Bozell Column: Unseat These Atrocious Moderators
By Brent Bozell | January 10, 2012 | 23:03
Sitting through the Republican debate on Saturday night with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos was just painful, from beginning to end. Some of it was just political Ambien. But when it was finally over, there was just one question. Who in the GOP in his/her right mind invites a historically shameless Democratic spin controller like Stephanopoulos to “moderate” a primary debate like this – ever?
The only thing that can be said in defense of that horrible decision was turning to NBC the next morning and seeing “moderator” David Gregory be even more slanted in his questioning. ABC slanted the ideological questions in their debate by a ratio of six questions from the left to each one from the right. The NBC ratio was eight to one.
Why must the Republicans keep handing over their debate stage in the primary season to the people who desperately want them all to bumble, stumble, and fall on their face on national TV?
In the ABC debate – an event held for Republican voters presumably to decide who is reliably conservative enough to win the nomination – ABC asked three questions from the conservative perspective, and twenty from the left (25 were ideologically neutral). Twelve of the 48 questions, or 25 percent of the night’s total, were devoted to promoting contraception and gay marriage, so trite and repetitive that finally the audience booed them down.
Is this what happened in the Democratic debates last time? Were candidates Obama and Clinton badgered about governments promoting contraceptives, even to children? What about abortion, and the candidates’ radical views? In fact, in the entire 20 Democratic debates in 2007 and 2008 monitored by the MRC’s Culture and Media Institute, there were only seven questions about abortion...in the entire campaign.
But the Republicans get Stephanopoulos the Partisan asking Mitt Romney, “Do you believe that states have the right to ban contraception? Or is that trumped by a constitutional right to privacy?” By the sixth follow-up question, the audience was booing.
Diane Sawyer pounded Romney with the typical homosexual activist sitting at home. “Would you weigh in on the Yahoo question about what you would say sitting down in your living room to a gay couple who say, ‘We simply want to have the right to,” as the -- as the person who wrote the e-mail said -- “we want gay people to form loving, committed, long-term relationships.’ In human terms, what would you say to them?”
Because, as America knows, opposing the homosexual lifestyle makes one not just insensitive, but inhumane.
Many Republicans loved Newt Gingrich when he slammed the ABC moderators for their obvious bias. No one, he pointed out, ever asks about the secular Obama progressives driving the Catholic Church out of the adoption process by demanding they place children with gay couples. “The bigotry question goes both ways. And there’s a lot more anti-Christian bigotry today than there is concerning the other side. And none of it gets covered by the news media.”
Over on NBC, Gregory and his co-conspirators asked 25 questions from the liberal perspective, and just three from the right. It was extra-skewed by Gregory including quotes liberal activists on Facebook. “And this from Martin Montalvo, because we do have a spending crisis but also a lot of people hurting. He writes this: 'With more Americans on government assistance than ever before, is it un-American for Americans to feel relieved when the government helps them?'"
How perverse is this question? More than 45 million Americans are on food stamps, a record high. It’s “un-American” to question this ever-increasing load of government dependency?
Boston media hack Andy Hiller demanded both Romney and Santorum needed to become “a voice for increasing gay rights.” He even made it personal with Santorum. “What if you had a son who came to you and said he was gay?” The applause line would be “What if you had a son who came to you and admitted he was a conservative?”
But worst of all, these “moderators” couldn’t utter a single question that was negative about Barack Obama. Not one.
Instead, Hiller pestered Rick Perry to agree with a Washington Post article written by John McCain right after the Tucson shootings, that Obama “is a patriot sincerely intent on using his time in office to advance our country's cause. I reject accusations that his policies and beliefs make him unworthy to lead America or opposed to its founding ideals.”
These are not moderators. They are Obama partisans. Again: Why is the GOP putting up with this?
- Brent Bozell's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Comments
Maybe if these same jerk-wads
Submitted by rbosque on Tue, 01/10/2012 - 11:21pm.
Maybe if these same jerk-wads vetted Obama properly, our economy wouldn't be in a ditch. Yet election after election, they're there to make sure the Democrats get their sound bites...
The LSM is responsible, more
Submitted by d1carter on Tue, 01/10/2012 - 11:33pm.
The LSM is responsible, more than any other entity in the dumbing down of America. The GOP establishment seem to think they are going to win the respect of the LSM by accepting their invitations to more beatings. I don't get it.
I have a better idea - unseat the repube "leadership"
Submitted by Dave. on Tue, 01/10/2012 - 11:41pm.
The commies in the MSM are never going to change, but the repube leadership can be, and thus be forced to stop repeatedly serving up republican (and particularly conservative) candidates as cannon fodder for the left.
-Dave
"Why is the GOP putting up with this?"
Submitted by MightyMouth on Tue, 01/10/2012 - 11:45pm.
