|
||
Liveblog! Dems Debate Tim Russert's Giant Noggin!
Hello, and welcome to Dartmouth, and the kickoff debate of the fall season, which apparently is different from those practice debates of the spring/summer season. Tonight, the Dems will aim to prove it — and, with Hillary Clinton the frontrunner to knock down a peg, pundits are predicting that tonight, the gloves will come off. Will they? We'll find out when you do, and we'll be liveblogging every second of it on yet another installment of our patented HuffPo Debate Liveblog Series ™ — where we watch the debates and critique the candidates in real time. Tonight HuffPo mainstay Glynnis MacNicol and your trusty ETP editor Rachel Sklar (me) will be evaluating your candidates, plus making frequent reference to moderator Tim Russert's giant head, because let's face it, that thing is huge. Join us, won't you — here we go!
Glynnis (9:06:00 PM): Welcome to the first Democratic debate of the Prime Time season! The Caucus is saying that this is the political equivalent of a television fall premiere.
Rachel (9:12:38 PM): Heroes!
Glynnis (9:06:45 PM): It is fair to assume that after Hillary's strong showing this week, and "full Ginsburg," the gloves might be coming off. This isn't a vote for "class president," after all.
Rachel (9:07:08 PM): For the uninitiated, the "full Ginsburg" refers to taking a spin across the dial on all five Sunday morning shows, in honor of William Ginsburg, former lawyer for Bill Clinton during l'affaire Monica Lewinsky. It does not refer to wearing giant glasses and long black robes.
Glynnis (9:07:31 PM): The first question is to Obama regarding troop withdrawal. Obama says that he wants everyone out. Hillary basically repeats her answer from Sunday's shows and says we will have to withdraw responsibly. Edwards is coming on strong, saying that he will maintain an embassy, but wants troops out.
Rachel (9:08:38 PM): At this point, Edwards really needs to distinguish himself in these debates - he is doing well on the campaign trail but during the debates, inevitably the soundbites and TV clips go to Hillary and Obama. So strength from him is not surprising (let's just hope that no one pops a rib).
Glynnis (9:10:35 PM): Richardson now - who's hair looks suspiciously thick - wants to all the troops out. In one year.
Rachel (9:10:43 PM): You are so on top of the candidate hair situation. Yet another thing you bring to this process. For my part, I think Dodd's is looking very grabbable (I'm not going to touch Edwards' hair here...probably because it would muss it up).
Glynnis (9:11:05 PM): The crowd has been strangely quiet thus far.
Rachel (9:12:38 PM): It has! I understand that a relatively small proportion of the audience is actually made up of Dartmouth students. But it's a far cry from the labor audience...or the Univision audience!
Glynnis (9:11:40 PM): Richardson says leaving any troop behind will keep us from establishing stability in the region. Dodd says problem in not only withdrawal of troops but why are we there? Our policy is making us less safe.
Rachel (9:12:38 PM): Leading with Iraq allows each candidate to establish themselves as strong and confident, since none of these questions are surprising and there are so many hot buttons to push here. The whole slate seems more sure here.I will say that the candidates all seem to have reviewed footage of past debates and learned from it - bold, strong colors, more confident bearings across the board.
Glynnis (9:12:45 PM): Dodd has switched to a blue shirt. Interesting choice. Very technicolor.
Rachel (9:13:08 PM): Right. Dodd, Richardson, Edwards - bold, strong tie colors. Pooh-pooh if you want, but it's TV - these things matter (see here.)
Rachel (9:13:34 PM): (Though that doesn't apply to Russert, who is looking a tad rumpled.)
Glynnis (9:13:27 PM): Tim Russert looks the opposite of technicolor. Bad cold?
Rachel (9:14:02 PM): Bad tie.
Rachel (9:14:09 PM): You know, this actually DOES feel a little different. The answers feel less scripted.
Glynnis (9:14:39 PM): It feels serious. No longer a dress rehearsal.
