The defining moment of Sunday’s town hall interview in Indianapolis with Sen. Hillary Clinton came at the outset when host George Stephanopoulos stated that the “[g]as tax has become the defining issue in this primary and in North Carolina.” ABC News president David Westin, who blasted the rise of opinion media nearly 4 years ago, should have fired Stephanopoulos on the spot for substituting his opinion for that of the voters of Indiana and North Carolina. Unless the “gas tax holiday” proposed by Sen. Clinton and Sen. McCain represents a comprehensive plan to address the economy, Stephanopoulos must not care that that the actual voters of North Carolina list the economy, followed by health care and the Iraq war as their defining issues.
Meanwhile, over at NBC, Tim Russert intoned dramatically during the introduction of his interview with Sen. Barack Obama that “[i]ssues such as the Reverend Jeremiah Wright and the soaring cost of gasoline and food prices dominate the debate.” In a March Gallup poll, 35% of voters polled listed “the economy in general” when asked to name the most important issue currently facing the country, followed by Iraq (21%) and healthcare (8%). Unless you count “lack of respect for each other” (1%), Rev. Jeremiah Wright and/or race relations was not mentioned among the 27 issues. Undeterred, Russert spent the first 18 minutes of the interview grilling Sen. Obama about Rev. Jeremiah Wright (”What has the controversy over Reverend Jeremiah Wright done to your campaign?”) before moving on to ask Sen. Obama whether he was tough enough to defend his patriotism (”Many superdelegates, undecided ones, have said to me, ‘Is he tough enough? How is he going to respond? How is he going to defend or define his patriotism?”).
Russert, determined to avoid probing policy questions, prodded Sen. Obama about his ability to connect with white voters (”in 26 of the 29 contests you’ve been involved in you have lost white voters who do not have college degrees. How do you connect with them? What’s wrong?”). Satisfied, Russert moved on to the same “defining issue” recognized by Stephanopoulos (”One issue that has really defined the two campaigns here in Indiana is this debate over gasoline. Why are you against giving taxpayers in Indiana, North Carolina, a relief from federal gasoline tax this summer?”).
Then, addressing something on everyone’s lips these days, Russert waded into the thorny issue of ethanol subsidies (”Would you be willing to change ethanol subsidies or suspend some of these requirements so that people are not using corn for ethanol, but using corn for food and lowering food prices?”). Notice the leaps of conventional wisdom - ethanol subsidies are distorting the free market to such an extent that, unlike decades of other farm subsidies, it’s putting pressure on the cost of food. Of course, we all remember the protest marches across Mexico last year when the same subsidies doubled the cost of corn tortillas? And never mind the hundreds of millions of upwardely mobile Indians and Chinese whose demand for meat is pressuring food prices. With focused energy, Sen. Obama set the record straight on where he stands when it comes to food (”my top priority is making sure that people are able to get enough to eat.”). Perhaps he should promise a chicken in every pot?
Russert, known for his rapid-fire delivery of pointed questions, put Sen. Obama in the line of fire: “How long before our automobiles are off of gasoline oil and, and using something like an alternative fuel?” That’s just want Americans want to know - when exactly can I start gassing up my car with something other than gas - like water maybe?
Rather then ask Sen. Obama how he plans on getting us out of Iraq, Russert asked Sen. Obama if he supported limited strikes in Iran or whether he supported Sen. Clinton’s position that she would “totally obliterate” Iran should it launch a nuclear strike against Israel. Never mind that Iran has been accused of supporting the Iraqi militants for years or that, according to our own government, Iran stopped it’s nuclear weapons program in 2003. Why let facts get in the way of a juicy narrative?
Obviously finding nothing of interest currently going on in the world, Russert pushes forward with additional questions about new and exciting scenarios: “Do you think the American people would want to send American men and women to Saudi Arabia to defend them against Iran?”
Apparently unaware of that the Pentagon is currently drawing up plans to ship 7,000 troops to Afghanistan because we can convince our NATO allies to do more, Russert ponders
Afghanistan. The situation, according to some, is deteriorating as the Taliban continues to reconstitute itself. Would you, as president, be willing to have a military surge in Afghanistan in order to, once and for all, eliminate the Taliban?
And then, in the defining moment of Russert’s interview, having obviously covered all of the substantive issues, he says the following:
In the remaining minutes, let me talk to–about some politics. You said, “Indiana may end up being the tiebreaker.” Right? That’s where we are. So if Hillary Clinton wins here, she wins?
That’s right. It’s time to move away from all of the detailed questions about substantive issues and ask a few questions about politics.
Bottom Line: Two of America’s most influential journalists wasted precious moments with two of the three people who might be our next president to talk about Reverend Jeremiah Wright and gas-tax holidays. They took a holiday from their jobs.
