Obama Attended Wedding of Thursday’s VP Debate Moderator

Originally posted by seabag
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!

If the Repubes are worried about Obama attending a wedding twenty-one years ago and that couple is now divorced and thinking he will get blatant favorable treatment in front of an audience of 50 million must not have faith in their paper tiger candidate. Wow, I fit that all in one run-on sentence.

reply to post by seabag


Waa

Your making excuses before it even happens.

Lyin Ryan will tell everyone he will cut taxes,keep the entitlements.spend more on Military and Balance the Budget.

(I hear he traded some magic beans for 3 wishes)

reply to post by Tw0Sides

reply to post by seabag 


Waa 

Your making excuses before it even happens. 

Lyin Ryan will tell everyone he will cut taxes,keep the entitlements.spend more on Military and Balance the Budget. 

(I hear he traded some magic beans for 3 wishes)

There are a lot of defensive people on ATS making all kinds of excuses. Hell, one member practically wrote her resume' for us. The fact that so many of you are circling the wagons in such a tight formation makes me even more suspicious.

reply to post by UnBreakable

If the Repubes are worried about Obama attending a wedding twenty-one years ago and that couple is now divorced and thinking he will get blatant favorable treatment in front of an audience of 50 million must not have faith in their paper tiger candidate. Wow, I fit that all in one run-on sentence.

It's nothing to get worked up about really. Obama and Bozo will get preferential treatment regardless which ABC employee they provide. 

Besides, she likely couldn't provide enough help to save Bozo from himself. Maybe if they take more frequent commercial breaks she can run on stage and dislodge his foot from his mouth for him.

Great catch on this and it really doesn't matter to me if there is funny business or not. The debates are all scripted to some degree...even if the last one came as somewhat of a surprise.

What really gets me is that until recent years there was a vague notion called 'appearance of impropriety'. Anyone else recall that little idea? Crap like this didn't happen this way because it LOOKED bad and that was plenty reason to do things another way.

now appearances don't even matter for their own sake. That's what i think the point of this is. Appearances make another person in this position a 100% no brainer. I mean damn...Could Jeb Bush have been a moderator in '08 for McCain? It's getting stupid...the connections left bare for all to see and casually brushed aside when I can never recall things like this being ignored before. Not so totally, like this.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

What really gets me is that until recent years there was a vague notion called 'appearance of impropriety'. Anyone else recall that little idea? Crap like this didn't happen this way because it LOOKED bad and that was plenty reason to do things another way.

Thank you, Wrabbit2000! I was beginning to think I was the only one.

This is typical of how democrats and republicans act when they do something wrong. When a democrat politician does something inappropriate (like storing tens of thousands of dollars gained illegally in their refrigerator ) the dems circle the wagons and protect him. When a republican politician does something that is inappropriate the republicans circle the firing squad and shoot their own. There is a fundamental difference in how certain groups respond to impropriety.

reply to post by seabag

You're right and in this season of madness leading to the big vote I have to remind myself sometimes that, as you note, this is both sides. The games were no better and no more amusing when recently the White House, House of Representatives and Senate Chambers were all Republican majority and at the same time. Same games then....just a different twist perhaps.

I think it says everything when these days, you can take whole statements made by people of either side and after stripping context and identifying data for who specifically said it, often people would be HARD pressed to say which party even produced the words. That's true on ENOUGH right now to certainly speak the point, eh?

....and the wheels on the bus go round and round...

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


For those of you that said there was nothing here…..BS!!

I’m 1 hour into it (I am on DVR delay) but so far Martha has allowed Biden to interrupt, change topic, talked over him NUMEROUS times, carried on with no limit, etc.

This was a straight-up HIT JOB facilitated by the moderator and complete BS!

If you have any intellectual honesty you’ll admit there was favoritism.

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow

 

For those of you that said there was nothing here…..BS!!

I’m 1 hour into it (I am on DVR delay) but so far Martha has allowed Biden to interrupt, change topic, talked over him NUMEROUS times, carried on with no limit, etc.

This was a straight-up HIT JOB facilitated by the moderator and complete BS!

If you have any intellectual honesty you’ll admit there was favoritism.

edit on 11-10-2012 by seabag because: (no reason given)

No, that's called a debate. A good one one at that.

This OP gave me a good chuckle, your disdain is almost cult like. Grasping at straws it seems. Feel free to continue

Seems like people pick sides like its an NFL team, we all know it's two turds in the same punch bowl.

Punch anyone?

Had to come back to the thread to eat my words, Biden kind of got away with murder!

So in the end you were to an extent, right...

Raddatz Visited Biden at His Residence in March
www.weeklystandard.com...

has this been posted?

reply to post by LeatherNLace


Jim Lehrer is a much more professional moderator. That woman, just, well there are no words to describe how I think she did......

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow

 

For those of you that said there was nothing here…..BS!!

I’m 1 hour into it (I am on DVR delay) but so far Martha has allowed Biden to interrupt, change topic, talked over him NUMEROUS times, carried on with no limit, etc.

This was a straight-up HIT JOB facilitated by the moderator and complete BS!

If you have any intellectual honesty you’ll admit there was favoritism.

edit on 11-10-2012 by seabag because: (no reason given)

Seabag, the pro Obama crowd will never admit Biden is a lousy, rude, demeaning debater, and the moderator was fully biased and it was completely obvious.

Yeah her husband was a classmate of Obama.

Her ex husband.

Yeah Im sure she is all about throwing support toward her ex husbands classmate


BTW, when Mitt was rude it was considered very astute and showed signs of strength and leadership.
When Biden was rude it was considered rude.


For the love of god you guys are so hypocrtitical.
When Obama got beaten everyone admitted it.
Why can't you just admit that your boy Eddie Munster got beaten by the VP?