You do realize that you still have a moderator, its just a machine now, right?Originally Posted by Lewkowski
You do realize that you still have a moderator, its just a machine now, right?
. . .
On incapable of having bias.
Also one incapable of judgement. These debates aren't simple games, they have an important purpose and the moderator's job is to keep all participants on track towards that purpose.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Last debate Romney asked Obama a question. Obama used a minute and a half to answer. There's your three minutes.
I heard the second debate the moderator was excellent. Instead of going: 'your turn, your turn' she actually was being critical of the answers. By golly I can imagine your surprise when that happened.
And if Romney won the first one, no question about it Biden won the second.
But it'll be a cold day in hell when you'll look at both debates using the same criteria. Your accusations of bias clearly originate from projection.
I could have had class. I could have been a contender.
I could have been somebody. Instead of a bum
Which is what I am
I aim at the stars
But sometimes I hit London
Crowley was forced to intervene when Romney violated the pre-agreed rules.
Romney's first error was posing a direct and confrontational question to Obama (about his speech in the Rose Garden, and whether he used the words Act of Terror). He did it again when asking about Obama's pension investments in China.
That left the moderator with a sticky situation, where both candidates were standing at the same time, and Romney crossing the stage's midline -- all against the rules. I think Crowley made the right choice to fact-check that way, given the breach in etiquette, and did a good job of tamping down the emotions, and getting them back on track.
After the debate (which 90% of the audience will NEVER hear)
"He was right in the main. I just think he picked the wrong word," Candy Crowley said of Romney on CNN shortly after the debate ended.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012...#ixzz29hrhPMDA
"He was right in the main. I just think he picked the wrong word," Candy Crowley said of Romney on CNN shortly after the debate ended.
Clearly the correction of a single word choice was MASSIVELY important to ensure the debate's credibility... clearly.
Ah you would be refering to the moderator who had Obama come to her wedding back in the 90s?
Biden won the debate? Some polls say Biden won others way Ryan won. It is a fact that Biden interrupted Ryan and the moderator over 80 times in the debate (far more then Obama and Romney combined have done in two debates). In terms of likability Biden is being mocked for being a laughing jackass. Ryan is being mocked for drinking a lot of water. I wonder witch is worse...
The only reason you and the left don't want a completely passive moderator is because you know the moderator is typically BIASED to the left. I'm not asking for the next debate to have a hard core meat eating conservative to counteract the hard core vegetarian liberal of this last debate. I'd just like them to have equal time without a tag team effort. Why is that so scary for you?
Yeah, it's all that moderator bias, and "lame stream media". Also the MSM biased polling. Such shenanigans. Surely that suggests a conspiracy, somewhere, somehow!
So why are you opposed to a truly impartial moderator? Just out of curiosity who do you think most of the debate moderators are voting for?Yeah, it's all that moderator bias, and "lame stream media". Also the MSM biased polling. Such shenanigans. Surely that suggests a conspiracy, somewhere, somehow!
I'm not going to waste my time rebutting your moronic premise. But I will take this opportunity to call you a moron.
Ie - you like moderators who take sides because they almost always take the side of your ideology.
Don't ever pretend to know my reasoning. Your projections are an insult to my intelligence.
Don't ever pretend to know my motivations. They are too alien to you, for you to comprehend.Why is that so scary for you?
Journalism is scary to you. You want uncontested talking points. Since that's what you understand.
I could have had class. I could have been a contender.
I could have been somebody. Instead of a bum
Which is what I am
I aim at the stars
But sometimes I hit London
Why take Lewk seriously anyway, with his implications that a vegetarian has to be rail-thin.
I have been waiting to see how Lewk would justify the fat joke at the end of his earlier rambling. Its a pretty strong identifier for the strength of the rest of his arguments as of late.Why take Lewk seriously anyway, with his implications that a vegetarian has to be rail-thin.
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
Miss the winky face? Since when has it been wrong to make fun of fat people? Don't get your panties in a bunch.Why take Lewk seriously anyway, with his implications that a vegetarian has to be rail-thin.
Uncontested? So the other debater never challenges anything the other person says? What world do you live in? You don't think Obama can hold his own in a straight debate between two people?
He can but when Obama calls Romney out on a lie/factual error how will you react? I too want debates where one debater can waste the other debater's--and the audience's--time with lies and factual errors, but I don't know if my desire is healthy.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Oh so its the moderators job to fact check on the spot? And only fact check one side? Or do you think everything Obama said was 100% accurate?
I'm looking for balance. Liberals will never want a truly unbiased moderator.
I'm just looking for accuracyit should be someone's job to fact-check on the spot if at all possible, esp. things a participant wants to get "on the record"
I don't think Obama was 100% accurate, but he was more careful to not expose himself to such obvious risks.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
I was talking about the moderator in the veep debate. You. Blithering. Idiot.
I could have had class. I could have been a contender.
