Campaigns want debate moderators to sign statement

[Supersedeas]

See:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=usatoday/campaignswantdebatemoderatorstosignstatement


<<An attempt by the Bush and Kerry campaigns to require that the four moderators of the upcoming debates sign statements saying they've "accepted" the rules drawn up by the campaigns is causing concern among some experts in journalism ethics.

It is "ludicrous," Alan Schroeder, a professor at Northeastern University in Boston and author of Presidential Debates: Forty Years of High-Risk TV, said Wednesday. "These are journalists doing a service to their country. They cover these guys. How can they climb into bed with them?" >>


Somehow, I believe these pledges are more important to the * campaign, Kerry manages to be quick on his feet.

When will the Professor's get it through their head that this election is not about SERVICE TO THEIR COUNTRY, it is about the Media and whom they pledge to.

Pledge week in the Media. All but Rather may rush with Rove.

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

1. The mods will also have to sign Bush Loyalty Oaths

stating that they will ask * questions written by Karl Rove, while only asking Kerry about the allegations of the Swiftboat Liars.

[KittyWampus]

2. Hope They Don't Assasinate Kerry The Way They Did Clark

in the last debate Clark was in. :(

You can "turn a question around" all you want... but when you don't get policy questions... or questions designed as smear....

it hurts the debater.

Anyone remember how Fox ripped Clark to shreds AFTER the debate?

Hell, they even ran a piece before the debate trying to say Clark met with terrorists.