Ben Carson appeared on ABC's This Week and explained the problems he has with the debate format as it is. He's not a man who has ever been involved in politics so he finds them distasteful in many ways including being asked questions about past behavior.
CARSON: Well I think we should have moderators who are interested in disseminating the information about the candidates, as opposed to, you know, 'gotcha' 'you did this' and 'defend yourself on that.' you know, what is very important right now, we have so many incredible problems that are facing us as a nation, you know, we're being divided, we're fiscally irresponsible which is creating an unstable economic foundation, you know we're not taking an appropriate place in the world in terms of leadership.
I see. The moderators should be used as propaganda tools for each candidate so they can better clearly articulate the plans of each candidate. Why should Dr. Carson defend promoting a phony supplemental cure-all just because he wanted to make a little cash? Who cares if it never cured cancer. Free markets, baby!
Why should a Senator be asked to explain why they voted a certain way (Iraq war) or why a governor implemented a certain health plan in their state, who cares, right? Moderators are there to help each candidate and not to inquire.
CARSON: Well we have to ask ourselves, what is the purpose of a debate? And the real purpose is to allow the voters to have an opportunity to see what's behind each of the candidates. What do they actually think about the various policies that are affecting the lives of everyday Americans? If you make that the goal that will help you define how a debate should go and some of the things that we've seen recently, that certainly was not the goal.
Dr. Carson is a debate expert and really knows the purpose of a debate. His stood up for twenty hours doing surgeries so he knows best. In Carson's world, the candidates should gather round, eat cheese and crackers, talk a little policy with Sean Hannity, let the voters get to know them. Explain their thoughts without having to bother about facts and other nonsensical things.
↓ Story continues below ↓
RADDATZ: So what would you like changed specifically, the number of participants? The moderators?
CARSON: Well I would like to see us be able to have a substantial opening statement, at least a minute, a substantial closing statement, at least a minute, and I would like to see tighter guidelines in terms of people when they respond to questions, you know some people pretty much ignore the time constraints, while others are very careful to stay within them and I think that creates inequality. So, we need to tighten it up a little bit and do it more like a professional type of debate.
With ten candidates at their podiums, Carson wants at least twenty minutes dedicated to opening and closing statements so we're back to three hours again. The less amount of time to actually debate is preferred by the candidate doctor.
Carson scored well on the first Fox News debate with his closing statement so he's looking to recreate that juice. He also wants the debates to be authoritative little exercises and he's mad at the other candidates for going over their time and interrupting.
The smugness in which he answered Martha's questions was unsettling. I think he really believes he's above the primary process and shouldn't be subjected to it at all.
Raddatz came back to Carson's issues with moderators and he said that debates are no place for candidates to be challenged.
RADDATZ: Dr. Carson, you talk about gotcha questions, but shouldn't the candidates be challenged? Don't you want to hear what they have to say and have that challenged by a free press?
CARSON: There's a place and time for that, but as far as I'm concerned, these debates are to highlight the differences in philosophy between the candidates-- particularly when you have as many candidates as we have now. The people have to be able to find out what is the thing that distinguishes each one of us. You know, you can spend forever combing back through somebody's history saying '1942 didn't you say...' come on give me a break, we need to mature in the way that we do these debates if they're going to be useful to the American people.
Where are candidates supposed to be challenged? Oh, right. On The Glenn beck Show.
This man is unhinged.
It would have been nice for Raddatz to question Dr. Carson on his Mannatech connection and tell him why that's important to the voters, especially after his business manager admitted he negotiated a contract with the company when Carson flat out denied having one during the CNBC debate.