I could have been somebody. Instead of a bum
Which is what I am
I aim at the stars
But sometimes I hit London
I'm far more concerned/not-entirely-surprised about this allegation:
Reporters applaud Obama's slam on Romney's wealth
HEMPSTEAD, N.Y. — The room set aside for reporters to watch Tuesday night's debate erupted into applause after President Obama ridiculed the size of Mitt Romney's personal wealth.
Mr. Romney was trying to make the point that both his and Mr. Obama's investment funds probably include investments in China — something the president has attacked Mr. Romney for.
"Mr. President, have you looked at your pension?" Mr. Romney said.
"You know, I don't look at my pension. It's not as big as yours, so it — it doesn't take as long," Mr. Obama retorted. His reply prompted laughter in the debate hall where the two men were squaring off — but across the way in the separate room where the press was stationed, a brief round of applause broke out.
Mr. Obama has made Mr. Romney's personal wealth a major issue in the campaign, arguing that he is out of touch with average voters who pay a higher income tax rate even though they earn far less than Mr. Romney, who founded and ran Bain Capital, an investment firm.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/...omneys-wealth/
I can never figure out where these two stand on China, esp. after Romney's whining about China's cheating and Obama's grim declaration that some jobs are simply not going to come back and nor should they.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Journalists have wanted to see and write about Romney's tax returns for a long time. Not just to compare reality to his 'promise' that he's never paid lower than 14% effective rate, but to compare his off-shore investments, use of carry-trade loopholes and special tax exemptions....and contrast that to his proposed tax plans.
Of course journalists want to get into that. They want to play "gotcha" with the Republican nominee. As if anyone doesn't try to get every deduction they qualify for!
So back to the VP debate -next election cycle can we get a journalist who attended a Republican candidate's wedding?
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that yeah, it'd be incredibly mundane if in 2016 one of the nominees had attended the 1997 wedding of a debate moderator. As a guest of the moderator's now ex spouse, whom the moderator had divorced in 2003. Assuming this was the only link between them.
Obviously Obummer has Kenyan communist disco voodoo with which he hypnotized the moderator of the VP deba---- Wait.
Biden is a Kenyan communist disco voodoo master?!
In the future, the Berlin wall will be a mile high, and made of steel. You too will be made to crawl, to lick children's blood from jackboots. There will be no creativity, only productivity. Instead of love there will be fear and distrust, instead of surrender there will be submission. Contact will be replaced with isolation, and joy with shame. Hope will cease to exist as a concept. The Earth will be covered with steel and concrete. There will be an electronic policeman in every head. Your children will be born in chains, live only to serve, and die in anguish and ignorance.
The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.
It would explain a lot.
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
It seems like one of those answers that just raises more questions!
In the future, the Berlin wall will be a mile high, and made of steel. You too will be made to crawl, to lick children's blood from jackboots. There will be no creativity, only productivity. Instead of love there will be fear and distrust, instead of surrender there will be submission. Contact will be replaced with isolation, and joy with shame. Hope will cease to exist as a concept. The Earth will be covered with steel and concrete. There will be an electronic policeman in every head. Your children will be born in chains, live only to serve, and die in anguish and ignorance.
The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.
I fail to see how the divorce issue has any relevance. Its clear that the moderator hangs out in liberal circles.
I know this makes sense on Free Republic, Lewk, but it doesn't really in the real world. Like, Joe McCarthy would look at you funny right about now.
Barry attended the wedding of the VP debate's moderator 20 years ago. As a guest of the husband, a lawyer like Obummer is, ostensibly a class mate or something. Said husband and VP moderator divorced 15 years ago. I'm not exactly clear on how old you are, but do me a favour and when it's physically possible, go hit up some chick whose wedding you attended 20 years ago as a friend of the groom who hasn't been married to said chick for the past 15 years, ask her for a favour on a national political scale. Report to us your experiences.
Also, since we've tapped into your well of Freeper funnies, let's take this idea for a spin; by your previous statements, some significant portion of the US higher education system counts as "liberal circles", yes? Ivory tower elitist lieberal lie factories that indoctrinate children as communists? Mittens is a Harvard grad, right? Mittens hanged out in lieberal circles, Lewk. Would Mittens be qualified, in your Freeper mind, to moderate the VP debate? Would anyone in the US who has a university education be qualified to moderate any political debate, given their communist lieberal indoctrination, their yearning thirst for your precious bodily fluids making Ryan oh so thirsty?
In the future, the Berlin wall will be a mile high, and made of steel. You too will be made to crawl, to lick children's blood from jackboots. There will be no creativity, only productivity. Instead of love there will be fear and distrust, instead of surrender there will be submission. Contact will be replaced with isolation, and joy with shame. Hope will cease to exist as a concept. The Earth will be covered with steel and concrete. There will be an electronic policeman in every head. Your children will be born in chains, live only to serve, and die in anguish and ignorance.
The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote