Recent Democratic and Republican debates - 5.8.2007.1

OK, I’ve played a bit of hooky. The good weather has gotten to me. But there has been something that has bugged me. The recent Democratic and Republican debates that were broadcast on MSNBC. Did anyone even see them?

My problems with the debates range from execution to interest. The debates were poorly run in my opinion. Far too many stupid questions of little relevance or impact were provided to both political parties. I mean questions like ‘who grew up with a gun in their home?’ is not relevant to whether or not the candidates are for or against gun control. [This question was asked of all the Democratic candidates, answered by a show of hands.] Another choice question that said nothing was ‘what would be your favorite tax to cut?’ [This was given to the Republican candidates.]

Questions like the above are hardly worth the time. Speaking of time, it was poorly managed. There was only 90 minutes for the entire debate, which hardly provides enough time considering the number of candidates. Added to this was the mere 90 seconds to answer a question, unless the question was cherry picked from the internet and then there was merely 30 seconds to answer. Talk about soundbites. There wasn’t enough time given to any candidate to say anything but a tagline answer. That is the candidates that were given an opportunity to answer.

Several times a question that was supposed to be asked to all the candidates was stopped mid-way through the group with a new question asked. Or the current frontrunners were directly selected to answer specific questions with lesser known candidates completely ignored. This was more obviously and painfully shown during the Republican debate. Mr. Romney dominated the airtime, with what I gather as the most questions asked and the most time to answer.

It was a joke. This wasn’t a debate; it was an extended free advertisement for each candidate. The only real question was who could look more presidential. An example is when the Democrats were asked what they would do if America was attacked 2x on the same day. It’s an odd question, why 2x, isn’t once enough? The answers were boilerplate and along party lines. Not one candidate had an answer that was straightforward. I mean what does, ‘I’d evaluate the situation and take action once I knew who was responsible.’ Really what does that mean? Every candidate answered with this response to some degree or wording. Not one said they would retaliate with force, or that they would ensure that the culprits would be chased and brought to justice regardless what rock they might hide under. I was in New York City when the Twin Towers were hit; I know and knew several people there that day. I don’t want the Presidents’ response to an attack on the citizenry to be rounds of talks at the U.N. Timeouts don’t work for children and it definitely won’t have an affect on a terrorist or nation seeking the removal of America.

Continued in part 2...