Last night, what an embarrassment. But far more than that, what a waste.
Rachel Maddow could have asked Congressman Peter DeFazio’s Republican challenger, Art Robinson, how a demand-less economy can rapidly recoup without massive infusions of government cash, thus substituting much-needed demand; she could have asked how he otherwise intends to health-insure 50 million uninsured Americans; she could have asked how familiar he is with the wretched consequences of unregulated capitalism; she could have asked about the (lack of) wisdom of our military involvement in Afghanistan.
Maddow could have asked many a relevant question, but instead she played a transparent game of “gotcha,” mostly about ancient and, to be sure, scientifically crackpot quotes. Well, Ms. Maddow, Isaac Newton went to his grave believing he could unlock the alchemistic secret of “creating” gold. So what? Such was the thrust of Robinson’s studied response lying in wait -- and frankly, Ms. Maddow, it visibly unnerved you and probably generated a touch of sympathy for him.
All those relevant questions left dangling, left unasked, to which Robinson likely would have looked the absolute fool. But you, Ms. Maddow, asked about “hormesis.”
If Rep. DeFazio were to appear on Sean Hannity’s fraud of an interview show, and were he then to be asked by Mr. Hannity nothing but questions about 15-year-old oddball quotes or writings, movement progressives would, quite rightly, be up in indignant arms. Typical, that’s just typical, they’d say, of the malign Sean Hannity and his far-right tactics of distraction.
So what was movement progressivism’s rarely granted preemptive strike in response? To act like Sean Hannity, thus demonstrating that impeccable wastes of valuable interview time aren’t the sole property of the malicious right.
What a waste. Robinson could have been nailed, but good. But you, Ms. Maddow, blew it.