CDZ How About a Debate Moderated By Rush Limbaugh ?

[protectionist]

It doesn't matter who moderates or what they ask, Trump can't/won't answer the questions. *sniffle*

It's Hillary who has questions to answer. *cough*gag*

 

[protectionist]

Moderators have traditionally been established and working journalist. Pundits like the ones you have named are not journalists and do not adhere to journalist standards. As pundits, they are not expected to adhere to the ethics a journalist is expected to follow.

HA HA HA> So far with Holt, Tapper, et al what we've seen is "established", low-life SHILLS for Hillary Clinton. You high horse just ran away.

 

[protectionist]

How About a Debate Moderated By Rush Limbaugh ?

How about a defensive driving course from Evel Knievel?

How about a dietary plan from Michael Moore?

How about singing lessons from WIlliam Hung?

The world's thinnest books....

One would expect those questions from someone who is OK with Tapper, Cooper, and Holt.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"How About a Debate Moderated By Rush Limbaugh ?"

A truly idiotic idea.

 

[protectionist]

Holt also bogged the debate down with anti-trump stuff, like talking about Obama's birth certificate, cornering Trump,

Imagine. The meanie, taking Rump to task for stuff he actually did and said. It's just not fair.

Did you notice Rump never did answer the question?

"Did and said" ? Maybe they could take Trump to task for wearing a sock with a hole in it, or rooting for a last place baseball team. Anything to distract the people away from the subjects of the ISIS Trojan Horse, nuclear attack threat, $133 Billion/year lost in immigrant remittances, sanctuary cities, the Obama/Sharpton race hustle scam, gun-free zone danger, the irreparable email damage to US national security, the Billy/Loretta Tarmac deal, obstruction of justice, etc, etc

Trump SHOULD ignore the stupid, derail questions, and then ask his own questions. The ones I just mentioned. And then go to a REAL debate - moderated by Lou Dobbs, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, Rush Limbaugh, etc

 

[protectionist]

Zackly. Not one of the talking heads the OP named has ever been within smelling distance of a journalist. He just wants to stack the deck.

Zackly WRONG. What you call a journalist, is somebody who agrees with your liberal slop. At this point, Holt, cooper, and Tapper couldn't even shine Lou Dobbs' shoes. (or anyone else I mentioned who are ALL fine accomplished journalists))

 

[protectionist]

So you're jumping in with your 2 cents in regard to something you know nothing about? What else is new?

Why do you say he's knows nothing about it ? It so happens he's right. Good post, oldsoul.

 

[protectionist]

False equivalency. Hillary is more or less a traditional politician with her heart in the right place, and a great resume. But she has uneasy relationship with the truth. Trump is unfit for any political leadership role, and may have a severe mental illness. He has no resume, and believes dishonesty is a virtue.

"Heart in the right place" ? WHAAAATT?? You'r either totally lying, or the dumbest poster in this forum. Hillary's "heart" is with money and power, and nothing else, and she is ruthless. She and Bill have ordered the killings of 50 people (the Clinton Body Count). They are low-life mass murderers. Bill is a serial rapist, and both are racketeers, raking in millions, by trading high govt office favors for speaking engagement jobs$$$ all over the world.

They also are outsourcers with NAFTA, the TPP, both longterm supported by her, plus Hillary's membership in the Trilateral Commission and Council on Foreign Relations. And let's not forget the $200 Million she's taking from big Wall St banks and hedge funds, and anti-gay, anti-women Muslim countries like Saudi Arabia and UAE.

THAT'S where Hillary's "heart is" and SHE is the one who dishonesty fits like a glove. You're getting an education. You need to get away from MSNBC.

 

[protectionist]

"How About a Debate Moderated By Rush Limbaugh ?"

A truly idiotic idea.

Because it wouldn't be steered by people who agree with you. Uh huh.

 

[protectionist]

A debate with Rush I dunno....he's too loud and bad for America like Al Bundy and Homer Simpson are.

Now I would say a half hour "interview" of each candidate by the other or a person of the other's choice would be interesting.

No screaming theatrics. People on message boards are rude and loud and eneducated enough already. We don't wanna make Rush, Archie, Al or Homer look cool.

I think Rush would do fine - as well as the other conservatives I mentioned. For ever liberal "moderated" debate, there should be a conservative one to counter it. And the Commission on Presidential Debates needs to be renamed. Hillary Shills Presidential Debate Squad would be more accurate.

