Do you remember back in 2012 when debate moderator Candy Crowley interrupted Mitt Romney for having his facts mixed up? There was a big brouhaha about that and it might have cost Crowley her job. It’s taboo in a debate for a moderator to challenge the veracity of a candidate, and it would become an absolute circus in 2016 with Donald Trump, who seems to be challenged in saying what actually happened in the past, what is happening now, and what might happen in the future.

But the biggest problem is getting a straight answer from candidates or their surrogates. When confronted with a question that they don’t want to answer (most questions), the frequent modus operandi is to deflect the question and morph it into an opportunity to criticize their opponent. To control this errant behavior requires a moderator to immediately step in and stop a candidate who deviates.You don’t think that it can be done? Well watch what Rev. Faith Green Timmons did yesterday in Flint, MI when Trump deviated from addressing Flint’s water problem and tried to attack Hillary Clinton.

Unfortunately, Hillary Clinton has recently joined Trump in focusing more on lambasting her opponent than on speaking positively about her ideas and qualifications. Hopefully the low point is when she took a bridge too far and criticized Trump’s supporters rather than the candidate. She didn’t use an adjective to describe them, instead she turned an adjective into a noun and called half of his supporters “deplorables.” It was a speech, so there was no one to stop it.

But the Trumpians are by far the worst of the turnabout artists. No one is more skillful at it than recently anointed campaign manager, Kellyanne Conway. In a nearly six-minute interview with CNN’s Alisyn Camerota, she “respectfully” turned every question about Trump into a criticism of Clinton.

Example #1:

Camerota (interviewer): She has said now that she was suffering from pneumonia. She got the diagnosis on Friday. This is all Mr. Trump has released about his health, four paragraphs, as you know, from his Gastroenterologist who says that, “Mr Trump is in, his health is astonishingly excellent.” It also says that, “All of his latest medical examinations and tests were only positive results.” Which of course is funny because that means something’s wrong. That’s not what he meant. How can this be considered transparent?

Conway (campaign surrogate): Wow, you can laugh all you want at the medical report, but as far as I can see, there are two major party candidates running for president, and only one of them has pneumonia and lied about it, especially to the press because she always thinks that she has … She treats you all like second class citizens, won’t have a press conference, and when she pretends to have press available. “I’m going to be uplifting and aspirational and all,” then goes onto attack tens of millions of Americans the very next day.

Example #2:

Camerota: What exactly will he be releasing? His entire medical history, or just the results of the last checkup?

Conway: I don’t know, but I’ll tell you what he won’t be releasing. He won’t be releasing the fact that he had pneumonia for two days and lied about it.

Example #3:

Camerota: Well, you’re his campaign manager, which is why we’re asking you questions about Donald Trump. We have people from the Clinton Camp, and her surrogates, and we ask about her.

Conway: They talk about Donald Trump.

Example #4:

Camerota: Has Donald Trump, or will he release anything from the IRS, a letter from the IRS proving that he’s under audit?

Conway: I don’t know. Why? In other words why are you … Are you calling him a liar?

Camerota: Well, we’re taking his word for it.

Conway: Are you calling him a liar? We’re taking Hillary Clinton’s word that she was overheated and didn’t have pneumonia, or that she’s going to be aspirational and uplifting, or she’s going to start talking to the press again. I mean, seriously, we’re running against a Clinton, and we’re going to challenge someone’s veracity?

Camerota never cut Conway off when Conway twisted a question about Trump into a diatribe about Clinton. Perhaps this is understandable, because if she or any other interviewer from the mainstream media does not let a guest answer a question, then they run the risk of never again having that guest and his/her compatriots back on the channel.

But this would be different in a debate. NBC’s Lester Holt is moderating the first debate on Monday, September 26. What if he stated at the beginning that he is not going to tolerate any non-answers, be they directed at their opponent or simply refusal to respond directly to the question. If he enforced it by turning off their microphones when they deviated, he would have them at his mercy. He would be justified in doing this because the American people deserve answers rather than platitudes or insults. If either of the candidates chose to walk off the stage, it would be at their own peril.

And by the way, Flint would get clean water a lot faster.

The post Debate moderators can learn from pastor in Flint about shutting down Trump appeared first on Occasional Planet.

