Live Blogging from Ohio’s Democratic Debate
Email10:48 pm ET: Again, gang — great comments and discussion tonight. Thanks for participating — and if this is the last debate of the season, thanks for clicking your way through all of them.
10:42 pm ET: That was an exhausting 90 minutes — just to watch. Probably as close to a draw as you can imagine — really, two very talented politicians and debaters fighting it out extremely closely.
On one level — no clear winner is good news for Obama, the frontrunner, who avoided any significant missteps. But there are plenty of scattered moments for the Clinton campaign to be proud of (though that bizarre reference to the SNL skit, to me, was a low point). All told, she made it substantive, kept the focus on Obama’s record (or lack thereof).
They did not break much new policy ground this evening. But for a Clinton campaign that’s looking to fight out the final week before Ohio and Texas, maybe, just maybe, there’s some pieces here that she can work with. Obama entered and leaves Cleveland State as the frontrunner. But there’s a big week left…
Thanks, all, for the fantastic comments and feedback. Check back tomorrow, as always, for a full wrap in The Note.
10:35 pm ET: "I still intend to do everything I can to win, but it has been an honor," Clinton says. "Either one of us will make history. The question that I have been posing is, who can actually change the country." She doesn’t say what Sen. Obama has to prove, just puts herself out there as better.
10:31 pm ET: Obama: "She would be worthy as the nominee." That puts her in a tough spot on the same question…
10:31 pm ET: This time it’s Obama extending the olive branch! Interesting. "I’m very proud to have been campaigning with her." He’s winning — so this doesn’t sound like a valedictory, like her close did last week. But Obama decided to include this, must have been deliberate. How does it play?
10:28 pm ET: Clinton wants to take back her Iraq vote — no surprise there. I haven’t heard Obama say he should have stepped up in the Schiavo matter before. "That’s an example of inaction, and sometimes that can be as costly as action," he says.
10:22 pm ET: Meaty foreign policy for Clinton to strut her stuff with. (But she needs some help in pronouncing that name — and Russert was willing to pitch in, despite the pop-quiz nature of his query.)
10:21 pm ET: This rather silly National Journal ranking is with us to stay, I’m afraid.
10:19 pm ET: From ABC’s Sunlen Miller: "Words matter…even in this debate. Obama decided to reject and denounce Farrakhan.
According to dictionary.com
Reject = " to refuse to have, take, recognize…"
Denounce = "to condemn or censure openly or publicly"
10:13 pm ET: Clinton: "I would not be associated with people who said such inflammatory or untrue charges. . . . I was willing to take that stand. . . . I thought it was more important to stand on principle." That’s one heck of a suggestion to let linger out there, isn’t it? Obama: "I would reject and denounce."
10:12 pm ET: I don’t think there were as many questions about the sources of Sen. Kerry’s fortune as there are about Sen. Clinton’s.
10:10 pm ET: Is Obama good for the Jews? I think he handled this exchange well — didn’t take the Russert bait on Farrakhan, but stayed measured and calm. Sounded reasonable, comforting.
10:06 pm ET: Yes, the point is that loan though – where did that money come from, Sen. Clinton? Why let general election voters see your tax returns but not primary voters? "Word toward releasing" your tax returns? Why not just get your accountant to run off some — gulp — Xeroxes?
10:05 pm ET: ABC’s Sunlen Miller, who covers Obama, contributes: "When speaking about inspiring the American people Obama says there is "nothing romantic or silly about that" – Obama is addressing the criticism that his supporters are delusional – he’s been pushing back against this for a couple days now."
10:04 pm ET: Obama would have so much more of a high ground if he’d just say he’d commit to his word on public financing. But Clinton has a hard time exploiting this weakness because that’s not a commitment she’s prepared to make.
9:58 pm ET: Clinton brings more attention to Obama’s legislative record — it’s late for this sort of thing, but every little bit helps. Some good Obama pushback though — he’s so much better as a debater than he was six or eight months ago.
9:56 pm ET: "I’m not interested in talk. I’m not interested in speeches," Obama said. I’m confused — I thought words matter, Sen. Obama?
9:55 pm ET: ABC’s Tahman Bradley (noticing media bias?): It seems like Clinton is sitting lower than Obama and that isn’t helping her.
9:54 pm ET: Obama gives Clinton "points for delivery." Clever.
9:53 pm ET: From ABC’s Sunlen Miller: "Here in Cleveland were watching a campaign ad during the first commercial break from former presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich who’s now in a new battle: to hold on to his seat in Congress!"
9:48 pm ET: Somehow, Brian Williams managed to cut off Hillary Clinton to get to the break. A tense evening so far — no clear winner, as far as I’m concerned. Two pros at the top of their games.
9:46 pm ET: Clinton accuses Obama of holding "not one substantive hearing" on NATO oversight. A new line of attack, as far as I now.
9:44 pm ET: A big break from last week — nobody’s rushing to say they agree with each other this evening.
9:43 pm ET: I’d score the last chunk of time for Obama — he’s more than holding his own on foreign policy. But the emphasis on substance — not that it’s bad for Obama (he’s got this stuff down pat, it seems), but this is the kind of debate Clinton wanted going in. If she can go 90 minutes without having to say "superdelegate," she’ll be happy.
9:40 pm ET: And the discussion of foreign policy takes Sen. Obama to friendly territory — talking about Iraq. (Another measure of how far this campaign has traveled — remember when that was THE issue?)
9:36 pm ET: Once again, Clinton will not back up what she’s saying about Obama’s qualifications to be commander in chief. She’s ducking by turning to his Senate record. Go back and read that speech she gave yesterday — she was very strong in suggesting that a President Obama is a risk on foreign policy. Maybe she doesn’t feel comfortable saying it to his face?
"I will have a much better case to make" – that’s as close as she’ll get to it.
9:35 pm ET: "Sen. Clinton, I think, equates experience with longevity in Washington," says Obama. He’s used variations on that line before, and it’s an effective one because it wraps so many of his campaign rationales into one.
Notice that Obama is the first to try to turn the argument to Sen. McCain — their battle has already begun, if tentatively, and Obama welcomes it.
9:32 pm ET: An intriguing way into the jobs question, looking at Clinton’s Senate record, and promises not fully kept. She blames it on the Bush administration — and here, you’ll notice, she’s happy for some reflected glow from the Clinton administration.
9:26 pm ET: Russert read Clinton the record, chapter and verse, on NAFTA. This is difficult for her, with anyone who would remember Bill Clinton with those "NAFTA We Hafta" hats on.
9:21 pm ET: That silly distraction of an SNL reference aside — it does seem like Clinton has settled on an effective tone this evening. She’s mixing substance with style, attacking without seeming overtly negative, sounding like she’s playing defense when she’s really playing offense.
9:19 pm ET: Clinton: "Maybe we should ask Barack if he’s comfortable." Quick reference to that SNL skit. But sorry, but you’ll have to explain this one — why is it media bias, senator, for you to get the first question?
9:17 pm ET: I score the first tussle of the night for Senator Clinton — but did she need to force herself to have the last word on the subject?
9:14 pm ET: Bottom line on these healthcare mailings, as my colleague Jake Tapper points out, is that they’re both misleading.
But clearly Sen. Clinton is glad to be talking substance now — they do have real differences on healthcare plans, and they’ve now spent the better part of the first 15 minutes playing that out.
9:10 pm ET: You get the feeling that they could recite each others’ lines, essentially verbatim, on healthcare by now?
9:08 pm ET: Sen. Obama seems very subdued so far. No signs of anger — that kind of smooth response should make the lines of attack difficult to pursue. "Sen. Clinton has constantly sent out negative attacks about us. . . . We haven’t whined about it."
9:05 pm ET: I like starting out with the many voices/faces of Hillary Clinton. "But we have differences," she says. She’s making it a debate about tactics as much as it is about issues early on. This has been something the campaign has been focusing on — but will this discussion over tactics really matter? Seems like a Kindergarten style, he started it, no she started it, fight. But Obama should watch that smirk — caught in the cutaway shot.
8:43 pm ET: Thinking about how this is possibly the last debate — it seems like so long ago that Sen. Clinton was untouchable on stage, the one being targeted but happy to smile and laugh above it all. That speaks to how the stakes change depending on the position in the campaign — back then, Clinton could "win" just by emerging unscathed. No longer.
8:35 pm ET: Obama is picking up support among the superdelegates — Kevin, add to your list Rep. Stephanie Herseth, D-S.D. Clinton still has an edge among the supers, but it’s narrowing, even as Obama’s advantage among pledged delegates grows wider. That will make the Clinton argument very difficult to make — unless she can show some real momentum, starting with a pair of victories on Tuesday.
Re Richardson — I can’t get inside his head, though I thought it was telling that he said he didn’t feel bound to support Clinton just because New Mexico voted for Clinton, since the margin in his home state was so tight.
8:27 pm ET: Responding to questions below — the debate is televised on MSNBC — they control all usage rights, on TV and online.
8:18 pm ET: Any thoughts on how much ANY debate can matter at this point? It is No. 20 — though you could argue that none have had stakes this big. But the expecations are so high going in for Sen. Clinton — another reason it’s tough to be trailing.
8:11 pm ET: I’m wondering how this theme the Clinton campaign has been rather successfully pushing — that the media has been going soft on Obama — plays into tonight’s questioning. I’ve got to think that MSNBC goes out of its way to ask some tough ones of Obama, maybe a little bit tougher, in light of that SNL skit.
6:48 pm ET: Just to underscore the stakes — another national poll out tonight has Obama up over Clinton. It’s 48-42 in the Bloomberg/LA Times survey — and McCain is ahead of both of them in a head-to-head matchup. Intriguing, no? Not surprisingly, McCain has a huge edge on issues involving national security and terrorism.
6:31 pm ET: Building on that point I made about them having a full week, the Clinton campaign just put out a schedule showing the theme of each of the remaining days before March 4. The message: This is not a campaign in panic mode. Two days on the economy, one on child poverty, one on veterans, than two big days in Texas and one in Ohio. Per the memo, from strategist Mark Penn and spokesman Phil Singer: "This schedule reinforces our larger message: Hillary Clinton is in the solutions business."
5:57 pm ET: My predictions are almost always off when it comes to the tone of the debate. But I’d be surprised if we saw the "kitchen sink" thrown out on stage. First, that’s one way to guarantee negative news coverage — words like "flailing" and "desperate" get thrown around if one candidate takes an overtly and entirely negative tone. Second, the Clinton campaign is very aware of the fact that it has a week to make its case. That’s not a lot of time, but it’s not two days, either — so the "kitchen sink" can be unloaded over a few days, at least.
In case you were wondering, I did not make it to C-town. I finally gave up after four hours of smelling stale Subway sandwiches at Baltimore-Washington International Airport. So I’m watching on TV, from home, this evening.
———–
Rick Klein here from ABC’s The Note. I’ll be live-blogging during Tuesday night’s debate in Cleveland — alas, not from Cleveland as the weather would not cooperate — starting at 9 pm ET. It’s the last debate scheduled — and if next Tuesday doesn’t go Hillary Clinton’s way, it could very well be the last debate of the primary season.
One way to watch the debate: How much new ground will be covered? The more new material, the better for Sen. Clinton, in all likelihood. She’s more comfortable on matters of substance, for starters, and Barack Obama has a lighter record and more areas to be tripped up.
But mostly, she can’t allow this debate to become a long eulogy for her candidacy — and if the tone of the questions becomes, "How can you go on, given your setbacks?", this will be a wash of an evening for Clinton. The Clinton campaign is hoping this focuses intensely on the economy — an area where Clinton can perform at the top of her game.
Santorum Wins Three States: What Does It Mean? 
Rick Santorum Wins Minn., Mo. and Colo. Primaries
Hey Rick – I know you don’t like to predict, but do you think the tone of this debate will get more heated? Is it “kitchen sink” time? There’s been a lot thrown around the last few days, does any of it keep going; anything with traction? “Shame on you”, “celestial choirs” “instruction manuals”
Posted by: Kevin | February 26, 2008, 5:24 pm 5:24 pm
I am actually looking forward to this debate. Have a feeling that Hillary is going to lose it (become completely unravelled)here. She just seems unable to find her center. She may have to channel those celestial choirs.
Will be checking in later with you Rick.
Posted by: Maverick | February 26, 2008, 5:30 pm 5:30 pm
Am I a bad person to hope that we get to see her head spin around? Maybe screaming in tongues?
Then Obama just sitting there, writing notes.
