Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Candy?

Candy?

It’s really hard for the Commission on Presidential Debates to find truly neutral moderators, because of how neutral is perceived.

If the moderator were from Fox News, even if a non-ideological news person like Bret Baier, there would be howls of protest from the Obama campaign and the media.

Yet Candy Crowley is acceptable for some unknown reason despite describing the Ryan nomination as a death wish.  While she attributed the comment to unidentified Republicans, she seemed pretty enthused about it:

Crowley also pushed hard the Tea Party racism theme, via American Glob:

There’s something very wrong with the moderator selection process.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

legacyrepublican | October 15, 2012 at 10:09 am

My sarcastic reply:

Just ask Ms. Crowley during the debate if Michelle has gone over her diet with her recently because it is clear to the whole world she needs to lose weight and is so obese. At least cut out those 32 oz sodas. You know, she ought to demand vending machines with healthy food in her workplace. I mean, Ms. Crowley, if you are going to be a liberal and vote for Obama, you have got to lose weight because you are a role model and by losing weight you could set an example for millions of little girls and boys out there who look up to you, not for your talent, but for your looks.

      In Candy’s room, there are food wrappers all over the floor,
      but to get to Candy’s room, you gotta walk the darkness of CNN’s halls,
      Staffers from Obama, call my baby’s number and they bring her cheese,
      When I come knocking, she smiles pretty, she knows I wanna be Candy’s squeeze,
      There’s a sadness hidden in that pretty rounded face,
      a sadness all her own,
      with the hope the media can keep Obama safe.
      We eat a pizza,
      my heart burn coming back again,
      when I touch the last piece of pizza, She stabs a fork in my hand,
      I go driving deep into the light, in Candy’s eyes. She says,
      “Just wait for the Presidential Debate suckas!
      Talk about a death wish!”

        legacyrepublican in reply to EBL. | October 15, 2012 at 2:43 pm

        I didn’t want her weight to be the issue or to make fun of it. So please don’t attack it.

        I was using sarcasm to point out the absurdly obvious blind spot she and others on the left has regarding worthiness.

        Too often these days, the left uses an idiotic litmus test standard to determine the worthiness of an individual or an organization.

        In one video above, an unnamed republican who doesn’t like Ryan’s bill becomes the force behind Crowley’s defense that choosing Ryan is the worst possible choice Romney could have ever made and is the death wish of his presidential bid.

        In the next video, Crowley believes that specious charges of racism in the tiniest fragments of the ranks of those in the Tea Party totally invalidates the credible assertion of the Tea Party that we are spending too much, need to balance our budget, and need less government not more.

        Using the same litmus test Ms. Crowley and the left uses on others, I picked on her weight to show how she was totally invalidating her being the moderator in the debate because under the left’s inane standards of logic, if she cannot moderate her food intake, how can she moderate the debate? The point was too irresistible a point to make because it really is so lame.

        I don’t, again, want her weight to be the issue or to make fun of her or it. The competence of a journalist has to be in their talent, not in their outward looks.

        I did show in my sarcastic reply that Crowley’s hypocritical attitude for not seeing the logical application of her leftist agenda could equally call into question her competence to perform her job. By her own standards, she needs to totally invalidate her being there by applying character assassination standards to herself since the left, and by association Ms. Crowley too, has obviously applied to others the standard of their weight to invalidate their opinions and trustworthiness in office or as a journalist, i.e. Gov. Chris Christie and Rush Limbaugh.

          I have to agree with you that making Candy Crowley’s weight an issue is in poor taste. Her appearance is not relevant and I would be uncomfortable with that attack whatever her political leanings may be.

          It might be important to note Crowley has reportedly a right-leaning perspective and is rumored to be Republican. Megyn Kelly’s show addressed this topic today and it was noted she worked for Bob Dole’s campaign. More recently, Eric Erickson was quite enthusiastic she would be moderating this debate after he was quite critical of Martha Radditz’s performance in the VP debate. Since Erickson works with Crowley he could be merely promoting a CNN journalist. I suspect, however, he may have some first-hand knowledge of her political leanings.

          If you watch the clips above and consider she may lean to the right they don’t seem as telling as they might on first glance. She does after all give Mitch McConnell an opportunity to correct the notion tea partiers condone racism. Shocka – he is not exactly vouching for them. She also provides context about the importance of the tea party movement when discussing charges of racism. Is she promoting the idea or trying to clear it up?

          As for Paul Ryan, there were many Republicans – probably beltway elites – who thought the choice may have been a death wish. Is she wrong for reporting that or are they wrong for making the charge. We’ve got a boatload of hand wringers on our side who use the beltway media as therapists. I’d be willing to kick in a quarter so they can pay for professional counseling instead.

    Inquiring readers want to know …. can Candy make it through the entire 90-minute debate without taking a snack break?

Maybe the idea of importing some British Members of Parliament would be good.

They know from debate, and they could spin up to a Candy-level knowledge on American political issues in an afternoon.

