Where Is the League of Women Voters When We Need Them?

Would someone please get the networks out of the presidential debate business?

The networks and the national press love their gotchas, their -gates, their "controversies," their heat. They, alas, are not the grownups in the political process. The grownups are the voters, who -- lamely, in the mind of the political class -- are troubled by the war, the economy and boring stuff like that. Stuff that networks think make for lousy television.

I don't blame news producers for doing what they think their job is, which is scoring bragworthy Nielsens. I don't blame political talking heads for being infatuated with the narratives that they themselves create and market. Blaming them would be like blaming babies for banging their spoons on their highchairs, or addicts for wanting their fix.

But I do blame the candidates, the campaigns and the parties for being complicit with the corporate politainment circus. The first ten people in the phone book could do a better job of asking candidates questions that voters care about. There is no freaking reason in the world to grant the networks a rotating monopoly on staffing and broadcasting these debates. The whole media political system we now suffer from is tilted entirely toward trivial combat, pathetic niggling over words, ridiculous sideshows, and inside baseball. Now that we know how awful it can be, are we really powerless to stop it from continuing to waste our time and turning our political process into a third-rate version of a condescending reality show?

Sorry, I've just got to get a grip on this bitter thing.

Follow Marty Kaplan on Twitter: www.twitter.com/martykaplan

Comments

[rjcrane]

I have already done my part and called the Obama campaign to advise them not to participate in any more of these debates. It's was a total waste of time for me and them and anyone who could stomach watching this spectacle. I had to turn it off after about 20 minutes because I couldn't subject myself to any more pain from watching this farce. But the warning signs of what was to come were really in the opening graphics and announcement before any view of the candidates and stage appeared. If you paid attention to how they opened this show there was really no difference between how it was hyped versus a championship boxing match. In other words they were marketing this debate as entertainment and not news. Might as well have allowed the people at Sports Desk on sister station ESPN ask the questions.

As for ABC they should do us all a big favor and shut down their news department and spare us all from seeing these monkeys on TV again.

RJ Crane, topplebush.com

[Dartanion]

I too would like the League of Woman Voters to host the debates. However, if they cannot, the
Democratic Party should NEVER AGAIN trust ABC to host a debate! Charles Gibson and his
partner in crime George Stepenopolis were disgraceful. They did not even pretend to be professional. I have completely given upon ABC news. What decent news person would take
a loaded question into the debate he received from Shawn Hannity (from the FOX Republican Party machine) ?

[RBKC]

Whatever, lady Clinton is the first woman to have come so far in the election to the nomination process forget about being the president of USA which has been totally monopolised by the other gender /male. With what ever imperfections lady Clinton comes but as no one is perfect in this world so is Mr. Obama. Why not remove the tag of gender inequality charge that is the truth of the country/ the only super power/ land of mother of modern democracy & liberty that has not so far produced even nominee forget about electing to the president of USA. What is wrong with your society & the system when even dev. countries have already produced women main political CEO whom USA preaches the values of the gender equality ? Where are many women of USA when you have the opportunity for the first time in the history at least to minimise the gender inequality imposed on yr gender ? Why not this male dominated society gives this chance to the female gender for the presidency this time when she is equally qualified & competitive if not more. Mr obama as a gentleman shd give this time space for the nominee to her & join the dream ticket to fix Mr. John MacCain & his party. Eng. Ram Bahadur K.C. from the land of Mt. Everest & Lord Buddha, Kathmandu, Nepal.

[SkimaskBob]

... what?

[Ramus]

English is not the writer's native language

[Syco]

Well is this country racism has done more damage.

[gevan]

Nothing against women per se, but we're talking about Hillary Clinton here. We have seen enough of her "fighting" (and losing) in her eight years in the White House. Some of us would like to see something different. It's way too easy to imagine Bill roaming around and undercutting everything that a President Hillary tried to do. We perfer to have a single chief executive.

[swoosie1]

It's amazing how hostile people are now that Obama is exposed for what he is. A politician, and quite frankly a sort of weak one at that. Good. Better now than in November. At least the media is being blamed this time for the truth, rather than Clinton. This is new. The media has never been in question until now--when they finally did their job and ask the hard questions.
Do we honestly believe that all this info that was the focus last evening is irrelevant in Peoria? Or that it does not matter in Maine? It does. All candidates have baggage and such to deal with and it is how they manage that over the course of their political lives that matters. Obama rode in on a scandal to get into the senate in the first place---a sex scandal that forced the predessor out of office. So if Obama and his followers really believe that Rev Wright, whom Obama has quoted VERY HEAVILY THROUGHOUT HIS EARLY CAMPAIGN, the internet mythology--which he has used so very expertly against his opponents and now works against him with his flag pin controversy, and the recorded WORDS--just WORDs that he now has to explain are not fair game for questioning or hammering, then he really does think he is Prom King.

