Video: Mary Katharine Ham gives thumbs up to the YouTube debate

posted at 3:36 pm on December 2, 2007 by Allahpundit

A not so minor detail: This was obviously shot shortly after the debate ended, before news of CNN’s green thumb had emerged. And stick with it — the Hammer does, presciently, raise an eyebrow about some of those odd gotcha questions near the end…

I agree with her, though, about the debate having been enjoyable. People are complaining that the questions from Democrats soaked up time that could have been spent on true conservative concerns but you’re not going to get any meaningful answers about that in this 30-second soundbite format. The only way to have a substantive discussion about policy is to go to a Lincoln-Douglas format, once the field’s been narrowed to two candidates, or some sort of roundtable conversation once it’s been narrowed to three or four. Fred can’t explain his tax plan in 30 seconds; it sounds the same as every other candidate’s tax plan. We’ve sat through half a dozen GOP debates thus far and I don’t think we’ve gotten a substantive answer yet about Iraq beyond “we need to win.” Planted questions suck but the format sucks worse. Change it.

After you watch, it’s worth scrolling through the list of questions for the Democratic YouTube debate to see how many gotchas they got. There was nothing quite as squirm-worthy or inflammatory as the confederate flag question on the GOP side (which was well handled, incidentally, especially by Fred), but these all seem to me like ones I’d expect to see CNN using to sandbag Republicans, not Dems: “Who would you pick as a Republican running mate?”, “Should African Americans be given reparations for slavery?”, “Is it OK to cite religion as a reason to deny gay rights?”, “Do you send your kids to a public or a private school?”, and the always popular “What’s to like and dislike about the candidate to your left?”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

The only way to have a substantive discussion about policy is to go to a Lincoln-Douglas format, once the field’s been narrowed to two candidate, or some sort of roundtable conversation once it’s been narrowed to three or four.

Fully agree. Imagine, just imagine. I doubt it will happen, primarily because the lefties will not agree to it.

Entelechy on December 2, 2007 at 3:46 PM

lincoln douglas debate between democrat and repub would be spectacular

between repub candidates, well that may have some unintended consequences….

cougfan on December 2, 2007 at 3:52 PM

I give MKH a thumbs up.

but you’re not going to get any meaningful answers about that in this 30-second soundbite format.

I do agree with this in regard to policy, but I think the debates tell us a lot about the individuals and their poise and personality, etc. I have found them, in general, not only enjoyable, but somewhat valuable.

Spirit of 1776 on December 2, 2007 at 3:56 PM

if there were a Lincoln and a Douglas in this year’s field it would be valuable.

I think 90 minutes of unfettered Hillary and [whoever] would send me straight to the arsenic bottle to embrace the sweet release of death.

sulla on December 2, 2007 at 3:59 PM

Everyone got worked up about the Dems sneaking in questions. So what? I don’t want to see us crying like they do. We are not afraid of them like they are of us. Just answer the question and move on.

nazarioj001 on December 2, 2007 at 3:59 PM

Darling is right! …woof!

ajmontana on December 2, 2007 at 4:11 PM

The only way to have a substantive discussion about policy is to go to a Lincoln-Douglas format, once the field’s been narrowed to two candidate …

Agreed. There either needs to be either an individual interview with each candidate with an agreed moderator (probably Jim Lehrer) or a round table.

Speaking of which, it seems Ron Paul won’t agree to a full hour with Glenn Beck.

Ian on December 2, 2007 at 4:22 PM

MKH was half an hour away and I didn’t know about it? Sigh…

:)

rockbend on December 2, 2007 at 4:22 PM

If we’re going to have debates…let’s have a room full of us questioning the defeatocrats and their base questioning our guys (or throwing pies or shouting them down). It would be quite the contrast for the general public to see.

SouthernGent on December 2, 2007 at 4:40 PM

MKH was half an hour away and I didn’t know about it? Sigh…

:)

rockbend on December 2, 2007 at 4:22 PM

You gotta pay attention, son.

steveegg on December 2, 2007 at 5:21 PM

I think 90 minutes of unfettered Hillary and [whoever] would send me straight to the arsenic bottle to embrace the sweet release of death.

I feel your pain, but it’s soo much easier to just turn the darned machine off.

Bob's Kid on December 2, 2007 at 5:28 PM

MKH… our darling. Well put.

I think 90 minutes of unfettered Hillary and [whoever] would send me straight to the arsenic bottle to embrace the sweet release of death.

I feel your pain, but it’s soo much easier to just turn the darned machine off. Bob’s Kid on December 2, 2007 at 5:28 PM

I’m reminded of this brilliant exchange with the godfather of political backbone:

Lady Nancy Astor: Winston, if you were my husband, I’d put arsenic in your morning coffee.
Churchill: Madam, if you were my wife, I’d drink it.

Mojave Mark on December 2, 2007 at 5:38 PM

I give MKH a thumbs up.

Her insightful conservative commentary brings all the boys to the yard.

saint kansas on December 2, 2007 at 5:39 PM

With all the guys that comment about girls looks on this Web site sometimes I think it’s a boy’s club :)

Oh well.

terryannonline on December 2, 2007 at 5:43 PM

With all the guys that comment about girls looks on this Web site sometimes I think it’s a boy’s club :)

Oh well.

terryannonline on December 2, 2007 at 5:43 PM

So start posting vlogs; that’ll get you noticed ;-)

steveegg on December 2, 2007 at 5:48 PM

steveegg on December 2, 2007 at 5:48 PM

But why can’t I just be liked for my mad writing skills?

terryannonline on December 2, 2007 at 5:53 PM

But why can’t I just be liked for my mad writing skills?

terryannonline on December 2, 2007 at 5:53 PM

Who said you weren’t liked? ;-) The thing is, we’re an A/V world, and the percentage of us with mad reading skills is dropping.

Disclosure, I’ve met MKH, and she is simply as nice as can be, even to an idiot like me.

steveegg on December 2, 2007 at 5:57 PM

Her insightful conservative commentary brings all the boys to the yard.

saint kansas on December 2, 2007 at 5:39 PM

And their life is better than the dems… Damn right, it’s better than them…

(sorry, saw an opening there…)

rightg33k on December 2, 2007 at 6:00 PM

terryannonline on December 2, 2007 at 5:43 PM

To what are you referring? My comment has nothing to do with looks.

Spirit of 1776 on December 2, 2007 at 6:20 PM

Spirit of 1776 on December 2, 2007 at 6:20 PM

You’re right this thread in particular doesn’t have those type of comments.
However, the threads that have MKH and Ms. Banderas do tend to have comments that get into their appearances. We do live in a free country and guys will be guys. No big deal. So I’m not saying I’m offended or anything like that I’m just pointing it out. That’s all.

terryannonline on December 2, 2007 at 6:38 PM

The current ‘news conference’ style format is like a security blanket for Clinton where she can give scripted answers to scripted question posed by the MSM. She’s been doing that since she began running for the U.S. Senate.

A true debate format with no MSM would take her out of her element and would show a weakness in her inability to think for herself.

Clinton would, therefore, never agree to such a format because she needs the protection of the MSM to prop her up.

pocomoco on December 2, 2007 at 6:58 PM

terryannonline on December 2, 2007 at 6:38 PM

Yeah, I didn’t read that you were offended, I was just checking to see if I was giving the wrong impression as that was not my intent.

You are right though, that is quite common. Not sure why, but in the general perhaps that relates to the ease of such statements. They require no context.

Spirit of 1776 on December 2, 2007 at 7:02 PM

If only our politicians were as kind, smart and level headed as MKH…… a man can dream can’t he?

Yakko77 on December 2, 2007 at 7:45 PM

Here’s my question for an interesting exchange:
“If you were not running, which of the other candidates would you support and why?”

Tzetzes on December 3, 2007 at 1:32 AM

Link hopping, I saw a vid with Chuck Norris. You guys should try to get an interview with him. Why? Cause it would be kewl.

- The Cat

MirCat on December 3, 2007 at 1:36 AM

MKH should get another interview with Mr. AC360 so she can say, I told you so.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/MaryKatharineHam/2007/11/27/anderson_cooper_on_choosing_questions_from_the_youtube_madness

mad saint jack on December 3, 2007 at 2:27 AM

“Do you send your kids to a public or a private school?”

Hey, I remember when an out-of-town couple were asked this question during a presidential campaign! Of course, what with their committment to public education, their child would go to the DC public schools.

thegreatbeast on December 3, 2007 at 2:36 AM

MM and MKH are the darlings of the blogsphere and they can always be counted on to provide U.S. the evidence needed to make a fully informed decision.

On the other side of the spectrum decisions are made in a vacuum. You can vote your conscience but those who count the votes determine if you have a conscience or matter at all.

MSGTAS on December 3, 2007 at 8:35 AM

But why can’t I just be liked for my mad writing skills?

If you do click over to terryannonline like I did (and you certainly should), you will love her for her mad writing skillz.

Plus, she’s teh hotness.

saint kansas on December 3, 2007 at 9:13 AM

Anybody else notice that MKH kept shifting focus from the interviewer to the camera? Drove me crazy. Ok, maybe I’m a little too close to insanity this fine Monday morning.

craig on December 3, 2007 at 12:42 PM