Democratic Texas Debate – Be sure to smile while you’re lying

Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton headed down to Texas to debate for what seemed like the hundredth time, fielded some questions in heavily accented English, bashed George W. Bush at every opportunity, and did a lot of lying. In other words, nothing’s changed.

For those expecting Hillary Clinton to come out with claws and fangs exposed (myself included), they were sorely disappointed. Clinton’s lost ten (or is it 11?) states in a row, yet could manage nary a mean-spirited attack on the much younger and more likable Obama, and Obama took advantage of the niceties to appear more and more presidential before a national audience.

Obama drove yet another stake through the Clinton electoral heart. If we didn’t end up with him at the end of the day, it would actually be kind of fun to watch.

Speaking of Dracula (stake through the heart), Hillary’s wardrobe choice was somewhat curious – a navy blue suit with a rather flamboyant collar, that one observer compared to the famous vampire. Too bad she wasn’t out for blood on Thursday evening, or the theme would’ve worked perfectly.

The debate was hosted by CNN and the Spanish language network Univision, and there was a distinct Spanish flavor – with Univision correspondent Jorge Ramos posing questions in both languages to the candidates. CNN offered up Campbell Brown and John King, and overall, there were some interesting subjects asked of the candidates.

And maybe it was because the candidates were seated side-by-side at a table, but the atmosphere was devoid of the tension you would expect from a forum with two candidates who’ve been campaigning for over a year and are set apart by only a few delegates, this late in the game.

The pandering started early

Both candidates were allowed an opening statement, and Hillary Clinton took advantage of the opportunity to once again emphasize her ‘experience’ in Texas, and to start the name dropping game – including mentions of former Texas Governor Ann Richards (who’s famous for saying “George H.W. Bush was born with a silver foot in his mouth”) and the late Congresswoman Barbara Jordan, who 99% of the country under the age of fifty has probably never heard of.

Hillary emphasized her “lifetime of experience and proven results.”

Obama took the chance to set the tone of the debate with his opening speech, claiming “Hillary and I were friends before this campaign started, and we’ll be friends after it’s over.” He then launched into a drawn out soliloquy of all the people he’s met in Texas and Ohio on the campaign trail who need the federal government’s help, or most surely will perish – and how Washington needs him to bring folks together. “Washington is a place where good ideas go to die,” he said.

Just exactly what those ideas are, he didn’t really elaborate, and one has to wonder just how much damage will be done if Obama’s ‘ideas’ aren’t allowed to die a natural death. But that’s a discussion for a later time.

Obama concluded with another allusion to Congresswoman Barbara Jordan, quoting her: “We need to help America be as good as it’s promised.”

Clearly, both Clinton and Obama had done their homework – but it took a steady string of lies to keep the discussion moving.

Working hard on differences

Realizing that there are precious few policy differences between them, Hillary Clinton went out of her way to try and emphasize the minute points where they have some disagreement. Obama countered with how similar their policies are, trying to make this a race based on personality that he’ll certainly win.

Clinton fielded a question on Cuba and whether she’d meet with the ‘new’ president now that Fidel Castro has stepped down – and Clinton drudged up a point from a debate last summer where Obama said that he’d meet with ‘enemies’ in order to start a dialogue with foreign dictators.

Clinton spoke out of both sides of her mouth – she said there would be diplomatic dialogue with Cuba, but there would have to be demonstrable change in the country before a presidential meeting would be arranged.

When the discussion turned to healthcare, this is where Hillary went ballistic in her attempts to draw lines between the candidates, once again claiming that Obama’s plan would not insure a small portion of the population, and promising universal healthcare for all if she’s elected.

She kept coming back to the subject, too – virtually ignoring a question from Ramos on whether Obama was fit to be Commander in Chief – in order to keep pounding the point on healthcare.

Listening to the Democrats, you’d think there are sick, untreated people dying on virtually every street corner while evil health insurance executives hover over them with taunting glances. Hillary said “I want to stop health insurers from discriminating against sick people.”

