What did you think of the way Tim Russert conducted the debate last night?

[hisownpetard]

His questions seemed designed to embarass, more than enlighten.
To me, he seemed to direct more questions to Hillary than the other candidates. Biden seemed largely ignored.
Do you think he acted as an impartial moderator, and how would you rate this debate as compared to others?

[katmondoo]

1. All I could see was his eyes popping out

The questions eluded me watching his facial expressions

[u2spirit]

2. With Dems he's pure gotcha

Anytime a prominent Democrat is on press the meat he plays gotcha. Wait until the rethug debate. He will try it, but not to the degree and he will let the candidates bully him.

[niceypoo]

21. He asked about gay sex and five year olds and used the plot of, '24'" as a question

'If a terrorist knew where a nuke was that was going to destroy a US city in three days would you torture him?', What the fuck kind of questioning is that?

[Apollo11]

24. The torture scenario was something that Bill Clinton said on Meet The Press last year.

I think it was legitimate for Tim Russert to use it as the basis for a question.

I have watched most of the debate on YouTube, and I think Russert did a good job.

Every candidate was given opportunities to get their points across.

[depakid]

3. The man should never, ever moderate another debate

He's a weasel and a shill- and it showed in full force last night.

[hisownpetard]

16. I agree. I thought the best moderator was Keith Olbermann. His questions were outstanding

and he knew when to inject a little humor, to balance things out.
Russert seemed to be in a sweat, pushing out his questions before the person
replying to the previous question was finished, as if he didn't even hear their answer.

[Rambis]

30. Disagree he should do a pug debate

then go away- If he acts like that with the pugs McCain and Mittens will have kittens! Then we will see the angry side of most of the pugs.

[depakid]

36. Unfortunately, he'd just softball and enable them

The man has no integrity.

[bullimiami]

4. i despise that cowardly moron.

i remember him pandering to bush/cheney and co and always he goes after those he isnt afraid of. ie democrats.

[rucky]

5. At least he had the courtesy to say it in front of their faces...

and gave them a chance to respont to the talking points.

[patrioticintellect]

6. Well, all around

I noticed for the last half hour I managed to catch that the timer was very lenient with time. Every so often people would be cut off. Sometimes (especially Edwards who managed to earn another :30 in this point in the lightning round) the candidates could go on and on and on until...until they were done. In the instances that candidates were cut off by Russert just straight up asking the next candidates his or her question, it wasn't fair because the time wasn't being enforced in the lightning round effectively.

As for Russert's questions, I do not and cannot make a conclusion from just managing to catch the last half hour. But in that half hour, yes, it looked like only Hillary was worthy of being looked at for the presidency and so Russert needed to embarass or squeeze as much truth from her as possible.

Impartial? Well, I don't know who he would have been partial to. Bill Clinton? I mean, that's the only way I could think he might have been influenced here. But the overall debate looked like candidates were each getting speaking time...enough to throw down. And man, did Gravel throw down.

[JerseygirlCT]

7. My husband popped in and out, only catching parts - his

comment was that the questions ALWAYS seem directed to Hillary.

I agree, and I watched most. I think they've decided she's "it", and we probably will see them directing most attention her way now. Which is a shame, because there were a lot of voices worth listening to there last night, not just Hillary's.

I also thought it interesting that Russert didn't bother following up Gravel's attack on Hillary for voting for the Lieberman-Kyl amendment. She laughed it off (seems to be her technique these days) and he moved on. I would have liked to see some more discussion on Iran and war. Frightening that it's passed over.

[bleedinglib]

8. Russert,Tim

He was trying to provoke arguments between the front runners?
I wish we could have a non-media academic person asking intelligent Questions?
Blib

[Donnachaidh]

9. at the beginning it seemed he attempted impartiality

But as it went on, it was evident (at least to me) that he had some nasty *shots* to get in. I'm no Hillary supporter, but I think his torture question was set up primarily to embarrass her. The glee on his face after he revealed the source was disgusting.

And he was definitely gunning for Gravel, Kucinich and Edwards as well.

And he was on Scarborough's show this morning, and has already spun what will possibly be *his* mantra until the election -- "The Dems won't stop the war before 2013".

I wonder if he's going to do any of the Republican debates - and if so, will he be as underhanded with them?

[Evergreen Emerald]

10. his questions were inflammatory and incorrect

For example when he asked Kucinich about bankrupting the city, he told only partial truth, inflamed it, twisted it, and did a gotcha. I loved Kuchinich's response: "well that was the NBC version, let me give you what really happened."

[Pierzin]

14. Amen to that!! It's all about the network

'nuff said. Dennis gave the low down there.

[graywarrior]

11. He's a daddy's boy. I can't stand his attitude.

[hisownpetard]

19. Who picked him? n/t

[mrigirl]

12. He sucked!!!

I didn't like his tactics at all. As a Biden supporter I was extremely disappointed in the amount of time he got- it was like Russert was ignoring him. Biden started getting a little ticked off and mentioned it during the debate. Russert kept a lid on him. And he was very nasty to alot of the canidates up there- especailly Hillary and Kunich (sp?) I don't like debates like that. Granted, some of the questions he fired at Hillary were good and she deserved to squirm a little but he seemed to focus on the same candidates all night.

