When Russerts Attack [VIDEO]

Posted by Steve Benen, The Carpetbagger Report at 12:07 PM on February 27, 2008.

In the last post, we talked a bit about how Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama did in last night's debate in Cleveland. But I'd remiss if I neglected to note how truly awful Tim Russert was as a moderator. His performance was rather embarrassing -- for all of us.

This had to be one of my favorite exchanges of any of the Dems' 20 debates.

MR. RUSSERT: I want to ask both of you this question, then. If we -- if this scenario plays out and the Americans get out in total and al Qaeda resurges and Iraq goes to hell, do you hold the right, in your mind as American president, to re-invade, to go back into Iraq to stabilize it?

SEN. CLINTON: You know, Tim, you ask a lot of hypotheticals. And I believe that what's -

MR. RUSSERT: But this is reality.

SEN. CLINTON: No -- well, it isn't reality. You're making lots of different hypothetical assessments.

Clinton shouldn't have had to explain the difference between a hypothetical question and a real-life scenario, but Russert was clearly confused.

Alas, it only got worse. Much worse.

The entire series of questions for Obama about Farrakhan was even more noxious, as Josh Marshall explained.

I would say it was borderline to bring up the issue of Farrakhan at all. But perhaps since it's getting some media play you bring it up just for the record, for Obama to address.

That's not what Russert did. He launches into it, gets into a parsing issue over word choices, then tries to find reasons to read into the record some of Farrakhan's vilest quotes after Obama has just said he denounces all of them. Then he launches into a bizarre series of logical fallacies that had Obama needing to assure Jews that he didn't believe that Farrakhan "epitomizes greatness".

As a Jew and perhaps more importantly simply as a sentient being I found it disgusting. It was a nationwide, televised, MSM version of one of those noxious Obama smear emails.

Josh posted a video clip, and it's as bad as it sounds. Obama denounced Farrakhan and said his anti-Semitism is "reprehensible." Russert, for no apparent reason, decided to start reading some of Farrakhan's more disgusting comments anyway. Obama interrupted, saying we all know about Farrakhan's record, which is why he's denounced it. Russert, apparently unable to help himself, stuck with the topic.

Digby drove all of this home beautifully.

The country wants change. They want Washington to stop all the partisan bickering and they want a different tone. They want their government to be serious and deal with real problems.

Can someone please explain to me how that can possibly happen until something is done about the reprehensible political press? From tax returns to Farrakhan to footage shown by "mistake" to the endless, trivial, gotcha bullshit, this debate spectacle tonight was a classic demonstration of what people really hate about politics. It isn't actually the candidates who can at least on occasion be substantive and serious. The problem is Tim Russert and all his petty, shallow acolytes who spend all their time reading Drudge and breathlessly reporting every tabloid tidbit and sexy rumor and seeking out minor inconsistencies from years past in lieu of doing any real work.

Judging by their silly questions tonight, Russert and Williams obviously know nothing about health care policy, Iraq, Islamic terrorism, economics, global trade or any other subject that requires more than five minutes study to come up with some gotcha question or a stupid Jack Bauer fantasy. It's embarrassing.

It is, indeed, and it's harmful to the process. There's no reason for debate moderation to be this bad.

Tagged as: media, race, clinton, obama, farrakhan, democratic debate, russert, williams

Steve Benen is a freelance writer/researcher and creator of The Carpetbagger Report. In addition, he is the lead editor of Salon.com's Blog Report, and has been a contributor to Talking Points Memo, Washington Monthly, Crooks & Liars, The American Prospect, and the Guardian.