The second Presidential Debate was yesterday and I don’t care what any FOX news correspondent says, Barack Obama whooped Mitt Romney. There is only one way to describe Obama’s performance last night and that’s, straight up, Reagan-esque.
Anyway I don’t really want to talk about the candidates’ performances, What I really want to talk about is this faux outrage surrounding Candy Crowley fact checking during the debate.
You can catch what I’m talking about at the end of the video above, but basically what happened was Mitt Romney said something untrue, Barack Obama corrected him, the two then disagreed on the facts, then Candy Crowley told them the facts, simple.
This led to the right crying favoritism.
-Glenn Beck tweeted, “Candy loves to police Romney!”
-Americans for Limited Government said, “Crowley’s behavior goes beyond despicable as it was a blatant attempt to influence the presidential election,”
-Rush Limbaugh said, “She committed an act of journalistic terror or malpractice last night. If there were any journalist standards, what she did last night would have been the equivalent of blowing up her career like a suicide bomber.”
[Side Note: This is just more proof that Reps know there guy lost the debate last night, so they’re trying to discredit the moderator. To be fair, Dems did the same thing to poor Jim Lehrer after the first debate.]
Anyway back to the point at hand, why is politics the ONLY forum where a person can blatantly lie and not be held responsible?
Here’s a bold idea, how about we embrace this whole “fact checker” thing?
Here’s an even more bold idea, when someone bullshits, YOU CALL BULLSHIT!
This is not “journalistic malpractice?” This is journalistic integrity. Journalists have a responsibility to inform the public. Not sit idly by while someone slanders an American President. Of course this faux outrage is only because it reiterates the reality that Romney plays fast and loose with the facts. Something, Romney pollster, Neil Newhouse has already confirmed when he made it clear, “we are not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact-checkers.”
Now of course Mitt is not alone in having some fun at the expense of facts, Obama, like any politician, does his fair share of manipulating the truth (you can read here each sides’ misstatements) but my point is, why shouldn’t there be fact checkers at the debate? I know the news media will tell you it’s too difficult to fact check in real time, but to steal a phrase from Joe Biden, that’s a bunch of malarkey. Mitt Romney’s been running for president for SIX years, Barack Obama has been President for four. Each of these guys have answered these debate questions in some form or another a million times, so it shouldn’t be too difficult to figure out what talking points each candidate will trot out.
Here’s my overall point. If you have fact checkers at the debate each candidate will understand that they HAVE to be honest or risk being called a liar on national TV. That’s how you make each candidate responsible for what they say.
In closing, I think we should have Will McAvoy moderate the next debates.