Florida Governor Debates: I Smell A Dead Skunk

I’m reading the Deadwood Online Political Blogs and discovered that  ”The Children’s Movement of Florida” has “announced” a Florida Governor debate dedicated to the topic of “Children’s Issues”.  Here is a link to their stated primary goals.

Now, I know what I am about to say is probably akin to saying “Let’s Hold a Fundraiser to Drive Down the Cost of Euthanasia in Animal Shelters“, but yours truly will go ahead and say it.  When I read who is behind of “The Children’s Movement Of Florida”, I found out it is sponsored by some major players on both sides of the aisle who have had major influence in both the media and government involvement in the Florida Public Education scene for the past 15 years. If you don’t believe me, just go here and look at the Steering Committee.  So please excuse me if I look askance at this organization as being willing, much less capable, to make the really hard decisions that is needed to address the state of our children’s schools. I mean, these are the people who have been, to a great degree, in charge or had major influence in our public education system.

This special interest group is mostly concerned about the youngest of our children, but also make proposals about increasing the school day by two hours as well as increasing the school year from 180 to 220 days.  (I bet our Public School teachers will embrace this idea without insisting on a 20%-25% pay raise /s off).

Alex Sink has already met with this group in early August and while the lead honcho, David Lawrence, Jr, has an impressive resume, this statement he made today gave me pause:

“You would think this is the first debate [Scott] would want to do,” said Lawrence. ”I can’t believe he wouldn’t accept.”

So let me get this straight: Mr. Lawrence, in apparent coordination with Alex Sink, announces the debate, sponsored by Mr. Lawrence’s personal Special Interest Group, as more or less a done deal, but then Mr Lawrence let it slip Mr Scott hasn’t yet agreed and then adds subtle pressure to make him show (i.e., ”I can’t believe he wouldn’t accept.” statement).  I smell setup and I cry foul.

If we are going to have a debate about education, I want neutral questioners who have no association with any special interest group.  And If we are going to have a debate about education, then all levels of education are on the table, from Pre-K to University.  My taxes help pay for it ALL.  Above all, I would like for each of the candidates have the opportunity to address their vision and how we can educate our children more efficiently, more effectively and most importantly, with less money.

Face it America, we are going to have to cut down on public spending across the board and I don’t care what they may say at “The Children’s Movement of Florida“, it has throwing more of the public’s tax money as the core of their founding principle.  For that reason alone, this disqualifies them as an honest broker in any debate. And If Alex Sink or Rick Scott says “More Money is Needed in Education”, then they are not facing the economic reality of our times (we are broke, folks). We need to spend our funds more wisely and be willing to rethink our education system to meet the state’s economic needs.

Also, why is it we Republicans ALWAYS agree to debates where the moderators are 99% of the time from the liberal/progressive side of the spectrum?  Whether it be Presidential or Gubernatorial, Republicans are always faced with questioners that either openly or privately, support the left. (Example A: In 2008: Jim Lehrer,Tom Brokaw and  Bob Schieffer were moderators of the three Presidential Debates and Gwen Iffil was the moderator for the vice-presidential debate. Enough said.)

I say it is time for Republicans to start insisting that openly conservative moderators always be part of any debate.  Let’s drop the pretense that the moderator is “neutral” and when the League of Women voters give us a “Gwen Iffil” as a moderator, then Republicans insist on a “Charles Krauthammer” to join her as a co-moderator.

We have also turned TV Debates into a “Political Fetish”.  They are no longer truly debates, but highly scripted Kabuki theater where makeup is as important as words.  I prefer my Candidates to go from town to town and hold Townhalls, taking questions from the audience (i.e, Real People) and letting the local media televise it.  I honestly feel ordinary people usually ask the questions that make the most sense.  The MSM plays “Gotch ya” all the time in order to increase ratings or sell papers.  To hell with them.

Candidates can also use the web to put their vision into words and, if they are so inclined, discuss the subject matter at hand in depth.  The danger of this is the Press (once again for ratings and/or sales), will take in-depth position papers (especially if it is a paper from a conservative) and try to spin them to stir up public anger or to deliberately misinform the public. That is why the MSM is dying on the vine.  They have lost the trust of the public and it is reflected in their ratings and sales.

As you can tell, I am not a fan of our nation’s press. It is no longer an honest broker of public debate and we Republicans should be much more aggressive in calling them out on their bias.  For example: Why didn’t they raise the questions I am raising about “The Children’s Movement of Florida” and the way they announced this debate before Rick Scott agreed to it?

So my advice to Rick Scott and the RPOF is this.  Insist that half the debates are in the format you most favor and insist that both sides of the political spectrum are represented if moderators are used in any of the debates. If not, tell them to go to Hell. Then get Rick Scott out there on the stump and have him take questions from the people who pay the bills, the Taxpayers of Florida.