Just How Soft has Obama's Coverage Been?

by Taylor Marsh

Marshmallow soft.

Down pillow soft.

Baby's bottom soft.

So no one should be surprised that Obama had a a nightmare night. He finally got real questions for which he should have had ready answers. Over the last year Barack Obama has gotten a complete pass on his record, his life and everything associated to his political rise. In fact, if Senator Obama had been subjected to the scrutiny that Hillary Clinton has been subjected to he would have turned to ash by now.

So forgive me if all the blogospheric bellyaching permeating Democratic circles is not impressing me much. In fact, it's a laugh out loud moment.

Now don't get me wrong. I'm more than willing to blame the traditional media for piling on a Democrat, which they do often. But do these progressives now crying fowl really believe they could protect Mr. Obama, as his Democratic challengers did all last year, throughout the rest of this campaign? Asking a question about Rev. Wright? A question about William Ayers? The horror! Seriously, is Senator Obama so frail that he shouldn't be subjected to questioning that should have come a long time ago and will inevitably come in the general election? If nothing else and at the very least, everyone in the Democratic party should want to know how he's going to handle this stuff if he's our nominee. Because there can be no doubt that the wingnuts will lock and load Barack's greatest hits, then share them with the electorate in a cascade of negative gifts.

Mind you, this is questioning I've been doing for a year and getting excoriated for it. So I feel Charlie and George's pain. Going for substance isn't easy amidst the Political Idol crowd.

The facts are that the progressive community and Obama supporters have done their candidate no favors by the kid glove treatment they've applied to all things having to do with him and his record, including his associations. What happened last night is a result of one year of people ignoring reality. That's right, reality. Because the closer Obama got to the nomination and the general election, the curtain would eventually be pulled back on every event in his life, good, bad and horror show, which includes Rev. Wright.

This is the reason we lose elections.

What, did Obama's adoring fans think they could hermetically seal him and protect him from the meanies out there, then simply deliver him to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue because "he's the one?" Good grief.

If Obama would have been put through his paces last fall, he might have been past this by now. If his own campaign had faced up to his associations long ago, head on, he wouldn't be dealing with this now.

Again, I'd blame Gibson and Stephanopoulos, but it's not their fault that someone, anyone finally asked questions that have been out there for months and months. It's not tabloid to ask about Ayers any more than it was tabloid to question Bill Clinton about his past. Hillary's been asked about everything more than once, as they reload to ask it all over again.

Oh, and as for Keith He's No Edward R. Murrow Olbermann, don't send a sportscaster to do a political analyst's job. Talking to Howard Wolfson, with Olbermann whining about the questions about Ayers, isn't doing us any favors either. He's just giving Obama fans a false sense of security. It's as if the only people dealing with reality and preparing for the Republican attack machine is the Clinton campaign. Olbermann is on planet Zen if he thinks that Ayers won't be part of the dialogue come September. (You know, because you never roll out a new campaign in August.)

We need a nominee that can walk through fire. Whoever we offer up should be able to withstand anything, and I do mean anything. Because that's what always comes at Democrats, with the traditional press inevitably having a thing for the guy on the other side. Considering that guy will be John McCain, the hero worship will be out in force.

No Democratic politician in the last 20 years has gotten a softer introduction onto the national stage than Barack Obama. Nobody has gotten an easier ride to the top step of presidential politics either. He paid for it last night.

Follow Taylor Marsh on Twitter: www.twitter.com/taylormarsh

Comments

[standforpeace]

Although I didn't have a rproblem with George asking about Ayers, those kinds of questions were disproportionately directed to Obama; if you want to draw associations to the Weathermen, why not ask Hillary about her husband's pardon of 2 Weathermen? Bringing up Bill's actions would be appropriate given the number of times that Hillary used the word "we" last night to characterize things that Bill did in the 90s. Second, when Hillary gave the explanationn for the Bosnia debacle, why didn't Charlie or George ask a couple of followups. For example, "so are you now admitting that you lied rather than simply misspeaking?" Or how about "Isn't it true that you repeatedly lied until video tape emerged to conclusively discount your story? Why should voters trust that you are not lying about other things where there is no video tape to contradict you?" Third, why didn't they ask about the recent shake up in her campaign due to Penn's support for the Colombia trade agreement that she says that she opposes? Or what about the fact that groups supporting passage have paid her husband hundreds of thousands of dollars? What about asking why she filed for an extension of her 2007 tax report rather than filling and including those returns in her public offering as she had promised to do? What about questions exploring what we now know about the Clinton's finances?