Glynnis (9:17:46 PM): Kucinich says he will definitely have troops out by April 2007. Until Russert points out that was four months [and six debates] ago.
Rachel (9:18:38 PM): Nice recovery by Kucinich about being ready to be President right now. (Kucinich: Also part of the strong-tie club.)
Rachel (9:18:49 PM): Gravel gets the floor, uses it to bash war. "Shame on you Hillary!" Russert allows her to respond - her laugh was a tad inappropriate, given the gravity of his accusation. You can dismiss Gravel but not the sentiment.
Rachel (9:19:44 PM): She recovers though, and - typically, emits strength and poise. The bottom line is that she has the substance, but knows how to package it, too.
Rachel (9:20:10 PM): I have to say, Dodd looks fantastic. Like, George Hamilton-ish. Very cabinet-position-appointee-appropriate.
Glynnis (9:21:24 PM): Gravel says if he was senator now he would be voting against the President daily (I'm paraphrasing slighty, but you get the picture). He then congratulates Biden and Dodd for their vote against declaring Iran a "foreign terrorist organization."
Glynnis (9:22:04 PM): is Tim the first one taking off the gloves?
Glynnis (9:22:20 PM): The question is, would the Israelis be justified in launching an attack if they feel threatened by Iran?
Rachel (9:23:14 PM): Battle of wills between Hillary and Tim!
Rachel (9:23:16 PM): And she wins!
Glynnis (9:23:58 PM): Hillary is refusing to deal in hypotheticals
Glynnis (9:24:34 PM): First audience reaction in response to Hillary refusing to and Tim's question.
Rachel (9:24:52 PM): Wow. That was interesting to watch. Especially since you don't often see it on MTP.
Glynnis (9:27:38 PM): Obama is hemming and hawing a bit, too. But stressing diplomatic relations.
Glynnis (9:28:18 PM): He also has a great red candy-cane like tie on.
Rachel (9:41:47 PM): BIden smacks down Giuliani!! "Rudy Giuliani doesn't know what he's talking about - he's the most uninformed person on foreign policy running for president!" Wow, awesome. Biden makes this race more exciting, and fun, and substantive.
Rachel (9:42:15 PM): Immigration now - Kucinich reminds us all of the Statue of Liberty - "Give me your tired, your poor..." He TOTALLY ripped that off from the Republicans.
Glynnis (9:42:47 PM): Gravel wants EVERYONE here. Come one, come all! No holds barred!
Rachel (9:42:53 PM): A note: I haven't seen a single young face so far. It's a little shameful, actually.
Glynnis (9:43:16 PM): First commercial break. And...we're back!
Glynnis (9:43:44 PM): Russert tries to put Dodd on the spot by asking him about his statement that Hillary's nomination would be ideal for the GOP party.
Rachel (9:43:52 PM): Dodd! Nice zingers re: Brownie and Mission Accomplished when discussing Bush's prediction that Hillary would be the nominee.
Glynnis (9:44:05 PM): Hillary lightens the mood by laughing first. Russert isn't letting him off. Dodd suggests that Russert is trying to stir things up. But, he doesn't bite.
Rachel (9:44:22 PM): Why does Bush want Hillary to be the nominee? Dodd dodges. Why? We all know it's because she's a lightning rod for Republicans, and will get out the vote in droves.
Glynnis (9:45:04 PM): Dodd's far enough behind to keep one eye on the VP.
Rachel (9:45:08 PM): Russert raps Hillary on health care, asking her about her self-described "fundamental misjudgments" on health care and her Iraq war vote. Great set-up — because Hillary knows how to play this, exactly.
Rachel (9:45:58 PM): And by the way, she didn't exactly screw up health care herself, you know. She DID have help!
Glynnis (9:46:03 PM): She's staked out a smart, successful position on health care. And it's working.
Rachel (9:46:25 PM): And she will never budge on that Iraq war vote: With the information she had at her disposal, she does not regret her vote. If you want to blame someone, blame Bush.
