The 6/3 Debate or You Can Come to My Party but You Can't Eat My Cake

It was almost 7 PM on Sunday. My husband and I poured ourselves some wine and headed to the living room to watch the CNN broadcast of the Democratic debate. We were anxious to hear more from Mike Gravel and Dennis Kucinich. The media had essentially narrowed the contenders down to Obama, Clinton, Biden and Edwards with Richardson and Dodd enjoying a visible position on the periphery. But Gravel and Kucinich had been relegated to the shadows. Like the cooty kids in school, they were begrudgingly included in the activities but nobody really wanted them to be there.

Yet my husband and I remained hopeful. For us, Gravel and Kucinich were saying things that the American people (whose collective voice had been raised against the war in Iraq, whose concerns about the astronomical costs of health care coverage had gone unheeded by both parties) wanted to hear -- if someone would just hand the candidates a mike once in awhile. As we watched the debate unfold, it became apparent that Wolf Blitzer had already picked his favorites for the evening. Having been thrown a cursory question or two, Mike and Dennis stood at their podiums, strategically (and symbolically, perhaps) positioned on the outskirts, waiting like a pair of Oliver Twists for more gruel.

From his disadvantageous position, Kucinich, who is short ( a superficial drawback in his quest for the presidency but one, nevertheless, deemed considerable in our image-fixated culture), was captured by the CNN cameras, standing on a box behind his podium.

On the other end, Mike Gravel, who is old (another superficial drawback but one, nevertheless, deemed considerable in our youth-fixated culture), was given short-shrift by Blitzer and, when asked one of the few questions directed at him, was not encouraged to pursue his line of reasoning for more than a brief minute or two.

On the key issues (and I’m speaking from personal concerns), Iraq and universal health care, the two candidates have a far stronger platform than their more popular counterparts. But, deprived of airtime and exposure, they become waterboys in a major league game.

As my (dear) sister said to me, “You don’t want to give your vote to someone who isn’t going to win anyway.” But a loser becomes a loser only when relegated to the sidelines.

Why not correct the bias with a kitchen timer and a moderator who adheres to the standards of formal debate? “ ‘Ding!’ Senator Clinton, your time is up. We now go to Senator Gravel for his evaluation of the war in Iraq and how to address the current situation. Senator Gravel? You have fifteen minutes. ‘Ding!’ ”

Until then, our choices remain defined by the corporate media. If we want exposure for candidates who offer thoughtful and viable solutions to the critical issues facing America, we shall have to present a united front to the powers-that-be and demand that all individuals in the presidential race be given equitable coverage and the forum they deserve.