Posted on 08/10/2015 7:08:54 AM PDT by Sybeck1
I don't need liberal Howard Kurtz, formerly of the Washington Post, telling me or you why we criticize his network's handling of the Republican debate. He's on their payroll. I am not. His comments are self-serving. I've explained in plain English my assessment on my own radio show and elsewhere. And I am not a Trump supporter as I've not declared for anyone. But I have been a Fox supporter. Nor is this about what Democrats or liberal news outlets would say or do. Argument by innuendo and distraction is a typical but flawed tactic. Kurtz doesn't know me or my audience. He's flailing and projecting.
This is about dumbing down the debate, turning it into a spectacle to promote Megyn Kelly, the moderators hogging limited time that should have been available to the candidates, flawed opposition research in one case taken completely out of context, etc. This was not to be the Fox debate but the first REPUBLICAN PARTY sanctioned debate. We Republicans are trying to decide who to support in the primaries through this process. Fox was given an opportunity to moderate the first debate. It wasn't to be "the Fox debate." Meanwhile, they've been relentlessly touting their ratings to the public and advertisers from the debate because that was their objective. Well, cable ratings be damned. Their corporate objectives are not our objectives. We, the people, learned next to nothing. These are serious times and they perverted the format. Of course the New York Times and CNN praised them.
The fact that Kurtz and others are circling the wagons is more of the same. We are owed an apology, not dishonest, sanctimonious, and self-serving lectures from the paid staff through Fox's program schedule. This process belongs to us not corporate news outlets and their hosts. The GOP needs to find new ways to conduct their debates so this doesn't happen again.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/08/10/why-fox-debate-is-taking-hits-from-donald-trumps-fans/
What he said.
I absolutely agree.
The debates should be set up and run by the parties not the media.
The media should be invited to cover it the same way they cover live sporting events but not run them.
There are other ways: the GOP should insist that their OWN people moderate the debates - there are at least 3 prominent GOP leaders who are both (a) not candidates, and (b) could be reasonably trusted to be even-handed in their questioning.
Unlike the blonde beeyotch from Fox...
SLAP!
If a Republican presidential candidate can’t handle tough questions from Megyn Kelly, how are they going to deal with Putin and the Iranian Ayatollahs?
The upcoming debates won’t get any easier. The Fox News debate was a good way to get used to responding cogently to pointed questions. If Levin thinks it should have been a softball game for the candidates he has little respect for the formidable Republican field.
The inference that the RNC-approved debate should have been little more than a two-hour campaign ad for Republicans is dismissive of Fox News as a credible news network and not the Republican party propaganda outfit the left claims.
Right effing on. The don’t call Mark “The Great One” for nothing.
One of the best summary statements I have ever seen out of Levin. Fox suffers from an inferiority complex re the big broadcast networks and is angling for status against them. They let that agenda blind them seeking to "test" the candidates for how they might perform in the MSM limelight.
That's not their job. They forgot their purpose.
Not Fox's ratings, more like Trump's ratings, at least the huge incremental increase in the audience size over debates from past years belongs to Trump.
Fox is to host two more debates. Wouldn't surprise me if The Donald sat one of them out. Fox Business Channel will also host one debate.
Mistah Kurtz...he dumb.
You’re waaaaayyyyyyyyy off base. You obviously have absolutely no idea of what Levin’s “debate” criticism is all about. None. Zero. Nada.
Anyone who approves of Kelly’s and Wallace’s stupid and insipid debate “performance”(and make no mistake, performance is what it was)hasn’t a clue.
You're merely repeating Kelly's own weak defense. I highly doubt that Putin or any Ayatollah would ask Trump why he referred to a woman as a fat pig.
How about tough policy questions for Trump and the other candidates with some consistency?
c-span’s Brian Willams gets my vote.
Plus it’s a laughable argument.
For all Trump’s warts, I don’t think you could find a voter outside of the hard left who would say Trump is a wimp.
I’m sure Putin would be much more intimidated by Scott Walker or Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio. Spare me.
The first 20 minutes was not a debate, but a clown show, more like an SNL skit than a serious discussion on the issues. These weren't "tough" questions. They were meant to turn the process into a farce.
I 100% agree with Levin and have said similar things elsewhere. If you can't find a serious journalist, get a Conservative commentator, or drop the moderator completely. I want to hear from the candidates on the issues that matter, not the bimbo moderators with their inane questions. War on women? Only a brain-dead lefty would ask such a stupid question in a time when we are actually at war with a deadly enemy.
I watched Howard yesterday trying to walk Chrissy Wallace and Bret Baier across the bridge to redemption. I didn’t buy it.
What he said
Couldn't agree more. Megyn Kelly is nothing compared to what the Clinton organized crime family is eventually going to be throwing the way of the eventual nominee!
How did the debates prepare Obama to do the same?
This is red-herring argument. The President won't be debating these people, he will be negotiating with them.
Negotiations with Putin will not be held on a stage with moderators challenging the terms and the nation watching.
Which candidate will be a better negotiator with Putin and the Iranian Ayatollahs?
-PJ
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.