By Jonah Goldberg
Friday, October 16, 2015
Democrats and their supporters in the media are
congratulating themselves for a job well done in the first Democratic debate.
Both Martin O’Malley and Hillary Clinton included in their closing remarks
canned celebrations of how civil and morally superior the Democratic debate was
compared with the earlier GOP donnybrooks.
The New York Times
began its Wednesday editorial extolling the value of civility thus: “It was
impossible not to feel a sense of relief watching the Democratic debate after
months dominated by the Republican circus of haters, ranters, and that very
special group of king killers in Congress.”
Longtime Hillary Clinton pet Lanny Davis churned out a
column headlined, “The real winner in Las Vegas Tuesday night was the
Democratic party — in stark contrast to the GOP.”
Now, it is true that Donald Trump’s presence in the first
two prime-time debates lends a superficial credence to claims that the
Republican field is more coarse and insulting. Trump, after all, is coarse and
insulting. He uses words like “losers” and “dumb” as if they’re punctuation
marks.
But there are a couple of other factors at work. First of
all, both parties have their no-chance candidates. In the GOP, these tend to be
single-issue activists or ideological purists whom the cynics among us suspect
are interested in getting radio shows or cable-news gigs, or in selling books.
Most Democratic vanity candidates are running for a Cabinet position in the
next administration. As a result, they tend not to go for the jugular,
particularly when the prohibitive front-runner is from a famously vindictive
political dynasty with near-monopoly control of the party.
The more salient piece of the equation is that
Republicans are always asked to justify their conservatism in a way that puts
them either at odds with their supporters or with the public.
Here are just a few examples of questions asked of
Republican presidential candidates in the debates so far:
“Governor Perry, try and answer this question again. What
do you say to the family of illegals? Are you going to break them apart?”
“Governor Walker, you’ve consistently said that you want
to make abortion illegal even in cases of rape, incest, or to save the life of
the mother. You recently signed an abortion law in Wisconsin that does have an
exception for the mother’s life, but you’re on the record as having objected to
it. Would you really let a mother die rather than have an abortion, and with 83
percent of the American public in favor of a life exception, are you too out of
the mainstream on this issue to win the general election?”
“Senator Rubio, you favor a rape and incest exception to
abortion bans. Cardinal Timothy Dolan of New York just said yesterday those
exceptions are preposterous. He said they discriminate against an entire class
of human beings. If you believe that life begins at conception, as you say you
do, how do you justify ending a life just because it begins violently, through
no fault of the baby?”
These questions were asked by Bill Hemmer and Megyn Kelly
of Fox News — where I am a contributor. But you could find just as many similar
questions from the CNN debate. The point isn’t that these are unfair questions.
Presidential candidates should be asked tough questions.
Rather, the point is that Democrats rarely get asked
similar questions from the mainstream media. The rape-and-incest abortion
questions are totally fair game. But why was no Democrat asked an equivalent
abortion question in Tuesday’s debate. Why not ask something like: “Mrs. Clinton,
you recently told John Dickerson of CBS that you oppose any restrictions on
abortion, at any stage of pregnancy. Do you honestly believe that it should be
legal to abort a healthy 8-month-old fetus for non-medical reasons? Also, would
you be okay with Planned Parenthood then selling that healthy fetus’s brain and
heart?”
Sure, it’s a nasty question, but no less unfair or
irrelevant than the ones routinely put to Republican candidates. It’s just as
easy to concoct a host of questions about religion, immigration, and gay rights
that would illuminate that Democrats, too, can be out of the mainstream.
Anderson Cooper and his colleagues at CNN didn’t only lob
softballs at the Democrats in Las Vegas; they made little to no effort to
highlight the fact that on many social issues, the Democratic party is often
more out of the mainstream than the Republicans are. Why? Because the Democrats
don’t seem out of the mainstream — to
the mainstream media.
No comments:
Post a Comment