Political debates were designed to give people a close-up of the candidates’ views in a given campaign in order to allow the voters to make a prudent choice of those who will be leading them for a period of years. Those verbal confrontations are supposed to get to the truth concerning issues the public cares about. However, getting to the truth is more difficult than one might imagine; especially if the candidate feels that the truth might cause a loss of votes among some segments of the electorate. With that in mind, people running for office will often enlist the aid of debate specialists who will train them in the nuances of answer-evasion. In her blockbuster book, “Going Rogue,” Sarah Palin wrote about the excessive attention to debate strategy by the McCain team during the 2008 presidential campaign. She described her uneasiness with the way her “handlers” were trying to teach how not to answer questions.  Governor Palin was told that she doesn’t have to answer the question that was asked. Her response was, “Why wouldn’t I want to answer the questions?”

     Anyone watching the recent Texas gubernatorial debate would think that Senator Hutchison was given the same advice as Palin. Each time the moderator asked her if she would support overturning the Roe vs. Wade Supreme Court decision, which made abortion legal in the US, the senator went into evasion mode. She is on record as supporting the decision, while saying that she would like to see fewer abortions performed. That’s like saying you support capital punishment, but you don’t want anyone executed. Inasmuch as she is running as the most conservative candidate in the race, and the fact that abortion is a core principle of conservatives, it’s easy to understand why she refused to answer that question directly. Governor Perry, her major opponent, is staunchly against abortion and would indeed like to see Roe vs. Wade overturned. Because Perry is sure of his personal and political convictions, he had no reservations about answering the question.