You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Candy Crowley’ tag.

On Tuesday, October 16, CNN’s Candy Crowley acted more like Obama’s personal secretary than as an unbiased moderator during the second presidential debate.

She ended up being the Gwen Ifill of 2012. Those who remember the 2008 presidential debates recall the PBS journalist’s adoration of Obama. Ifill moderated one of the debates that year to nauseating effect and a few months later produced a book about the President.

As a bit of information for younger readers who might not know, debates are supposed to be unbiased and impartial — like a job interview. The moderators are not there to help, jolly along or give extra time to a candidate. In the UK, happily, the moderator will still announce at the beginning ‘You have three minutes to answer this question’, followed by ‘You have thirty seconds left’ and ‘Sorry, but your time is up’.

So far, Obama has been allowed three or four minutes more speaking time than Mitt Romney.  Martha Raddatz also let Vice President Joe Biden speak a few minutes longer than Romney’s running mate Paul Ryan.

On Thursday, October 16, 2012, Romney had four minutes’ less speaking time than Obama in the town hall debate held at Hofstra University on Long Island (New York).

Yet, what really took the biscuit was Obama’s saying to Crowley during a discussion of Benghazigate, ‘Get the transcript’, which she immediately pulled out from her papers. This assistance on the part of a moderator left many Americans aghast. She then compounded the error by agreeing to a misquotation of what Obama had said.

It also transpired that Crowley issued a public apology the next day (of her own volition), acknowledging that — yes — Mitt Romney was right in recalling what Obama actually said in the White House Rose Garden about the incident.

That and Crowley’s having the transcript in the first place — no doubt slipped to her by one of the Obama team — shocked many viewers around the country.

This could be the decisive moment when The One quickly turned into The Once.

With the exception of the final debate last night in Florida, Mitt Romney (and Paul Ryan) showed exceptional ability in debating two people instead of one during these travesties. (Fortunately, last night [October 22], Bob Schieffer moderated rather well, although he also let Obama speak for three or four more minutes longer.)

By the end of the week after the Crowley-moderated debate, Romney had jumped five points ahead of Obama in Real Clear Politics’s projected Electoral College votes. He also broke away from Obama in Friday’s Gallup poll by several points. The race appears to be opening up.

Whilst there might not have been a conscious association on the part of the public with Crowley’s actions which showed bias against Romney, one would have to wonder if her help given to Obama and misquotation had a subliminal and detrimental effect on the President’s chances as the public finally saw the mainstream media’s unwavering support for the Left. Millions of Americans simultaneously witnessed the extent to which the media are in the tank for the incumbent.

Kevin DuJan of HillBuzz has once again — as he did in 2008 — provided a forensic examination of the presidential campaign. Long may he continue to write about high-level US politics seasoned with insider information. He lives and works in Chicago, which is also Obama’s campaign HQ.

What follows are excerpts from DuJan’s ten takeaways from the Hofstra debate, a lengthy and informative post (the photo credit goes to him as well).

The ninth point alluded to possible drug use on the part of the incumbent. I do not think that DuJan’s hypothesis of cocaine stands up to the endurance test of such a long debate. However, one of his readers whose husband is a physician wrote in to say that certain mood-altering prescription drugs could have produced the blinking and agitation. In any event, to think that the leader of the ‘free world’ (I use the term advisedly) could be resorting to this is … scary. Some American observers have been asking since 2008 if Obama is well. Should it transpire that he isn’t in good health, one has to wonder who could be leading the ‘free world’ at this very moment.

