The Candy Crowley Tipping Point

[clevergirl]

FactCheck.org : FactChecking the Hofstra Debate

Obama challenged Romney to “get the transcript” when Romney questioned the president’s claim to have spoken of an “act of terror” the day after the slaying of four Americans in Libya. The president indeed referred to “acts of terror” that day, but then refrained from labeling it a terrorist attack.

 

[clevergirl]

Presidential Debate Commission Rules:

" (c) With respect to all questions...

(iv) The moderator will not ask follow-up questions or comment on either the questions asked by the audience or the answers of the candidates during the debate or otherwise intervene in the debate except to acknowledge the questioners from the audience or enforce the time limits,"

Crowley deliberately and intentionally broke the agreed upon rules, and decided as Obama has decided during the course of his administration, that rules don't apply and the ends justify the means.

So, what recourse do the American people have when a journalist is selected who openly ignores the rules in conducting the debate and in comments leading up to the debate? What happens when the journalist moderator interjects herself into the debate, in order to blunt a candidate's momentum, as Crowley did to republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney?

The easy answer is to say; simply that Republicans and GOP candidates who are the favorite targets of biased coverage in the mainstream media should just grit their teeth and bare it. But that is not what the American public needs to see or should have to endure. If a presidential debate commission purports to field "unbiased reporters" who are going to be fair and balanced moderators, then failing to do so should result in a penalty, and or permanent suspension of the reporter and their affiliated network from future participation in debates.

According to the national Verified Voting Foundation, in 2012 there are approximately 180,802,372 registered voters in America. Voters are entitled to see a debate that is free from a moderator who appears to purposely steer a debate, to benefit the incumbent president Obama. Crowley's behavior becomes even more suspect when one considers that Obama was increasingly losing ground to the republican challenger Mitt Romney.

Did CNN senior political reporter Candace Crowley conduct herself in a professional and nonpartisan manner? Examine her earlier statement, when she announced that she would evade and ignore the professional rules of journalistic conduct, and inject herself into the presidential debate if and when she saw fit. So one has to question, who judges the moderators when moderators declare that they are above the rules as Crowley did?

Should Candy Crowley be penalized for presidential debate misconduct

 

[Cheddarmelon]

All the outrage. All the indignation.

And still the rethugs won't admit it: Romney was full of shit.

 

[PredFan]

Candy Crowley tipping point.....
Candy Crowley tipping....
Cow tipping.....

 

[J.E.D]

I see you are still struggling to XXXXXXX.

You know, family insults is going against the forum rules. Big no no.

It'd be nice if it wasn't the case, but it is, and you're in violation.

Well, it was a tit for a tat...but why don't you go off crying and report it then. That would be a typical liberal move to start a slam fest and then whine about getting it back.

Except that I didn't say anything about your family. Don't worry, though, I won't report you. I've reported family attacks before and nothing was ever done about them. It seems conservatives get away with a lot around here.

 

[J.E.D]

We're complaining about her in her role as Obama shill. The fact that this time it occurred at a debate is incidental.

So, you ARE complaining about the debate. Would you make up your mind?

And your intentional obtuseness continues to the point of trollery. Tiresome.

This is about how America learns about things which are important, and about how the liberal media stands in the way of this.



I'm done with this thread now. I'm hoping that enough Americans see Obama's deflections for what they are. And I'm optimistic that this might truly be the case. Romney has shown that there is an alternative to Obama's incompetence. People don't need to be afraid to jump from the Obama ship. And the media aren't quite as dedicated as they once were to covering for Obama. So we do have a chance to get this right on Nov. 6.

That is what is important.

So, you're NOT complaining about the debate.

 

[Unkotare]

The day after the attack Obama stood in the Rose Garden and called it an act of terror.

No, he didn't.

Yes, he did.

He did not. This talking point spin has been debunked many, many times since the debate. If obama couldn't spin it convincingly, you sure aren't going to, nuthugger.

 

[Cowman]

I see you are still struggling to be half the XXXXXXX.

You know, family insults is going against the forum rules. Big no no.

It'd be nice if it wasn't the case, but it is, and you're in violation.

Well, it was a tit for a tat...but why don't you go off crying and report it then. That would be a typical liberal move to start a slam fest and then whine about getting it back.

Don't worry. I reported you on your suggestion. Have to keep up the appearances of this fine establishment we call usmessageboard.

And it wasn't a tit for tat. You're a tit, so you wouldn't realize that.

 

[J.E.D]

No, he didn't.

Yes, he did.

He did not. This talking point spin has been debunked many, many times since the debate. If obama couldn't spin it convincingly, you sure aren't going to, nuthugger.

Try reading this statement again. Only this time take the nutsack off of your face first, you sniveling sack of shit.

“No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for,” -- President Obama, Sept 12, 2012

 

[clevergirl]

You know, family insults is going against the forum rules. Big no no.

