Why aren't the Democrats debating now?
You need to know this… Last night, Fox So-Called News announced the lineup for Thursday's first Republican presidential debate. The 10 candidates who will take the stage in Cleveland, Ohio will be: Donald Trump, Jeb Bush, Scott Walker, Mike Huckabee, Ben Carson, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Chris Christie, and John Kasich.
So that's the lineup for Thursday. But Monday night, America got its first glimpse of the Republican presidential field in all its - um - glory at a special forum in Manchester, New Hampshire.
The current front runner, Donald Trump, wasn’t there, but 14 other candidates were. And, even though no audiences responses were allowed, it was still a good first look at what makes this year’s cast of Republicans tick.
And what makes them tick is what makes every Republican candidate everywhere tick these days - repealing Obamacare - blocking the Iran deal - slashing away at vital government programs. You know, the usual red meat kind of stuff.
Former New York governor George Pataki, for example, said that if he was elected president he would repeal Obamacare, do away Common Core, and fire hundreds of thousands of people. The end result of his plan to eliminate 15 percent of federal jobs.
Texas Senator Ted Cruz, who appeared at the forum via a studio in DC, also got in on the red meat game and said that the deal to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon will make the US a “state sponsor of terror.”
This is the kind crazy rhetoric Americans are going to hear all week on all the major cables news stations, and with the first official Republican debate just a day away, they’re going to hear even more of it over the coming months.
Which raises the question - why is Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, waiting until the fall to hold the first Democratic debates?
With all this Republican crazy talk floating around, wouldn't it be a good idea to get a Democratic response out there sooner rather than later?
Wouldn't it make sense to let Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton, Martin O'Malley, Jim Webb, and Lincoln Chafee confront Republican talking points head on?
Wouldn't it be good for the party - and the issues it says it cares about - to debunk Republican lies BEFORE - not after - the catch on?
Or, is protecting Hillary Clinton just too important to care about any of that?