In short, why didn't Hillary get some of those gotcha questions coming her way?

[MissDarla]

oooh, the tables were turned--now you know what it felt like for Hillary supporters. Get used to it b/c if Obama is the nominee, this was kids' stuff--and Hillary supporters, like myself, won't be screaming foul for him.

[BBackSoon]

So you will vote for McCain if Obama is the candidate?

Or you just won't care when the slime machine turns on?

Thanks, you fair weather Dem.

[HaveyouPerspective]

Replace the "if" with "when" and realize that it is over for Hillary. She tried and her best wasn't good enough. Simply looking at the polls today and the Super Delegate response should show you this much.

Now you can start to ask yourself who you would rather have as President come November: Obama or McCain.

Seeing as Obama and Clinton are much closer on the issues, one would assume the rational Clinton supporter would put their support behind Obama. So, the question becomes will we behave rationally, or emotionally. Remembering that the consequences will be profound and last at least four years.

[Kishadawn]

I think the debate was moderated poorly. I"m an Obama supporter but I didn't like that they brought up Bosnia with Hillary either. It simply wasn't an issue that PA voters are really interested in anymore and definitely not one that has any effects on gas being 4 bucks a gallon. There may have been 21 debates before this but maybe this debate was the decision maker for some PA voters? I personally didn't pick a candidate until a little earlier this year before my state primary.

If we are going to pull out the "connections" that Obama has and compare them with the "connections" that Clinton has, then the Democrats are in trouble. Clinton isn't exactly an angel in this arena either.
They will pull names for every person ever pardoned by her husband (some related by blood) and her only response can be "I didn't agree with him even though I was actually there and heard him". How is that a stronger argument than Obama's "I wasn't there that Sunday, I didn't know until recently that he said it"?

All three Presidential Candidates have weaknesses. I wasn't any more impressed with the answers Clinton gave for the few hard questions she answered than Obama's.

Democrats UNITE.

[kcjc]

THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU!!! I just read about William Ayers and I am shocked. I was very concerned over what the republicans would do with Rev. Wright, I am stunned by what I learned last night. This is UNREAL! Are the media really republicans hiding behind the mask of liberals? When was the public going to learn about this??? Why haven't we heard these things before? I don't care if Senator Obama was 8, William Ayers was a part of this radical group THAT BOMBED THE US! Is that okay with Senator Obama? Wright's radical views are shocking, but this is unbelieveable. Did William Ayers actually have a fund raiser for Senator Obama? I have a serious problem with that. I want to know more. Inform me media!! DO YOUR JOB!

[HaveyouPerspective]

Where have you been, my Republican brother? This has already been around the blogosphere three times and has been deemed a non-issue. Didn't you see it on Limbaugh's site?

Your gamble that we are all simpletons is what Bush and Co. bet on in the last election. If you hold out any hope that we won't see through disingenuous acts like this, you are betting a losing hand.

[MoMule]

Go to Taylor's site for actual reality based commentary. taylormarsh.com or go to noquater.com to get more information. Taylor is good straight commentary,she is a Clinton supporter but she is fair to Obama. No Quarter's Larry Johnson is a retired CIA guy so he has an interesting perspective, he has some other bloggers who sometimes are questionable.

[jvarga]

Senator Clinton is in favor of cluster bombing civilians, leaving a deadly legacy that lasts for years and years. Somehow that seems more pertinent than when Senator Obama was 8, some crazy guy "bombed the us".

[jsarbee2]

If you think those questions are substantive, you must ghostwrite for the Enquirer.

Obama should be asked the tough questions on the issues that actually affect the American people. While Clinton supporters and surrogates repeatedly claim that she is excorciated by the media, I don't recall her ever having been asked in a debate to answer most of the tough questions that the Republican 529's will throw at her. When Hillary Clinton finally has to start answering questions about Mark Penn, her husband's lobbying interests, the donors to the Clinton library, her flip flopping on NAFTA and the war... let alone those lingering scandals from her time in the White House... remember all that furniture the Clinton's claimed belonged to them? The only reason she is still standing in this election is because Obama hasn't fallen to the level of her cheap attacks and made an issue about any of her questionable ethical and policy decisions throughout her public life.

