Corrente

If you have "no place to go," come here!

The upcoming dog and pony debates

The next dog and pony is the Dem convention where the platitudes and non-specific proposals will fly fast and furiously across the tv, radio,net, and printed media.
And will change very few peoples perceptions.

And then, just to keep the commoners amused, that will be followed by what is called 'The Presidential Debates'. As someone who took a few course in argumentation, it truly pains me to have these scripted shows be called 'debates'.

AND, neither Dems nor Repubs will speak out about this:
OPEN DEBATES CALLS ON PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE COMMISSION TO MAKE SECRET CONTRACT PUBLIC

Robert F. Bauer of the Obama campaign and Benjamin L. Ginsberg of the Romney campaign negotiated a detailed contract that dictates many of the terms of the 2012 presidential debates. The Commission on Presidential Debates, a private corporation created by the Republican and Democratic parties to serve their interests, has agreed to implement the debate contract. In order to shield the major party candidates from criticism, the Commission on Presidential Debates is concealing the contract from the public and the press.

“In denying voters access to critical information about our most important electoral events, the Commission on Presidential Debates is more concerned with the partisan interests of the two major party candidates than the democratic interests of the voting public,” said George Farah, Executive Director of Open Debates.

Previous debate contracts negotiated by the major party campaigns have contained anti-democratic provisions that weakened debate formats, excluded third-party candidates and prohibited additional debates from being held. For example, the 2004 debate contract negotiated by the Kerry and Bush campaigns contained the following provisions:

“The parties agree that they will not (1) issue any challenges for additional debates, (2) appear at any other debate or adversarial forum with any other presidential or vice presidential candidate, or (3) accept any television or radio air time offers that involve a debate format or otherwise involve the simultaneous appearance of more than one candidate.”

For all four debates: “The candidates may not ask each other direct questions, but may ask rhetorical questions.”

For the town-hall debate: “Prior to the start of the debate, audience members will be asked to submit their questions in writing to the moderator. … The moderator shall approve and select all questions to be posed by the audience members to the candidates.”

For the town-hall debate: Audience members shall not ask follow-up questions or otherwise participate in the extended discussion, and the audience member's microphone shall be turned off after he or she completes asking the question.”

Every four years, the Commission on Presidential Debates implements and conceals the debate contract jointly drafted by the Republican and Democratic campaigns. Despite claiming to "have no relationship with any political party or candidate," the Commission was created by, and for, the Republican and and Democratic parties. In 1986, the two parties actually ratified an agreement “to take over the presidential debates,” and the Commission has sponsored every debate since 1988. The Commission is co-chaired by Frank Fahrenkopf, former chairman of the Republican National Committee, and Mike McCurry, former Press Secretary to Democratic President Bill Clinton.

A copy of the 2004 debate contract is available at: http://www.opendebates.org/news/documents/debateagreement.pdf

0
No votes yet

Comments

Submitted by YesMaybe on

what is your response?"

Based on the primary debates, there is every reason to believe the debates will consist mainly of:

1. Moderators communicating each puppet's talking points to the other puppet and asking for a response.

2. Moderators bringing up a recent gaffe and asking the puppet to address it.

---

Submitted by ubetchaiam on

takes these so called debates seriously only goes to show how discordant the electoral process is and the lacking, of capacity for critical thought, of the majority of the U.S. voting population. That the population accepts such drivel as being meaningful paints a sordid picture.