10:26 p.m. --WRAP UP: UP CLOSE AND PERSONAL
Well, if you were looking for political hot stuff tonight, you should have been wearing asbestos.
The veneer of civility--and it was thin to begin with--cracked within the first few minutes of the two-hour debate as Clinton, Obama and Edwards landed blow after blow upon each other.
Obama seemed to have the biggest bullseye painted on his back.
Both Clinton and Edwards--who physically flanked him for the entire evening- hit him on everything from his voting record in the Illinois state legislature to his association with indicted Chicago businessman Tony Rezko. Obama handled it, for the most part, smoothly by briefly but firmly answering the charge and then changing the subject.
A lot of this probably flew by most people in the audience, but they certainly got the idea that Obama was taking major heat. And, that could help him.
Obama stopped just short of calling Clinton and her husband liars, charging them with spreading misleading information about his record. He reserved most of his fire for Clinton, but took a few swipes at Edwards as well.
Caught in the relentless crossfire between Obama and Clinton, Edwards was left so gasping for airtime that CNN moderator Wolf Blitzer felt obligated to apologize to him. Edwards remained the coolest during the debate, landed some blows and made some good points about his positions. But, what he really needed wasn't an apology but the time to make the case that, despite the polls, his campaign deserves more consideration and has a future.
The bottom line: If this debate was any preview of the next five days here before the primary, it's a good thing that fireworks are legal in South Carolina.
Good night and thanks for joining me.
10 p.m. KING ME
The last question: If Dr. Martin Luther King were alive today, why should he endorse you?
"I met with Martin the third in Atlanta on Saturday" and he was very kind about supporting Edwards' campaign against poverty, Edwards said, noting he had also worked for King's Poor Peoples' Campaign.
"I don't think Dr. King would endorse any of us," said Obama. "I think what he would do is hold us accountable."
Clinton said, "There is no doubt that change comes from the extraordinary efforts of the American people...I am sitting here because of that change." That is the kind of change that King fought for, she said. "Dr. King transformed the lives of so many of us and I intend to do whatever I can to make his legacy" continue to impact the lives of Americans."
TIME'S UP! CATCH YOUR BREATH....
<9:59p.m.-- I CAN SLAY THE MCCAIN DRAGON BETTER THAN YOU CAN
Obama took another bite of the apple and salted it with some faith talk. "I am a proud Christian," he said, noting the Democratic Party has not been overly comfy dealing with evangelicals. It also may be another jab at puncturing the persistent rumor that he is a practicing Muslim.
"If John is right and Sen. McCain is the nominee," we will have a national debate on security, said Clinton. She said she's the one who can take him on. "If it's the classic Republcian campaign. I've been there, I've done that. They've been after me for 16 years," she said.
Edwards jumps in to remind everyone that he has never taken a dime from corporate lobbyists. Clinton jumps him back, saying he hires the children of lobbyists. Yikes.
"John, trial lawyers have given you millions and millions of dollars," Clinton continued.
Now, both Obama and Edwards look like they've been sucking lemons. "The lobbyists represent the interests that are paying the lobbyists," Clinton hammers home.
"Nobody's hands are clean," said Obama, in an attempt, maybe, to defuse the temperature that again is rising. Then he veers back into why he's the one to slay the McCain dragon.
"I believe the way we are going to take on a John McCain on national security...I think it's going to be someone who can bring a strong contrast" and say we have to overcome the politics of fear," he said.
strong>9:47 P.M.-- IT'S ALL ABOUT WHO CAN THUMP THE GOP NOMINEE
Clinton may have "found" her voice in New Hampshire, but it's her husband who is being criticized for talking to loudly. What does Clinton think about that?
"I think this campaign is not about our spouses, it is about each of us individually...I think it's fair to say the most important decision is who would be the best president on day one. The subsidiary quesiton is who can best resist the Repubolicans..and win in 2008," said Clinton. She knows she is that person.
"Hillary's right. All of us have incredible smart..advocates in our spouses...I would expect that Bill Clinton would campaign vigorously on your behalf," Obama told Clinton. "I have been troubled...to the degree to which my recored is not accurately portrayed, but that is standard practice in some political battles."
But, he challenged her that she is the best chance to defeat the Republicans. "We want to expand the scope of the electorate so we get a 60 percent majority...and that is something I think I can do."
John Edwards warned voters in South Carolina that their vote will be crucial to who gets the Democratic nomination and will take on Arizona Sen. John McCain, whom he said is the likely GOP nominee. "Who can compete with John McCain in every place in America?," he asked.
Guess who?
9:37 "KILL BILL" PART IV
Was Bill Clinton "our first black president?"
Obama is not too sure, although he is duly complimentary to the former president who has been making his life hell in recent weeks.
Now the three are sitting closely, perhaps too closely for this group, side by side in red armchairs. But the atmosphere isn't too cozy. Obama tries to warm things up.
"I would have to investigate more Bill's dancing abilities and some other stuff before I could accurately judge if he is a brother," said Obama to hoots.
"I'm sure that could be arranged," said Clinton, smiling tightly.
