Just a moment ago, radio host Rush Limbaugh was blasting the mainstream media's notion that the YouTube debates represent a revolution in American presidential debates.
Not so, says Limbaugh, at least in terms of the content of the questions asked. They're still as inane and moronic, or brilliant (in rare circumstances) as they've always been because they're the same inance, moronic, or brilliant (rare circumstances) people asking them.
Instead, Limbaugh insists, we are seeing a revolution in media technology being confused for a nascent political revolution.
Now couple that, the notion that "new voices" are being heard in the YouTube debates ,with the wild left-wing skew we've documented at NewsBusters, and you see the media's liberal bias at work in staging the 2008 election in terms of liberal issue battlegrounds.
NewsBusters will be covering the debates tonight and track the agenda of questions and how they skew. Stay tuned to NewsBusters for coverage. Yours truly might also live-blog the debate, leaving the comments field as a space for you our readers to react in real time as well.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
And Limbaugh is right
July 23, 2007 - 11:51 ET by GalvanicThe 'YouTube debate' is nothing more than a gimmick. The audience could always mail or Email their questions in. The only difference here is that the debaters will see the image of the questioner, which means they'll make assumptions about what the person expects to get as an answer.
"Nothing more than a
July 23, 2007 - 12:45 ET by Challenger Grim"Nothing more than a gimmick."
Like Nintendo's latest game systems?
Besides, didn't we have something like this when canidates would actually treck across the country and hold meetings where ANYONE could come up and ask them questions.
This isn't a "revolution". This is a "RESTORATION" movement to get politics back to its roots.
Be sure to get your daily Fred Thompson Fact!
It's nothing of the kind.
July 23, 2007 - 14:29 ET by GalvanicIt's nothing of the kind. They'll select the entries they chose to answer, and ignore the rest. It's all set up like the proverbial "Town Hall Meeting," where the candidate stocks the crowd with his own people who toss him softball questions for which he has already rehearsed the response.
What we really do need is what you're suggesting: plain, ol' stumping, with candidates going around the country and answering questions. Unfortunately, most of our politicians have never had to do that, so they are comfortable with the status quo.
au contraire
July 23, 2007 - 15:20 ET by Challenger GrimRestoration movements are NEVER perfect Galv and I certainly don't think this will be anywhere close to the old ideas we should return to with politics.
But it is a step (however small) toward that direction.
Also I was trying to counter the people calling it a "revolution". We might debate what it is exactly (I still say it's an attempt at political reformation) but this is certainly NOT a revolution by any rational interpretation of the word.
Be sure to get your daily Fred Thompson Fact!
Hundred percent agree with
July 23, 2007 - 14:38 ET by Senior ChiefHundred percent agree with you, Galvanic. I happened to scan what was on the tube last night after the "1/2 Hour News Hour", and sure enough CNN was showing some "sample" questions that is soooo lame that even my middle schooler twins know what the democracks would say. Not one question had substance, and CNN believes that voters, especially the conservatives, are dumb and stupid. This trick is not going to work, unless Republican candidates are dumb enough to get into the trap and give some senseless answer.
September is their date anyway, and suggestions to our Conservative candidates: Grow some balls, and don't leave your conservative base or you'll be hammered big time from us and from the left.
Rush is right as usual. The
July 23, 2007 - 11:59 ET by mytwocentsRush is right as usual. The technology changes but the source remains the same.
Select Questions
July 23, 2007 - 12:04 ET by allanfSo long as "trained journalists" select questions, we will be treated to nothing new.
Training bras
July 23, 2007 - 12:07 ET by dagdaI remember a friend sharing the comment of her father when he learned she was wearing a training bra. "What are you training them to do? Back flips?" I always think of that when someone talks about "trained" anything. So, what are "trained" journalists trained to do?
Our real problem, then, is not our strength today; it is rather the vital necessity of action today to ensure our strength tomorrow. Dwight Eisenhower
}}}----> Trained Journalists
July 23, 2007 - 12:15 ET by Cool ArrowJournalists are "trained" to fry the Conservative pigs and fluff the Liberal ones. The one for the cooking channel and the other for porker porn.
Trained Jouralists
July 23, 2007 - 12:18 ET by allanfTrained Jouralists are professionals trained to ask insulting, unsubtansive questions in the hope of hitting at the emotional fiber of television viewers and readers. Part of the training is to use phrases such as "Some people say". "How do you respond"
They are usually failed English majors who lack the creativity to contribute to literature. Instead they have taken up a new sort of fiction called "news".
(For more dictionary refereces see "empty suit" and "bimbo")
}}}----> Tube You Debates
July 23, 2007 - 12:10 ET by Cool ArrowRegardless of the quality of the wine, the kidneys still produce pretty much the same result.
Maria Antoinnette Cooper sayeth: "Let them eat softballs"
What's next, a debate via
July 23, 2007 - 12:52 ET by Chris NormanWhat's next, a debate via I-Pods? The message is the same old same old. No new gimmicks are going to change that...
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
- Arabian Proverb
Children at the adult table
July 23, 2007 - 12:53 ET by KC MulvilleThe purpose of this gimmick is simpy to reinforce the idea that the media are professionals with skill and expertise. The video will show people whose hair isn't blow-dried and who sound like amateurs. The questions will be almost exactly the same, but the media will look better by comparison.
The whole tenor of CNN's coverage about this stunt is that the media are allowing the little people to speak. The children are (temporarily) allowed to sit at the adult table. I'm wondering how long it will take some prima donna "professional journalist" to huff about how we need to get back to the real journalists asking "real" questions.
Fox News
July 23, 2007 - 13:42 ET by Prester JohnI find it rather interesting the CNN has been advertising this on Fox (at least in the morning on Fox & Friends) in conjunction with the SC debate.
Don't be fooled by CNN promos on Fox News
July 23, 2007 - 15:01 ET by nkviking75Most likely your local cable system has dropped a CNN promo in a local "avail" (availability) on Fox News. Most, if not all, cable nets allow a few minutes each hour for local cable systems to sell local ads. I seriously doubt CNN would buy time on Fox News on a national level, and I doubt Fox News would accept an ad from CNN.
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised if a circus breaks out.
...but... but ...I heard
July 23, 2007 - 16:43 ET by bigtimer...but... but ...I heard Anderson Cooper say they changed some to the video's at the last hour early this morning around 3:00 eastern time because of some excellent last minute video's they got from the west coast that they are going to put out this evening for sure....
WOW!
Bet they aren't less of a bias coming from the west coast...how about you?!
But he said he is keeping this close to his chest....
Ewwww...can't wait.