October 15, 2012

Can Debate Moderators Be Trusted To Reveal What Is A Fact?

Why should moderators be trusted to make rulings on facts? Why do politicians, lawyers, and FBI Special Agents believe they have an entitlement to lie, to deceive and to distort facts when they talk to other humans? Politicians, lawyers and FBI Special Agents more frequently are truthful with their colleagues, but show no concern about lying to ordinary citizens. There are no sanctions for deception even when they are caught lying under oath. In court lawyers are permitted under the "puffing" rule to say whatever they want to say. Elected officials are absolutely immune from liability for making false, slanderous statements when acting in the course of their duties. 

[From article]

My big complaint about all these debates so far: Moderators don’t step in to straighten out facts. [. . .] the listening public may have had no idea, and that serves nobody well.

http://bostonherald.com/news/columnists/view/20221011mr_nice_guy_back_but_debates_a_draw/

Mr. Nice Guy back, but debate’s a draw
Boston Herald
By Margery Eagan
Thursday, October 11, 2012

No comments: