Des Moines Register Editor Carolyn Washburn takes a shot at Republicans with an obviously false statement in her piece summarizing the recent Iowa debates which she moderated:
By and large, the Republicans say they can get us to smaller government and lower taxes with economic growth and government efficiency. They don't ask Americans to make terrible sacrifices. About half wanted to tackle global warming and about half chose not to talk about it. They want local control and choice in education.
Chose not to talk about it!?! Not only did one Republican ask to talk about it, as opposed to raising his hand, Washburn wouldn't let them talk about anything other than what she had pre-scripted in her mind. From the transcript: see rest of pertinent part below the fold. Everyone there that was permitted to talked about it until she changed the subject. She also defends inviting Keyes and not Kucinich using criteria that's been pretty much debunked.
I want to take on a new issue. I would like to see a show of hands. How many of you believe global climate change is a serious threat and caused by human activity?
THOMPSON: You want to give me a minute to answer that?
WASHBURN: No, I don't.
THOMPSON: Well, then I'm not going to answer it.
(LAUGHTER)
WASHBURN: OK.
(APPLAUSE)
THOMPSON: You want a show of hands. I'm not giving it to you.
WASHBURN: We're going to follow up on that, but what I need to know is: Who believes global climate change is serious and caused by human activity? And then we'll talk in more detail about it.
(CROSSTALK)
MCCAIN: I think that climate change is real and I...
(CROSSTALK)
(LAUGHTER)
WASHBURN: I'm going to start with Senator McCain and come back to Mayor Giuliani.
MCCAIN: I've been involved in this issue since the year 2000. I have had hearings. I've traveled the world. I know that climate change is real.
But let me put it to you this way: Suppose that climate change is not real and all we do is adopt green technologies, which our economy and our technology is perfectly capable of. Then all we've done is given our kids a cleaner world.
But suppose they are wrong. Suppose they are wrong and climate change is real and we've done nothing. What kind of a planet are we going to pass on to the next generation of Americans?
It's real, we've got to address it, we can do it with technology, with cap and trade, with capitalist and free enterprise motivation. And I'm confident that we can pass on to our children and grandchildren a cleaner, better world.
WASHBURN: Mayor Giuliani?
GIULIANI: I agree with John. Climate change is real. It's happening. I believe human beings are contributing to it.
I think the best way to deal with it is through energy independence. And I...
WASHBURN: Who doesn't...
GIULIANI: And I think energy independence is...
WASHBURN: Who doesn't agree?
HUNTER: He said contributing, but not totally.
GIULIANI: Yes. Yes.
HUNTER: OK.
(LAUGHTER)
(CROSSTALK)
GIULIANI: And I think that all parties should embrace this as an issue for us and our...
WASHBURN: Let me come at it this way. Let me come at it this way.
What impact on the economy would be acceptable in order to reverse global warming and greenhouse gas emissions?
Governor Romney?
ROMNEY: Well, it's going to help our economy because we're going to invest in new technologies to get ourselves off of foreign oil. And as we get ourselves off of foreign oil, we also dramatically reduce our CO2 emissions.
That's good for the environment. It's also good for our economy. Because buying $300 billion or $400 billion worth of oil a year from other people who use it against us, that's bad for our economy. It's also bad for the environment.
We can do these things in a way that help both the environment and the economy and national security. That's the beauty of what we're talking about here.
Is global warming an issue for the world? Absolutely.
Is it something we can deal with by becoming energy independent and energy secure? We sure can.
But at the same time, we call it global warming, not America warming. So let's not put a burden on us alone and have the rest of the world skate by without having to participate in this effort. It's a global effort.
But our independence is something we can do unilaterally.
WASHBURN: Mr. Keyes, what do you think about this?
KEYES: Well, what I think is that a lot of folks out there ought to understand that what you're watching represents the situation in our country. Ask yourself who represents the people they don't let you hear from. And you'll know who you should vote for in the Iowa Caucuses.
Who represents the voice that they're absolutely determined to overlook in the discussion of our sovereignty and the betrayal of this people's sovereignty, on the border, on our moral principles, on the major export overseas -- which is our jobs?