Progressives are all too familiar with Barack Obama’s desire, upon assuming the presidency, to want to work collaboratively with Congress. Indeed, he did have some successes with the 111th Congress (2009-2010).

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was a victory, at least half a loaf. An economic stimulus package was passed, although most progressives wish that it had been for a greater amount or that there had been a follow-up to the 2009 one.

But as time went on, it was clear that the President was not in a position to effectively work with  Congress. Even in 2009-2010, when Democrats almost had a veto-proof Senate as well as control of the House, Republicans were successful at thwarting most of the President’s policies. Between their forcefulness and the president’s timidity and continuous backing away from previously strong positions, he lost the ability to legislate with Congress.

The current Congress has defined gridlock. Not only has the Republican-controlled House voted against virtually every piece of legislation that the President has supported, they have openly stated that their primary legislative goal is to undermine the President so that they can defeat him in the 2012 presidential election. That strategy actually was first stated in the Senate, where  Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) stated several years ago that his view towards legislation would be dictated by what would be most effective in allowing the Republicans to win the 2012 presidential race.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi may have more political acumen than anyone in either chamber. Additionally, she supports a progressive agenda. With a lock-step Republican majority in the House, she fully understands that no legislation that either she or the president strongly support will pass the House. So her advice to the President: run against Congress.

She stated this on CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday, January 8. Host Candy Crowley was somewhat taken aback by  Pelosi’s words.  Pelosi clearly repeated that it is her feeling that, because this Congress has been so ineffective and obstinate, Obama’s campaign strategy should be to counter the grid-locked Congress. Congress is not gridlocked because of her; it’s because Republicans have openly stated that they would rather defeat President Obama than do the business of the country.

It’s hard to know of anyone who has more credibility about how President Obama should conduct business with Congress than Pelosi. In the 111th Congress, when she was Speaker of the House and Barack Obama was president, she was able to steer through the House virtually every significant piece of legislation that the President proposed. She not only had to deal with the Republican minority, but also with the Blue Dog Democrats, who purportedly preferred fiscal discipline over progressive reforms. The Blue Dogs did cause her frustration, particularly Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI), who was largely successful in forming a coalition between Blue Dogs and Republicans to remove all direct and indirect references to abortion in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. But Pelosi was able to steer a meaningful bill through the House, even though the President had backed off numerous essential progressive components of the original legislation, most particularly the public option. Additionally, she had to overcome the direct sabotaging of the bill that came elsewhere from the White House, specifically from then chief-of-staff Rahm Emanuel.

One of the “what-ifs” of the difficulties that President Obama had in dealing with the 111th Congress was if Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid had been as savvy as  Pelosi. Reid was  captured by absurd requests for pork from many of his fellow Democrats. Among them were Ben Nelson, (D-NE)’s “Cornhusker Kickback” and Mary Landrieu (D-LA)’s “Louisiana Purchase.”

If Reid had been as strategic as Pelosi and possessed her the negotiating skills, it’s quite possible that President Obama would have had more confidence in Congress, would have recognized at an earlier time that time spent negotiating with Republicans was time wasted, and would have successfully steered more progressive legislation through Congress. With a clear message and record, Democrats might have stood proudly by a progressive agenda in 2010 and not been steamrolled by the Republicans in the Congressional elections.

It’s still open-season on President Obama by both the Congress and the GOP’s presidential candidates. Following his victory in the New Hampshire primary, Mitt Romney denigrated virtually everything that President Obama has done over the past three years. Humorist Andy Borowitz facetiously mocked Romney by stating, “In a rousing victory speech in New Hampshire last night, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney vowed to undo everything Barack Obama has done as President, promising his supporters, “I will make Osama bin Laden alive again.”

Nancy Pelosi has been a frequent target of Republicans because she is a threat to them. She knows how the political system works, and she is committed to advancing the needs of lower and middle income people.

When Pelosi said that President Obama should run against Congress, she was not being flip. Regrettably, President Obama has sought advice from numerous Democrats who have not been helpful to him. There are even accusations in Ron Suskind’s recent book, Confidence Men, that President Obama has not given equal respect in the White House to women and men. Listening to Nancy Pelosi could be the key to his winning a second term.

The post Kudos to Pelosi for urging Obama to run against Congress appeared first on Occasional Planet.