Rachel (9:46:52 PM): Health care: "The highest domestic priority right now."
Glynnis (9:46:56 PM): Perhaps in fourteen years she will be as eager to take responsibility for her Iraq vote.
Rachel (9:47:47 PM): Zing!
Rachel (9:47:49 PM): She is really handling this extremely well. This is a lucid, thoughtful and reactive answer - she isn't spouting talking points, she's addressing the fundamentals of Russert's follow-up with the information she naturally has at her disposal. Right on. Glynnis (9:48:26 PM): Wow. Russert is trying to aim everyone at Hillary.
Rachel (9:48:39 PM): Well, that's really what everyone wants at this point.The role of the moderator is to guide the debate, and to push the needle.
Glynnis (9:48:47 PM): Biden won't bite, either. "It's not Hillary's fault"
Rachel (9:49:17 PM): Ha! Now he's trying to get Edwards to elaborate on "mismanagement" of the health care issue.
Glynnis (9:49:26 PM): And it is interesting to see ALL the candidates back off attacking Hillary.
Rachel (9:49:36 PM): Edwards doesn't bite either. So Russert's efforts to get people to jump on Hillary is resulting in a health-care love-in.
Glynnis (9:49:54 PM): Of course Russert has yet to get to Gravel or Kucinich, or Obama for that matter.
Rachel (9:50:27 PM): Edwards: As president, if his team didn't have a plan for Universal Healthcare by July 2009, they all lose theirs. "There is no excuse for politicians in Washington to have health care if America does not have health care." Applause!
Rachel (9:50:38 PM): Russert has no time for applause - he cuts it short.
Rachel (9:50:43 PM): This is the nitty-gritty debate.
Glynnis (9:50:37 PM): No one is laughing. literally. Except Hillary who lately seems to be perfecting the casual, deflecting, chuckle.
Rachel (9:51:57 PM): John Edwards gestures with his fist as though he's holding Dole's pen.
Glynnis (9:52:34 PM): Obama doesn't seem to be seizing the opportunity to establish himself as a force. Edwards is doing a much better job at seizing his time.
Rachel (9:52:54 PM): Not so fast - "Telling the truth to the American people even when it's tough" - this is a great answer. He does a good job at making his record sound impressive and very team-player-ish, and his purpose part of something bigger.
Glynnis (9:53:57 PM): He is also subtly making the point that all the health care plans are VERY similar, and it will be about who has the drive and inspiration to implement.
Glynnis (9:55:49 PM): Now, Russert is going after Gravel and Kucinich. Gravel's condo business went under. Kucinich bankrupted Cleavland?
Rachel (9:56:12 PM): I, too, had no idea on that score.
Glynnis (9:56:39 PM): Interesting to see these two outspoken (arguably entertaining) candidates on the defensive.
Rachel (9:56:39 PM): But Kucinich is rising to it, in his own defense.
Glynnis (9:57:04 PM): Kucinich owns the answer. He was not afraid to stand up to the banks.
Rachel (9:57:17 PM): If I knew anything about the facts of that case I could react better, but seriously of all the issues on the table this is just not that relevant. Fair, in terms of a multi-candidate debate, but just not that relevant to the practical outcome.
Rachel (9:57:33 PM): Wow.Russert just asked Richardson about his foot-in-mouth disease.
Rachel (9:57:52 PM): "I may not be the perfect blow-dried candidate..." potshot?
Glynnis (9:58:54 PM): Richardson has received FOUR Nobel peace prize nominations? Wow. had no idea.
Glynnis (9:59:52 PM): This audience questioner is not a member of the audience (technically) she's Alison Owen's from a local TV.
Glynnis (10:00:37 PM): Question: Would the candidates support a book about two princes getting married being read to their children?
Rachel (10:00:42 PM): Edwards is suddenly all for gay marriage...actually, this is a good answer.
Glynnis (10:01:13 PM): Edwards says yes. And (admirably) points out that his daughter Kate who is twenty-five doesn't understand why it's not legal.
