So, Democrats didn't want to participate in a debate hosted by "right wing" FOX news (sorry, but Fox is simply moderate).
If you want to see slanted questioning, look at the first Republican debate hosted by liberal Chris Matthews. It is so clear by looking at these questions that the focus was on liberal talking points, liberal concerns. It boggles the mind to think that Dems are too afraid to debate where there MIGHT atleast be a few actual hard questions, and Republicans have the integrity and courage to jump right into the fire of a liberal debate.
Some "fair and balanced" questions:
"What do you dislike most about America?'"
The "Interactive Rounds" at the Republican presidential debate, from the Ronald Reagan Library in California and carried live on MSNBC, became an opportunity to raise hostile questions from a left-wing agenda or meant to embarrass the candidates (What's the difference between Shia and Sunni?, How many have been killed or injured in Iraq? etc.)
"Bradley Winter of New York would like to know if there's anything you learned, or regret, during your time as Mayor in your dealings with the African-American community?";
"Thousands of reputable scientists have concluded, with almost certainty, that human activity is responsible for the warming of the Earth. Do you believe global warming exists?"
Later, to Tom Tancredo: "Will you work to protect women's rights, as in fair wages and reproductive choice?"
This is amazing. Can you even imagine someone asking a liberal if they are for partial birth abortion, then have the moderator explain in detail what that was.
Or, ask a question like this, "Mr. Obama, it has been proven that gun control laws lead to an increase in violent crime, can you defend your position to take away American's second Ammendment right to protect themselves"
Or
"Are you willing to apologize to the American people for high gas prices, since you voted against drilling in ANWAR and everywhere else in the United States" or "What will you do to lower gas prices"
ect....
Are you seeing the slant yet?
Do you see the bias?
Of course you don't if you are a liberal. I understand. You are so used to things being slanted left that you think that is center, that is moderate. When you see things get close to the center or actually go slightly Right, it seems so strange and out of place. Conservatives, this is not good. It gives a huge advantage to the Democrats. Just think, if they can every produce an actual good candidate, they could win an election. And even with another bad candidate, they get 2% to 3% advantage in voter fraud, and how many points in the liberal media worth? 5%? 6%
Sunday, May 06, 2007
Question During Debate: 'What Do You Dislike Most About America?'
Posted by The Game at 8:15 AM
Labels: liberal bias, liberal media
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Oh yeah, Matthews is so liberal serving up such "hardballs" as "Would it be good for America to have Bill Clinton back living in the White House?"
This is one of the most ludicrous questions I've ever heard in a debate.
All of the questions you've listed here both ways are good questions. I don't see what your objections is to them.
Frankly, from both sides, I'm very disappointed in the media all around. This is why I don't post to media blogs (even this one) but once in a blue moon.
I'm disgusted with them all.
I'm just here now, to send you a link, Game. It's one I think you'd be interested in, being a teacher. It's another blog -- I'll post it at your last MPS thread.
I don't know what the deal is, but this thing's not letting me login with my blogger account??? Nor will it let me sign in anonymous?
Take care.
Ded.
Game
The way the questions are framed, reminds me of several polls put forth.
But you make an excellant point, the framing of a question means so much. Now if you, Game, were to moderate a debate, that would be a debate worth watching! You'd make them squirm, don't-ya-know!
Jim,
Of course
... "All of the questions you've listed here both ways are good questions. I don't see what your objections is to them" ...
you don't see the objections, that's the whole damn point!!!
Damn dude, wake the hell up!
The fact that you can't even see the bias in the questions proves Games point.
Dang! You people make it way too easy.
It doesn't matter if you agree or disagree with a certain point. This country is divided, and it's time for a little balance.
What's wrong with "What do you dislike most about America?" This is a good opportunity to talk about any number of things like poor enforcement of immigration laws, liberals messing up society, black leaders not stepping up to the real problems that plague their constituents, not being able to drill offshore or in ANWR, unfair tax laws. Whatever. In other words they were given a chance to say what's on their mind and few if any of them had the guts to do it.
"Do you believe global warming exists?" This gives any one of them to call global warming a hoax. Are they afraid to say that?
This is only the latest in your string of ridiculous rants that have no foundation.
jim
well I guess, if you put it like that. Of course they could have said "how would you improve America?". But that doesn't have near the conatation as "What do you dislike about America?" or better yet, as some polls I've heard "What's wrong with America?".
Words mean things (?). The framing of that question was a caculated statement.
Back to the "What's wrong with America?" question. I was recently asked that by a caller (6:10pm while we were sitting at the table for dinner) whom identified herself as a "Harris" poller. My answer, short and sweet, LIBERALS. I tried to expand, but obviously the parementers of this poll didn't anticipate such a response; go figure!!! I wonder how my answer was catogorized? Any guesses?
Your global warming statement is ludicrous. Yet another example of "framing the debate".
Why is it ludicrous? You complain, you assert, but you do not show why this is such a repugnant question.
Why couldn't Brit Hume ask the same question? Come on, why couldn't Hannity ask the same question? Why is this an inherently "liberal" question? Why is this not an opportunity for someone to state their opinion on the subject?
I'll ask you:
"Thousands of reputable scientists have concluded, with almost certainty, that human activity is responsible for the warming of the Earth. Do you believe global warming exists?"
Jimmy
The "thousands of scientist" have allready admitted that the earth is warming without human help! The question is - are humans helping to warm, how can I say this - "a little faster" than normal.
That's the debate in a nutshell, yes that's right, the libs have given up on blaming Capitalism for global warming (they tried, but they couldn't do it) , they're now reduced to "is capitilistic society accelerating the global change? Of course, there's nothing wrong with changing your stated goal, for a more reasonable objective. especially when your original thesis is totally, absolutely, wrong
So, do you think we're accelarating, the warming?
How long do we have?
Do we need to stop this ridiculous "driving hither and younder"?
Maybe we should all replace our light bulbs with the new mercury laden "long lasting bulbs".
Or maybe I should just seperate my newspaper from my 2 litter bottles and all will be well?
Nice blather, Blamin'. Makes no sense but might add to green house gases.
It is you who have turned this argument into one about capitalism. Some of the great American capitalist companies are realizing the opportunity for saving money, creating investment opportunities, and doing the earth and its children good by adopting non-draconian "green" practices.
China is a large creator of green house gases. Since when did they become capitalist?
Post a Comment