These folks represent the very elite who year, after year, after year, have destroyed our Constitution, betrayed our rights and undermined our strength created by our people in the world.
WASHBURN: Ambassador?
KEYES: And yet the one person willing to talk about that is overlooked, time and time again. That person...
THOMPSON: I agree with Alan Keyes' position on global warming.
(LAUGHTER)
WASHBURN: Let me come to...
KEYES: I'm in favor of reducing global warming, because I think the most important emission we need to control is the hot air emission of politicians who pretend one thing and don't deliver.
(CROSSTALK)
WASHBURN: Let me come back -- let me come to a question that Iowans may not let you out of answering.
Governor Huckabee, you've said you support increasing government mandates, requiring motorists to use 36 million gallons of biofuel by 2022, which is six times what we're producing this year.
—Dan Riehl is a blogger and journalist. Read more of his work at Riehl World View.















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Kucinich, with a guy in a house...
December 15, 2007 - 07:52 ET by sarcasmoProbably has more of an Iowa campaign office than Keyes. Debate attendance criteria are both too important and too-historically-arbitrary (I have decades of experience as a Large-L Libertarian with this aspect of bias and idea-exclusion) to be trusted to obviously-biased news media outlets. This incident simply functions as more proof. Either Dennis should have been there or Alan shouldn't have. Fox News yesterday said they had yet to find a Keyes campaign office in Iowa...
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)
Keyes-Kucinich double-standard
December 15, 2007 - 09:29 ET by sarcasmoFox News reporter Carl Cameron's blog says:
A Des Moines Register insider says Alan Keyes told them before the Oct 1st qualification deadline he had a staffer and office.
The Iowa republican party which tracks candidate organization meticulously says it has no record of Keyes having had any campaign headquarters or staff at all this year.
The Keye’s web page says his campaign headquarters is in Utah. There is no contact info for anyone in any other state.
The phone number goes to an answering machine and provides no other information
Looks like the Des Moines Register's got a little explaining to do to some angry lefties who wanted to see Dennis. And as I said before, this kind of debate-participation double-standard is nothing-new. I may not like either candidate. The point is media-bias so strong and palpable that the idea a newspaper should be allowed to exclude a candidate needs careful scrutiny by both major parties.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)
After watching the
December 15, 2007 - 08:10 ET by Gary P JacksonAfter watching the Republican "debate" and a piece of the dim debate, it was pretty easy to see this gal is just a shill for the dims. Beyond that, she is the worst moderator ever! You could have walked down the street in any major city, and just grabbed someone at random, and with no prep, you'd had a better moderator.
"The worst debate moderator ever"
December 15, 2007 - 10:24 ET by RJAbsolutely true, but the media has closed ranks around her and spun the debate as "boring." The obvious implication is that the Repubicans made it that way, while the moderator was just a bystander.
Washburn came from nowhere
December 15, 2007 - 13:34 ET by kgWashburn came from nowhere and has had her 15 minutes of fame. The people didn't like what they saw. Now we can only hope she crawls back into her hole never to be seen again. Unfortunatly she is a Democrat and Democrats love to hear themselves talk and pretend they have power.
According to the
December 15, 2007 - 08:22 ET by motherbeltAccording to the transcript, Carolyn Washburn is....um.....not being entirely truthful?
After ruling the debate with an iron hand and slapping Thompson down, she only asked 3 of the 9 men on stage about global warming (McCain, Romney and Keyes), Hunter got in one little quip, and she ignored Thompson, (who actually wanted to talk, not raise his hand) and the others. When Thompson said he agreed with Keyes, she quickly switched to "Let me come to..." and after a bit of crosstalk...."a [different] question that Iowans out of answering..." (the one on biofuels).
So who was it that "chose not to talk" about global warming here??:????
Unfortunately, Iowans who didn't catch the debate only have Washburn's word for what happened. So what's Washburn's rationalization...if people don't take the time to watch the debate, it's their own fault if they don't have the whole story?
