The Presidential Debates: Rules Of Engagement

[Bob Hubbard]

The Presidential Debates: Rules Of Engagement

Author: Christopher Buckley Source: The New Yorker

Title: RULES OF ENGAGEMENT

"At no time during these debates shall either candidate move from their designated area behind their respective podiums." -- From the agreement worked out for the Presidential debates.

Paragraph Two: Dress

Candidates shall wear business attire. At no time during the debates shall either candidate remove any article of clothing, such as tie, belt, socks, suspenders, etc. Candidates shall not wear helmets, padding, girdles, prosthetic devices, or “elevator”-type shoes. Per above, candidates shall not remove shoes or throw same at each other during debate. Once a debate is concluded, candidates shall be permitted to toss articles of clothing, excepting underwear, into the audience for keepsake purposes.

Paragraph Six: Hand gestures.

Standard “American”-style gestures meant to convey honest bewilderment, doubt, etc., shall be permitted. Candidates shall not point rotating index fingers at their own temples to imply that opponent is mentally deranged. Candidates shall at no time insert fingers in their own throats to signify urge to vomit. Candidates shall under no circumstances insert fingers into opponent’s throat.

Original Thread: http://www.witchvox.com/wren/wn_detaila.html?id=11120
Full Article: http://www.newyorker.com/shouts/content/?041004sh_shouts

 

[michaeledward]

Paragraph Six: Hand gestures.

Standard “American”-style gestures meant to convey honest bewilderment, doubt, etc., shall be permitted.

That line had to be added by hizzonner.

 

[Mark Weiser]

candidates shall not remove shoes or throw same at each other during debate.

Darn and I thought it was going to be interesting!!

 

[Flatlander]

Who enforces these rules? If one candidate breaks the rules, what repercussions could they reasonably expect? Anyone?

 

[Spud]

Bester has a great link giving the history of the presidential commission on debates in his rigging the debates thread.

Absolutely amazing how the two major parties gave the boot to the independent League of Women Voters and then forged their own corporation to control the public debate process. They have eliminated actual debate, hamstrung the people asking questions, blocked the entry of qualified third party candidates (Perot II, Buchanon, Nader).

Disgusting.

http://www.pbs.org/now/transcript/transcript_debate.html

 

[Spud]

Who enforces these rules? If one candidate breaks the rules, what repercussions could they reasonably expect? Anyone?

Mutual Interest.

The debate commission is the Democrats and Republicans acting together to the exclusion of the press, public and third parties. They are joined at the hip with this turkey. Straying too far from the rules may cause the other party to side with an independent debate group for the next election.

 

[someguy]

Paragraph Forty-two: Language.
Candidates shall address each other in terms of mutual respect (“Mr. President,” “Senator,” etc.). Use of endearing modifiers (“my distinguished opponent,” “the honorable gentleman,” “Pookie,” “Diddums,” etc.) is permitted. The following terms are specifically forbidden and may not be used until after each debate is formally concluded: “girlie-man,” “draft dodger,” “drunk,” “ignoramus,” “Jesus freak,” “frog,” “bozo,” “wimp,” “toad,” “lickspittle,” “rat bastard,” “polluting bastard,” “lying bastard,” “demon spawn,” “archfiend,” or compound nouns ending in “-hole” or “-ucker.”
Oh oh oh so when will Kerry start calling Bush Pookie. That I would pay to watch.