I actuall agreed with Judy Woodruff on one point

[dolstein]

I think she was right to urge the candidates not to waste what little time they had attacking Bush. The fact is, we've already had plenty of opportunities to hear them attack Bush. And we know the candidates are all in agreement that Bush has been, in Gephardt's now-tired phrase, "a miserable failure."

But the purpose of these debates is, ostensibly, to help Democrats choose who their candidate should be. So unless you believe the nomination should go to the candidate who can get off the best zinger against Bush, wouldn't it make far more sense to have candidates actually explain why THEY should be nominee? Honestly, odds are that virtually every person who tunes in to the debate already agrees that Bush should go -- they're trying to decide who they should vote for in the primaries.

[displacedtexan]

1. ohmygodohmygodohmygod!

the moderator should never tell debaters what to say, how to fram an argument, or whom to trash. the moderator asks questions and watches the time. period.

[Bread and Circus]

6. I agree....

Judy should have shut about what to say
or not to say. She pissed me off.

[KittyWampus]

20. Judy Got More Time Debating The Candidates

Then the actual candidates did.

How messed up is that?

[Eloriel]

2. Sure

This is one of few chances they get to actually start to weaken the sob in the white house by telling the American people (those watching, anyway) the truth, and Judy doesn't want them to use it. Yeah, sure, I agree with that. Wouldn't everybody?

Eloriel

[dolstein]

5. Uh, you missed my point.

Everyone who bothered to tune in the debate -- all fifteen of them -- already dislikes Bush. Trust me, Bush supporters are watching Fox News, and independents aren't even paying attention right now. You aren't weakening Bush when you spend a lot of time trying to convince people of what the ALREADY BELIEVE.

[NashVegas]

9. I Disagree

CNN is one of the outlets that doesn't allow any meaningful criticism of Bush on its airwaves. These debates are the only 90 minutes where you'll hear anyone presenting hard truths about the Bush admin that Cable news viewers are ever going to get to hear unfiltered by talking heads, and because of that, they are helping spark dialog among voters.

[Bread and Circus]

11. SPOT ON

[TheDonkey]

21. Do you watch CNN?

If you looks at the 24-7 news outlets in America (MSNBC, CNBC, FOX, CNN etc) you'll see CNN has the most fair pundit balance out there (even if sometimes it goes from dismal to non-existant). Crossfire and Capital Gang are good examples of pundit bashing with actually equal representation as opposed to Hardball or Hannity & some guy.

[maggrwaggr]

22. Oh please .....

You call CNN fair? Have watched Paula "sucking the BushCock" Zahn? Lou Dobbs?

Give me a fucking break. CNN is horrible. What's bad about them is that they're not obvious about it like Faux news, at least Faux is obvious propaganda (to anyone with a brain)

[billbuckhead]

3. Judy Woodward was protecting the Chimp. No more, no less.

One of the primary reasons some of the candidates are ahead in polls and/or have legions of committed activists is because of how well they attack the Bush misadministration.

[cprise]

13. AGREE

Standard CNN running interference for Bush.

I would have flouted her suggestion right on the spot.

[SlavesandBulldozers]

4. what else is there to talk about

besides Bush being a dismal failure in every endeavour.

[dolstein]

7. What about all the wonderful Democratic plans to save the economy?

Oh, never mind.

[WyLoochka]

16. That's right

few will listen so nevermind.

dolstein - it is totally OK, as it is in the grand American tradition to hammer the opponent mercilessly on the results of his disastrous occupation of the peoples' White House - that's the way to get peoples' attention. They HEAR the fulminating anger coming from a strengthening opposition that gets louder and more frequent and they start paying attention.

How are the people going to ever understand the need for the Democrats to come to the rescue with "wonderful plans" if they don't first understand the dire straits the bush* regime has put us all in for generations to come?

[bleedingheart]

8. The reason she doesn't want them bashing Bush is because

the republicans will use footage from these debates to shred the nominee of the Democratic party in their commercials... for example if Kerry wins...they will use footage of the others tearing him to shreds...same goes for Dean, Kucinich, Gephardt, Edwards, Lieberman, Sharpton, Braun...etc.

[kentuck]

10. Judy Woodruff kept interrupting just as the candidates were making ....

their point. It was very disconcerting to me.

[union_maid]

12. They want to see the differences that aren't there

There are a few small differences in the positions of the frontrunners. That's it. The Democratic platform is coming together as these guys campaign. We're going to choose more on personal characteristics, including who can best get these initiatives through Congress. That leaves plenty of time for bashing Bush and I think it's a great thing.

[WyLoochka]

14. I couldn't disagree with you more

You just don't get it, dolstein. Sorry to be so personal, but jeez - our candidates should stick to Woodruff's script?

I wouldn't vote for anyone who does....it would be the death knell, as far as I'm concerned.

Of course I'm listening for which one contrasts him/herself most vividly with bush* - and I'm oh so sorry if the "over protective neurotic" Ms Woodruff gets all upset thinking her hero is getting trashed when it's actually the truth that is being spoken.

Candidates get to say why they think voters should not vote for the other guy. Our guys were silent about why people should NOT support bush* in any way, shape or form for way too long and NOW you want them to shut up about it?

Thanks a lot - that's very helpful of you, dolstein. Do you wear your pink tu-tu to bed?

edit - add a question

[jayfish]

15. When You Ask The Candidates A Question...

that can only be answered by including commentary on the direction that the country is currently being led, then tell them that they can't provide that commentary, you are stifling debate. If the candidates need to provide background on why a problem exists in the first place in order to give voice to their solution to that problem, then that is their prerogative and not the prerogative of the moderator. For example... If I ask you what we can do to stop gas tanks in those damn Ford Pintos from exploding, then tell you that you aren't allowed to tell me why they are exploding in the first place, then what’s the damn point?

Jay

[0rganism]

17. That's just great. But she was supposedly the MODERATOR, got it?

Moderator asks the question, keeps the time for each stage, makes sure the debate procedure is followed.

Woodruff asks the question, interrupts the answer, reframes the question, tells the candidate what to say, and makes sure no criticism of bush* reaches the camera.

Someone didn't clue her in on what her job is.

[Cat Atomic]

18. Isn't Judy Woodruff the same one that did nothing but

gush about how great the food was on the Dubya World Tour? I could swear that was her- she completely ignord policy and reduced everything to "the food was bad on Gore's plane, but Dubya gave us lobster".

That *was* her, wasn't it? Ms. "I've Always Stood Up for the Weak"?

[TheDonkey]

19. I agree!

I really enjoyed the CNN debate. Yeah I like when the dems pile on Bush, but this is the 4th debate. It's time they really start to make clear why we should vote for THEM in the primary as opposed to he or she against Bush.

She may have looked like a rude insane GOPwhore (b/c she is) but she did us all a service by cutting down on the bush bashing so we could hear them talk about them.

[maggrwaggr]

24. that's not a debate, that's a talk show

If youw ant to watch a talk show, watch Jerry Springer

[Robin Hood]

23. Why does every debate have freeper's questioning the candidates?

And oh yeah, Fuck Judy and Candy ass crowley.

[mvd]

25. Yes, it was good to keep them on topic

My problem was with her interruptions, her hostility towards the crowd, and her rudeness. And she should have expected some Bush bashing. Occasionally, she would let it be known right away that she didn't want anti-Bush comments. The media is really showing their true conservative colors.