Clinton challenges Obama to two debates in Oregon

[depakid]

Fat chance!

Even so:

"Oregon deserves just as much attention -- and just as much information to make your decision -- as New Hampshire, Iowa, and Pennsylvania," Clinton said in the transcript of a video her campaign will be releasing in Oregon. "Since the Pacific Northwest hasn't had a single presidential debate, I am proposing today that Oregon host two Democratic debates, including one specific debate on the challenges facing rural Oregonians."

More, including the response from the Obama campaign: http://blog.oregonlive.com/breakingnews/2008/04/clinton_challenges_obama_to_tw.html

A debate in Oregon would be a good idea, if:

1. It was televised by PBS; and

2. It was moderated by academics (the heads of the University of Oregon and Oregon State Forensics teams).

Dr. David Frank Professor of rhetoric and a resident faculty member in the Robert D. Clark Honors College. http://www.uoregon.edu/~forensic/

and

Dr. Mark Porrovecchio, Assistant Professor of speech communication. http://oregonstate.edu/groups/forensics/
-----------

Now THAT would be an issues debate that would potentially benefit either (or both) candidates and would serve as a model of how things ought to be done in the fall.

[DJ13]

1. I think Obama SHOULD debate

McCain, not Clinton again.

[MindMatter]

27. Absolutely agree, but it would be cool to see him

turn the tables on her and propose a real academic debate with real moderators dealing with real issues in a format that allowed real discussion.

That would be awesome just to watch all the lame media types trying to cover their asses. The time is perfect for this kind of a move. After that abysmal ABC train wreck, it could be a great strategic move for Obama to call the shots on a whole new level of debate.

And he is in a position to do it. He doesn't have to debate Clinton. He can run out the clock on her. But by setting up this whole new fresh kind of debate, that puts him in a position to insist on nothing but the best form of debates later when he goes head to head with McCain.

[Jawja]

112. Agreed.

No more "debates" with Clinton. SHE needs the debates, not him. Can he be guaranteed he won't be stepping into another "gotcha" farce?

He will be giving her campaign credibility with additional debates. Enough is enough.

[democracy1st]

117. Just another scheme by team Clinton nothing new

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

126. me too, I'd like to see Obama bitch slap

McCain

[scheming daemons]

2. He's not running against her anymore... he's running against McCain....

...

[livetohike]

9. I think he should just ignore her - keep talking about McCain

:hi:

[GarbagemanLB]

3. As an Oregonian....fuck her. We've had enough debates.

[Yes We Did]

7. Woo Hoo! Thank You!

[depakid]

16. We've never had a debate like the one I just proposed

and Obama has A LOT to gain from from this format- both going into the convention and in the fall.

Does he really want a different style of politics? This would be an excellent place to start- because you know that McCain isn't going to agree to anything that excludes his corporate media sycophants.

Unless, of couese- it's been done before, and received rave reviews.

[GarbagemanLB]

22. It gives Hillary FREE AIR TIME. SHE IS IN DEBT. Make her PAY for her air time. Again, fuck her.

[depakid]

25. Like so many others, your hatred for this woman blinds you to critical thinking

and considering strategies that would help Democrats win in the fall.

[wileedog]

28. Nothing to do with hatred

just political stupidity to let her off the mat.

These debates hold no gain for Obama in a state he projects to win handily. Why bother?

[depakid]

44. The gain would be in the fall

where if he gets the nomination, he's sure to face 3 loads of crap like we saw last week- and we saw in 2004.

[wileedog]

53. He's faced it and more from Hillary already

There is no gain in going on TV and getting attacked for your lapel pin. That's stupid.

He has this wrapped up. The smart move is weather out the last of her dying gasps and turn to McCain, not get into another senseless mud slinging match with her.

Oregon is a strong state for him to boot. There is simply no need to give in to her wishes on this.

[Jawja]

114. But he doesn't need to face that

load of crap with CLINTON again. McCain is not Clinton.

[gal]

58. Why is it hatered?

I agree with him, enough debates already. She is running a campaign and debates are free airtime.
No time to campaign, 20 debates are enough. If they havn't watched a debate by now they aren't going to.

[MindMatter]

40. I caomplete agree with you. It is about setting up for McCain

It is an opportunity for him to fundamentally change how the fall debates would go. I hope some of his strategists are reading this. it could be a brilliant move.