[hisownpetard]

17. Yeah, I think he gave short shrift to Biden and, it seemed to me, that after a while, Biden

sort of gave up.

[LWolf]

13. Tim Russert?

Did he write those questions, or just ask them? Many of the questions were ridiculous: irresponsible and lacking in journalistic integrity, imo.

Of course, that could be said for the whole debate. Tim Russert got more than double the talking time than fully half of the candidates, and no candidate got more time than he did. Only one of the candidates not in the "top 3" even made it into double digits; Richardson got 11:49.

Some candidates got questions that allowed them to get their message out on the table, some didn't.

That's not a debate. That's a media event set up to manipulate the outcome.

The "analysis" after the fact showed clear bias. The favored few who decided for us who "won" and who didn't had obvious favorites to pump and opponents to bash. It wasn't about what they said, it was about spinning what they said to fit a media talking head's preconceived opinions and/or agenda.

My analysis, recycled from another post.

How did this debate rate? About the same as the rest; all media circuses, no true debates.

[liberal renegade]

15. He's like a fly

all he does is eat shit and bother people.

[hisownpetard]

18. and make an annoying noise. n/t

[Highway61]

20. Biden ignored???

Dennis might as well been invisable. I am sick of the "push" for Hillary. When Georgie came right out and said she will get the nomination (how inappropiate was THAT?), you know they are setting up for a MAJOR bashing of her when she runs full tilt boogie. It will make the swift boat affair seem like a carnival. Why do you think Rove left the Whitehouse? No....and it's not to spend time with his family.

[frazzled]

22. Let's talk about the crazy NECN lady, too

Whoa, I have never seen such an antagonistic, right-wing nutter lob questions at a Democratic panel.

My ears perked up when she asked that question about the two princes marrying book that she claimed parents of Lexington, MA second-graders were outraged about. Yeah, two parents were outraged and sued. I used to live in Lexington, MA. It's about the most liberal place on earth. Noam Chomsky lives in Lexington, MA. There are always a few nutters wanting religious displays on the Green or complaining about the homosexual "agenda" in the schools, but I can assure you that most parents were not outraged about this little fairy tale book.

Fortunately, all the candidates acquitted themselves well on the question (Obama was particularly good at pointing out the divisiveness of such questions) ... as well as on her question about the sanctuary cities (Clinton was particularly good at pointing out why local law enfocement shouldn't be involved in immigration enforcement).

[hisownpetard]

23. She was pretty damn scary! n/t

[chieftain]

25. He continues to demonstrate his fealty to the RW.

He also confirmed just how much of a prisoner he is to Republican rhetoric on social security.Fat Timmy is not a well informed man.

[LeFleur1]

26. Not Well Informed

He's not well informed because he's been busy looking up quotes (mostly out of context) to try to stir up controversy and thereby boost his own ratings.
He's just not smart enough to have the job of asking questions during a SERIOUS debate.
The questions about faith and Bible quotes were ridiculous. We heard this kind of "I'm a Christian" from Bush and found out it was a big fat lie. People can say anything about religion. I want to know what they would do about the country's terrible problems, not what their favorite Bible passage is.

[SaveElmer]

27. As expected...

He is not the type of person who is interested in exploring issue positions or how someone would handle them...he is more interested in the gotcha moment, absurd hypothetical situations, demands for strange and often bizarre pledges...

In short, he is in it for ratings!!!

That's the lay of the land and candidates are gonna have to learn to deal with it

[DeepModem Mom]

28. I think he's old media, on the way to being over. "Gotcha" stuff. The debate was boring...

compared to some previous, more innovative ones. I'm thinking particularly of the CNN/YouTube debate moderated by Anderson Cooper, and the Chicago debate in a stadium full of union members, moderated by Keith Olbermann.

[hisownpetard]

29. Yup. I think Keith asked the most intelligent, insightful questions of all. Last night's debate

wasn't interesting or informative. Lots of words, without much meaning.

[hedgehog]

31. It all depends.

Let's see if he asks the Republicans the same questions.

[Think82]

32. He ignored Biden on foreign policy and Biden's iraq resolution passed yesterday

and Biden is the most qualified to answer foreign policy questions. I wanted to jump through my TV and strangle him. Russert is OBSESSED with the front-runners

[hisownpetard]

35. Totally. Did you catch Biden's remark to him, about how Russert should give him a shot

especially on questions regarding foreign policy? He was really annoyed, and rightly so.

Since the purpose of the debates is to expose as many people as possible to the variety of ideas represented
by all the candidates, Russert did not serve us well at all. He deferred only to Hillary, as I saw it, implying that
she was the one to beat, when that has not at all been decided at this point.

[Capn Sunshine]

33. I thought he carried water for every neocon pundit in media

Every one of those questions was a right wing talking point.

[themaguffin]

34. He was ok as far as these things go on questions except for the ask others about Hillary stuff