Obama vs. Clinton: What They Choose Not to Say Would Fill Volumes

Senators Clinton and Obama met in debate last night, their last public battle together before next week's critically important Pennsylvania primary. How did they do?

Keeping the score card, there's no way Obama could fared worse. Nearly 45 minutes of relentless political scrutiny from the ABC anchors and from Hillary Clinton, followed by an issues-and-answers session in which his anger carried over and sort of neutered him. But Hillary Clinton has a Reverse-Teflon problem: her negatives are up, and when she's perceived as the attacker, the attacks never seem to settle on Obama and always seem to boomerang back on her. So it would be unwise to declare that Hillary "won" the debate in the dynamic sense just yet. (How much money will Obama raise off this debate? $3m million? $4 million?)

A lot of stuff that Obama doesn't Pennsylvanians to think about were the subject of fairly detailed questions. Obama's supporters are already blaming the "establishment" -- that is, the powerful institution of the mainstream media -- for the tone of the debate. This sets up a blowback scenario wherein his supporters will rally to his defense and lash out at the media very loudly. But Obama's going to be the next president of the United States, maybe. The most powerful person in the world. And questions about his personal associations, his character, his personal beliefs, his statements at private fundraisers -- the answers to these questions tell us a lot. __Source

This was perhaps the first honest debate that Obama has been forced to face head on. He did not do well. He was lost in a fog through most of the performance. His supporters in the audience violated the "no applause" rule repeatedly, which seemed to rattle Obama even more.

The Marc Ambinder report quoted above is fascinating. Why? Because of the comments that followed his report at the Atlantic website. The well-zombied following of Obama comes out in full force in Marc's comments to rant and condemn ABC, Marc, the MSM in general, George Stephanopolous, Charlie Gibson, and the usual suspects Sean Hannity and Fox News (??).

The most interesting way to watch such political performance theatre is to turn the volume all the way down, and watch the debaters' faces. The silent examination allows a better reading of the speaker's subconscious nuances, that underlie the attempts to obfuscate and circumvent the things they really do not want to say.

Most fascinating.