Come this January, upon assuming office the next president of the United States will have to confront (in no particular order):
1) The war in Iraq.
2) An economy in free fall.
3) Rising gas prices.
4) Terrorism.
5) Global warming.
6) A crumbling infrastructure.
7) Restoring American credibility around the world.
8) A disgraceful public education system.
9) Rebuilding a stressed military.
10) A variety of complex multinational trade issues.

And then on the second day in office, things will really get busy.

So on Wednesday evening what consumed nearly the first 50 minutes of the ABC News Democratic presidential debate between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama?

Who said what when? Whose preacher is an moron? What did so and so mean when he or she blah-blahed this, or yada-yadaed that?

Nearly half of a two-hour debate was preoccupied with the dodging sniper gaffe, the crazy minister rants and serving on the board of some organization with an old, radical hippie.

It was embittering, is what it was.

At the same time, George Stephanopoulos and Charles Gibson, who proved to be about as effectively inquisitive as Barney Fife, treated the debate as if this was an election for Moose Lodge president.

Roughly 12 minutes was spent on Iraq, about 15 minutes on the economy. Another 12 minutes was dedicated to gun and gun control, about the same amount of time allotted to affirmative action.

Or put another way, this debate was more fixated on Obama’s comments on the non-issue of the bitterness or lack thereof of Pennsylvania voters than the candidate’s views on the matters of state, they as president would have to deal with after the swearing in.

There is a reason so many people distrust the news media.

Wednesday night, thanks to ABC’s treatment of a presidential debate as if it was the Q&A portion of the Miss American contest, the public has one more - legitimate - beef.