Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bozell Column: Unseat These Atrocious Moderators (MSM still in the tank for Obama)
newsbusters ^ | 1/11/2012 | By Brent Bozell

Posted on 01/11/2012 4:10:20 AM PST by tobyhill

Sitting through the Republican debate on Saturday night with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos was just painful, from beginning to end. Some of it was just political Ambien. But when it was finally over, there was just one question. Who in the GOP in his/her right mind invites a historically shameless Democratic spin controller like Stephanopoulos to “moderate” a primary debate like this – ever?

The only thing that can be said in defense of that horrible decision was turning to NBC the next morning and seeing “moderator” David Gregory be even more slanted in his questioning. ABC slanted the ideological questions in their debate by a ratio of six questions from the left to each one from the right. The NBC ratio was eight to one.

Why must the Republicans keep handing over their debate stage in the primary season to the people who desperately want them all to bumble, stumble, and fall on their face on national TV?

In the ABC debate – an event held for Republican voters presumably to decide who is reliably conservative enough to win the nomination – ABC asked three questions from the conservative perspective, and twenty from the left (25 were ideologically neutral). Twelve of the 48 questions, or 25 percent of the night’s total, were devoted to promoting contraception and gay marriage, so trite and repetitive that finally the audience booed them down.

(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...


TOPICS: Extended News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: brentbozell; msm; republicandebate; stephanopoulos

1 posted on 01/11/2012 4:10:24 AM PST by tobyhill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

They don’t call them the Stupid Party for nothing.

Many Freepers had the same exact reaction Saturday night and the same observations.

Maybe Brent was reading the live thread.


2 posted on 01/11/2012 4:13:36 AM PST by exit82 (Democrats are the enemies of freedom. We have ideas-the Dems only have ideology.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

“Things are in the saddle, and ride mankind” - Emerson.

This whole process is a show, contrived to produce a Romney-Obama matchup and to make sure, whoever wins, that nothing changes.


3 posted on 01/11/2012 4:13:56 AM PST by Jim Noble ("The Germans: At your feet, or at your throat" - Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill
What I want to know is WHO sets up these debates?

Is it the RNC?

Anybody know?

4 posted on 01/11/2012 4:16:33 AM PST by Conservative Vermont Vet (l)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

The only thing that can be said in defense of the decision to accept those moderators is that they are the ones who are moderators.

Why didn’t Brent Bozell invite the candidates to a debate? Why didn’t Rush? Why didn’t Mark Levin, or Sean Hannity, or Hugh Hewitt or Dennis Prager, or Glenn Reynolds? Or even Michael Medved?

The candidates had no choice because out side never stepped up.


5 posted on 01/11/2012 4:18:38 AM PST by Piranha (If you seek perfection you will end up with Democrats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

When these ridiculous questions are asked, I would love it if a candidate said “that is not an appropriate question for this debate, but here is a question that we will answer....” And if the moderators continue with the slanted questions, keep ignoring them.


6 posted on 01/11/2012 4:19:00 AM PST by TomT in NJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill
Any candidate who submits to these fools is an even bigger fool.
7 posted on 01/11/2012 4:27:18 AM PST by ryan71 (Dear spell check - No, I will not capitalize the "m" in moslem!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

Haldfway through that idiocy I found myself thinking I will guarantee my vote for the first person to say they had enough of this crap and walk off the stage

WHY ARE OUR DEBATES MODERATED BY “THE ENEMY”???

(yes, I DO consider The Media ‘the enemy’ of the USA)


8 posted on 01/11/2012 4:29:22 AM PST by Mr. K (Physically unable to profreed <--- oops, see?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

“Who in the GOP in his/her right mind invites a historically shameless Democratic spin controller like Stephanopoulos to “moderate” a primary debate like this – ever?”

Indeed. Whoever is making these decisions should be fired.


9 posted on 01/11/2012 4:30:41 AM PST by nuconvert ( Khomeini promised change too // Hail, Chairman O)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Conservative Vermont Vet

And IF it was the RNC was it done while mikey steele was in charge???


10 posted on 01/11/2012 4:41:56 AM PST by Joe Boucher ((FUBO))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: nuconvert

One of the candidates needs to take a stand.

They need to refuse to attend any debate where one of these MSM hacks is moderator.

Then they need to hold a counter-event elsewhere at the same time.

They need to pledge to do that in the general election as well.

Lack of courage in the primary campaign guarantees lack of courage in the general election and if elected, in the White House.

The speech: “These ‘moderators’ do not have the interests of the American people at heart. The primary issues of this campaign are ..... I refuse to be side-tracked by stupid gotcha questions or irrelevant major media agendas.”


11 posted on 01/11/2012 4:46:42 AM PST by cgbg (No bailouts for New York and California. Let them eat debt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: cgbg

I’d much rather see all candidates attend the debate and directly address the biased moderators each time they ask their left-leaning questions. It isn’t fair to ask candidates to skip the debate. Besides, this is a matter that needs to be tackled head-on, before the country on the offending moderators’ own turf. Most questions could be responded to initially along these lines: “Now [moderator], why, when there are so many pressing issues that the country is truly concerned about, would you ask a question about [gay marriage, abortion, etc]? The Constitution provides for freedom of the press, but isn’t there a counterbalancing duty on the part of the press to act responsibly, and maybe even, if I dare say it, fairly? Why, then, would you choose to ask such a question?

Others here can frame responses much better than I, but there’s a start.


12 posted on 01/11/2012 4:56:01 AM PST by NCLaw441
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: NCLaw441

Sun Tzu “The Art of War” is relevant here.

You do not fight a war on a battlefield controlled by your enemies—unless you like to lose.


13 posted on 01/11/2012 4:59:15 AM PST by cgbg (No bailouts for New York and California. Let them eat debt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

It benefits both sides at some level or they wouldn’t do it time after time??? I think it has something to do with the left obsesive need to make sociall issues ( gay marrige and contraceptives and soaking the rich)
The candidates would rather answeer stupid questions than difficult questions?
This is how we end up with a rino Romney as the frontrunner. He is the best at answering stupid questions.
As we all know its far more important that a President look and sound good,even if he is a radical marxist, rather than actually lead a country with real substance.


14 posted on 01/11/2012 5:00:11 AM PST by Leep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Leep

obsessive need that is


15 posted on 01/11/2012 5:03:44 AM PST by Leep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: cgbg

I agree


16 posted on 01/11/2012 5:07:17 AM PST by nuconvert ( Khomeini promised change too // Hail, Chairman O)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Leep

EDIT:

It benefits both sides at some level or they wouldn’t do it time after time??? I think it has to do with the left’s obsessive need to make social issues ( gay marrige and contraceptives and soaking the rich) and avoid the real issues.
The candidates would rather answeer stupid questions than difficult questions?
This is how we end up with a rino Romney as the frontrunner. He is the best at answering stupid questions.
As we all know its far more important that a President look and sound good,even if he is a radical marxist or a fake conservative, rather than actually lead a country with real substance.


17 posted on 01/11/2012 5:08:13 AM PST by Leep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: cgbg

I am not sure Sun Tzu is apt here. I stand by my comments.


18 posted on 01/11/2012 5:27:25 AM PST by NCLaw441
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Leep

I thought Stephys questions were good because it showed that Mitt can brush off an imbecile with grace and humor. Poor Stephy was looking like a moron after pushing his dumb questions. /p>

Putting that liberal commy jackass in as moderator was a good idea. Any Pub worth his salt should be able to stick it to him, as Mitt did.


19 posted on 01/11/2012 5:29:31 AM PST by PA-RIVER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

They go to the alphabets because the alphabets have the audience share.

I would package the debate as if it were a football game and put it out for bid based on a contract written by myself. In that contract, I’d spell out neutral, non-media moderators from business, academia, agriculture, medicine, science, etc. The only media moderator would be the one who ran the program saying things like: “Now a question from former ambassador John Bolton”.