Emphases in the original from some of DuJan’s other ten points:

8. Democrats have given up on Independents and Moderates and are now pushing a solely base-turnout election. 

This is something that should be obvious if you look at both Joe Biden’s performance at the VP debate and how Barack Obama conducted himself last night:  these people have given up on independents or moderates and are now just trying to get their base to stay enthused and turnout in this election …

But independents and the purposefully noncommittal “undecideds” out there are severely turned off by a Democrat who is not presenting a nonthreatening, calm, and reassuring facade.  Negative attacks from Democrats never work because the public punishes the Democrat Party for being too much like Occupy Wall Street on the national stage.  You’ll see exactly what I mean on November 6th …

7. Obama’s lie about Benghazi is going to come back to haunt him in a big way. 

I referenced this above in regards to Candy Crowley’s gross unprofessionalism and … behavior during the debate, but the fact is that Obama’s lies about the Benghazi attack are going to do him serious damage.  Democrats aren’t paying any attention to this today and seem oblivious to it but let’s just think about the ramifications of what really happened last night.

Americans know little about the Libya situation besides the fact that people died in what they think is the embassy there (it was just a consulate, but that point is lost on most people because Ambassadors live in embassies, they think, and most know the gay Ambassador to Libya was killed on September 11th, 2012).  Today, they also know that Romney and Obama got into a fight over what Obama said the day after the Ambassador died …  I think about 80% of the public at large is very uninformed about politics and finds most of this stuff boring…but they’ve watched enough tee-vee to know when someone is lying and something’s been covered up.

Last night, they clearly saw Candy Crowley race to cover something up for Obama…and today a lot of them are wondering what that was about.  They’re seeing people talking about some YouTube video and how everyone in the Obama White House kept going on about that video for weeks…and they don’t remember hearing anything about a terrorist attack.  When did a terrorist attack happen?, they wonder…all I heard about was some movie that Muslims hated and then rioted over.

I doubt 80% of the voting public will invest the time needed to fully understand what went wrong in Benghazi but most of them will believe in their hearts that Barack Obama is lying about something, even if they don’t know why he’s lying or what exactly he’s lying about.  This is very bad for Democrats just three weeks before the election.

Being caught lying is one of the things that drive the public against Democrats.  A lot of people who believed the hopeychange, feel-good stuff of the 2008 campaign will now feel duped that “Obama ended up being a big liar just like the rest of them” and they will either vote for Romney or sit home on election day.  This will result in disaster for Democrats on November 6th.

People died.  Obama lied.  And that Creepy Crawley creature at the debate tried to help cover it up!

6. Obama’s lies about him not being at war with oil, gas, and coal production will be easily exposed in coming days. 

This one’s pretty simple, but at the debate Barack Obama tried to claim that high gas prices are a good thing…when no consumers feel that way.  He also tried to say that low gas prices were responsible for the economy collapsing, which is absurd.  Obama later tried claiming that he is not at war with oil, gas, and coal production.  I can assure you that in Pennsylvania and Ohio and any other state that produces coal everyone affiliated with that industry knows that if Barack Obama gets a second term that coal production will be eliminated in this country.  Mines will be shut down.  The EPA will force the closure of all coal-burning plants.  Millions will lose their jobs.  And then the same thing will be done to the oil and gas industries.

Democrats actually believe — as in, really and truly believe with a good amount of wishful thinking — that destroying the fossil fuel industry in this country will not only force people to invent “renewable energy technology” that is probably hundreds of years beyond our current abilities but it will also redistribute wealth globally because we’ll lower the standard of living in the United States so that it’s more in line with Africa or South America.  Democrats really believe that if the third world countries can’t be improved after years of trying then equality on a global scale can only be achieved by reducing America to a third world status as well…then social justice will exist for all and a new socialist utopia will appear on the Earth as magically as that “renewable energy technology” that will replace fossil fuels if we’d just declare all out war on oil, gas, and coal today.

Reason #4,567 why I will never vote for ANY Democrat for elected office again for as long as I live …

5. Mitt Romney presented himself as presidential to the extent that one woman actually called him “President Romney” last night. 

This really happened during the debate.  A Hispanic woman asking about immigration actually addressed Mitt Romney as “President Romney”.  She also giggled and got nervous talking to him, the way people do around the sitting President.  There was no such aura or presence to Barack Obama.  He came off, instead, like some coked-out junkie attacking wildly and lying to cover his bare butt as much as possible.  It was remarkable to see just how different Romney and Obama were last night. Republicans really did select the best candidate possible to run against Obama this year.