The answer is simple. The GOP is infected with liberalism. Let's face it folks the liberals are winning and winning big in this country. It's that simple!
Thank you Brent.
Submitted by NeoKong on Tue, 01/10/2012 - 11:48pm.
It has to be said.
What I myself would like to know is why do the candidates themselves put up with this and why do they not collude to organize something more appropriate...?
I also would like to know why they tolerate such ridiculous questions.
Seriously...If I was up on that stage and Sawyer started asking me some dumb question about about gay couples I would land on her like a ton of bricks.
A smart candidate would turn the tables and ask the moderator a question like "We have been here for thirty minutes. Why have you not mentioned the fact the Democrats have no budget...?" They could corner them and say "Are you not allowed to say anything negative about Barack Obama tonite?"
The GOP has to stop letting something so important as our debates be handled by a hostile entity. There is no good reason to turn to leftie media hacks to present the candidates to America.
Who the hell is organizing this and why do they still have a job.....?
There was nothing wrong with
Submitted by goldwater89 on Wed, 01/11/2012 - 12:18am.
There was nothing wrong with Diane's questions. You all are also forgetting that she worked for President Nixon. Now George on the other hand...
I'd like to forget...
Submitted by BBallleaper on Wed, 01/11/2012 - 7:01am.
about Diane Sawyer (a notorious drunk!), Nixon, Goldwater, and you! What a ridiculous statement. Better get back to Dummy Underground!
Diane sawyer was first hired
Submitted by Levingston on Wed, 01/11/2012 - 7:18am.
Diane sawyer was first hired on a national scale by a Nixon press secretary and then later was one of the few insiders to prepare Nixon for his interviews with David Frost. she is also the daughter of a prominent local republican official in KY. these facts lead me to believe that sawyer is a republican.
But, they're all "professional journalists," aren't they??
Submitted by PrairieSky on Wed, 01/11/2012 - 12:19am.
That's the bs that we're always told, usually in a huffy tone, about these overpaid buffoons when someone on the right questions their ethics, and points out their rabid political bias...."Well, that's just ridiculous....These are all highly qualified professionals"....Blah, blah, blah.
Uh huh...All evidence to the contrary.
"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction...It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them (our children) to do the same." ~President Ronald Reagan
Steph and the MSM only wear left shoes
Submitted by Gary Hall on Wed, 01/11/2012 - 12:38am.
Of course Brent is exactly correct - this folks are not balanced news reporters. They are not moderators; rather, they are Obama partisans - they are on the team. But, if it wasn't Obama, then it would be any other Democrat that they supported, and here, and and all other Republicans that they were out to get.
My first thought in regards to the subject matter of the post was, 'well, this same MSM when conducting Democrat primary debates, hits them from the left, as well - never from the right.'
Of course, that is done in a more friendly manner, as in 'all in the family;' a shared vision of which one of them will carry out the agenda of that which they all believe in. Such as, "Do you feel that if you win this election that you will have the ability to deliver what you promise, and keep the R's at bay?" Ever hear a question like that asked of a Republican from a member of the MSM?
My second thought, and this would be an interesting comparison, would be to take a look at how often questions to the Democrats in their debates -- as well as the daily interviews by the press -- come as direct questions of how to stop the Republicans, reverse what they've done, stop what they want to do, and how to stand tall against the GOP onslaught.
And the soft stuff, reserved for the Democrats.
I recall that so many questions to Obama from the MSM, during the 2008 race, sounded like this:
"How are you and the family holding up against the constant barrage of attacks from them [the R's]."
In fact, I wonder if there ever was an interview with candidate Obama, in which the interviewer did not ask Obama about how he dealt with all of the [unfair] attacks on him. The MSM is always there to lend a helping hand.
On the other shoe, has any national MSM figure actually ever asked a Republican candidate how they were holding to the the hate and vitriol coming from the left?
(;~/ gary
Excellent
Submitted by grammajane on Wed, 01/11/2012 - 12:57am.
article Mr Bozell!! If these candidates continue to waste their time with these radical libs, there is not much we, who care, can do about it. Wonder when the Republican Party Chair Person will stop every and all debates on the LSM.???? Hopefully, in the very near future
I still can't figure out why
Submitted by killa37 on Wed, 01/11/2012 - 1:16am.
I still can't figure out why 'our people' even give ANY of these dopes the time of day.............and it's amazing to me as to who, how, and where therse 'debates' are set up - and who on 'our side' is responsible for this!!! You might as well go into the ghetto and start preaching about abstaining from drugs - you KNOW that you're NOT gonna win anybody over!!!