20 posted on 01/11/2012 5:29:52 AM PST by xzins (Pray for Our Troops Remaining in Afghanistan, now that Iran Can Focus on Injuring Only Them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: exit82

BTW, the Romney lovefest on this morning’s Fox and Friends is over the top—all Romney, all the time.

It is sickening.


21 posted on 01/11/2012 5:32:34 AM PST by exit82 (Democrats are the enemies of freedom. We have ideas-the Dems only have ideology.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

I still want a real debate, moderated by Rush Limbaugh and panel participants like Mark Steyn, Mark Levin, Victor Davis Hanson, James Pethokoukis, etc.

WHY NOT? Why not just ONCE, let real questions get asked of the candidates? JUST ONCE!!


22 posted on 01/11/2012 5:37:08 AM PST by SueRae (I can see November 2012 from my HOUSE!!!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Piranha; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; stephenjohnbanker; DoughtyOne; calcowgirl; Gilbo_3; NFHale; ...
RE :”The only thing that can be said in defense of the decision to accept those moderators is that they are the ones who are moderators. Why didn’t Brent Bozell invite the candidates to a debate? Why didn’t Rush? Why didn’t Mark Levin, or Sean Hannity, or Hugh Hewitt or Dennis Prager, or Glenn Reynolds? Or even Michael Medved? The candidates had no choice because out side never stepped up

Good point. Or Club for Growth?

On the other hand, There will be 2 POTUS debates against obama and one VP debate and some of these liberal moderators will be asking the questions so these candidates might as well show they are ready for them now. It sometimes shows that some candidates that we like are not good at defending their positions that we like in front of a general audience. You can tell that when the questions cause pain on their faces and they delay answering. They need to get ready to.

23 posted on 01/11/2012 5:37:44 AM PST by sickoflibs (You MUST support the lesser of two RINOs or we all die!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill
"Why must the Republicans keep handing over their debate stage in the primary season to the people who desperately want them all to bumble, stumble, and fall on their face on national TV?"

Well, what choice do they have?

If they want the "debates" to be broadcast, they have to air on the networks.

The networks decide who will be the moderators.

Fox is only marginally better than ABCNBCCBSMSNBCNPR.

24 posted on 01/11/2012 5:48:34 AM PST by eCSMaster (Democrats:always looking for someone else to blame)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Piranha

“Why didn’t Brent Bozell invite the candidates to a debate? Why didn’t Rush? Why didn’t Mark Levin, or Sean Hannity, or Hugh Hewitt or Dennis Prager, or Glenn Reynolds? Or even Michael Medved?
The candidates had no choice because our side never stepped up.”

Excellent point!


25 posted on 01/11/2012 5:50:36 AM PST by midwyf (Wyoming Native. Environmentalism is a religion too.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: PA-RIVER

.Poor Stephy was looking like a moron after pushing his dumb questions.


That sounds good until you realize Romney is probably closer philosophically to Stephy than he is to Reagan.
I remember a tough talking McCain,too. You know Mr Amnesty.


26 posted on 01/11/2012 5:57:24 AM PST by Leep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Mr. K
Halfway through that idiocy I found myself thinking I will guarantee my vote for the first person to say they had enough of this crap and walk off the stage...

Indeed. Someone should have. Or rubbed Stephanapolous' nose it in... hard.

27 posted on 01/11/2012 6:01:35 AM PST by Rummyfan (Iraq: it's not about Iraq anymore, it's about the USA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

I’ve been a Republican my whole adult life and have come to realize that they are the same as the Democrat Party. Logical thinking tells me that the leaders of the GOP allow all this ridiculous stuff to happen. The open primaries in the oddball states, the debate hosts, the media bias-—all condoned by the leadership.

They are all seeking the power, money, position, etc, that Washington provides and will go along to get along. The people have no say in things. Those elected don’t represent us! They represent the Party! They do as they are told.

Look at Speaker Boenher or even one as conservative as Sen. DeMint. I’ve seen nothing from him regarding the GOP presidential race. Is he standing back and allowing Romney to be the nominee? And Boenher has been quiet about the recess appointments that are blatantly un-Constitutional.