And there is no downside for him. He is agreeing to debate, "But the American public is fed up with the kind of debates we have been getting, and they simply don't want to see any more like the last one. It is insulting to the process and insulting to the American people. I am perfectly happy to engage in debates that inform the public and deal directly with the issues forefront in the American people's minds. I accept Senator Clinton's offer for two additional debates, provided that they be conducted in this manner ..."

If she balks at that, then he has her on the run, "Oh so I guess Senator Clinton is only interested in 'debates' that deal with my choice of clothes or who's my barber. I'm sorry to hear that because I was looking forward to a serious discussion of the meaty issues."

[nancyr]

29. As a fellow Oregonian, that's my thinking, too.

[pdxmom]

57. As another Oregonian, I agree with you. And I think this is a total

sign of her desperation, because Oregon wouldn't be a friendly place for her to debate. Think she got booed before? That would be nothing compared to what a debate in Portland would treat her to. This place isn't known for being shy and retiring.

[otohara]

85. 22 & 23 of Same Old Shit

next one would go to Katie Couric - :puke: which could possibly prove to be worse that Stephanopolis and Gibson.

[dugggy]

97. As another Oregonian, there must be a debate in Oregon.

But chickenshit Obama is too scared to debate.

[kwenu]

107. Oh. So a debate would make difference for you. Wouldn't it?

:rofl:

Hillary can sit in her mud puddle and spin for Oregon. That should provide sufficient entertainment for you (as in you personally).

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

101. thank you, we in NC said the same thing, f' her

[here_is_to_hope]

106. That is so cool, that revolving pic thingy...

That and hearing a Tarheel telling Hillary to fuck off.
From Coast to Coast then, a Big Bird for her.

[Triana]

108. Yep. NO use for any more debates with Clinton/Obama.

It's past that time. Obama should that, and get on with fighting McSame, since Hillary's lost (unless she buys or threatens enough superdelegates to appoint her the nominee).

[DeschutesRiver]

120. As another Oregonian

I'll give it a triple f'her on this. I am not in the least interested in her idea of "debates". I'm a lawyer, I know what a f'g debate is, and she doesn't do debates. That last debate was a mockery and a sham - there were NO issues raised that were relevant to what americans need in these bad ass times. And I already know where each of these two stand on the issues. By the time I saw that fake chipper face shrilling that she willing to stand by and wait until some dumbass makes a stupid nuke move, and then she will proudly make her own retaliatory stupid nuke move, well, I just can't listen to this much more. She is absurd.

That abc debate was like an audio version of the National Enquirier - rumors, gossip, who said what to whom, just tripe. And while I understand Obama's stand on acting like a decent human, and not engaging in thug crap like Clinton, I did want him to take off at least one glove and pop her right on her ass. OTOH, unless he makes some major mistake (which can happen when you least expect it, like when you pop back at some deserving whining jerk like Clinton), he has the delegates and is the nominee. So the lawyer in me says don't go for the cheap obvious shots back at this corrupt Clinton, just go for the kill.

What a fake can of whoop ass Clinton is - keep your sham debates/free advertising elsewhere. Sure, nobody can stop you, so come campaign here in Oregon, which you formerly called a meaningless little state in your early grand delusions of how things were going to go down for you. After PA, which is being called the "turning of the tide" victory, which netted you a meaningless 10 extra delegates, you are not much more than a punchline on a bad joke about someone who doesn't know when to leave a party and just hangs on.

[Hawkeye-X]

4. Uh - obvious answer is NO.

No free air for Hillary.

[wileedog]

5. Why, were people in Oregon not allowed to watch the last 21 debates?

[dugggy]

98. None of the previous debates addressed problems facing

small town Oregonians who are turning to religion
and guns in frustration.

[rainbow4321]

6. Translation: I need all the FREE publicity I can get

So please help me do so by debating me...over and over and over. Maybe a debate a day??

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rainbow4321]

37. Ruh-roh..you used THAT word....don your flame resistant suit

Apparently the politically correct words are "inappropriately timed laughter" (that's what I was told Monday night when I used the word in describing her interview style in some threads) One of the better things I got called that night here was "sexist"..followed by "will you stop with the cackling shit already?"...and then a multitude of keyboards thrown at me.