Like a Coen Brothers version of a democratic debate…
Posted by: BardemsBowlcut | February 26, 2008, 5:33 pm 5:33 pm
When it’s only two candidates on stage, histrionics never play well. Look for the jabs to be subtle and cloaked in humor or sarcasm. I would expect more talking over each other and the moderators than the last debate, and a reluctance to stay on topic. Clinton needs to land at least a few blows, but there’s not a lot left in the arsenal that haven’t already been used and deflected.
Posted by: Kevin | February 26, 2008, 5:38 pm 5:38 pm
Good bye, Hillary. Enjoy the Senate!
Perhaps you’ll have lots of time to watch “the skies open” or to hear the “celestial choirs sign.”
Unless, of course, you need to locate Bill. . . . Enjoy!
Posted by: patrick | February 26, 2008, 5:41 pm 5:41 pm
I hope one of the questions is about Mr. Obama’s voting record of “present” on so many important pieces of legislation. Seems more like a man who wants to play it safe, then someone who wants to fix what is broken about Washington. That takes someone bold.
Posted by: OhioNative | February 26, 2008, 5:46 pm 5:46 pm
Perhaps we should focus on how Obama has said in Cleveland “If we are honest with ourselves we have to admit that some of those jobs are not coming back” well I do not agree. and my HOPE will be with a candidate who says they are not giving up on any jobs, and that they will come back with the right choice of candidate. It sounds more like “admit we can’t, I’m giving up” than “Yes we Can”
Posted by: GM | February 26, 2008, 5:50 pm 5:50 pm
Explan something to me, why the HELL is
everyone APOLOGISING for saying HUSSEIN,
that is HIS name,HUSSEIN OBAMA.
His MUSLIM father gave him that name,am
I right or wrong?Louis Farrakhan the
great MUSLIM leader does’t think its
bad.So why APOLOGIZE ?
Posted by: baccarattwo | February 26, 2008, 5:54 pm 5:54 pm
while the country is sinking in all aspect Obama messages need to stay in Disney Land Parks.Obama has a unreal message
Posted by: johnny s | February 26, 2008, 5:56 pm 5:56 pm
I hope Hillary does well in the debate and in Ohio and Texas. Too bad the Media gave Obama a free ride.
When the General Election comes we will lose to the Republicans once again, because the Republican Attack Machine is going to leave serious doubts in people’s minds.
Too bad. Since LBJ the only 2 term Democratic President for the the last 50 years is going to be William Jefferson Clinton.
Posted by: Gabriel | February 26, 2008, 6:02 pm 6:02 pm
<>
This is true. Times have changed and technolgoy has changed. So some of the traditional (manufacturing) jobs will not be back. Case in point, most of the welding jobs that used be done by workers on an automobile assembly plant are no longer there as these are being done by robots these days.
We need to retrain and retool the workers. We have to come to grips with this reality to solve some the employment issues. Also, a lot of the jobs that are being created require a level of education that was not required previously
Posted by: Rama | February 26, 2008, 6:09 pm 6:09 pm
==”If we are honest with ourselves we have to admit that some of those jobs are not coming back” well I do not agree. and my HOPE will be with a candidate who says they are not giving up on any jobs, and that they will come back with the right choice of candidate. It sounds more like “admit we can’t, I’m giving up” than “Yes we Can” ==
Regarding the Posting by GM
This is true. Times have changed and technolgoy has changed. So some of the traditional (manufacturing) jobs will not be back. Case in point, most of the welding jobs that used be done by workers on an automobile assembly plant are no longer there as these are being done by robots these days.
We need to retrain and retool the workers. We have to come to grips with this reality to solve some the employment issues. Also, a lot of the jobs that are being created require a level of education that was not required previously
Posted by: rama | February 26, 2008, 6:11 pm 6:11 pm
Atta boy (girl?) rama
Somebody is paying attention. we need the jobs to return. Do we need someone who is trying to convince us that we should admit that the jobs are not returning. Hillary are you giving up on “those jobs”?
Posted by: GM | February 26, 2008, 6:15 pm 6:15 pm
NObama: What does his left hand have to do with anything? Don’t you know that Bill Clinton is left-handed?
Posted by: GObama | February 26, 2008, 6:18 pm 6:18 pm
I’ll 3rd or 4th the following comment and add to it.
Good bye, Hillary. Enjoy the Senate!
Perhaps you’ll have lots of time to watch “the skies open” or to hear the “celestial choirs sing.”
Hillary has shown her true colors lately…a witch on steriods!! Running around making immature comments and acting like a child that has just been spanked. Can you imagine her as a President and something like 9/11 happening? Let’s see, panic, no, cry…maybe, yell and scream, perhaps, oh wait I know “shame on you”. Boy that’ll get’em, and rally the America!! people! Bye Bye Hillary :-)
Posted by: John | February 26, 2008, 6:20 pm 6:20 pm
Can we talk about something that matters? There are too many people ranting about meaningless dribble. Does anyone care that Mr. Obama has said “If we are honest with ourselves, we have to admit that some of these jobs are not coming back” What does this mean? Can we focus on how we are going to have the jobs come back. If we admit that they are not coming back what the hel* are we going to do? Sit around and watch Obama’s speeches? Maybe we can all bring ourselves together and sing Kumbaya.
Posted by: GM | February 26, 2008, 6:33 pm 6:33 pm
if there hope somebody some where has a hope we all know am shure hillray will loose this depate and barak obama will gain alot hopefully he wiil win so she cant stop him obama go on
Posted by: hakiimy | February 26, 2008, 6:35 pm 6:35 pm
The apologies regarding the use (misuse) of Senator Obama’s middle name do not have to do with simply citing his full name. They have to do with the attitude and implications intended by the person/group citing it. Same as those snarky “slips” of Barack Osama.
And, just as an fyi, the traditional dress thing is not a problem for those of us who look at it, seeing just that. It is a problem for those who circulate it with the intent to portray Senator Obama as a muslim who does not pledge to the flag, etc., etc.
The Clinton Campaign would have no reason to be passing their opponents picture to right wing media (if they did) other than to fuel those racist fires.
I guess I join the “hoping her head spins” crowd, but I’m thinking she’s way too controlled and professional for that. Interesting implications about her reaction on the phone to Senator Dowd, though — “More than just disappointment”!!!
Posted by: Jackt51 | February 26, 2008, 6:37 pm 6:37 pm
Do you think anyone will ever address the issue of abuse in the welfare system. Can you get this question into the debate tonight. I am tired of paying for kids that are not mine. I don’t have any! When is america going to take charge of this abuse. There are millions of dollars right there if they find a solution to this keep having kids payroll!
Posted by: MELISSA | February 26, 2008, 6:42 pm 6:42 pm
Well Obama will be next what a shame Do you really think with three supreme judges maybe ready to retire the republicans won’t fall in line and vote thier party they always do. Thats to bad the party is split.
Posted by: Bishop | February 26, 2008, 6:44 pm 6:44 pm
MSNBC promises tough questions tonight. Sure. Obama will get the soft floater pitch and Tim will be waiting for Hillary. I wouldn’t count Hillary out just yet. Is it possible that we Democrats will elect a George Bush clone, someone who knows very little and depends on “advisors” to assist him? His statement about bombing Pakistan in a debate caused a major uproar in Pakistan. I think that’s not the kind of foreign policy or lack of negotiations with foreign countries I’d like to see. You know, yikes. I forgot they were listening to the debates. Is he who we want sitting there with his finger on the button…? He, who admits to “bone head” mistakes, a lack of organization and the inability to find things? Can we all just come together and love one another become a foreign policy, really? Hmm. I think we did that in the 60’s. I’d like a smart president for a real change. But men will decide this election, again, so…
Posted by: AmazonTraveler | February 26, 2008, 6:53 pm 6:53 pm
watch the brave MEN take out the female it is so wrong!!
Posted by: Bishop | February 26, 2008, 6:56 pm 6:56 pm
I wish we could see and hear these debates. I’m sure you’re a wonderful reporter but, there’s nothing like first hand knowledge, taking in body language, etc. ! Any chance this will be video taped in it’s entirity?
Posted by: soose | February 26, 2008, 6:57 pm 6:57 pm
In reality, Hillary Clinton has won every debate so far … but unfortunately most of the Dems don’t want to be told that we have “work” to do … they want to sing … “hold on I’m coming” … in celebration of their savior, Obama! sick.
Posted by: Jackson | February 26, 2008, 7:00 pm 7:00 pm
As I recall some of those same polls had Obama up by double digits in New Hampshire. The polls are irrelevant. America needs to wake up–already been asleep at the wheel for seven years.
Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | February 26, 2008, 7:05 pm 7:05 pm
Hil ary!!!!!!!!
H I S T O R Y!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Rigel | February 26, 2008, 7:16 pm 7:16 pm
Some of you people dont even know what is going on in this election and have the nerve to post here. Like: hillary-is-president says: “Hillary Clinton already has won the debate..How many more debates does she have to do? Why is obama continually trying to prove himself? Could it be that he lacks experience substance ?” Are you a moron? Hillary is the one who demanded and did not get Debate after debate after debate. She wanted one a week nd Obama had to agree to two! This is just one example of the smearing lies being spread and belived by some people. Please, unless you know what you are talking about, let this forum be for serious discussion. This election is important and just typing to see yourself in print is wasteful and stupid!
Thank you!
Posted by: krenz | February 26, 2008, 7:18 pm 7:18 pm
Geaux Hillary!
Posted by: Bonny | February 26, 2008, 7:27 pm 7:27 pm
This is a bad situation! We as a country are making a big mistake. We are letting our frustraions allow us to get behind someone that has no real reason to be even close to becoming our president. I am not an Obama hater but a realist. Im 40 years old and my parents always educated me on the election process and politics. In my lifetime I have never seen the media so one sided, and our young voters acting as if this was there college pep ralley! I have 3 children ages 10 and younger and for me this is by far the most important Election of my Lifetime!!! and to see backers of Barrack not even able to state any of his polcies or voting history is just mind bogling to me. Its time for America to put there personal feelings beind them, and look at the facts of the people running and out of the 3 Clinton gives us the best chance to recover from some of the worst times in our Countries History!!!! Please I live in Florida where my Vote isn’t even going to get heard! due to a republic govenor. Please those states still left to vote please re-think your issues and research the truth about the candidates, and ont rely on the media alone for that info. Take your vote seriously because our Countries future depends on it.
Thank You
A proud American and Concerned Citizen!!!
Posted by: True American | February 26, 2008, 7:27 pm 7:27 pm
Can some one tell Why Hillary didn’t divorce Bill over Monica scandal?
Will she after she returns to NY?.
Posted by: Jay | February 26, 2008, 7:29 pm 7:29 pm
I agree. Hillary Clinton will be our next president!!!!
Posted by: Bonny | February 26, 2008, 7:30 pm 7:30 pm
Jay-because some women and men choose to do the right thing for their family. It’s harder to stay and work it out then it is to leave! I respect her for trying to save her marriage. If more families tried to do that–I wouldn’t see so many screwed up children in the classroom!
Posted by: Bonny | February 26, 2008, 7:34 pm 7:34 pm
Boony- True. I agree if it is for us, not for people looking for power and not letting the family values ruin their career because of unfaithful husband. I would have support her decision if she decided the other way. The decision was career not family. But It is not my personal life is stack. And I have not decided yet to vote.
Posted by: Jay | February 26, 2008, 7:40 pm 7:40 pm
Good luck Rick, keep your ears and eyes open (don’t forget to describe some telling facial expressions!), and thanks for always doing such a good job with the live debate blogging. Have an exciting night out there!
Posted by: Rainer | February 26, 2008, 7:45 pm 7:45 pm
obama is nothing but a bunch of hollywood hype. H-Y-P-E. Its like all of a sudden its ‘trendy’ to vote for him, but no one really knows why they are voting for him–its just the cool thing to do… i’d, personally, like to see some accomplishments behind his speeches..
Posted by: 4hillary2008 | February 26, 2008, 7:52 pm 7:52 pm
I don’t mind a woman president. I don’t mind a black president. What I care about is someone HONEST. I’m certainly not calling Obama Honest Abe but the Clintons have showed time after time THEY CANNOT BE TRUSTED. A president who lies to the entire American public. White Water, Monica Lewinsky, Paula Jones, and the list goes on and on to give affirmations America does not need another CONNIVING president. McCain vs Obama is the ticket!!!
Posted by: Thomas Kelton | February 26, 2008, 7:52 pm 7:52 pm
maybe if talking heads like george stephanopoulos would stop referring to hilary as shrill she would actually have a chance.
Posted by: carol | February 26, 2008, 7:56 pm 7:56 pm
Jay-Do you honestly think Hillary Clinton wanted her husband to humiliate her in front of the world? Just because they are public servants? I don’t buy into that. I believe some things should be off limits. Do we really want to know everything about them. I don’t! JFK was a great presidnet–but he had Marily Monroe. David Vitter was in the book of a prostitute here in New Orleans, which he admitted to associating with. It is between them and our God.
Posted by: Bonny | February 26, 2008, 8:01 pm 8:01 pm
Why is America so biased against women? Any time a man attacks it is so macho for both men and women alike (shame on all you women, I am a man), but, when a woman goes on the attack she is shrill to even women.Even my dumb three sisters who are caught up on the mania think so.It is good that I have my wife and three daughters on my side. Can I tell you a simple fact.This is beacuse I love my wife and three daughters, and I know what they are against.Women are the most discriminated in this country.I want my three daughters to feel pride when they say, we can do it too.
Posted by: VPNathan3 | February 26, 2008, 8:03 pm 8:03 pm
My vote is with Hillary, if I get a chance to cast it. My concern is the media appears to want us to think the race is over and Hillary just needs to concede. With that attitude some people will jump on Obama’s bandwagon. The race is not over, the candidates are neck to neck. Clinton is clearly more experienced, proven tough in hard times, and knowledgeable about foreign affairs. Obama sounds good, but what is he really about?
Posted by: Denise | February 26, 2008, 8:06 pm 8:06 pm
Why can’t an awesomely smart woman be the president of our great country? I truly and sincerely believe that she will be one of our best presidents,even better than her husband.
When Obama and Edwards attacked Hillary in Nov/Dec, were they shrill or simply macho?
Posted by: VPNathan3 | February 26, 2008, 8:06 pm 8:06 pm
Getting back to issue of jobs, as stated earlier, we need some new ideas and some innovative approaches to crating new jobs. The old ways of thinking will not work. Trying to bring jobs relevant to the last century will not work. We need some fresh ideas and people will have to realize that they have work to do also. Just expecting some politician to bring those jobs of the 50s, 60s or 70s back may not work. We also need to change some of the infrastructure. eg., some of the automobile manufacturing jobs have gone to Canada as the companies do not have to pay workers health insurance which costs them around $3 – $10k per person per year. So we need to make some fundamental changes in this country. There are lots of forces that resist changes due to selfish motives.
I think both/either Clinton and Obama will make a wonderful president. Clinton has experience and Obama will bring fresh ideas. We need to let the process work and get behind the person who wins. Getting emotional will just make things work. Either of these will be great presidents compared to McCain who will be just like Bush. He is trying to appease all fractions of the Republican party and will focus on the 3 Gs (Gays, Gods and Guns) and not solve any of our problems.
Posted by: rama | February 26, 2008, 8:08 pm 8:08 pm
Why isn’t the Ohio Dem debate started yet? Are they not airing it or what?
Posted by: xastrid3 | February 26, 2008, 8:11 pm 8:11 pm
Could someone PLEASE tell me where I can watch the debate online? A link would be greatly appreciated I have searced everywhere but nowhere seems to have any details onwhere i can watch it! Eternal thanks to whoever can help!
E
Posted by: Emmet | February 26, 2008, 8:12 pm 8:12 pm
With gas prices going up and up, why hasn’t any of the canditates considered speed limits. And I mean under 70mph. Calif. did it in the ’70′s This would save fuel immediately without hurting anyone.I would think someone in Washington could figure out the savings from driving 70 and 75 down to 60 or 65
Posted by: Genna | February 26, 2008, 8:12 pm 8:12 pm
I wish America would step back and take a look at who as implemented action and lead life that involves fighting for change in American life. Children’s health care in Texas, Senate Arms Committee, recently asked to join and Armed Forces committee by leading military leaders, has been involved in diplomatic exchange in over 80 countries and is highly regarded as a humanitarian and change force throughout the world, has a real plan to support higher education and control loan costs after college, and a universal health plan that involves everyone like most other progress power countries in the world. What exactly–please someone tell me–has Obama done for the better of a nation? Maybe its time to elect a woman’s perspective on problem solving and lets run with the rest of the world’s great female leaders? But I bet those running on the coattail of words can’t even name them nor could the candidate for that matter. Besides, I am not sure why anyone would be line to support a candidate who has been endorsed by Farrakhan–I don.t care what ethnicity or religion you hail from–this man this one of the world’s greatest racist, bigot, descructive idiots to walk. Please step back, take a breath, and examine the real issues and the candidate’s proposals before running with the lastest craze and hype. Remember all fads come to an end and then what?
Posted by: Shane | February 26, 2008, 8:13 pm 8:13 pm
Hey VPNathan3 thanks for the link this is very interesting. Can someone explain to me how those two people gave 10000 dollars each. is not the max 4600 2300 for the primary and 2300 for the general. This is something worth looking into. This is what we hillary supporters mean by vetted.
Posted by: joshua bradshaw | February 26, 2008, 8:13 pm 8:13 pm
I want to know Mr.Obama is not requiring everyone get health care. I am sick and tired of paying for those who don’t have it. We pay in the form of higher rates, higher co-pays and higher taxes. I have to go to a clinc at our local charity hospital–only place my insurance will let me go–and the people getting out of Lincoln Navigator’s, BMW’s, with their $200 shoes, their Coach or Dooney & Burke purses with thier expensive cell gizmo’s and gadgets. It’s utterly disgusting! I have to pay for those who choose to do without because they rarely get sick! No, thanks! It’s like car insurance–everyone should have to have it!!
Posted by: Bonny | February 26, 2008, 8:14 pm 8:14 pm
Its the Chicago real estate deal
Posted by: al | February 26, 2008, 8:14 pm 8:14 pm
VPN, i think the limits are for matching funds. IE, if a candidate opts for matching fund (from the taxpayers) there is a limit. But if no matching funds, then there is no limit. I’m a Hillary supporter but at the moment, I am trying to get my contribution back!
Posted by: Poorah Goy | February 26, 2008, 8:17 pm 8:17 pm
Yes – I have the same problem. Please someone help with info on where thedebate can be watched online. It’s nearly impossible to find info on search engines!
Thanks!
Posted by: James | February 26, 2008, 8:20 pm 8:20 pm
If the state of Ohio with its over 50,000 jobs that have been lost due to transfer of those jobs outside of the United States and its impoverished economy can not understand that the US free trade policy needs to be addressed, I feel sorry for the ignorance of the American public. The US trade deficit is going to reach a 3 trillion dollar deficit needs to be addressed. The only candidate that has voiced addressing and modifying any part of a trade agreement has been Senator Cliinton, who has been against NAFTA from day one when her husband got it passed during his administration. Senator Obama said he will not do anything on NAFTA and McCain is all about free trade. Does the American public not understand how not doing anything makes the American dollar devalue?
Posted by: John | February 26, 2008, 8:20 pm 8:20 pm
Yeah, The Sous Chef at the White House has more experience in the place than Hillary and he’s not running for President. Frankly, I don’t want a Menapausal maniac in the White House with her finger on the button of a nuclear missle…do you?
Posted by: Mr. Big | February 26, 2008, 8:21 pm 8:21 pm
CAN SOMEONE PLEASE TELL ME WHY THE DEBATE IS NOT ON CNN OR CNN.COM YET? WASN’T IT SUPPOSED TO START AT 7PM CENTRAL!
Posted by: xastrid3 | February 26, 2008, 8:23 pm 8:23 pm
the debate is at 9 p.m. on msnbc
Posted by: dennis | February 26, 2008, 8:23 pm 8:23 pm
You know folks, I read through quite a number of your comments. I was star struck by Obama after his Dem Convention Speech back in ’04. In the last year, my infatuation for him has eroded, I am definitely in the Clinton camp now. I am reading Obama’s book, Audacity of Hope and realize now that he is quite the politician and also admits early on in the book what a cake walk his Senate seat was.. So I am a little concerned that things came to him too easily and now the media has practically handed him the primary by drugging students and young voters with seductive incantations of “yes we can” from Obama.. If you peel away at the layers, which the Republicans will force us to (there are no further Clinton layers to peel, certainly Obama’s a blank page and the Pubs are going to have a field day tearing him to shreds.) I can just see Karl Rove. I hope Hillary wins, if she doesn’t I will vote for Obama in the fall but with great trepidation for his safety.
Posted by: Sean Somers | February 26, 2008, 8:24 pm 8:24 pm
I can’t find a site to watch the debate on. I have checked TV listings websites and its not there either, PLEASE someonehelp with info on where online it can be watched!!!!!!!
Posted by: happyman | February 26, 2008, 8:24 pm 8:24 pm
I believe, we as Clinton supporters, need to do everything we can to help her win the nomination. If by some horrible set of events she doesn’t win the nomination–we need to write her in. We can do it! With Florida and Michigan, she is ahead of Obama. I hope we can do what we can to help her win! Geaux Hillary!
Posted by: Bonny | February 26, 2008, 8:25 pm 8:25 pm
The debate is on at 8 central.
Posted by: Bonny | February 26, 2008, 8:27 pm 8:27 pm
Here is what qualifies Obama to be President?
Experience………………1%
Military service…………0%
Articulate………………3%
Ethnicity……………….18%
Religion………………..8%
Oprah/Endorsements……….12%
Nothing…………..58%
Posted by: Tom | February 26, 2008, 8:27 pm 8:27 pm
it will be streemed on msnbc at 9 p.m. eastern time
Posted by: dennis | February 26, 2008, 8:28 pm 8:28 pm
Thank you Dennis!
Posted by: Emmet | February 26, 2008, 8:30 pm 8:30 pm
no problem
Posted by: dennis | February 26, 2008, 8:32 pm 8:32 pm
Rick – I read today that BHO picked up the two Shadow Sen.s in DC plus Dodd this AM, and John Lewis was supposed to make some sort of announcement today or tomorrow. That superd. count is pulling closer. Also Richardson may soon endorse (but whom?).
Posted by: Kevin | February 26, 2008, 8:34 pm 8:34 pm
Rick:
I think the same question was asked last week, and the answer then, as now, has to be that it won’t count for much — unless one of the candidates “self-destructs” and/or the other candidate reponds badly to the self-destruction or aborts the self-destruction by responding badly before it is complete.
Again, this is Hillary’s debate to win or lose, and — despite all the Hillary-optimists and racists commenting above, it’s hard to see her winning. More likely either a draw, with a coherent and relatively polite debate, or a loss with a “kitchen sink” debate.
A lot, of course, will depend on the questions, and how both candidates respond to things like last week’s continued efforts to bait Hillary into a negative attack.
Thankfully, this should be the last debate. Thank God, the Clinton push for four debates didn’t work!
Posted by: Jackt51 | February 26, 2008, 8:36 pm 8:36 pm
The Rezko trial link above led me to this information:
“Prosecutors have not alleged any wrongdoing on Obama’s part”
So thanks for that.
Posted by: RMP | February 26, 2008, 8:40 pm 8:40 pm
Will the ask any questions tonight about . . .
1.) the death penalty
2.) the environment
3.) support of the Palestinians
Posted by: ctravel | February 26, 2008, 8:44 pm 8:44 pm
Surely folks think about the very difficult times we are in.We are in two wars,fighting fanatical extremists,homeland security is tops on the agenda,the economy is in a worse shape than 9/11,the worst housing crisis in history,homeowners are losing their american dream, the poor are getting shafted,jobs are being lost and nearly 1oo millions are either without health insurance, or are undersinsured/losing coverage. Not since Harry Truman’s time have we had a more daunting beginning for a president.
Posted by: VPNathan3 | February 26, 2008, 8:53 pm 8:53 pm
Hillary is done
Posted by: robert | February 26, 2008, 8:55 pm 8:55 pm
continuing from my last post. Who do you want in the white house? Can we really really take a chance? What will you tell your children? I took a gamble and it did not pay off.Oops I did it again? I care about my wife and three dauhgters. I want to give them the best chance. That is Hillary Clinton.
Posted by: VPNathan3 | February 26, 2008, 8:55 pm 8:55 pm
If a guy buys a portion of a yard for more then its worth and you buy the house for less then its worth and then you buy a portion of that yard for $100,000 from the guy who bought the yard what does that look like.
Answer: A real Bone head move, but add that it was made by a graduate of harvard law school, yea it was a bone head move alright.
Posted by: al | February 26, 2008, 8:57 pm 8:57 pm
Enough with the Health Care Plans. We get it already. Mandatory vs affordable. Can we move on.