    VetHusbandFather in reply to Ragspierre. | October 15, 2012 at 10:14 am

    Probably better if they know nothing about American political issues. Just give them a card with the questions on it and tell them to stop the candidate if they go over their time. That’s what moderating should look like.

VetHusbandFather | October 15, 2012 at 10:12 am

If you want to find a journalist to moderate that hasn’t bashed Romney, Ryan or the Tea Party… I think the only place left to look would be Fox News. You’ll never find a moderator that is completely unbiased… but I think journalism is a bad place to look for a moderator to begin with. With the exception of Lehrer, journalists want to insert themselves into the conversation, and really they don’t belong in it. No matter how hard they try bias will show through. The only fair way to handle it is like Lehrer did and play referee instead of journalist. Hell I heard the NFL has some replacement referees that are looking for work now.

    I liked Huckabee’s series when he had a panel of state governors examine the Republican primary candidates. They had competent questions about real issues that affect the states and the American people.

    So why not have state governors (R and D) serve as the moderators in the presidential debates?

Why not a judge? Someone used to listening to oral arguments and cutting people off when their time is up?

Maybe it’s the Republicans who are at fault? Why don’t they insist on changing the format? Why don’t they raise some hell about it?

Obama to next debate moderator: Candy, oh I need you so.

At the risk of not sounding like Bow Wow Wow, I don’t want Candy.

Why not a sportswriter or commentator? They seem a level headed lot. Or an entertainment reporter? Any of them mite be better than Gawd Awful? (Sarc.) Excuse me please , I was looking for a way to insert Gawd Awful. In reality , Tim McCarver would be a good choice.

“There’s something very wrong with the moderator selection process.”
YOU ARE WRONG, Professor.
The process is set up exactly how the liberal/progressive/pinko press wants it. Candy was chosen because of her liberal “bono fides” which pale only in comparison to Maddog and Ed the rabid Shitz.
What is wrong is the sissified Republicans establishment, afraid of their own shawdows. For crying out loud; why is it that Okeefe has to film voter fraud in action and the RINO establishment pansys don’t do anything. The absentee ballots are already made out for rest homes, the prisons, the graveyards and the illegals while the RINO extablishment does what? Look at’em, Boehner, McConnel and Cornyn, dressed up in their $1000 suits, lamp tanned with their $100 haircuts and manicures and facials, they even look the part of PANSY. Sure, play golf with O, write a STERN letter to O, cut of campaign funds to Akin because he gets a little tongue tied. The Dumocrats are playing hard ball while the Republicrats are playing tiddlywinks. Geeeeeeeeeeesh, when are we gonna get some conservative leadership that has a pair, that will stand up in the face of the people ripping our country to pieces and tell them, to their face, like Josey told Ten Bears (God Bless you Clint Eastwood, I knew Rowdy Yates still lived: “I came here to die with you, or live with you”…I’m here for either one. ” I ain’t promisin you nothing extra”. The folks that believe in this Exceptional country are waiting for a MAN/WOMAN to LEAD. Alas, I’m not sure there’s anybody available to do it, democratically. To quote 10 Bears:It’s sad that governments are chiefed by the double tongues”. Movies are the illustrated narratives of our times, much like the illustrated books those poor monks labored over and quotes from them are a more relevant inspiration than the obfuscation being spouted by our supposed leaders.

For someone named candy, she leavers a bitter taste in my mouth

listingstarboard | October 15, 2012 at 11:30 am

Jake Tapper would have been an excellent choice. Candy Cow is going to deliver yet another biased liberal performance. I think Romney can take her.

I came that close to getting engaged with a girl named Candy whom I met in Japan when she was on sabbatical.

A Pennsylvania Dutch girl, she was absolutely the salt of the earth.

And oh so sweet.

[…] made some statements in the past that should make us concerned about her ability to be fair. From Legal Insurrection: It’s really hard for the Commission on Presidential Debates to find truly neutral moderators, […]

SoCA Conservative Mom | October 15, 2012 at 11:51 am

Candy is neutral to those who think Obama is too far to the right.

If Candy were to moderate a debate between Scott Brown and Lizzie Warren, her first question to Warren would be about some recipe in “Pow Wow Chow’ …

To paraphrase John Huston in “Chinatown,” perhaps reporters are like whores and old buildings: If they hang around long enough, they become respectable. Candy Crowley is now some kind of “dean” of Washington reporters? This is where we’re at.

But Romney could work this to his advantage. He could, but he won’t. I’ve become tired of complaining about the media. Like Breitbart, I want to move to the next step — dealing with them, exposing them, humiliating them. I’m tired of this sado-masochistic BS kabuki which the GOP seems unable to comprehend much less to fight or free itself from. Romney’s victory will not arrest the problem. Indeed, it will probably flare up with new virulence. At some point, republicans have to show the self-respect to call out these people.

To misquote Miss Hong from MadTV: “Wait a minute, wait a minute. I tell you. She look … she look … she look like a man.”

“It’s really hard for the Commission on Presidential Debates to find truly neutral moderators, because of how neutral is perceived.”

