Posted on 01/24/2012 8:21:28 AM PST by Bigtigermike
Newt Gingrich insists his fans will not be silenced.
Mr. Gingrich, a former House speaker, on Tuesday morning threatened not participate in any future debates with audiences that have been instructed to be silent. That was the case on Monday, when Brian Williams of NBC News asked the audience of about 500 people who assembled for a debate in Tampa to hold their applause until the commercial breaks.
In an interview with the morning show “Fox and Friends,” Mr. Gingrich said NBC’s rules amounted to stifling free speech. In what has become a standard line of attack for his anti-establishment campaign, Mr. Gingrich blamed the media for trying to silence a dissenting point of view.
(Excerpt) Read more at thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com ...
Yes..
FOR THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE!!!
We are paying for it!
The media think they own the debates?
They just made themselves look even more controlling and stupid at the same time!
Ok. We will all go vote for Santorum.
Because that’s pretty much all you are looking to do.
“In what has become a standard line of attack for his anti-establishment campaign, Mr. Gingrich blamed the media for trying to silence a dissenting point of view.’
Maybe because they are?
The idea that these are serious debates to begin with is a joke.
The sole purpose of the gag order last night was to take advantage away from gingrich.
Otherwise,I agree with what others who have said, if the audience has to remain silenced then why have an audience at all?
Just eliminate the audience.
While we are at it maybe they could make it a rule that the moderatorts can’t ask stupid loaded,biased and or gotcha questions?
>> I have no problem with brief polite applause if some candidate makes a point that the audience appreciates. I could do without the booing.
Are you okay with standing ovations?
I agree the audience should be well-behaved, but not instructed to be silent.
I prefer the professional debates of the British Parliament where the professional debaters a la Thatcher have to make themselves heard above the din of the opposing party. They are damn fine debaters and that is damn fine theatre.
I am politically very hungry, in fact I am starving, because the fare offered up by slick Barry or slick Mitt is all vegan served in the smallest of portions.
To Newt, I say pass me some of more of the red meat, please.
Sorry, I wasn’t responding directly to your post. I intended to post to the FReeper who started the thread, but my thumbs and/or cell phone have minds of their own.
Then why have an audience at all? Just have it on TV without one, and then you don’t have to worry. I agree totally that without some sort of reactions it’s boring and in fact sucks the life right out of them.
said the same
I see a couple of sly digs coming out from the establishment RINO Romney supporters on here and they’re using this to attack him and of course they don’t want the crowd to make a noise as they know Romney would be booed for his pathetic attacks and lies
NBC protected Williams too by making the crowd quiet they knew the crowd would not boo Williams with his silly boring uninteresting questions.
The next debate the crowd needs to ignore these talking heads, the establishment and the liberal MSM.
BTW How does one get to the debate in Jacksonville as I would love t go and I would clap if I thought it was worthy ?
I’m thinking that courtroom trials would be more entertaining if everyone, including the jury, got to applaud or boo witness testimony and every motion.
Ridiculous. I’m voting for what the candidate has to say, not how loud their supporters can hoot and holler.
Agreed.
The comments here regarding petulance should be assigned to those attempting to quell any signs of enthusiasm. I wouldn’t be surprised if the gag order originated from some Alinskyite in the Administration.
you forgot one thing.
NBC set this up to protect Williams they knew by telling the crowd to shut up the crowd would not boo Williams and make him look stupid.
If the next crowd is told to shut up then all there need to get up and walk out in protest.
Yet again the MSM is protecting their own and their candidate to go up against their messiah
They did this precisely to thwart Newt's popularity after seeing King hit and Newt's meteoric rerise.
The audience gives Newt or any other GOP candidate a vehicle to fight back against an always hostile moderator team in gotcha mode, the complete opposite of how they handle Democrat debates.
He is right to challenge them.
I see the usual detractors here who have been anti Newt all along decrying his demand that the networks allow the audience to respond...no surprise.
Newt supporters who eschew this confrontation just think about why the media decided right now to stop audience participation?
I mean really.
For all their talk about Newt being easy for Obama to defeat...they are scared to death of him because they know he will bring the fight.
Something they have not had to deal with from anyone but Palin a bit and Bachmann a little.
But neither has the platform Newt may have as this rumbles along...a platform over and over if this drags out.
Bruising for them and their lad Obama.
It sounds like this debate had a very small audience compared to the past debates. The most critical one coming will have an open audience.
I believe it is important to have audience feedback, because it shows how the candidates are effecting the voters directly. Newt is right. Free speech IS the reason for elections and silencing the audience is nothing more than censorship.
The arguments in this thread are moot.
Newt said no such thing.
This is all about a misleading third rate NYT blog entry headline. The headline is an outright lie.
I replied to you, that the audience checks the leftwing moderators and you answer that Gingring insistence to not allow the media to remove that check is “whining.”
You must have loved McCain’s rollover at the media’s command and lose without a fight 2008 strategy.
Exactly what part of the anatomy does the “Lickers” in “Lib-Licker 2” refer?
Folks, the headline is inaccurate!
Once again the media is dictating the dialogue by putting headlines that do NOT communicate what the candidate said. Please go listen to the clip, even just the first 2 -3 minutes, and you will realize Gingrich said nothing of the kind. Or if you are cubicle bound - check my post at 99 for a quick synopsis.
If we are going to get a guy we want as the nominee, we gotta quit taking the media bait : \
May God grant us strength, wisdom and courage.
Tatt
Sorry, but these aren't Presidential debates. They're presidential primary debates, which are quite a different thing.
When the general election debates begin between Obama and the Republican nominee, those will be presidential debates, and I'll agree with you that the audience participation rules should be different.
I think the people should be participants in the nominating phase of the contest. If we're prevented from participating, then the only others involved, are the elites and the media. That's just wrong.
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.