Hill No Match For Sodrel In Recent Debate

For those of you that happened to take in last week’s debate between the three candidates for the 9th District Congressional race on WTIU you witnessed the vast differences between Mike Sodrel and Baron Hill. Mike Sodrel was armed with facts, he was able to articulate his responses to the questions with ease and he was on point throughout the debate. Baron Hill on the other hand was often off topic, he had absolutely no data or figures to back up his responses and honestly after serving six years in Congress should be ashamed of his poor performance. Even the Libertarian candidate, Eric Schansberg seemed better prepared and was able to articulate his thoughts far better than Hill throughout the course of the debate.

The opening remarks were indicative of the their overall strategies, Sodrel pointing out his understanding of world as it exists today and his overall grasp of how to deal with its complexities. He took the opportunity to highlight that the debate was the third time he and Hill had opposed each other, the first time he lost his bid for Congress he went back home to southern Indiana doing what he had been doing, running his trucking business and contributing to the states economy. He compared that to the 2004 election where after his victory over his opponent, Hill blamed everyone but himself for his loss and then took a job with a special interest lobbying group in Washington DC once again laying proof of Hill’s status as a career politician. Hill opened by strafing Sodrel with a variety of opportunistic talking points that he hopes will offer him some political traction in the next couple of months. Ironically many of the troubles that face the citizens of the 9th District were born or at least matured during Hill’s six-year tenure in Congress.

Hill made several references to the fact he would have preferred a” single topic” debate where a single topic could have been thrashed about for an hour versus the spontaneity of a variety of topics where his weakness and vulnerability shown through. Hill’s obvious topic of choice was gasoline prices and high costs of energy. His supporters should be reminded that his strategy is rather disingenuous since it was none other than Baron Hill that in 2003 and 2004 repeatedly voted against bi-partisan energy legislation that required higher use of ethanol and bio-diesel fuel now seen as a clean renewable alternative that will help ease our dependency on foreign oil.

With each question whether the topic was fuel costs, the war in Iraq or the No Child Left Behind Act Mike Sodrel offered facts and figures that supported his position and proved he has a thorough grasp on reality and the challenges that face our nation. Hill sounded confused and often retreated to political pandering without offering any data or relevant facts to back up his position. At one point Hill indicated the No Child Left Behind Act was a failure all the while he had to recall that in 2001 he voted for it. He also indicated that he thought the war in Iraq was a mistake, again another one of those I voted for it before I voted against it situations.

My advice to Baron Hill and his handlers is don’t agree to any more debates, single topic or otherwise as its quite obvious Mike Sodrel will flat out eat your lunch. If the debate were scored it would have put Sodrel with the gold at about a 9.4, Schansberg would have taken the silver with an 8.7 and Hill would have taken the bronze with about a 6.8. It was truly revealing to watch Hill stumble around sorting through his notes trying to find his talking points while Mike Sodrel looked straight ahead offering up facts and figures. At one point when he was providing his reasoning for supporting the war effort he recited the words of John F. Kennedy without once looking down. Sodrel’s knowledge, passion and depth of feeling came through crystal clear throughout the debate and proved he truly is the best man for the job because of his understanding of the issues that face the citizens of the 9th district.