In Praise of Martha Raddatz

Let me say a few words about the really astonishing person who appeared at the vice presidential debate on Thursday – the moderator.

Martha Raddatz of ABC News didn’t ask puffy questions like Jim Lehrer did at the presidential debate. Or let the candidates get away with vague non-answers, as Jim Lehrer did.

Ms. Raddatz acted like a working journalist instead of a television personality from her first question, on Ambassador Stevens’ death: “It was a pre-planned assault by heavily armed men,” she said. “Wasn’t this a massive intelligence failure, Vice President Biden?”


Later, she pressed Mr. Ryan. “Governor Romney, and you’re talking about this again tonight, talked about the weakness; talked about apologies from the Obama administration. Was that really appropriate right in the middle of the crisis?”

“Mr. Ryan,” she said, “I want to ask you about — the Romney campaign talks a lot about no apologies. He has a book called ‘No Apologies.’ Should the U.S. have apologized for Americans burning Korans in Afghanistan? Should the U.S. apologize for U.S. Marines urinating on Taliban corpses?”

Mr. Ryan’s response: “Oh, gosh, yes. Urinating on Taliban corpses?”

Ms. Raddatz showed a consistent willingness to call the candidates on their “malarkey,” as the Vice President put it. When Mr. Ryan said he could cut taxes without reducing the deficit by eliminating loopholes, but didn’t actually mention which loopholes, she drew attention to his evasiveness: “No specifics, again.”

And she refused to let Mr. Ryan ignore her question about his ticket’s plan to increase the defense budget. By my count, she returned to that point six times, culminating with the rather sharp: “I want to know how you do the math and have this increase in defense spending?”

With 15 minutes left, after dragging the candidates through taxes, Medicare, Social Security, the budget deficit, terrorism and Afghanistan, she raised a topic that didn’t come up at all last week: How did each of the candidates’ personal beliefs (they are both Catholic) affect their views on abortion.

Mr. Ryan mentioned seeing an ultrasound of his first child at seven weeks, “who was in the shape of a bean.” He said he believes “that life begins at conception.” He said he respects other people’s views, but then made it clear he does not respect their rights.

Mr. Biden said his “religion defines who I am” and that included accepting his church’s doctrine that life begins at conception. “I just refuse to impose it on others, unlike my friend here the Congressman,” he said.

Then Ms. Raddatz cut through the malarkey: “If a Romney/Ryan ticket is elected, should those who believe that abortion should remain legal be worried?”

The answer from both candidates was yes.

“We don’t think unelected judges should make this decision.” Mr. Ryan said. Mr Biden said: “Just ask yourself, with Robert Bork being the chief adviser on the court for Mr. Romney, who do you think he’s likely to appoint?”

We’ll have an editorial on how the actual candidates performed, but Ms. Raddatz certainly won her part of the debate.