Dems get more time in debates so far

by NW Spotlight

National Review is reporting that Democrats have had more time in all three debates so far – the two presidential debates and the VP debate.

This latest concern about the fairness and objectivity of the debate moderators comes on top of previous concerns about President Obama’s connections to the VP debate moderator and second presidential debate moderator, Candy Crowley, inappropriately jumping in to defend President Obama with her deceptive, real-time “fact checking”.

It’s unclear why Crowley selected that one item of all the things discussed to “fact check”. For example, Crowley didn’t choose to fact check President Obama’s false claims that Romney would turn Medicare into a “voucher program,” or his false claim that Romney’s economic plan calls for a $5 trillion tax cut.

 

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to LinkedIn Post to Reddit

Posted by at 10:16 | Posted in 2012 Presidential Election, Mitt Romney, President Obama | 32 Comments |Email This Post Email This Post |Print This Post Print This Post
  • Well, so far, the debates haven’t had a moderator who stuck to the rules.
    The Democrats keep interrupting and getting away with it.

  • Oregon Engineer

    It is kind of so what. The debates are anything but debates. Just for bread circuses for the masses. if anybody gets anything out of these please point it out. both sides lie and use half truths: the first one that comes to mind is Romney “14 days before the president said terrorist attack” it was the rest of the administration staff that took 14 days.

    Obama ” read transcript I said terrorist.” wasn’t on the same page as the rest of his staff who took 14 days before admitting it was a terrorist attack.
    Just exactly where was Obama’s “leadership” from behind again?

    Which way were they going and how fast were they traveling? I must catch up because I am there leader.

    • ardbeg

      Finally, someone who sees the light. Yes-both sides lie. An all to easy example to prove. Did O misrepresent Romney’s stand on the Arizona immigration law? Yes he did. Did Romney cherrypick and misrepresent on oil production on federal land? Yes he did! They will say whatever they need to to get elected. Keep there power and make there money. Too many fools with rose colored glasses are on this site. Glad to see your not one of them. Take off the shades Judah-never once have I heard you be critical of your guy. keep drinkin the kool-aid(e) brother.

    • guest

      ‘there’ or their leader…mr obama affordable theater?

  • DavidAppell

    If a candidate can’t get his message across in about 40 minutes, 3 or 4 more minutes isn’t going to help. (In fact, in Romney’s case it’d likely hurt.)

    • guest

      Malady or Lordy…what a d’oh bawl doth DavidAppell resound.

      Pith or pithy – he or his ID remains in sum snort of coma – perhaps, relapse of his flailed mj meds.

      Selah.

  • Judahlevi

    Romney has done a wonderful job at both debates, and the polls show it. You don’t get the bounce he is getting without performing well and connecting with the audience. Even in the last debate, Romney came out ahead on the economy – one of the most important concerns of the voting public.

    Obama has one downside in this election, and that is people who voted for him because of his skin color no longer have a so-called ‘historic’ reason to vote for him again. People who did so the first time were being racists (selecting someone only because of the color of their skin) but that won’t be as much of a factor in this election.

    Frankly, we should only vote for a competent president regardless of their skin color, gender, sexual orientation, religion, etc. When America’s polity matures, and we get past all of the so-called ‘firsts’, maybe we can get back to that.

    • DavidAppell

      Yes, we should vote for a competent president regardless of their skin color, gender, sexual orientation, religion, etc.

      And if you think that’s how a significant fraction of voters vote, you’re an idiot.

      To me it looks like a good portion of the opposition to Obama is, from the extreme right, because of his color. Clint Eastwood made that clear: “We own this country.”

      Well, no your don’t. I’m old enough now to understand how that frightens Eastwood. But he’s wrong, and wrong in a fundamentally unamerican way.

      And that’s the fundamental problem. The demographics are against extreme conservatives — and the smart ones know it.

      • Judahlevi

        Name-calling already, David? You lost the argument that quickly?

        Based on your answer, you see people by their skin color and judge accordingly. It is what I expected. Liberals are some of the most racist people around, yourself included.