 

[Pogo]

Holt also bogged the debate down with anti-trump stuff, like talking about Obama's birth certificate, cornering Trump,

Imagine. The meanie, taking Rump to task for stuff he actually did and said. It's just not fair.

Did you notice Rump never did answer the question?

"Did and said" ? Maybe they could take Trump to task for wearing a sock with a hole in it, or rooting for a last place baseball team. Anything to distract the people away from the subjects of the ISIS Trojan Horse, nuclear attack threat, $133 Billion/year lost in immigrant remittances, sanctuary cities, the Obama/Sharpton race hustle scam, gun-free zone danger, the irreparable email damage to US national security, the Billy/Loretta Tarmac deal, obstruction of justice, etc, etc

Trump SHOULD ignore the stupid, derail questions, and then ask his own questions. The ones I just mentioned. And then go to a REAL debate - moderated by Lou Dobbs, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, Rush Limbaugh, etc

So you're saying one of the debaters should get final approval of what questions he gets. Any topics he finds "inconvenient" get 86ed pre-emptively. Meanwhile his opponent just has to deal with whatever comes.

Digging even deeper, you want your guy to actually write his own questions and interview himself.

I uh, don't think you quite have a grasp on what a debate is.

 

[protectionist]

Don't know, don't care, and frankly anyone who sits and composes a tally of shit like that needs a life.

I did see about two-thirds of it though, since I couldn't find a good ball game or a rerun of "F Troop". I saw Rump several times outright deny reality --- the classic example being his flip-flop on the Iraq war; when he was asked about that he just flat denied it happened, even after the whole world has already seen and heard the recorded evidence, even after Matt Lauer got taken to the woodshed specifically for NOT calling that same denial of reality out very recently when he tried the same outright-denial ploy

You can answer the question however you see fit... you can dodge the question altogether (saw a lot of that too, e.g. the Birferism question he never answered). But you can't interrupt the question denying the very premise because you regret what's already on the record and want to dictate your own do-over. Can't do it. So yeah he got taken to task for that. ANYONE who stands there and denies what's already on the record HAS TO be.

Rump seems to think when he does or says something that doesn't work or backfires, all he has to do is deny it ever happened --- even though there's already ample evidence on audio, on video, or in court. He lives entirely in a world of self-delusion. That's a YUGE problem. That's a mental illness. That alone makes him unfit to be in charge of anything.

• "I was the CEO but I wasn't in charge"....
• "I only licensed my name".....
• "I never went bankrupt, I took advantage of the laws"....
• "I was being 'sarcastic'".......
• "I wasn't mocking his disability"....
• "only Rosie O'Donnell"......
• "I never said that" (multitudinous times) .....

on and on and on. Complete inability to ever take any kind of responsibility for anything, ever.
Narcissistic Personality Disorder. Complete sham. Psychological development arrested around age seven. He wants to go "that didn't count because I had my fingers crossed behind my back" --- holy shit grow the fuck UP.

When you stand there and deny stuff that everybody already knows, and everybody has already seen ---- how can you NOT get called on it?

He DID only license his name. The lying TV ads that accuse him of outsourcing are typical Hillary lies.

He never went bankrupt. That's correct. He declared Chapter 11 four times. Chapter 11 is a REORGANIZATION. Chapter 7 is a bankruptcy. For someone to have all the businesses all over the world, for 40+ years, and ZERO bankruptcies, is about the best business record in the world. Democrats know this. That's why they distort the truth, create a straw man argument, and then attack it.

And Trump was NOT mocking anybody's disability. How the hell would he know the guy has a disability ? From meeting him one time, many years ago ? Get real. He thought the guy was drunk or just actin erratic, and his was in a crowd of thousands of people. This is just another example of Democrats' lying TV ads, to push Hillary. It's what they've been doing this whole year. What else is new ?

And denying that things happened, is what Hillary does. Like when Boy Boy Bill attacked Dick Morris and tackled him, Hillary told Dick to keep it quiet.. When Dick said a reporter had already been told about it, Hillary said "Just say it never happened. It'll be your word against theirs."

As for THIS >> "When you stand there and deny stuff that everybody already knows, and everybody has already seen ---- how can you NOT get called on it? That is exactly what the whole world is saying ABOUT HILLARY.