Rachel (10:01:22 PM): But yeah, it's so hard to take his answer in support of having kids exposed to same-sex relationships without remembering how he's responded in the past.
Glynnis (10:01:56 PM): Obama also has young children and feels "similar to John." And then says the government must stop fanning people's fears.
Glynnis (10:03:36 PM): Clinton takes the long view...and then says it's a matter of parental discretion.
Glynnis (10:10:46 PM): Commercial - and we're back. Tim is asking about social security.
Glynnis (10:12:09 PM): Hillary focuses on fiscal responsibility. Tim in on Hillary about details!
Glynnis (10:12:39 PM): Wow, Tim and Hillary are going back and forth on percentages. One more battle of wills between them.
Rachel (10:12:42 PM): She said 2055 he says 2038.
Glynnis (10:13:06 PM): And Hillary is not taking it...does anyone really doubt that Hillary is clear on the details? Arguing the finer points with her seems to be a losing battle.
Rachel (10:13:29 PM): This is a candidate who is extremely well-prepared. She WELCOMES a debate over details!
Glynnis (10:13:48 PM): Hillary is not putting anything on the "proverbial table." Dodd is answering the question by addressing the camera directly.
Glynnis (10:16:02 PM): Full disclosure: this debate is being liveblogged by two Canadians...social security details are always a little fuzzy.
Rachel (10:16:12 PM): This might be a good time to point out that the Canadian and U.S. dollars are at parity. Which basically means that hell has frozen over.
Glynnis (10:16:27 PM): Back to the social security budget: Russert wants Richardson to know this isn't funny money!!
Rachel (10:16:42 PM): See above re: Canadian funds.
Glynnis (10:17:15 PM): Russert says that in case Richardson wasn't aware when Roosevelt created this life expectancy was sixty-five. People were in and out of the program in a matter of months!!
Glynnis (10:21:41 PM): Hillary is jumping in here - after Dodd - and getting fired up! Fiscal responsibility must come first!
Glynnis (10:22:11 PM): I'm not sure Russert really likes Hillary. Just as a side note.
Rachel (10:22:21 PM): Ha. What tipped you off?
Glynnis (10:23:10 PM): Now the question is, Should there be a national law to ban smoking? Hillary says it should be local - and that business actually increased in NYC when smoking was banned...hmm, I know I said not to argue details with Hillary, but I'm not convinced on that.
Glynnis (10:24:33 PM): Kucinich owns the laugh by saying he has been breathing in a lot of second hand smoke here tonight!
Glynnis (10:25:24 PM): Back to Alison Owen in the audience. And also a Howard Dean spotting.
Rachel (10:25:46 PM): And a young person spotting. A first.
Rachel (10:25:58 PM): Biden: "You've got to calculate the cost here" - good approach. Cost of alcoholism, drunk driving accidents, babies born to alcoholics. Good approach.
Glynnis (10:28:42 PM): Gravel says that anyone who can fight and die for this country should be able to drink. To big applause.
Rachel (10:28:46 PM): Well, he does have a point there. Though a backward, cheap one - protection of the troops over there but not over here?
Glynnis (10:28:53 PM): Kucinich says the voting age should be sixteen.
Glynnis (10:30:17 PM): Richardson says that we spend the same amount on the Iraq war in two weeks that we spend yearly on cancer research. A case of misplaced priorities.
Rachel (10:30:46 PM): Now that is a good answer. Put it in context, and how.
Rachel (10:33:36 PM): Lightning round! 30 seconds for an answer...there is no way that Obama didn't just go over it. It felt like it.
Rachel (10:34:07 PM): Russert to Clinton: "Is it healthy for a democracy to have a two-family political dynasty?"
Rachel (10:34:45 PM): Her answer is great: Humor ("I thought Bill was a pretty good president!") and strength ("I'm running on my own, I'm going to the people on my own").
Rachel (10:35:01 PM): Biden: MoveOn.org - good or EVIL????
Rachel (10:35:06 PM): Biden: Not evil. Next!