        • DavidAppell

          “Judah” you’re the Queen of name-calling. So, from you, that accusation carries no weight.

          We all know what Eastwood meant. It’s endemic throughout the Republican campaign — especially from those who wanted anyone but Romney, but who have now settled for his crumbs.

      • Rupert in Springfield

        >And if you think that’s how a significant fraction of voters vote, you’re an idiot.

        A surprisingly stupid assertion given that Obama was elected by a majority, not a plurality.

        >To me it looks like a good portion of the opposition to Obama is, from the extreme right, because of his color.

        If a good portion of Obamas opposition was because he is black, can you produce some evidence for this? Anything?

        Also, your contention that a good portion of Obama’s opposition is from the extreme right is inane. The extreme right, as well as the extreme left, are not majorities by any stretch of the imagination.

        >Well, no your don’t. I’m old enough now to understand how that frightens Eastwood.

        No, your not old enough to even keep a car in running order. Stop with the Selma routine. You just like calling other people racists because it makes you feel good about yourself.

        Essentially you are using racial hucksterism, asserting anyone who disagrees with you is a racist because you have no valid argument otherwise.

        Pathetic.

        • valley person

          “If a good portion of Obamas opposition was because he is black, can you produce some evidence for this? Anything?”

          Sure. Look at the Counties that had the heaviest vote against Obama. White, rural and southern. The same demographic that is and always has been the most racist in America.

    • ardbeg

      “Romney has done a wonderful job at both debates” could you please try and kiss this guys rear end a little more! Listening to you, this guy is perfect in your eyes and can do no wrong. Wake up!

  • Rupert in Springfield

    Three debates, three moderators associated with left of center networks or positions and golly gee, all three times Obama got more time than Romney. Hardly unexpected.

    Candy Crowley clearly throwing her hat in the ring for BO with her, self admittedly, incorrect defense of Obamas terrorist assertion was amazing.

    I actually think that backfired. The American people know exactly what happened here. BO ran around with the ridiculous video story and it added up real quick that he was coming from the typical left wing “blame America first” perspective. It was a disastrous miscalculation on the administrations part and to now try and claim he had been asserting it was a terrorist attack from day one insults peoples intelligence.

    Unless something astonishing emerges in the final debate, I think that assertion and the Crowley throw in are going to be seen as pivotal points in the campaign.

    • valley person

      Yes, people know what happened. Romney had a pit filled with bullshit that he thought was a trap for Obama, and he managed to step in it all by himself. Then he pleaded with Obama to help extricate him, and Obama replied, with a nasty grin, “please proceed governor.”

      Ouch.

      • Judahlevi

        Romney was right to question Obama’s remark and Obama will pay for attempting to lie to get out of taking responsibility for his actions. Unless the American voters are as stupid as some think they are, Obama’s comment and smirk will cost him the election, not win it for him.

        • valley person

          Well…as days go on it sure doesn’t look that way. American voters are plenty smart enough to see for themselves when one guy is way out of his depth on how to deal with a crisis in the middle east by NOT jumping to conclusions and acting hastily.

          Foreign policy debate on Monday. Mitt’s chance to extricate himself from his own BS. Why do I think he will not manage this?

          • Judahlevi

            You have the “BS” on the wrong side. Obama needs to explain his actions, not Romney. If he can’t do it on Monday, he will definitely lose.

  • valley person

    The side complaining about he referees is usually the side that is losing.

  • Pingback: Blue Coaster33()

  • Pingback: water ionizer loans()

  • Pingback: parking()

  • Pingback: electrician pants()

  • Pingback: locksmith salary in oklahoma()

  • Pingback: n campbell plumber stornoway()

  • Pingback: house blue()

  • Pingback: pay per day loans plan()

  • Pingback: water ionizer()

  • Pingback: electricity()

  • Pingback: alkaline water()

  • Pingback: alkaline water()

  • Pingback: right here()

Stay Tuned...

Stay up to date with the latest political news and commentary from Oregon Catalyst through daily email updates:

Prefer another subscription option? Subscribe to our RSS Feed, become a fan on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.

Twitter Facebook

No Thanks (close this box)