Posted by: Maverick | February 26, 2008, 9:17 pm 9:17 pm
A Summary of Hillary’s Great Leadership:
Siding with George Bush to invade Iraq. This war has cost nearly 4000 US lives and half a trillion dollars.
This war, which was unnecessarily started in 2003, is still costing our country 10 billion dollars a month. We and our children will be paying this bill long into future.
If this is what experienced leadership is, then I don’t want it.
Posted by: Mark | February 26, 2008, 9:36 pm 9:36 pm
having watched the meet the press since it was black and white, i’ve seen a lot of fair reporting. not since russert took over. even if he’s just holding up one of his stupid delegate counting board/scribbles, he can’t help but look like he’s about to devour his prey. i hope he’s fired soon.
Posted by: so saddened | February 26, 2008, 9:36 pm 9:36 pm
Virginia from N.C. Totally! You said it!
Posted by: irma | February 26, 2008, 9:45 pm 9:45 pm
Twin, so I guess you can’t blame Hillary for voting with Bush on Iraq and Iran now can you? I guess we can just chalk her disastrous judgement up to Bush too. Whatever. Her disastrous judgement is inexcusable. We can’t afford to extend Bush’s foreign policy.
We can’t afford Hillary.
Posted by: kings2beat | February 26, 2008, 9:45 pm 9:45 pm
Why does Obama keep bringing up McCain’s 100 years? He knows exactly what he meant.
Posted by: jim | February 26, 2008, 9:45 pm 9:45 pm
Can he let Hillary finiah a statement as he lets Obama get his lofty ideas out.
Posted by: Ryan | February 26, 2008, 9:45 pm 9:45 pm
Hillary certainly doesn’t mind calling Tim Russert on what she thinks is right! Good. Don’t give the press a free pass, no matter what.
Posted by: LawyerLady | February 26, 2008, 9:46 pm 9:46 pm
his calm and consistancey is his strength. he has answered that Pakistan question over and over again. I don’t even think Bush could say the word “actionable.” sounds like a good foreign policy maker to me.
Posted by: Mark David | February 26, 2008, 9:46 pm 9:46 pm
Well not voting or not showing up is always how Obama’s right 100%. Pretty hard to be wrong when you’re nver there to vote. So, not actually being a senator at the time or having to make that vote makes him have the right judgement. Yeah.
The republicans will rip him to shreds.
Posted by: s.b. | February 26, 2008, 9:46 pm 9:46 pm
daveo, perhaps we’re missing the point here – it’s not about bill or bush. it’s about hillary vs. obama. and she has it over him by a mile.
Posted by: so saddened | February 26, 2008, 9:46 pm 9:46 pm
Yeah Tim, “you know, you come up with a lot of hypotheticles” to debate Hillary. Why don’t you sit back and let Obama fight for himself.
Posted by: irma | February 26, 2008, 9:46 pm 9:46 pm
Thats just silly. i am not sexist at all and i didnt say anything about her PITCH – i said her VOLUME. big difference.
Posted by: Amir | February 26, 2008, 9:47 pm 9:47 pm
I cannot get the debate either. Can’t say I am too sorry since I am severely hearing impaired so ‘talking heads’ are a pain for me. I like to look at body language though and for many like me that jabbing finger is not nice! I am not so sure about that look either, Hillary’s. I will carefully read the full text later. I still think that Barack Obama is holding back on his debating abilities. I just learned he likes to play poker. Hah! One does not spend eleven years(1993 to 2004)as a lecturer of constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School to classes of know-it-all students without also finely honing debating skills and knowing when is just the right moment to make a decisive point. Yes, he is young and I have better hopes of him being a CEO type and bringing the best brains on board since the complexity of our Nation and international problems are too much for any one person to know it all. I think all too often that we already have one of those – or either fossilized advisors or totally incapable of looking at any other viewpoint! But, that is just my opinion.
Posted by: tcnz | February 26, 2008, 9:48 pm 9:48 pm
Man does anyone think she sounds shrill?
Posted by: The Commander Guy | February 26, 2008, 9:48 pm 9:48 pm
I don’t really have a favorite either way here. (I’m just very glad that W will be gone soon) However, I feel that I’m watching Fox News where the media gangs up on someone, claiming to be indifferent. Russert is the new O’Reilly and Osama is his W…
Posted by: DaveO | February 26, 2008, 9:48 pm 9:48 pm
Sorry, I’m watching the debate and trying to spell. Hypotheticals
Posted by: irma | February 26, 2008, 9:49 pm 9:49 pm
tcnz, you keep saying the same thing on a lot of sites. There are women out here, believe it or not, who are NOT voting for her because she is a woman. We are educated, wise and very political and because of our intelligence we support her as the best candidate. So thanks for the “advice” but we know exactly what we’re doing.
Posted by: irma | February 26, 2008, 10:01 pm 10:01 pm
Hillary is coming off as very desparate.
Posted by: Debbie | February 26, 2008, 10:02 pm 10:02 pm
Obama, if he wins, will be a one term president, like Carter, because people who so idolize him now will become disillusioned, like my husband and I did with Carter, and vote him out of a second term.
Posted by: Cheryl Morris | February 26, 2008, 10:02 pm 10:02 pm
lawyerlady is right – age and sex are irrelevent in this case. though i dont know who was making sexist comments (must have missed it) and i hope it isnt someone else that managed to get unfairly labeled on here!
Posted by: Amir | February 26, 2008, 10:02 pm 10:02 pm
How long will they let him talk? He gets 5 minutes and she gets 1 second.
Posted by: suzelee | February 26, 2008, 10:02 pm 10:02 pm
For all those who dismiss the art of negotiation, you invite all parties to the table. It doesn’t matter if you disagree, if you want to reach concensus, all have a seat. Without that open invitation, you exclude, create enemies you never knew you had, and that is what is wrong with American politics. If you are too selective, or only want to hear the voices of those who will agree, then you are openining the door to war and unrest.
He is willing to open that door, as scary as it is to everyone. Better to know and speak to those who disagree with you than ignore them, or hope they don’t exist.
You are all missing the point of what he is saying, and if she gets the nom., then good luck. I don’t want to see posts from all of you suddenly saying “I don’t like how she operates.”
Posted by: M in Bellevue | February 26, 2008, 10:03 pm 10:03 pm
The difference between you an me is that I am living in reality. You are dreaming if you think the most extreme liberal who plans on taxing the country into socialism is going to work hand in hand with the right.
Posted by: Dave B | February 26, 2008, 10:03 pm 10:03 pm
How can Obama who doesn’t vote either way on important issues criticize another’s vote regardless of what it was? A person who will stand for nothing will fall for anything.Obama will never be ready. Reject him!!
Posted by: Virginia in NC | February 26, 2008, 10:03 pm 10:03 pm
Well, I think that about summarizes the whole Obama campaign – “why won’t you keep your promise”.
Posted by: jas | February 26, 2008, 10:04 pm 10:04 pm
Unless, Cheryl Morris, Obama *succeeds,* perhaps beyond your/our wildest dreams.
Posted by: Mark | February 26, 2008, 10:04 pm 10:04 pm
Obama sure backed out of that one on public financing. He did not put in all those things when he signed the statement originally.
Posted by: Cheryl Morris | February 26, 2008, 10:05 pm 10:05 pm
amir, you mention before you learned more since the announcement of her candidacy. imho, that’s one of the problems we’re facing in this country. people don’t pay any attention to what’s going on until the campaigning starts, so then they get a filtered view from partisan campaigners and biased media. if americans did a better job of being informed all the time, we would know more about the candidates from watching what they actually do and wouldn’t rely on whatever b.s. someone tries to sell us. i hear so many people say things that came straight out of speeches or off of websites or blogs, and they are so very factually inaccurate. but people didn’t watch cspan when the bill was actually debated or whatever, so they don’t know they’ve been lied to.
Posted by: so saddened | February 26, 2008, 10:06 pm 10:06 pm
Oh wow…a plug for donations on national TV, why not? lol
Seems a bit on the desperate side there….yet again.
Posted by: Amir | February 26, 2008, 10:06 pm 10:06 pm
To so Saddened, Obama is NOTHING like Bush and if that’s how you feel you need to take your blinders off.
Posted by: Tj | February 26, 2008, 10:07 pm 10:07 pm
joint return please Clinton.
Posted by: Mark David | February 26, 2008, 10:07 pm 10:07 pm
Amir, they were earlier comments. I simply want to be able to see something from ONE of them that will push me in the right direction. I want to make an informed decision…not one based on emotions or “hate” towards another candidate. We need strong leadership. Period. I want this country back on track.
Posted by: LawyerLady | February 26, 2008, 10:07 pm 10:07 pm
Obama is the choice.
Posted by: Mark David | February 26, 2008, 10:08 pm 10:08 pm
I agree with you Lori. And it IS SAD that she’s making a plug for donations to her failing campaign.
Posted by: TJ | February 26, 2008, 10:08 pm 10:08 pm
so saddened, I agree with you, but unfortunately I think most of us gave up after Cheney won again, even after less people voted for him…. I think most of us just wanted Washington to disappear for 4 years when that happened. This is why I think these debates are probably more of reality TV than important…:*)
Posted by: DaveO | February 26, 2008, 10:09 pm 10:09 pm
I’m glad Russert asked him point blank about Farakhan. He needs to clarify that situation. In my opinion, he needed to denounce him completely. Louis Farakhan is NOT what anyone committed American needs behind him as a supporter.
Posted by: LawyerLady | February 26, 2008, 10:10 pm 10:10 pm
Obama is taking the high road and winning on points.
Hillary is clearly trying to go after him, but she’s actually making herself look bad in the process.
Hillary dodging Russert’s question about disclosing her tax return documents looks suspicious. If there’s nothing to hide, why not disclose them before the OH and TX primaries?
Posted by: Mark | February 26, 2008, 10:16 pm 10:16 pm
As Obama said that he had no time to have more debates. He wants more time on his campaign with his supporters. At this critic point, does Hillary has time to do her tax return?
Posted by: Mike | February 26, 2008, 10:16 pm 10:16 pm
Seems to me denouncing is stronger than rejecting, but I guess hillary is feeling rejected lately, so it feels stronger to her!
Posted by: Jackt51 | February 26, 2008, 10:17 pm 10:17 pm
Good job Hillary…getting him to use the word ‘reject’. We must understand that Obama is being tested by Farakkhan and other blacks. Using the word ‘reject’ will hard him. He try very hard not to use it. Good job Hillary.
Posted by: suzelee | February 26, 2008, 10:17 pm 10:17 pm
lawyerlady i would like to point out that Farrakhan has very little influence in the muslim community.
Posted by: Amir | February 26, 2008, 10:18 pm 10:18 pm
Both are intelligent people with good communication skills. Both have great persuasive techniques. IMO, Obama does come across a bit more suave and less flustered.
Wow more liberal than Ted Kennedy? That may do it for me!
Posted by: LawyerLady | February 26, 2008, 10:19 pm 10:19 pm
Rick, you also miss the point of what she was doing in that exchange. She was showing that she was in charge and made him agree with her.
Posted by: jas | February 26, 2008, 10:19 pm 10:19 pm
reject and denounce. semantics, she is grasping.
Posted by: Mark David | February 26, 2008, 10:20 pm 10:20 pm
Clinton tried to grab the high ground on the Jewish vote, but Obama trumped her and said it. It was actually a brilliant response as it made her look petty. Just words? Good use of them there.
Posted by: Kevin | February 26, 2008, 10:20 pm 10:20 pm
Hillary Clinton took the correct position on Farrakhan. A reluctant Barack Obama was forced in public to reject such association.
Posted by: Angel | February 26, 2008, 10:20 pm 10:20 pm
Obama did not want to debate in Wisconsin
Posted by: mike | February 26, 2008, 10:21 pm 10:21 pm
liberal, conservative – I DONT CARE
Can the candidate assess a situation and make an intelligent decision? Thats all that matters to me.
Posted by: Amir | February 26, 2008, 10:21 pm 10:21 pm
Lawyerlady says about O’s answer to the Farakhan dude:
“In my opinion, he needed to denounce him completely.”
NO THIS WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
He has to reject him too. Denounce ain’t good enough so says HRC.
Posted by: The Commander Guy | February 26, 2008, 10:21 pm 10:21 pm
yeah chris your probably right te media has given him this, and its a real shame for our country!! and bye the way I think against it all hillary is doing the best she has done tonight
Posted by: dennis | February 26, 2008, 10:21 pm 10:21 pm
lawyerlady, i’m just reading the blog, so i missed whatever was said about teddy, but i did read that obama had moved from one of the most liberal senators, based on voting record, to the absolute most liberal senator, based on voting record. whether that’s good or bad, of course, depends on one’s point of view. but it certainly isn’t a good thing in terms of winning a general election.
