MSNBC = Opportunity Lost

[ncteechur]

It is unfortunate that MSNBC could have really done something bold with the fact that they had the first two legitimate debates/forums for the 2008 election BUT squandered the opportunities with poor questioning from the moderators. Although I must say that Brian Williams' questions were much better than those put forth by Matthews whose questions seemed more like what would have been asked for a high school SGA debate.

We really don't know much at all about the GOP contenders different than what we knew before except they all want to be Ronald Reagan.

It was a terrible lost opportunity on the part of MSNBC.

I guarantee that Keith Olbermann would have been just as tough on the democratic candidates as he would have been on the republican candidates AND the questions would have been excellent and telling.

MSNBC should pay Olberman very well--he's all they've got.

[MadBadger]

1. They'd have to be insane to put Keith Olbermann as a moderator.

[NMDemDist2]

2. why? n/t

[MadBadger]

4. You cannot have an extremely biased person do a debate

Not to mention, he wouldnt do a good job moderating because he has trouble asking questions spontaneously (Follow ups). KO is the liberal at MSNBC. They treat Chris Matthews as the moderate, and Joe and Tucker are the conservatives. You have to have the moderate do the debate.

[NMDemDist2]

6. I disagree. I think a liberal should moderate the Repuke debates and a

conservative the Democratic debates.

Some hard hitting questions would be good I think

:shrug:

[MadBadger]

8. The Republicans would pull out of the debate in an instant

And you know what, they would have every right to. We pulled out of a FOx debate. So I would understand if they wanted to pull out if KO was moderating the debate.

[NMDemDist2]

9. true. n/t

[nini]

11. Being on the side of truth does not necessarily mean one is biased

against a party but biased against those who are shitting all over our constitution etc..


That's exactly why he should have been in there - asking the hard questions.

[MadBadger]

13. Again, the Republicans would have had every reason to pull out of the debate.

[Catherine Vincent]

17. Olbermann extremely biased?

Yes, he would be biased against Bush and/or Cheney but the others he would be fair. Matthews is more biased than he is.

[Neecy]

3. I found the entire event irksome...

But why did MSNBC let that Politico.com guy walk around the stage with a question card in his hand like some kind of game show host? It was distracting, annoying, and it gave the impression that he thought himself the most important person there. Terrible, terrible staging, especially since they had Tweety at a podium.

[blitzen]

5. Tweety's questions were bad, but Brian W.'s were way worse....

Williams was all about gotcha, trivial inside-baseball, conventional wisdom horse-race punditry type crap---Tweety generally stuck to the so-called issues, in his lame way.

[bluethruandthru]

10. Tweety sucked!

I can't believe he asked the candidates (paraphrasing) How would you like to see Clinton back in the white house? !!!!

[BlueManDude]

14. "Reagan was awesome!!. Are you as awesome as Reagan?"

[bluethruandthru]

15. How about his

"How great will it be when Roe V. Wade is no longer the law?

[BlueManDude]

16. do you read the howler?

http://www.dailyhowler.com/

great site

[Nite Owl]

12. I agree

I thought Williams was terrible. The 'raise your hands' questions were demeaning and he made the GOP talking points the questions: gay marriage, immigration etc., nothing on issues that the dems shine in like healthcare and education. These are the issues important to the dem base and the public, the GOP wants it to be about gay marriage and immigration not us. It's like he was framing the issues that they want to talk about.

[KharmaTrain]

7. The Face We See It Means Others Have As Well

In a lame MSNBC defense, they had the "exclusive" rights to these debates and paid a pretty penny...they were gonna milk it for all they could get and what may appear to us as "over the top" or kissing up may do more to expose the Repugnicans hypocrisies than cover them up. The words and spin mean far less than the pictures of 10 old white, christian men who are totally detached from a majority of this country...and appear to be proud of it. They were saying "elect us and we'll go off into the land of Oz even more...".

The one problem the network has, and needs to work on, is its reliance on talking heads with known GOOP bias without some kind of "balance" from the other side...or at least some "devil's adocate" to the overt partisan rantings...we all know 'em, so don't try to present it as "analysis" anymore. If we have to put up with the bullshit of a Buchannan or O'Bierne...then please offer a similar podium to Katrina Van Den Huevel or Joe Connason or even Ronald Raygun's namesake. One more note: Democrat doesn't mean DLC.