On This Week With George Stephanopoulos this morning, Sen. Jim DeMint got pummeled by Barney Frank, as Blue Texan rightfully notes. But there was more going on there than the debate between two diametrically opposed worldviews. Did you notice Google CEO Eric Schmidt attempt to shut that debate down? Now, he didn't literally shut either DeMint or Frank up but he repeatedly took Frank and DeMint to task for...arguing...on a debate show.

Take this exchange between Schmidt and Frank:

SCHMIDT: And, by the way, you guys need to get this thing fixed. What we need is very simple. We need some form of a jobs program, something that causes jobs to get created, and we need credit to get -- get going again. That's what we should be talking about as a country. And we can debate exactly how to do it, but get it going now.

FRANK: Well, excuse me. You dismissed...wait, it's called democracy, Eric. I'm sorry, but it's inevitable.

Followed later by this:

SCHMIDT: Chairman, the fact of the matter is, that if the government simply told everybody what you all were doing...and then people could track it and figure out whether it's actually working...

FRANK: But we are going to do that.

SCHMIDT: ... we could get through these classic fights that you all have.

FRANK: Well, no, I differ -- differ with you on that. Please. Let's not obviate democracy. There are legitimate different philosophical differences between Jim DeMint and myself. Please don't treat them as some sideshow.

Nice.

Now, on substance I agree with most of what Schmidt said on the show but the subtext of Schmidt's complaints here is the classic "partisan bickering is the reason nothing gets done in Washington." Yawn. Give me a break. Glad to see Barney Frank shut Schmidt down.

You see, this idea that partisan bickering is what's wrong with Washington is an invention of the Village denizens in order to perpetuate the myth that both parties are equally to blame for the last eight years and thus immunize themselves against the (accurate) charge that they enabled the real perpetrators of the disaster we're trying to dig ourselves out of: the Republican extremists who ran this country for 8 years.

In fact, the lack of debate for fear of its being labeled "partisan bickering" is one of the ills that's plagued Washington. Just think what might have been different if there had been MORE debate about the destructive post-9/11 Bush policies and if Democrats had stood up to Bush and the Republicans when they were popular rather than caving at every turn. Also, consider all those people who voted for George W. Bush or, perhaps more significantly, Ralph Nader in 2000 because "there's no difference between the two parties."

As Blue Texan observes:

The stark contrast between the two parties was on full display this morning.

Indeed.

So, while Schmidt overall clearly agreed with Frank more than DeMint on This Week, his perpetuation of the myth that Frank's and DeMint's arguing is the real problem rather than the fact that DeMint represents a failed governing philosophy and a caucus intent on obstructing rather than working with Democrats to solve America's problems is really unhelpful.

More of this please:

DEMINT: One is for the government to take it out of the private sector through taxes and then decide where it's going to go through political manipulation, as they've done in the House. The other is just to leave more money in the private sector for consumers to spend and businesses to invest.

And that's the American way. And that's -- that's the approach we're pushing. [...]

FRANK: I regret Senator DeMint saying that this is the American way. Let's -- let's just agree that we're all Americans here, Jim, and that nobody's got the American way versus presumably the non-American way.

And as far as spending versus tax cuts, I think we need to fix some highways and bridges. I never saw a tax cut fix a bridge. I never saw a tax cut give us more public transportation. The fact is, we need a mix.

We need -- and I think we've suffered from an extremism in this country in the past of relying only on private-sector activity and having too little government. It's possible to have too much government, no question. But it's possible to have too little. And some parts of this stimulus -- extending unemployment benefits, helping with food stamps -- you know, we have two purposes here. One is to stimulate the overall economy. The other is to go to the aid of some people who, through no fault of their own, have been damaged. You can't just look at the aggregates. [...]

FRANK: The largest spending bill in history is going to turn out to be the war in Iraq. And one of the things, if we're going to talk about spending, I don't -- I have a problem when we leave out that extraordinarily expensive, damaging war in Iraq, which has caused much more harm than good, in my judgment.

And I don't understand why, from some of my conservative friends, building a road, building a school, helping somebody get health care, that's -- that's wasteful spending, but that war in Iraq, which is going to cost us over $1 trillion before we're through -- yes, I wish we hadn't have done that. We'd have been in a lot better shape fiscally. [...]

FRANK: I also disagree that we're taking money, quote, "out of the economy" if we improve public transportation, if we improve highways. That's your concept. You're taking money out of the economy if you make sure a bridge doesn't fall down.