Posted by: so saddened | February 26, 2008, 10:21 pm 10:21 pm
Hmmm….maybe I wasn’t clear, Mark David. I’m on the fence so I’m not sure why you say “vote for Clinton then”…. Is that because I said I’d vote for LawyerLady? I don’t know which way LawyerLady leans, all I know is that she’s smart. However, that doesn’t mean I’m voting the way she does… and btw, I’m sure I can find dirt on everyone in this if I want, but I appreciate the nudging.:*) (so whatcha got on Tim Russert?)
Posted by: DaveO | February 26, 2008, 10:22 pm 10:22 pm
Rick: There were no questions about Kerry’s finances because you media types did not ask them… Get it?
Posted by: Kabindra | February 26, 2008, 10:22 pm 10:22 pm
I agree Angel. Yes she did.
Amir, as to your comment, let me clarify: he has a STRONG influence in the black muslim community in this country. That is why is name is brought up in the first place due to past history with radical thoughts and ideas.
Posted by: LawyerLady | February 26, 2008, 10:22 pm 10:22 pm
Was that censure (denounce, which he just did) or censor, which is not appropriate in light of free speech?
Posted by: Jackt51 | February 26, 2008, 10:23 pm 10:23 pm
As long as you’re looking at the dictionary, check out the difference between “censure” and “censor.” Obama didn’t say he wouldn’t “censure” Farrakhan, he said he wouldn’t “censor” him. Come on, guys — words matter, and I’d hope that you alleged journalists would at least know some basic English.
Posted by: Fred App | February 26, 2008, 10:24 pm 10:24 pm
He said ‘censor’, not ‘censure’.
Posted by: paul | February 26, 2008, 10:24 pm 10:24 pm
Another “I agree with Senator Clinton” she is the one with the great ideas and he just nods and smiles.
Posted by: Bonny | February 26, 2008, 10:24 pm 10:24 pm
watch Barack bring it back to domestic here, who cares who succeds Putin. they want a piece the can mess with us, they have all the money in the world after all.
Posted by: Mark David | February 26, 2008, 10:25 pm 10:25 pm
Did he just say “me too” again?
Posted by: jim | February 26, 2008, 10:25 pm 10:25 pm
blah blah blah…..neither one is fit…lol
It will be McCain in a landslide!
Posted by: John in Winston-Salem | February 26, 2008, 10:25 pm 10:25 pm
Whoa! T-Russ throwing out the Medvedev highlights! Is he making a late run at the Presidency?:*)
Posted by: DaveO | February 26, 2008, 10:25 pm 10:25 pm
Censure is not the same as censor. I believe Senator Obama said that he would not censor Minister Farrakhan (i.e., try to control what he says). He is still able to censure (or reject) Minister Farrakhan’s record.
Posted by: Mike | February 26, 2008, 10:25 pm 10:25 pm
Hills looks like she has given up now.
Posted by: The Commander Guy | February 26, 2008, 10:29 pm 10:29 pm
Barack really hit it on the head here I think.
Posted by: Amir | February 26, 2008, 10:30 pm 10:30 pm
Ahh,,,he took the previous debate tactic that HC did in last debate to end his comments with. Very smart of Sen. Obama.
Posted by: LawyerLady | February 26, 2008, 10:30 pm 10:30 pm
Suzanna, that was a pretty ignorant statement, the garb was African. and it was used out of context to smear him.
Posted by: Mark David | February 26, 2008, 10:31 pm 10:31 pm
Okay. This time Barack gets to be first to be magnanimous toward Hillary. As we wrap this up, I’m glad we didn’t see the “kitchen sink,” nor the “love fest” that was the last debate.
A lot more substance this time. No clear winner, which is probably not good for Hillary; no clear loser, which is probably good for Hillary.
Okay, we’re both qualified and capable — at least I hope she agrees!
Posted by: Jackt51 | February 26, 2008, 10:31 pm 10:31 pm
saftgek – well said brother!
Posted by: Amir | February 26, 2008, 10:31 pm 10:31 pm
well all hillary has delt with every form of media against her as well as obama and has stood tall. I think that proves she is truly ready to fight as our president!!!! My childrens future depends on it!! May God bless our great country and guide us to the right leader for our futures.
Posted by: dennis | February 26, 2008, 10:32 pm 10:32 pm
Shame on him for bringing up the Schiavo matter. I was heartbroken for the family and for him to exploit this is SHAMEFUL!!! He has never brought this up before. Is he scared?
Posted by: Bonny | February 26, 2008, 10:32 pm 10:32 pm
Go Hillary…lol
Keep the democratic race a disawray..its hillarious!… can you imagine either one of these two cats being a Commander n’ Chief? What a joke.
Posted by: John in Winston-Salem | February 26, 2008, 10:32 pm 10:32 pm
Russert is a bonehead. When did the debate become about how clever his hypotheticals can be? And then demanding a FIRM response?
Posted by: kevin in ga | February 26, 2008, 10:33 pm 10:33 pm
In response to Bonny, it’s an issue that comes up more often than is in the news. Why not bring it up because it impacts those families going through that same situation?
Posted by: TJ | February 26, 2008, 10:34 pm 10:34 pm
Excellent post Saft….informative and productive comments.
Posted by: LawyerLady | February 26, 2008, 10:34 pm 10:34 pm
I think as far as winners and losers Clinton started poorly but came together better towards the end. (Listen to her now – she is no longer yelling!)
Seems to me that she certainly didnt win though, I thought Obama came across as much more ‘presidential’ in most ways and matter of factly answered the questions well throughout.
Posted by: Amir | February 26, 2008, 10:34 pm 10:34 pm
Oh, bonny, if Hillary had brought up Schiavo you would have hailed her sensitivity to a tough issue…
Posted by: Jackt51 | February 26, 2008, 10:34 pm 10:34 pm
Why is she keep repeating “35 years of experience?” That will only link her to the NAFTA.
She lost me.
Posted by: Philip, NYC | February 26, 2008, 10:36 pm 10:36 pm
Hey thanks for entertaining and (sometimes) thought provoking comments people. my first blog/debate and it was definitely enjoyable.
Posted by: Amir | February 26, 2008, 10:36 pm 10:36 pm
Sen. Clinton is clearly the best for the job. Yes I believe she will help us ALL and right now that is what matters.
Posted by: Virginia in NC | February 26, 2008, 10:36 pm 10:36 pm
She didn’t wrap it up. She didn’t make her case and she is still talking about being a “fighter”. We don’t want a figher we want a uniter. Welcome to the global economy and way to conduct business. The Clintons are ageist, boring, and don’t get technology. And, that is their weakness. Wake up.
Posted by: M Bellevue | February 26, 2008, 10:37 pm 10:37 pm
It is most enjoyable Amir to connect this way. Glad you had the opportunity to experience it.
Posted by: LawyerLady | February 26, 2008, 10:38 pm 10:38 pm
Barack Obama proved once again to be more presiding and presidential.
Posted by: Philip, NYC | February 26, 2008, 10:40 pm 10:40 pm
Thanks lawyerlady. i think you had some excellent points and its good to know that these things arent dominated by crazy folks spewing meaningless drivel about their favorite candidate!
Posted by: Amir | February 26, 2008, 10:40 pm 10:40 pm
Clinton is an amazing person. She came into tonight with so much pressure and expectations that no one could possibly meet. We need her experience, her talent for the issues we face today.
If she were a man, we would be preparing a coronation.
If Obama were a woman, with his limited experience, he never would have made it past the second debate.
Go Hillary – We need your fighting spirit!
Posted by: twinmom48 | February 26, 2008, 10:41 pm 10:41 pm
M Bellevue, yeah, right. Mr. Uniter. We don’t want a fighter. All in favor raise your hand and vote PRESENT!
Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | February 26, 2008, 10:41 pm 10:41 pm
“I want to expand my knowledge of all sides – not stunt it with “pre-formed” garbage spewed by people who follow their party like like sheep – whichever party that may be.”
LawyerLady this is also my political philosophy.
Posted by: TJ | February 26, 2008, 10:51 pm 10:51 pm
Yep
Pretty clear the big loooooser is HRC tonight.
Posted by: The Commander Guy | February 26, 2008, 10:51 pm 10:51 pm
As Americans, we must ALL search for the knowledge on the issues and vote for whom we feel is truly the best candidate. As a nation we cannot afford to continue on the same path. And someone did make a fair comment above….said if Obama was a woman running on his less experienced record, he would have no chance. Valid comment I feel.
Posted by: LawyerLady | February 26, 2008, 10:52 pm 10:52 pm
Bottom line:
Hillary came off pushy, sarcastic, and rude
Obama came off as presidential.
He will be the nominee and that’s good news for the Democratic Party.
Posted by: jenny | February 26, 2008, 10:53 pm 10:53 pm
I’m not a big fan of Hillary but John I fail to see how her “love life” has anything to do with her bid for the Democratic nomination.
Posted by: TJ | February 26, 2008, 10:54 pm 10:54 pm
Thank you TJ. I appreciate your validation of my comments.
Posted by: LawyerLady | February 26, 2008, 10:54 pm 10:54 pm
I disagree with my dad, The Commander Guy… I think Barack was the big loooser.. He was stuttering way too much at one point…. Why?
Posted by: The Commander Guy Son | February 26, 2008, 10:54 pm 10:54 pm
Obama was a Constitional law professor and still can’t see that the Rezko funded purchase of his residence more then just a bone head move? yea lets get real.
Posted by: al | February 26, 2008, 10:55 pm 10:55 pm
It was a Clinton win. She had a plan of attack and went after it. She set her tone Healthcare and made them stick with it. She made him answer some hard things especially about Farakahn. Obama doesnt have the ability to really trump her up and turn the tables, she pulled that off on him tonight. Allo f you in support of Obama..Take a good luck at your candidate, Im from Illinois, I am still trying to figure out his “PUBLIC SERVICE”. Anyone can make a speech, I would like to see him ommit to some action and follow up on it. GO HILLARY
Posted by: Ryan | February 26, 2008, 10:55 pm 10:55 pm
Hillary for President! :)
Posted by: Jenny | February 26, 2008, 10:56 pm 10:56 pm
Excellent point TJ. It has NOTHING to do with her performance in politics. Give the woman her due. She is by far more intelligent than most of us on here and appears passionate about her beliefs. I want to give credit where it is due to anyone.
Posted by: LawyerLady | February 26, 2008, 10:56 pm 10:56 pm
lawyerlady and tj, i think jim was saying it was remarkable that chris matthews would make any comment about obama other than his usual fawning, rather than expressing an opinion about the accuracy of the comment itself. not that it’s my place to speak for jim, of course, but – before i completely stopped watching msnbc due to their lack of any semblance of objectivity, i observed an almost fanatical level of fawning, along with chris even making attacks and arguments for obama that he hadn’t come up with yet.
Posted by: so saddened | February 26, 2008, 10:57 pm 10:57 pm
If as Obama claims his health care plan is similiar to Hillary’s then why and how was he attacking it in the mailing of campaign ads?
Posted by: al | February 26, 2008, 10:57 pm 10:57 pm
I am from Illinois too……. And I don’t know anything about his community organizing, etc………
Posted by: DMK | February 26, 2008, 10:58 pm 10:58 pm
Hey tcnz, could you maybe put all that down on the side of Dr. Bronner’s soap bottle, you just aren’t making any sense to me. Try summarizing.
Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | February 26, 2008, 10:58 pm 10:58 pm
John in Winston Salem, I must disagree. No one owes me. Not man or woman. Your attitude leaves quite a bit to be desired in my humble female opinion. (A tad sarcasm thrown in for effect.)
Posted by: LawyerLady | February 26, 2008, 10:58 pm 10:58 pm
Hillary is NOT passionate..lol
Hillary just knows what to say in order to be precieved that way…..wake up DA
Posted by: John in Winston-Salem | February 26, 2008, 10:58 pm 10:58 pm
This debate doesn’t matter at all. John McCain will beat either of them handily.
Posted by: SF | February 26, 2008, 11:00 pm 11:00 pm
Is Tim Russert a jerk or what I felt bad for the other announcer.
Posted by: al | February 26, 2008, 11:00 pm 11:00 pm
I don’t think Ryan saw the same debate as I did. I don’t think she won that debate by a long shot. She may have mad some good points along the way But Obama was more composed and didn’t resort to bashing as a means of self-promotion.
Posted by: TJ | February 26, 2008, 11:00 pm 11:00 pm
All in favor that Obama won, please signify by voting PRESENT!!! LOL. What a joke that guy is.
Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | February 26, 2008, 11:00 pm 11:00 pm
This debate doesn’t matter at all. John McCain will beat either of them handily.
Posted by: SF | February 26, 2008, 11:01 pm 11:01 pm
al, you’re right re the rezko house deal. re the constitutional law professor, actually he wasn’t. that’s just one of his “exaggerations.” he was just a lecturer, which in law schools is very, very, very much a lower level status than professor or even assistant professor.
Posted by: so saddened | February 26, 2008, 11:01 pm 11:01 pm
So Sad, thank you for that clarification. I read and reacted. I appreciate your clarifying his point for me. :>)
Posted by: LawyerLady | February 26, 2008, 11:01 pm 11:01 pm
First of all, there certainly a lot of hot heads, who seem to wish that Hillary had been coronated. The fact is, there is no birth right to the presidency. As to experience, how would Hillary play that card against McCain? He has more experience, and is a war hero. Hillary’s campaign did not take Barack Obama seriously, as if he could unseat her ascendency to the “throne”. There is a change in the air. Now look at how the three have run their campaigns, only Barack Obama did not go broke. McCain was declared “DOA” due to lack of funds last summer. Hillary, had to loan her campaign five million of her own money. I personally do not want two families in the white house for over twenty years. GO Obama!!..2008..the year of Change.
Posted by: Michael | February 26, 2008, 11:02 pm 11:02 pm
I don’t mind if you support a different candidate. That’s your right to exercise.
However, there are undisputable facts
1. She did support the NAFTA.
*In her own book she writes trying to take credit for it “Creating a free trade zone in North America-The largest free trade zone in the world-would expand U.S. exports, create jobs and ensure that our economy was reaping the benefits, not the burdens of globalization.” (“Living History,” by Hillary Rodham Clinton, 2003, p. 182)
*She touts her “35 years of experience.” That does include the years of her WH & the NAFTA.
2. Hillary’s universal health plan is a “mandatory”. That means ultimately you are required (=forced) to buy it regardless if you want it or not.
* Sorry, I do not intend to vote for a candidate based upon geographical origin. By the way, Hillary is originally from Chicago area FYI.
Posted by: Philip, NYC | February 26, 2008, 11:02 pm 11:02 pm
In his closing statement, Obama mention accountability—So why won’t he agree to Public Campaign Financing? If this is a sign he is going to change government, I’d be better off to take my chances with Hillary.
Posted by: Take A Chance | February 26, 2008, 11:03 pm 11:03 pm
So Saddened, how right you are about being a lecturer and low man/woman on proverbial lawyer totem pole!
Posted by: LawyerLady | February 26, 2008, 11:03 pm 11:03 pm
Hillary has been runnung a National campaign and Obama has been runnung a democratic primary campaign . Like the NE Patriots Hillary knows that it doens’t do any good to get to the play- offs to lose the Superbowl in the end.
Posted by: al | February 26, 2008, 11:06 pm 11:06 pm
“Hillary has been runnung a National campaign and Obama has been runnung a democratic primary campaign . Like the NE Patriots Hillary knows that it doens’t do any good to get to the play- offs to lose the Superbowl in the end. ”
You have to GET to, and through, the playoffs first, then you focus on the Superbowl. :)
Posted by: Bill | February 26, 2008, 11:13 pm 11:13 pm
What will Obama do when MCCain picks a women or hispanic vice president not to mention Colin Powell?
Posted by: al | February 26, 2008, 11:13 pm 11:13 pm
Barack Obamma starts every answer with “Ummmm, Ahhhh, Ahhhhh, ya know”?
Posted by: me | February 26, 2008, 11:13 pm 11:13 pm
How do you think Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or North Korean President Kim Jong Il will react when HillBilly starts boo hooing when they ask her a question first?!? What a cry baby and a joke. We don’t need her running this country! She can’t even run her campaign.
ANYBODY BUT HILLARY ’08!!!
Posted by: Cheryl in Seattle | February 26, 2008, 11:14 pm 11:14 pm
lawyerlady, hope it didn’t sound elitist – wasn’t meant to. just felt the need to clarify, because i see so many comments on various sites about the alleged professor status. to me, it doesn’t matter so much that he was the bottom of the ladder in terms of law school educator status, but it does bother me that he seems to feel a need to stretch the truth about the matter. to me, it reveals a great deal about the person’s character. i’ve observed over many years that those who feel a need to exaggerate their status or accomplishments often have internalized insecurities that lead to poor judgment and decisions. nixon comes to mind.
Posted by: so saddened | February 26, 2008, 11:14 pm 11:14 pm
Bill and thats why Obama will lose the national election. Remember its about the big picture. If Obama gets the nomination and loses the national election his political career is over he will be viewed as the guy who gave the elections to the GOP and Hillary will ne poised for 2012. That unless Colin Powell gets the GOP VP spot.
Posted by: al | February 26, 2008, 11:17 pm 11:17 pm
Hey Commander Guy, you aren’t fooling anybody, you’re here representing the disenfranchised wing of the Republican Party, just trying to made do with your sour grapes over Huckabee’s failings. Yeah, aren’t you the same guy that said, and I quote,
“We all believe in Huck. The More folks that get to meet him the more folks there will be to get on board.
Let the people vote and see what happens.
I got Huck’s back, but he’s got everyone in America’s back.
Roll on Huck”
Have some dignity, tuck your tail in, and call it a night.
Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | February 26, 2008, 11:17 pm 11:17 pm
many GOP voters vote for Obama in texas. But in general election, they will vote for GOP. Please look at news in Yahoo.com.
Posted by: mike | February 26, 2008, 11:17 pm 11:17 pm
What is wrong with the American voter? First we get duped by a guy from TX who wins because many thought it would be great fun to have a “drink with him;” yeah like that was going to happen. Now we are getting duped by a guy who is “articulate.” Is this the criteria we use today?? We make such an important decision based who makes us feel good and not who’s more qualified? I’m in a position to hire people and I always hire the most qualified person; don’t we all??? For Pete’s sake, Hillary isn’t exciting and most of us wouldn’t care to have a drink with her but she is still much more qualified than Obama. I don’t need someone to make me feel good, I have myself, friends and family to take care of that. I need someone in Washington who’s going to get things done!!!
Posted by: Joe | February 26, 2008, 11:18 pm 11:18 pm
If McCain picks a hispanic VP its over for the DNC. And a women would be the ultimate slap in your face to Howard Dean and the DNC.
Posted by: al | February 26, 2008, 11:20 pm 11:20 pm
Joe, it looks like the problem with the American voter is that he tries to vote twice when he should merely be voting present, as taught by Mr. Obama.
Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | February 26, 2008, 11:22 pm 11:22 pm
After reading AP, WSJ and other papers, a reluctant Barack Obama forced by Hillary Clinton to publicly reject Farrakhan association appears to be the high point of the debate.
Posted by: Angel | February 26, 2008, 11:22 pm 11:22 pm
Prior to Obama the GOP was riding this one out looking to 2012. They tell you they would rather run against Hlllary but me thinks that might be disinformation.
Posted by: al | February 26, 2008, 11:22 pm 11:22 pm
i think Obama is a prophet from God his vision about change,unite people, best things that america need, it’s time to america to be a good example in the world a country in friendships no more ennemies
Posted by: edou78 | February 26, 2008, 11:24 pm 11:24 pm
thank you joe for your common sense comment. i see so many comments about hillary’s personality or appearance or obama’s charm, but neither is relevant. we’re electing a president and commander in chief, not a speaker, talk show host, or whatever. i care a great deal more about what they know and how well they can evaluate and handle complex situations than i do how they look or sound on tv or whether i’d like to be friends with them. re hiring, i think a lot of us have worked in places where the boss made the mistake of hiring the good talker, then we ended up with the incompetent or do nothing coworker who just kissed ___ to get by. you’d think people would realize hiring the good talker isn’t the best idea. (not including the kids, of course, who haven’t yet experienced the realities of the work world and can somewhat be excused for their innocent belief in what they hear).
Posted by: so saddened | February 26, 2008, 11:26 pm 11:26 pm
Well I was undecided going into this debate. And in good faith I wanted select the most worthy candidate.
I went back and forth on this very important decision. But, while I thought Hillary Clinton initially should be the recipient of my support, I now have definitively come to the conclusion that MIKE HUCKABEE needs our support at the polls.
Everyone support MIKE
Posted by: LawyerLady | February 26, 2008, 11:27 pm 11:27 pm
I agree with you WestCoastMessenger. But these hateful comments….Todd StoneCold would they say these things if their pictures were online.
Posted by: Kabindra | February 26, 2008, 11:27 pm 11:27 pm
al, you are so right about the disinformation. unfortunately, it probably worked.
Posted by: so saddened | February 26, 2008, 11:29 pm 11:29 pm
irma: You are the one who just brought up the issue of women voting for Hillary because she is a woman. I have not ever done so. I have said I would like to have a female president, but I do not want this one. My choice. I too am an educated older white woman who reads a lot. Sorry, this white woman wants somebody with a much cleaner slate. I have been voting since Kennedy so I look at issues very seriously.
Posted by: tcnz | February 26, 2008, 11:30 pm 11:30 pm
no matter how excellent a female is, a third of voters reject woman President. only 20% voters reject black President. It is very sad in USA
Posted by: sad | February 26, 2008, 11:31 pm 11:31 pm
I’m normally nuetral on Tim Russert but I have to say he was terrible tonight. It was embarassing watching him on the MSNBC program after. It looked like a good ole boy party talking about how he got the candidates to say things they normally don’t.
Posted by: jeff | February 26, 2008, 11:32 pm 11:32 pm
WestCoastMessenger, I absolutely agree. Tonight, Obama criticized Hillary for voting on a Bill she was glad didn’t pass. I guess voting present is better??? In an earlier debate he said voting present was the thing to do when he didn’t feel exactly right about a Bill. Yeah a true “Profile in Courage.”
Posted by: Joe | February 26, 2008, 11:32 pm 11:32 pm
I believe Hillary Clinton is the most experienced for the job. She did a wonderful job tonight. As always, she was funny, articulate, and sharp. What’s more, she demonstrated that she would be the best qualified to take on John McCain and the Republican spin-machine. I am inundated with hope because she will be the first woman president!
I have read many of the comments on here, and it’s clear that Obama’s supporters a filled with hate, while Hillary’s supporters brim with optimism and hope. I can’t figure out why Obama’s minions despise Hillary so much. Is it because she’s an independent woman? Is it because she is America’s greatest hope? Obama’s acolytes are so vicious that they sound like Republicans! Grow up. Hillary Clinton will be our next president, despite Obama’s best efforts.
Posted by: Hillary for Hillary | February 26, 2008, 11:35 pm 11:35 pm
Hillary did very well tonight in the debate. She was an effective fighter. She seemed especially presidential in answering foreign policy questions. Go Hillary!
Posted by: Nancy | February 26, 2008, 11:36 pm 11:36 pm
Hillary Rocked! Obama looked like a deer in the headlights. He might be a good VP
Posted by: terry | February 26, 2008, 11:36 pm 11:36 pm
m cohen, you are so right. obama, as usual, tries to deflect real questions by using his personality and attempts at humor. it works for the kids, but not only does it not sound presidential but it also raises serious concerns about his willingness and ability to address the issues. i’ve found it very surprising that palestinian/isreali issues have received virtually no attention in the campaign so far. but this is an area in which i fear obama’s inexperience and very poorly developed world view can be extremely dangerous.
Posted by: so saddened | February 26, 2008, 11:38 pm 11:38 pm
M Cohen, I totally agree with you. I thought that was a shocking answer but you know it will be overlooked in the media because he finally rejected Farrahkan. The first answer is normally the most honest answer.
Posted by: jas | February 26, 2008, 11:40 pm 11:40 pm
jas, you’re so right about the media – they only take the most superficial of views. they care about things like did he denounce vs. reject, did she say she made a mistake or just excuse it, etc. they don’t address farrahkan’s racist views and how they have or have not influenced obama, whether and how obama’s church affiliations will affect his ability to deal with middle east issues, etc. they just look for the easy story, and particularly when it suits their agenda.
Posted by: so saddened | February 26, 2008, 11:44 pm 11:44 pm
M. Cohen wrote the following above: “As a Jewish American, Obama wasn’t quick enough to….” Look at what he said again. “As a Jewish American, OBAMA….” Last time I checked, Senator Obama wasn’t a Jewish American! Cohen could use a few lessons in grammar. In any case, Obama has repeatedly denounced the pathetic head of the Nation of Islam, so I don’t know what Cohen is talking about. In addition, someone doesn’t have to be a Jewish American to despise Farrakhan (which is what Cohen seems to imply). The Nation of Islam believes that white people were created by an evil black scientist, so any decent human being should be offended by the man.
