Living-room ambience maybe; or was it the charming and disarming Susan Hoffman? (Majette and Oxford get together)

Friday night's "get together" by Majette and Oxford. Ajc's headline by Ben Smith of ajc says it all: "Low-key exchange for Oxford, Majette" ("Perhaps it was the living-room ambience of the 'Georgia Week in Review' studio at Georgia Public Broadcasting or the lack of a clock to restrict the length of their answers." [If you haven't noticed, I love the way Ben Smith writes.]

Susan Hoffman of Georgia PBS, a/k/a "Job," asked the right questions on Friday night, but for the most part got little more than canned responses from both candidates.

Ms. Hoffman began by noting to Oxford that he had been called O.J. and accused of threatening to hire a hit man to kill his wife. Oxford, he just smile.

So Ms. Hoffman tried to elicit a lively response from Majette by observing that this past week she had lambasted the Democratic Party's leadership.

Oh no, Majette explained with a big smile, we were just having a friendly fireside chat, and everything is just fine now. [Did someone say something about with friends like this, who needs enemies?]

Oxford told Majette she just didn't like the Democratic Party's leadership supporting him. Majette retorted that the Party is not supporting him. [Credibility on this one lies with Oxford. I know, I know, as a traditional Southern Democrat I am old school, as in the days when character mattered.]

Early on Oxford appeared inclined to say what was on his mind, but then backed down as he had already begun to articulate the thought (he probably just didn't want another licking from Kevin Griffin, who would explain that what Oxford meant by what he said was something other than what he meant when he said what he meant, you know, Lewis Carroll type talk).

It appeared that Oxford was in the process of repeating the remark he made earlier in the week that "As near as I can tell, her message is basically, we need any African-American woman candidate in the United States Senate, no matter who that candidate is."

But he faltered, and settled for: "You [Majette] can't just say elect me because I am great."

Susan Hoffman asked Majette about her response to so many people questioning her sanity in leaving her safe Congressional seat. Majette responded that she does as God directs her to do.

Ms. Hoffman asked her to name three accomplishments from her tenure as Congresswoman: Majette began discussing one, and then turned to chasing rabbits with more canned stuff.

Ms. Hoffman asked her about the likelihood that black voters may not turn out in great numbers because DeKalb CEO Vernon Jones had won without a runoff, and Cynthia likewise had won without a runoff. The response -- I don't agree there is such a likelihood.

As I stated, Susan Hoffman was one patient person, and had to put up with the candidates carrying on about everything other than than address her succinct and clear questions.

In responding to a question about the 9-11 Commission's recommendations, Oxford said the smartest thing (OK, push me, the "only" smart thing) I have heard him say all summer. He talked about there being a "bureaucratic feifdom" in Washington.

Near the end of the program Ms. Hoffman asked each candidate to tell voters why they should vote for the candidate.

Majette went first, and said because she has never missed voting in an election (this meaning in the context that Oxford rarely bothers to vote); and as good measure, Majette threw in that she has a 95% voting record in Congress.

Oxford said the election is about more than just his pitiful voting record; it is about -- you guessed it -- the 150 jobs he outsourced to Americus rather than India. And also, about some being without health care.

In summary, you didn't miss much. Ms. Hoffman spared Oxford of having to explain the Carter "switch" that was noted by Ben Smith in the ajc this week. But it will come up during the debate next week, I feel certain.