She then says how proud Martin Luther King would be to see their diverse--if fractious--little group on the stage together as presidential candidates. As for their "differences" that they keep pointing out, "It would be unbecoming of any of us not to share those differences," she said, because they are competing for the most powerful job in the world.
Obama said "I especially appreciate that Hillary and John are giving me a tough time": because that means he's doing pretty good. He said he would be upset if "there was too much civility."
No chance of that.
9: --THEY'RE BAAACK...SEND SMALL CHILDREN FROM THE ROOM.
Now, race is on the table. Obama's asked if Rep. Charles Rangel of New York's statement that black voters should not vote "for what feels good" but for what's best for the country.
Obama says he knows Clinton doesn't want women to vote for her just because she's a woman, although he did say he thought Edwards did think white men should vote for him. That was a joke, a rare event so far in this raucous debate.
So, should the prospect of haviing th efirst black president be a factor in determining people's votes?
"I don't think it's for me to tell anybody, particularly African Americans, what to consider when they're voting," said Edwards.However, he said, the problems of the black community should be addressed by any president. "If you're black you're much more likely to be poor...that community is hurt more than any other by poverty," he said.
Clinton emphasized all her work for children in poverty. "How is it best to end poverty," she asked. Over the last eight years black Americans have lost financial ground--ground they had gained under the last president, you know who. "I think we know what we need to do and if we have a president who is willing from day one" to create shared prosperity again, it will be good for everyone.
Obama compliments Edwards on his campaign's focus on poverty. Then he swiftly pats himself on the back. 'I started my career after college working in low income areas, working in housing projects," he said. "I want to make clear, John, that a lifetime commitment is how we must measure these issues."
Then he slams the media for injecting race into the campaign. "People want to move" beyond this, he said. "In a race where you've got an African American, a woman and John," he said--drawing laughter by inadvertently pinpointing Edwards' biggest problem--the subject might be raised. But voters want to get beyond it, he said.
Edwards quickly cites his own credentials working with ministries and poverty centers. He talks about the single mother he met who had to dress up her kids in their winter coats to sleep at night because it was so cold. "No mother in America should have to live like that. We are a better country than that."
9:10--WARRING WORDS ABOUT THE WAR
Clinton says there is "no military solution" to Iraq and she will bring the troops home shortly after she becomes president. "This is complicated but I am committed to withdraw our troops and put the Iraqi" government on notice that they had better get cracking on their own, she said.
Even Bush recognizes that the solution is for Sunnis and Shiites to work out their problems, said Edwards. "If Bush recognizes it, man, it's really got to be out there," he said, drawing laughs. He'd take all combat troops out within a year of his arrival in the Oval Office.
"Understand what's at stake here...how do we create a stable Iraqi government," says Obama. "It is not just the loss of life, which is the most tragic aspect of it," he said. It's all that money, which could be used for so many things that people need--especially people in South Carolina.
TIME FOR A COMMERCIAL BREAK
When we come back, we'll see a new set, new format and "All the rules will go away...whatever rules are left," said Blitzer.
9:02 p.m. ENOUGH HEALTH CARE, ON TO IRAQ
"I think it is imperative to have plans, as both John and I do, to cover every single" American," said Clinton. She says it is such a core Democratic principle "I'm willing to go to the mat for it."
I am not running for president to put band-aids" on health plans, she said.
Obama said of mandatory health care, "What is happening in Massachusetts right now, folks are paying fines because they can't afford healthcare." He took umbrage at Clinton's suggestion "t that I'm not interested in having everyone covered.
8:57 p.m. STAY HEALTHY...
The issue is now health care and Clinton is "adamantly in favor of universal healthcare" that is affordable but mandatory for everyone.
Obama acknowledges that his universal plan leaves out illegal immigrants. "I do think we have an obligation to make sure children are covered...but the critical issue on these various plans is how are we actually going to get it done." He "appreciates" that Sen. Clinton in 1993 did try to create a plan, but she did it "behind closed doors."
"We are very clear about who is carrying water for the drug companies," he says. "We have to put responsbility not just on the next president but on Congress."
Who is going to help illegals if they wind up in the E.R.? Edwards says, "Honestly, none of our three plans does." Edwards points out that only his and Clinton's are universal health plans. "His is not," he says, pointing at Obama.
Moreover, "Sen. Obama's taken more money from the drug companies than anybody. Sen. Clinton's take more money from the insurance companies. I have not," Edwards said.
Obama, standing at the middle lecturn, is getting it from both sides. Nonstop.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8:50 p.m. NOW, IT'S MY TURN TO THROW FOOD...
Finally, Edwards gets a word in edgewise. "What I didn't hear was why for more than 100 times you voted present, not up or down," he asked Obama, regarding the Illinois senator's former record in the state legislature. "You criticized Hillary. You criticized me" for our votes," he said.
Obama launched into an explanation that ended with: "Don't question, John, that on issue after issue that are important to the American public, I have not followed, I have led." So there, again.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8:45 p.m. NO HAPPY FACES HERE
Lots of talk about bills and policy which may glaze some eyes. But what none can miss is that Obama, hands in pocket, is nearly glowering as Clinton speaks. "I'm used to taking the incoming fire. I've taken it for 16 years," said Clinton, insinuating that Obama is too inexperienced and thin-skinned to be in the big time.