Posted by: F. Lawrence | February 26, 2008, 11:55 pm 11:55 pm
evidently, you do not know that Colin Powell is BO supporter.
Posted by: greenlee2 | February 26, 2008, 11:59 pm 11:59 pm
Hey WestCoastMessenger,
The American voters carry more weight than you or Chris Mathews, and thus far Obama has won more votes, more states and more delegates despite starting out with double digit defecits in the polls.
Hillary Clinton is a career politician who tries to play both sides of the fence. I don’t go for politicians like her who try to be “all things to all people”.
Posted by: Mark | February 27, 2008, 12:00 am 12:00 am
I have changed mind. I used to promote Hillary Clinton for President.
But Hillary is just too strident for me to listen to anymore. I am going with Roy Moore from here on on out. He has the 35+ year experience. He is balanced and just a good all around role model for our kids.
I am tired of hanging around people who are bad influences on our kids.
Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | February 27, 2008, 12:04 am 12:04 am
although obamaites have demonstrated no ability whatsoever to be gracious winners (or at least winners so far), those of us who were actually raised with manners will try very hard to not scream i told you so when your candidate loses in a landslide in november.
Posted by: so saddened | February 27, 2008, 12:34 am 12:34 am
Obama is right when he said Hillary is the champ.
Posted by: jt | February 27, 2008, 12:35 am 12:35 am
new yorker, the issues pertaining to farrahkan, etc., are not about whether we should be showing concern for jewish people when we should be concerned for black people because of the wrongs done to them over the years (although you are apparently young enough not to remember “restricted” neighborhoods, etc., i.e., that we treated jewish people badly too, although admittedly not to the same degree). (btw, i’m not jewish, not that it matters, but i’m sure you’ll assume that the only reason i’d care about the issues would be religious). the issues are not about “guilt” for past bad acts, which is a subject worthy of thoughtful consideration in itself, but about present day concerns that affect all of us. middle east political matters are very serious and have rippling effects throughout the world. your narrow focus on campaign issues and who race baited first ignore the very real realities of the world. and obama’s 20-year association with a church that openly expresses admiration for farrahkan’s racist views certainly raises serious concerns about how that association would affect his ability to properly deal with middle eastern countries/issues/leaders.
Posted by: so saddened | February 27, 2008, 12:51 am 12:51 am
If there were any Christians on this board you would know that YOU DO NOT REJECT THE SINNER you reject the SIN
Posted by: TheUrbanRevolution | February 27, 2008, 1:02 am 1:02 am
i think Hillary re-invented her campaign tonite and won the day!
Her comments on foreign policy and especially Putin were knowledgable, sensible, and concise.
And had she not been the one to respond to the question first, I believe B O
would have stuttered his way through the first and subsequent sentences of his answer.
You might not like her….. but I would trust Hillary to be President and make more “right decisions” than any other nominee.
Posted by: questioner | February 27, 2008, 1:16 am 1:16 am
If you like to gamble then vote for Obama because you are not sure what is the outcome when you put a bet. May be Mr. Obama will “CHANGE” his own character – no more vote “present” instead of say “YES” or “NO” when he becomes US President. God bless America.
Posted by: stock_craft | February 27, 2008, 1:26 am 1:26 am
I am an independant who has spent several weeks trying to catch the “Obama Train” and I just don’t get it. Another debate down and again I feel closer to Hillary Clinton, I just think she is a realist and not trying to tell us what she thinks we want to hear but what she actually believes is achievable.
Senator Obama has never really engaged my interest when he speaks but for some reason I keep trying to give him a chance to.
Posted by: Oliver Twisted | February 27, 2008, 1:33 am 1:33 am
Why is it always okay to cut Hillary off in these debates, and let Barack go on and on with no interuptions? Why is it okay that when Hillary Clinton answers a difficult question, when it is Barack’s turn , he simply says,” I agree with Hillary?” How can that be enoug? I will tell you the job Barack Obama is qualified for: Vice President to Hillay Clinton’s Presidency.
These debates prove this to me everytime time that Hillary has the experince and is ready. Barack Obama is still a student who is eagar to learn, but is not quite there yet. Let’s WAKE UP America before it is too late.
Posted by: Katie | February 27, 2008, 1:38 am 1:38 am
I have to say that Obama has done even better today than what he has done in the past. I did not catch a moment when I felt Hillary had a chance to come out from under. I did not catch a moment when I felt Hillary had a chance to come out from under.
The lengths her campaign will go with the half truths and innuendos thrown at Obama, only to roll off like ‘WATER DOWN A DUCKS BACK’.
She looks the wear for all the emotional mood swing roller coaster we witnessed. To go from how much she was honored to be running against Obama on Thursday, to her “Shame on You Obama!” On Monday, her waving the fliers which did contain facts of Hillary’s position on NAFTA. Yet with her crazy episodes, reminding me of what MENOPAUSE was like for me, I can sympathizes for her.
But if Hillary cannot handle Obama, and his gentleman nature, How could she ever handle McCain and his mood swings combined with the mouth of an old drunken sailor? Let’s not forget that elderly men do suffer from menopause also, the medical profession just labels it differently.
Posted by: Angie | February 27, 2008, 1:42 am 1:42 am
You mentioned Senator Clintons sex and age, Senator McCains age and how gentlemanly Senator Obama is. In this day and age you should be ashamed.
Posted by: Oliver Twisted | February 27, 2008, 1:47 am 1:47 am
Katie, did he really deserve a promotion? I don’t think so. Put him on same ticket will end Hillary Clinton political career this November. He needs to do more public works before can qualify as a VP or US President.
Posted by: stock_craft | February 27, 2008, 1:50 am 1:50 am
Hillary whines too MUCH, PLEASE give it a rest. When they say it’s time for a break with our sponsers…SHUT UP…Shut it downnn…ME..me..me…I…I..I…Shut UP! Why do I always have to go first? She sounds like my 2 yr old talking to my 4 yr. old…This is who you me to vote for? Somebody shut this woman up, and that cackle…Please! She didn’t even know the name of Russian President Putin’s successor. A woman President would be AWESOME…Hillary’s not THAT Woman.
Posted by: Sabastian | February 27, 2008, 2:17 am 2:17 am
Hillary just is not going to make it. She faulted by not being cool calm and collected. Obama will win the Democratic nomination but will lose the one that counts the most.
Posted by: Kottaras | February 27, 2008, 2:29 am 2:29 am
I am America! And I am Hillary Clinton! And I am Barack Obama! Together we shall engage is a fabulous three-some. We shall make love everywhere. We shall make love every day. While we perform rim jobs on each other, our supporters will engage in petty spats, and we shall sneer at them.
Posted by: Diablo Cody | February 27, 2008, 4:47 am 4:47 am
American need change so, barack obama is one of the changer to build American strong in any lavels and also care for all. I think now is the chance for obama to lead America. Bravo obama I support U
Posted by: syukronmakmur | February 27, 2008, 5:22 am 5:22 am
Hillary started to blow a gasket with the paranoid rambling about always getting the first question. I thought she was going under but she snapped back to reality. Still, it made me wonder how she would handle fifty times the stress of Commander in Chief. I don’t think so. Too much sweating and rolling her eyes already..
Obama kissed her ### too much playing the agreeable opponent. It made him seem soft and not willing to challenge her. Uniting people doesn’t mean uniting your lips with their wrong end.
Still at least he seems level headed and marginally capable. And he’ll learn toughness when the Republican party attacks him with the ferocity of a doomed rat trapped on a sinking ship. McCain is out of touch and dried up, like a broken down couch with no stuffing left. But nesting inside the couch are dirty GOP rats ready to spread fleas like Karl Rove. Fun times ahead.
Posted by: Thompson S Hunting | February 27, 2008, 5:23 am 5:23 am
Uh, why havent the democrats candidate talk about the economy and inflation!!!
Posted by: dave | February 27, 2008, 5:37 am 5:37 am
ITs official…..the Obama campaign has 1,000,000 contributors……….I think this is a clear recognition of individuals taking ownership and their desire to build a movement.
Posted by: Wilson | February 27, 2008, 5:38 am 5:38 am
Wonderful news!!!! Please, stop trying to give HRC hope, this could give the woman a heart attack. Stop talking maybe she can pull it out, maybe people will become dumb between now and next week, maybe she got her message through, maybe…maybe…just give it a rest and LET’S MOVE ON! In spite of all of her attacks, you can see that he doesn’t hate her and the conciliatory mood?? well, he knows, as a good leader, that he needs everybody’s help, and he is putting his party above all! That is what leadership is about!
Posted by: carmen | February 27, 2008, 5:59 am 5:59 am
Mark, It’s good to try to blame her several failed attempts to bring down the whole democratic party’s moral, by injecting her “too” many negativities, on Sexism. Maybe, you would feel better if everybody realized she was just a woman trying hard, with a genuine heart, who deserves a chance to be president just for the sake of making history. Nice try buddy and contrary to what you guys are saying in Canada, she has been a “woman” senator and a front runner from the go. It just can’t sink well in my mind the notion that once she lost her lead, she becomes a victim of sexism. What happened to sexism before, when she was a front runner during the whole 2007???? (Maybe, America was more open-minded last year)
Like I said, Nice try!!!
Posted by: TheOne | February 27, 2008, 6:23 am 6:23 am
I wasnt’ a “nice” try but, your post was. In fact people were talking about sexism when she was winning. They were talking about it quite a lot. It wasn’t rearing it’s ugly head so much as when the onslaught began. There is a huge list of media comments that are blatantly sexist. The choice of Obama’s “victory” song being the worst IMHO.
It was there. It just got worse as time went along. There were articles about how Obama benefited from it all over the web if you looked and nooo they were not on the NOW website if that is were you would go with it.
To say it wasn’t there?? Come on!! It’s a huge part of society!! How many women’s shelters do we have to have before we accept that it’s huge problem??
She bore the brunt of it even when she was winning. JUST the very FACT that she was answering even at the beginning for what her husband did. She would have been criticized if she left him or if she didn’t. I didn’t see anyone talking about Obama’s hair style, his ankles, his voice tone…if she got angry she was a bitch, is she showed emotion, she was too soft…look up on this very blog and you will see it. She WON in New Hampshire and they said it was because she “cried” which she did not…she teared up. So did Reagan, so did Bill Clinton, so did Bush and all of them got kudos for showing their feelings!!
Perhaps being male you do not see it so easily but, I have daughters and they noticed it. All along.
Obama never spoke up and indeed when he won Iowa he chose to use a sexist victory song…that was when for all intents and purposes she was still winning.
Nice Try indeed. It’s there, every day all around you and if you talk to women who are voting Clinton…or men for that matter they will tell you that it is the reason they are not voting Obama…he used it against her and that is a fact. He refused to apolgise and the frat boy mentality in a lot of the media was so blatant about it a times it was a shocking joke.
Posted by: Mark | February 27, 2008, 7:38 am 7:38 am
I sent back the survey to DNC last Saturday that every vote should count and not likely to vote this year plus Democratic Party will lose the White House again in this November if a young, no experience candidate is nominated to run against John McCain. Hope Mr. Howard Dean hears it.
Posted by: stock_craft | February 27, 2008, 7:51 am 7:51 am
“CHANGE” I hear you. I promise that I will CHANGE my style, not to voting as “present” or skip to vote 130 times any more if you elect me as US President. Instead, I will CHANGE to say “YES” to whatever you have lobbied me today. “YES, WE CAN” I am sure I can do it.
Posted by: stock_craft | February 27, 2008, 8:14 am 8:14 am
I’m seeing a Obama/Clinton ticket. If Obama is to unify the country, he will have to unify the Democratic Party first.
It he can talk and work with to foreign dictators we don’t like, he can have Hillary as a VP for 8 years.. giving Hillary a opportunity in 8years to be President..
Join me in supporting an Obama/Hillary 08 ticket.
A story book ending to this drama.
Posted by: Lawrence | February 27, 2008, 8:46 am 8:46 am
Lawrence – “Join me in supporting an Obama/Hillary 08 ticket. ”
HA!
Don’t you know the She is entitled to be Pres and the Veep role is Below her dignity?
Posted by: The Commander Guy | February 27, 2008, 9:01 am 9:01 am
In your dreams how about Clinton/Obama since me to seems to be his favorite word.