[SkimaskBob]

"when they finally did their job and ask the hard questions." - how about some questions like these: Upon entering office, would you propose an investigation into the Bush administration for war crimes relating to torture? Do you believe the US has a fundamental responsibility in Iraq, namely, you brake it, you bought it? and maybe something like ... do you believe the news media is ruining America?

[bobwalters]

If you thought those were "the hard questions", you've been drinking too much of the media Kool-Aid!! The media, for far too long, have trivialised the whole political/social discourse in this country by focusing on irrelevant nonsense and avoiding addressing genuine issues. This post is a sad, but revealing example of the relative success of that effort.
Rev. Wright, if you'd bother to investigate beyond what the media has fed you, is quite right about much of what he's had to say. Furthermore, as a Marine Corps veteran of the recent unpleasantness in SE Asia, he's certainly earned -- as well as is inherently entitled to -- the right to his opinions and to speak them openly. The flag-pin nonsense is pure drivel -- comparable to the Congressional idiot who insisted on renaming French fries "Freedom fries" -- it has relevance to exactly what, pray tell?And finally, your feeble attempt to somehow associate Senator Obama and his election to the Senate with a sex scandal that engulfed his OPPONENT is pathetic, indeed.
You need to go back and re-take Rhetoric 101, and try to stay awake this time.

[Syco]

You're a Decepticon aren't you?

Your leader Hilatron well soon be destroyed

[Ramus]

Thanks for this Marty.The kicker for me was when Wholfson (sp?) went off, on Olbermann's show afterwards. He started ranting about what Bill Ayers said forty years ago when Obama was 8..or 6.. To try to associale Obama's politics with what Bill Ayers was thinking in 1969..just ludicrous. But it is over and Clinton has lost and now Obama can see the kinds of insane questions he'll be asked to answer during the fall campaign. The networks are part of the ruling oligarchy. They need to see their air time..and whatever other products they make..

[Ramus]

"see their air time" should be "sell their air time" sorry, bent out of shape here.

[jsinclair]

And Clinton PARDONED Ayers!!!!! Where was the question to Hillary about the PARDON of the Weatherman Underground? (Assuming this is at all important---which, of course, it wasn't other than being a desperate one-sided effort at 'gotcha').

Tv journalism has gotten worse and worse these past ten years. We desperately need the League of Women voters to run the debates if we really want an intelligent, informed electorate.

[Thunderbeach]

The blogosphere is the teapot in which all these tempests are stirred, and Mr. Kaplan is one of the spoons contributing to the swirl. Last night's debate was uncomfortable, a bit tedious and, yes, the candidates could have spent more time outlining plans and promises that will inevitably fall away after the inauguration. But in the last debate between two formidable candidates, why not confront these teapot tempests head -on? In last night's debate, I saw an attempt to apply the hard-earned lessons of the Al Gore and John Kerry candidacies in an effort to avoid making more glass candidates.

[Sportswoman]

The films Broadcast News and Network nailed corporate mass marketing of entertainment news and yet 20 years later, nothing has changed except the formats have worsened, the puppethead manikens
continue to make Edward R roll in his grave like a chicken on a spit, and weare saturated with Paris Hilton-Britney Spears-Jolie/Pitt when we should be demanding the gas industry get its foot off our collective necks, insurance companies reimburse us our medical procedures, and the War Without End continue without US.
That this debate--and it was not a debate in any sense of the word or I'm Denzel Washington--was even allowed with Clintonian Sephanopolous as chief interrogator/pit bull is fraudulent in its inception..
PBS needed the viewership far more than the networks. We needed PBS far more than the networks.

[SkimaskBob]

second!

[closerthanuthink]

FINALLY, some sanity! Bosnia-gate, Bitter-gate, Chickens-coming-to-roost-gate, Weathermen, Snipers...where and when does it end? Thank you Marty, for at least trying to show the path to sweetening the "bitterness" (Oh dear, now I'm doing it!!)

[magicmary]

https://member.lwv.org/ContactUs.asp

[JoelNH]

I think you need to contact the campaigns not the league. The league was "Asked" to moderate the debates. But when the league refused to eliminate 3rd party candidates (Nader, Perot.) the campaigns took over.

When the general election debates come along, they will be handled by a "Commission" created by the Republican and Democratic parties. So, they have no one to blame but themselves.

Democrats were smart to avoid Fox, but it turns out ABC is really just another Fox.