"Sen. Obama it is very difficult having a straight up debate with you because you never take responsibility for any vote," said Clinton, drawing a chorus of boos from the audience.
While these two are bickering, Wolf Blitzer apologizes to Edwards--who might as well be playing solitaire--for not getting appropriate time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8:35 p.m.--MANNERS, MANNERS
Clinton slams Obama for his association with indicted Chicago businessman Tony Rezko.
"Are there three people in this debate? Not two?," said Edwards. "This kind of squabbling, how many kids is this going to get healthcare...We have to understand that this is not about us personally," he chided his bickering debate mates.
Then he finally launches into his thoughts on the economy, only to be stopped by Blitzer. "Let me finish this, Lord knows you let them go on forever," said a frustrated Edwards.
African-Americans in this country only have about 10 percent of the net worth of white Americans today, said Edwards, making them more vulnerable to predatory payday lenders and mortgage lenders.
He wants a "national predatory lending law," teach financial literacy and help them with savings, he said. Edwards seems to be talking faster and faster to make the most of his time since Clinton and Obama seem intent on sucking all the air out of the room.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8:25--IT'S STILL THE ECONOMY STUPID!
Edwards may be the son of a millworker, but Obama wasn't to be outdone in empathy for the working people, particularly those no longer with jobs. "I spent three and a half years working alongside folks who had lost their jobs," Obama said to Edwards, referring to his work in Chicago. Edwards looked on with raised eyebrows.
Then here veered into reference to his current feuding with the Clintons."When Pres. Clinton asserts I said the Republicans had better economic policies since the 1980s, " he said, it isn't true.
"I do think your record and what you say does matter," Hillary shot back, saying it's hard to figure out what Obama is actually saying. "As soon as he's confronted on it, he says that's not what he said," she said. "And we can give you the exact quote," she said, looking at him. So there.
"Senator, you're a little off-topic," chided Blitzer.
MAJOR SQUABBLING BREAKS OUT BETWEEN CLINTON AND OBAMA....and we're barely 15 minutes into the actual debate.
Obama slams Clinton saying he was working for poor people while she served on the board of Wal-Mart.
_____________________________________________________________________________
8:10 --IT'S THE ECONOMY STUPID!
The opening quesiton is about what the candidates would do to put money back in the pockets of strapped Americans, particularly those in SC, where the unemployment level is the third highest in the nation. Hillary would put a moratorium on home foreclosures for 90 days, freeze the interest rate for 5 years and give $650 to qualifying people to help them cope with rising energy bills.
Obama said giving a "stimulus to the economy" is absolutely critical. He wants to get tax cuts into "the pockets of hardworking Americans" right away. They should go to people making $75,000 a year or less. He'd boost supplements for senior citizens on Social Security to help pay their energy bills.
Edwards began by saying how proud he is to be on stage tonight on Rev. Martin Luther King's birthday. But what about the stimulus package, asks Wolf Blitzer.
"It is the cause of my life, to end poverty," Edwards said. Finally, he got to specifics, sort of: Investment in green infrastructure to create jobs, do something to end the mortgage crisis. "There is a difference between myself and my colleagues on jobs," he said, referring to NAFTA. But he didn't draw that line very sharply.
____________________________________________________________________________
by Lisa Anderson
7:50 p.m. EST—GOOD EVENING!!
COLUMBIA, SC—Hello everybody. Welcome to the icy Palmetto State, which is shivering under a huge full moon tonight. So who knows what may happen during the Democratic presidential debate which begins at 8 p.m. on CNN and is hosted by the Congressional Black Caucus Institute.
My colleagues are on the ground in Myrtle Beach, where the debate is being held at the Palace Theater, and I am watching the action on TV from my post in the state capitol.
What we do know is we are about to witness what is being billed as the War on the Shore or the Roast on the Coast. And we can expect some heat as Sens. Hillary Clinton of New York, Barack Obama of Illinois and former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina face off in their final appearance together before the Democratic primary here on Saturday.
That will be the first big primary test for these candidates in a very diverse state, where African Americans make up about half of Democratic primary voters. While Obama seems to be drawing more of them, many remain torn between their long-standing loyalty to Clinton and her husband and their excitement over the candidacy of the first viable black candidate for the presidency. Those voters, critical to success here, doubtless will be watching very carefully. What they see tonight may tip some of them one way or the other.
For John Edwards, the native son who won here in 2004, the challenge tonight is to find a way to emerge from the blinding glare surrounding his celebrity rivals and draw some limelight to his own campaign, which has been mired in a distant third place.
Just hours after all three candidates appeared on the State House steps to honor the Rev. Martin Luther King and spoke passionately of the need for unity, it will be interesting to see how sharp the elbows will be on stage tonight.
But Obama and Clinton already were mixing it up this afternoon. Obama accused former President Clinton of making misleading statements in support of his wife. Clinton slammed Obama for airing ads in Florida, claiming he broke the pledge candidates made not to advertise in states that violated the Democratic Party’s primary calendar. Florida thumbed its nose at party by moving its primary up to Feb. 29.