'We' should just take our message to the people - no middle man, no agenda to deal with, no left-wing filter, no 'gotcha' questions, no lib operatives disguised as 'newspeople'..................and you KNOW that ANY media outlet will run ANY advertisement - for the right price. So why obstruct 'our' chances of making any kind of coherent statements or concise plans by having to sit up there and absorb the absolute CRAP that these dolts are going to throw at us???
I have to admit...........I don't 'get it'!!! These guys are NOT, and will NEVER BE, our 'friends' - regardless of what the delusional and semi-senile McCain Mutiny says - look what 'friends' they were to him!!! Screw'um!!! Some sanctemonius jerk said yesterday that the Republican candidates didn't 'deserve' the Press Corps....................well, I've got a new plan. When a Republican wins the Presidency - he (or she) cancells all of their press passes, since they're too good for the job!!! And then we give those passes to some people who might actually get things right, for once in our lives!!!
I don't know...
Submitted by almostacowboy77 on Wed, 01/11/2012 - 2:35am.
what percentage of the public watch the debates, but much like O'Reilly has liberal knuckle heads on to expose them as the fruitcakes they are, the debates allow the public to see the 5th estate for what it really is.
Sorry about the run-on sentence.
Agree with commenters
Submitted by gwalt on Wed, 01/11/2012 - 6:25am.
We need to talk above the media clutter. These arses will never ever change. Can you imagine Karl Rove "moderating" a Dem primary? Would never happen.
Time to get their faces and names in ads and billboards. Buy some time on local news in the mornings before Stepphie is on and remind viewers ; If you are going to watch Good Morning America next, remember George Stephanoupolos worked for Bill Clinton, a Democrat".
"A lot of briefing for a 2 hr. special with Dan Rather. Saw the show & wonder why we bothered". Ronald Reagan
"Who in the GOP in his/her right mind?"
Submitted by Newsbubba on Wed, 01/11/2012 - 6:29am.
I'm coming to the conclusion, NOBODY! I swear, they are all beginning to look like morons.
I suspect that they have some disorder akin to what abused wives suffer from when they keep going back to the same old abusive spouse that beat the hell out of her the week before.
Reagan seems to be the last Republican who felt like conservatives deserved to lead the country. This pack of fools act like the libs are doing them a favor showing up for their own public flogging.
I'm sick of the entire G*ddamned party.
PS. The only thing nuttier than the GOP "establishment" is Ron Paul.
Guess I'll have to wait till someone like Marco Rubio works his way into the leadership of this lame pack of fools, if the country lasts that long
You are right, Newsbubba
Submitted by motherbelt on Wed, 01/11/2012 - 7:10am.
I've compared them to an abused wife forever.
She always thinks: If I keep the house cleaner, get dressed up when he comes home, keep the kids quiet, make better meals, maybe he won't hit me.
But he always finds a reason to hit her. Because that's who he is; he likes hitting her.
Similarly, Republicans always think: If we go along with what they want, if we give in to the media demands, if we cooperate with the liberals, maybe they won't attack us.
Get it through your heads morons....that's who they are; they want to destroy you!!
I like your analogy
Submitted by ohio granny on Wed, 01/11/2012 - 7:38am.
i have wondered the same thing for years. I just never thought about it in this way. This is the best analogy I have ever heard for why the republicans keep doing this.
Thank you, granny. It hit me
Submitted by motherbelt on Wed, 01/11/2012 - 8:02am.
Thank you, granny. It hit me some time ago that they were following the same pattern of self-blame and desperate attempts at appeasement as those women.
I have been wondering when we
Submitted by kinijane on Wed, 01/11/2012 - 6:56am.
I have been wondering when we are going to have a real debut. The only one
that came close was the Newt/Cain Douglas style one and it was most informative
and interesting. Time to let folks like me moderate a debut, I have some really good
questions I would like to ask.
Get Charlie Rose
Submitted by CO2Maker on Wed, 01/11/2012 - 8:05am.
Liberal, sure. Pretentious, sure. Serious and gravitas-laden, you bet. But with his stem-winder questions, he'll only manage to get out eight or ten and the whole hour will be gone.
The Stupid Parties
Submitted by Jake6 on Wed, 01/11/2012 - 8:24am.
The Democrats won't even appear on Fox because it's biased in their view (How they expect to deal with unfriendly countries when they are scared witless of a news channel remains unexplained). The clowns the Republicans have running for POTUS would agree to a debate hosted by Barney Frank and Debbie WS. This country is doomed.
Yes, well you are preaching to the choir here
Submitted by c5then on Wed, 01/11/2012 - 8:40am.
It has been obvious for a long time now that the major media outlets with few exceptions have moved from having a liberal bias to outright activism and partisan campaigning for the liberal ideas and especially candidates. I can trace the change from ABC "coming out of the closet" if you will and hiring George Stephanopoulos as a "journalist" fresh from being Bill Clinton's press secretary. He wasn't hired as a junior political reporter or even as an analyst, but was almost instantly a major figure on the network and quickly was moved to anchor position. This was their signal to the industry that the time of hiding and sneaking around was over.