Rachel (10:35:24 PM): Russert to Kucinich: Look! I read Greenspan's book — the whole thing, not just the press release!
Glynnis (10:36:05 PM): Kucinich calls out Russert for something that Bush said on MTP and has exact date and time.
Glynnis (10:36:28 PM): One hour and thirty six minutes in, the audience is warming up...thanks mostly to Kucinich.
Rachel (10:37:15 PM): Russert to Dodd: Temporary ban on toys from China?
Rachel (10:37:45 PM): "We would shut down a company in 20 minutes that was using lead paint..." well, that is certainly true.
Rachel (10:38:14 PM): 30 seconds, as it turns out, is plenty for giving a cogent answer.
Rachel (10:38:30 PM): Russert to Obama: Should you have gone to Jena BECAUSE YOU'RE BLACK?
Rachel (10:38:54 PM): Obama: No, I was in Washington trying to end the war in Iraq, with other people who didn't go to Jena. So, bite me.
Rachel (10:39:11 PM): Richardson looks confused that he's the honorary chair of the Boy Scouts.
Rachel (10:39:30 PM): He is just getting those sexual orientation questions. No getting away from that, Bill.
Rachel (10:39:53 PM): Questions about sexual orientation wanna come over! To hell with the consequence!
Glynnis (10:44:57 PM): Russert's hypothetical question is very 24. if there is a dirty bomb and one person knows the whereabouts, is torture allowed?
Rachel (10:45:00 PM): Oh! Shades of Brit Hume.
Glynnis (10:45:03 PM): Obama says no.
Glynnis (10:45:12 PM): Biden says NO. Ever.
Glynnis (10:45:40 PM): Clinton says it cannot be a matter of policy..
Glynnis (10:46:11 PM): this question feels so hypothetical...somebody should say: just send Jack Bauer.
Rachel (10:46:38 PM): Oh! Russert to Hillary: Your husband disagrees with you.
Rachel (10:46:49 PM): Hillary: Well, he's not standing here right now.
Glynnis (10:46:56 PM): Good for her!!
Glynnis (10:47:27 PM): He set that up for her perfectly. We'll be hearing that a lot tomorrow I bet.
Rachel (10:50:22 PM): "The idea that the US would hold anyone without a right to a hearing undermines everything we stand for." Nice, Edwards!
Rachel (10:50:32 PM): If that answer was good lovin', it would have popped my rib.
Glynnis (10:50:25 PM): Edwards furthers by saying that he will close Guantanamo.
Rachel (10:54:02 PM): Oh! Russert is going after Edwards for the hedge fund thing, for being wealthy, for $400 haircuts.
Glynnis (10:54:27 PM): Edwards is saying he's proud of how he's spent his life. He points out that he came from nothing. Which, upon consideration, I think applies to everyone on stage, actually.
Glynnis (10:55:44 PM): Edwards is not backing down on Russert suggesting he should have given back some money...and he is fiery!
Rachel (10:56:02 PM): He gives the kind of answer that ought to merit applause — passionate, resolute, fiery, sincere, justifiably self-righteous. Alas, this dead crowd does not oblige. It feels like they just missed their cue.
Glynnis (10:56:21 PM): Russert now wants to know what is the candidate's favorite Bible verse. The first one that jumps to my mine is, do not throw your pearls to swine...
Glynnis (10:56:28 PM): Obama: Sermon on the Mount
Glynnis (10:56:37 PM): Hillary: The Golden Rule
Glynnis (10:56:52 PM): Gravel: Hmmm, he says love, not actually bible verse
Glynnis (10:57:14 PM): Kucinich: Quotes St. Francis of Assisi - also not actually in the bible
Rachel (10:57:32 PM): Richardson: Sermon on the mount - copy cat!
Glynnis (10:57:35 PM): The last person is totally screwed!
Rachel (10:57:39 PM): "Umm....Genesis 38:10?"
