am not religious, though I do not begrudge people who are. What concerns me is who is deciding how to interepret “Gods word and Standards”
January 17th, 2008 at 11:41 am
fuck +1..+10 for that!
January 17th, 2008 at 11:45 am
bobb…I believe that was his round about way of banning Gay Marriage and making Abortion illegal in a Constitutional amendment..I believe he phrases it that way do he doesn’t get the Huckabee wants Anti-Gay Marriage Amendment…he is letting his base know what he believes without scaring off those who are more socially progressive Republicans. I don’t think he is looking to make whole sale changes..but who knows he left it open to interpretation.
January 17th, 2008 at 11:46 am
…meant to put the word “Headline” after “Anti-Gay Marriage Amendment”
January 17th, 2008 at 11:51 am
bobb…its that kind of shit that alienates him from what Roman said were more socially progressive Republicans.
believe it or not, US citizens aren’t all Christians. to mold ANY law in an interpretation of “god’s word” is a disservice to the country. any religious talk regarding a potential executive leader should be explicitly discouraged. i was raised a christian, and after 12 years of jesuit schooling, think the majority of devoutly religious people are oblivious to anything regarding common sense. once someone states their religious zeal, they expose a bias that’s ingrained in their psyche.
of course, my rejection of anything religious is the same bias im railing against towards Huckabee. I actually like the dude as a candidate, but the most important position in our govt should not have an ounce of subjectivity when it comes to religion and shaping the order of the US.
/anti-religion in politics rant that was extremely vague and poorly worded
January 17th, 2008 at 11:54 am
I hear you. RWH, but it still bothers me. I just get very concerned when religion is the basis for statements regarding the constitution of the United States.
January 17th, 2008 at 11:57 am
Bob do you have a link? I am a non-religious (not anti-religion, a la Spencer) conservative but that statement of his is pretty crazy.
January 17th, 2008 at 11:57 am
Another supporter of political talk on this site, since it’s one place where people actually seem to have their own ideas instead of screaming what the stupid pundits say.
January 17th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
Mike I just typed in (Huckabee, Gods word, Constitution) to google, and found it. I had actually heard the quote on the radio, so I had to find it that way. Here is an MSNBC Link to the quote.
Sorry I am not sure how to link with just a click.<
January 17th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
Oh wait, I guess I just did
January 17th, 2008 at 12:08 pm
Thanks. The thing is, he can make his point about abortion without using religion as his crutch.
Here’s hoping Fred can pull one out.
January 17th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
Our current president talks to god. Like seriously has conversations with god about going to war and kinda important stuff like that. Huckabee is just one shade loonier.
January 17th, 2008 at 12:22 pm
Why would you say I am non-religious but not anti-religious? Thats like having to say I’m Christian, not anti-muslim. Why is it so taboo to say you are an Athiest in America? It’s O.K.
January 17th, 2008 at 12:28 pm
ehhh, Im an evangelical and I cant stand Huckabee. I think he is a good guy, but he is pimping christianity too much for me. Im for Thompson/Romney.
January 17th, 2008 at 12:33 pm
Owl you have a good point. I think what most of us are saying by that is we are tolerant of other beliefs.
January 17th, 2008 at 12:34 pm
I don’t want to hear the candidates mention religion when defining their message or prospective agenda. We just had 8 years of “faith-based” leadership, look where that got us. If a candidate stated he was going to abide by the laws and wishes of Allah, you think people would be down with that?
Like Spencer said, not everyone is Christian and not all Christians care about the religious beliefs of a candidate for the most powerful elected position in the world. Our next President could be a Pagan for all I care as long as they carry out the will of the people.
January 17th, 2008 at 12:37 pm
Because they are not the same thing, that’s why. I have no problems with (most) religion. Many people, on the other hand, despise organized religion of all kinds – therefore, they are anti-religious.
And atheism is a belief of its own kind, too.
January 17th, 2008 at 12:39 pm
You think that might have something to do with, you know, Islam? Pick up the Koran one day and flip through it. You’ll be amazed.
January 17th, 2008 at 12:40 pm
Christianity in America has become an “if you’re not with us, you’re against us” issue. Non-believers are forced to keep our opinions to ourselves for the fear of being labeled an “against us”.
Since when do have to declare our tolerance of other beliefs. The people who weren’t tolerant used to just speak up and say something racial or hateful.
January 17th, 2008 at 12:42 pm
“Since when do we have”…
January 17th, 2008 at 12:46 pm
That’s your “fear,” a label? It didn’t seem to stop Andres Serrano from creating his “art,” now did it? Now tell me, how many Christians rioted in the streets and chanted for this man’s head because of his artistic expression?
January 17th, 2008 at 1:06 pm
You’re comparing the democratic process to someone’s taste in ART? You can’t be serious!
