Did Gibson try to bias Friday's 'debate' against Kerry?

I counted three HUGE ways in which Charles Gibson apparently used his discretion as moderator to try to help Stupid and hurt John Kerry:

First, he let Stupid shout him down as he tried to ask a followup question. He let Stupid give his standard little diatribe about how Kerry was slighting Britain, Italy and Poland by pointing out Stupids's Iraq coalition is a sham. He could have said, "Sit down, Mr. President! I'M in charge here, not you!" Can you imagine Brokaw, Jennings, or any REAL news professional just rolling over for Stupid?

Second, Gibson chose as the first question of the night a direct continuation of the 'Kerry flip-flop' theme the RNC and Bush/Cheney have spent millions of dollars to promote. Yet there was no similar picking up of any of the main themes of Kerry/Edwards political ads. Gibson tried to put Kerry on the defensive right out of the gate, and cued Stupid to open with part of his well-rehearsed stump speech rather than forcing Stupid to try to think.

Third, Gibson allowed a questioner to force Kerry to make a 'tax pledge'. Yet there was no forcing of Stupid to pledge to do something about the deficit, to restore the Social Securty cash flow he's already used up, or to do anything in particular.

IMO Kerry STILL won the debate, but it was more of an uphill battle than it would have been with an MPARTIAL moderator.

What do you think?

I don't watch television, but I believe all the people here who say Gibson is a right-winger. However, I didn't see him trying to especially help Bush out. I think that he just didn't have enough backbone to put Bush in his place during the interrupting outburst, but I don't think his acquiesence was designed to hurt Kerry. After all, it made the idiot look like the spoiled brat that he is.

And don't worry about the tax pledge. In order for Kerry to consider having to break it, the Republican-controlled House and Senate would have to pass a bill to raise taxes, and this bill would need to raise taxes on those earning < 200K. Not freaking likely.

in the 3rd debate Bob Schieffer will certainly help Kerry
since Bob leans towards liberal ideas from way back when.

I have heard that he leans pretty far right.

Thanks for the insight.

I particularly liked the last question regarding the naming of 3 mistakes. I thought that was a significant and important question.

I do think he was weak on letting * run over him, but I think that worked against the shrub more than Gibson winning that battle.

I think Gibson was fair and I think Kerry won a fair debate.

3 mistakes. No, I think all in all Gibson TRIED to be fair. A zinger for the first question..a zinger for the last question. That is 'fair and balanced'...bush* made himself look like he was out of control, and you cannot tell the pResident of the usofa that I am in charge tonight..no...

And I agree Kerry DID win the debate!!!

about Gibson. He definitely skewed the Debate in The Village Idiot's favor. The Idiot was handed some softball questions and Kerry was forced to answer quesions from nutbag fundies and the like.
In the end yes, I do think JK won the debate. However, it's not what I think it's what the so called "undecideds" think. How anyone can be undecided about the choice between Kerry and The Village Idiot is beyond me. The Idiot is a straw man, all form and no function. A tool to be used by his Corporate and Fundie Masters.

which was a pretty extreme and over the top question for Kerry . . . I don't believe Bush got a similar OTT question.

The guy who asked that question obviously hated Bush. He just glared at him the whole time he answered.

That put Bush on the spot, and the person asking the question obviously hated the PATRIOT Act.

for Kerry--not attacks. That first question gave him an opportunity to take on the flip-flop charge head on and put it permanently to rest. It is all in the attitude. For a good debater like Kerry--I think any question is an opportunity to show his stuff--and a question that puts him on the spot really gives him an opportunity to rise to the occasion.

PLEDGE to do or not to do something specific. Kerry had no OPPORTUNITY except to choose to comply or not to comply with a demand for a 'no middle class tax increase' promise. Either he had to risk a 'Read my lips' moment a la Daddy Bush, or he had to risk a 'tell you the truth' moment a la Hubert Humphrey. Since Daddy Bush won and Hubert Humphrey lost, Kerry was forced to follow Daddy Bush's lead. But why should Gibson and some Missouri chowderhead be allowed to limit future budget flexibility by President Kerry? That's real arrogance and bias on Gibson's part.

Kerry is building his case against bush and the jury is the American people. the next debate is his summation on the state of the united states and it`s economy. bush` will have to defend his economic stewardship of the american economy.kerry will demand no excuses from bush.

also, the rules should have been enforced. Intentional bias? Hard to say - but easty to say Mr. Gibson sucked as a moderator.

The first one about John Kerry being wishy washy came right out of the white house; the one about him choosing a lawyer as his running mate was also a Karl Rove special, IMHO. Also, why was John Kerry asked what he planned to do in Iraq (exit strategy, etc.,) and Bush-boy was not. He's the one that got us there and doesn't know how to get us out. He should have had to answer that question. He's the president (Hand picked at that.) The good part is, even if Bush is being favored (which he probably is), Kerry answers the questions with ease and with professionalism.

a major Republican home-stretch ad campaign that starts this week. Republicans are spending MILLIONS to put commercials on the air that somehow blame John Edwards for rising healthcare costs. Gibson HAD to have known that this Republican ad campaign is imminent. I wonder whether Gibson HIMSELF even REPORTED the story of the impending ad campaign while he was preparing for the debate.

That means at least TWENTY PERCENT of Gibson's questions for Kerry were tied DIRECTLY into multi-millon-dollar Republican attack ad campaigns with little or no foundation in fact. 'Flip-flop' and 'trial lawyer' are almost 100 percent pure campaign advertising ephemera, with no real-world referents.

i'm sure kerry was expecting it also. after gibson went after that medal thing a few months ago , Kerry's mic was still on and he was overheard saying something like "abc must be on the RNC payroll".

the question to Shrub to state any of his mistakes was sweet!
His answer that he hired the wrong people said a lot too. He got rid of everyone who disagreed with him. Gibson did not follow up. I think Gibson was embarrassed Friday night.

I thought Gibson did a pretty good job. Bush was asked alot of tough questions too, so I didn't detect any obvious bias.