Tuesday, October 12, 2004

Presidential Debates = Corporate Sponsorship

I find incredibly vexing - and believe me, I am not easily vexed - that the Presidential Debates are paid for by corporate sponsorships. This eeks me out for a few reasons, most importantly, the association created, whether figuratively or literally, between the election process, our leaders, and big business.

Another problem area is the exclusion of independent party representation. With corporate money funding the debates, in order to remain truly bipartisan, independent party leaders should also be invited to speak. Otherwise, the boundaries of the established Federal Elections Campaign Acts are blurred.


Connie Rice: Top 10 Secrets They Don't Want You to Know About the Debates


Presidential debate group loses lawsuit


The Debate Debacle
Keeping candidates out of the presidential debates is the secret shame of American politics.

Having watched the debates in the past, I have come to the conclusion that nothing relevant is ever said. If you cross sectioned media outlets over the course of 2004, and gathered all the headlines and soundbites, you'd have the bulk of the debates right there.

What I find more interesting to observe is the speech patterns, body language, attire, and presence of the candidates. Everything from how they sit to the color of the tie is scripted, strategically planned to produce a desired public persona.

It's all very surreal.



Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home