Trading Places: It's Time to Trim the Debate Moderators' Role

American Thinker ^ | November 2, 2014 | Clarice Feldman

[jazusamo]

Ramirez Bump.

[DoughtyOne]

He deserves it...

Thanks.

[Organic Panic]

I don’t know why republicans bother to do TV debates. The moderator’s sole purpose is to ensure the democrat wins the debate and the republicans look like fools. Come on, Candy Crowley was fair an impartial?

[Cen-Tejas]

Please! The last thing I want to see walking in Walmart my one time per year is that broad!

[terycarl]

she should be a Walmart greeter.

Walmart has standards

[Balding_Eagle]

The problem faced by Conservatives who hold out for a neutral debate moderator is going to be the fact that the Dems won’t participate.

Still, I say hold out.

Have the debate go on without the Dem.

[Wildbill22]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfmKpA30Xeo

What could possibly go wrong by having a liberal “Journalist” moderating a debate for the conservative?

Mitt was gullible to think that he would get any sort of justice or perspective that reflected anything close to the truth.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

Why do debate panels always have to be composed of journalists, anyway? Why not a panel composed of a business leader, a retired military officer, a physician, a law enforcement officer, and then maybe throw in a journalist just for old time’s sake? The concerns of journalists hardly outrank those of other Americans.

Fundamentally, the position of “objective journalist” is ideally suited to the demagogue. And when it comes to demagogues, birds of a feather flock together - a politician who will say anything and flatter anyone to get elected will get along just fine, thank you, with a journalist who will say anything and flatter anyone to get money, prestige, and political influence.

But, the question is not why “debate panels” should consist of journalists, but why debates should be moderated with anything other than a chess clock to control the microphone?

If the only consideration were to publicize the candidates’ positions on what issues are important and what should be done about them, there would be no need of a moderator to presume to define the issues at all. George Stephanopolis’ infamous injection of birth control as an issue among a group of candidates none of whom had the slightest interest in debating that issue was entirely gratuitous. It should not be a possibility in the future.

[Chode]

LOLOL!!! tooo funny...

[a fool in paradise]

A rigged debate is a rigged election. The “Twenty-One” gameshow scandal pails in comparison.

NO liberal should be the moderator of a Republican primary debate. They cast the entire tone of the debate through the selected questions/positions. Then add in their personal “favorites” (or false fact attacks on certain candidates).

[GeronL]

bump