Editorial BLASTS Blitzer performance ('Maybe Dems should rethink decision not to debate on FOX')

[Bluebear]

Maybe the Democratic presidential candidates should rethink their decision not to debate on the Fox News Channel. It couldn't be worse than the theater of the absurd that CNN organized Sunday night at New Hampshire's St. Anselm College....

Despite the fact that this was a two-hour debate, moderator Wolf Blitzer acted as if he was hosting "Beat the Clock." Of course, a moderator must keep a crowded field under control. But the candidates weren't the ones who were off the leash. Rather, it was the CNN anchor, who repeatedly interrupted contenders who were trying to explain the basics of their positions, cut off thoughtful answers in mid-sentence and failed to follow up when significant points of difference -- on issues such as trade policy -- were thrown into the mix.

Worst of all, Blitzer tried to reduce complex issues to show-of-hand stunts. At one point, Blitzer tossed a wild hypothetical at the candidates: If they knew where Osama bin Laden would be for 20 minutes, would they move to eliminate him even if that meant killing "innocent civilians"? Blitzer's question raised fundamental questions: What do we mean by innocent civilians? Are we talking about children? How many would die? Could bin Laden be captured? Would taking him out compromise a flow of intelligence that might provide information that could prevent future attacks on Americans?

Kucinich tried to explore subtleties of international law and common sense, but Blitzer shut him down. Instead of a nuanced discussion on how the U.S. might operate in a post-Bush world, Blitzer simply demanded that candidates raise their hands if they were for getting bin Laden.

Moments later, after Delaware Sen. Joe Biden suggested using military force to end the genocide in Darfur, Blitzer was again calling for a show of hands. No room for a discussion about what sort of force -- a no-fly zone or troops on the ground, an international coalition or a U.S.-led expedition, a full-fledged attack on another Muslim state or peacekeeping in the desert -- just hands in the air by candidates who were for marching on Africa. Blitzer was determined to race past anything akin to a serious discussion. And through most of the night, he got away with it.

http://www.madison.com/tct/opinion/151107

[dusmcj]

1. he's an atrocity while anchoring, why expect anything else here ? nt

[BeyondGeography]

2. It was good to see Wolfie get smacked around

:toast:

[cascadiance]

21. Part of me wondered if that was actually "set up" that way...

If they were intentionally putting those extreme questions out there, and perhaps some folks like Hillary knew in advance they were going to do this and was there to allow her to take advantage of being "contentious" towards Wolf and seem "presidential" as they described her in the end when she did so. Those questions did seem a bit childish and immature (especially the ones to "raise your hand"), that it seemed that it had to be that way intentionally rather than something that Wolf did without intending to have them be stupid and obnoxious. It smelled a little too much like a setup for me, but I admit it's more of a "conspiracy theory" at this point than any thing I have any substantive reasons to believe be the case.

[MindPilot]

3. Another "I told you so" moment.

At the time, I came down on the side of "sure the Fox news people play to their bias". Not debating on Fox simply gave the righties the opportunity to say "look as those wussie Dems...they are too scared to debate on Fox."

And of course the Dems were treated SO much better on CNN than they would've been on Fox.

Same thing with the "don't want to be accused of not supporting the troops so we'll top off Bush's war chest." Of course the righties immediately accused Dems of not supporting the troops.

[blondeatlast]

4. Wow--I thought it WAS on FAUX Snooze.

j/k

[depakid]

5. Or maybe Dems should recognize that CNN is JUST AS BAD

and even more insidious than fox.

At this point, I'm not sure how much evidence that they need....

After this debacle, I think it behooves the Dems to avoid both venues- and to pick moderators MUCH more carefully.

[muffin1]

6. He was awful last night

just like he's awful every night. Stopped watching "The Situation Room" ages ago! His voice is like fingernails on a blackboard. Add to that, the inane stories...bleh!:eyes:

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

11. The "Bitchuation Room."

:think:

[butterfly77]

7. They were correct...

plus the fact that his voice just irritates me, and the way he keeps harping on a question basically which leads to the same answer by the candidates he spent most of the time trying to pick fights between them he even interrupted when others asked the questions. They need a variety of people from the public when they let the public ask the questions. I was really angry at the start of the debate because, he kept asking all of the questions to Hillary,Obama and Edwards as though the other candidates were unimportant...

[Forkboy]

8. Probably the worst I've ever seen in twenty odd years of paying attention to debates.

If there was someone as bad I can't remember him.

[durtee librul]

10. I sent CNN an email last night and told

them to let Cafferty do the debates and to keep Wolfie in the closet with Carol Costello.

And the new morning crew? Thanks, but no thanks. Give me Sobad Obrien back anyday.

[Forkboy]

15. Thankfully I don't have cable,so that was my one and only exposure to Wolfie in awhile.

Hopefully it'll be the last time for another long while.

Sorry to hear the morning crew sucks too.Figures.

