4063605399?profile=originalWith the continuing furor erupting concerning the highly partisan nature displayed by Candy Crowley during the second presidential debate, the real question has evaded the American voter.  Who is truly responsible for acts of journalistic misconduct and what should be done when a debate moderator decides to go rogue, as Crowley did in favoring Obama?


The Commission on Presidential Debates is the organization which sponsors the presidential and vice presidential debates and it claims that these debates will be conducted in “a professional and nonpartisan manner.”  What happens when the journalist moderator interjects herself into the debate, in order to blunt a candidate’s momentum, as Crowley did to republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney?


Presidential Debate Commission Rules:

(c) With respect to all questions...

(iv) The moderator will not ask follow-up questions or comment on either the questions asked by the audience or the answers of the candidates during the debate or otherwise intervene in the debate except to acknowledge the questioners from the audience or enforce the time limits,

Crowley deliberately and intentionally broke the agreed upon rules, and decided as Obama has decided during the course of his administration, that rules don’t apply and the ends justify the means.

So, what recourse do the American people have when a journalist is selected who openly ignores the rules in conducting the debate and in comments leading up to the debate?  What happens when the journalist moderator interjects herself into the debate, in order to blunt a candidate’s momentum, as Crowley did to republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney?


The easy answer is to say; simply that Republicans and GOP candidates who are the favorite targets of biased coverage in the mainstream media should just grit their teeth and bare it.  But that is not what the American public needs to see or should have to endure.  If a presidential debate commission purports to field “unbiased reporters” who are going to be fair and balanced moderators, then failing to do so should result in a penalty, and or permanent suspension of the reporter and their affiliated network from future participation in debates.


According to the national Verified Voting Foundation, in 2012 there are approximately 180,802,372 registered voters in America.  Voters are entitled to see a debate that is free from a moderator who appears to purposely steer a debate, to benefit the incumbent president Obama. Crowley’s behavior becomes even more suspect when one considers that Obama was increasingly losing ground to the republican challenger Mitt Romney.

Did CNN senior political reporter Candace Crowley conduct herself in a professional and nonpartisan manner?  Examine her earlier statement, when she announced that she would evade and ignore the professional rules of journalistic conduct, and inject herself into the presidential debate if and when she saw fit. So one has to question, who judges the moderators when moderators declare that they are above the rules as Crowley did?


It’s possible that the American people can supply the answer. ( Read More )

E-mail me when people leave their comments –

You need to be a member of Tea Party Command Center to add comments!

Join Tea Party Command Center


  • She should be penalized or even fired from her job because of the lie she told for Obama.  She was told before she came out as Moderator what she could do and not do, but being the idiot that she is had to run her mouth and then in a mere swisper she said the Romney is right.  I am fed up and I am sure the the rest of the America are sick of seeing these radical liberals try to ruin the Republicans.  When I find out who on the debate team hired these idiots I am going to give them a piece of my mind.  Undoubtly it was a RINO that picked these partisan idiots.  No more.   These is an outrage for one person to do Romney the way they did it must less two, and we will make sure that never happens again.  I don't know why they can't get someone that are going to answer the right questions in order to get the correct answers that the American people want answered.

  • Honesty and integrity are essentials in journalism. A one follows Ms. Crowley, her demeanor, supports her liberal lifestyle. She and all journalists who support killing innocent unborn babies, and same sex marriage have no compunction to involve themselves in a protectionist posture.
  • Oh no. She did not slip,

    Hell, she just happened to have the transcript at her desk. What kind of slip is that? I am tired of people making excuses or delivering their venom under the guise of an honest contribution. I am sick of the communist methods of minimizing. Why can't the commies just be honest and proclaim that they are commies?

  • She slipped, and her supposed impartial journalistic standards wound up around her ankles.  I don't believe it was deliberate, despite others who believe otherwise.  I think she got caught up in the excitement of the moment and thought she could resolve the dispute.  If, in fact, she had the transcript of the Rose Garden statement, it would have been part of her own background research in preparation for the debate (yes, moderators have to know their subject matter).  It doesn't take a rocket scientist to anticipate that the Libyan terror attack question would be one of those that would be asked. 

    What concerns me with all these debates, is the extra time that Obama always insists upon when his time has run out.  There is a countdown clock that shows time remaining, which, like a stop light,  changes colors from green to yellow to red.  It should be enhanced to to automatically shut off the candidate's microphone as soon as the clock hits 0:00.  Then there could be none of this toothy pleading to the moderator for additional time to "finalize" their point.

  • I not only question Candy's motives but the Commission as well.

  • YEP - if CNN wants to prove that it wants me as an audience, they will dismiss her immediately.

  • So whats the fuss all about any one with any sense could see that this bitch was not going to support any thing Romnewy said and would find a way to defeat any thing he said, and she did a good job of that. As for did OBASTARD know in advance of any questions asked that is what should have been expected when they had this liberal witch as the Moderator.

  • I thnk they need to find neutral moderators .. if that is possible .. to be real honest I think any conservative could be more fair then these liberals they have been tagging .. how about o'riley he's fair and balanced .. Maybe Cbama has a bug on him to provide answers ..

  • There should not be any doubt that this moderator should be penalized heavily for her interjections.  She wasn't there to ask the questions, her job was to moderate..period!

    This miscreant should be reprimanded for her bias-ness and for aiding this Zero in office and cutting off Mr.Romney.  She wasn't doing her job moderating....she was doing her job as a Demo-Rat to help continue POTUS'S LIES, and later have to apologize to the viewers that Mr. Romney was right and she was wrong....YES, WRONG ON ALL COUNTS!

  • This woman is lucky to even have a job! And, as we all know she is part of the establishment libs which makes her not worth the effort for any type of sanction. She is only preaching to her own choir, with little or no effect on any of us! Better than another unemployed entitlement recipient! In Oblama's growing unemployment line.

This reply was deleted.