It's Wolf's Fault! Feisty Debate Blamed On "Exceedingly Lenient" Blitzer

New York Times/TV Decoder:

As a seemingly endless series of presidential candidate debates have proven this election cycle, the posture of the debate moderator can make the difference between a forgettable evening and a feisty one.

Viewers of Monday's Democratic presidential candidate debate saw the latter, partly because the moderator Wolf Blitzer was exceedingly lenient with the format.

Mr. Blitzer appeared at some points to lose control of the conversation as Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton and Senator Barack Obama, and to a lesser extent the former Senator John Edwards, traded barbs during the two-hour debate televised on CNN. The result, Jeff Zeleny and Patrick Healy write in Tuesday's New York Times, was "the most intense and personal exchange of the campaign season."

Read the whole story: New York Times/TV Decoder

Comments

[cblcar]

Blitzer is a dickless wonder. So far, Charie Gibson has been the only credible monitor.

[GeoLee]

Sorry folks, but street fighitng is not debating. Hillary and Obama both should be blamed when the repubs win in November because their uncivil behavior just makes John McCain seem more presidential. This country does not need a Democratic Party inmitating the terrible Democratic Republican split that has left us unable to pass any meaningful legislation unless there is even more given to the very rich slipped in. We need a unified party that can help elect more Democratic senators so the government can function. A pox on both Obama and Clinton houses! The republicans are loving the war between them and probably had their stooge Blitzer, who has clearly shown pro Bush sentiments for years, in cahoots enabling this wound to fester so publically!

[doglove]

Obama wants to make nice with republicans because he is a wanna be - a joe LIEberman. Talk about the worst of attorney's - he and wife are shameful.
Hillary wants to make nice with republicans in the backroom behind closed doors.
"let's meet half way, let's work with them."
"the only party with ideas in the past twelve years"???????
and then he has the nerve to say
"I didn't say 'good ideas'"!!!!! What a sellout, we need another LIEberman????

John Edwards is ready to do battle, he knows rethugs don't meet halfway or play fair or nice. We need someone to bitch slap them now and replair our country. Not a no experience, or a too experienced liar.

Hillary voted for Kyl-LIEberman, Obama skipped the vote. Chris Dodd stood filibuster alone while they campaigned.

The only candidate that is truly going to take on the CORPORATIONS THAT OWN AMERICA IS JOHN EDWARDS.

EDWARDS 08

[anghiari]

BILL'S OBAMA STRATEGY
It takes an attack dog to know an attack dog...Bill Clinton's ex-buddy Dick Morris' take on Bill's Obama Strategy below...po­int by point

"WHY is Bill Clinton courting such intense publicity, in evitably much of it negative?
Is he crazy? Crazy like a fox.


He has two goals and is achieving them both spectacularly.
First, he wants to be the same kind of lightning rod for Hillary that she was for him during his run for the presidency.

Now, she rarely gets hit anymore. They're hitting Bill instead.

The other method behind his madness is that Bill wants to suck up all the oxygen in the room and dominate the coverage of the Democratic contest. By doing so, he cuts Obama out of the news, pushes him off the front page, and usurps the headlines.

His tactics now are reminiscent of those he used to black out John Kerry during the lead-up to the 2004 Democratic National Convention.


Ultimately, the Clintons are playing a game of jujitsu with Obama, using his own strength against him.

By challenging Obama for the black vote - by promising to go door to door in South Carolina in minority neighborhoods, for example - Bill is highlighting the question: Will Obama carry the black vote? Of course, he will. He leads, 4 to 1, among African-Americans now.

But by making that the central question, Obama's South Carolina victory will be hailed as proof that he won the African-American vote. Such block voting will trigger the white backlash Sen. Clinton needs to win.

Once whites see blacks voting en masse for a black man, they will figure that it is a racial game and line up for Hillary. Already, she carries white voters by 2 to 1.

[anghiari]

BILL'S OBAMA STRATEGY

It takes an attack dog to know an attack dog...Bill Clinton's ex-buddy Dick Morris' take on Bill's Obama Strategy below...po­int by point

"WHY is Bill Clinton courting such intense publicity, in evitably much of it negative?
Is he crazy? Crazy like a fox.


He has two goals and is achieving them both spectacularly.
First, he wants to be the same kind of lightning rod for Hillary that she was for him during his run for the presidency.

Now, she rarely gets hit anymore. They're hitting Bill instead.

The other method behind his madness is that Bill wants to suck up all the oxygen in the room and dominate the coverage of the Democratic contest. By doing so, he cuts Obama out of the news, pushes him off the front page, and usurps the headlines.

His tactics now are reminiscent of those he used to black out John Kerry during the lead-up to the 2004 Democratic National Convention.


Ultimately, the Clintons are playing a game of jujitsu with Obama, using his own strength against him.

