Obama Attended Wedding of Thursday’s VP Debate Moderator

Nothing to see here, folks! There will be no favoritism, I’m sure!

Thursday’s vice presidential debate moderator has known President Obama for years, reports TheDC’s Josh Peterson:

“President Barack Obama was a guest at the 1991 wedding of ABC senior foreign correspondent and vice presidential debate moderator Martha Raddatz, The Daily Caller has learned. Obama and groom Julius Genachowski, whom Obama would later tap to head the Federal Communications Commission were Harvard Law School classmates at the time and members of the Harvard Law Review.

Source


This should be one of the top news stories today but hardly a mention. The deck is stacked yet Obama and the gang can barely keep their heads above water. If the MSM wasn’t biased I would expect Martha Raddatz to recuse herself from moderating this debate but that won’t happen. Hell, she was probably hand-picked by the White House.

I’ll be watching Martha Raddatz closely tomorrow and I’ll have my BS flag close at hand!

The deck is stacked against Paul Ryan because the Guy who is asking the pre-scripted questions like's Obama more?

And just to be clear isn't it televised where any sign of favoritism would lose him his job?

Hardly a news story, i am sure Romney hangs with a gang of good ole' boys with all sorts of positions across the board that are far more suspect of corruption than a supervised debate moderator**.

reply to post by POPtheKlEEN89

The deck is stacked against Paul Ryan because the Guy who is asking the pre-scripted questions like's Obama more?

The moderator controls the tempo, the amount of time each candidate can speak, the type of responses allowed, the back and forth exchanges, etc.

You don’t see any room for favoritism here? Give me a break!

And just to be clear isn't it televised where any sign of favoritism would lose him his job?

RIGHT!!!

Obama is the Teflon Don….this guy gets away with anything he wants.

Hardly a news story

Hardly a news story you want to focus on maybe, but definitely a news story.

reply to post by seabag


Martha Raddatz is a frequent correspondent for ABC news, and as such shows an obvious favoritism for the Democratic Party. I guess at least in her case we now know why. I've always felt that in order to participate as moderator of a political debate you should be neutral in your beliefs, but I guess in order to do the job well you have to be SO learned in political issues that there is probably no way you could stay neutral in your opinions. Let's just hope that she puts her personal political beliefs aside and does the job she's supposed to do fairly.

reply to post by POPtheKlEEN89

Hardly a news story, i am sure Romney hangs with a gang of good ole' boys with all sorts of positions across the board that are far more suspect of corruption than a supervised debate moderator**.

If it’s not a story than please explain why ABC is scrambling right now…ABC knows how bad this looks. How come you don’t?

After TheDC made preliminary inquiries Monday to confirm Obama’s attendance at the wedding, ABC leaked a pre-emptive statement to news outlets including Politico and The Daily Beast Tuesday, revealing what may have been internal network pressure felt just days before Raddatz was scheduled to moderate the one and only vice-presidential debate Thursday night.

Both Politico and The Daily Beast jumped to ABC and Raddatz’s defense. The Huffington Post, a liberal news outlet, joined them shortly thereafter, while calling “unusual” ABC’s attempt to kill the story before it gained wide circulation.

[url=http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/10/abc-news-scrambles-to-cover-up-barack-obamas-attendance-at-vp-debate-moderators-wedding/#ixzz28u9ceAcH]Source[/ url]

The debate questions and rule are already agreed upon by both parties. I don't get the point of this thread. I could see if the debates were actual real and unscripted, but they aren't so this doesn't matter.



The Commission on Presidential Debates is a private corporation headed by the former chairmen of the Republican and Democratic parties. The CPD is a duopoly which allows the major party candidates to draft secret agreements about debate arrangements including moderators, debate format and even participants. The result is a travesty riddled with sterile, non-contentious arguments which consistently exclude alternative voices that Americans want to hear.

reply to post by seabag


Not exactly true. The candidates agree on every single aspect of the debate before it happens. Don't worry your little head they are in it together.



Also if you ask me this is a non story, the candidates agree, but often these debate hosts are regulars used over and over again. I don't think the v,p, debate will change many minds anyway..

Edit: Realspoke posted the video as I was making this post using the same video. Maybe that's evidence that OP should watch it.

if Biden does well thursday, guess who will be the first to say it was fixed. OP. Why is it so hard to face the fact that Obama sucks, but Romney sucks worse. Republicans shouldnt have been stupid and nominated that guy.

reply to post by RealSpoke


You nailed it. There is a whole hell of a lot of agreement before the "debate."

