I didn’t watch the recent Democrat debate. After a long day, I just couldn’t deal with Obama’s bromides and Clinton’s whoppers. There has, however, been so much bitching and whining from the Left about the event that I now regret my lack of intestinal fortitude. It must have been a pretty good show.
The outrage is ostensibly about the lack of professionalism shown by Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos. They asked question after question that showed how unserious they were. Ed Morrissey links to a piece by John Harris and Jim VandeHei that neatly captures the real cause of all the Lefty dudgeon:
In fact, the balance of political questions (15) to policy questions (13) was more substantive than other debates this year that prompted no deluge of protests. The difference is that this time there were more hard questions for Obama than for Clinton.
In other words, Gibson and Stephanopoulos dispensed with the softball questions, and made Obama look like the lightweight he is. Flopping Aces links to a piece by Peter Wehner that suggests what the reaction would have been if the candidate on the hot seat had been a Republican:
Not only would there be a near-universal consensus that those questions should be asked; there would be a moral urgency in pressing for answers. We would, I predict, be seeing an unprecedented media ‘feeding frenzy.’
True enough. And it’s high time that someone pressed Obama a little harder. His own whiney response to the debate questions suggests that he isn’t ready for prime time. If he can’t handle Charles Gibson, how’s he going to handle Vladimir Putin?
Post a Comment