Much as she miscalculated the public reaction to Obama's "bitter" comments, ABC miscalculated the likely reaction to last night's farcical debate. His fundraising will soar today. Prominent Pennsylvanians who supported Clinton will come out for Obama today. We have had enough and we will no longer allow the narrative to be set by the corporate media and by partisan political hacks who keep the game going for their own entertainment and profit. John McCain is going to have to wage this battle without Hillary doing the dirty work for him.

[gabbyone]

Actually Obama was asked tough questions on issues last night and I didn't see him do very well on them either.

[HaveyouPerspective]

On issues of policy, or political agenda?

You are swimming in the MSM subterfuge. If we throw you a life preserver, will you willingly accept it or drown as a symbolic act? Perhaps with a little effort you can swim on over to the Island Ms. Marsh has put herself on. You can be Gilligan to her Skipper, little buddy.

[ChuckIgnorris]

What I've failed to grasp from anyone who actually thought last night's debate was not vomit-worthy is how any of the first hour had a positive impact for Americans who are out of work, who don't have healthcare, who are struggling to pay bills, who are worried about the environment, who care about energy independence, who think the 4,000+ troops that have died in Iraq matter and wonder why we are spending so much of this country's money to accomplish something that's undefinable?

Taylor, you continued in the same vein...no substance about the future of this country, no substance about the people of this country, nothing but spin and opinion about the media's treatment of Obama which doesn't have an impact on ANY of the above things.

Obama wearing a flag pin doesn't win back someone's job. Clintons approval ratings doesn't get anyone healthcare. Barack's neighborhood community board meetings don't change the war in Iraq. Those are the issues that people need to be educated on that actually have an impact on the future of this country. Those are the issues that should concern you, Taylor Marsh, as an American citizen AND a journalist.

Stop wasting everyone's time.

[bmora]

Nothing was served by the first 45 minutes of the debate (much the same for this article) and I see this gives you immense pleasure. I can practically see you grinning from ear to ear. Hillary's campaign is making me bitter. The sad thing about it all is that I am going to vote for her if she is the nominee, but I will hold my nose.

American citizens and the Constitution are dying and we are dealt this tripe.

[AnninSoCal]

I think you got a good glimpse of Obama on his "feet."

That's what Hillary has been doing for quite awhile.

Now, maybe some of the Obama supporters will understand what we have been saying.

I don't mind a harsh light on my candidate, but it needs to be evenly distributed.

A free ride on obvious issues is NOT OK.

That just increases the divisiveness.

This debate helped a lot.

He got asked the hard questions. He wasn't prepared, but even I am willing to agree that the free ride from the press contributed to that. He just never dreamed anyone would attack him.

Now he know.

Let's see how he adjusts.

[KaylaVeg]

HuffPost's Pick

All I can say is thank you for your sanity, Taylor. You are one of only a few voices on Huffington Post who are fair. Thank you, thank you. Don't let the Obama-maniacs chase you away.

[JJI]

What makes this a "Huffpost's Pick" exactly?

[Lindy222]

I was wondering that too. I'm guessing because it maxed out on Taylor's "obsequious meter."

[frustratedinohio]

Really, why is this a pick? I agree with the comment, but what is it that makes a pick? Brevity? Nice nice?

[SteveClements]

As an Obama supporter I kept wishing he'd fight baxk more. He could all too easily have responded to the gang attack by asking her about her associations with Commies in her early law career, or her especially close ties to corporate special interests. But he showed real class. He made no attacks that could have offended Hillary's supporters, knowing that we have to unite after the convention. Instead he kept trying to get back to the issues. What amazes me is how Hillary's stated policy toward the middle east was more hawkish than even McCain. And it amazed me that Hillary waS ARGUING TO PROTECT THOSE MAKING $250, 000. wHEN DID THAT BECOME MIDDLE CLASS. I pay payroll tax on 100% of my income, why shouldn't they?

[Mollye]

Great commentary! The boards are not flooded today with debate coverage and the complainers are all Obama supporters. You are spot on...we have known for months that Obama has been given a free ride with media coverage, thus far. It is not too late to turn this thing around and nominate the candidate who is the most competent, qualified, hard-working always prepared.
Hillary Clinton 2008

[MartiP]

I'm not sure where Obama's supporters got the idea that they could protect him from hard questioning all the way to the Whitehouse. Some of us have been saying for months that this was coming, and the fault lay with the Democrats for refusing to vet this man and treating him with kid gloves for so long.

