I caught most of the Democrat’s debate tonight on CNN. A lot of people are saying that the sparks really flew during this one, but I’m just not seeing it. True, the three did throw a lot of sparks at each other, but the overwhelming majority of these barbs were rooted in trivial subjects. The shallowness of the debate was pathetic.
What did Obama do during his stint as a state legislator? Why did he vote present so often instead of taking a stand? At least five minutes seemed to be devoted to this, first brought up by Hillary and then rammed home by the talking haircut, yet neither of them took it to the level that would’ve made it relevant to this campaign. Why are Democrats seriously considering a man who is serving his first term in Congress as the leader of the free world?
The obvious answer as to why this hasn’t come up is because the only other alternatives to Obama in the Democratic party can’t very well tout their long histories of public service. Repeatedly during the debate Hillary touted almost mythical memories of the roaring ’90s, yet she wasn’t President at the time, nor did she contribute in any substantive way to public policy at the time. She was only elected to the senate in 2000, riding the coattails of her husband.
And even though her experience is marginally greater than Obama, what legislative wonders can she tout? Nothing, beyond her rip-roaping support for authorizing the Iraq war. So we’re treated to a half-hour of psychoanalyzing what Mr. Obama might’ve been thinking while he walked many political tightropes in Illinois. It’s just a waste of time.
As for Edwards, this man’s judgment is so lapse he retired from the Senate to hitch his wagon to John Kerry’s Presidential bid, something that Kerry himself wasn’t willing to risk! His only hope at relevance is to continue to siphon off his distant third place and then use it as leverage at a split Democratic convention.
The most often used term at the debate was the phrase ‘I have respect for…’, which is apparently Democrat-talk for ‘hold on, I’m going to throw a convoluted political punch at you, but it’s nothing personal!’
As for CNN, I have to say that I was impressed with a single question that was asked. CNN framed a question on Iraq so as to make it clear that undeniable military and political progress was being made, asking the candidates if they would be willing to stay in Iraq to win it. What was the response? A total denial of any real progress from all three candidates, despite the question flatly asserting such, and more complaints about that evil George Bush. I have to wonder if liberal voters will still respond as warmly to invocations of the Dubya by the time the general election rolls around.
It’s surely possible, since we’re still hearing about the 2000 election, but the Dubya dodge is getting worn out fast. They’ll have to find something nice and juicy to hang around the next Republican nominees neck to keep those hate-fires burning. At least it will be interesting to see what they make up come up with.
So, what did the African-American voters get last night? A lot of empty promises, and three candidates sure to count on the black populations continued blind allegiance to the Democratic party. Oh, and Obama isn’t sure whether or not Bill is ‘a brother’.
More on the debate: Hot Air | Michelle Malkin | Gateway Pundit | Another Michelle, funny screencaps | Vodkapundit |