Stay tuned…
• 
• 
• 
• 
Comments
May I ask a question of all you highly educated people? Who among you thought that with a black man with a real chance of winning, that the race issue wouldn't come up? Are you kidding me? The media makes this out to be a dreadful thing. Lou Dobbs says isn't this a great time to be an independent. As if they are above all of this. I would much rather be at this stage in history where we are actually dealing with it, than wondering what if. If you remember when the first black man came to baseball, oh what a mess. But you know what...look where we are today. This to me is a part of all of America growing up. it's nasty, it hurts, but could it be the first step to real equality? Damn right!
Posted by: bill r. | January 21, 2008 8:11 PM
bill r,
Frankly, I don't get your point.
Martin Luther King said (paraphrasing) that he looked forward to the day when a person is judged soley by the content of their character and not the color of their skin. I agree with him.
What we're experiencing now (campaigning that encourages racial division) is a huge step backward and Dr King would be sad and ashamed if he were here now.
Posted by: MJ | January 21, 2008 8:38 PM
bill r.,
You're dead on the money pal.
It's diligent Americans like you that keeps Dr. King's dream alive.
Happy Dr. King Day!
Posted by: Doug Zook | January 21, 2008 8:40 PM
While we're watching these outstanding Democratic Presidential candidates debate let's take a look back at what the Republic Party has given us the last seven years.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_3JfvnjTTc
Posted by: John E | January 21, 2008 8:48 PM
MJ...You really think King would be upset that a viable black candidate for the POTUS would cause a country to hash out and start to deal with something like this that has been a long time coming? I know you wish everyone would just go Oh...not an issue? I do, but I'm also a realist. Nothing concerning the race issue has ever been easy. Why would you think this would squeak by?
Posted by: bill r. | January 21, 2008 8:50 PM
I also would like to add that this "is" a presidential election. All the candidates feel they can do the best for America. I put it to you that I feel the race issue seems to come from supporters more than the candidates themselves.
Posted by: bill r. | January 21, 2008 8:53 PM
Well spoken bill r,
Don't listen to that MJ dope, he's really Leo Juanito, remember him? He's scared to death that Obama might get the nomination because he knows the Wingnuts don't stand a chance against him.
Posted by: John E | January 21, 2008 8:55 PM
"MJ...You really think King would be upset that a viable black candidate for the POTUS would cause a country to hash out and start to deal with something like this that has been a long time coming??"
Posted by: bill r. | January 21, 2008 8:50 PM
I think MLK would be disappointed that it's the Black candidate who is promoting division, who is making it about "us" v. "them".
Look, I'm not naive. I know that all the wounds are not yet healed... not by a long shot. But to my mind, Obama should be above this. He's an intelligent, sophisticated man (I've always said that) and I'm honestly surprised that it is he who has injected race into the campaign.
As for the suragates (not the candidate) stirring the manure, well you're partly right. But they're working from instructions from Obama Campaign HC (it's documented in a lengthy memo) and furthermore barack has been absolutely silent about the ridiculous charge that HC made a racist statement.
So yes, I expected race baiting to happen, but I thought it would come from the KKK types -- not the only viable Black candidate for POTUS!
Posted by: MJ | January 21, 2008 9:14 PM
bill r,
One more thing: When Obama visited Sharpton for a photo Op last year I didn't put much stock in it at the time; i thought it was just a gesture.
Looks like I was wrong. The tactics we're seeing from the BO campaign are classic Sharpton!
Posted by: MJ | January 21, 2008 9:22 PM
MJ...On this, I'll have to say we agree to disagree. Believe me, no one wishes this would not be an issue more than me, but there are not enough words or room on this swamp to list the things I wish. I remain firm in my faith in the American people, as slow as it may be, we are headed in a direction that will leave us in a better place.
Posted by: bill r. | January 21, 2008 9:30 PM
May I ask a question of all you highly educated people? Who among you thought that with a black man with a real chance of winning, that the race issue wouldn't come up? Are you kidding me? The media makes this out to be a dreadful thing. Lou Dobbs says isn't this a great time to be an independent. As if they are above all of this. I would much rather be at this stage in history where we are actually dealing with it, than wondering what if. If you remember when the first black man came to baseball, oh what a mess. But you know what...look where we are today. This to me is a part of all of America growing up. it's nasty, it hurts, but could it be the first step to real equality? Damn right!
Posted by: bill r. | January 21, 2008 8:11 PM
bill r,
That was one of the best posts I have ever read on here, well done.
Senator Obama made a beautiful and very uplifting speech yesterday.
My wife and I were dumb-struck and very touched after we finished watching it on TV.
Senator Obama pulled no punches in this speech, telling it like it is. He preaches personal responsibility, empathy, and hope.
Just when you think he couldn't possibly outdo his last speech, he hits another one out of the park! This was easily as historic and timely as MLK's "I Have a Dream" speech.
If everyone would just stop listening to lies and innuendo and actually listen to one of Obama's speeches, they would understand why so many of us have dedicated so much time and effort to get him elected.
It would not be an overstatement to say that this man has changed my life in a positive way.
