by CKR
David Broder is concerned about the state of discourse in the campaign.
Indiana and North Carolina were doubly irrelevant this year, because the "issues" that Clinton and Obama discussed in the two weeks before those states' primaries were some of the phoniest of this entire election cycle.And of course Broder has been absolutely, completely responsible and has asked the kind of questions he'd like to hear and never fanned the Wright controversy. Right?Obama was all but obliterated for that time by the huge media-fanned controversy over his former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Wright's inflammatory comments were obnoxious, but they bore no resemblance to the rhetoric and the record of the Illinois senator. I'd like to know what kind of people Obama would bring into his White House and where he would turn for a Cabinet, because there is so much uncertainty about his actual policies at home and abroad.
Wright would clearly not be anywhere in that administration, so why waste a full fortnight on him?
Broder mentions Wright in every column all the way back to March 23.
May 1: A Pastor's Influence
April 24: The Democrats' Worst Nightmare
April 20: Democrats' Damaging Brawl
April 17: What Pennsylvania Voters Are Saying
March 23: The Real Value Of Obama's Speech
Admittedly, in some of these columns, Wright is mentioned only incidentally. And I suppose Broder would say that Wright was part of the news, he had to mention him.
But I count ten weeks plus, not just the two before Indiana and North Carolina.