The Hillary, Obama, Edwards Circus Act

No longer even pretending impartiality during last night's so called Democratic 'debate', CNN's ringmaster Blitzer spent practically the entire first half of the town hall meeting allowing Hillary Clinton to get away with not answering the questions put to her, but dancing around everything like a ballerina. With the audience packed full of Hillary's supporters, (I can't imagine how that happened), it becomes clear once again that we the people will not be allowed to get an unbiased snap shot of the candidates until a true debate is held by an unbiased third party media, such as PBS. And we'll never hear what each candidate truly stands for, and who's trying to play both sides of any issue until they hold debates on each of the issues separately.

Having noted that Blitzer gave as much speaking time as possible to the media's favorite candidates, it should also be noted that there appeared to be an active attempt to stifle what the others in the circus ring had to stay, most notable of which was the point at which we all knew that Kucinich was going to say THAT word again, and Blitzer sputteringly kept saying "Alright, Ok, Alright," in an attempt to prevent the man from speaking. He did say it however, Impeachment, and the stacked audience made a fool out of Blitzer by standing and cheering for Kucinich. The rest of the candidates just shuffled their feet, not having the courage of their convictions. Even in their story on their web site, CNN makes absolutely no mention of this, which is a shameful case of yellow journalism. Only Mike Gravel agreed with Kucinich, as anyone who watched his webcast, running alongside the made for television talking points show already knows.

Indeed, even on the CNN web site, in their "Highlights" header to this story, they list Clinton, Obama, and Edwards only, and even in the story itself, they don't get around to talking about the other candidates and what they had to say, until about three quarters of the way through the "All Hail The Queen" monologue. And even at the end of the article, there are links underneath it that lead the reader to either of only three of the candidates, but none of the others. Can you guess which ones they are?

This blatant campaigning for certain candidates by the media has to stop. We are supposed to be able to believe and to trust what we are told, and in these times of utter uncertainty on the part of the people, if we can not depend on unbiased reporting by the very people that are supposed to be guarding us against just this type of hooliganism, then every American had better start checking out the facts on each and every candidate for themselves, including the ones that the media has discarded for you.

And so, it becomes incumbent upon us to take back the power from the media also. It is us, the viewers and the readers, those of us who know how to make web sites, and even just the surfers, who must write and call our media outlets and demand they hold fair and open forums, and cut out the obvious favoritism. To give every candidate equal time, without allowing some to go on speaking long after their time allotted, and others to get cut short before they have finished their answer.

The media might also try to concentrate a little more effort into telling us the backgrounds of each candidate, and give us poor bloggers a break from doing their job for them. They get paid to do just that, most bloggers don't. I'm talking about the little things, like Clinton's record, Obama's sudden memory loss about documents pertaining to his time as Illinois legislator, or Edwards' flip flopping like a fish out of water on almost all of the issues.

To sum up, to everyone who at least tuned in to hear what the missing candidate had to say, good for you. An informed voter won't make the same mistakes we've made in the past. As to the substance of what was said last night by the candidates, only Biden, Dodd, Kucinich, and Gravel gave straight answers, and let us know where they stand. Richardson is running for Vice-President and should just bow out now. Clinton, Edwards, and Obama are all just skirting the questions and giving sound bites, hoping that the media will clean up what they say the next day. In fact, Obama's mentioning of Warren Buffet last night cost him my vote altogether, Hillary sounded like a whiny little child, (They're mudslinging!Waaaaa!), and Edwards came across as undecided. Debate? What debate?

And to the media, stop trying to slant the conversations to try to push forward a corporate agenda. These political versions of 'Dancing With The Stars' are little more than propaganda fests, with little substance, no answers, the exclusion of candidates who aren't rich, and the attempt to steer the people, (we are not the electorate, we are the people) towards the corporations' choices as the path to least resistance. We need information, and the people have a ton of sources to get it from. If we can't get a fair and balanced discussion from our fourth estate, we may as well just watch the Fox Comedy Channel. Because the rest of this stuff is pure hogwash.

Hopefully we'll see some changes at the next 'debate'. If not, then maybe it's time to organize a People's Debate online. One in which every candidate is allowed to speak to each question being asked, given the time to finish their answers, includes all of the candidates, and not just those with money, and has moderators who don't try to make some candidates look good, while asking other candidates idiotic questions. Some of us are keeping track. Batmanchester