I called it as I saw it. Cackle.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

102. brittle, harsh, castrating...

[jefferson_dem]

10. Bugger off Hillary.

You are irrelevant.

[cliffordu]

11. Can't afford publicity???? do some name calling, try for another

PASTORBATE

[XemaSab]

12. Did she even CAMPAIGN in Washington state?

:shrug:

[dugggy]

123. Many times, and I saw her in person!!! n/t

[AlinPA]

13. Obama should request a debate with McCain! Clinton could watch.

[stillcool]

36. now that's a good idea!

or is it the same thing?

[rocktivity]

14. If Obama wins in North Carolina and gets only 42% of Indiana

Any other debating will be, uh, academic.

:headbang:
rocknation

[zulchzulu]

15. Sounds like her fundraising must be going badly...she needs free TV time...

Stop begging, Hillary. You had 23 debates. No free air time for you... drop out.

[rwheeler31]

17. Only if Thom Hartman is moderator, that would be interesting.

[GarbagemanLB]

23. All right, THAT is something I might support. Thom is awesome.

[depakid]

24. Now that's another inetersting thought

But I think changing the format to a professional debate, run by people who do this all the time would be a significant paradigm shift.

Believe me, what you see college forensics puts most politicians to shame.

[newmajority]

18. Moderator for an Oregon debate: Thom Hartmann

He's there already. Not biased toward either candidate. Not a tool of the "defense" industry. Guaranteed to ask REAL questions.

[dugggy]

124. Hatmann is a Obama hack...no thanks.

[myrna minx]

19. Translation: Hillary wants free media. n/t

[Tribetime]

20. I still need to know what Obama has for dinner on Tuesdays

[swishyfeet]

21. Pass

Besides, rural Oregonians voted for 8 years of Bush.

--
Bitter Oregonian

[IDemo]

26. Oregonians, here is the substance of your debate in a nutshell:

Obama not wearing a lapel pin is a more important issue than Iraq, a collapsing economy, climate change, the energy crisis, and the prosecution of the criminal cabal in the White House responsible for much of it all.

Oh, and don't forget about his embrace of the Wright brothers' religious and political beliefs every time he boards a plane.

Copyright ABC News

[depakid]

43. And wouldn't it be great if we, as Democrats could marshal all the outrage over that

and put on something completely different.

You could break it down into policy segments:

1. Economics

2. Health Care

3. Environmental issues

4. The role of government (a beauty segue for the candidates to start focusing on Republican abuses)

5. Foreign policy

6. Education

etc.

Does anyone have a better way to ensure that flagpins, and crude associations no longer dominate the public discourse?

[IDemo]

47. Well, for starters, we could give the debates back to the League of Women Voters

I'm not even familiar with the history behind why they no longer conduct debates, but we seem to be permanently stuck with the blathering talking heads.

edit to add the history --

In 1988, the league withdrew from debate sponsorship, in protest of the major party candidates attempting to dictate nearly every aspect of how the debates were to be conducted, which ultimately resulted in the Democratic and Republican parties forming the Commission on Presidential Debates which gave the parties greater control over the debate environment.

On October 2, 1988, the league's 14 trustees voted unanimously to pull out of the debates, and on October 3 they issued a dramatic press release:

The League of Women Voters is withdrawing sponsorship of the presidential debates ... because the demands of the two campaign organizations would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter. It has become clear to us that the candidates' organizations aim to add debates to their list of campaign-trail charades devoid of substance, spontaneity and answers to tough questions. The League has no intention of becoming an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American public.

That statement was twenty years ahead of its time...

[Erin Elizabeth]

30. LOL, she's trying to get more free air time.

I'm so fucking sick of her.

[ej510]

35. Hillary Clinton is a hack.

[jenmito]

31. She refused to debate him in NC before the PA primary. Of course, he didn't make a big deal of it.

She's desperate.

[MadBadger]

32. Obama should accept a debate moderated by PBS, I agree with that.

[depakid]

48. He's holding all the cards- so his campaign has the most influence on how it would go down

Unlike some, I see a debate as a huge opportunity.