This last "debate" was such a travesty and such a study in what NOT to do that I feel it could not have happened by mistake or through sheer blind bias. The obvious liberal skew and partisan nature of the questions and the argumentative exchanges between the candidates and the so-called moderators actually created an atmosphere of anamosity. With the caliber and intelligence of the people putting this on (which says nothing about their political ideology), they must have wanted to do this on purpose. So I found myself asking why would they want to produce this kind of circus and farce? I can only surmise that it is because they were not targeting the conservative audience who are trying to decide who to pick as their nominee to run against the incumbent President but were actually targeting the liberals and populists/moderates who were watching and actively campaigning FOR the incumbent.
The questions asked had little or nothing to do with helping an undecided voter choose a candidate or even exposing similarities and differences between the candidates. The questions were all meant to establish the differences between the candidates and the liberal ideology. In fact at some points it seemed almost as if the so-called moderator was actually the one debating with the candidate and was trying to make them change their mind or say something different than they had said in the past. It became so blatant that they even made up a hypothetical controversy over "States rights" that was really a surrogate for asking about abortion. Would this manufactured issue help any Republican voter make up their mind? No. It could only serve to remind the liberals in the television audience that their core litmus-test issue was "in danger" from these candidates.
The "mainstream media" are no longer interested in providing news and analysis to the American public. They are interested in providing a platform for teaching and celebrating liberal ideology and promoting liberal candidates. That is their "business plan" and their operational strategy. They are not trying to report on the current election cycle nor are they trying to analyze why the leaders are the leaders. They are trying to influence the outcome of the Republican primaries first, and more importantly, influance the outcome of the general election in November to insure that "thier side" wins. It is that simple and that insideous.
Part time Congress with term limits! - No more professional politicians. Let's start rebuilding the Republic!
c5then
Submitted by richard on Wed, 01/11/2012 - 11:37am.
short and sweet.......you be right!
Debates
Submitted by A Typical Patriot on Wed, 01/11/2012 - 8:45am.
We don't watch these worthless debates. There are no journalists or reporters anymore. None of them are passing on FACTS to us. They just read whatever is put before them to read and then act as though their word is gospel. It's just one big propaganda show. Why the R's even show up is a puzzle to me.
It's like asking Ahmadinejad to moderate the Knesset debates.
Submitted by SickofLibs on Wed, 01/11/2012 - 8:48am.
It's that hostile... and obvious.
I also question why......
Submitted by richard on Wed, 01/11/2012 - 11:33am.
....any sane Republican/Conservative would ever give the time of day to any one of these Liberal biased commentators/talking heads/news readers, etc. If they expect honest and fair treatment when they go on these shows, they are living in fantasy land. I don't believe for one second that there is a necessity to give presence to these slime balls, in the thought that it gives information to the liberal side of the spectrum, that probably wouldn't otherwise hear your message. I've got news for you, the other side doesn't give a twit about your message and only cheers when your being defamed and ridiculed by the afore mentioned slime balls. You will NEVER be treated with any respect when you visit these venues.
You know the old saying, "It takes two, to have an argument", well why give them the two? Without you to ridicule, they have no show and in short time it becomes a cacophony between like minded fools who try to out-postulate each other in an effort to sound educated and informed. This format quickly becomes worn and tiring and even the completely way out leftist loons start to channel surf. These programs soon resemble a circular firing sqaud.
The most egregious of these shows are Chrissy Mathews and any & all of the MSNBC shows. Don't give any of these vermin anything to feed on - starve them out.
Right on richard.
Submitted by greatj on Wed, 01/11/2012 - 10:52pm.
Richard,
You know what is going on here.M.S.N.B.C. and the other leftist trash that thinks they are journalists are all working for Obama and the Democratic party as propaganda operatives.They have only one job and that is to attack all Republicans and conservatives.They all try to prove how much they love Obama's rear end.Obama and the Democratic party will say and do anything to get reelected.I call these so/called journalists--Obama Toadies.The only way to fight these toads are to vote Republican in 2012
Greatj
Left controlled moderators
Submitted by TyRockwell on Thu, 01/12/2012 - 1:24pm.
It is time to have debates moderated by people who are not committed to making conservatives and Republican candidates dance to liberals' tunes. We don't need the approval of the Mainstream Media, who are never going to give it. Conservatives have shown we aren't afraid of the media. Now, we need to remember that they are the False Prophets, telling people what to think, and whom to believe; that is, nobody but themselves. But these false prophets always end up advocates for worshipping beast-sized government and its dark "wisdom."