I’d like to see a three part response:
1) Have the Romney campaign and SuperPACs put out two ads. One regarding the obvious bias in the moderators, questions and setups.........suggesting that enough is enough. The future needs to be different. Two......the correct response regarding the Libya questions. It must be hard hitting.... Mr. President, you are offended that Mr. Romney questions you regarding your obvious lie on Libya? Well you have no idea how offended we as Americans are that you would sacrifice our diplomatic corps on the altar of political correctness to support your failed mideast policies. And fortunately your term is almost up, otherwise you’d find out how we feel about your lame coverup.
2) Have Newt appear on Bob Schieffer’s Sunday show and put him on notice that the credibility of his entire career is on the line in the final debate.
3) Align with YouTube (Google) for no moderator (timer only) debates in the future because the Mainstream media is irredeemably biased and appears beyond rehabilitation.
I think this is the correct direction. Using YouTube would be a last resort if broadcast TV refuses to participate, but I think the timer-only moderation should be done.
The campaigns submit a ranked list of issues they would like to discuss, and address the top 5 from each, alternating from candidate to candidate.
On opening, the first candidate gets 2 minutes, the second candidate gets 2 minutes, and the 1st candidate gets a 1 minute rebuttal. Change the time intervals, if you like.
Use a colored light or card system to notify when a candidate has 60 seconds, then 30 seconds remaining. When the time is up, the microphone is shut off.
If a candidate interrupts the other during his time to speak, the interrupted candidate loses his next interval to speak, and the time is awarded to the candidate.
Any time remaining from a candidates speaking interval is "banked" for future use. The candidate can use it to expand on a future point, or for his closing speech.
It's time for a MODERATOR, not a referee. Crowley over-stepped many pre-agreed boundaries when she took sides in settling that particular dispute. And to top it off, she was wrong -- and she admitted it afterwards. However, most people will never know that.