WAR OF THE WORDS
Remember how
Primary debates used to be handled? There
were candidates on the stage who answered questions posed by a moderator.
Never did a moderator join the debate. Her/his function was to keep order
and ask questions.
It is so different
this year as the cable fat heads, swollen
with ego, have entered the debate as de facto advisors, prompters and debaters.
Before the debates, moderators of the next debate discuss the campaigns
of the candidates with guest analyzers.
Then when the debate
is in progress, the moderator may insert himself into the debate with stunning
nastiness using his own opinions and script he wrote for his cable program.
The idea is to incite a fight, entertain
and provide lots of clips to run on the cable programs to hurt one candidate
and provide lots of clips to run on the cable programs to hurt one candidate
and build up another.
MSNBC's Chris Matthews
was first to enter into the debate he was supposed to be moderating but
pulled back when the crowd voiced its disapproval. However he continued
to script on his program what Obama and Edwards should do to hurt Clinton
at the next debate. That one was moderated by Russert who asked questions
of Clinton, many of which were based on lies or slanted to misinform.
Viewers from all
walks of life were appalled by Russert's actions as moderator, especially
in the debate which took place in Philly with a Matthew's-packed crowd
that was clamoring for Clinton's blood.
Chris was really
pissed off at the criticism and "protested too much" and too
often. He claimed that Russert acted the way a moderator should act. Then
he further manipulated the debate in subsequent Hardball programs. Typically
he played clips only of parts of Hillary's responses without showing that
the questions asked were different.
Following the
Nevada debate, Matthews was livid. We've
seen this side of him before whenever Hillary won. He declared that the
moderator, Wolff Blitzer, had been co-opted with threats (even after Wolff
denied it) and gave Hillary soft ball questions.
Matthews raged on,
declaring that the crowd was fixed, the boos were programmed and the questions
were all managed by the Clinton campaign. He showed himself to be the leader
of the "Stop Hillary movement".
In his head, a programmed
anti-Hillary audience in Philly was OK but Hillary backers in the audience
in Nevada was not. Likewise he often criticizes and complains about Hillary
clapping her hands with never a word about the fact that nearly every shot
of Barack show him clapping his hands.
He desperately needs
Obama to win because O is sure to lose the general election. Chris's candidate
has always been Giuliani and he is terrified that Senator Clinton will
win and he knows she can beat him.
He has constantly
demonstrated his hatred of everything Clinton. He should be worried. A
huge poll taken this week reported that 64% of Democrats believe that Hillary
is the only candidate that can win against a Republican. Most realize that
Rudy or any of the other Repug candidates would make mincemeat out of Obama
in the presidential debates.
The media is becoming
even more strident in managing this Primary by telling us lies and half
truths. It focuses on anything it can blow up to make the candidates fight.
Who will you believe? Them or your own evaluation made following perusal
of the facts?
Now the media mavens
are breathlessly telling us that Barack has the highest likeability of
any of the Dem candidates. Seems that was one of the principal reasons
why people voted for George Bush -- we ask them: "How did that work
out for you?"
gapperserve-at-peoplepc.com
http://gendergappers.blogspot.com
2007-048
Copyright
2007 Renee T. Louise and Ruth M. Sprague, Ph.D. These articles may be republished
for noncommercial use only, provided that they are copied intact, and that
this copyright notice is attached. Address all queries to: gapperserve@peoplepc.com.
G e
n d e r G a p p e r s T
M
|
