I didn’t feel good enough last night to watch the whole debate. I did record it, but it seems unlikely I will watch the whole thing. Right off the bat, I was disappointed in Williams and Russert, the co-moderaters. All day long, and I mean ALL DAY LONG, every talking head MSNBC has on their roster chimed in on what Obama and Edwards had to do to “topple” Hillary. The emphasis of the coverage was about handicapping, and indeed critiquing the performances of the participants, before the damn thing even got under way.
Ok, there is an audience for this kind of crap, I’ll admit. So, while I hate the practice, I understand that political junkies want this. But what I watched last night pissed me off, because these two guys carry at least a whiff of credibility around with them. Like Isaid, all day long, there was much said about “what Obama must do.” So far, so good. However, there is a huge difference in opining on strategy, and initiating it on behalf of another candidate. If Obama had made the decision prior to the debate that he wanted to stay above the fray, that is his right. He may very well have decided that he would do his best to stick to the issues, and not comment on Hillary whatsoever. We’ll never know. The first two or three questions literally forced him into saying negative things about Mrs. Clinton. It was blatantly manipulative. Apparently, the Moderators wanted blood, particularly Hillary’s blood, and they made sure they got it.
For the record, she is not my choice in the Primary. If she is the nominee, though, I’ll vote, I’ll donate, I’ll volunteer.
Unrelated: There was a poll released yesterday that said 52% of Americans polled supported military action against Iran. The talking heads acted all surprised at the supposed “revelation. ”
Then I saw the question, as asked to those polled: It asked, “would you be supportive of a military strike against Iran?” That, like all polling questions, was so carefully crafted it bordered on brilliant. Seems straightforward, until you see the word ‘supportive.” People do not like to be “unsupportive” of our military, even when they think the mission is wrong. Change that question to: “Do you think we should strike Iran first, or exhaust every single diplomatic strategy available first?” and I think the numbers change dramatically.
If Abrams agrees to stay the hell away from MSNBC News Division, I’ll issue him a pardon and promise him safe passage out of the country. Oh, but he has to fire Tucker first.