I am at the point of giving up. All the TEA Party efforts, all personal efforts, calls, letters, emails, town hall meetings, and nothing changes!!!


28 posted on 01/11/2012 6:46:12 AM PST by jch10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jch10

Nothing can change, I would imagine, because the people are too uninformed.


29 posted on 01/11/2012 6:51:01 AM PST by Theodore R. (I'll still vote for the Right Rick --Santorum-- if he is on the April 3 ballot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

Many of the people who run things in the GOP have a “kick-me” sign taped to their posteriors.


30 posted on 01/11/2012 7:04:09 AM PST by driftless2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins

I like your idea of non-media moderators.

The one advantage of having the alphabet moderators is that it prepares our candidates for the general election. At least they know what idiocy will be thrown at them.

One problem with having a debate moderated by the likes of Hewitt, Rush, Stossel, etc. is that we would eat each other up alive. Look how Rush is getting onto Newt for his ‘anti-capitalism.’ It isn’t like all conservative orthodoxy is hunky-dory. We have schisms too, and they would really be exposed with conservative moderators.

Rush always tells his listeners that in war you take no prisoners. Seems like Rush is telling Newt it’s ok to attack the castle; you just can’t use the long bow.


31 posted on 01/11/2012 7:24:28 AM PST by A'elian' nation (Political correctness does not legislate tolerance; it only organizes hatred. Jacques Barzun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: exit82
BTW, the Romney lovefest on this morning’s Fox and Friends is over the top—all Romney, all the time.

It is sickening. And it continues on the Romney network. I just watched Brit Hume crying about Newt picking on Romney with the vulture capitalism charge.

Romney the Raider bought companies, over-borrowed them, siphoned off huge fees from the borrowed money, and then allowed them to go bankrupt sticking creditors/contractors/investors with pennies on the dollar.

That is a distortion and a manipulation of the free market; it is not free market capitalism.

It is nothing more than powerful interests DISRUPTING a free market. It is the same thing that a monopoly or cartel does....muscle free market capitalism to the side.

32 posted on 01/11/2012 7:44:22 AM PST by xzins (Pray for Our Troops Remaining in Afghanistan, now that Iran Can Focus on Injuring Only Them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: exit82

Every time, the same thing happens in the general election—most of the “moderators” are leftists.


33 posted on 01/11/2012 8:17:55 AM PST by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: nuconvert
Whoever is making these decisions should be fired. taken out and hanged by the neck until dead as a traitor to these United States of America.
34 posted on 01/11/2012 8:35:28 AM PST by HKMk23 (YHVH NEVER PLAYS DEFENSE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: midwyf; sickoflibs; Piranha
“Why didn’t Brent Bozell invite the candidates to a debate? Why didn’t Rush? Why didn’t Mark Levin, or Sean Hannity, or Hugh Hewitt or Dennis Prager, or Glenn Reynolds? Or even Michael Medved? The candidates had no choice because our side never stepped up.”

Excellent point!

Actually, the Tea Party (or Tea Party Express) co-sponsored and organized one of the first debates, last summer. People complained then, too, because the Tea Party people went to MSM to get a moderator, and they sent us a libtard polemical dork.

More press bias here -- ABC News and Charlie Rose/PBS (linking one of my own posts from earlier today):

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2829090/posts?page=760#760

35 posted on 01/11/2012 1:00:49 PM PST by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: xzins
It is sickening. And it continues on the Romney network. I just watched Brit Hume crying about Newt picking on Romney with the vulture capitalism charge.

Ditto Rush and Hannity today.

There is a big difference between "turnaround" capitalism, which is a variety of venture capitalism (think Gerry Tsai turning the old American Can into Primerica) and vulture capitalism, which strips assets with fees and self-dealing, to the disadvantage of the original shareholders.

Vulture capitalism or turnaround capitalism?

That needs to be clarified, and then somebody needs to climb down. I suspect that it's Romney's side which needs to go on the defensive. They will have to defend this against the MSMrat Lie Machine -- and the Lie Machine won't give them a chance or a fair trial, ever.

36 posted on 01/11/2012 1:07:27 PM PST by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson