On the debate

Talking Points Memo points to some issues I had with last nights debate.

The aim behind most of Blitzer's questions was to "put Democrats on the wrong side of public opinion, even if those questions are about things like driver's licenses or "merit pay" for teachers that aren't really under federal purview. Efforts to reframe those questions by putting those topics in the larger context of immigration policy more generally or education more generally are derided as cowardly dodges. The point, after all, is to force a choice -- piss off an interest group, or say something that could be used in a GOP attack ad." My only addition to this point is that I thought Obama should have put Blitzer and his militant simpletonism in its place. Just tell him to shut up. He was terrible. But a presidential candidate should be able to stand down a moderator.

And of course there was that dumb question at the end (I found Clinton's answer funny, but still...).

Probably like a lot of people I was stunned at the amazingly lame and I'd say fairly offensive diamonds or pearls question that closed out last night's debate. I'd assumed they'd just given the last question to a complete dingbat. Seems CNN got the girl to ask that one rather than a question about Yucca Mountain.

Just to be clear, I'm not above a few cutesy or fun questions. But it's a friggin' presidential debate. And don't ask the first competitive female candidate for president her jewelry preferences.

Let's give AMERICAblog the last word on Blitzer.

Holy cow, this is actually interesting. Hillary and Obama getting into it on health care. My God, it's an actual debate. Oh, never mind - Wolf Blitzer just killed the discussion, the first time we've had a real debate in the debates. Sigh.