Posted by: Kurt | January 21, 2008 9:40 PM
The tactics we're seeing from the BO campaign are classic Sharpton!
Posted by: MJ | January 21, 2008 9:22 PM
and the tactics we're seeing from Hillary are classic Hillary..and the tactics we're seeing from Huckabee are classic Huckabee...and the tactics we see from Romney are classic Romney. Politics are dirty, and again, do I wish it was different? sure do.
Posted by: bill r. | January 21, 2008 9:42 PM
I'll agree MJ. I'll go one step farther.
Obama tired to portray himself as one the greats from the get go. JFK and MLK. Even before he did anything great. He oozes vanity, and his campaign disorganization. Obama wishes the race issue was the hurdle he portrays it to be to jump over in hopes of a presidential election. The hurdle that will unite black and white America; black and black America. It isn't. If anything it is like affirmatively action, it is a way for white people to feel better about themselves by electing a black man. Regardless of what continues on the ground. For people who are far removed from inner cities or haven't sat in on an African American class the race issue in politics has not benefited the the race debate, and a black president will not close it. Mostly race was and is repeated by those who support Obama fearing he might get shot, who think people say what they say about Obama only because of his race, or hope that people will get swept up by the perceived grandeur of participating in the moment. They see race in everything, lying in everything, conspiracy in everything, gender in everything, Bush in everything. The media loves it up.
Posted by: JJ | January 21, 2008 10:03 PM
Now comes the worst part of the debate. The recap from the media. I say show the debate and stop. The media only plays for the sensational remarks to stir the pot..as if the pot isn't stirred enough.
Posted by: bill r. | January 21, 2008 10:10 PM
Posted by: Kurt | January 21, 2008 9:40 PM
KurtObamabot so nice to have you with us
Hit all the bot points.
Obama the beautiful.
Obama the peace maker.
Obama the legend.
Obama the misunderstood.
"It would not be an overstatement to say that this man has changed my life in a positive way."
^ Dead give away. Google it.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1/20/222952/529/52/440311
http://my.barackobama.com/page/dashboard/public/gGgyYr
don't know which one is kurt, maybe both, but a bot is a bot is a bot.
Posted by: mother board | January 21, 2008 10:18 PM
They all have dirt that can be dug up, in the end who cares. The 2 real issues are (1) Where this nation should be 4, 8 12, 16 years from now - the Neo-Cons are working real hard to bring about their fundamentalist vision of the "Rapture" and the Second Coming.
(2) What was missed so far was the comment made by Obama to attacks he is taking from Bill, which was that he wasn't sure who he was running for president against - Bill or Hillary. This needs to be brought up time and again, IF we elect Hillary, we extend the Bush-Clinton Oligarchy into the forseeable furture. Constitutionally, Bill is out of chances, BUT if the tables were turned to note that by electing Hillary, you are in effect ellecting Bill, then you have to choose between the politics of division (Clinton-Bush) or try something new. The reality, no matter how much McCain or the others in the GOP try to distance themselves from Bush, they are in the same party, voted for Bush's policies, etc...
Lets for Gods sake try something new, I for one am tired of the same old stuff. Start a new revolution and receate a better USA, not the same old tired one.
Sorry about any bad spelling or grammar, I'm tired and I need to sleep for early rise to work.
Posted by: Buckley | January 21, 2008 10:23 PM
bill r,
I couldn't agree with you more and I think "MJ" has just turned himself into "JJ" to defend his pathetic smear job of Senator Obama.
This contest is being turned into an ill-tempered vaudeville routine. How can Obama manage to pull a rabbit out of his hat?
First: Stop running for the general election. Talk of Reagan etc. plays to the American public. Direct your comments to Democratic Party members. You have offended some of these people by not respecting the work they have done over the last few decades (that is the greater part of their lives). Save the history lessons and the pitch to the uncommitted for after you win the nomination.
Two: You've got some great endorsers. Get them to get out to mix it up in the crowds - give a speech where they make their points. Having people issue statements doesn't resonate as news. Get these people to make news. By the way, put some of the women who have endorsed you front and center. Get their story out there. Like who is Janet Napolitano? Don't just let her be a talking head. Make it a bit more up close and personal.
Three: There have been stories of shenanigans in both the NH and NV contests. Make sure you have a strong person from your team at every - and that is EVERY precinct/voting booth - especially in your hard fought states. Particularly the urban ones. The weird stuff seems to happen in the larger towns and urban places. Don't let them get away with stuff. Be ready on the ground.
Four: put your money on the Feb 5 states you can win. I don't know which these are but don't spread yourself too thin. Then let the press know where you are really in contention. Make the news about these states. Then win them!
Five: WJC has been mugging for the camera before each primary. Know that he or a surrogate will do some really crummy thing and come up with your own surprise to counterract it. You have to buy the news cycle.
Six: If possible follow the other campaigns' people and try to know the story before it's a story. They get their stories on the news so they are telling the media where to be - be there too. Get videotaping and see if you can blow this thing open.
Well writing this has made me feel better. I know I am partisan. I do see Obama as a leader who can create a new moment for America. I want to see him get the chance.