[jsinclair]

ABC was Fox--but Fox without the anti-Clinton bias.

So, in reality, even worse! Not only was it not fair, it wasn't "balanced" (in its dislike of the candidates).

The pro-Hillary audience reaction shots just added to the incredible level of bias--in big things and small. Unbelievable.

[savertime]

How do you expect the MSM to drive the election(s) if they can not control the debates, and everything we think, feel and believe? If they don't decide what is relevant or controversial or significant, then the voters might do this for themselves! Heaven forbid!

[dapperd72]

I watched last night's debate from start to finish & it was the most ridiculous one yet. Barely any substantive issues were covered, unsurprisingly with Stephanopoulos' conflict of interest with Clinton & Gibson's arrogant obsession with tabloid follies involving Obama. The last debate organized by the League of Women Voters was in 1992 when Perot debated Bush & Clinton. When Perot won 19% of the popular vote, both major parties' powers that be decided LWV must divest control, lest an independent candidate be elected. Thus the Demicans & Republicrats created the "Commission on Presidential Debates", a front for the public relations industry, not a non-partisan or non-profit organization. The first 51 minutes (according to Keith Olbermann) of last night's "debate" revolved around superficial issues of Obama's credibility and patriotism, where the "moderators" did Clinton's bidding by smearing Obama with irrelevant trash. This explains why Pat Buchanan thought Obama was "defensive" since he was justifiably frustrated with these ludicrous questions, though I saw his grace under pressure. He barely flinched, providing articulate rebuttals to these queries, along with clever references to Clinton's complicity in more egregious activities on similar issues, for example, Pres. Clinton's pardons of Weathermen members. That entire issue, along with flag-lapel wearing, is moot to voters' concerns. Do we really need more fodder for the public's "bitterness" about this campaign environment? The word "bitter" itself is perfectly chosen & Obama shouldn't apologize for those remarks any more than the Dixie Chicks should have to apologize for their remarks

[magicmary]

Can't we as a nation put our collective foot down and DEMAND that the League of Women Voters get back the responsibility for having debates? Do they have a website? I'll meet you guys over there! when did it switch over anyway?

[magicmary]

Yes! Yes! The League of Women Voters! The News media needs to GET OUT of our political process!

If not, we might as well pair Hill and Barack up with some professional dancers and let them compete on Dancing with the Stars. What the hell... that's the only thing that ABC knows how to do right. It doesn't translate to prez politics though. Ya think?

[nccp1870]

As a third generation member of the League of Women Voters, I'll tell you where the League is. Right where it has always been, working to inform voters. Years ago, the two big parties stole the well-established debate moderating role the League developed so they could control it--not only in terms of questions, but in terms of parties.
You see, the League sometimes asked questions on substantial issues that politicians found awkward. The League was there on behalf of the public, not the corporatocracy. In short, the League was just one big bother, so the good ol' Washington types took its role away.
I think a lot of us would welcome a citizens' call to restore the moderating role back to the League of Women Voters. Enough of this tabloid television.
Let's do it! Let's take the debates back and give them to the people!

[rinpochet]

TOTALLY AGREE!! I miss those substantive debates. I actually learned something from them. So tired of the tabloid pseudo-debates. How can we take it back for the people?

[BarryChamplain]

"Years ago" doesn't quite cover it.

It happened at the strong-arming of the Republican Party, when George H.W. Bush was running for president. The League presented its usual rules and regs to the candidates, and the Bush campaign just told the League, after years of admirable service, to take a flying leap.

That the Democrats of 1988 agreed to what the R's dictated doesn't speak too well for them. Perhaps they felt "a" debate was better than no debate. Pehaps the R's knew they would cave.

Either way, as a result, today we get the "Gotcha" debate. Gee, I'm so proud to be an American, replete with my democratically-elected representative form of government. Where's my goddamned flag lapel pin?

[bobwalters]

Totally agree. But it's doubtful the controlling party hacks will readily relinquish control of the debates, any more than it is likely the media moguls will voluntarily give up their self-declared right to decide for us who shall be the annointed candidates and who shall be eliminated before they can build a constituency. Why, my goodness, that might lead to 'ordinary' people actually thinking they have some say in this process -- but I agree, it's enough to make one bitter.

[joja]

Aaaaaaaaa-men, Mr. K!

[Tomlastliberalleft]

A perfect example of why people should reconsider watching any network TV news. Expecting huge entertainment companies to further the news is not ever going to work. Read as many sources as you can and hope that picture is in some way the actual news. Seems like George should have recussed himself anyway. Give me the League of Women Voters any day over ABC's silly presentation.