1. He's an academic, he has more experience and will excel in this sort of format;

2. He'll be in a friendly venue; and

3. Hillary pretty much has to agree to terms.

You get situations like that very often-

[MadBadger]

52. I think he should Contact PBS and try to organize a debate in Indiana.

[depakid]

64. That's also an option

Though I'd still like to see just one debate where the corporate media pundits (they're on PBS too these days) didn't toss out tabloid crap.

Or showed half as much judgment, insight and objectivity that I've seen among people involved with college and even high school forensics teams.

Comparatively speaking- what Americans end up with are a bunch of posers, and that's sad, considering how much they're paid-

[RiverStone]

33. Sorry Oregon, but I think by then Obama will be the "known" nominee n/t

And as a Washingtonian, I'd love to see him back in the NW - but I'd rather this dance be over.

[stillcool]

34. Hillary is broke!!

instead of chasing after Obama, she should hit up the GOP, or maybe some of Bill's foreign investors.

[anonymous171]

38. She really is broke.

[ShortnFiery]

39. Senator Clinton, has your husband sought treatment for his sex addiction?

:wow: :P

[backscatter712]

41. Why should Obama bother?

For one, her debating privileges should have been revoked after the ABC ambush.

For another, it's just giving her free airtime. Obama's strategy should be to outspend the hell out of her, and starve her campaign of oxygen.

[IndianaGreen]

42. Hillary can always debate her hand. I am sure she loves the sound of her voice.

No more debates!

[Why Syzygy]

45. Lemee guess. And she wants FAUX to moderate.

Of course she wants DEBATES. SHE HAS NO MONEY.

[depakid]

50. Did you read the OP- or are you stuck in group think?

[Why Syzygy]

88. I get what you said. Is that what SHE said?

[MindMatter]

54. Right. Like Obama is going to step into a trap at this point.

He has thoroughly outwitted her at every step of the campaign.

It is almost comical to see all of this sound and fury for 6 weeks in PA, ending up with an inconsequentially small handful of delegates.

Obama's team is in the power position and will take advantage of that.

[depakid]

59. How do you figure an academic debate on policy is a trap?

I'll tell you who it would be a trap for, though:

ANY REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE ON ANY BALLOT IN ANY STATE.

[MindMatter]

65. Not at all. I was talking about having FAUX moderate

On the contrary, I think the academic debate is a stroke of genius, and an idea just right for this very moment when the public is galvanized against the way the last debate was conducted.

The academic debate is not a trap for anybody. It is the way important issues SHOULD be discussed. And Obama might just have a brief moment of opportunity to wrestle the McCain debates out of the hands of the usual media weasels and snakes.

[Why Syzygy]

89. He knows what's important to us.

And it sure isn't a LAPEL PIN. We're progressives, fer cripe's sake.

We don't need any more debates. Let them go see him in person.

[guyanakoolaid]

46. While we're at it, Pat Robertson would like to debate Obama, as well.

:eyes:

[scheming daemons]

49. Hillary won't even still be in the race when Oregon comes around...

..

[depakid]

55. That remains to be seen. Wouldn't bet on that

My guess is that Indiana and (depending on the timing) West Virginia will be in the Clintons' column.

With Kentucky still on the line.

Remember, Oregon votes exclusively by mail, so lots of ballots will already be in by the time West Virginia's votes come in on May 13.

[milkyway]

51. There are usually 3 debates for the general election. 21 debates not enough? What's the magic number

Clinton thinks is necessary for them to serve their purpose? 22? 23? 28? 37?

Maybe the public would be better served if for two hours every night on national television Hillary tries yet again to explain her Iraq war vote. Or maybe we've had enough.

Sorry if I sound snotty, I'm directing this at Clinton, not the OP, and Clinton's ridiculous self-serving argument that we need more debates. Does she think they don't have television in Oregon?

[depakid]

56. I'm talking quality, not quantity

[RareLubbockDem]

60. Why debate someone who is irrelevant now?

Seriously. That'd be like Nader challenging him. What's the point? He's concentrating on McAngry now, as he should.

[Why Syzygy]

91. The best point yet. You don't debate with irrelevants.

That's why I never debate a freeper.

[shadowknows69]

61. Obama should agree to one more debate

If he gets to choose the moderators.

