At one point during the Democratic debate hosted by ABC News on Wednesday night, I fully expected moderators Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos to ask Sen. Barack Obama if he had finally gotten around to visiting Mumia Abu Jamal on Pennsylvania's death row.

After all, both Mumia and Obama have been saddled with "funny" Muslim names that hint at a revolutionary pedigree.

One was affiliated with the Black Panthers in his youth and the other suffered the only election defeat of his political career at the hands of a former Black Panther.

Mumia used to live in North Philadelphia. The final debate between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton was taking place in Philadelphia, a northern city.

Last, but not least, both Mumia and Obama were both breathing Pennsylvania air at the same time. How did the Democratic frontrunner feel inhaling and exhaling knowing that a convicted cop-killer was doing the same on the other side of the state?

It would even have given Mrs. Clinton an opportunity to vow she would take only shallow breaths in Pennsylvania until the Mumia situation is properly dealt with.

According to the specious logic of Wednesday's debate, Mumia and Obama's mutual need for oxygen would have been enough of a causal link to merit further exploration by ABC's once-respected newsmen.

Stephanopoulos: "A gentleman named William Ayers, he was part of the Weather Underground in the 1970s. They bombed the Pentagon, the Capitol and other buildings. He's never apologized for that. And in fact, on 9/11 he was quoted in The New York Times saying, 'I don't regret setting bombs; I feel we didn't do enough.' "

As Mr. Obama narrowed his gaze to prevent his eyes from popping out of his skull and rolling across the floor, Mr. Stephanopoulos continued:

"An early organizing meeting for your state Senate campaign was held at his house, and your campaign has said you are friendly. Can you explain that relationship for the voters, and explain to Democrats why it won't be a problem?"

Mr. Obama maintained a dignified bearing despite being asked on national television why he consorted with terrorists in the neighborhood. He must have wondered why he ever agreed to a debate moderated by Sean Hannity in disguise.

Obama: "George, but this is an example of what I'm talking about. This is a guy who lives in my neighborhood, who's a professor of English in Chicago, who I know and who I have not received some official endorsement from. He's not somebody who I exchange ideas from on a regular basis.

"And the notion that somehow as a consequence of me knowing somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago when I was 8 years old, somehow reflects on me and my values, doesn't make sense, George."

After copping to having right-wing associates, too, Mr. Obama asked if he was expected to apologize for those relationships, too.

Obama: "So this kind of game, in which anybody who I know, regardless of how flimsy the relationship is ... somehow their ideas could be attributed to me -- I think the American people are smarter than that. They're not going to suggest somehow that [this] is reflective of my views, because it obviously isn't."

Barack Obama's problem is that he still has a lingering belief in an orderly universe where rational first principles have more sway over the news cycle than the primitive, reptile-brained instincts of the media establishment.

Alas, very few within that elite circle of hell believe in the rationality of the voters. If they did, they wouldn't harp on questions about flag pins, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, patriotism, Louis Farrakhan, "guns and God" or even Mrs. Clinton's sniper debacle at the expense of more substantive issues mere days before a crucial primary.

It was an infuriating spectacle executed with an unconscionable air of smugness by two media professionals who should have known better.

Had it been sponsored by Fox News or conducted on right-wing radio or even a far left radio show, there would have been some precedent for the shoddiness and myopia that managed to defile both candidates and the audience.

Let there be no doubt about it: Everyone who took the time out of their busy lives to watch ABC's Democratic debate has been debased. I, for one, will think twice about tuning into an ABC-sponsored "debate" during the general election.