There's more...

One of the reasons I liked Hillary in the primary was that I knew she would fiercely fight for the presidency and that she could win. Whether Barack Obama had the same fight in him I just didn't know. After a couple months of ably deflecting attacks, I thought he did but after this past week, I'm less confident.

As David Gergen said on This Week today:

The challenger has got to put the Bush administration more on trial that he has. He's got to drive home the points that this hasn't worked and that John McCain is an extension of that. He hasn't connected it in a really firm way.

Now, that's not to say Obama won't but I think we can safely say that he has a level of discomfort with hitting back against McCain in a really tough way that has accrued to John McCain's benefit this past week. So what is to be done about it?

Again from Gergen:

When the Republican attack machine cranks up, just as Clinton predicted, [Obama's] actually pretty vulnerable...What this tells me is that Obama needs some help out there to fight this campaign. I know he's dismissed Hillary Clinton as a running mate, I think he needs to reopen that question and re-examine that because he needs a fighter by his side to take this on. There are some things that he just can't say very well that she could say or someone who is a fighter could say. I think this week just underscored very much he needs a strong running mate, he doesn't need a colorless running mate.

I couldn't agree more. Now does this lead one necessarily to Hillary Clinton? Not really. All signs still do point to 'No,' perhaps now especially since the perception would likely be that he's picked her because he needs her, which is not terribly flattering to Barack. Also, Hillary Clinton can still be that fighter by his side on the campaign trail on his behalf without being on the ticket. But it does recommend someone like Joe Biden, Wesley Clark and Chris Dodd who've proven themselves to be able fighters against the right, and is yet another mark against Kathleen Sebelius (State of the Union response, anyone?) and Tim Kaine for whom Joe Lieberman is apparently )or was) the paragon of independence. It's also a strike against Evan Bayh, because I think we can all agree that he's the very definition of colorless.

So a little more unsolicited advice for Barack Obama: whomever you pick, make sure he or she is a fighter.

There's more...

Barack Obama was looking weary as he endured a barrage of questioning by Tim Russert on his releationship with Rev. Wright. At the same time Clinton looked and acted confident and professional as she towered over host George Stephanopoulos and silenced her critics.

While being interviewed by Mr. Russert,Obama tried to quell the controversy over his connections to Rev Wright by simply ignoring it opting to change the subject.

For her part, Hillary Clinton did not even flinch when a woman in the audience, an Obama supporter who said she made less than $25,000 a year, argued she, too, thought Mrs. Clinton was "pandering" for short-term political gain. Instead Hillary rose to her feet and answered the women directly, cutting Stepanopoulos completely out of the camera shot.

When he tried to flummox her by asking whether the campaign would ever release the names of donors who had given money to her husband's foundation, Mrs. Clinton shut him down with a one word answer: "No."

In Short Mr. Obama revealed that he was not impervious to pressure, while Mrs. Clinton once again proved that it takes more than a village to make her sweat.

Clinton Steals the Show

This Week and Meet The Press are on up against each other here in L.A. Watching This Week now, will watch MTP later. Did you watch/are you watching now?

Update [2008-5-4 12:9:1 by Todd Beeton]:George asked some tough questions putting to rest, I think, the notion that he is in the pocket of Clinton's campaign. Actually, he was more confrontational with her than Bill O'Reilly was. Seemed like she may have been a bit shaken in the beginning by his confronting her on the gas tax holiday the way he did -- she stumbled on the "name an economist who supports the plan" question -- but she picked it up in the second half once she got to answer voters' questions. She was clear once again that she would do everything she could to make sure a Democrat is elected in November, which I believe she will despite the conspiracy theories of many to the contrary.

There's more...

Sen Obama should drop out of the race. Having just seen the new attack ad that the GOP is showing in NC -- condemning the state's Democratic leadership for backing Obama, replete with Rev Wright cursing America -- it is clear that Senator Obama is detrimental to the Democratic brand nationwide. As Jerome Armstrong wrote nearly one month ago, "That's fall-out from Wright, not against just Obama, but also Clinton, and most likely against the Democratic Party in general. It's branding of Democrats Obama, and Clinton, as anti-American."

Obama earned his lead early on, prior to being vetted. After he lost Texas and Ohio, the Wright videos appeared, shocking the nation. Slowly, information about his relationship to Rezko, and his affiliation with William Ayers have also entered the mainstream.

CLICK HERE TO CONTINUE READING 

There's more...