The beginning of Peggy Noonan’s commentary, this morning, in the Wall Street Journal:
I will never forget that breathtaking moment when, in the CNN/YouTube debate earlier this fall, the woman from Ohio held up a picture and said, “Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Obama, Mr. Edwards, this is a human fetus. Given a few more months, it will be a baby you could hold in your arms. You all say you’re ‘for the children.’ I would ask you to look America in the eye and tell us how you can support laws to end this life. Thank you.”
They were momentarily nonplussed, then awkwardly struggled to answer, to regain lost high ground. One of them, John Edwards I think, finally criticizing the woman for being “manipulative,” using “hot images” and indulging in “the politics of personal destruction.” The woman then stood in the audience for her follow up. “I beg your pardon, but the literal politics of personal destruction — of destroying a person — is what you stand for.”
Oh, I wish I weren’t about to say, “Wait, that didn’t happen.” For of course it did not. Who of our media masters would allow a question so piercing on such a painful and politically incorrect subject?
I thought of this the other night when citizens who turned out to be partisans for Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Obama and Mr. Edwards asked the Republicans, in debate, would Jesus support the death penalty, do you believe every word of the Bible, and what does the Confederate flag mean to you?
It was a good debate, feisty and revealing. It’s not bad that the questions had a certain spin, and played on stereotypes of the GOP. It’s just bad that it doesn’t quite happen at Democratic debates. Somehow, there, an obscure restraint sets in on the part of news producers. Too bad. Running for most powerful person in the world is, among other things, an act of startling presumption. They all should be grilled, everyone, both sides. Winter voting approaches; may many chestnuts be roasted on an open fire.
Her narrower point is the “media masters” seem more diligent when is comes to shielding the Democrat Party candidates. Yet, if so, they are not doing their preferred political party nor leaning voters a favor. Without the full spectrum of questions asked and answered early on, we, regardless of affiliation, are left to assume what each Democrat Party candidate would do should they be elected President.
Worse, it “favors” the supposed national poll leader (what a screaming mistake that turned out to be four years ago). Which is Ms. Noonan’s wider point: saddle up boys and girls of all persuasions for, from this day forward, the questions will only get tougher.
Don’t you want to know now whether your horse is up to circling the track or just a donkey headed for the stall long before the far turn?
2 comments for “CNN and media don’t ask yet do Dems disservice”