Posted on 09/18/2004 11:50:22 AM PDT by forest
The Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD)[1] has sponsored all general election presidential debates since 1988. We always question the way these debates are set up, but never mind that for the moment; there are more important things to talk about this year. For instance, as usual, there is no "balance" to the debates this year.
The first presidential debate is scheduled for Sept. 30 at the University of Miami and is to deal with domestic policy. The third debate is scheduled for Oct. 13 at Arizona State University and the topic is foreign affairs.
The second debate is more interesting, and silliest. That is tentatively scheduled for Oct. 8 at Washington University in St. Louis and they want it to feature the hackneyed "town hall" format. Therein, "undecided voters will question the candidates on any issue."
Right. Anyone believing that audience will be normal walk-in voters who are politically undecided needs a serious reality check.
Again this year, CPD stacked the deck against the Republican candidate with their pick in moderators. Jim Lehrer, host of PBS' "News Hour," is to moderate the presidential debates -- with the assistance of ABC's Charles Gibson and CBS' Bob Schieffer. The CPD also picked Gwen Ifill, a "News Hour" correspondent and moderator of PBS' "Washington Week," as moderator for the debate between Vice President Dick Cheney and Sen. John Edwards.
Anyone else see a pattern here yet? It's a set up by the Democrats and their media friends. All the questioners are flaming liberals. There is not even a moderate, let alone even one conservative.
Well folks, as can be expected, we have a better idea. Herein, the new Fiedor Commission on Presidential Debates (FCPD) makes its picks for moderators and questioners from a vast field of very knowledgeable people.
For moderators, we pick Fred Thompson and Tony Blankley [2].
Thompson is a lawyer, actor, retired Senator (and important committee chairman) and now actor again. Thompson knows all the issues, without exception.
Blankley is a journalist. As press secretary for Newt, when Newt was Speaker of the House, Tony Blankley became well schooled on political issues. As the current editorial page editor for the Washington Times, Blankley also qualifies as a noted journalist.
As an alternative moderator, we would pick Brit Hume of Fox News, simply because he knows the current issues and everyone likes him. Or, Dick Army, retired House Majority Leader.
For questioners, there's a long list of people much more qualified and conversant on the issues than any chosen by the CPD. Among those would be Economics Professor and pundit Walter E. Williams[3] -- what great fun that would be to watch! Lawyer and pundit Ann Coulter[4] is eminently qualified. So would be Laura Ingraham and Michelle Malkin[5].
Neil Cavuto from Fox News would bring interesting economic questions. John Gibson of Fox News would be expected to ask a few no-nonsense political questions.
We must not forget the ever-present talk radio personalities, though. Rush Limbaugh[6], of course, has an excellent handle on the issues. Rush would not only ask some very good questions, he would also help to raise the viewing audience to new highs.
So would another broadcaster with 40 years radio experience: Dale Sommers[7].
Who is Dale Sommers, some readers are asking now. . . . Many of the midnight workers know Dale by his alter ego, The Truckin' Bozo, on his nationally syndicated radio program by the same name. The Republicans want the vote of working folks and The Bozo has talked to them all night every night for a couple decades.
Let's not let the handle of "The Bozo" get in the way here. When "Dale Sommers" comes on the air, he is every bit as professional and knowledgeable as Rush Limbaugh. He also commands a huge audience that is comprised of folks from all walks of life and he can be expected to handle himself quite well in the questioning department.
So, what we have done here is put together a group of moderators and questioners that can be expected to ask the presidential candidates rather tough and pointed questions. All are media people and well versed in those rules. But, each also has their own unique viewpoint, knowledge and abilities. Which means, each would ask direct questions which would be much more interesting to the rest of us than the liberal journalists picked by CPD could or would.
2. <http://www.washingtontimes.com/op-ed/tblankley.htm>
3. <http://www.townhall.com/columnists/walterwilliams/archive.shtml>
4. <http://www.anncoulter.org/>
5. <http://www.townhall.com/columnists/michellemalkin/archive.shtml>
6. <http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/today.guest.html>
Again this year, CPD stacked the deck against the Republican candidate with their pick in moderators. All the questioners are flaming liberals.
We have a better idea. Herein, the new Fiedor Commission on Presidential Debates (FCPD) makes its picks for moderators and questioners from a vast field of very knowledgeable people. Each would ask direct questions which would be much more interesting to the rest of us than the liberal journalists picked by CPD could or would.
Bush and his debate negotiators havent agreed to any debates yet and first scheduled one is two weeks off. Pressure must be on the Dem negotiator to come up with something, anything to give his guy a chance.
You have correctly identified the next critically important events. We absolutely MUST act to have fairness inserted into the process. My guess is that the FCPD will totally ignore all input from us and the MSM will do all that they can to aid to that end. Recharge your coffee cups and warm up those keyboards.
i think it ought to run like the British House of Commons... each side gets certain amount of time to bring up issues and comments regarding the other side... after a certain amount of time, the other side gets to rebut... and then that side gets to make it's case... and the other side gets to rebut... and they ought go back and forth until all time is up... i loathe the Q and A... catching the House of Commons on CSPAN is one of my favorite past times...
my viewpoint is anybody who is undecided by now is too stupid to vote.
Bush should tell the Kerry campaign that there is no need to debate since Kerry already covered both sides of the issue.
The town hall debate is nonsense, and I think the dozens of undecided voters could make up their minds with only two debates and a VP debate.
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.