He has lost the last 2 primaries by heart-achingly small amounts. He and his campaign have to take it over the top a few times so that he doesn't lose delegates, etc. and can continue to contest the nomination. It's all about strength, focus and getting that news cycle on your side.
Good luck Barack!
Posted by: Mimi | January 21, 2008 10:24 PM
The review has begun and out come those wise pundits who have the answers. Please remember that these "wise" pundits are no different than the swamp rats John D, Paulo, bill r., Cmorris, dt, terry , Bruce ( please don't feel left out,just not enough room )....etc. The ONLY difference is they get paid.
Posted by: bill r. | January 21, 2008 10:25 PM
Great Debate!!!!
...Clinton attacked way too much and may have overplayed her hand. She was strong on issues, but took too much time trying to take Obama to task for his record. She should have focused on her abilities more strongly.
Edwards was solid, strong, and steady...though we didn't get to hear enough of his great message in the second half. He's going to do surprisingly well in SC after this performance--a lot better than what the punditry assumes.
Obama did extraordinarily well, and pushed back against Clinton's attacks. His rebuttals were excellent and passionate, something that we haven't seen before. To me he won the debate, by a few points, with Edwards close behind.
Overall we have 3 great candidates here, and it's all down to Super Duper Lollapalooza Tuesday.
Posted by: Blog Mom | January 21, 2008 10:35 PM
Obama dominated the debate, challenging Hillary and hitting back hard whenever both she and Edwards attacked him (which was near constantly in the first half). It was nasty in the beginning, but he didn't give any ground. He was the center of the debate and he shined.
Obama won hands down -- the Clinton people can't be happy.
GO OBAMA!!!
Posted by: board mother | January 21, 2008 10:37 PM
No "Mimi" and "Buckley" straight from your Obama network on assignment...I am not MJ, but I have been a resident of an inner city for 15 years. I know what I am talking about. In true bot fashion the Obama fascists could not help but reward those they agree with their Obama re-capt epihanies and set aside those who don't see Obama thorough their rose colored glasses.
"Sorry about any bad spelling or grammar, I'm tired and I need to sleep for early rise to work."
Don't worry about covering this night shift on Obama watch. I'm sure Mimi can cover tomorrows shift while you sleep it off.
Posted by: JJ | January 21, 2008 10:49 PM
What's a republcian?
Posted by: Jeff | January 21, 2008 10:51 PM
Edwards won. And it's not because I'm a supporter. Everyone who's posting of course wants to support their candidate, but I think we can objectively say that he was the best debater. Why?
(1) He rose above the fray and squelched the personal attacks that were going on between OHB and HRC early on, getting the debate back on tract.
(2) A lot of his policy points are first articulated by him and then simply repeated by the other candidates. For example, green-collared jobs -- he came up with that before HRC. The need for universal health care -- he came up with a plan months before HRC came up with a not-so-comprehensive one, that repeats many ideas of JRE.
(3) He was clear and straight to the point. On the health care issue, he was able to challenge OHB's rationale for not supporting universal health care. (read the transcript).
Posted by: James T. | January 21, 2008 10:55 PM
Mimibot aka zoziebot
http://www.http://dailykos.com/story/2008/1/20/101624/227
Posted by: mother board | January 21, 2008 10:58 PM
I'm trying to figure out who among the three Dems is Moe, Larry and Curly?
Seriously, none of these three has any qualifications whatsoever to be president.c They have no managerial background, never ran anything and really are not very talented.
Posted by: John D | January 21, 2008 11:24 PM
Hillary totally lacks class and vision. The more I see of her, the less I like her (I was once a supporter of her campaign). In tonight's debate, she personified what is wrong with politics in this country, and would divide us like no other leader in recent history. She is paranoid, spiteful, and just not a nice person. She is showing us "the real Hillary", and it is not pretty; we really need to move forward and end this Bush-Clinton legacy.
Obama stands out not only as a true leader and a real uniter. Not all Republicans are evil (as Hillary would like us to believe), and Obama has a following that even my Republican and Independent friends are noticing.
After tonight's debate, I have made up my mind, and will send a check to the Obama campaign (however meager) in the morning.
Posted by: Vivian | January 21, 2008 11:26 PM
HRC, Obama or Edwards won so much as the GOP lost. If any of that Bucket List crew had a debate they'd have to have more commercial breaks to a) wipe up the drool,
b) wake Fred up
c) find Rudy,
d) work on Mittens hair,
e) figure out which "my friends' McCain is talking about and finally,
f) figure out which Constitution Slickabee is talking about.
Posted by: Daily Kos | January 21, 2008 11:40 PM
Mimi,
Excellent post -especially point #2.
I'd only add that people from Obama's team, if not Obama himself, should keep Clinton's authorization of Iraq, as well as the even more disturbing support of Kyl-Lieberman in everyone's minds.
You've got over 70% of the country (and now over 50% of military families) agreeing Iraq was a mistake, yet Clinton voted for it, and was duped into supporting an amendment last summer that almost led to yet another war based on Bushco propaganda -Clinton learned absolutely nothing in 5 years, and now she wants to be commander in chief?
And if Clinton tries to bring up Rezko (and here, Obama is in the clear), then Obama has to hit right back with Norman Hsu.
And it's completely fair to ask why Clinton is holding back the release of presidential records. What is she hiding, if she believes in transparency in gov't?
Posted by: Karl B. | January 21, 2008 11:42 PM
This debate was terrible..like three little kids trying to out do one another. It's laughable that this is the best the dems can come up with.
Paulo
Posted by: Paulo | January 21, 2008 11:44 PM
....meanwhile during an untelevised GOP debate somewhere in Texas:
Chuck Norris is insisting McCain will probably die in office or age 3x the normal rate of aging.
McCain's mother is heading to the Norris home to do her own butt kicking.
Huckleberry on Hound is equating Gay Marriage to marrying one's family pets.
McCain is singing Bomb Bomb Iran.
Rudy is at some Senior Center scaring old people and shouting 9-11 and all they want to do is go the hell to bed so they can make it to tommorows early bird special down at the local Denny's.
Posted by: Mimibot aka zoziebot | January 21, 2008 11:49 PM
If I vote "present," does that mean I can take credit for whomever wins the election?
To be honest, Hillary completely took it Obama again tonight. She showed how he lacks a grasp of issues and speaks in generalities, rather than being specific or showing a plan outside of nice speeches.
Posted by: Kris | January 21, 2008 11:58 PM
bill r.,
Nicely stated!
John D.,
You voted twice for someone who ran everything he touched into the ground. Furthermore, Dubya is easily the least talented president in history. So seriously, why would anyone listen give cred to anything you say?
Re: the debate;
Would like to have heard more from Edwards.
Zell is on the warpath, how will this affect The Swamp?
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/21/business/media/21cnd-paper.html?_r=1&ex=1358658000&en=d57733978453e3b3&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&oref=slogin
Posted by: dt | January 22, 2008 1:06 AM
Obama won the debate...
As with last week, all three did really well. Obama, for the first time, really won me as the overall winner. This was for sure his sharpest debate.
Clinton had some fiery moments, but overall she came off a bit more shrill than last time, and I think that she probably turned off people with some of the low blows. She kept running out of wind trying to get every one of her talking points in on every answer. It sounded more like the "old Hillary" than the "new Hillary".
Edwards had a great night, and I almost voted him the winner. He was on his game for sure. I ended up giving it to Obama though, for his ability to take shots from both sides (interesting that Obama was front and center, and was literally taking shots from both sides) and give it right back.
Compared with what the Republicans are putting up, the Democrats clearly have the better field of candidates.
Posted by: Obamabot | January 22, 2008 1:11 AM
Barack's wife's wal-mart connection
Posted by: PFCWintergreen | January 22, 2008 3:23 AM
MJ...On this, I'll have to say we agree to disagree. Believe me, no one wishes this would not be an issue more than me, but there are not enough words or room on this swamp to list the things I wish. I remain firm in my faith in the American people, as slow as it may be, we are headed in a direction that will leave us in a better place.
Posted by: bill r. | January 21, 2008 9:30 PM
I'll drink to that!
Posted by: MJ | January 22, 2008 5:39 AM
Wow, James T, I thought that post sounded familiar. Here it is in the LA Times: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/01/clinton-obama-g.html Posted by: James T. | January 21, 2008 at 07:57 PM
Why do you call him OHB? Just can't bring yourself to give him the respect he is due to have his own name? I won't tell you how many things I can think "Clinton" or "Bush" can be transformed into, but man, you have to show some class.
Bill R's first post was very interesting. Mimi's recommendations are worth considering, if any Obama campaigners are reading. Kurt, you have to give us more info as to which speech blew you away, so we can all go find it. Why so much hate from the BHO detractors? Jeff, JJ, MJ, and Motherboard, you have to turn off the O'Reilly and Hannity and start reading more carefully all the articles in the reputable newspapers! Don't just read the headlines -- they are controlled by the editors who want to sell papers. They are almost always misleading, like TV news teasers these days.
The actual author/journalists work hard to say things carefully, and then the editors throw these "adventurous" titles onto their work just to make waves. Howard Roark would be cr*pping his pants.
Now, something no one else is talking about. Brett Favre's team just lost to the NY Giants. The NY Giants, with their crybaby qb who would be sitting at Kurt Warner's feet if it weren't for his famous last name and his front-office true-believers, who don't know he's more Rex Grossman than Phil Simms. These monsters of the thruway, who say they are from NY but don't even really play there, are going to deprive us of one of the great Superbowls of our time: one of the greatest qb's in history against one of the greatest challenges, and only someone like him, with his honest constitution, could rise to the occasion, like Joe Montana's, Terry Bradshaw's, Jim McMahon's, and John Elway's past. Instead of a real chance at greatness, we get yet another Brady-v-Manning contest, as if we haven't had enough of that matchup, and it isn't even the Manning we really think could make it a game. Kinda makes me think how I'll feel if Obama doesn't get the nomination.
