But first it’s worth looking at what exactly happened to infuriate conservative critics (even leading Rush Limbaugh to pun that Crowley committed “an act of journalistic terror”). The conflict arose during a question on Libya, Mr. Romney criticizing President Obama’s response to the Benghazi attacks and alleged refusal to admit it was a terrorist strike:
ROMNEY: I — I think interesting the president just said something which — which is that on the day after the attack he went into the Rose Garden and said that this was an act of terror.
OBAMA: That’s what I said.
ROMNEY: You said in the Rose Garden the day after the attack, it was an act of terror.
It was not a spontaneous demonstration, is that what you’re saying?
OBAMA: Please proceed governor.
ROMNEY: I want to make sure we get that for the record because it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror.
OBAMA: Get the transcript.
Well, Crowley did just that. Or tried to:
CROWLEY: It — it — it — he did in fact, sir. So let me — let me call it an act of terror…
OBAMA: Can you say that a little louder, Candy?
CROWLEY: He — he did call it an act of terror.
Now, Obama’s actual Rose Garden Statement was that “no acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation....” In other words, he does use the phrase “acts of terror” and implies the Benghazi attack was just that. But Romney is correct that Obama did not directly label the incident as a terroristic attack, focusing instead on the role of ongoing protests over an anti-Islam movie.
So perhaps the right wing pundits have reason to be angry with Crowley for making a definitive imposition against Romney. Except she didn’t do that at all--she continued:
CROWLEY: It did as well take — it did as well take two weeks or so for the whole idea there being a riot out there about this tape to come out. You are correct about that.
ROMNEY: This — the administration — the administration indicated this was a reaction to a video and was a spontaneous reaction.
CROWLEY: It did.
Crowley pointed out the obfuscation from both sides, bookended the petty argument over word choice, and forced the event onward. In other words, she moderated.
The question asked--a question Obama very pointedly did not answer--was why a request for heightened embassy security was denied by the state department. Of course, Paul Ryan’s budget called for cuts to that security as well, so Romney didn’t rush into the thicket either. Since neither candidate wanted to answer the question at hand and risk any subtleties, they focused on the petty matter of a phrase, ignoring what that phrase purported to show. Crowley simply put an end to it by highlighting the essence of both candidate’s position while forcing them to stop arguing past each other.
Why, then, are conservative pundits so up in arms? The same reason liberal pundits, and the crowd at the debate, cheered so mightily at the first half of Crowley’s statement (“he did in fact, sir”). The issues at hand now are who looked best, which candidate is a better leader, who came off as more presidential. The fact that Romney was obviously knocked off-kilter at the moment ensures Obama is the answer to all those questions.
But, that one candidate faltered in the moment and the other didn’t is irrelevant to whether or not Crowley acted properly: those angered with Crowley for aiding Obama are missing the exact same point as those praising her for fact-checking Romney. What both should pay more attention to is whether their candidates are actually answering the questions asked them.
Crowley’s credit comes not from hampering Romney, because that wasn’t actually the essence of her interjection. She deserves thanks for doing exactly what Jim Lehrer didn’t in the first debate: attempting to force the candidates away from their stump speeches and focusing them on the actual issues that voters are asking about. That happened far too little last night--again, note that the original question was never answered by either Obama nor Romney--but this exchange was the one where Crowley did the most to ensure an informative debate.
No comments:
Post a Comment