[Vincardog]

9. And having a lousy moderator and FAUX SnewZ in control would have helped HOW?

[Bluebear]

16. It's not a serious suggestion. nt

[mikelgb]

12. not only was Wolf horrible the coverage and production was too

there were multiple problems with the sound and the direction was non-existent as camermen and equipment were seen everywhere and made it very unprofessional

[Tara_NM]

13. I though Wold was rude to Richardson

I noticed right away that Wolf seemed to actually dislike (or maybe disrespect) Bill Richardson. I was not happy and it made me wonder if Wolf has a bias against Latino people that isn't public knowledge?

[cascadiance]

14. And Blitzer certainly didn't do a followup on Biden's bringing up public financing!

No, no, no, no, no NO! Can't have us talking about stuff that will get papa corporation PO'd!

And predictably NOTHING on that comment in the subsequent two hours of "analysis" even though they talked about Biden quite a bit. Only ONE person I would consider on the left of the spectrum (and she had to be THE person on these shows to position being against the war was NOT necessarily just a "left-wing" anti-war position that everyone else was labeling it as) and that was Ariana Huffington. Everyone else was a Republican or a corporate Democrat (James Carville and Donna Brazille) in terms of analysts talking, and they threw out the term "the left" SO many times. I'd not watched CNN for so long, and now I know why. Had I seen this a couple of years ago, I would have wondered if I'd tuned into a Fox News show.

[Bluebear]

17. When the audience produly applauded NH's new same sex civil union law, Wolf shushed them

"OK, let's keep this applause to minimum, people" or some such chiding.

[ncrainbowgrrl]

23. OMG- are you kidding?

:grr:

[Downtown Hound]

18. I didn't watch the debate

So to those that did, please correct me if I'm way off here and the Dems did in fact do any of this. What really needs to happen is for the Dems to start calling out the corporate media on their bullshit. When Clinton did it with Fox News, people cheered him on. And Fox looked foolish. I think that was really the moment when The Fox jig was up. Nobody really buys that "fair and balanced" crap anymore.

The Dems constantly let themselves get pigeon-holed by the corporate media and right wing talking points. What I would like to see happen is for them to turn the tide on Blitzer and say, something like, "You know what Wolf? I know you and CNN, Fox, and the rest of the corporate media have been trying to scare people for 6 years ever since 9-11, and look where it's gotten us? A losing war, the loss of respect around the world, rising crime, debt, a crumbling environment, and no Osama bin Laden. How about it Wolf? What's with all the fear-mongering? What's with all the tried and worn-out scare tactics that you've been using over and over again?"

I'm sure it could be worded better than that with a little planning. But the point is, the corporate media has set it up so that the Dems will lose in the eyes of public opinion. They toss these ridiculous scenarios out there and essentially make it seem as if unless you're willing to kill innocent people and torture terrorism suspects all in the name of making the country safer then you're not fit to be president. It's time to stop playing along, and it's time to turn the tables on them in their own game.

[cascadiance]

19. The problem is that some of the DLC Dems are served by this!

The way CNN and Faux News handle these debates, it gives advantages to the folks like Hillary and Biden, etc. and screws over people like Kucinich and even to some extent Edwards (who was positioned as "trying to appeal to the left" CONSTANTLY in their analysis). When looking at the bloggers "ratings" where Hillary Clinton was in third place behind Obama and Edwards, they kept analyzing it just from Hillary's perspective, saying that she did better than was expected on these "far left" venues. That may be correct, but part of it is because they only focus on people like her instead of doing a balanced treatment of all of the candidates.

[EVDebs]

20. Does Wolf Blitzer Owe His Career to Pat Robertson?

A Little Story About Pat Robertson, Wolf Blitzer, and David Corn
Does Wolf Blitzer Owe His Career to Pat Robertson?

October 21, 2005
By Katherine Yurica
http://www.yuricareport.com/Media/OnPatRobertsonWolfeBlitzerAndDavidCorn.html

"Yep! Wolf used to work for Pat Robertson's CBN way back when Pat was setting up his news bureau and Wolf was the 700 Club’s reporter from the Middle East. He was a lot younger in those days, but in those beginning days Pat exposed Wolf Blitzer to a viewing audience that topped the Nielsen ratings at 28.7 million monthly viewers! That’s a great way to launch one’s career. But Wolf Blitzer likes to keep that part of his career kind of quiet. He doesn’t list the 700 Club’s news bureau in his biography. He doesn’t tell CNN’s audience that Pat was like an angel to him when he was just an independent reporter starting out. But those of us who watched Pat’s show could never forget Wolf Blitzer’s reports. He was presented to us as such an expert—we were just so proud of him! And look how high he’s gone. You’d think he’d give Pat a little credit. No doubt he says “Thanks” by inviting him on CNN!"

Pat also started a Law School too, as we've learned recently.

[Joe Chi Minh]

22. On the contrary, CNN need to be told that the boom will lowered on them,

too, unless they give Kuchinich and others Blitzer marginalized, an opportunity to state what they were prevented from saying by Blitzer.

[Supersedeas]

24. If only the public cared enough to be Leslie in his place