[Tribetime]

62. Oprah and Olbermann?

[anonymous171]

63. Maddow and Olbermann would be a good set for Obama.

[RichardRay]

66. From a campaign strategy point of view he'd be crazy to do this...

but a real debate run by real debate folks would certainly be a change, and fun to watch. IF (and that's a big if) Senator Clinton is still in the race at that point I'd be persuadable on this. Of course, it wouldn't be Senator Obama's best bet to 'put her away', so if that 'weakness' continues to get a lot of air time he shold just let her twist in the wind. Aside from just wanting to see what would happen it makes NO political sense at all for him to do this.

But, if he doesn't, I'd sure as hell like to see the presidential debates run under that framework, or even just let the League of Women Voters have it back. If the campaigns were willing to comply with the League's requirements I'd be willing to consider it a fair contest.

[depakid]

68. "just let the League of Women Voters have it back."

There's a reason why they left:

In 1988, the league withdrew from debate sponsorship, in protest of the major party candidates attempting to dictate nearly every aspect of how the debates were to be conducted, which ultimately resulted in the Democratic and Republican parties forming the Commission on Presidential Debates which gave the parties greater control over the debate environment.

On October 2, 1988, the league's 14 trustees voted unanimously to pull out of the debates, and on October 3 they issued a dramatic press release:

The League of Women Voters is withdrawing sponsorship of the presidential debates ... because the demands of the two campaign organizations would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter. It has become clear to us that the candidates' organizations aim to add debates to their list of campaign-trail charades devoid of substance, spontaneity and answers to tough questions. The League has no intention of becoming an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American public.
------------

Now, who here wants to change that?

Hopefully everyone.

I just tossed out one idea. Maybe it's not a good one- maybe it is- maybe there are better solutions.

But, Houston- we have a problem.

[RichardRay]

84. That's why I specified that the campaigns would have to play nice

with them. I have a dear relative who's a bigwig in the LWV - she's not gonna be an easy sell on this topic, but if the League could be convinced that they were getting what they needed to be willing to take it I think they'd do a great job.

Aside from that, I think making the candidates play by formal debate rules, at least for one meeting, would be great.

[Why Syzygy]

93. It would be giving legitimacy where none exists.

Hillary would like to convince some more people that she is without a chance of winning the nomination.

[tishaLA]

67. she needs the air time

he doesn't.

[quakerboy]

69. As an Oregonian, screw debates.

I saw 4 more Obama yard signs spring up since yesterday. Still have only seen one Clinton sign in totality.

I like your debate ground rules. Under those conditions (PBS/true public interest group sponsorship and academic not pundit moderation) I would be for a debate. Any debate. Under those rules, it would be a valuable experience. If it is run as the ones so far, by corporate media, then more debates are pointless and purposeless. In Oregon, we have seen over 20 of those debates, and there is nothing left to gain from them.

[depakid]

71. "nothing left to gain from them."

Except of course, Oregon's once highly tauted ability to lead the nation in public policy shifts.

Like the bottle bill.

and others.

[quakerboy]

74. From a Corporate debate, there is nothing to gain for any Oregonian

Nada.

Under other leadership and moderation, perhaps. But yet another distorted MSM debate has nothing to offer us.

[depakid]

80. Not a corporate debate

A real debate on issues that affect us all.

Run by people who actually DO debates, rather than by people who make their money off of tabloid angles.

Charles Gibson sort of gave up the game on that.

There are links to his previous statements, easy enough to find.

[quakerboy]

83. Is that the kind of debate Hillary is asking for?

I have my doubts that we would get that kind of debate. I am not interested unless that is right off the top the basis for it.

[depakid]

87. Hillary has few cards to play

Obama does.

Seems to me that Oregon is as good a place as any to have a go with changing dysfunctional political dynamics.

[quakerboy]

90. Hillary is asking for more debates. It is on her

to give us a reason other than "I wanna".

[Why Syzygy]

95. She's irrelevant. Unwinnable. Why debate a ghost?? nt

[quakerboy]

99. Yup

Though if we could get a real debate (voter group organized, nonMSM moderators, etc) I would rather have him do it than not, on general principal. That is the kind of debates we should be getting, and the precedent would be worth the irrelevance and even the free media exposure for her. Getting our elections back is important to me.

Plus I personally think that in a genuine issues debate, he would shine far better than these distraction debates.

