Re "A sharper tone in Round 2," Oct. 17
Is this the kind of president America is looking for? The most obnoxious, rude, insincere, self-serving egotist available? The candidate with the fastest draw, who can shoot first and worry about the consequences later?
These hyped-up media shows tell us almost nothing about a candidate or his policies because the candidates never say what they really think or believe; they say only what they hope will get them votes. They are not even talking to mainstream America; they are talking to a tiny group of so-called undecided voters in a few battleground states. The rest of us don't matter.
The presidential "debates" are a shame and a disgrace.
Missing from the debate was the 1.5-billion-ton elephant in the room. That's the amount of carbon dioxide Americans spewed into the atmosphere in 2010.
This year has been one of record heat, fires and drought. The states are crying out for relief from these unnatural natural disasters. We all know, whether we choose to admit it, that fossil fuels are dirty and dangerous and a real threat to our future. But we don't want to talk about it, even in our presidential debates.
We have a sick planet overdosing on carbon dioxide, and the solution by both parties is to burn more fossil fuels. It's time to put sane energy policies on the table, not this delusional denial of our obsolete energy policies.
I can describe Tuesday's presidential debate in one word: unseemly. Unseemly on the part of the moderator, unseemly on the part of Mitt Romney and, saddest of all for me to say, unseemly on the part of President Obama.
How I wish that the tenor of these debates, and the campaigns in general, would aspire to a higher plane of discourse.
Severe conservative presidential nominee Mitt Romney, as governor of Massachusetts, saw that women were underrepresented in government and took affirmative action to correct the injustice. Romney gave further evidence that affirmative action is needed and works.
Re "A fine example of democracy in action," Critic's Notebook, Oct. 17
What moderator Candy Crowley did to Romney, "fact-checking" him in the middle of the debate, was an egregious violation of a debate moderator's supposedly neutral role. Her intervention resulted in a shout-out from the president, unacceptable applause from the audience and adulation from The Times' television critic, Mary McNamara.
Crowley's behavior was analogous to a referee helping shove the quarterback into the end zone. Yet rather than fault Crowley, who has since acknowledged that Romney was largely correct, McNamara hails the referee. So much for an impartial media.
Letters: L.A.'s cleaner, regulated air
Letters: Deadly weapons, made in USA
Letters: What to do about crowded colleges