So apparently last Wednesday’s Democratic debate on ABC was the worst debate in the entire history of debates. It was so bad, the audience booed the moderators when it was all over. I didn’t watch the debate live but I saw clips and read reactions online. “Disgusting”…” biggest sham”…”freak show”…”substance-less nonsense”…just a few descriptions i came across. Is it really that surprising though that mainstream media would duck from its responsibilities and offer up shallow, “substance-less” questions?
One popular political journalist, Andrew Sullivan, updated his blog every few minutes for the entire two hours of the debate in a sort of play-by-play. His final assessment depicts Obama as a tragic hero beaten down by the ruthless media machine:
It was a lifeless, exhausted, drained and dreary Obama we saw tonight. I’ve seen it before when he is tired, but this was his worst performance yet on national television. He seemed crushed and unable to react. This is big-time politics and he’s up against the Clinton wood-chipper. But there is no disguising the fact that he wilted, painfully.
Clinton has exposed herself in this campaign as one of the worst shells of a cynical pol in American politics. She doesn’t just return us to the Morris-Rove era, she represents a new height for it. If she somehow wins, it will be a triumph of the old politics in an age when that is exactly what this country cannot afford. But Obama has also shown a failure to be resilient in this grueling process. In some ways, I’m glad. No normal reasonable person subjected to the series of attacks on his integrity, faith, patriotism, decency and honesty would not wilt. And we need a normal reasonable person in the White House again. But this is still the arena we have. It is what it is. ABC News is what it is. The MSM knows no other way. Obama has to survive and even thrive under this assault if he is to win. He failed tonight in a big way.
*Sigh.
His periodic updates were actually a pretty entertaining read, especially his comments on Hillary. I posted some of his observations below. (fyi, “MSM” is short for mainstream media.) Enjoy =)
=======================================================
8.06 pm. Both opening statements total blather. But she looks a little more comfortable.
8.10 pm. That opening silence was priceless. But he seems exhausted. Since she has had her humanity surgically removed, she seems less so.
8.15 pm. Because she’s shameless, she’s doing better. The appropriation of small-town life as part of her autobiography was a particularly brilliant touch. She was much subtler than her ads have been, or than she has been when she isn’t looking at Obama…
8.27 pm. On Wright, again her shamelessness helps her. His affect is total exhaustion, alas, as if being pummeled with every Rovian tactic has beaten the life out of him. And he is being pummeled by the ABC hosts as well. One reason I like the guy is that he is still human; politics hasn’t killed his soul.
8.31 pm. What kind of question asks a candidate to determine another person’s patriotism? When that person served his country in Vietnam?
8.33 pm. So far, neither Gibson nor Stephanopoulos have asked a single policy
-related question. They seem utterly uninterested in foreign or domestic policy. After the past eight years, we have had half an hour with nothing but process questions. Gibson and Stephanopoulos are clearly part of the problem in this election and part of what has to be reformed.
8.40 pm. Now, it’s flag-pins! I’m just pointing out that we are now almost halfway through this debate and ABC News has not asked a single policy question. It’s pure Rove, sustained and hyped and sustained by Stephanopoulos and Gibson. It’s what they know; it’s easy; and it will generate ratings. It is not journalism.
8.44 pm. Ambers: “Even Clinton advisers can’t believe that ABC asked about wearing the flag on his lapel.”
I have to say I am actually shocked at the appallingly poor quality of the questions: the worst of the campaign so far. Pure MSM process bullshit. Again: it’s now halfway through and there has not been a single question on the economy, foreign policy, healthcare, terrorism, Iraq or any other actual policy issue in this campaign. How much longer can ABC News avoid the actual policy issues in this election?
8.53 pm. They’re actually asking a question about the war. Remember that?
8.55 pm. A reader writes:
This debate is beyond disgusting. The triviality of this whole production from the intro segment to the nature of questions is just gross. There’s no decency or dignity to any of this. “Clinton versus Obama.” Is this a sporting event?
9 pm. Clinton will disappoint her neoconservative supporters by such a strong, unequivocal commitment to withdrawal from Iraq. She is, of course, lying. But she does it so well. They both seem exhausted at this point. But she has the capacity to run on fumes. This is all she lives for. Obama seems off-balance and drained. All I’m learning from this debate so far is that both need a rest and that ABC News is utterly out of touch with their viewers.
9.11 pm. Check out the ABC News comments section. The viewers appear mad as hell at this pathetic shell-game. They should be. Money quote:
My pet snake would be a better moderator than the two dopes ABC has supposedly running this debate! After an hour, we get to a legitimate question??!!! HORRIBLE JOB ABC!!! Just plain HORRIBLE!!!!!
9.15 pm. The longest section on policy so far, in the age of terror, debt, and torture … is about the capital gains tax. And Gibson is clearly trying to get both of them to say something that can subsequently be turned into a gaffe or a GOP talking point. There have been almost no clear, substantive policy questions designed to elicit real information.
9.28 pm. A reader writes:
Has Obama’s message of a new vision of politics ever looked more attractive than after this display?
9.32 pm. No questions on the environment, none on terror, none on interrogation, none on torture, none on education, none on spending, none on healthcare, none on Iran … but four separate questions in the first hour about a lapel-pin, Bitter-gate, Wright-gate and Ayers. I’m all for keeping candidates on their toes. But this was ridiculous. And now we have affirmative action? Again, it’s not illegitimate as such – but the only reason it is asked is to try and trip these people up and make Gibson and Stephanopoulos look smart.
9.38 pm. A reader notes:
You understate how silly the constitutional snippets are. The first snippet, awarding the vice-presidency to the runner-up in electoral votes, was superseded by the Twelfth Amendment!
And Gibson made it the basis for a question if my memory serves!
9.44 pm. If you want to let ABC News know how you feel about this “debate”, here’s the link.
9.49 pm. The closers: Clinton went into rote mode. They both need a rest. Obama’s final words were great: against spin and PR and in favor of an honest conversation at a dire moment in history. It makes you realize that among the forces that have to be defeated if such a conversation is to take place will be the kind of “journalism” we have been forced to endure tonight.
9.51 pm. The big winner is John McCain. Then Clinton who seemed at least awake. Then Obama whose calm was nonetheless trumped by obvious exhaustion. Yes, the Clintons have shredded him. But that’s what they know how to do. It’s also what the GOP knows how to do. Obama has got to get used to this and find a way to withstand it and fight back without enabling the very cynicism it represents. That’s not easy, and we are discovering if he has it in him. Tonight he looked and felt depleted beyond measure. Which is when his supporters have to take the weight.
The loser was ABC News: one of the worst media performances I can remember – petty, shallow, process-obsessed, trivial where substantive, and utterly divorced from the actual issues that Americans want to talk about. At the end of the debate, it appeared that the crowd was actually heckling Gibson. “The crowd is turning on me!” complained Gibson. He has no idea. But he will soon enough.
