To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
There’s no way you are going to get me to watch a Republican debate, so please enlighten me as to the role the good lady played in that Fascist pep rally.
i didn’t catch the debate, but she’s always good on the diane rehm show- one of those people who makes centrist/moderate views seem very pragmatic and deliberate, instead of uncritical or pandering.
I second the motion of the honorable Vel-DuRay. Please just the highlights, or even a 30 second-2 minute maximum video clip. My eyes can’t handle much more than that of Perry or the other Perry or the other Perry.
@3 – Ideally, I’d like to see it reenacted by actors who are given a mercy killing afterwards. I’d like to avoid direct contact with the candidates as much as possible.
@1: I’m sorry you feel that way Catalina. I’ve always found that watching debates is a good way to size up the candidates despite your political dispositions. Only hearing summations through the prisms of partisan punditry isn’t that interesting.
This sentiment must be the reason I see so few comments on articles about republican debates or live-slogging etc. People, even if you consider yourself a liberal, or a progressive… The inability or disinterest in tuning into these things is nothing to be proud of, nothing to celebrate.
Debate? What are they debating, anyway?
I have to laugh at the establishment criticism of the Occupy protests. Whining about not having a clear purpose or goal. What is the purpose or goal of this country? I’m pretty sure we used to have one. We used to have a national purpose, a chicken in every pot, building the middle class, mastering space travel, ending poverty, sending everyone to college with ambition who could handle the work, better living for the next generation. Where is that now?
What are the Republicans debating? Certainly none of that. As Alan Grayson enumerated the other day, we have 24 million people who can’t find full-time work, 50 million who can’t afford or get health insurance, 47 million who require food assistance, and 15 million homeowners who owe more on their mortgages than their homes are worth.
Have you heard any plans to address that? Me, either.
@5 – That’d be nice if these were actual debates rather than competitive prayer and hate contests.
I feel pity for her and Charlie Rose. As I would for myself if I watched any of that tripe.
@8: And when was the last time anyone saw one of those, for either party? Maybe Lincoln-Douglas?
Forget about the defintions of what a good debate is, that’s acutally beside the point.
Phoebe dear, when they decide which member of the clown car gets to drive, I’ll start paying attention. In the meantime our MacCrocodile pretty much nailed it.
Although I’d love to see a “debate” where the candidates could only speak twice, for opening and closing remarks. The rest of the time they could only press buttons for No, Yes, or Abstain.
@5 – I’ve seen enough of all the Republican “cantidates” to size them all up as completely undesirable. It’s impossible to know what any of them *will* do in office (See also: Obama) but everything they *say* they will do repels me. I have no need to watch them repeat their nonsense a fifth or sixth time.
the “yes, no, abstain” light is interesting. i wouldn’t mind that. but i also wouldn’t mind it if the speaker had to articulate the actual policy they would support, or the rational that supports said view. there is a time for news-worthy sound bites, a time for speeches, and, i would like to think, a time for discourse. it seems the discourse is mainly what is missing. the assumption being, i suppose, that discourse is both unentertaining and something the viewers have already done prior to the debates, and are merely watching to see which candidate matches most closely with their conclusions.