Thoughts on the Infamous ‘Debates’ held by Biased Networks
and Biased Journalists
The media hostile to certain candidates is soooo
disappointed at their lack of control over our electoral process, even to the
point of featuring a RNC past chair talking about dislodging candidates from
front runner positions as if that were the way to win a national election. Maybe that’s why we lost. The idea of the RNC is to back the candidates
the people want, not the candidates they want the people to want. I’m tired of RNC chairs, pundits and PACs
choosing our candidates for us. Could it
be that the media wants Republicans to choose weak candidates so the Democrats
can retain power?
The Internet Age has brought unprecedented literacy to the
populace in the form of cell phones with full internet capability. The media is still operating like the Dark
Ages when the church controlled all the information. The media does not control the information
anymore, except for the stories they choose to highlight or manufacture and
they are apparently unaware that the population does not believe everything
they say. This educated populace now
has the whole internet to learn from.
And people use this capability every day, using Facebook and other
systems that disseminate information. We
are no longer dependent on what the media chooses to serve us! And we know when they are lying, spinning,
slanting and otherwise jacking with news stories BECAUSE WE ARE EDUCATED.
How about the non-story of Vice President Biden running for
president? This drug on for months as
the media blasted this man with their opinions and even bringing his family
into it. This ‘story’ emphasis was
hurtful at worst and a time waster at best.
The media even kept Vice President Biden in the polls when he was not
running. Why did they do that? To siphon off support for Bernie
Sanders? To make Hillary look good?
When John Boehner announced his resignation, the liberal
media went crayzy with rabid speculation about the demise of the Republican
Party, the need to bring in an outsider to restore order among the Republicans,
and in general criticized the whole party and predicted ongoing chaos. The draft Paul Ryan movement immediately
caused a media circus and I don’t know how Speaker Ryan or others shut them up
about their endless negative speculation. The media bashed John Boehner, bashed the
process of choosing a new speaker, and bashed everybody who expressed an
interest in the position. The process to
choose a new speaker was actually quite orderly and fair, despite the media prediction
of fatal Republican disharmony. Some of
the media even found negativity in Speaker Ryan’s insistence on spending time
with his family, which reflects true Republican family values.
As for the MSNBC debate debacle, the media really showed
their rears. That business station blew
it by allowing John Harwood to ask unvetted questions since he obviously was
there to push a negative agenda towards Republicans. Why did they trust that man? It was a set up but hopefully Harwood has
trashed his own ‘career’ by abusing his position as a journalist. Did the Democrats pay Harwood for his
hostility? Since Harwood damaged himself
by asking vicious ‘social’ type questions and lying on the air, what did he
actually get out of his miserable performance???
I avidly watched this flawed debate, hoping that CNBC would
ask good business and economic questions that would show the knowledge of the
candidates. Donald Trump did shine when
talking about the economy, which may have been the reason so few of those types
of questions were asked. Why was the
focus on personal questions rather than political, military and economic
issues? Becky Quick and Carlos
Quintanilla are experts in economics, so why did they focus on areas out of
their expertise? Why didn’t they ask
questions about interest rates, the Federal Reserve and foreign trade? What a missed opportunity! Were they given questions or did they make
them up?
How about a Democrat and a Republican debate moderated by Bill
O’Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin and Hugh Hewitt? The Democrats would never agree to that,
claiming bias in advance. Maybe somebody
could ask if Hillary rode in on her husband’s coattails? Or about Monica? Those
questions would be considered rude but it is open season on Republicans flying
away from the podium? Harwood is
evidently academically deficient in that he phrases questions in emotional
terms, rather than using a systematic approach using facts to frame the
question. The emotional attack questions
are easy to dream up and require no research or learning.
I like the idea that the candidates are taking over the
debate terms and conditions. As Donald
Trump pointed out, the networks are making money on the debates. The networks then want to dictate all
concerning the debates, leaving the candidates at their mercy to answer every
stupid question asked, while the networks rake in the money.
How about a debate focused on issues instead of
personalities, histories, criticisms, infighting and personal agendas? And why can’t the candidates sit down at
desks while debating? All this standing
looks too much like a cop show criminal lineup.
Possible
debate topics
- Discuss the Middle East.
- How do you view cooperation with the Russians in the Middle East?
- Please briefly explain your tax policy.
- Explain job creation and maintenance.
- Explain economic sustainability.
- What would you do about the problems in the Veterans healthcare?
- What about organized labor?
- What about Common Core?
- What about climate change?
- What about the infrastructure?
- What about the Bill of Rights?
- And many more but how many could be discussed by all who volunteer in a two hour span?
Or let candidates choose one of those topics to expound on
and others to common upon. The isolated
question debate structure where they all get different questions is not a
debate. A true debate has to have
interchange among the candidates on the same topic. Divide and conquer. Let’s all get together and actually talk
about the issues and compare ideas. And
then the viewers can see for themselves all the ideas. I would even give the candidates the topics
in advance. A debate is when you come
prepared to discuss and defend your positions on the issues.
Let’s have
a real debate!
