A Lincoln-Douglas Debate? But Obama Just Isn’t Up To It

When danger reared its ugly head,
He bravely turned his tail and fled.
Yes, brave Obama turned about
And gallantly he chickened out.
  - From Riverdaughter‘s blog

Barack Obama is cowering in fear of another embarrassing debate performance. In contrast, a confident Hillary Clinton is petitioning Obama to honor the debate he reneged on in North Carolina (originally scheduled today) and challenging him to more debates in Indiana and Oregon.

Today, Hillary Clinton upped the ante, proposing a 90-minute Lincoln-Douglas style debate before Indiana’s primary. Obama is sure to refuse.

“[I]ndescribably stupid” is what Tom Watson calls Obama’s repeated refusals to debate in North Carolina or Indiana. In “All the Wrong Moves,” Watson observes:

For one, running and hiding from Hillary looks, well, like running and hiding from Hillary. It cements that growing perception in the press that she’s tougher, and that he’s a brittle political actor – all smiles when the polls are moving upward, quite another story in stormy seas. When you’re running against a beloved American war hero and the Republican attack machine, this is never a good posture.

Secondly, it leaves Obama’s terrible performance in the last debate at the top of people’s minds when they think of the two Democrats duking it out. For all the hand-wringing about the inane ABC News questions in the debate’s first half, it was Obama’s sullen and seemingly lost persona that was the Philly battle’s real story. …

Harry S. Truman, the same president who said, “If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen,” also said:

America was not built on fear. America was built on courage, on imagination and an unbeatable determination to do the job at hand.

Senator Obama, move past your fears and face your opponent, or get out of the kitchen. It is Hillary Clinton who has both the “courage” and the “unbeatable determination to do the job at hand.”

That ABC News debate, held days before the April 22nd Pennsylvania primary, proved disastrous for Senator Obama, who was flummoxed and tongue-tied by tough questions about his questionable longtime associations with Rev. Jeremiah Wright and William Ayers. And Tom Watson is spot on in pointing out that Obama’s refusal to accept more debates actually further cements the unfavorable memories of that last performance in people’s minds.

Since the debate and subsequent drubbing in the Keystone State’s primary, Obama has reneged on a promise to debate in North Carolina that would have been carried on CBS and moderated by a surely gentler Katie Couric. (Clinton spokesman Lanny Davis has intimated that DNC Chair Howard Dean abetted Obama in weasling out of the debate.)

In a preview of Sunday’s interview of Obama by Fox News’s Chris Wallace —
“Obama: No More Debates Before Next Primary” — Obama provided disingenuous excuses:

Asked why he was repeatedly “ducking” Clinton’s debate challenges before the Indiana and North Carolina primaries, Obama said, as he has before, that he just wants to spend time with voters.

“I’m not ducking. We’ve had 21 (debates), and so what we’ve said is, with two weeks, two big states, we want to make sure we’re talking to as many folks possible on the ground taking questions from voters,” he said, so no debates.

“We’re not going to have debates between now and Indiana,” he said.

Typically, he exaggerated.  In fact, there have been 21 debates, but only four debates that directly pitted him against Senator Clinton.

Saturday’s post at ABC News blog Political Radar, “Clinton Challenges Obama to a ‘Lincoln-Douglas’ Debate,” offers more details on the proposed Lincoln-Douglas debate:

Speaking in South Bend, Ind., Sen. Clinton said, “What I think the people in Indiana deserve is a real one-on-one debate, where Sen. Obama and I discuss [the] issues. Now I have accepted the debates that have been offered, and in fact Indiana has a debate commission which organizes this to make sure it’s fair and nobody gets any special advantages. I’ve said I’ll be anywhere, anytime in order to debate, because I think the people of Indiana — after having wandered in the wilderness of American politics for 40 years — deserve a break. Who knows, we might even carry Indiana in the fall if we start with a good debate right here.”

Clinton continued, “Unfortunately, Sen. Obama has not agreed yet, and he’s turned down every debate that has been offered. So here I have a proposition my campaign sent his campaign today. You know, after the last debate in Philadelphia, Sen. Obama’s supporters complained a little bit about the tough questions (awwwwwww heard in the audience). You know tough questions in a debate are nothing compared to the tough questions you get when you are president.”

Clinton challenged Obama, saying, “And they complained about the moderators asking tough questions. So here is my proposal: I’m offering Sen. Obama the chance to debate me one-on-one, no moderators.  Just the two of us going for 90 minutes asking and answering questions. We’ll set whatever rules seem fair. I think it would give the people of Indiana — and I assume a few Americans will tune in because nearly 11 million watched the Philadelphia debate, and I think they would like seeing that discussion. Remember that’s what happened during the Lincoln and Douglas debates. Now we have had like four debates between Sen. Obama and myself.”

So what is Clinton really talking about here?  We’ve all become so accustomed to the televised mass media-styled debate that a review is in order, via Wikipedia’s description of the Lincoln-Douglas debates:

The debates were held in seven towns in the state of Illinois: Ottawa on August 21, Freeport on August 27, Jonesboro on September 15, Charleston on September 18, Galesburg on October 7, Quincy on October 13, and Alton on October 15. …

Seven debates in 7 different towns in less than 60 days!

Each debate had this format: one candidate spoke for an hour, then the other candidate spoke for an hour and a half, and then the first candidate was allowed a half hour “rejoinder.” The candidates alternated speaking first. As the incumbent, Douglas spoke first in four of the debates.

Take a quick look at the text in “The Lincoln-Douglas Debates of 1858,” posted at a National Park Service site.

Talk about detailed and wonky!  There were no moderators. The crowd obviously shouted out questions. And the two men often took a cue from those questions, switched gears and answered them, right off the top of their heads.  There were no speechwriters or earpieces available to help them out. There were no teleprompters.  Yet the depth and breadth of knowledge that they displayed — and their ability to convey it — is mindboggling!

We’ve all watched, in debate after debate, as Hillary Clinton displayed the same breadth and depth of knowledge, an ability that even her most ardent detractors admit she commands.

There was also media meddling in the reporting of the original Lincoln-Douglas debates:

“Newspaper coverage of the debates was intense, as major papers from Chicago sent stenographers to create complete texts of each debate. Then newspapers across the nation reprinted the full text of the debates as published by the Chicago papers.  Interestingly, newspapers that supported Douglas edited his speeches to remove any errors made by the stenographers and to correct grammatical errors, while they left Lincoln’s speeches in the rough form in which they had been transcribed. In the same way, Republican papers edited Lincoln’s speeches, but left the Douglas texts as reported.”

Sound familiar?

Now, what Senator Clinton is suggesting isn’t nearly as strenuous as the Lincoln-Douglas debates surely were.

“Senator Clinton believes deeply that political debates are a vital part of our democratic process,” her press release reads.

It is the American way to place our would-be leaders side by side to hear them articulate and defend their ideas; to challenge each other on their visions for the future; to answer the tough questions about their plans, their records and their judgments; and to celebrate their achievements.

“Senator Obama has declined the invitation from CBS and the North Carolina Democratic Party to appear for a debate at North Carolina State University tomorrow evening. Senator Obama has apparently declined the invitation of the Indiana Debate Commission to appear for a debate in Indiana next week. Senator Obama has not responded to Senator Clinton’s challenge to debate in Oregon.

Will there be no debates in other upcoming states? The American people, of course, deserve more. They deserve debates before casting their votes. They deserve debates just like the states who have participated in this invigorating process before them.

Surely Senator Obama wants open discourse about important issues!  What does it say about him if he refuses?  

Is it that he isn’t willing to take the risk, now that he is no longer guaranteed “a pillow” at these debates?

Or is it just that he’s chicken?

If he can’t handle the relatively soft, wonky questions that Senator Clinton will ask, how could he ever handle John McCain?

How will he hold up under the relentless attacks of the GOP 527s?

The ball’s back in your court, Senator Obama.

Show us… do you know how to play hardball?

If not, get out now. And give the Democratic party the one nominee who can take the heat and can handle the hardball questions: Hillary Clinton.