ABC News Debate Reveals the New Bill Clinton: Barack Obama

I spent much of last night watching American Idol and old TiVo-ed shows, so I didn't see the big Democratic debate on ABC News -- the 21st collision between these two candidates on TV.

(Much of America wasn't as disinterested as I; ABC News reports that 10.7-million people watched the debate, making it the most-watched debate of the 2008 presidential cycle).

And, if the news reports are to be believed, the first 50 minutes or so were spent quizzing Obama on a long litany of controversies that don't have much to do with the issues of the day, from Rev. Wright and his loose connection to a former member of the Weather Underground to the fact that he doesn't wear a flag pin on his lapel. So what headlines have dominated coverage of the event?

Hillary Clinton's admission that she does indeed think that Obama can win the presidency if he is the nominee.

It sounds like last night was a perfect storm of conditions converging to ensure an irrelevant debate. These candidates have already tangled publicly on policy issues for months (and on many issues, their positions aren't that different); they just appeared separately as a public forum on faith issues Sunday, we haven't had a primary in weeks, so there are no fresh electoral results to parse and the resulting lack of real campaign news has flooded the news cycle with irrelevance.

But through all that, the top headline on many post debate stories either criticized ABC News for focusing on such trivialities or played up Clinton's admission that she thinks he can win the general election, even as she presumably tells superdelegates in private that he cannot.

Despite some critics claim that Obama survives challenges because of racism charges, there seems to be something else going on. I hope its that people are parsing the BS on their own, with little help from the media.

And if that isn't an example of the kind of Teflon politics that Bill Clinton seemed to perfect during his years in politics, I'm not sure what is.

Check out the spin room reaction to the debate:

Comments

[Eric Deggans]

Dude, this is an OPINION blog, where i have already stated that I support Barack Obama.

So if you don't want to read my opinion, why are you coming to this blog?

[rick]

Every one of the journalists at the SPT, save Bill Maxwell, needs to read "Practicing History" by Barbara Tuchman. You all write to persuade, which is allowable in the opinion section, but not the news. The news is history and should be respected. I think it is disgusting the way the Times has manipulated and shaped the news to fit their leftist agenda. From someone who used to praise the SPT for their independent ownership structure, I now say you are no better than the rest of the corporate owned agenda-laden rags. Do you think we don't know that you are shaping every story to get your chosen candidate elected? Do you think we are stupid? Sadly, I know the answer would be yes.

[Jim Johnson]

Sully, the problem with having Obama and Clinton talk about issues is that they agree on almost every point. They have shades of grey where they differ, but they can not really debate substantive issues.

So they have to debate other facets of being president: character, judgment, personal philosophies, etc. On these subjects, differences can be brought to light for the voters to use in deciding which candidate to nominate.

In the fall, one we have a Democratic and Republican nominee, we can have more meaningful debates about the issues facing the country.

Would you really want to listed to Obama and/or Clinton say a lot of "Me too." because they agree with each other on the issues you describe?

[Sully]

I am appalled with the current state of our news media. With the creation of the First Amendment, many viewed the Press as a “fourth branch” in our governmental system of checks and balances. The Press is supposed to be our advocate, our eyes, our ears and most importantly our voice. They are granted additional freedoms with the First Amendment to protect society by informing and investigating the actions of leadership.

However this story clearly illustrates that the Press is not concerned with the watchdog role and the part it can play in checks and balances. The only checks the media is concerned with are the ones they can cash.

I do not care if our next president is religious, hunts, wears a lapel pin, spoke with someone that does not have patriotic views, or evaded sniper fire 12 years ago.

What I am concerned with and I feel many other Americans are too, is the economy, gas prices, the mortgage crisis, Iraq, Afghanistan, the War on Terror, the environment, etc. I could go on and on but I have to get back to work.

On a night where ABC is crowing about 10 million viewers, wouldn’t you think this could have been the best forum for a presidential nominee to address issues that have an immediate impact on the lives of many Americans? Unfortunately, many Americans are still left with the most important questions unanswered.