Romney’s mere presence on the stage made Obama seem unpresidential at times…while at others he made Obama completely disappear on his stool, as if he was just a member of the audience and not a fellow debater.

4. There are no McCain 2008 voters who are undecided this year or switching to Obama; the audience last night was only Obama 2008 voters who are now undecided or voting for Romney. 

This was FASCINATING, folks, but repeatedly I heard that Gallup actually had great difficulty finding people to sit in the audience for this debate or be questioners who participated in the Town Hall.  That’s because only undecided or “uncommitted” voters were allowed to participate.  Normally, these people are culled from those who either voted for the Democrat last time but don’t know if they will do so again or who voted for the Republican four years ago but don’t know if they will repeat that.  Gallup could not find people who voted for McCain in the last election but weren’t going to necessarily vote for Romney this time.  It really does appear that Mitt Romney is going to get all of the votes from people who supported John McCain, with no one switching sides or being undecided this time around …

Incumbents only win reelection if they find new supporters to replace those they alienate during their term in office.  Obama has clearly not done that and will lose this election as a result …

3. Frank Luntz’s [Las Vegas] focus groups ran screaming away from Obama after this debate and confidently said they will vote for Romney. 

… I’ve never seen anything like it, frankly.  Even Luntz was stunned.  These people were ANGRY at Obama for lying to them in 2008…for promising the moon and the stars as a candidate but then mooning them from the White House for four years in which their lives all got worse and nobody saw a lick of hope or change.

If the low-information casino dwellers are this angry and Obama’s lost the former showgirl/prostitute and pregnant male vote in the Luntz’s Dunces demographic then November 6th is going to be a super mega jackpot for Mitt Romney.

1. Obama’s Ministry of Truth is working hard for him, but it is no longer powerful enough to deliver him this election.  

It’s too early to tell, of course, but my gut is that what Candy Crowley did last night in service to Obama will be a breaking point for a lot of people in the long run.

I talked to a friend of mine in California late last night after the debate and she very astutely said that few people ever remember what was actually said in these things, but they remember the demeanor and behavior of the people involved.

The takeaway from last night was that Romney was serious and professional and seemed optimistic.  He would not back down and he had fight in him but his tone was always positive and he presented himself as someone who was capable of fixing the problems we’re facing.

Obama was belligerent, caustic, and abrasive …  He interrupted, was petulant, and played to his base that loves that sort of behavior.

The moderator was clearly on Obama’s side and actually injected herself into the debate to help him when he got in trouble…and then afterwards she was called on it and had to admit she was wrong to behave like that.

I think it’s going to be hard for anyone to claim that the national media is not a Ministry of Truth that exists to help Democrats.  This was painfully obvious last night.

Constitution-loving Americans cannot rest easy until Mitt Romney has been inaugurated. So, before November 6, please circulate Romney positives and ads to friends, families and neighbours. Make sure you vote and, if you can, please take a friend or two with you.

Also, please pray for Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan. They’ve had a shedload of stuff dumped on them by the media and the Left. Pray that they, their families and advisors stay well and safe.

Keep calm and carry on.

This can — and will be — won for America, the great Republic!

© Churchmouse and Churchmouse Campanologist, 2009-2021. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Churchmouse and Churchmouse Campanologist with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN? If you wish to borrow, 1) please use the link from the post, 2) give credit to Churchmouse and Churchmouse Campanologist, 3) copy only selected paragraphs from the post — not all of it.
PLAGIARISERS will be named and shamed.
First case: June 2-3, 2011 — resolved

Creative Commons License
Churchmouse Campanologist by Churchmouse is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 UK: England & Wales License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 1,533 other followers


Calendar of posts

October 2021
31 - The internets fastest growing blog directory
Powered by WebRing.
This site is a member of WebRing.
To browse visit Here.

Blog Stats

  • 1,661,210 hits