“Cold blooded”? I don’t get it. They’re not encouraging people to assassinate Obama/Romney and shout “Semper Pizza Hut!”
No, you’re changing your argument. It was about pulling a solemn occasion into the mud if filthy lucre. It was not a coldblooded but a “tacky” move. Well, debates are tacky on their own. I ‘m not saying the audience should start mooning the candidates or every question should be a put-on, but come on. What’s a little frivolity on top of frivolity in a world where we once asked a president about his underwear?
I’m not changing anything, and even if you find election debates “tacky” which is a weird enough view for someone dedicated to elections and politics, it still has nothing to do with a corporation making a “cold blooded” or “emotionless”, or a “clear-eyed” or a “planned, calculated” business decision to attempt to disrupt the national debate in front of 50 or 60 million viewers for free guerrilla advertising.
This isn’t frivolity by an individual, or something spontaneous, this is a corporate business decision.