Letters to the Editor
-
Not a Bad Idea, but Certainly the Event was Rigged
It sounds like the new Youtube.com format made a dull event much fresher, but the trouble is you know that the questions were screened before they were asked. That isn't all that big a deal in today's squeaky clean media, but when the event is touted as reaching out to the average people, it becomes just as glossy and postured as Anderson Cooper's hair do (which I'm going to bet cost more than $400). I admit, you have to weed out the pranks, but it would be even better if the person screening the questions was also an average bloke and we could really put the candidates on the spot with some serious questions.
-
What has happened to us??
What depresses me about the debates is this: under Bush, the presidency has become an issue of what the president believes, what he wants, what he insists on. It’s a cult of personality. What the presidency was intended to be was one of three branches of government, namely the executive. That is to say, the branch that carries out the people’s wishes as expressed through its representatives in a democratic (small "d") congress and overseen by the judiciary. All those questions about what the candidates’ convictions were about this and that played right into the idea that somehow the president is a ruler, a monarch who sets the tone and agenda for government rather than acting on an agenda set by the people. What I was dying to hear a candidate say tonight, when asked a question like, “If you are elected president, what would you do about (fill in the blank),” was a response that said, in effect, “It doesn’t matter what my personal feelings are about (fill in the blank). As chief executive of government, my job is to see to it that the will of the people is put into concrete form, not to stand on my principles, to do what I feel like doing, whether my inclinations conform to the popular will or not.” Sadly, this statement was completely absent from the responses of all the candidates.
-
Democratic Debate - YouTube
It was a great debate. I most especially liked the fact that 'You Tube' viewers were able to ask the questions. I even watched it a second time, to ensure I didn't miss anything.
The questions were refreshingly honest, without a moderator determining which ones to ask. Except the pre-debate selection, there was no one screening them.
I was very impressed with most answers - Mr. Gravel, in my opinion, should call it quits. He is simply too forceful and angry, and is not going to make points with the democratic voters - maybe a few who are equally angry and disgruntled.
In all fairness, I could easily vote for any one of the selected candidates from the Democratic Conventions - I prefer Hillary Clinton, however. I am very tired of the past male leaders who have done so much harm to this country, that I cannot help believe it is way past time for a Woman President! Hillary defended her positions, without being defensive! She was articulate and well spoken. I chuckled when she deflected the question which alluded to her [lack of] femininity, as it just kind of slid away. Simply because she is a strong woman, who takes a back seat to no one, does not UNfeminine, make!
I liked Geraldine Ferraro, and voted for her as VP - alas, America was not ready for her. Our loss.
Now, we actually DO have a choice for our next President!
Vote Hillary!
-
Game show
The sets for these debates are increasingly overwhelming the stature of (or lack of) the participants. This one looks like a game show. Why is it necessary for such theatrics?
Similarly, the revamped White House press room has a 'stage' now, with 'message-enforcing' display screens to either side of the podium, that makes theatre out of Tony Snow hemming and hawing. Whatever happened to just a simple podium and blue curtain, with substance in the answers?
I'm outta here.
-
Juvenile behavior
I quit reading when you "heathered" your comment about Edwards' hair. A stupid, uncreative, cheap shot. Grow up.
-
This Doesn't Sound Like Any Revoution In Political Affairs!
I did not watch the 'debates', but, if Salon's recap is faithful to what happened, then it was clearly another media-political whitewash circus sideshow. When will we get candidates who engage in staright talk? Wait, wasn't there a guy named McCain who had a 'Straight Talk Express'? Oh yea, until he was hytnotized by the political consultants, pollsters, and mooneymen, along with the goons from Bob Jones University et al. Apparently, we will never get any politicians who will level with us in our lifetimes. But, we have nobody to blame but ourselves...we don't want to know the truth, or hear the straight talk. Maybe we should grow some big ones and elect a person who doesn't care about his persona; popularity but wants to do the right things to support society...a person such as Ralph Nader. Instead, we will elect another handled, groomed, packaged puppet controlled by the global military-religio-petrochemical complex. Thin I am ranting? Keep telling yourself that as you drift off to sleep...
-
Same old, same old
The questions were mostly good. The candidates ignored the questions and simply used the questions to launch into prepared sound-bites. I suspect this is all we can expect.
Politics and news are entertainment. YouTube was a great idea, but it could not get past the facades.
-
@RudeRo
Unless I can't read polls, I would think that a candidate with a greater than 50% disapproval rating would be considered unviable; regardless of their sex, race, or planet of origin. Wake up Democrats! Hillary Clinton cannot win a general election.
More importantly, she voted for the war and to my knowledge has not apologized yet. She doesn't deserve our votes as Americans or as Democrats. She might be a woman, but if you think she'd be much different than Kerry, you either haven't been paying attention or you've made your mind up based on chromosomes. I don't think that we can do another "right war, wrong time" or "I voted for the war before I voted against the war; but before my husband was President...remember him? My husband" [cue 'Don't Stop Thinking About Tommorrow' and start planning for 2012]....
It was funny to hear the 'pundits' start talking about how great she was; only to hear their knowledge get beat down by facts on the ground (in this case the focus groups) that said the winner was Barrack Obama.