August 2015. The ugly political puppets debate happened in front of 24 million eyes
and ears last Thursday, August 6, 2015. Mega political opinion happened
when three Fox Cable News Superstars moderated the evening "debate"
between 10 of 17 Republican candidates interviewing for the job of
President of the United States.
It's the first step. Honing down 17 to just one candidate who represents
conservative values in a final contest with the one who represents
liberal values of Democrats.
The GOP, which means Grand Old Party and refers to the Republican Party, is the historic opposite of the Party of Democrats.
Some say that the GOP has not been one happy party with bickering between what I call the old guard (entrenched politicians) — and those labeled the right wingers who resist, filibuster, shake up the old guard.
If I understand correctly, the old guard sits on both sides of the proverbial aisle in the big hall called, but not limited to, Congress. They are those in office so long, they've become puppets to the Godfathers who guarantee spin, their election and reelection. I dare comment that the Democrats have had similar disposition, but that's another story for another time.
There are several signs of this truth if you observe closely. There's the Harry Reids and the Mitch McConnell's representing both political parties who go along to get along with the powerful pullers, some known, some not.
According to Senator Ted Cruz who was one of the ten candidates on stage that night, there is what he calls the Washington Cartel — a coalition of political or special-interest people with common cause. Manipulators. Con Artists. Godfathers with "Make an offer that can't be refused" in their deep pockets. My words, not his.
There's always such power struggles in business and politics, but it's gone on for so long in the U.S. government within the Political Parties that it has America by the throat. Do you feel choked? That's how I feel, and it makes me sick to my stomach to think that We the People are nothing more than pawns, easily taken with their smoke and mirrors and illusions.
Nothing could have been more clear than last Thursday's debate. I put my professional writer hat on to write about members of my profession. Not the ten candidates. The journalists, media readers and writers. News writers, copy writers, free press writers. Commentators turned moderators.
In that evening debate, in front of We the People's Top Ten Choices, sat three moderators with questions in hand. After the debate, they smiled and took their bows. So proud of their journalistic prowess.
They — who with the blessing of Fox Cable News — have been quick to shame and condemn main stream media for bias and omissions. They, the self acclaimed better of the lot, became the lot. They have since defended themselves claiming that their questions were "Fair." You decide.
1. Debate: Discussion involving opposing viewpoints in which the affirmative and negative sides of a proposition are advocated by opposing speakers.
2. Fair: Free from bias, dishonesty or injustice.
3. Moderator: Person or persons who presides over a panel discussion of debaters.
The occupation of reporting, writing, editing, broadcasting news as a business is what journalists do. They have a code of conduct.
Members of the Society of Professional Journalists believe that ethical journalism strives to ensure the free exchange of information is accurate, fair and thorough. An ethical journalist acts with integrity.
According to the debate protocol, moderators must honor their role to maintain order and enforce the rules, NOT take an active part in the debate.
In the 2012 Presidential election campaign debate, the moderator, Candy Crowley broke that rule when she "took part" and sided with Obama at a crucial point in the debate. She later admitted her mistake, but too late. That's another story.
Last Thursday evening, Chris Wallace, Megyn Kelly and Bret Baier were supposed to be neutral journalists, moderating the debate between the candidates.
The moderators were supposed to ask questions that allowed the ten debate participants to fully develop their differing views among each other. Their job was to hold the ten candidates to time limits and keep them from straying off the topic of questions being raised in the debate.
During the debate and after, people took to Twitter to object to the questions asked to Donald Trump. Most shouted "Foul." Trump turned into a wounded tiger slapping back the only way that he knew. No surprise. He is a tiger.
Bret Baier pulled up his shield and stated without fault that he believed all the questions to Trump were fair.
Given that only an idiot would think that the first question asked to Trump was intended for anyone except Trump, it was a falsetto. You know the question, don't you.
“Is there anyone onstage — and can I see hands — who is unwilling tonight to pledge your support to the eventual nominee of the Republican Party and pledge to not run an independent campaign against that person?” Mr. Baier asked.
Examine the meaning of "fair" and role of "Moderator" to judge Baier's claim for yourself. Was that question free from bias? Was the question really meant for all ten candidates?
Next question from Kelly to Trump was about women. It was a direct question ONLY for Trump. Again, was that a fair question for a debate between the candidates? Did Kelly moderate or become part of the debate? Aren't the candidates supposed to debate each other, NOT the moderators. It's obvious that Kelly had her own agenda. Unlike Crowley, I've not heard an apology from Kelly. Have you?
Next question to Trump from Kelly was about his business failures. Again, it was a direct question NOT intended to stimulate discussion between the ten candidates, but clearly it was to potentially discredit Trump. Kelly claims she serves her viewers, if that's true, where is her apology to those watching who she offended.
No where in debate moderator ethics does it say, "insult, embarrass, humiliate, attack, assault" one of the candidates with your questions. A legitimate debate does NOT include sensationalism.
Wallace wasn't any different. He pushed for Trump to answer a question on how he could prove that illegals coming across the Mexican border were murderers. Of course, all the Kate Steinle's murdered by illegals are proof of Trump's statement about the border.
Again, Wallace's question was intended ONLY for Trump, not intended for the entire panel of ten GOP Presidential candidates. It wasn't meant to stimulate debate. It was a question for an interview, lawyer to witness in the box, not for Presidential debate.
Even the NY Times, liberal newspaper, seemed disgusted. The Times indicated that Fox was triying to prove that, "Fox journalists can be as unsparing toward conservatives as they are with liberals, and that they can eviscerate with equal opportunity if they choose." Fox lost. My opinion, not the Times.
After the debate, those Fox News commentators claimed Trump had no meaningful stance on the issues. Is that true when it was the moderators who used up Trump's ten minutes of the two hours of time with personal questions solely aimed at sensationalizing the event as if it was a reality survival show?
Chris Wallace, Megyn Kelly and Bret Baier owe Donald Trump an apology, even if someone behind the scenes who doesn't like Trump gave the suggestion to "take him down." I certainly don't know, but I have a brain. It was inexcusable behavior. No wonder people say Fox is not real news. At the very least, they owe us, the viewers who were offended, a big apology.
Donald Trump was the Fox Cable News scapegoat. Expendable. I mean, come on, does anyone really think he's going to be the Republican Party's candidate?
What does Trump know about eviscerating the enemy? What does he know about creating jobs? What does he know about International business? When has he felt the sting of ridicule from naysayers and proved them wrong? Has Trump ever known debt or bankruptcy, felt money pressures like Greece, and emerged victorious?
Why on earth would We the People of the United States of America want someone who refuses to fall in line with powerful behind-the-scenes Washington Cartel who apparently govern this country.
I've had my eye on one candidate, not Trump. Now, I'm wondering if that candidate is under the spell of the puppet masters. I'm for America.
America needs a President who speaks for us, We the People, rather than the spinners, bobble heads and old guard who appear to dance for the Godfathers — the ones who make them an offer they can't refuse.
Who was it that said, "If you keep doing the same thing, you keep getting the same result."