Righties Wrong about CNN/YouTube Debate

The conservative pile-on of CNN over last week's debate is getting ridiculous.

"CNN opened its gates to the American people and, to their surprise, the network's relentlessly touted credibility ran out the door like a dog in heat," vents Jonah Goldberg. "Nearly a third of the questioners in the debate proved to be if not outright plants of the Democratic Party or other liberal interests, then at least very far from the 'ordinary Americans' this whole circus was supposed to be catering to."

But wait: Goldberg's not just angry that CNN let Democrats -- some of whom have even have a favorite candidate already! -- ask questions. He's also pissed that Republicans were invited to the party:

For the most part they were a motley crew of conservative caricatures. CNN's typical "ordinary American" (translation: "scary Republican") was a pale, gaunt, twenty-something white dude who looked like he'd spent the last year working in the sunless bunker he'd constructed out of his mom's basement.

It's eleven months before the election. The primaries are still a month away. Who do you think is paying attention at this point besides intense partisans on both sides? Does it really surprise you that the people who'd go to the trouble of creating and submitting video questions are mostly axe-to-grind wingnuts? The "ordinary Americans" are all out Christmas shopping.

Peggy Noonan has an equally obtuse take on the debate. She says the liberals in the audience were able to put the Republican candidates on the spot with tough questions such as "would Jesus support the death penalty, do you believe every word of the Bible, and what does the Confederate flag mean to you?"

"It's not bad that the questions had a certain spin, and played on stereotypes of the GOP," she adds. "It's just bad that it doesn't quite happen at Democratic debates. Somehow, there, an obscure restraint sets in on the part of news producers."

It does? Then why have Democrats been getting all tangled up in debate questions about national security and immigration -- exactly the issues that "play on stereotypes" of liberal weakness?

Noonan dreams of the day a pro-lifer will hold up a picture of a fetus at a debate and ask Democrats "to look America in the eye and tell us how you can support laws to end this life."

This is her idea of the kind of a "gotcha" question for Democrats? Given overwhelming support for legal abortion, this is practically a softball, and Hillary Clinton, the putative subject of Noonan's column, has already devised the perfect formulation for talking about it: a "sad choice," "safe, legal and rare," etc.

Noonan's living in a fantasy world if she really thinks Clinton wouldn't prefer to discuss abortion over, say, drivers licenses for illegal immigrants.