Posted on 10/18/2012 7:46:01 PM PDT by tobyhill
If authentic, CNN’s memo explaining why Candy Crowley permitted President Obama to speak four minutes more than Mitt Romney during Tuesday’s presidential debate is devastating to that network:
On why Obama got more time to speak, it should be noted that Candy and her commission producers tried to keep it even but that Obama went on longer largely because he speaks more slowly. We’re going to do a word count to see whether, as in Denver, Romney actually got more words in even if he talked for a shorter period of time.
One of Crowley’s main jobs as moderator was to enforce the rules that were established for the debate. The rules established time limits, not word limits.
When I debated in high school and college, we had to stop speaking when our time ran out. It didn’t matter how many words we had gotten in (I wish it did when I debated John in practice rounds). When, as I lawyer, I argued cases before Courts of Appeals, I had to sit down when my time was up. It didn’t matter whether my opponent had uttered more words in his or her alloted time.
(Excerpt) Read more at powerlineblog.com ...
“If you’re not old enough to know what that is, it will be a teachable moment.”
Don’t forget the playing of the National Anthem...
Furthermore, a debater may choose to speak slowly for stylistic reasons. Such as to make what he is saying sound more profound or more eloquent. So not only would such a debater potentially benefit from speaking slower, but at least according to CNN he should also be given more time to keep hammering home his points.
Strange though that Crowley didn’t inform both debaters before it started that “just to let you know, if you speak slowly, i’ll give you much more time!”
Well okay, not so strange, for it would have sounded ridiculous. For the whole thing is laughable and obviously thought up after the fact as a means to try to justify a referee doing everything she could to help one contestant while delivering low blows to his opponent.
A quick summary: more time for Obama, more interruptions for Romney, more “last words” for Obama, more stepping in and preventing Romney from landing a knockout punch. So go ahead and count all you like CNN, but everyone knows that it all adds up to four measly letters: B-I-A-S.
I watched the whole debate...post a video link where she has, in her hand, a copy of the transcript of the Rose Garden speech.
I’ve seen it replayed over and over. She lifts a paper, motioning towards Romney when she says “That’s right.” Obama at that moment interrupts and says, “Say it louder, Candy.”
I don’t remember seeing it the night of the debate, but that was either the camera angle, or the fact that I am always doing something else and may have my eyes averted.
But, in the replays, it is really blatant. 1, 2, 3. Obama says, “Get the transcript” and she lifts the paper with a little wave and says, “That’s right.” You can tell that it threw Romney.
If they are going to base turns to speak on word count, then what’s the point of a clock?
Answer- the fix was in...
Dead air would represent the most truth ever to be broadcast by them!
I'm sure Obama knew the subject was going to come up and went back to reread his remarks...so he would know exactly what words he used...that's likely why he told her to “check the transcript”.
Terrific recommendations. I especially like the muting of the mikes at the end of his time.
Nobody knows what she had in her hand. The point is, Obama said, “Get the transcript” and Candy waved a paper and said, “That’s right,” as if Obama’s statement was correct. It wasn’t, but it threw Romney off his point.
She later admitted that she did it deliberately — said she was wanted to “help balance the debate.”
She should be fired, and she certainly should NEVER be allowed to moderate another debate.
What she did was bad enough on it’s own...there’s no need to add a baseless conspiracy on top of it.
Extreme doubt obtains in *my* mind she ever had any integrity (journalistic, or otherwise) to begin with...
the infowarrior
It’s sort of an affirmative action approach to debate rules. Little barry just can’t speak as fast as that other guy. So we’ll celebrate by giving barry more time.
Hell, speak real slow and Mitt doesn't even have to show up.
I agree with you.
I don't believe that ever happened.
In response to Obama's "let's go to the transcript," directed to Candy, She was waving a sheet of paper as if it were the transcript as she responded.
She was fingering it as soon as Romney stepped up, sliding it out so it would be easy to pick up quickly (at 1:10:04--->). Perhaps it was just the next question, but she responded as if it were the transcript that Obama specifically and directly asked her to go to.
That is so lame it finally convinced me to dismiss all your prior statements.
And what if Ms. Crawley had said, "What transcript?"
And what if Ms. Crawley had said, "What transcript?"
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.