The American Spectator : The Spectacle Blog : Re: Not a Good Night...

Text Size

Re: Not a Good Night...

By Wlady Pleszczynski on 4.17.08 @ 10:08AM

Phil: Compared to Obama, Hillary was frighteningly good. He was dead on his feet; down the stretch I half-expected he'd be checking his watch. He had nothing new to state, and increasingly he gave off the vibe that he wanted to be anywhere else but there. Even he seems tired of his old bromides, but in his empty suit he had nothing new to offer. He appeared exasperated. Hillary, meanwhile, was having the time of her life, showing off at every opportunity, the smartest girl in the class, scoring points with teacher, with great satisfaction, giving off not a hint that most everyone assumes her days are numbered. The interesting thing is that all the post-debate intensity has involved Barackudas rallying to defend their little darling; Hillary seems to have no devoted followers.

Charlie Gibson's supply-side conversion notwithstanding, this was not a good night for big media. Gotcha question after gotcha question is not going to cut it, particularly since there was so much else to discuss that ABC's guys never bothered to address: for starters, Jimmy Carter's visit to Hamas and Pope Benedict's mission to America. And who does Gibson think he is? In the odd set his throne was clearly a head or two higher than Stephanopoulos's, who was seated off to the side, almost at his knee level. And such self-importance when he read off his questions, as if the debate were about him and it was his show and he was Bill O'Reilly. I can fully understand why any Obama backer would be irate at having their hero patronized by this popinjay.