So much for the ‘ol Hippocratic oath. The Democrats make it sound like health professionals in America are turning out the masses in order to treat only those with the best health insurance. It’s just one of many lies advanced by a party that wants to take apart the entire engine to replace one leaky washer.

On the economy, Obama took his turn at completely ignoring a question. He was asked how a President Obama would differ from a President Clinton in economic terms – and barely mentioned Clinton in his answer, instead discussing all the ‘damage’ that’s been done by George W. Bush in his seven years as president.

Obama also threw in a plug that will please his enviro-nut constituents, saying that he wanted to build a ‘green economy.’ What exactly is a ‘green’ economy, and how much will it cost to build it?

He concluded his answer by using ‘change’ several times in the same sentence. It’s really starting to get old.

Clinton said “we need a president who will work for you every day.” It sounds like something her husband made up that sounds nice and says absolutely nothing. The problem in this country is that there are too many politicians working entirely too hard to ‘change’ our lives and make them conform to a bleak medium that nobody but the absolutely desperate would aspire to.

She continued laying out her economic plans by saying we need a ‘trade time-out,’ as well as a freeze on mortgage rates for five years and a 90-day moratorium on foreclosures.

Where in the Constitution is the presidential authority to alter private contracts?

If these people ever reach office, and they go to work ‘for’ us, it’s going to make it incredibly difficult for first-time buyers to ever get a mortgage – because no lender in his right mind would extend credit to anyone without proven assets.

The ‘help’ that Clinton proposes will set the concept of private home ownership back centuries. 

George W. Bush’s amnesty bill was defeated in 2007 by a wave of grassroots conservatives letting their voices be heard – but all the rancor is lost on Clinton and Obama, who made it absolutely clear that they’re for amnesty, and they wouldn’t keep their promise to build a fence along the border.

“There’s a smart way to protect our borders, and a dumb way,” Clinton proclaimed. I guess she’s implying that building a barrier is the ‘dumb’ way.

It’s astonishing to listen to them talk about the issue – like the illegal aliens themselves are the ‘victims’ in this regard. Clinton drew applause from the audience by saying there needs to be a path to legalization for illegal aliens – I wonder how many people outside the auditorium were clapping in their living rooms.

Obama used the opportunity to inject race into the equation, claiming that ‘hate crimes’ have risen dramatically since immigration came to the forefront – once again, blame the American citizens instead of the law-breakers.

Both of them said that America needs to improve its relationship with Mexico – to create new jobs so the Mexican population won’t see it necessary to move northward. 

More lies. Is there anything more that the United States can do to improve things in Mexico that hasn’t been done? Why not just dissolve the border and we can all ‘benefit’ from the mix of cultures?

The most interesting exchange of the evening followed a series of questions over the ‘tone’ of the campaign. Clinton was asked about her recent rhetoric, and whether Obama was ‘all hat and no cattle.’

Clinton didn’t do herself any favors with her answer – first trying to make nice, then claiming that she offers ‘solutions’ and Obama merely offers words.

Obama seized the question and demonstrated why he’s trouncing Clinton with younger voters, claiming that people need to be inspired in order to affect change – the same message he’s been advancing for months.

Therein lies the difference – Obama inspires, and the Clintons repel people. It doesn’t take a genius to see why Hillary is losing this race, even with all her built-in advantages.

The final question of the debate nearly brought us another Clinton ‘crying’ moment. When asked if there was one defining instance that helped hone their leadership and judgment skills, Hillary joked that she’s lived through some crises and challenges – truly a moment of clarity.

Then she said “I was called by my faith and my upbringing to do what I can to help others.” Faith and upbringing made her this way?

If that’s the case, then religion has a bad name. I was certain that she was going to start crying (again), but the tears just wouldn’t come. Bill Clinton used to emphasize the point by biting his lip for effect, but clearly Hillary lacks his flair for the spontaneous dramatic. 

For what it’s worth, the talking heads seemed to love Hillary’s closing moment – but maybe they were just trying to inject some interest back into this debate and a race that Obama’s clearly winning.

And if the voters of Texas and Ohio don’t go along with her, she’s finished.