 

[protectionist]

So you're saying one of the debaters should get final approval of what questions he gets. Any topics he finds "inconvenient" get 86ed pre-emptively. Meanwhile his opponent just has to deal with whatever comes.

Digging even deeper, you want your guy to actually write his own questions and interview himself.

I uh, don't think you quite have a grasp on what a debate is.

I don't know what the hell that jibberish was that you just said. What I'm saying is WHAT I'M SAYING, not what you're saying. And who cares what dopey words you try to put in my mouth, because you're just tying to contort this whole thing to what is favorable for Hillary. Duh!

I know exactly what a debate is. And a Trump-bashing festival like we saw earlier this week, doesn't qualify. Neither do you.

PS - "uh" isn't a word in the English language. Sharpen up.

 

[Pogo]

So you're saying one of the debaters should get final approval of what questions he gets. Any topics he finds "inconvenient" get 86ed pre-emptively. Meanwhile his opponent just has to deal with whatever comes.

Digging even deeper, you want your guy to actually write his own questions and interview himself.

I uh, don't think you quite have a grasp on what a debate is.

I don't know what the hell that jibberish was that you just said. What I'm saying is WHAT I'M SAYING, not what you're saying. And who cares what dopey words you try to put in my mouth, because you're just tying to contort this whole thing to what is favorable for Hillary. Duh!

I know exactly what a debate is. And a Trump-bashing festival like we saw earlier this week, doesn't qualify. Neither do you.

PS - "uh" isn't a word in the English language. Sharpen up.

I simply restated what you had just said. Now you wanna run away from it huh?

"Give me forty acres and I'll turn this post around...."

 

[Slyhunter]

Get rid of the moderators. Let the Candidates form the questions for their opponent.

 

[JakeStarkey]

So you're saying one of the debaters should get final approval of what questions he gets. Any topics he finds "inconvenient" get 86ed pre-emptively. Meanwhile his opponent just has to deal with whatever comes.

Digging even deeper, you want your guy to actually write his own questions and interview himself.

I uh, don't think you quite have a grasp on what a debate is.

I don't know what the hell that jibberish was that you just said. What I'm saying is WHAT I'M SAYING, not what you're saying. And who cares what dopey words you try to put in my mouth, because you're just tying to contort this whole thing to what is favorable for Hillary. Duh!

I know exactly what a debate is. And a Trump-bashing festival like we saw earlier this week, doesn't qualify. Neither do you.

PS - "uh" isn't a word in the English language. Sharpen up.

I simply restated what you had just said. Now you wanna run away from it huh?

"Give me forty acres and I'll turn this post around...."

protectionist has real trouble when his words are put into context.

 

[2aguy]

The slanted moderating of presidential debates up to now, really calls for there to be debates moderated by conservatives. It started with Jake Tapper who instead of asking each of the Republican primary candidates to express their views, he tried to get them all to fight with one another (which could only benefit the Democratic candidate)

No we've had Lester Holt showing off his leftist bias by asking Trump to explain how he would create jobs, when Trump had already answered the question. Holt also bogged the debate down with anti-trump stuff, like talking about Obama's birth certificate, cornering Trump, instead of talking about critically important things like the ISIS Trojan Horse, and the $133 Billion/year the Us is being robbed of in remittances$$

Now the next debate (October 9) has Holt scheduled again with another liberal moderator, Anderson Cooper of CNN. How about having some conservative moderators ? How about Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Lou Dobbs, or Sean Hannity ?

And how about having another debate with THESE moderators, right after the Commission on Presidential Debates debate is concluded ? Then let's see Hillary be targeted as Trump is, and let's see Hillary coward out, when she knows they won't let her slide.

How about Hugh Hewitt......he would be great. Any conservative would be fair to both people on the stage...conservatives believe in the rules and fairness.....the democrats working as journalists working as democrat political operatives only believe in helping the democrat win....

 

[protectionist]

I simply restated what you had just said. Now you wanna run away from it huh?

"Give me forty acres and I'll turn this post around...."

You did NOT restate what I said. You introduced whole new words that I did not say. You're trying to pass the lie that I said something I didn't.

 

[protectionist]

protectionist has real trouble when his words are put into context.

I have no trouble spotting dishonest fools trying to put words in my mouth, and having my words put into a context not of my making.. Not hard to spot straw man ploys. Quite easy actually.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Another alt right piece of nonsense >>>> Any conservative would be fair to both people on the stage