It'd be nice if it wasn't the case, but it is, and you're in violation.

Well, it was a tit for a tat...but why don't you go off crying and report it then. That would be a typical liberal move to start a slam fest and then whine about getting it back.

Don't worry. I reported you on your suggestion. Have to keep up the appearances of this fine establishment we call usmessageboard.

And it wasn't a tit for tat. You're a tit, so you wouldn't realize that.

No, you're a liberal tit so of course you turn on the whine when you get a tat.

Perhaps your whole purpose in life is simply to serve as a warning to others.

 

[Cowman]

Well, it was a tit for a tat...but why don't you go off crying and report it then. That would be a typical liberal move to start a slam fest and then whine about getting it back.

Don't worry. I reported you on your suggestion. Have to keep up the appearances of this fine establishment we call usmessageboard.

And it wasn't a tit for tat. You're a tit, so you wouldn't realize that.

No, you're a liberal tit so of course you turn on the whine when you get a tat.

Perhaps your whole purpose in life is simply to serve as a warning to others.

Attacks on family members will not be tolerated and will be subject to action by an Admin/Mod. Action taken could range from a warning to banning and will be at Admin/Mod discretion. THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS TO THIS RULE, PERIOD.

I don't make the rules, sweetheart.

I think in doing so, I get one more cum dumpster off the forums.

Nah, I'm just razzing you. I want you to stay. But you really should respect the rules. I'm just following the fine precedent set by all your other fellow fine conservatives on this forum, attempting to enforce the rules.

 

[clevergirl]

Don't worry. I reported you on your suggestion. Have to keep up the appearances of this fine establishment we call usmessageboard.

And it wasn't a tit for tat. You're a tit, so you wouldn't realize that.

No, you're a liberal tit so of course you turn on the whine when you get a tat.

Perhaps your whole purpose in life is simply to serve as a warning to others.

Attacks on family members will not be tolerated and will be subject to action by an Admin/Mod. Action taken could range from a warning to banning and will be at Admin/Mod discretion. THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS TO THIS RULE, PERIOD.

I don't make the rules, sweetheart.

I think in doing so, I get one more cum dumpster off the forums.

Nah, I'm just razzing you. I want you to stay.

Dude your dicks so small it hasn't seen saliva let alone cum.

Don't you love nature, despite what it did to you?

 

[Cowman]

Oh the wit on you. A small dick joke.

You haven't done that one today before, surely.

 

[clevergirl]

Oh the wit on you. A small dick joke.

You haven't done that one today before, surely.

Do you ever wonder what life would be like if you'd had enough oxygen at birth?

 

[J.E.D]

Oh the wit on you. A small dick joke.

You haven't done that one today before, surely.

Do you ever wonder what life would be like if you'd had enough oxygen at birth?

 

[clevergirl]

Oh the wit on you. A small dick joke.

You haven't done that one today before, surely.

Do you ever wonder what life would be like if you'd had enough oxygen at birth?

Why are you posting an email address~

 

[Cowman]

Oh the wit on you. A small dick joke.

You haven't done that one today before, surely.

Do you ever wonder what life would be like if you'd had enough oxygen at birth?

You're right. I was too busy performing autoerotic asphyxiation on myself in the womb with the umbilical cord.

 

[clevergirl]

Oh the wit on you. A small dick joke.

You haven't done that one today before, surely.

Do you ever wonder what life would be like if you'd had enough oxygen at birth?

You're right. I was too busy performing autoerotic asphyxiation on myself in the womb with the umbilical cord.

Careful now, don't let your brains go to your head!

 

[Unkotare]

Yes, he did.

He did not. This talking point spin has been debunked many, many times since the debate. If obama couldn't spin it convincingly, you sure aren't going to, nuthugger.

Try reading this statement again. Only this time take the nutsack off of your face first, you sniveling sack of shit.

“No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for,” -- President Obama, Sept 12, 2012

Speaking in general and conspicuously NOT referring to the actual attack in that little bit of political, cover-your-ass doublespeak. The spin has failed, nuthugger, find something else to lie about.

 

[J.E.D]

He did not. This talking point spin has been debunked many, many times since the debate. If obama couldn't spin it convincingly, you sure aren't going to, nuthugger.

Try reading this statement again. Only this time take the nutsack off of your face first, you sniveling sack of shit.

“No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for,” -- President Obama, Sept 12, 2012

Speaking in general and conspicuously NOT referring to the actual attack in that little bit of political, cover-your-ass doublespeak. The spin has failed, nuthugger, find something else to lie about.

So, tell me then, what was he referring to when he made that statement during a speech which was a direct response to the attack, the day after the attack?

Was he referring to the war on drugs? Cracking down on illegal immigration?

What on earth could he have been referring to?

You know as well as I do what he was referring to, only you're too much of a coward and a partisan hack to admit it.

Now get back to wearing that nutsack on your face, you pile of shit.