[Why Syzygy]

100. So, he needs to debate McCain.

That's going to have to start happening asap. I genuinely don't believe he should waste another public appearance with her.

[Why Syzygy]

94. I always love to see the blackmail card. That's a new one today.

I would love for Oregon to lead the nation in the legalization of medical marijuana. Now there's a project.

[bluestateguy]

70. Only on the condition that there be no gotcha questions and tabloid topics

Only policy issues. No Rev. Wright, bittergate, snipergate, flag lapel pins, etc. Only health care, education, Iraq, economy, etc.

[depakid]

76. I know for a fact that at least one of two I suggested as moderators would never do that

And I'd place a sizable bet the other wouldn't either....

Seems to me, that's what Republicans fear the most: that ordinary folks might have a fair look.

'cause if they did, they might think about some things and want a fair go.

[tokenlib]

72. Only if moderated by Colbert....n/t

[IndependentDem]

73. sounds good to me. n/t

[thevoiceofreason]

75. Say "NO" Instead, spend the time meeting with people in The Dalles

[Political Heretic]

77. There's no political reason Obama should enter a thritieth debate.

None.

[fortyfeetunder]

78. Let's have Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert moderate

And Comedy Central host it. Now that would be a debate!!!

[peoli]

79. I think he should just ignore Hillary the rest of the way

[woolldog]

81. No more debates!

It gives off the impression that there's still a primary going on, and there isn't. He needs to start signaling to the voters that it's over....because it is.

[AtomicKitten]

82. Screw her. He's the frontrunner. He sets the terms.

[jillan]

86. Nah - it might interfere with his waffle eating time.

[Secret_Society]

92. What is Obama afraid of...o yea almost forgot that last debate

[Catherina]

96. ! Rofl I'd rather watch a clip of Obama trimming his nose hairs n/t

[Eurobabe]

103. I'd tell Hill to stick it where the sun don't shine

We don't need no stinkin' debates!

[StevieM]

104. Obama is such a jerk. Proposing a debate is "old "Washington game." Ordinary people are far more

likely to watch a debate when it is in their home state and the local media--newspapers, radio--hammers home that there is a local debate coming up. Obama knows this and that is why he is refusing.

Steve

[cali]

111. desperate and losing hilllypoo doesn't get to dictate jackshit

tough for her, the pathetic jerk.

[bhikkhu]

105. As an Oregonian, I've seen enough

Please, Hillary, just stay home. That crap they pull on your side of the continent doesn't go over well here.

[cascadiance]

109. Have moveon.org sponsor it. Then he can tell her to "take it or leave it!"

It's time she got the same treatment he got the last debate!

Turnabout is fair play!

[depakid]

110. I was thinking a full and fair debate on issues that concern us all

Scary, eh?

[undeterred]

113. And since television doesn't reach the whole country

nobody's had the chance to see a debate yet. :sarcasm:

[depakid]

115. Hate radio reaches into communites all across America

and, from what I can see on this thread, lots of folks are influenced by it (even as they, themselves don't much care for the consequences).

Indeed, in many places, it's about the only game in town.

Wouldn't it be nice if there was something else to listen to?

[undeterred]

116. Hate radio isn't what is making Clinton lose this race to Obama

She's doing that all by herself, with her own hatefulness, and all the debates in the world aren't going to undo the vicious things she has done and said.

[Liberal Dose]

118. She's playing Bill's game of harrassing the other side about debates, to make it look like he's

afraid. Only in Bill's case, H.W. was afraid and would not debate. Imagine how stupid Bill would've looked sending Chicken George to bug H.W. if there had been 20 debates.

[eridani]

119. How about a science debate?

There's an organized group pushing for this.

[democrattotheend]

121. Why 2 in Oregon?

What value is there in having more than 1 debate in the same state? I can understand why a state would want its own debate, to force the candidates to talk about issues important to that state (at least in theory; none of the questions in PA were PA-specific), but why have more than 1 in any particular state? Why not do one in Oregon and one in West Virginia or Kentucky? Or does Clinton only want to debate in states where she is behind?

[lojasmo]

122. I've had enough.

Anybody who needs more debates to make up their mind is a fvcking moron.

[ray of light]

125. Only if we can have the League of Women Voters and a REAL network

moderate and show it.

Leave the corporate liars ummm corporate media out of it!