Tough Questions

[Carnes]

I've been following the presidential debate. One thing that I have seen come up time and time again through the primaries and to present is the idea that certain media sources are assaulting candidates with questions that are too tough.

I have seen arguments from FOX to C-Span arguing in favor of certain individuals because the questions of 'other' media sources are, "Too tough."

Whats up with this?

I feel that tough questions should be encouraged for our potential leaders. I feel that our leaders should be prepared to deal with the toughest of questions. I would go so far to say that our potential leaders should be required to answer questions that are unanswerable dilemmas that can only serve to indicate the candidates moral values.

I have heard the complaint from all sides that, "the questions are too tough." I feel that the questions are very far from being tough enough. These media sources are not seeking our interests, they are seeking their own immediate, cash generating interests. WTF.

[soberbyker]

It's all part of the politically correct wimpy ass society we've been brewing the past decade or so. How's the old saying go ...... If you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen.

Bill

.

[Carnes]

Originally Posted by soberbyker

It's all part of the politically correct wimpy ass society we've been brewing the past decade or so. How's the old saying go ...... If you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen.

Bill

.

Exactly.

We are developing a 'non-confrontational' society, and I feel that there are tragic consequences regarding such a society. (There are many eastern societies that operate in a 'non-confrontational' norm.)

The lack of confrontation does not diffuse the attempts for bad intent.

"Politically Correct" is a destructive force that is contrary to the intentions of our founding fathers that we must overcome. Our founding fathers deeply valued confrontation. Not only did the Fathers value the attitude, it is entirely natural in our Darwinian world.

Can we confront the resistance?

[Carnes]

Originally Posted by soberbyker

wimpy ass

IMO this equates exactly with, "Non-confrontational."

[nijwnfi]

On the other side of the coin, I would love to see a candidate say, "None of your damned business", when asked a personal question.

[Carnes]

Originally Posted by nijwnfi

On the other side of the coin, I would love to see a candidate say, "None of your damned business", when asked a personal question.

That is another dilemma...

Do we judge our leaders based on the actions they perpetrate from day to day, or do we see our leaders as nothing more than a voice for our opinions?

Being that we are seeking "representatives" for us, as opposed to "speakers" I feel it is important to critically judge the character of those who we allow to 'represent' us.

Bill Clinton is a fine example of a person who had demonstrated that he does not value INTEGRITY.

I feel that integrity is a key value for a leader to have. Bill demonstrated that if he can use semantics (what the definition of is is) to justify a clear lack of values and integrity he will be glad to do so for political expediency. I feel this is unacceptable.

A US National leader must have strong values in order to be successful, AND right. A leader's values have to share the values of the persons that are being led.

What are your values? How do you define, "Is?"

[dc dalton]

Originally Posted by soberbyker

It's all part of the politically correct wimpy ass society we've been brewing the past decade or so. How's the old saying go ...... If you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen.

Bill

.

Yuppers!

The REAL problem is none of the "candidates" are really saying anything, its the old "double speak" that turns you in circles without ever getting a real answer.

This too (the not asking tough questions) I am afraid is a further extension of 'political correctness' gone horribly horribly wrong (not that it was good in the first place). People seem to feel that if you ignore it it will just go away. When someone does get up and speak the truth, as Ron Paul did, they are chided and laughed at as some kind of nut. The ugly part of this problem is that we are acting just like someone that is too afraid to look at their bills because they can't pay them so they ignore them until things get completely out of control, the people that wont pick up the phone and try and work something out with the people they owe money to until it is too late.

It seems to me that society in general has moved toward the 'lottery mentality'.... if you don't know what I am talking about it is a well documented phenomenon that occurs when people are seriously broke or out of work. They tend to start playing the lottery or play it more than they normally would. These people hope beyond hope they will hit the 'big one' and that will pull them out of their mess when in fact they are making the situation worse by spending money that could be used to help them out of the situation.

Not talking about the issues and even more so, hoping the big issues will 'solve themselves' only makes matters worse but I do think that this election has a lot more people realizing we have some serious problems that if not fixed will cause immeasurable damage to our country. The only problem is having people realize the problems while Washington 'dances around them' still wont get them fixed.

[Pector55]

The American people need to be asking tough questions of our media system as well.

There is an article on CNN, calling out Palin that the luxury jet, purchased by her predecessor, did not sell on Ebay. (as if she lied during her speech) The fact is, it didn't sell on Ebay but it was put on Ebay. Her point, and what she said during her speech was that it was wasteful spending and when she took office, she decided that to cut costs, she put it on Ebay. In the end, it sold outside of Ebay. WTF? I don't give a rats ass if it was paid by money order send to a guy in Nigeria. The point is, an elected official was cutting expenses instead of exploiting the system. Again, spin the story to shine the light you want.

[adymond]

Originally Posted by Pector55

The American people need to be asking tough questions of our media system as well.

There is an article on CNN, calling out Palin that the luxury jet, purchased by her predecessor, did not sell on Ebay. (as if she lied during her speech) The fact is, it didn't sell on Ebay but it was put on Ebay. Her point, and what she said during her speech was that it was wasteful spending and when she took office, she decided that to cut costs, she put it on Ebay. In the end, it sold outside of Ebay. WTF? I don't give a rats ass if it was paid by money order send to a guy in Nigeria. The point is, an elected official was cutting expenses instead of exploiting the system. Again, spin the story to shine the light you want.

Also her quote was "That luxury jet was over the top. I put it on eBay." I added the bold. That's the problem with the media these days and yes we need to be asking them tough questions. I don't know about anyone else, but I think the questions have seemed a bit biased at times. I have seen softball questions thrown at Obama while shite is being slung at Palin about her child's pregnancy. I want tough questions all around.

Private life of a public figure? No such thing. That private life that we have acces to does not extend to children of a candidate though. That her daughter had sex does not mean she is a bad mom or that she does not have the values she speaks of. If her daughter were a few months older would it really have mattered? Would that have been a story then?