By challenging Obama for the black vote - by promising to go door to door in South Carolina in minority neighborhoods, for example - Bill is highlighting the question: Will Obama carry the black vote? Of course, he will. He leads, 4 to 1, among African-Americans now.

But by making that the central question, Obama's South Carolina victory will be hailed as proof that he won the African-American vote. Such block voting will trigger the white backlash Sen. Clinton needs to win.

Once whites see blacks voting en masse for a black man, they will figure that it is a racial game and line up for Hillary. Already, she carries white voters by 2 to 1.

[SmolderingRuin]

It seemed to me that Blitzer tried to keep Edwards from speaking, while encouraging and enabling the fireworks between Clinton and Obama. (Good for ratings, great television). Edwards managed to take over the position of the only adult on the stage. I think Blitzer is a complete tool and a bush ass-kisser. His monotonous delivery and irritating cadences, with the pauses in all the wrong places, make me numb. I have learned to tolerate him out of necessity. He is ubiquitous.

[anghiari]

BILL'S OBAMA STRATEGY

It takes an attack dog to know an attack dog...Bill Clinton's ex-buddy Dick Morris' take on Bill's Obama Strategy below...po­int by point

"WHY is Bill Clinton courting such intense publicity, in evitably much of it negative?
Is he crazy? Crazy like a fox.


He has two goals and is achieving them both spectacularly.
First, he wants to be the same kind of lightning rod for Hillary that she was for him during his run for the presidency.

Now, she rarely gets hit anymore. They're hitting Bill instead.

The other method behind his madness is that Bill wants to suck up all the oxygen in the room and dominate the coverage of the Democratic contest. By doing so, he cuts Obama out of the news, pushes him off the front page, and usurps the headlines.

His tactics now are reminiscent of those he used to black out John Kerry during the lead-up to the 2004 Democratic National Convention.


Ultimately, the Clintons are playing a game of jujitsu with Obama, using his own strength against him.

By challenging Obama for the black vote - by promising to go door to door in South Carolina in minority neighborhoods, for example - Bill is highlighting the question: Will Obama carry the black vote? Of course, he will. He leads, 4 to 1, among African-Americans now.

But by making that the central question, Obama's South Carolina victory will be hailed as proof that he won the African-American vote. Such block voting will trigger the white backlash Sen. Clinton needs to win.

Once whites see blacks voting en masse for a black man, they will figure that it is a racial game and line up for Hillary. Already, she carries white voters by 2 to 1.

[Feettotheflame]

If CNN had it's way, it would be a Clinton-Blizter ticket for '08. Wake up America, it's not a debate if the mediator is part of the Clinton Campaign.

Please bring back Dennis Kucinich, he's the only canidate who knows how to speak to fascist power.

[Chandidevi]

He caters to Clinton. He stopped Barack and Edwards a few times because he said that Clinton needed to say something. Gimme a break!

[TheMiddleman]

Wolf Blitzer's droning monotone drive me batty. If he comes on the tube, I switch channels immediately or turn the damn thing off.

Jack Cafferty is the only thing on CNN worth watching. At least he can be mildly entertaining. The rest are pompous opinionists. They have no reporters.

[SmolderingRuin]

Wolf "lost control" deliberately, of course. Today they're crowing on CNN that 5 million people watched the debate, and they watched it "all the way through"! (Such impressive attention spans.) Contumely makes for good television, and Wolfie is always thinking of the ratings.

[Clarabell]

So what's wrong with a feisty debate? Let's see if they can get the Republicans to talk about something other than the weather when they have their next one.

[Nutcase]

Wolf is part and parcel of a celebrity-driven news media. A demi-celebrity himself, he is still subject to holding full-fledged celebrities in awe. How could someone of that ilk feel constrained to pull back the reins on them.

cognito ergo populistae

[LeftLeaner]

1000x better than the so-called debate on NBC last week from Nevada with (SNARKY) Tim Russert and (YAWM) Brian Williams.

They started out by JUST discussing RACE for the first portion of the show, and then the Candidates were ALLOWED to ask "2" questions to another. After Edwards asked his first question regarding LOBBYING interests in the others' campaigans, Williams suddenly informed him that he made a mistake (sure?) that only 1 question was allowed.

What kind of debate is that. All these debates are carefully choreographed and controlled, so NO REAL IFNORMATION comes through.

This was the FIRST time I saw them allowed to act normal. It was very refreshing.

KUDOS to CNN, who just effortlessly reinforced my already carefully formed belief that JOHN EDWARDS is the only CANDIDATE who would be ready to be our NEXT PRESIDENT.

Go, John, GO in '08

[ChristopherLib]

Blitzer is not a good debate moderator. Though I have to say, that was some entertaining stuff. The last few debates were pretty dull if you ask me. Not so this time. Yeah ideally we'd what real sustantive issues being discussed, but hell if more people watch the next debate because of this maybe that serves democracy well.