Friday, August 12, 2011

Debate Blues

I HESITATE (See video below) to say this, but does anybody else agree with me that one minute answers are utterly ridiculous?    I'd rather dedicate a few evenings to one-on-one question/answer with an interviewer and a candidate than watch this idiocy.  The candidates feel they have to get everything in about themselves before they answer because they have so little time..."I, who was the only governor who balanced the budget and doesn't believe in abortion, do think that we need to secure the border!"   What the heck is that?!
Also, has anybody seen CNN ask anything as brutal as FOX asked the Republicans tonight? 
Who do you think WON? 

Ya, the video's got little to do with my subject, but I've always loved the pickin' and singin' of Hot Tuna and when I thought of my BLUES watching that debate, it made me think of HESITATION BLUES.  I hope you took the time to wait for him to's a simple song, but I like it.


sue said...

Z - First, I think I told you before that I do not get many of the pictures on your posts - just a big white square. It's obviously something we are lacking on our computer and need to check out.


When I watched the 2008 Democratic Debates I felt the same incompetent
hosting - almost if it were The Dating Game. Someone needs to take a hold of these (and any presidential debates) and make them more intelligent and watchable.

If I were a candidate, I would find the short or yes/no questions impossible to answer - without being able to qualifly my responses.

Brooke said...

I just could not bring myself to watch; yesterday was my son's eighth birthday and we were having too good a party to stop for THAT.


Dave Miller said...

Z, as in the Presidential Debates, after the primaries, the campaigns and their staff members, have quite a bit of say in how the debates are structured.

Many, myself included, would love a different style, perhaps with time for longer answers, or maybe even direct questioning of each other, ala Lincoln/Douglas, but the candidates themselves will not permit it.

Of this current group of GOP people, perhaps only Gingrich would favor those approaches.

Your ire is misplaced this time. Few candidates, of either party, will approve the type of debate most would deem as informative and helpful in making an election choice, because that is not their goal.

Their goal is to get through the debates without making a mistake and losing followers.

Z said...

Sue, I'm so sorry my images don't come through for you; at least the text is there but I'd like you to have heard HESITATION BLUES, it's really good......try YouTube...directly. HESITATION BLUES CANNED HEAT!

I thought the hosting last night was competent but I don't like the're right, almost like The Dating Game, is a good way to describe it!
it makes all candidates sound ridiculous.......
Here's an answer when they're first one, as the debates begin, and they're afraid they won't get the info in SOMEHOW later on:

"You asked about the debt ceiling? Well, Brett, I am against abortion, I'm for the Flat Tax, I'm the only governor to ever get a AAA rating in my state, I drove jobs UP, and I don't like the debt ceiling and can't vote for it"

RIght? Makes me laugh, but it's true!
I'd have to qualify my responses, too.

Brooke...happy birthday to your son!! Glad you had too much fun for that!

Dave; We all have quite a bit to say about the debate structure, apparently.

I have a hunch you'd be surprised that these candidates might just have permitted what you describe. They couldn't have been hit with tougher questions from the Republican panel; I have NEVER EVER seen such tough questions from WOlf Blitzer to the Left..that fascinates me.
I don't think the Republicans have much to fear after last night; how much more accusatory and demanding could they have been?!

I have no 'ire', I have curiosity and disappointment.
And, of course, all candidates are FAR more afraid of making mistakes; which is why this format is reprehensible. I dare anybody to be thrown the tough stuff they threw at them last night and have one minute to respond without qualifying time......
given a little more time, creating a less "Jeopardy" kind of situation, and they'd do much better and I KNOW they know that.
You get the feeling they're all trying to remember to ask the question FIRST (as in Jeopardy) than they are to answer the question at all.......In other words, make it formulaic of they're WRONG! They're not WRONG, but they haven't the time to stipulate WHY they take that stance and that's not helpful for anybody but their opponents.
It does nothing for us voters but sway us away from people we might like much more had they the time to really TALK.

Silverfiddle said...

Z: I agree. Politics now delivers us homogenized, canned crap.

It's part of the gotcha age, nobody wants to make a mistake. Talk too long and you give the opposition too many quotes to take out of context. And God forbid you've ever changed your mind on something, you'll be called a flip-flopper.

We get the government, and the politicians we deserve.

Scotty said...

I read someplace someone saying that, the most important thing that happens at the debates is what happens AFTER the debate.....the spin. And, I agree!

Z said...

Scotty, I thought calling Hannity's program after the debate THE SPIN ROOM was a badly picked title.
As if all other channels don't spin much more? :-)

SF...well said. Remember those Rick Warren interviews (Not that I'm a Warren admirer, in general, but...for sake of conversation) when he sat with McCain and Obama for at least an hour?
I would like that kind of platform and I think politicians would welcome being able to explain, qualify, give some background, on their answers, don't you?

I agree they'll be called Flip Floppers, doubt about that, but the quicker answers seem to open them up to that more, no?

Ducky's here said...

What do Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann have in common?

They both like to sleep with gay men.

cube said...

I didn't watch the debate, but I have been hearing much conflicting spin today. I always question the source.

Pris said...

I agree the format is not sufficient for a substantive debate. I suppose it doesn't help to have eight people to fit in.

Fewer questions would help, but unfortunately the questioners have an agenda to "shine", themselves.

I thought Newt was most dominant last night, and I liked how he threw it back at Chris Wallace. I like Wallace, but I also like the media to have to take some heat once in awhile.

I liked the back and forth banter, showing some spotaneity and how those challenges were dealt with.

I liked Bachmann, and Santorum.

Romney held his own.

Herman Cain is a good man, but, no chance. Pawlewnty looked forced and unimpressive.

Huntsman is a non-starter, and Ron Paul is a flake IMO. His defense of Iran having a nuke, proved that. I guess he figures Israel is expendable? Unbelievable.

That's my take. I thought this debate was better than the last one, and I wasn't bored.

Z said...

Pris, I had to laugh at Ann Coulter (who I'm seeing tomorrow at a luncheon, come to think of it..) this morning on the radio saying "Newt's better in these short-answer venues" I think she's right. Sometimes, you give the man enough time/rope and he does hang himself.

Even I thought he was impressive last night, though, as you know, I thought he had that answer for Chris Wallace all ready and memorized..... Newt's good on the defense.
Ron's he pack the pro-Paul audiences like that??

Pris said...

Ducky, now you're getting your talking points from Bill Maher?

Do you ever, EVER, have an original thought?

MK said...

Lengthy, detailed answers are good when that's what they actually give.

But have you ever watched a leftard answer a question about the mess they've created. I can't watch crap like that for too long, the blood pressure goes up and it's just a waste of time. It's like they go to some sort of school that teaches them to talk sh!t.

beamish said...

What do Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann have in common?

They both like to sleep with gay men.

Really? Have you slept with them, Ducky?