I will be addressing two topics regarding the race for CD2 in this article.
Topic one: On Tuesday the GOP candidate running for Louisiana’s 2nd Congressional District learned that WDSU was hosting a televised debate to which he was not invited. WDSU instead extended invitations to three of his democrat running mates: Troy Carter, Karen Carter- Peterson, and Gary Chambers. One significant name missing from that list is Claston Bernard. Bernard, 41, is a young dynamic black conservative leader who may well be kryptonite to the democrats he opposes. He is a LSU graduate, a decathlon track star, Olympian, author of the book Outcast: No Room at the Table for Conservative Blacks in Black America, and most importantly a husband and a father who also happens to be the republican backed candidate for CD2.
Topic two: In an interesting turn of events, that I will address more later in this article, I have a credible source who tells me that the decisions on which candidates were allowed to participate in Wednesday night’s congressional debate were handed down directly from New York, which would not only be deeply disturbing but would also seem to point to some very uncomfortable answers to the questions that have subsequently arisen.
On to the first topic:
After hearing that WDSU was hosting a televised debate which he was not invited to Claston went to WDSU’s headquarters to find out if the decision was made in err (watch the video of him at WDSU here). He asked to speak to someone regarding the debate they were hosting. Claston states on his video, while standing outside of their building that he was informed (through their intercom system, as they never allowed him inside) when he inquired, that they were unaware of any debate scheduled or happening that day or the next (Wednesday). However, I was informed that their “ZOOM” style debate was filmed that same day – Tuesday – to be aired on Wednesday.
I spoke with Heather Sellers from the Bernard campaign; she told me she reached out to WDSU’s News Director as well as the General Manager to find out why the republican candidate for CD2 was not invited to the debate. No one returned her call.
I called WDSU twice.
The first time I called was last night after seeing that Claston was not in the debate. Their answer was a prepared statement saying they chose candidates who met their requirements. When I asked what those requirements were, the woman responded, “I do not know”.
The second time I called was this morning. I believed that if I called during office hours I would be able to speak to someone other than a receptionist with a script who could help me understand their decision. I left my name and number informing them I was writing an article and felt the people should know why WDSU excluded Claston from their debate. As with Mrs. Sellers they have not returned my call either.
WDSU’s inability to explain how the participants were chosen uncovers a unique problem. Similar to the movie ‘Working Girl’ what should have been an easy explanation is what exposes the villain; being unable to explain how the process evolved, when asked, points to a much more nefarious possibility. Not only were they unable to answer, they did not even attempt to reach out to either Mrs. Sellers or myself to explain the blatant favoritism shown to the Democrat candidates in this race.
Here are just two of WDSU’s shifting answers for why they excluded Claston:
- First they were told it was based on the candidate’s financial contributions. However, FEC filings show Claston is in third place in that regard and would have qualified for the debate, had that been the actual criteria.
- The second was after questions arose regarding their first reason. WDSU posted Tuesday evening that it was “Based on established criteria including recent polling data, the top three candidates were invited to join in the debate… With 15 candidates on the ballot, a poll conducted during early voting by Edgewater Research… narrowed down the field… Troy Carter leading with 35%… Karen Carter-Peterson… 24% and Gary Chambers held 11%. The other 12 candidates combined for 16%, while 15% of those polled were still undecided.” * Important to note that this poll listed three of the 15 candidates names to choose from the final option was “someone else”- according to Jim Ellis of Ellisinsight.com that leaves 31% of the vote as unaccounted for. Which suggests poor polling practices.
Now to address the second topic:
Sadly the two topics appear to merge after WDSU did not have a readily available answer as to how the debate participants were chosen but if we factor in my source stating that the choices were made in New York it becomes much clearer. Remember Pelosi has a very slim majority in the house. She is even fighting to overturn the election of Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks (R-Iowa). And, when taking in the 5 vacant house seats Pelosi’s majority could be as narrow as three.
WDSU/NBC made decisions limiting the debate field which when viewed inline with the 2020 Presidential election paint a fairly clear picture of corruption both in our local and national newsrooms across the country. The picture reveals a news media that not only believes it can successfully choose who represents us in “our” elected government but a news media who actually does choose who those in power will be.
Ask yourself these very important questions dear reader:
- Who is it that deciding who you can vote for?
- What right do they have to make that choice for you?
- What are they getting out of it?
If it is not already clear, the news is no longer a neutral platform to show us and give exposure to political candidates, but instead one that deceptively hides that they pick them for us.