Okay, I want to start of by saying it was amateur hour at the CNBC republican presidential debate. I commented on Facebook that the high school A/V department could probably do a better job. Carl Quintanilla, Becky Quick and John Harwood were ham handed in their questioning of the candidates. Their approach was combative at times. They were rude. They cut people off in the middle of sentences. They asked 'When did you stop beating you wife?' questions. In short they behaved like Fox 'News' does to anybody who doesn't conform with their extreme right-wing, dictated by the foreigner, Rupert Murdoch, view of the world.
SO WHAT????
It's fine for the republicans to drag Hillary to Capital Hill and grill her for 11 hours. Too bad for them she wiped the floor with them. It's okay for them to shout down guests on their (Fox) network, usually piling on four or five to one. But they can't handle some tough questions and some not so polite handling?
Has Fox made them so soft?
Full Debate Here:
https://www.youtube.com/...
RNC Cancels Debates on NBC
So now, the RNC has announced it will cancel all of it's remaining debates on NBC and their affiliates. They won't stand up for themselves. They are taking their football and going home. They are going to have the biggest pity party in the world and they are not going to invite anybody... except if you ask them non-threatening questions or feed them applause lines in front of a prepackaged audience.
Now, you have to understand how unprecedented this is. No party or politician has ever balked at going into what they perceive as hostile territory. It is what they are expected to do. It is what Mark Anthony did with his famous eulogy for Caesar. It is what the Kennedys did when they campaigned in the South. Hell, it's what Ronald Reagan did on a almost constant basis as he metamorphosized the country from a relatively forward thinking progressive one to a right-wing 'Tie a Yellow Ribbon' around your 'whatever', Lee Greenwood singing, shallow, disco loving, rich on paper, yuppie wasteland.
They have given up MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF FREE AIR TIME.
If their message had any value they would be able to rise above any pesky news people asking mean questions that required facts, don't you think?
And now the right-wing echo-sphere is crowing this as proof positive of a 'liberal bias' in the media. Well, I hate to break it to them but there isn't a liberal news media in America. There is only a corporate news media and if you can't hack it there, good luck trying to deal with world leaders some of which live to find weakness.
This is a sign of the total failure of the right-wing effort to dumb down America. Their instrument of choice, Fox 'News', has only created a breed of politicians who are so used to being handled with kid gloves, they can't stand on their own against adversity. They have created the ultimate hot house flowers. Exactly how are these people supposed to handle it when they have to square off one on one against Bernie and/or Hillary? You can't tell me you would be comfortable with any one of the republicans being the same room with Vladimir Putin.
They may as well just admit it's too tough for them.
So, as the republicans have declared before: We won’t ‘Let Our Campaign Be Dictated By Fact-Checkers’.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...
Highlights of Ridiculousness.
It was Ben Carson's night to lose... and he did. Other than being certifiable the man has the charisma of a turnip.
Link to his hit song: https://www.youtube.com/...
I'm pretty sure I heard Kasich proposing some form of indentured servitude for students unable to pay their student loans. I can't be sure over all the shouting and whining.
AND Donald Trump stole the night by congratulating himself (and Ben Carson) for keeping the debate under three hours. This he thought was a good thing. None of the millions of people who tuned in or read about in the paper care about all that fussy policy and fact stuff, right?
And now they cancel all the rest of their NBC debates. They need a nap.
Quoth the Bush, 'It's hard... It's hard work...' (whimper, whimper)
Time for the RNC Clown Tent to fold.
What could prevent this sort of unpleasantness for the poor RNC?
Reinstate the Fairness Doctrine. There probably wouldn't be a network like Fox where candidates of choice got a free pass and the playing field would be equal across all networks. SIGN THE PETITION BELOW:
Some quick Fairness Doctrine facts:
1. It has been constitutionally upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States. Red Lion vs. FCC, 1969.
2 It was the law of land from 1949 until 1987 (38 years).
3. The cited reason for deregulation was the advent of cable television creating multiple news options.
4. It's needed now because all those different cable channels are owned by an oligopoly of about 6 corporations. (No Diversity)
5. Even if there were more news media owners there is a permanent condition of scarcity because an individual citizen can not respond in kind to a television or radio news network.
6. It augments the 1st Amendment. It is not censorship. The Fairness Doctrine is to help guarantee the news is factual and truthful. It also works to assure differing sides of an issue are given equal representation (fairness), so, actually, it is augmenting the 1st Amendment. It is the very opposite of censorship. Censorship occurs in newscasting when newscasters report dishonestly and present only one side of an issue.
7. The wording of the Constitutionally upheld Fairness Doctrine provided plenty of leeway for news networks to comply.
Below is a link to the Fairness Doctrine wiki page for additional reference:
https://en.wikipedia.org/...
'Like' 'Bring Back the Fairness Doctrine' of Facebook:
Bring Back The Fairness Doctrine Facebook page:
https://www.facebook.com/...
SIGN AND SHARE THE PETITION, " Re-institute the Fairness Doctrine and Require Strict Adherence to Fairness and Accuracy in Broadcast Media"
http://petitions.moveon.org/...
Tom Wheeler, FCC cc President Barack Obama
Federal Communications Commission
445 12th Street Southwest,
Washington, DC 20536
We request the FCC re-institute the Fairness Doctrine and institute rules that require reporting and commentary be held to the highest journalistic standard of fairness and accuracy in broadcast media. We also request strict adherence to the 'equal time rule' devoid of a requirement for financial remuneration to the broadcasting networks.
The 'Fairness Doctrine' is necessary to encourage accurate, unbiased newscasting, diversity of editorial comment and to identify editorial comment as such as opposed to news. Recent studies have shown an unacceptably large percentage of inaccurate and misleading content in news/editorial broadcasting. Though there are alternative means of getting the news and commentary, none are as powerful as television and radio which are, for all intents and purposes, the sole domain of corporate owned entities. Corporate consolidation of media is having a chilling effect on diversity of opinions represented and the selection of news stories covered. Last but not least, these airwaves belong to the people of the United States and should be the most inclusive in diversity of viewpoints and free of bias in any news coverage.
The Fairness Doctrine was a policy of the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC), introduced in 1949, that required the holders of broadcast licenses to both present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that was, in the Commission's view, honest, equitable and balanced. It was ruled constitutional by the Supreme Court in 1969 and deregulated during the Reagan era, the advent of cable newscasting being the cited reason. Currently there are only six corporations that control almost all of television and radio newscasting. The Fairness Doctrine is necessary to ensure there is diversity and honesty in newscasting and telecast editorials.
Respectfully yours, The Undersigned.
SIGN AND SHARE THE PETITION, " Re-institute the Fairness Doctrine and Require Strict Adherence to Fairness and Accuracy in Broadcast Media"