Also.. I didn't see that you posted the same video, I was posting it at the same time, but slower to the draw haha.

The Romney campaign agreed to the rules and who the moderator is.

So if you think this is a legit concern, then you either think Romney is an idiot or is incompetent.

So in reality, this shouldn't be a thread about Obama, it should be a thread questioning Romney's judgement.

I don't see what the issue is. Jim Lehrer moderated the last debate; you know, the Jim Lehrer who works for that liberal commie socialist public television channel PBS. Not only did Jim Lehrer not show favoritism towards Obama, he barely moderated the damn thing. Jim Lehrer let Mitt Romney bully him around from beginning to end.

Just because some people can not put personal feelings and partisan politics aside in favor of an adult discussion does not mean that no one can be fair and impartial when the job calls for it. I suspect that Martha Raddatz will do a decent job as moderator. I just hope she has more balls than Jim Lehrer and stands up to either candidate that does not wish to play within the agreed upon rules of the debate.

reply to post by HostileApostle


Seabag isn't real big on research..

OP this is one in a long line of shoot first ask questions later threads I have seen from you. Non stories spun solely by you. I know you have an agenda, but can you keep your propaganda to even remotely believable? I would like to read something that makes me stop and think before completely dismissing it as lunacy.

reply to post by HostileApostle

* The Romney campaign agreed to the rules and who the

moderator is. So in reality, this shouldn't be a thread

about Obama, it should be a thread questioning

Romney's judgement. "

Couldn't have said it better myself. This is supposed to be a thread to make Obama look shady but it just makes Romney look derp.



reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


Tis a good thing...the more times it is posted, more chances people will watch it.

Isn't this supposed to be a "town hall" type forum? If so, the moderator is there to watch the clock...nothing more...

geesh...people get so batsh!tty over this crap...it's ALL crap! What part of that do you not get?

Wanna know the truth about this election?

reply to post by seabag


I watched this type of favoritism, not even the right word, but anyway watched this happen at caucus for Ron Paul. It is the new form of politics and they will get away with it. O.'s VP will have all the questions before the debates. The mod will perform as expected. It is a show, it is for entertainment purposes only...

reply to post by Jeremiah65


Hope you dont mind I saved your picture to my comp...

reply to post by RealSpoke

The debate questions and rule are already agreed upon by both parties. I don't get the point of this thread. I could see if the debates were actual real and unscripted, but they aren't so this doesn't matter.

I guess you missed my explanation above. The moderator controls the tempo, the amount of time each candidate can speak, the type of responses allowed, the back and forth exchanges, etc. I guess you don’t remember the debate between Bush and Gore when Gore went off script (against the rules) and started directly questioning Bush and the moderated did nothing?? Personally, I don’t mind them fighting…I just think there should be an impartial moderator.

How about we have Dick Cheney moderate? He's impartial, right?

reply to post by Jeremiah65


The moderator is still there to make sure the people can't continue to ask their questions and to help get the candidates out of sticky situations by applying the "rules."

Now town hall debates are just as scripted. The people have to submit their questions prior and if they are allowed to ask it they have to ask the exact question agreed upon. After asking it their mic is shut off. That way the candidate can dodge the question and ramble or "misunderstand" and the person can't restate it or explain.

Watch the above documentary and you will see exactly why this is. It is all a show seriously. People aren't supposed to be allowed to make a candidate lose not a single vote or corner them in any way.

reply to post by seabag


Jay Carney and David Axelrod could be the moderators (might as well be) and it won't make a difference.

The moderators can pant and drool over The Emperor all they want, it won't hide the truth, though.

reply to post by seabag


So what? It will be there for everyone to see. I mean you don't even have a leg to stand on because no one knows yet. The last debate Romney went over his time and didn't follow the rules. I didn't see anyone crying conspiracy. Are you going to come back and say wrong if Ryan talks over his time? What do you mean the tempo? They speakers all get the same time to answer?

You are making a mountain out of a mole hill as they say. You are just crying foul about anything you can and it's getting kind of sad. I mean looking past the fact that it's all a show and Romney shouldn't even be the candidate. And looking over the fact we don't choose the president. Even if we really did and we had real choice this wouldn't matter.