Wednesday night’s debate between Clinton and Obama was one big media blunder. Moderators Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos chose to focus on missteps made by both candidates in the previous three weeks instead of on the issues affecting average voters.
I am pretty sure that most people don’t really care to hear Obama explain for the hundredth time why he doesn’t routinely wear a flag lapel pin, yet there he was explaining it again. The question was presented via video from a Pennsylvania voter. As I watched, I was thinking that anyone who thinks someone can’t be a true patriot because he doesn’t wear a flag pin should not be allowed to vote. I wanted to take away her voter registration card and burn it.
Sniper fire in Bosnia? Strange story, but old news. There she was explaining he memory problem again.
Can we discuss something that matters now?
Nope. The question that followed the lapel pin question was another question about who you know and whether or not you should know them or associate with them.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Senator, if you get the nomination, you’ll have to — (applause) — (inaudible).
I want to give Senator Clinton a chance to respond, but first a follow-up on this issue, the general theme of patriotism in your relationships. A gentleman named William Ayers, he was part of the Weather Underground in the 1970s. They bombed the Pentagon, the Capitol and other buildings. He’s never apologized for that. And in fact, on 9/11 he was quoted in The New York Times saying, “I don’t regret setting bombs; I feel we didn’t do enough.”
An early organizing meeting for your state senate campaign was held at his house, and your campaign has said you are friendly. Can you explain that relationship for the voters, and explain to Democrats why it won’t be a problem?
I watched Stephanopoulos ask that question and immediately thought he was a mindless jerk. In what should be a serious debate, there he was pandering to the worst instincts of the American electorate: we must find a way to tear somebody down now matter how lame the connection. Anyone who knows about politics, and I’m sure Stephanopoulos knows a lot, realizes that politicians attract people with power and money, and some of those people might have questionable backgrounds and motives. It doesn’t mean that because a politician meets them and speaks with them the politician is sympathetic to their cause or sanctions everything they’ve done in the past. Anyway, here’s Obama’s answer:
SEN. OBAMA: George, but this is an example of what I’m talking about.
This is a guy who lives in my neighborhood, who’s a professor of English in Chicago, who I know and who I have not received some official endorsement from. He’s not somebody who I exchange ideas from on a regular basis.
And the notion that somehow as a consequence of me knowing somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago when I was 8 years old, somehow reflects on me and my values, doesn’t make much sense, George.
The fact is, is that I’m also friendly with Tom Coburn, one of the most conservative Republicans in the United States Senate, who during his campaign once said that it might be appropriate to apply the death penalty to those who carried out abortions.
Do I need to apologize for Mr. Coburn’s statements? Because I certainly don’t agree with those either.
So this kind of game, in which anybody who I know, regardless of how flimsy the relationship is, is somehow — somehow their ideas could be attributed to me — I think the American people are smarter than that. They’re not going to suggest somehow that that is reflective of my views, because it obviously isn’t.
Excellent response. Now, can we move on to a topic that matters? The economy? Iraq? Healthcare? Taxes? Inequality? Anything of substance?
Nope… Clinton cant’ leave well enough alone. She’s “a fighter” so she has to join sides with media idiots (mediots?) and the Republicans. Here’s her jab at Obama:
SEN. CLINTON: Well, I think that is a fair general statement, but I also believe that Senator Obama served on a board with Mr. Ayers for a period of time, the Woods Foundation, which was a paid directorship position.
And if I’m not mistaken, that relationship with Mr. Ayers on this board continued after 9/11 and after his reported comments, which were deeply hurtful to people in New York, and I would hope to every American, because they were published on 9/11 and he said that he was just sorry they hadn’t done more. And what they did was set bombs and in some instances people died. So it is — you know, I think it is, again, an issue that people will be asking about. And I have no doubt — I know Senator Obama’s a good man and I respect him greatly but I think that this is an issue that certainly the Republicans will be raising.
And if I may say so Hillary, YOU just raised it. Perhaps you really are just a sparring partner who is there only to help toughen up Obama for the race against the meanest, nastiest, deceitful political party on earth. For that we thank you, but now we’ve really had enough already.
Of course Obama had to show her that he can throw a counter punch when necessary:
SENATOR OBAMA: I’m going to have to respond to this just really quickly, but by Senator Clinton’s own vetting standards, I don’t think she would make it, since President Clinton pardoned or commuted the sentences of two members of the Weather Underground, which I think is a slightly more significant act than me –
AUDIENCE MEMBER: (Applauds.)
MR. GIBSON: Please.
SENATOR OBAMA: — than me serving on a board with somebody for actions that he did 40 years ago.
Ouch!
Nice round senators. I hope that when you go back and review the tapes, you recognize what you were doing was knocking each other down. That’s great if you want McCain to be our next president. Personally, I don’t.
I know you guys are fighting each other for a shot at the oval office, but if you continue punching each other out like this for the next four months, you’re both going to look battered and beaten and neither one of you will be able to defeat McCain.
You should use these debates to explain the differences in your proposed policies, but you should also be working together in a united front against Republicans and explain how their policies are destroying our nation. Ultimately, they are the ones you must defeat.
So how about a truce? Can’t you both get your teams together and agree to stop the personal attacks against each other? Can you see that your proxies get the message too so that we don’t have another repulsive episode like the one a couple weeks ago when someone in Clinton’s camp said Obama wasn’t electable because he was a LIBERAL.
Enough! You are both on the same side. The goal is to defeat McCain and put Democrat in the oval office. Please don’t lose sight of that. If you do, neither one of you will win and all of America will lose. (Well… except for the extremely wealthy 5% of Americans that is.)
0 Responses to “Clinton & Obama - Sparring Partners”