Oh good lord... media bias ... agin

[Stealth Hunter]

Originally Posted by nikimcbee

There's no money to fix the roads

You know, my local department of transportation office has had a dozen holes around it for the past 10 years. They only fix two, both of which cause their trucks to bounce when they back out of the parking lot. The others haven't caused them any problems, so they don't bother fixing them.

Just thought it was a little relevant...

[Enigma]

As if it matters who the so called "moderators" are. It isn't a real debate on the issues, more of a collection of stump speeches, and is run like a business by the CPD, who takes donations from corporations and bans a possible 3rd party candidate from the discussion. It's a farce.

[Enigma]

Oh, and can anyone tell me why any member of the media is "moderating" these events? Why must it be media figures?

[UnderseaLcpl]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

Interesting....then again, might be a good move for McCain not to request this woman replaced. In other words, the media after the debate will say the cards were stacked in Bidens favor if Palin does poorly. Remember the "men" going after Hillary in the primaries? This might work to Palin interest. :hmm: Lately the media has been complaining Palin is not accessible and somehow sheltered. Perhaps they will say the same thing here if this woman is pulled

Now you're thinking like a politician!
My sentiments exactly.

This could be a powerful advantage for McCain as swing voters (esp females) rally around a VP that has been mocked and harassed by the left for being a woman. Obviously her family-friendly image and simple, honest values aren't good enough for those elitist Dems. And so on and so forth.

Used wisely, this could be a sticking point with voters.

[Digital_Trucker]

Originally Posted by Enigma

Oh, and can anyone tell me why any member of the media is "moderating" these events? Why must it be media figures?

That's something I'd like to know, too. An experienced debate moderator would seem to be the proper choice. I'm talking about real debates, not these things we've been watching.

[SteamWake]

Originally Posted by Enigma

As if it matters who the so called "moderators" are. It isn't a real debate on the issues, more of a collection of stump speeches, and is run like a business by the CPD, who takes donations from corporations and bans a possible 3rd party candidate from the discussion. It's a farce.

It matters very much whom the moderator is.

From Webster

2: one who presides over an assembly, meeting, or discussion: as a: the presiding officer of a Presbyterian governing body b: the nonpartisan presiding officer of a town meeting c: the chairman of a discussion group 2: one who presides over an assembly, meeting, or discussion: as a: the presiding officer of a Presbyterian governing body b: the nonpartisan presiding officer of a town meeting c: the chairman of a discussion group

[Thomen]

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-gra...lays-race-card

[nikimcbee]

If you want to make both of them squirm, let Rush Limbaugh ask them questions. I'd pay to watch that debate! That would be very entertaining, he doesn't either of them.

[SteamWake]

Originally Posted by nikimcbee

he doesn't either of them.

He dosent what?

While it would be entertaining it would be too extreme to the other end of the spectrum.

The problem is you would be hard pressed to find anyone from the media whom is truly impartial. So .. why choose someone from the media?

Obama refused McCain's invitations to debate in an 'open forum' townhall type debate where there would be no moderator. That in itself is worth pondering.

Oh and about Ifills book, now there trying to say the book is not about Obama rather about african americans in politics... really? Then why is his name in the title?

[Konovalov]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

Then why is his name in the title?

To help it sell like hotcakes perhaps? :hmm:

[SteamWake]

Originally Posted by Konovalov

To help it sell like hotcakes perhaps? :hmm:

Well of course... so wouldent that lead you to believe that she has a vested interest in the outcome?

[nikimcbee]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

He dosent what?

While it would be entertaining it would be too extreme to the other end of the spectrum.

The problem is you would be hard pressed to find anyone from the media whom is truly impartial. So .. why choose someone from the media?

Obama refused McCain's invitations to debate in an 'open forum' townhall type debate where there would be no moderator. That in itself is worth pondering.

Oh and about Ifills book, now there trying to say the book is not about Obama rather about african americans in politics... really? Then why is his name in the title?

He doesn't like either of them.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

Obama refused McCain's invitations to debate in an 'open forum' townhall type debate where there would be no moderator. That in itself is worth pondering.

Yes it is. I didn't know that. I've never liked the question-and-answer format of modern so-called debates, preferring the traditional Lincold-Douglas style. One side makes an opening speech on the topic, the other side makes his own speech answering the opponent and making his own arguments, and so-on. This lets them challenge each other, and lets the audience see how good they each are on the fly.

That's what I call a real debate.

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Yes it is. I didn't know that. I've never liked the question-and-answer format of modern so-called debates, preferring the traditional Lincold-Douglas style. One side makes an opening speech on the topic, the other side makes his own speech answering the opponent and making his own arguments, and so-on. This lets them challenge each other, and lets the audience see how good they each are on the fly.

That's what I call a real debate.

Personally, I believe Obama would crush McCain in this instance. Look at Obama and his speeches. He loves the free form speaking like the sermon on the mound. I noticed at the debates when questioned, he was not quite as sharp as when he has free reign to speak his mind without rebuttal. Perhaps McCain is better at this type of debate also, I seriously doubting it.