response to The Bimbo Kelly (FOX "News" attacker)
Posted on 08/07/2015 5:38:03 PM PDT by ElainaVer
Dears News Corps.,
Megyn Kelly apparently finds the state of our union amusing and "fun", whereas the viewers (our fellow citizens) deserve a much more serious moderator.
In addition, she had a clear agenda to attack Donald Trump, by tenaciously clinging to his past rather than his vision for the future. She focused on Trump personally, rather than politically. Ultimately, she did not not live up to the "fair and balanced" slogan at Fox News and News Corporation.
While her disdain for Mr. Trump was evident, this peititon is a call for truly fair and balanced coverage of ALL candidates. Thus, Megyn Kelly should be barred from hosting or moderating all future Republican Presidential Debates.
Please support this position by signing it as well as adding your reasons to bar Megyn Kelly from hosting or moderating any future Republican Debates (she is better of hosting a Democratic Debate at this unprofessional level).
I am on board for Cruz. I have already donated and I plan to donate more.
Yeah, but all three Fox jerks are “collectively standing behind the questions”— and Bimbo Kelly is on trying to justify herself. I only watched a moment—what a wh$re!
Why do we even need moderators? Let the candidates speak! It ain’t about Megan or Brett or any other lefty from New York. They will never be “fair and balanced” because of who they are, what they do, and where they live. And they certainly do not in anyway represent the average GOP voter.
If you have to place someone in charge, SURELY we can find someone that is a Conservative, or at the very least, ask questions that are important to GOP voters.
It looked more like an SNL skit rather than a serious debate on America’s future. I was REALLY disappointed in the opening questions. Those were ridiculous. War on women? Give me a freakin’ break!
I think she did Trump a favor by asking ridiculous & biased questions now, rather than leaving it to the idiot commie libs to do.
It’s all out there now. Fox proved itself “unbiased” by attacking their own, and Trump weathered it with outstanding scores from fans.
M.Kelly was the designated troll for the evening. She also will survive.
Let ‘em stand behind their questions, there’s enough publically viewable evidence on the internet that the damage is beyond their control.
A sane Freeper! That is refreshing!
Fox and other media see this as a chance to play GOTCHA ... they assume that a snarky GOTCHA GAME is productive - when in actuality it distorts viewpoints and disrupts the ‘debate’. Plus bringing a HEAVY Bias to the event is not really their option - IF they are professional. Other candidates were treated shabbily — Rand Paul - not a favorite of mine was shunted and given short times, Cruz - very limited time...
It is their news station BUT this is the NATION’S election and future... playing Gotcha Games with Snarky biased attitudes is totally out of place and a disservice to the public.
If Fox cannot conduct this type of venue with Objectivity — they should GET OUT OF IT!!!
Trump held up pretty well ... I will vote for Cruz but I want fair treatment for all - even idiot Bush... Fair but not favoritism - -fair and not biased... This is not asking too much for FOX to put aside the media ratings game — It is unpatriotic to do otherwise. Even for the Democrats if they can muster enough candidates for a debate.
The future of America should not be left to a media Circus.
If some here have issues regarding Trump's evening they'd do well to consider the Donald's failure to close his answer to an absolutely expected question, his failure to address an absolutely expected question and his generally bully's response to most other questions or candidate positions.
He left himself an opening to limit his "no" response to supporting a candidate he didn't like but closing off a potential independent run (he started to go there but stopped short).
Just about ANY answer would have been better than attacking Ms. Kelly after the "on her knees" comment.
And, Most successful negotiator/debaters avoid words like "stupid" and the making of disagreement into a personal confrontation.
That said (and assuming he does not do a Perot); Trump has done a great service by forcing illegal immigration & government incompetence into the campaign. He simply has shown us that he is not the guy to carry them forward in elected office.
The only good questions were those sent in by common citizens.
Debates with media whore anchors got to go.
In addition to it's blatant pro-RINO bias (clearly displayed recently), Fox News has steadily become increasingly pro-homosexual-perversion, and increasingly pro-same-sex-marriage. (Here are some sample web links highlighting those homosexual trends on Fox News in recent times.)
I agree. I would love to see a "Rapid Fire" question and answer show or "debate" with no moderators. Just a computer shown question panel. Have a hundred or more good pre-chosen questions. Have simple computer program pick one at random, then randomize the candidate list. Give each candidate 30 seconds to answer the same exact question. Give them a warning ding sound at 30 seconds, then cut their mic at 35 seconds. Go to the next in the candidate in the list. Repeat the process until either all the questions answered or there is only enough time for each candidate to have a 3 minute closing statement. Have live scoring for "question was answered" (doesn't matter if it was was good or not. Even a yes no could be the answer), "candidate projected and spoke well", "audience and maybe facebook/twitter/freeRepublic audience liked answer", etc. Get Levin, Limbaugh, Ingram, Palin, Eric Erickson, Boortz, and a few others on the judging panel and have each of their scores available. This type of debate would be very informative, it could cover all the candidates, and it would be really fun from the view of us news and politics junkies.
"Why do we even need moderators?"
I agree. I would love to see a "Rapid Fire" question and answer show or "debate" with no moderators. Just a computer shown question panel.
Have a hundred or more good pre-chosen questions. Have simple computer program pick one at random, then randomize the candidate list. Give each candidate 30 seconds to answer the same exact question. Give them a warning ding sound at 30 seconds, then cut their mic at 35 seconds. Go to the next in the candidate in the list.
Repeat the process until either all the questions answered or there is only enough time for each candidate to have a 3 minute closing statement.
Have live scoring for "question was answered" (doesn't matter if it was was good or not. Even a yes no could be the answer), "candidate projected and spoke well", "audience and maybe facebook/twitter/freeRepublic audience liked answer", etc.
Get Levin, Limbaugh, Ingram, Palin, Eric Erickson, Boortz, and a few others on the judging panel and have each of their scores available.
This type of debate would be very informative, it could cover all the candidates, and it would be really fun from the view of us news and politics junkies.
Why not have each of the candidates give their opinion?
btw, if I did go to one of those ceremonies, I would vomit even on an empty stomach.
Other than getting eyes on the issues, I don’t care about Trump.
My biggest issue with the “debate” is that was almost all about the moderators and Kelly in particular.
My next issue is not giving the same question to each candidate. If it was about a specific thing a candidate said or did, then I also want to know what the other candidates think about it or what they would have done different.
The debate drew a lot of eyeballs, but the debate sucked. I was very disappointed in Fox News.
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.
