Audience To Be Publicly EMBARRASSED If They Dare Confront Candidates W/O Permission Of Candy Crowley

[kpete]

In essence, audience members will be publicly embarrassed for daring to confront candidates without the permission of Candy Crowley.

A copy of the secret debate contract the campaigns for Barack Obama and Mitt Romney drew up for the 2012 presidential debates has leaked. TIME has posted it. The contract includes express limitations related to other candidates qualifying for debates, not publicly calling or participating in additional debates, not mentioning people in the audience beyond family members or not addressing questions to each or asking candidates to take pledges.
http://thepage.time.com/2012/10/15/the-complete-m-o-u/#ixzz29Pfde3tx

…Prior to the start of the debate, audience members will be asked to submit their questions in writing to the moderator. No third party, including the Commission and the campaigns, shall be permitted to see the questions. The moderator shall ensure that the audience members post to the candidates a balance of questions on foreign policy and national security, on the one hand, and domestic and economic policy on the other. The moderator will further review the questions and eliminate any questions that the moderator deems inappropriate. At least seven (7) days before the October 16 (Second Presidential-Town Hall) debate, the moderator shall develop, and describe to the campaigns, a method for selecting questions at random while assuring that questions are reasonably well balanced in terms of addressing a wide range of issues of major public interest facing the United States and the world. Each question will be asked by the audience member submitting the question. If any audience member poses a question or makes a statement that is in any material way different than the question that the audience member earlier submitted to the moderator for review, the moderator will cut-off the questioner and advise the audience that such non-reviewed questions are not permitted. Moreover the Commission shall take appropriate steps to cut-off the microphone of any such audience member who attempts to pose any question or statement differently than that previously posed to the moderator for review. The moderator will inform the audience of this provision prior to the start of the debate…

MORE:
http://dissenter.firedoglake.com/2012/10/15/leaked-2012-presidential-debates-contract-few-critical-points-worth-raising/

[HockeyMom]

1. How about the BRONX CHEER?

Yes, I know Hempstead (Nassau County) is not in NYC.

[nolabear]

2. Provocative headline. Seems fine to me.

This isn't a free for all and if anyone agrees to the format and the impedes it they should be cut off.

[Enrique]

3. i.e. no sneaking a marijuana question in

a very important question that millions of people care about deeply, but which neither party nor the media wants to talk about.

[HappyMe]

4. Oh goody!

So, it's going to be the Candy Romney show.

I think it would be funny to cut off Crowley's mic.

[caraher]

5. This is entirely appropriate

Sure, we might fantasize about calling out Mitt on his BS with an embarrassing question, but the rules also need to give the moderator the power to cut off an unhinged teabagger rant as well.

Don't forget, all these "debates" are really carefully-managed parallel live press conferences rather than true debates. And barring truly spectacular meltdowns, they signify nothing about the qualifications of either candidate - never have and never will.

[senseandsensibility]

6. Sure, but candy will not cut off a teabagger

or at least she will take her sweet time doing it. The teabaggers are not who the corporate media is afraid of.

[lonestarnot]

8. I almost cannot watch due to that bag of crap creepy crawley.

I don't think I can stand her.

[caraher]

22. I'm blissfully ignorant of 99% of today's newsreaders

I'd hope the Obama camp would have made an effort to secure a moderator who at least wanted to appear fair. I can't say I have any expectations of Crowley either way, though I'd expect her to be right-of-center given the biases of our misnamed "liberal media."

[EnviroBat]

7. Candy Crowley, what went on in your head...

Every time I hear her name I start singing Mr. Crowley by Ozzy Osbourne, only I substitute her name in place of "Mr Crowley"...

[lonestarnot]

9. Every time I hear her name I

[EnviroBat]

10. Yeah, me too...

She loves her some RW water...

[lonestarnot]

13. That little chimp is a demon.

[EnviroBat]

17. On has to wonder if the dawg ever got him...

He is one smart-assed monkey...!

[magical thyme]

11. Misleading headline. The actual provision is necessary to prevent audience members from grabbing

their "15 minutes" to spew whatever agenda they may bring.

Do you really want President Obama to end up answering question like:

"Why did you let the Government take over health care with death panels that will kill my grandma?" or

"Why did you let bin Laden get away? and thank GOD IN HEAVEN for top level navy seal Paul Ryan who, in spite of Obummer, slipped in there and killed him."

[randome]

18. Good point. It also wipes away Pizza Hut-type questions.

PH withdrew their asinine offer anyways but it keeps anyone else from descending into that '15 minutes of fame' you mentioned.

[Tennessee Gal]

12. So, Candy gets to select the questions to be asked by audience members?

I don't like that. Her bias towards the right is well known. In my mind that means that she will allow the audience to lob softballs at Mitt. The questions asked of Obama will be slanted to make him look bad.

At least that is the possibility I am envisioning.

[bemildred]

14. See how they fear the public? We get a dog-and-pony show managed by Crowley,

and it's called a "debate".

This could backfire to, if the audience gets in their face about it, challenges Crowley's authority to censor them: "Free speeh! Free speech! Who gave you the right to silence the American people?"

[randome]

15. Yeah, that's what we need -more yelling and chanting. That should make for an informative debate.

There need to be rules or else it will be a confusing anarchic rumble instead of a Town Hall style debate.

[bemildred]

16. There isn't going to be any informative debate, that's the point.

And disruptions are much more informative than canned responses to canned questions.

[randome]

19. I agree there's nothing much to be gleaned from this 'debate'.

But Obama always does well in these formats -and Romney does not- so the 'charade' will come down on the plus side for us, regardless of the rules.

[bemildred]

20. I certainly hope so.

Lehrer was rightly savaged for his impotent moderating style. I expect Crowley will have a very hard time not showing her bias, the other extreme.

I'm basically with Liz Warren, the game is rigged, and the more that riggedness is exposed, the better for all of us.

[Nye Bevan]

21. So no "boxers or briefs" type questions then. Well that sucks (nt)

[ChisolmTrailDem]

23. Conflicting rhetoric...

Just now on MSNBC Tamron Hall said "You don't know what the person in the audience, that everyday man or woman, is going to say in their question - how they're going to pose that question and that's the variable that no pundit, no expert on the air right now can determine before the question comes out of that person's mouth."

I am so weary and exhausted by all the conflicting messaging going on around this election. I may even give up on politics after this election as it has become such a joke in these modern times.