Posted by: Bishop | February 27, 2008, 9:08 am 9:08 am
Mark: Thank you for your post. I didn’t know about the Victory Song in Iowa. Interesting. But Obama gets a pass on most issues because the male press is focused on his winning this nomination. Your daughters, wife, mom and other women in your life should be proud of you for posting. When more men see through the fog of sexism and realize that it is really misogyny, then this country will take a giant step. Last night was the Most Sexist Nasty Boys Club night and they once again met expectations. They are a strange, strange group. Unfortunately, they aren’t alone. This post won’t last long. These guys delete the ones with with misogyny in them. I guess they finally looked up the word “misogyny” and realized what I was saying about them. You’re not one of them and that give me “hope”.
Posted by: AmazonTraveler | February 27, 2008, 9:10 am 9:10 am
Mark,
Let’s assume she’s a victim of “sexism”, would you agree that in spite of that, she was front-runner for a very long time?
Don’t you think it does call into questioning that we’re crying wolf only now that she no longer enjoys the front-runner status?
Lastly, if sexism is a constant element in the society (Meaning: it never changes), the fact that the results shifted to Obama, doesn’t it suggest rather that the variant is Hilary’s approach which in fact changes many times throughout her campaign? Hence, if anyone should be blamed, wouldn’t it be the variants which change the course of things?
Your rhetorics about sexism offer very little relevance my friend to Hilary’s campaign, because she was both front-runner and second, like it could be for anybody else…
Posted by: TheOne | February 27, 2008, 10:17 am 10:17 am
Obama has bought his superdelagates he is such a hypocrite.
He is as bad as a lobbyist.
Posted by: J | February 27, 2008, 10:45 am 10:45 am
I like how Obama had to defer several times during the debate to HIllary’s greater grasp of the facts, the world due to her intellect and experience. He looks like a person still relying on his mentor for the answers.
Posted by: votetheissues | February 27, 2008, 10:54 am 10:54 am
I think a very clear winner emerged last night. It was very obvious if you listened closely to the policies and agendas both Obama and Clinton espoused. The obvious winner: Karl Marx
Posted by: Scott | February 27, 2008, 10:54 am 10:54 am
Hillary’s finished, she drove her own campaign into the ditch, running on the strength of being a woman but always crying for help from her lying, cheating husband. She’s a whinning, crying can’t take the heat person.
Her eyes buldge, her nostrils flare and she rants. The press is being mean to me, women of america help me yell at the press, may I please go second; give me a break.
Run for the Presidency of a library and leave the Presidency to people who can actually take the heat without bitching. If she thinks the questions are too tough and unfavorable to her now, she’d have a stroke from the heat she’d take on world events.
All of this talk about 35 years of experience that you’re all falling for is crap, being married to a president for 8 years and living in the white house as well as traveling with sex thrill Bill does not count.
I wouldn’t let my Doctors wife perform surgery on me just because she’s watched him do it…get real!
You want to compare a woman who actually has experience with world affairs and world leaders as well as there respect, Google “Condi Rice…Nuff said”
If you want a woman for president send a canidate who can stand the heat as well as stand on her own two feet without whinning for her Husband!
Posted by: Sabastian | February 27, 2008, 11:04 am 11:04 am
I hate to say this but as a Black man I have no confidence in Barack Obama. It’s like we democrats have been waiting for almost 8 years to win back the White House, and now we are going to lose it to the Republicans again, because there are so many people who are feeling an inspirational sermon………..Oh Well Dems, maybe 2012!
Posted by: Marcus | February 27, 2008, 11:18 am 11:18 am
Sabastian I doubt that you’re a Black man, for the simple fact of you STATING your race. Nice try!
Senator Obama was the clear winner. He was presidential, confident, and right on target with his answers. Her so called “experience” backfired, because her judgement was sorely lacking and caused 2 major blunders for our country. Iraq and Nafta! She is self serving and like Barack said “you can’t just wipe away your past judgement and records when you decide it won’t work to your benefit in your campaign.”
Also with her not handing over her taxes or records makes her look like she is hiding something. I don’t trust her!
Posted by: Misty | February 27, 2008, 11:30 am 11:30 am
It was heartening to read your post, Mark. Yours too, Marcus. I agree completely. One of the many disturbing things about last night’s debate was Tim Russert’s obvious distain for Hillary. He cut her off incessantly, allowed Obama to ramble on, soft peddled Obama’s association with Farrakhan, and hammered her relentlessly until she indicated she would take her 2002 vote back. He even gloated with Chris Matthews about how he “got her” after the debate concluded. Like you, Mark, I believe sexism is so deeply rooted in our culture that many people don’t even notice it. It’s business as usual. The depth and breadth of Hillary’s real experience is overshadowed by Obama’s slick word smiting. The irony is that Barrack wasn’t a US senator yet in 2002 when Hillary cast her vote for the war. Obama didn’t have access to the intelligence our US senate had at the time about Iraq. Given Obama’s track record both in the Illinois senate and his year or so (of non-campaigning) in the US senate, he may well have voted the same way Hillary did. Either that, or he would have just voted “present” as he did 130 other times, rather than taking a stand on the issue.
Posted by: Emily | February 27, 2008, 12:23 pm 12:23 pm
Don’t get carried away with poll numbers. In 2004 poll numbers showed that Kerry has higher lead…but where did he go. Just bunch of people can not decide the whole country’s judgement. These numbers are good for media people to pass the time on the air to keep crunching…..
Posted by: abcdfw | February 27, 2008, 12:29 pm 12:29 pm
First I would Like to say Go Obama!!! and when he wins I hope all of you Hillary Clinton fans eat your words. No one is born to be a president . I think Obama has a lot to offer. I am a white woman and I believe in Him . He is going to make a change some of you are so stuck in time .You don’t know a good thing when you see it. You guys are scared of a change all you see is the negative side Hillary is basing alot of her actions off of what her husband did. Accept it guys and girls. HISTORY IS IN THE MAKING!!!!!!
Posted by: kyna | February 27, 2008, 12:36 pm 12:36 pm
Talkin the lines of Emily…in so many Asian countries such as Srilanka, India, UK, philipines…etc all had Women presidents. In these contries freedom is conditional, women rights are restricted but they are ready to accept women presidents.
But, America talks about free speech, woman rights, freedom in that and this
but not ready to accpet a Woman president. What a shame!!!!!@@@$$$
Posted by: abcdfw | February 27, 2008, 12:42 pm 12:42 pm
Who won the debate last night is of little consequence. Clinton is qualified and would make a good president. Obama is not qualified and would not.
Nader will be the spoiler for the Democrats. McCain will beat whatever
Democrat survives the convention in August…and it will come to that.
Clinton will not bow out gracefully to promote an Obama coronation. Whether they admit it or not, Americans know this to be fact.
The furor over the use of Barak Hussein Obama’s middle name puzzles me, though. Presidents have to handle a lot of criticism and be able to shrug it off as inconsequential to the task at hand. How can any candiate expect people believe he is up to the task of the Presidency when he can’t even tolerate the use of his own middle name?
People who will vote in November don’t care if whiner are crying about the use of Barak Hussein Obama inferring a Muslim influence. That is the man’s name. They need to get over it or he needs to change his middle name.
Posted by: Ken | February 27, 2008, 12:52 pm 12:52 pm
I want my voice to be heard about the unfair Media comments thrown out against Hillary Clinton.
I have been keeping up with Hillary’s and Barack’s campaigns and debates and I have to say as an American I believe Hillary is not getting enough positive feed back from the Media.
I just read an article on how Barack was taking on the character of Mohamad Ali (a rope…a dope, fly like a butterfly, sting like a bee, etc….) and Hillary was his opponent, basically losing the match. That’s not true, she is only a few delegates behind Obama. The games not over until its over and if the Media does not soon give her some positive cover, yes as you want her to be defeated she will be defeated. This is not fair again for the Women in America.
Posted by: Rhonda J Schlottman | February 27, 2008, 1:19 pm 1:19 pm
No matter who becomes the nomanee,all of use must be prepared to saport Obama or Clinton.Lets not forget what the goal is and that is to win back the WHITE HOUSE.
Posted by: Independent | February 27, 2008, 1:24 pm 1:24 pm
I want to see another debate! One where the people get to ask the questions and I don’t want the debate to be on MSNBC. Tim Russert wastes way too much time with hypotheticals, as if there aren’t enough REAL ISSUES to be discussed. I want to know about Right to Choose, NCLB, how we’ll solve the budget deficit, etc. A town hall meeting type of debate between Hillary and Barack. I want to know about the candidates lives. How they grew up and what has shaped them in experience etc. I want a debate where the time is used up by the candidates and not the moderators. I just want to hear Hillary and Barack answer questions and ask questions of each other. The moderators should facilitate, not be part of the discussion.
Posted by: irma | February 27, 2008, 1:56 pm 1:56 pm
The media is so biased towards Obama and this is probably one of the major reasons why he’s garnering so many votes. It’s not because he has a superior economic and healthcare plan, it’s because he talks well. What has he inspired people to do? To believe in themselves? That’s so vague, but it does win over people who don’t face major problems (e.g. struggling financially etc). All he’s inspired people to do is to vote for himself as President of America.
Posted by: Neutral Observer | February 27, 2008, 2:15 pm 2:15 pm
Yea, BHO just repeats everything Hillary says, because he hasn’t had an original thought in his life. Hillary is a fighter and that is what we need to get out of Iraq and get this economy going. We need someone with a backbone not someone who is content to straddle the fence. HILLARY 2008!
Posted by: Heather | February 27, 2008, 4:54 pm 4:54 pm
If you want to see unbiased news coverage, watch PBS news. They are interviewing Hillary tonight. HILLARY 2008!
Posted by: Heather | February 27, 2008, 4:55 pm 4:55 pm
Clinton puzzled me with her whining about be asked the first question…if you are a candidate touting yourself as being the best prepared on “day one” and that you can deal with any issue or catstrophic event that comes your way, and yet have a difficult time answer the first question, I now have to wonder how she would handle a crisis. I would think you would want to be the first, get your response out there first, show you are a leader and can handle controversial questions/issues. She disappointed me…her complaining was juvenile and unpresidential. She hurts her own chances as being nominated.
Posted by: Todd | February 27, 2008, 7:43 pm 7:43 pm
I think the difference in treatment is proof-positive that the media is just reflecting the nation: we are more sexist than racist.
Posted by: Oliver Twisted | February 27, 2008, 11:46 pm 11:46 pm
It seems as though the candidates believe in tough love, i.e. subsidy breeds dependence, when it comes to troops in Iraq vs the Iraqis policing themselves but they do not believe the same when it comes to an individuals responsibility to provide for their own welfare. This is populism and hypocrisy in its most grotesque form. I happen to believe, consistently by the way, that all subsidy leads to dependence including subsidies to individuals and corporations.
Posted by: Michael | April 16, 2008, 9:09 pm 9:09 pm
i knew this would be a cut throat debate due to all the personal attacks from the clinton camp–i was ready for that but its too bad that our media has to fuel the verbal sparing with their juvenile questioning to gain viewers—it took almost an hour before a legitimate question about the issues was even asked—i know that reality tv is a part of our dinner discussions but i really feel that if our country does not open their eyes to the political games that have been playing out for a long time we will loose the everything this country stands for—this is a plea to our media–please do your job—speak and ask questions for the people—the questions that we as people lay awake at night worrying about
Posted by: melaina | April 16, 2008, 9:55 pm 9:55 pm
I believe that the Democratic presidential “debate” was bias against Barack Obama. The moderators consistantly put him in the “hotseat”, slamming him with questions about the many allegations made by the media (which he had already addressed numerous of times), but proceeded to only ask Hillary Clinton primarily about her policies. The only time she was in the “hotseat” was when they asked her about her experience in Bosnia. However, they neglected to bring up her involvement with NAFTA, which put so many of the people she claims to represent in Pennsylvania, out of work due to their jobs being outsourced. However, Barack Obama was still successful in addressing each and every question to the point that they do not need to be readdressed, and in giving a more compelling debate.
Posted by: Glen from Atlanta | April 16, 2008, 11:03 pm 11:03 pm
Why is no one saying the real reason there is a housing problem. The banks were so greedy to lend money to people that should never had a loan to begin with!
Posted by: Gary Dennis | April 16, 2008, 11:26 pm 11:26 pm
Clinton asks why Obama never gets the first question on these tough topics and ties it into a skit from the most recent Saturday Night Live. She contends that from the begining (as in when she started running for the Senate in 2000), she has been a critic of NAFTA.
—————-
johnsmith
Posted by: johnsmith | July 16, 2008, 2:43 am 2:43 am