Thompson's 'agreement' with Keyes
December 15, 2007 - 08:36 ET by sarcasmoWas really just a joke, and (like many he cracks) a funny one by Fred. Keyes was not answering the question and taking up too much time at it. I do not like everything Fred does, by a long-shot (and yes, I will be doing the media's job & getting that Florida gunshow price he paid for excluding other Republicans, with a cite, soon) but I do like his sense of humor. Rudy may do the simpering AlGore-imitation laugh (rudely) at debates, but that takes 0-talent. IMO Fred was hilarious in this case, effectively pointing out the fact that Keyes had literally spent 30 seconds saying-nothing.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)
Yeah, that was funny, but
December 15, 2007 - 09:01 ET by motherbeltYeah, that was funny, but even at that, the minute he opened his mouth, Washburn quickly switched the subjet to biofuels.
The relevant point is that he was not allowed to express his opinion, and she didn't even ask half of the candidates, then claimed that they "chose" not to discuss it.
Really, really shoddy "reporting." And that's from the newspaper's Editor!
Right-on
December 15, 2007 - 09:49 ET by ThisnThatWho sets up these debates? I noticed immediately it was placed on Iowa public TV -- a dead giveaway towards bias. But who set the standard for this woman to be chosen as a moderator? Who was on the panel that chose her? What criteria did they use?
She's supposedly the editor of the Registor newspaper, but what qualifies her to be that editor? Like many newspapers with school-marm or Helen Thomas editors (see Boston Globe editor profiles for example), I find that they are tightly wound and only lean left. Is that the case here?
As Fred Thompson might say: "This whole business about debates has gotton out of hand. It's dangerous, pretty soon there's going to be an accident, and the whole world will soon know how deceitful this whole thing is".
___________________________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber
Good question
December 15, 2007 - 10:51 ET by celator"She's supposedly the editor of the Registor newspaper, but what qualifies her to be that editor?"
Her qualification is that she is another trained seal for the D's. She does what her handlers tell her to do. The D's have very low standards for their mouthpieces, but she really is at the bottom.
Yeah, the application form
December 15, 2007 - 10:56 ET by JerryYeah, the application form for "news"paper editors only has one question:
Party affiliation: _____________
When asked if he went to war with Iraq to derail the impeachment vote: “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).
}}---> Dum Bass McCain
December 15, 2007 - 08:27 ET by Cool ArrowNothing to lose anymore in Iowa, a Republican finally proclaims we need to drop all those farm subsidies.
Certainly all the candidates should have told ADM to stick it ages ago, but McCain's move was more in line with his next stop where his message will be "While the other guys were pandering to Iowans, I spoke out publicly against Ethanol subsidies"
I ♣ My Seal
Green acres
December 15, 2007 - 21:05 ET by nkviking75I don't believe ADM is in the ethanol business. Ethanol subsidies benefit farmers themselves. Corn farmers, like farmers who raise other crops, support research in to new ways to use their product. More corn based products means more demand for corn which means higher corn prices and a better chance to make a profit.
If the government got out of farm subsidies and let the market work, a lot of "family farmers" (the emotion-laden label of choice) would have to sell out, leaving fewer farmers with larger operations. There'd be a lot of short term pain. Farm state pols don't have the political will to ride that out, so farm policy is geared to keeping every farm profitable through artificial means.
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
Simple Question
December 15, 2007 - 08:52 ET by BourbeauI have no experience at arranging debates, I haven't a clue what goes into it. I'm guessing the RNC and DNC are the coordinators for the debates with the respective sponsors. If that be the case, where are the damn groundrules of how a debate is going to be conducted? How hard is it to get an understanding of what some of these schmucks are going to do before the debate. It's incomprehensile to me that every damn debate with CNN or Des Moines Register ends up with us squealing about this, that and the other thing; yet where were the coordinators before the debate? I can't understand how you commit to a debate and you can't even ensure you have a competent moderator. That debate in Iowa was an embarassment in execution, in content, in scheduling, and last but indeed not the least, EVERY ONE OF THOSE CANDIDATES SHOULD HAVE STAYED OFF THE STAGE UNTIL ALAN KEYS LEFT. HIS PARTICIPATION WAS AN OUTRAGEOUS AFFRONT TO THE CANDIDATES.
Are they really
December 15, 2007 - 12:53 ET by mattmAre they really debates? I'm not so sure they are.
A real debate would be organized as you describe, with the Parties organizing them, arranging them, setting the groundrules etc.
What we have now is a series media-driven circuses.
Media circuses disguised as debates
December 15, 2007 - 21:25 ET by nkviking75I don't think the parties arrange the "debates" at all. I think these debates are arranged by the media outlets. I also think they are as much, or more, about PR for the media outlets as they are meant to inform the public. The gimmicky CNN-You Tube debates are a prime example. There are so many of them, and so many candidates, that media outlets have to find ways to draw attention to them lest people tune out from the overkill.
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
Dennis Kucinich represents
December 15, 2007 - 10:24 ET by KarmaDennis Kucinich represents the ideals of the base of the Democrat party in general and liberals in particular. Alan Keyes is his counterpart in the Republican party. Neither will win their respective nominations, but I enjoy observing the stark contrasts between the parties and their ideology as laid out by these two. A Keyes/Kucinich debate would be much more entertaining and informative than say, a Giuliani/Clinton or Romney/Obama. I guess when it comes to politicians, I prefer confrontation over appeasement and side-stepping.
Good....Karma
December 15, 2007 - 12:42 ET by acumenA Keyes/Kucinich debate would be much more entertaining....
And make for a great "this is your brain/this is your brain on drugs" commercial.
Even better....acumen
December 15, 2007 - 12:55 ET by KarmaThey should scramble the eggs in the commercial.
It sounds like Ms. Washedout
December 15, 2007 - 10:53 ET by JerryIt sounds like Ms. Washedout only intended to let those who were in agreement with man made GW have time to elaborate on their positions.
The MSM is a complete farce. Someone please explain to me the differences between our MSM and any government run propaganda machine in a communist or socialist state? The only difference I see is here the press WILLINGLY follows the (D) party line.
When asked if he went to war with Iraq to derail the impeachment vote: “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).
"Terrible sacrifices"?
December 15, 2007 - 11:09 ET by Tyromac"They don't ask Americans to make terrible sacrifices.", which is code for pay more taxes to fund the liberal social program agenda as opposed to getting by without the nanny state.
about half didn't want
December 15, 2007 - 11:30 ET by botgto talk about it?
Yeah, that and everyone's afraid to debate Al Gore
GoHunter08
Carolyn Washedupburn had
December 15, 2007 - 11:54 ET by BlazerCarolyn Washedupburn had a shot at some national limelight and decided to show her originality in the form of being just another old-skool liberal shill.
With all that cheap caked on Dollar General makeup, she looked like she was trying out for The Nutcracker or something. Here's what she really looks like http://www.gannett.com/go/es/1999/marchapril/images/washburn.jpg . I know, no difference in hideousness either way.
Why do these liberal school marm journalist types alway's seem like they have a chip on their shoulder anyway. Could it be like their dog's, they cant' even get a conservative to play with them unless they drape a pork chop around their neck.
Let Iowa be over with allready, and let's move on to the states that actually elect a president.
it be over allready"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "
- Ben Kenobi on Liberals, and the MSM.
Thug liberal journalists in Iowa. Who knew?
December 15, 2007 - 12:16 ET by rammingspeedWe all knew, of course. But it's chilling to see the Big Red Machine ((Democrat party, MSM) operate so open and brazenly in the cherised heartland.
I believe that ultimately it's good: let Wahsburn and her ilk loudly and proudly display their arrogance. People are catching more every day.
I watched both debates
December 15, 2007 - 12:17 ET by Clear thinkerIf you want to see how obvious this supposed moderator was in her disdain for Republicans, I suggest you watch both debates back to back, but with a twist.
Watch the Dem debate first, then watch the Rep debate. This lady could not hide (no matter how hard she may have tried) he absolute love for the Dems and the hatred she felt for the Reps. Don't pay much attention to what the candidates say, focus on her through both debates.
Bottom line... she probably thinks we Conservatives are knuckle dragging, toothless, cavemen, and the Dems are the second coming of Christ. I appoligize to the son of God, but it's how I see it.
