Markey’s debate proposal is rejected by Lynch

[Mass]

(because, as we all known, what is better than general debates where you do not have to state your positions beyond a talking point. Obviously, the reason why wonk Ed Markey proposed issues debate in the first place, who could blame him)

http://www.boston.com/politicalintelligence/2013/02/15/markey-proposes-debate-plan-which-quickly-rejected-lynch/9nWK678R7c4GsIW7ttmHDK/story.html

Representative Edward J. Markey on Friday proposed holding two wide-ranging debates and four issue-specific debates with his Democratic Senate rival, Representative Stephen F. Lynch.

But Lynch’s campaign immediately rejected the offer, saying there should be at least four wide-ranging debates. In addition, Lynch’s camp complained that some of the advocacy groups Markey wants to host the issue-specific debates have been supportive of Markey’s bid for Senate.

...

His schedule calls for one wide-ranging debate each in Springfield and Boston, sponsored by independent news organizations, and four issue-focused debates sponsored by news organizations and advocacy groups, to be held around the state. The topics, he said, could include education, jobs and the economy, public safety and national security, and “equal opportunity.”
...
Lynch’s spokesman, Conor Yunits, quickly rejected the proposal, saying it was “not enough.” He said there should be at least four wide-ranging debates and the issue debates should not be sponsored by advocacy groups.

Another question is probably how they intend to hold more than 6 debates in 2 months and 1/2. I know the House is not particularly a place where people have to work hard, but dont these two people have a day job, plus the need to campaign throughout the state and raise money? I like debates, but the truth is that, after four debates without topic between Brown and Warren, I was really tired to hear the same thing again and again and very little that would be interesting on issues.