The Issue: CNN anchor Candy Crowley’s controversial performance as debate moderator.
***
What is it that’s got so many fair-minded people upset about Candy Crowley’s performance as moderator during the debate (“Candy’s Not Dandy,” Editorial, Oct. 18)?
She gave President Obama almost 9 percent more time, cut Mitt Romney off 28 times and Obama only nine times, picked the questions — some of which were perfect for the president to answer — and of course bailed him out when he got in trouble.
It sounds to me like she was just doing her job. Gary Cella
Cos Cob, Conn.
Crowley made Michelle Obama cheer, despite rules that governed everyone else in the auditorium, when she intervened and said Romney was wrong, which was not her job.
Crowley should be suspended for three months for making her company look suspect to the millions of people who were watching. Crowley is a day late and a dollar short in walking back her statement.
She’s not an ethical journalist, nor are her bosses if they permit her to get away with this journalistic disgrace.
Nancy Boyman
Boca Raton, Fla.
The good news for Crowley, now that her moderator career is in shambles, is that she can replace UN Ambassador Susan Rice and use her skills running interference for Obama on the world stage, as well.
Steve Gidumal
Orlando, Fla.
Not only was Crowley wrong to intervene, she was wrong in her facts.
Except for those afflicted with lawyer-logic, everybody can understand that Obama saying the words “acts of terror” does not mean he identified that specific act as terrorism.
He reiterated this days later on “The View” and “The Late Show with David Letterman,” those two bastions of hardball political journalism that Obama regularly seeks out.
The man is an empty suit with empty policies hidden behind voluminous rhetoric.
Ray Rombone Jr.
Douglaston
With the oversupply of pro-Democratic debate moderators and the absence of pro-Republicans, could we someday hope for a moderator who’s actually impartial?
If not, then our future debates should have two moderators, one favoring each side.
Strident Crowley cut Romney off repeatedly, let Obama babble endlessly and even entered the debate on his behalf. Why should Republicans tolerate this blatant prejudice? Gerry Muir
Mamaroneck
Crowley covered up Obama’s lie regarding what was said in the Rose Garden. I, along with millions of Americans, heard what he said.
Crowley should not have interjected during the debate by going along with the lie. She obviously supports the present administration and has lost all credibility.
Where was any professionalism and fairness?
Marie Marsala
Smithtown
If it isn’t obvious now that all the debate moderators are somewhat partial to the Obama-Biden ticket, then I feel sorry for you.
Crowley somehow knew the exact text of the White House Rose Garden statements, and her interpretation was wrong. She never asked Obama to answer the question of who denied Ambassador Chris Stevens beefed-up security.
It took almost two weeks for Obama to give up the movie theory.
That was long after Libyan President Mohamed Megariaf said it was an organized attack, which makes me trust him more than Obama.
Joseph DuPont
Towanda, Pa.
Getting assistance from Crowley was Obama’s only hope for a lifeline.
After Obama’s performance without his TelePrompter after that embarrassing first debate, Democrats were probably happy that a major liberal commentator was in place. It was obvious Crowley was ready to defend Obama on Libya.
Romney won on substance and held his own, without having a Fox commentator like Megyn Kelly moderating.
Misty Sawyer
Manhattan