Michael Gaynor
Persuasive Christine O'Donnell pounds pompous Chris Coons
By Michael Gaynor
Hopefully, the voters will realize that the moderators were manipulative and understand that they were because Coons needed their help.
Christine O'Donnell, Delaware's Republican Senate candidate, isn't a witch.
She's a Catholic ...and persecuted for her Catholic values.
Triple teamed by Chris Coons, her Democrat opponent, and the "moderators," CNN's Wolf Blitzer and Delaware First Media's Nancy Karibjanian (the "witch" on stage last night), O'Donnell nevertheless triumphed on substance and style in a handicap match.
National Review's Jim Geraghty titled his commentary on the debate last night "Did Delawareans Just Endure the Worst-Moderated Debate Ever?" (http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/249723/did-delawareans-just-endure-worst-moderated-debate-ever).
The moderating was not merely bad, it was blatantly biased. If O'Donnell was not a lady, she would have lambasted Nasty Nancy and told Wily Wolf that he should ask his questions and she would answer them as she saw fit.
Geraghty, who does not have illusions about the admittedly imperfect O'Donnell, judged O'Donnell the winner too:
"If Delaware voters tuned in, expecting a bubble-headed, wacky ditz to ramble about masturbation and Satanism, they probably wondered where she was and why some woman who seemed to know about the issues was on stage instead. All of those cable television appearances paid off for O'Donnell. She was polished, serious, engaging and nothing like the caricature painted in recent months by Saturday Night Live, her old Politically Incorrect or MTV appearances, editorial cartoons, etc.
"I'm not inclined to agree with the positions of Democrat Chris Coons, but he struck me as terrible. I wondered if he felt a bit like Al Gore taking on Dan Quayle in 1992 or Joe Biden taking on Sarah Palin in 2008; the opponent was supposed to be a blithering idiot and anything less than a TKO would be a disappointment. But Coons seemed intent to play it safe, to the point where the local moderator, Schoolmarm McFavoritism, had to invite him to jump in twice. Several times he said he didn't have the required time to answer the questions, and so he punted. His answers were pat, predictable, almost rote recitation of standard-issue Democratic talking points. As I said on Twitter, the generic ballot numbers in Delaware may be strangely relevant, since it seems Chris Coons is the Generic Democratic Candidate."
It was malevolent moderator bias, not imcompetence, that made the moderating a top contender for "worst moderated debate ever."
"Schoolmarm McFavoritism" personified liberal media bias.
The bearded Blitzer was not quite as bad, probably because he's male. O'Donnell is female and nasty Nancy was there to do the dirtiest work.
Geraghty:
"The moderators were pretty awful. Both Blitzer and the local reporter seemed hell bent on... well, the metaphor burning a witch comes to mind.
"Yes, Christine O'Donnell has a lot of quirks, a lot of questionable decisions in her past and a lot of evasive answers about those bad decisions. But it was pretty clear that neither moderator was all that interested in holding Coons' feet to the fire or interested in what he had to say at all. CNN's Wolf Blitzer, the better of the two, was hell-bent on pinning down O'Donnell's view on evolution. And he was the better of the two. This was the moderators' chance to play hardball with their designated Villain Du Jour, and the fact that CNN aired much of this debate live illustrates that the MSM doesn't just want to see O'Donnell beaten; they want to see her... well, metaphorically burned at the stake in the town square for her audacity."
The moderators did not singe, much less incinerate, O'Donnell, but they kept the arrogant Coons from going up in smoke by steering the debate arbitrarily and arguing for him.
Geraghty, admittedly no an O'Donnell fan, concluded: "...she deserved better than this, and so did the voters. This was supposed to be a debate, not a show trial."
Delaware voters should realize that the moderators were manipulative and understand that they were because Coons needed their help.
Geraghty's bottom line: "Did this night help [O'Donnell]? When you're 21 points down, you have to simultaneously build yourself up and tear down your opponent, and it's tough to do simultaneously. In the end, she's a very conservative candidate in a state that isn't very conservative at all, and that's going to be a tough sell."
True. But O'Donnell built herself up greatly...and she still has a bit of time to "tear down" Coons, by tying him to the radical agendas of President Obama and ACORN.
This isn't 2008 and liberal media bias is more obvious in Delaware now, especially as a result of the debate.
For O'Donnell, THAT'S GREAT!