Glynnis (10:57:53 PM): Biden is worried about the Pharisees (read: Cheney)
Rachel (11:00:11 PM): Baseball! Sox or Yankees? Sheesh.
Rachel (11:00:27 PM): Russert wants to use up all of Gravel's time bantering with Hillary about the Cubs. So uncool to cut him off that way.
Glynnis (11:00:46 PM): Oke - it's done. And fast it felt.
Glynnis (11:01:55 PM): Russert did good. Looking a bit under the weather, but if he was this assertive each Sunday on MTP I would have a whole new respect for Sunday mornings!
Glynnis (11:04:13 PM): Overall - Hillary looked the frontrunner she is. She was steady and strong and certainly not backing down in the [large] face of Russert's fairly consistent badgering.
Rachel (11:04:27 PM): Agreed. Poised and prepared as per usual. Overall it felt like everyone's game was raised, but again, no one stood out. Except Biden, actually. He was on it today. And Dodd came across well, too.
Glynnis (11:05:35 PM): Otherwise, I think Edwards owned his part of the debate. He was forceful and clear in the time he was given, without ever letting things get at all nasty. I think this was a real break out for him. Obama, however, felt a bit faded.
Rachel (11:07:20 PM): Of the Big Three - Clinton, Edwards, Obama - there was not much needle-moving. Edwards did attempt to break out front by breaking with Clinton, but with so many candidates it's just hard to carve out a position. The person who will be remembered for challenging Hillary here was Mike Gravel.
Glynnis (11:08:13 PM): Biden [sigh] was good and sharp and strong and continually cut to the chase.
Rachel (11:08:22 PM): Folks at home, Glynnis may have a soft spot for Biden. Disclosure.
Glynnis (11:09:06 PM): But back to Obama. He wasn't weak, per se, but he didn't stand out, and right now that is arguably worse.All in all, a strong, serious re-launch to the political season. If this was the first time some people were seeing the candidates (is that possible?) Edwards and Clinton certainly gave a good introduction.
Glynnis (11:14:40 PM): Catching glimpses of the after show a la Chris Matthews, it's clear he also has a sigh on Biden and, wow, the pundits are out for some Hillary, gloves off, blood!
Glynnis (11:16:57 PM): Case in point: Chris Matthews wants to know if Dodd finds it difficult to debate a woman. (Answer: NO)
Rachel (11:17:17 PM): Unreal!!! And the way he said it, too. The question just kind of burst out of him, like he just had to ask. He still needs to ask such a thing?
Glynnis (11:17:47 PM): Hmmm was that the weaker version of "black restaurants are clean?"
Glynnis (11:19:15 PM): Starting to sense that Chris Matthews doesn't waste any sighs over Hillary. This after show might actually be a preview of what the Clinton campaign can expect for the next three and a half months.
Rachel (11:24:02 PM): No kidding. Wow.
Glynnis (11:24:44 PM): Though if one were to judge solely by this aftershow, joined now by Russert, this wasn't actually a debate but a one-woman Hillary routine. Or the "Veronica and Betty Show" — Hillary's attempt to have something both ways, as Matthews keeps pointing out. We can't quite figure out what he means. As a blonde? As a brunette?
Rachel (11:24:02 PM): Archie was a total flip-flopper. Okay - this Veronica and Betty show is over. Thanks for reading, all, we're going to meet Archie, Reggie, Jughead and the gang for a soda. Oh! Speaking of Jughead, we totally dropped the ball on making Tim Russert Giant Head jokes. Sorry 'bout that, but whatever. It's not like someone could exactly miss it. Goodnight!
Comments for this post are now closed
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
It has become unmistakably clear.
If you want to be at war with Iraq for at least another 5 years, and to go to war with Iran as well, then vote for one of the candidates other than Dennis Kucinich.
If you want the profiteers in the Corporate Insurance Industry to continue to dominate our Health Care system, vote for any of the candidates other than Dennis Kucinich.
If you want higher payroll taxes and an increased age before being able to qualify for Social Security, vote for any of those other candidates besides Dennis Kucinich.
If you want PEACE, vote for the only man of Peace on stage last night.
If you want true Universal Health Care, vote for the only candidate who has proposed legislation to do exactly that.
Dennis Kucinich said everything right last night, yet he continues to be marginalized. Just like the debate in Iowa that was sponsored by the AARP which is pushing a $4 billion deal for themselves with the corporate insurance companies, and they didn't invite Dennis. Can you say, "conflict of interest?"
Dennis Kucinich, if he looked like Tom Selleck, he might get the cred he deserves. How shallow have we become? $13 Trillion in debt shallow, that's how much.
SHAME!
I rest my case.
The fact that Kucinich would vote agains SCHIP because it doesn't go as far as he would like is very telling, though. It makes him appear to be more interested in what he's doing than in the people being affected.
I'm sorry but you can't run a country this large and this diverse and make no room for compromise. I'm sick of idealogues destroying lives pushing agendas just because they believe them to be the right thing to do.
Although Kucinich is very likeable and says a lot of things I agree with, I can't support someone with a mind so closed to alternatives; that and voting for him is voting GOP.
Riddle:
Who has a giant cabbage patch head, asks no follow-up questions, and escaped from Libbyvile?
Answer:
Tim "oh, my aching neck" Russert
Count me in with Kucinich
I thought Russert was running for something the way he attacked Hillary.
What's his problem?
And pushing for answers to his questions, interrupting the candidates if they weren't responding the way he wanted it.
He's been watching too much Hannity and O'Reilly.
And the cheap trick question about the hypothetical terrorist, was a media cheap shot at Hillary because it was her husband that said it, no-one elses.
It's one thing to answer the "tough" questiona, and quite another to have to deal with an egomaniac like Russert.
Cucky job Tim, gimme a break!
"Unreal!!! And the way he said it, too. The question just kind of burst out of him, like he just had to ask. He still needs to ask such a thing? "
Chris Matthews disgusts me. I just hated the way he talked about how Hillary's pearls were a nice touch to show she was not trying to be a man.
Hillary says "I'm running on my own, I'm going to the people on my own".
But I believe the only reason she is being seriously considered for president is that Bill is her husband. The people I know who are for Hillary are actually for her because it would humiliate the Republicans to have Bill back in the White House.
"No one is laughing. literally. Except Hillary who lately seems to be perfecting the casual, deflecting, chuckle."
I would describe it rather as a grating cackle.
"With the information she had at her disposal, she does not regret her vote." ???
I REGRET HER VOTE. I knew what was going on, therefore so did she, and she made a political decision to vote for war.
"She's staked out a smart, successful position on health care." ???
I HATE her position on health care. It LOCKS insurance in, when the proper solution is to get insurance and the profit motive out of health care.
The major contenders for the democratic party's nomination will do nothing to stop the movement towards a fascism which is well under way and Hillary Clinton may well accelerate it. The two major parties and the media are totally corrupt.
Russert bored me to death, and who was the NH homobigotted woman questioning the Dems?
bag and tag that shrew!
Biden's gaffe towards Hillary was palpable when he said She's got a History...then kept trying to diffuse it saying just on policies,,,nothing more just on policies
I laughed my ass off.
Hillary had a gay gaffe too she said..."what ever those people choose"
Why exactly is a general term for a general group of people a gaffe? You know what the problem with being a liberal is, having to be around so many liberals. You know what irritates me, inappropriate periods of ellipses.
Russert wasn't biased or a bully. Each of the seven people that were on that stage want to be the next President of the United States, and it's our responsibility to choose the one candidate that will best fill that position. The candidates aren't stupid, they know they're under a microscope and rightly so. This isn't suppose to be a popularity contest. I can only hope they'll be asked tougher questions than they've had to answer so far. The questions tonight for the most part are the same questions I've been hearing all week from everyone I know, except for the one about baseball of course. I was angry when I heard the top tier candidates say they would not make a promise to the people to have all the troops out of Iraq by January 2013, and I agree with a guest of Chris Mathews that said tomorrow's headlines will read Democratic candidates will leave troops in Iraq until 2013. I'm also angry that they want the FDA to regulate cigarettes or control smoking through legislation. That's the Libertarian in me coming out...what goes into my own body and what i do in my home and bedroom is NOT the governments business.