If they didn't want a long hard fall, they should not have erected that pedestal in the first place.

We cannot win in November, unless we have a candidate who can take abuse like a trooper, and walk through fire and keep going. That is what it's going to take to win. Hillary is tough enough. Obama isn't.

His supporters have done him no favors by demanding he be coddled for so many months.

[jeeje]

"We cannot win in November, unless we have a candidate who can take abuse like a trooper.."

Is that really your measure of a candidate?­........so­meone who can take abuse...barf....

[Neef]

"He finally got real questions for which he should have had ready answers."

First of all, I agree he should have had ready answers. No question.

However, this "finally" business indicates such an egregious lack awareness that I'm tempted to put a mirror under your nose. Do you even HAVE a television? You heard of YouTube?

I can't think of ANY candidate who has *consistently* been hit with any issue as much as this Reverend Wright issue. The Wright issue has gone on so long that we've seen backlash in Wright's FAVOR. Colin Powell endorsed Rev Wright. COLIN POWELL, and you think we're "finally" asking questions about it?

Finally? Really??

Look, just be honest and say you're glad the issue resurfaced. That's OK. The whole "finally" business doesn't do anything but make intelligent commentators seem like they've been asleep this whole time.

[MoMule]

All the more reason for him to have been sharper last night than he was. The guy has a glass jaw and it will not work against McCain.

[Rescisco]

Obama's performance was flat, uninspired, inept. Hillary was Hillary (always a negative). ABC was incompetent. John McCain wins last night's Democratic debate. My sense is that the party is over. Once again the Democrats have lost a "sure win." I say this as one who sincerely would like Senator Obama be successful. But what I see in the end is another general election loser, and by a surprisingly big margin. In Hillary, I also see a loser but by a bit closer margin. This is not to comment on the substance of the issues or the obvious failings for which McCain and his party should be held accountable. Like I said, it should be a sure win (a slam dunk?). But last night convinced me that the Democratic party (with these candidates at least) is about as ready to win an election as New Orleans was prepared to respond to Katrina. What I do not know is to what degree the problem is inept campaign strategy or to what degree it is candidates who are not prepared to be president. Whichever it is, I've seen this before and I know how it ends.

[TP2]

Last night Hillary admitted for the first time that she knowingly LIED about Bosnia. No follow-up questions from the supposedly "non-partial" moderators. ABC needs to apologize for the performance of Charlie and George. Never, not even on Fox, have TV news "journalists" acted so unprofessionally. Obama tried several times to get the subject of the debate to focus on the important issues. What we are seeing is a real "generational" gap. All you Hillary lovers and your Republican counterparts are "confused" why the old politics of personal destruction seem to be hurting Hillary more than Barack. The fact is-you are the elitists who have counted on the stupidity of the American people and wedge issues or gross misrepresentations of people to get you elected year after year. Maybe, just maybe, this year the American people are waking up. We have a real candidate speaking the truth, honestly and people are noticing the difference.

[Gibbons]

This was the first debate since the Reverend wright had been outed he won all his delegates as "Mr. Clean just take me like I am, as pure as the driven snow". But snow tends to drift.

[Zenpilot]

OK, Taylor. Save some of this energy for McCain. I know we can count on you when the time comes. Even if the nominee ends up being Obama. Right? You are going to be there for Democrats, aren't you?

[jvarga]

Actually, Ms. Marsh suggests that that is not the case:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/taylor-marsh/obamas-america_b_95350.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/taylor-marsh/dear-democratic-elite-ba_b_94004.html

[DoninJoisey]

I'd agree with you IF Clinton had equal barbs hurled at her.
All she got was Bosnia, no follow-up, and moderators and Obama let her off easy on a LIE.

IF Clinton had been asked to talk about:
Her Iraq war vote, and why she didn't read the NIE report
The Columbian trade deal and Bill, Penn, and Wolfson
Her statements about NAFTA - then and now

Then is might have been almost fair. The points I would ask about really do matter....and why doesn't she have a flag lapel pin?

[MissDarla]

I guess b/c she never made a statement that she refuses to wear one.

[MoMule]

Oh please ! Like she hasn't been asked these questions and more terrible ones time and time again! Wait until McCain is the other candidate.The MSM love him, they have personal relationships with him, they are his base for God Sakes. He jokes about it, they joke about it. How level do you think the playing field will be then?