By the way, the Christians might not have rioted against this artist, but I guarantee there was at minimum a protest. Christians protest the scientific exhibit Body Worlds, they protest in front of Planned Parenthood, they protest against a fucking CHILDREN’S movie (Golden Compass)… need I go on?
January 17th, 2008 at 1:10 pm
As someone who lived in a town very judgmental on people’s religious beliefs, it’s not a fear of violence, but a fear of not being taken seriously.
As soon as I told someone I am not Christen, all of a sudden I became an inferior person. Not only that, but I was out there actively trying to cause the downfall of Christianity with my heathen ways. Somehow my not believing became a threat to their way of life. I think a fear of being treated like that is more what is meant, not a physical violence fear.
January 17th, 2008 at 1:13 pm
Isn’t the bedrock of any organized religion just denial of opposing viewpoints?
January 17th, 2008 at 1:14 pm
In their defense, the author’s belief is that Religion is the scourge of the work, Aethism is the only possible belief and that the Church should be destroyed because it’s pure evil. The book is about killing God, and he’s even said in interviews he greenlit the movie hoping more people read the book to see how evil religion is. I can understand the protests here.
January 17th, 2008 at 1:14 pm
scourge of the world*
January 17th, 2008 at 1:27 pm
Jibbles, I hate to disagree with you here because I’ve agreed with many of your statements, but I’ve read the “Compass” books. The author might have a personal view against religion, but the overall theme isn’t about “killing God”… the higher figure isn’t even the Christian’s picture of God! The author doesn’t agree with ORGANIZED religion, specifically those religions that use God as a fear tactic. In any case, I was trying to make the point that an artist making some painting involving God and pissing gets the same kind of protest from the Christians as movies or museum exhibits. It might not involve rioting, but it involves media coverage.
January 17th, 2008 at 1:36 pm
Point to me where I compared the “democratic process” to anything. Are you implying that non-Christians are not allowed to vote, or that they’re too “afraid” to take part in the process?
Ah, and therein lies the rub. Non-violent protest v. violent protest. Isn’t it comforting to you that a Christian will not kill you for insulting his religion, but a Muslim will (and do so based on the teachings of his holy book)?
January 17th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
Mike, the discussion involved the Christian right and their political decisions. I have seen on MANY occasions Christians badgering, yelling, spitting at people for not agreeing with their beliefs. They vote for candidates who don’t understand “separation of church and state”, and they’re fear mongers. Sure they didn’t kill anyone with their own hands, they just elected a President who’s killed thousands of American soldiers and Iraqi citizens.
January 17th, 2008 at 1:56 pm
SG, moral equivalent arguments tend to descend quickly into flame wars. Agree to disagree and move on (until next time!)
January 17th, 2008 at 1:58 pm
Mike-What do you call the crusades? What do you call the war in Afghanistan? What do you call this Iraq war?
The U.S. is killing Muslim’s because they are not Christians. We just have changed their name from Muslim’s to Terrorists.
January 17th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
Why wasn’t the whole transcript in CAPS?
January 17th, 2008 at 4:10 pm
There’s a reason John Saunders probably told ESPN that he wanted off the NBA coverage a couple of seasons ago —- Screamin’ A just makes being black hard.
January 17th, 2008 at 5:50 pm
Knowing SAS is a Republican might convince me to switch to Democrat.
“I don’t want to talk about Giuliani. Please don’t bring him up. He’s the man in New York City we are from. I think that he is the worst possible candidate imaginable considering the fact that you have a president in George W. Bush in office right now who is considered a bit of a dictator. Imagine following that up with Giuliani in terms of international relations and foreign relations.”
Rudy just earned a vote from me.
What is the difference between international relations and foreign relations, anyhow?
January 17th, 2008 at 8:02 pm
That would be akin to … adding Rush Limbaugh to the Countdown cast!
Not to nit pick but at least Rush Limbaugh was somewhat qualified to be on the ‘Countdown’ show, he worked in the Pittsburgh Steelers organization for a few years and is a big Steelers fan.
412 and Dirty Sanchez, if you didn’t already know this I’m sure your happy to know now!
January 17th, 2008 at 10:34 pm
jmorris – No, Rush worked for the KC Royals. He worked for a radio station in Pittsburgh (KQV), but never actually worked for the Steelers.
January 18th, 2008 at 2:25 am
Ron Paul for President
January 18th, 2008 at 3:32 am
Agreed with RiSK — Ron Paul has my vote. I’m not sure where SAS got off thinking that Huckabee was a constitutionalist; that position is clearly owned by Paul. My perception of Huckabee is that he’ll push the U.S. even more toward being a theocracy, which is a frightening prospect.
January 18th, 2008 at 9:18 am
This is one of the reasons why MSNBC is a total joke and gets killed in the ratings by Fox.
Who would put SAS on the air even to talk about basketball? I think Tucker Carlsons head was going to explode after every SAS answer.
January 18th, 2008 at 7:40 pm
@412 -I stand corrected, Rush did not work for the Steelers, sorry for the misinformation.