CNN moderator John King apparently thought it his job not to challenge the candidates too terribly hard, lest he be derided as a member of the media elite. So "elite" was one thing King proved he certainly was not -- at least not in the realm of debate moderators.
Now pulling ahead of former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney in the national polls, former U.S. senator Rick Santorum saw his position in the debate line-up change, occupying the center stage with Romney.
Santorum has not failed to make news in the last several weeks, as his opposition to the use of birth control has come to light, not to mention the resurfacing, thanks to Right Wing Watch, of a 2008 speech he delivered at Ave Maria University in which he claimed that Satan, "the father of lies," had set his sights on the United States, and that explained why universities were teaching bad things and why mainline Protestant churches were no longer really Christian.
Then there were the remarks that Foster Freiss -- the primary donor to the Red, White and Blue Fund, a Santorum-allied superPAC -- made to MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell last week about birth control. (Freiss said that a Bayer aspirin held by a woman between her knees made for an adequate form of contraception.)
Contraception Issue Evaded; Racist 'Expert' Citation Overlooked
King did ask the candidates about contraception, saying, "Since birth control is the latest hot topic, which candidate believes in birth control, and if not, why?" The audience booed heartily, and King took note of the lack of popularity of the question inside the Arizona hall. But he didn't press any of candidates to actually answer the question, and none of them really did...
No Questions on Santorum's Smear of Obama's Faith, or Romney's Sheriff Anti-Immigrant Sheriff Scandal...
A Shout-Out to Arpaio; No Questioning of Santorum's Theological Rationale for Iran Strike...
- Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.
- Public Discussion (4)
When you read about this debate in corporate news outlets, you'll learn about a long discussion of the ups and downs of earmarks in congressional appropriations (Romney accused Santorum of being something of an earmark king), about the adorableness of the candidates' one-word descriptions of themselves, offered at King's behest (Gingrich: "Cheerful"), and perhaps even some snark about how oddly smooth Gingrich's skin appeared. You'll read a bit about the pros and cons of the seated staging of the debate, rather than the use of podiums. Some rightfully cranky reporter may remark on the ridiculous, ESPN-style introductions given the candidates. You'll probably be told that Romney won, Gingrich had a good night, and Santorum could have done better. But, really, none of that matters. What matters were the questions not asked, and the answers not given.
Early in the debate, John King asked Ron Paul why he was running an advertisement that labeled Santorum "a fake."
"Because he's a fake," Paul replied.
The same could be said of the whole exercise conducted in Arizona Wednesday night. It was a fake -- a hoax played on the electorate. Shame on CNN.
More FOXification from CNN.
- 5 votes
I didn't watch the debate, but I saw a clip of King asking them about contraception. Gingrich immediate burst out with the fake, indignant blustering, but didn't actually answer the question. I wondered if any of the answered it. Now I see that they didn't.
- 2 votes
The whole debate season with these candidates has been a joke. Between ineffective moderators, formats and rude audiences..what have we really learned? Gingrich is a performer, Romney can fight when pushed other than that he is plastic, Santorum couldn't get a word in edgewise in many of them and Ron Paul does the best he can with limited time as well. And all of their noses grow with all the lies being spewed.
- 2 votes
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |



