Skip to main content

View Diary: Scott Brown: If I can't shut up the widow, I won't debate (103 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  How did we get to this situation? (6+ / 0-)

    Brown is a worthless goofball but who could have thought an institute named for Edward Kennedy would be a good place for a partisan debate for his old Senate seat?  It's as ridiculous as expecting Warren to do the wingnut-hosted debates.  Don't we have a League of Women Voters to organizationally host these things, and hotel meeting rooms to physically host them?

    Romney '12: Bully for America!

    by Rich in PA on Wed Jun 20, 2012 at 09:25:36 AM PDT

    •  Uh, because it's Massachussettes. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      blue aardvark

      Kennedys are kinda prominent there.

      Obama is at war with radical anti-American terrorists. The radical GOP is at war with American women. Take that and run with it DNC, you inept fucking pikers.

      by GOPGO2H3LL on Wed Jun 20, 2012 at 09:37:20 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Except Warren HAS (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      blue aardvark

      agreed to wingnut-hosted debates.

      Barack Obama is not a secret Marxist class warrior who wants to redistribute wealth in America. But I'll still vote for him, anyway.

      by looty on Wed Jun 20, 2012 at 09:41:17 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I agree. I'm not sure the voters (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      VClib

      will see it as all that unreasonable that a candidate will say no to a debate essentially hosted by somebody that endorses their opponent.  

      If Brown said no to a debate that would appear to be pretty non-partisan, that's problematic.  But if you are talking about an institute named for a big Democratic partisan like Senator Kennedy, when those who are running it are not committed to being non-partisan, I'm not sure that, to the average voter, Brown is going to seem unreasonable for refusing that -- unless he refuses to debate at all, which would be problematic for him.

      It's sort of like if the right were pressuring President Obama to debate Mitt Romney at the Reagan Library.  I don't think he'd look all that bad for saying no, let's have a debate on a more neutral site.  

      •  The debate would be hosted by the (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Peace JD, bdop4, Anonyman

        Institute, not by Vicki Kennedy, and she would not be the moderator.  That would be Tom Brokaw.  At most she would, as board president, welcome the audience to the institute and introduce the debate participants, although even that small part could be filled by another Institute board member.

        If Scott is that concerned about the appearance of partisanship, why would he agree to debates hosted by a known conservative radio show host and a newspaper that has already implicitly endorsed him?  His problem seems to be the appearance of partisanship against him, not non-partisanship as a prerequisite for fairness.

        "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." - H. L. Mencken

        by SueDe on Wed Jun 20, 2012 at 10:28:32 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I'm talking about the appearance (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          VClib

          to your average voter.

          Do you think that the Kennedy Institute, named after Senator Kennedy (a clear Democratic partisan), will not seem partisan when the Board President endorses a candidate?

          Like I said, this seems to me to be as if the President were asked to debate Mitt Romeny at the Reagan Presidential Library.   Sure he could agree to it if he wanted to, but I don't think most voters would think he was out of line if he said he wanted some place less partisan.  

          At any rate, if Ms. Warren were presented, for example, with the option of debating at a location named for a prominent partisan Republican, with the location headed by someone who, shortly after the debate, was certainly going to publicly endorse Sen. Brown, I don't think the voters would blame her for saying that she wanted a more neutral site, either.

          My point is that I simply don't think this story is going to seem outrageous to the average voter.  

          •  Average Voters Haven't an Effing Clue (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Tonedevil

            as to how debates work. If the rules are clearly delineated and the moderator is non-partisan (as Tom Brokaw is), it doesn't matter if the KKK is hosting the debate.

            Brown is acting as though Kennedy has written the rules and questions. In televised debates, it doesn't work that way. Not sure how the right-wing radio stations are handling it.

    •  Well, since Brown debated Marsha C (6+ / 0-)

      at a Kennedy Institute debate in 2010, that question has been answered already.

      Brown's problem is 0% with the host of the debate, and 100% with the person at the other podium.

      He's afraid of a smart woman.

      In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice; but in practice, there always is a difference. - Yogi Berra En théorie, il n'y a aucune différence entre théorie et pratique, mais en pratique, il y a toujours une différence. - Yogi Berra

      by blue aardvark on Wed Jun 20, 2012 at 09:43:30 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  That's because he didn't think he would win... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        VClib

        ...and any publicity beats bad publicity! But he's a senator now and I cant blame him for using his leverage.  My only complaint is that he should have politely declined any possibility of the Kennedy Institute as a sponsor rather than accepting it with bizarre conditions.

        Romney '12: Bully for America!

        by Rich in PA on Wed Jun 20, 2012 at 09:54:43 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I agree. It would hardly be good optics from (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Anonyman

      Brown's POV to appear at the Kennedy Institute, reminding everyone at every moment that this about EK's seat.

      On the other hand, Jon Keller?????????????

      A strutting little popinjay whose every story is about HIM, and how great he is playing gotcha on local pols. His high, nasal, whining voice will have the audience thinking they're listening to fingernails scratching a chalkboard.

      Oh, for the League of Women Voter days of hosting and moderating these affairs, instead of tiny little minds with delusions of adequacy and relevance.

      Fear is the mind-killer - Frank Herbert, Dune

      by p gorden lippy on Wed Jun 20, 2012 at 09:45:35 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site