Clinton Offers a Different Debate Challenge

After the last debate in which ABC News, George Stephanopoulos, and Charles Gibson proved once and for all that there was no more need to have any more debates between Clinton and Obama, as it was just a colossal rehashing of the dirt we already knew about them. What I want to see most is this race come to an end, one way or another. The last thing I wanted to see was another debate between these two. That is until now.

Clinton has been chomping at the bit for another debate ever since the ABC News debacle in Pennsylvania, which Obama has been less than receptive too because he claims the debates “focus too much on political trivia and too little on real issues.” A statement we probably all agree on, too much fluff and not enough substance. Clinton has proposed a debate with no moderator involved, a la “Lincoln-Douglas” style.

“Just the two of us, going for 90 minutes, asking and answering questions, we’ll set whatever rules seem fair.”

The more open style of debating where each side presents an argument gets its name from the famed debates that took place during the 1858 U.S. Senate race in Illinois between Republican Abraham Lincoln and Democrat Stephen Douglas.

No moderator, their own questions, and a pre-agreed upon set of rules. Barrack of course has no choice but to pick up the gauntlet thrown down by Hillary and accept the challenge. Hillary is a strong debater that’s a fact, but she’s also got quite a few weak spots in her armor as well. Barrack is no slouch either when it comes to arguing his point. This debate, depending on the “pre-agreed” upon rules is just what the doctor ordered to put an end to the Senator’s bickering and finger pointing.

Of course the rules will need to be clear and concise, no gray areas. The questions need to be focused on the issues, and only the issues. No Rev. Wright questions, no “with my extensive experience” segues. Only questions pertaining to present issues relevant to us, the people need to be asked, all others should be forbidden.

Restoring the Bill of Rights, and other Constitutional issues, the war in Iraq, the economy, unemployment, healthcare, education, foreign policy, international trade, oil dependency issues, the rising costs of living, etc etc. Anything and everything having to do with fixing what needs to be fixed in this country is fair game to be asked. And the answers should be limited to how he or she feels they could be fixed.

This debate needs to be focused on what the candidates are going to do to get this country back on her feet, not the reasons it got to where its at now. Both candidates claim they will bring change to Washington, and get the country back on the right path. Well, here’s their opportunity to prove it. If they can show that they are capable of being professional, civil and above all respectful of each other and stick to the issues at hand, there might be hope after all for the Democratic party to enter the general election pretty much in tact.

Technorati Tags: , , ,

Sphere: Related Content

Bookmark this article!

DiggDel.icio.usRedditStumbleUponFurlma.gnoliaNewsvinePropellerFark

BumpZeeSpurlSlashDotGoogleYahooBlogLinesWindows LiveTechnorati

Discussion Area - Leave a Comment