Yesterday on "CNN Late Edition" Wolf Blizer spoke with Massachusetts senator, former presidential candidate and Obama surrogate John Kerry about the upcoming primaries in Texas, Ohio, Rhode Island and Vermont and what he thought might unfold leading up to Tuesday's voting. The subject of the "3 a.m. Phone Call" ad from Hillary Clinton came up (watch it here), and Wolf Blitzer asked Kerry what crisis Barack Obama had ever been faced with that would "justify his being the commander in chief and getting that 3 a.m. phone call?" Kerry answered the question, except instead of sharing information about his candidate he talked at length about why Hillary Clinton had no experience. Then Blitzer asked another question. And that was it!
Blitzer's question was direct: "Here's the question, Senator. What national security issues, what crisis has Senator Obama faced that would justify his being the commander in chief and getting that 3 a.m. phone call?" Kerry's answer was anything but — which is par for the course considering who we're dealing with but it's up to Blitzer to keep a meandering interview on course. Without a straight answer from Kerry, the viewer is left to wonder whether Obama has relevant experience at all, or what Kerry even knows about this candidate that he's supporting (shades of Texas State Senator Kirk Watson there, hmmm?). It's Blitzer's job to get to the bottom of it either way.
Certainly his ears should have pricked up at this comment from Kerry about Hillary Clinton: "...when her campaign was asked, well, what crisis has she ever faced in which she's made a difference in foreign policy, they really couldn't answer." Really? They couldn't answer? What did they do, did they dodge and talk about something different, like another candidate? And if they did that, what did it mean, that their candidate was a big fat know-nothing? As a viewer, that's the sort of discrepancy I'd love to have Blitzer be attuned to.
My other favorite moment was when Blitzer asked Kery about Obama's assertion that he'd meet with leaders like Raul Castro, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and crazy Hugo Chavez. Said Kerry: "Let me tell you precisely what he means by that, as I understand it." New standard of precision!
In all seriousness, Kerry's a great guest and his comments are of value — read the whole transcript here — and I give full marks to a guy who can namedrop Reagan, Gorbachev, Kennedy and Khrushchev in the same breath as the phrase "willy-nilly." If "willy-nilly" became the new hot phrase of the campaign, I wouldn't complain. But Blitzer isn't only giving him airtime to spout talking points, he has him on to provide real, useful, new information — and he completely dropped the ball. In the game of cat-and-mouse between interviewer and campaign — journalists try to get around the talking poitns to something new; campaign people try to stick to message and give up nothing else — Blitzer let Kerry win, which means the viewers — and voters — lost, because that was a question that should have been easy to answer. If it's not, then Democrats have a problem. Either way, it's up to Blitzer to find out.
Here's the transcript of the clipped exchange; I know you'll tell me exactly what you think in the comments, so let's get to it! Feel free to provide examples of other dodges by surrogates. Specifics are good. So are links. Looking forward to your contributions!
BLITZER: Here's the question, Senator. What national security issues, what crisis has Senator Obama faced that would justify his being the commander in chief and getting that 3 a.m. phone call?
KERRY: Well, first of all, Wolf, the question applies to both of them. And the person asking the question really is culpable here of a fear tactic. I might add, you know, most of the time I think people are going to hear that phone ringing, and they're going to rush to answer the phone and not see the ad.
But leaving that aside, it strikes me that the ad is really deception and disingenuous. Hillary Clinton has never received a 3 a.m. in the morning telephone call as a senator or as a first lady. And secondly, when asked, when her campaign was asked, well, what crisis has she ever faced in which she's made a difference in foreign policy, they really couldn't answer.
They tried to say, well, she made a speech in China or something like that. The fact is that she had a red phone moment, as Barack Obama said. Her red phone moment was on the war in Iraq, and she chose the Bush course, the wrong course.
She had a red phone moment in Iran. When Senator Dodd, Senator Biden, Senator Obama, myself opposed the policy, she chose the Bush policy on Iran. She had a red phone moment. The fact is that Barack Obama comes to this race with more experience than George Bush, Ronald Reagan or Bill Clinton had in foreign policy at the national level. And the fact is that he has proven that it's his judgment that is correct. That's what the American people are voting for, and I believe they will see clearly that's a scare tactic. And in fact, it raises an issue which falls, in my judgment, in Barack Obama's favor.