OBAMA-ROMNEY: THE SECOND DEBATE

I don’t know about you, but with me yesterday’s debate left a heavy, sad aftertaste. The American political process has become a caricature of itself, and last night served as an illustration. The main criterion of success between the two contenders was how pugnacious each would be coming across. President Obama’s redemption, after the last debate’s alleged “fiasco,” would be the intensity of anger he was supposed to project this time, to indicate that he still wanted the White House job. Incidentally, I liked Mr. Obama more in the first debate, and he lost it. I liked him less in the second debate, and he won it. As for the so-called substance, it was entirely lost among the “binders full of women,” and other such telltale nonsense. But who would care for substance, anyway? The debate was not authentic enough, to make substance matter. Both candidates were unapologetically scripted, using each question from the audience to segue to their pre-fabricated talking points, and when on a couple of occasions the transition appeared too hard to find, Mr. Romney simply ignored the question altogether, and took the desired “highway exit” no matter what.

It was a fake debate all around. A town hall meeting is supposed to be a celebration of freedom and democracy in action. I have my strong suspicions about ‘democracy’ in yesterday’s event, but it was a glaring fact that freedom was nowhere to be found. Freedom is spontaneous, but there was no spontaneity, except when someone put his foot in his mouth. Reciting your handlers’ talking points is an insult to the concept of freedom. As for the questions from the audience, they were an even greater mockery. I am sure that America is capable of producing plenty of brave questioners who wouldn’t need a cheatsheet to ask a question, yet yesterday’s participants could not even memorize their lines properly, and unabashedly read from the notes, as if that was the only proper thing to do, thus contributing to the shameful evidence of a prearranged circus for all the viewing world to see.

No person chained to a piece of paper with what is supposed to be his or her question written on it, is a free person. Regrettably, I have to repeat that there was no freedom in yesterday’s audience, and not much more freedom on the stage, either. As for the moderator Candy Crawley, although she was criticized for a couple of questionable calls, I think she did a fairly decent job, professionally speaking, especially considering the eagerness of both campaigns to turn the venue into a warzone. But, presiding over a fake event, she does not deserve congratulations.

And finally, the worst thing about last night’s event is that it was not an exception, but the rule of our times. I am, however, refusing to obey reason, and am looking forward to the next and last debate, number three, with an open mind.