Rush Limbaugh stated that of the top 5 Republicans running for the presidency, only one was a true conservative. http://www.fred08.com/
Clear thinker, several of us had running commentary
December 15, 2007 - 12:26 ET by RJduring the Democrat debate. We were laughing about how she even went so far as to occasionally make little "agreement" noises while the Dems were talking.
You hit the nail right on
December 15, 2007 - 12:30 ET by BlazerYou hit the nail right on the head Clear. Her obvious disdain for conservatives shined the brightest in the fact that she chose to invite Keyes to the Rep. debate and excluded Kucinich from the Dem debate.
She figured Keyes would go off into some loud tacky sermon, to embarrass Republican's which he did, and Kucinich would say wacky, kooky thing's, to emabarrass the Dem's, which he would have.
I just hope that after all of this, that Iowan's realize when they are reading the Iowa Register, they are perusing the pages of a newspaper not even fit to line a dog crate with.
"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "
- Ben Kenobi on Liberals, and the MSM.
And they have the
December 15, 2007 - 12:41 ET by motherbeltAnd they have the self-righteous, unmitigated, GALL to bash Republicans for not wanting to play their silly games!!
Talk about Lucy pulling away the football!!
This just infuriates me! The Republicans are damned if the do, and damned if they don't. They should just refuse to do MSM-sponsored debates. They will take some flack from the MSM, but at least they won't have to act like pinatas.
"Thank you for the lash, Master, please may I have another?"
I have a friend that says "Don't drop sh#% on my head and then expect me to say thanks for the hat!"
I agree mb, Rep. need to
December 15, 2007 - 12:57 ET by BlazerI agree mb, Rep. need to start calling these people on their stupid game and flat out refusing to be a part of their sham spectacles. CNN especially. It's no secret to a majority of us conservatives of what the media is up to and as far as what harm that will do concerning "undecided voter's", most have made up their minds long ago what party their going to vote for, just not what candidate.
"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "
- Ben Kenobi on Liberals, and the MSM.
Thompson probably would
December 15, 2007 - 13:09 ET by ThisnThat"They [Republicans] should just refuse to do MSM-sponsored debates". Of all the candidates, the most likely to do that would be Fred. I'm tempted to pull the lever for him simply because of that reason.
___________________________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber
Ashamed
December 15, 2007 - 13:12 ET by Rndguy35As a resident of Des Moines I have to say I am ashamed and outraged that this leftist babe was choosen to represent Iowa. She was a duffus and acted in a way that casts a negative light on the rest of us more intelligent Iowans. The DMR is known for going into any article with a predetermined paradigm that you have to read the article backwards to get the full picture. This debate was no different.
On another note he Des Moines Register has employees who are actively involved in Hillary's campaign. With that I predict that they will endorse Hillary today.
But don't worry, most people use the paper to start their fireplaces around here so just like Hillary's chances to win the White House the DMR will go up in smoke!
"I knew I should have taken that right turn at Albuquerque!"
Gag Me With A Spoon
December 15, 2007 - 12:51 ET by third eye"We didn't focus on Iraq or immigration. Candidates touched on them. But
we decided to pose questions that hadn't been debated to death. You
want stump speeches? Ask about Iraq or immigration again." -- Carolyn Washburn
Translation
Iraq and immigration must be avoided because of the potential of a Howard Dean Moment among Democrats, and because it makes "them" look good. Some candidates defied my authority and briefly mentioned them, so dont pretend like it wasnt discussed. You want the truth? Then go read a blog.
I guess now she knows you
December 15, 2007 - 13:09 ET by wiwfI guess now she knows you can't mess with Republicans! >:D
The Rocky Mountain Collegian: Illustrating Idiocy
"You hit the nail right on
December 15, 2007 - 13:50 ET by ckc1227"You hit the nail right on the head Clear. Her obvious disdain for
conservatives shined the brightest in the fact that she chose to invite
Keyes to the Rep. debate and excluded Kucinich from the Dem debate."
Which raises an interesting question: Why do the democrat debates get lib moderators, while the republican debates get stuck with...lib moderators?