Brian Lamb from C-Span. Job done.

All of this back-and-forth over Ms. Crowley is meaningless. You KNOW she will let her own point of view influence how she moderates, just as Ms. Raddatz and (to a far lesser extent) Mr. Lehrer did. Personally, I think Lehrer struck a pretty good balance; he didn’t interrupt either candidate to a meaningful degree, but …

Selecting any moderators from the biased, left-leaning mainstream media rigs the game from the outset. It’s crazy that the GOP can’t figure this out. They are wusses.

I was blown away when I read stories complimenting Ms. Raddatz for the way she moderated the debate in Danville. Did anyone count the number of times that she interrupted or cut off Ryan vs. the same count for Biden? As they say up in New Jersey, Fuhgeddaboudit.

You know what will happen tomorrow night. Øbama will be aggressive; Romney will be presidential; Ms. Crowley will favor the incumbent; the right will complain; and the mainstream media will ignore it all because, ideologically, Ms. Crowley is one of them and they all want Øbama to win.

Next!

It is beyond stupid, if that is possible, that the GOP assented to this woman being involved in the debate.

It is so far beyond stupid, that I think this must be some kind of record for stupid, even for the GOP Establishment.

Or was it intentional? (I’ve always asserted the GOP Establishment is corrupt, and is happiest as a minority power: all the benefits, with none of the leadership responsibility.)

The only thing that I can figure is that their first choice was Andrea Dworkin, who’s dead, and that their back-up choices were Whoopi Goldberg, Roseanne Barr, and Rosie O’Donnell, who declined, because it was time to eat.

Henry Hawkins | October 15, 2012 at 1:28 pm

In that the moderator’s role is to govern the debate, not the debaters, which means basically just time-keeping, I see no reason why the moderator must come from the political news community. I think the following would make compelling time-keepers:

Mike Tyson
Stephen Hawkins
The Old Man from Pawn Stars
John Madden
Homer Simpson
Joan Rivers
Mean Joe Greene

There’s something very wrong with the moderator selection process.

Roger that. Personally, I lay a lot of the blame as to the current state of affairs at the feed of the senior Republican rep to the Debate Commission, Frank Fahrenkopf … who I’ve known since 1972 and I consider to be one of the nicest guys in the whole ‘pubby party, even if he is just a bit of a RINO.

I just wish Frank’d give up that assignment for the next few cycles to someone of a bit more conservative bent who can’t be rolled … say, Newt Gingrich, perhaps. 🙂

Why can’t each candidate pick a moderator?

9thDistrictNeighbor | October 15, 2012 at 2:17 pm

I can only imagine where they’re getting the audience members from. It will be a tough line to toe: Mitt has to be assertive without ruffling the feathers of the proverbial “town” assembled.

Candy said “I’m not a fly on the wall”.

Who thought you were a fly to begin with?

    Pasturized in reply to currently. | October 15, 2012 at 4:04 pm

    Frank Rich. According to him conservatives are cockroaches, so I must assume this means he believes journalists to be flies (attracted to and laying their eggs in manure and buzzing around annoying everyone).

What’s that old saying?

Candy is dandy, but Greta is betta
Candy is dandy, but Hannity is sanity
Candy is dandy, but O’Reilly is … ok, that one doesn’t work

Ah, here we go:
Candy is dandy, but Baier is fairer

My take is the debate committee has a list of possible moderators and the republicans choose the best they can get. And of course, Fox didn’t make that list. Obama will not be interviewed by Fox. He has a vendetta against them. All the potential moderators are in the tank for obama and will give him as much of a pass as they can et away with but some can be manipulated so the republican message gets out anyway. In Lehrer’s case his legacy was what mattered. He was retired and didn’t have to toe the line any more. Martha R was just inept and blatantly showed the world what she was. Let’s hop candy is of the same ilk.

[…] What? Isn’t Saul Alinsky Available? Posted on October 15, 2012 1:30 pm by Bill Quick » Candy? – Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion […]

I met Candy at a George W Bush event in SC during the 2000 Primary. My friends and I spoke with her at length after the event while W worked the crowd, shaking every last hand. She was very friendly and was interested in why we supported W over McCain, and talked about what it was like covering the campaign, constant travel, being able to recite the stump speech etc. We told her we had skipped Bible Study to attend, and there was conversation that led us to think she might lean conservative and could be a Christian. I hope she does a good job as moderator because I had such a good impression of her. Though I haven’t watched CNN in years, I’ve always respected them for having Candy on the air despite her size.

    currently in reply to MKReagan. | October 16, 2012 at 2:53 am

    Well, I guess we’ll see later this evening if Candy can be a good moderater. Until then, I’m just guessing.

    Have my doubts, but hope she proves me wrong.

living da dream | October 16, 2012 at 11:54 am

Yeh. Facts.. You’d think facts would figure in the mix …. Why are so many are still in “entitlement mode” when facts show it don’t work …. Just results in the plundering of the taxpayers and wealth creators…

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend