It was good to see the ‘new’ format with the presidential wannabes actually debating. No staged questioners, just the media questioning the candidates, and the candidates questioning each other. It was informative, that is, until the democrats had their turn.
Discussing illegal immigration, a major concern of people of both parties, apparently isn’t a concern to ABC News where democrats are concerned. Why is it that ABC left the country wondering where the Democrat candidates stand on the subject of immigration? I felt short-changed by ABC.
After the republicans had their turn, there was a little gaggle that lasted about 12 minutes. And it was informative and, I thought, useful. After the democrats had their turn, the gaggle was about 45 minutes. Wazupwidat? Matter of fact, during and after the debate, it was hard to discern any difference in policies between the dems on the panel. It seemed more like a pep rally of people running against Bush, who isn’t running, than something designed to inform potential voters. And we still don’t know their intentions on immigration, drivers licenses, sanctuary cities, the border, amnesty, health care, education concerning illegals, et al..
For some reason, ABC did get opinions from both parties on the war on terror. That was good. We can see the differences there. One wants to get out after winning, the other wants to get out before winning. However, there was not one question about what they would do with or about the Patriot Act, or even waterboarding. Last night John Edwards said that ‘we should use every tool available’ to fight the war on terror. That would have to include the Patriot Act. FLASH: Edwards has said that the patriot act should be scrapped. Edwards has said that the war on terror is just a Bush created bumper sticker. But those contradictions from Edwards and the others went unchallenged. Not very helpful in informing the voting public.
On the subject of illegal immigration for democrats, they were mute. It seems like ABC just came up with an alternative to planting questioners, which is, not asking the same questions of both parties and, letting them contradict themselves without question.