Tonight I think Edwards improved, and Obama didn't feel well so I understand why he wasn't at his best. Clinton was her usual self: she's still on the fence trying not to lose any votes on certain issues important to me, her new plans for Iraq and troop withdrawal, and her judgement when it comes to foreign policy hasn't improved since 2002. It's too bad. The candidate I would like to see win doesn't stand a chance, but it's been that way since the first time I voted...except for Bill clinton no one else was elected, oh well.
I agree Russert made this debate a little more interesting by being forceful. We've complained for six years about the spinless press not asking the tough questions, not asking follow-ups, not forcing answers and the moment it happens to our side we're not happy about it. I not only enjoyed his performance, I enjoyed Chris Matthews interviewing Hillary Sunday. I wish more interviewers would be that harsh toward everyone.
Chris Wallace, not Chris Matthews. Sorry, brain/hand disconnect.
Hillary's recent laughing fits come off totally insincere. The one after Ravel tonight was bizarre. He just said she voted for an attack on Iran, and how could that possibly be funny?
I love Hillary's laugh! It's a lot more than sincere enough for me. Of course, its high point to date was on Fox with Chris Wallace.
There are a lotta votes in that laugh. She should keep right on doing it whenever the mood strikes.
I'm more an Edwards/Biden kinda guy myself, but it's hard to believe somebody thinks Hillary's laugh is other than potent at the polls.
From above:
Rachel (9:18:49 PM): Gravel gets the floor, uses it to bash war. "Shame on you Hillary!" Russert allows her to respond - her laugh was a tad inappropriate, given the gravity of his accusation. You can dismiss Gravel but not the sentiment.
Rachel (9:19:44 PM): She recovers though, and - typically, emits strength and poise. The bottom line is that she has the substance, but knows how to package it, too.
-------------------------
I give up!! The bottom line is that that was the strongest moment of the debate, Gravel exposing Hillary's vote today to give Bush authorization to pursue his war with Iran, making the same mistake in judgment that she did before the Iraq war -- and Russert pissed that moment away and the blogger here missed it. Hillary got it though, the laugh said it all. Sure you can dismiss Gravel, just like you can shoot yourself in the foot. Or you could listen to him and let him speak. Shame on Russert.
what came out tonight even the dems smell oil and lots of it.
troops in iraq to guard our bases? hummm bush has got to love them for that. alpha dog does it again.
the top three demo candidates are imperialists.
obama go back to chicago and quit pretending you are the people's candidate.
we are am imperialist country both parties.
need third party but dont bet on it. americans love a two party system and who told them it works best? corporate america who owns both parties and the politicans and those in the two party system.
hillary said she knows how to take on the special interest groups. yea like the 874,000 from the insurance corporations donations.
the real problem? a naive and incompetent populance.
Thanks for saying it so well. The impression I got was that what the other candidates have learned from HC and her big lead in the polls was to TRIANGULATE...now they are all doing it (except for the ones who have no chance at the nomination). Sad thing to have happen, because those of us who like Edwards and Obama better might now see very little difference among the top three. Is this the best the Dems can do? Nominate a triangulator who is a pale shadow of the Republikker liars, thiefs and warmongers?
BTW...to the blogger: It is "CLEVELAND." Just reinforces my theory that in terms of brain function, computer-typing is more like speaking than writing...so many things get phonetically spelled that people truly and obviously know how to spell correctly. Here is a PhD thesis idea for some enterprising psychoneurologist, unless somebody has already beat me to the punch.
So does this mean you'll vote for Guiliani?
Loading comments…
|
||
Posted September 26, 2007 | 09:11 PM (EST)