Courtesy C-SPAN
When Professor Derek Malone-France took the stage Tuesday night, he was joined by two polarizing political figures. Howard Dean, former governor and chairman of the Democratic National Committee, and Newt Gingrich, former speaker of the United States House, sparred for about an hour during a debate that spanned a variety of hot-button issues. From a heated back-and-forth regarding immigration to some sharp questions on the issue of gay marriage, the duo kept the event calm, respectful and interesting. Malone-France sat between the two Washington veterans, moderating the debate and digging into each candidate, challenging them on their positions and delivering questions that begged intriguing responses. In correspondence with the GW Patriot, Malone-France graciously took some time to answer a few questions about the debate.
How were you selected to host this event?
Jake Wolf, the President of the College Republicans, is a former student of mine and he asked me to do it. I have moderated CD/CR student debates each of the last five years. I’m very proud to have developed a reputation for being fair to all political perspectives in my classes, and that’s carried over in a nice way in this ongoing relationship I’ve had with these two organizations.
Why were you interested in hosting this event?
It’s very rewarding to work with students on an event like this and see their passion and energy and excitement. Among people of my generation and older, it’s popular to talk about this generation of students as being very detached and apathetic, but I certainly don’t see that among GW students. One reason GW is a great place to be a professor is that we have students who care deeply about the sorts of issues discussed in this debate and, on top of that, they are engaged and hardworking enough to put an event like this together.
How did you select the questions you posed?
The student organizers gave me the list of general topics and made it clear that they wanted a “provocative” exchange. They also gave me some reading materials to give me a sense of their particular interests in the topics. My goal was to ask very substantive questions that also were a bit discomforting, to push against the boundaries of the very tame way in which moderators usually question political leaders in this country.
What was your favorite moment of the debate?
I thought there was a very nice moment in the back-and-forth over immigration where both debaters paused amidst a fairly heated exchange to tip their hats to one another on some issues of common ground, and then they went right back to going after each other. It perfectly symbolized the spirit of this event, and the way that the CDs and CRs worked together on it. One thing that has really struck me in my time at GW is how many of my most fiercely conservative students and my most fiercely liberal students are actually friends with each other. They argue—and when they do, they pull no punches—but they do so without ever losing their spirit of goodwill toward one another. That’s not true on all college campuses, and it’s a huge benefit to the GW community, because it makes things like this debate possible.
Who do you think “won” the debate? Who do you think “won” the crowd?
No good debate has a clear winner. That’s no fun. What’s fun is a debate like this one, where both of them performed well and scored points and engaged the crowd. I was very impressed with both of them.
How did you enjoy the debate overall?
It was definitely one of the highlights of my time so far at GW. It was exciting to be a part of such an event and deeply gratifying to see the students get to have the experience of it. I am tremendously proud of the student organizers. Jake Wolf of the College Republicans and Josh Altman of the College Democrats and all of the supporting staffs deserve a huge pat on the back for pulling this off. I think it is emblematic of so much that is great about GW students and the GW experience.
Derek Malone-France is the Interim Executive Director of the University Writing Program and Director of Writing in the Disciplines at the George Washington University. In 2008, he was awarded the Bender Prize for exceptional undergraduate teaching. He lives in the District with his wife, Katherine.
Looks like all those moderator pictures came in handy.
“My goal was to ask very substantive questions that also were a bit discomforting, to push against the boundaries of the very tame way in which moderators usually question political leaders in this country”
What this left-leaning academic parasite neglected to include:”… discomforting[to Gingrich], to push against the boundaries [of even handedness]…” At one point, Gingrich had to visibly maintain his composure, the question(s) directed at him were so obviously biased.
I think it’s quite appropriate that the moderator’s last name ends in ‘France’.
Bottom line: Dean = political rates (one exception: when he ID’d the core flaw with health care in this country – the Fee Based Medical System – I’ll bet he hears about that!); Gingrich = Verifiable facts!