© Michael Gaynor
October 14, 2010
Hopefully, the voters will realize that the moderators were manipulative and understand that they were because Coons needed their help.
Christine O'Donnell, Delaware's Republican Senate candidate, isn't a witch.
She's a Catholic ...and persecuted for her Catholic values.
Triple teamed by Chris Coons, her Democrat opponent, and the "moderators," CNN's Wolf Blitzer and Delaware First Media's Nancy Karibjanian (the "witch" on stage last night), O'Donnell nevertheless triumphed on substance and style in a handicap match.
National Review's Jim Geraghty titled his commentary on the debate last night "Did Delawareans Just Endure the Worst-Moderated Debate Ever?" (http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/249723/did-delawareans-just-endure-worst-moderated-debate-ever).
The moderating was not merely bad, it was blatantly biased. If O'Donnell was not a lady, she would have lambasted Nasty Nancy and told Wily Wolf that he should ask his questions and she would answer them as she saw fit.
Geraghty, who does not have illusions about the admittedly imperfect O'Donnell, judged O'Donnell the winner too:
"If Delaware voters tuned in, expecting a bubble-headed, wacky ditz to ramble about masturbation and Satanism, they probably wondered where she was and why some woman who seemed to know about the issues was on stage instead. All of those cable television appearances paid off for O'Donnell. She was polished, serious, engaging and nothing like the caricature painted in recent months by Saturday Night Live, her old Politically Incorrect or MTV appearances, editorial cartoons, etc.
"I'm not inclined to agree with the positions of Democrat Chris Coons, but he struck me as terrible. I wondered if he felt a bit like Al Gore taking on Dan Quayle in 1992 or Joe Biden taking on Sarah Palin in 2008; the opponent was supposed to be a blithering idiot and anything less than a TKO would be a disappointment. But Coons seemed intent to play it safe, to the point where the local moderator, Schoolmarm McFavoritism, had to invite him to jump in twice. Several times he said he didn't have the required time to answer the questions, and so he punted. His answers were pat, predictable, almost rote recitation of standard-issue Democratic talking points. As I said on Twitter, the generic ballot numbers in Delaware may be strangely relevant, since it seems Chris Coons is the Generic Democratic Candidate."
It was malevolent moderator bias, not imcompetence, that made the moderating a top contender for "worst moderated debate ever."
"Schoolmarm McFavoritism" personified liberal media bias.
The bearded Blitzer was not quite as bad, probably because he's male. O'Donnell is female and nasty Nancy was there to do the dirtiest work.
Geraghty:
"The moderators were pretty awful. Both Blitzer and the local reporter seemed hell bent on... well, the metaphor burning a witch comes to mind.
"Yes, Christine O'Donnell has a lot of quirks, a lot of questionable decisions in her past and a lot of evasive answers about those bad decisions. But it was pretty clear that neither moderator was all that interested in holding Coons' feet to the fire or interested in what he had to say at all. CNN's Wolf Blitzer, the better of the two, was hell-bent on pinning down O'Donnell's view on evolution. And he was the better of the two. This was the moderators' chance to play hardball with their designated Villain Du Jour, and the fact that CNN aired much of this debate live illustrates that the MSM doesn't just want to see O'Donnell beaten; they want to see her... well, metaphorically burned at the stake in the town square for her audacity."
The moderators did not singe, much less incinerate, O'Donnell, but they kept the arrogant Coons from going up in smoke by steering the debate arbitrarily and arguing for him.
Geraghty, admittedly no an O'Donnell fan, concluded: "...she deserved better than this, and so did the voters. This was supposed to be a debate, not a show trial."
Delaware voters should realize that the moderators were manipulative and understand that they were because Coons needed their help.
Geraghty's bottom line: "Did this night help [O'Donnell]? When you're 21 points down, you have to simultaneously build yourself up and tear down your opponent, and it's tough to do simultaneously. In the end, she's a very conservative candidate in a state that isn't very conservative at all, and that's going to be a tough sell."
True. But O'Donnell built herself up greatly...and she still has a bit of time to "tear down" Coons, by tying him to the radical agendas of President Obama and ACORN.
This isn't 2008 and liberal media bias is more obvious in Delaware now, especially as a result of the debate.
For O'Donnell, THAT'S GREAT!
© Michael Gaynor
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