Posted by: Ronald Loui | January 22, 2008 6:57 AM
Great debate. Personally, I think Edwards won it. Obama was close. He needs to get back on track by focusing on the future. He is losing self identified 'very liberal' votes because of his idiotic statements about Reagan. Those of us who lived through that era certainly don't look back w/fondness. You don't praise Reagan in a Democratic primary! Wake up!
Posted by: weinerdog43 | January 22, 2008 8:05 AM
The pettiness between Clinton and Obama will ultimately come back to haunt them.
They did a poor job of walking the line between being forceful while not being preachy.
For example, Obama made a derisive comment about Clinton working as a young lawyer for Walmart as a client.
What did he want her to do? Stay at home and make babies? Does it mean that all women (and men) who work for corporations are ill willed or have negative values?
Obama, you are not the virtuous person you claim to be. You did not mind taking an easy profit on a real estate deal with an indicted democratic fund raiser. You never decried the political corruption in your home political party, the Cook County Democrats. You did not stand up to the day in and day out corruption that occurs in your state.
You have supported many candidates in your home state that stand for patronage and waste of taxpayer money for their own personal gain.
THe old saying that when you point one finger at someone you have many more pointed at you seems quite appropriate.
Posted by: poor Richard | January 22, 2008 8:13 AM
Hillary Rodham Clinton did little for the feminist cause last night. Her tongue hardly stopped wagging, she was a hectoring nag, not giving poor Barack Obama a chance to reply to her distortions, doing her damnedest to prevent him from getting out his side of the story. If she had had a rolling-pin in her hand, she couldn't have done more to create a caricature of the shrew. When left on her own, leaving Obama alone for a few minutes, she spouted like a fire hose, phrase after well-worn clichéd phrase, fishing for an applause line. And, I do believe, "that's what [she]'ll do when" she is president. She registered 20 below zero on the credibility dial.
John Edwards, along for the ride, made for a cheerful companion, looking for any opportunity to please—he's neatly morphed into Bill Richardson without a job.
Posted by: Rarignac | January 22, 2008 9:00 AM
Republican Debate in SC last week--no Swamp reporter there to cover it.
Democrat Debate in SC last night--two Swamp reporters there to live blog it.
The Democrats at the Swamp aren't even bothering to hide their bias any more.
Posted by: Bruce | January 22, 2008 9:11 AM
Posted by: Ronald Loui | January 22, 2008 6:57 AM
RL,
Go back to your space ship. No need to back pat your surrogatebots. We get the point. BTW OHB are Obama's initials, just like HRC JRE are Hillary's and Edwards. Thank you for looking into yet another (non-)conspiracy on the part of your own. James, was using short hand. James was "tired." You can see which crowds Obama attracts- the 9/11 conspiracy theorists. Shoot off the mouth at a moments emotion. Repeat one thing, over and over, just so they can be heard saying it by a lot of different people. Will you be brain washing the Republicans in the same manner. As far as reading more. What makes you think someone did not follow Obama enough because they don't like him, or his surrogates? Is that your go to line. And, why is it that when someone isn't carried away with Obama he must "read more" or "open their eyes." Am I supposed to keep reading and opening my eyes as I chant Obama or something? I must be missing the chant part because no amount of watching Obama on --"liberal media" will get me to where you are. Thanks but I would never give Faux News a try. You should, they love conspiracies.
PS. Edwards was great last night; putting the issues back on the fore front. Hillary looked great and I'm grad she's aggressive. I'm glad she's more of a man than Obama can be who can't handle obstacles and his only way out is the victim card. Obama had his moments, though. In general, didn't do a thing for me. I apologize.
Posted by: mother board | January 22, 2008 9:40 AM
Ronald Loui,
I don't watch Hannity or O'Rielly (or Fox or CNN) and I do read reputable newspapers and if you are not going to read and comprehend the commentary here maybe you shouldn't waste everybody's time with an irrelevant "response".
My information comes from such sources as The NY Times, The Boston Globe, The LA Times, Harper's Magazine and NPR... the last time I checked these are all reputable news organs and they don't have a Right wing agenda.
But then you haven't been programmed with that info, have you?
Posted by: MJ | January 22, 2008 9:54 AM
MJ, several of the journalistic outlets you cited all have endured journalistic scandals of epic proportions: made up stories, made up sources, distortions of the truth to the Nth degree.
They certainly do not have a right-wing agenda, but they most certainly have a left-wing agenda.
How about broadening your information to a VARIETY of outlets: liberal, conservative and the few that try to be impartial. None of your outlets has any impartiality.
Posted by: John D | January 22, 2008 10:31 AM
Like some of the above, I was a Hillary supporter at an earlier time. No more- Her performance thus far screams concern only for achieving what is right for Hillary, Not this country. Add in her husband, who's constant tantrums reflect a spoiled child who has made a hard deal with the devil to get his wife, and therefore himself, back into power, and the thought of the Clintons coming back is a depressing thought!
Posted by: George | January 22, 2008 11:48 AM
What's a republcian?
Posted by: Jeff | January 21, 2008 10:51 PM
If you meant to type "Republican", then the answer is 'not sure'. With a scattered slate of candidates, an unpopular President that is bankrupting the country, and the fact that they are not voting in their primaries makes me wonder if they've woken up and come over to the D side.
Posted by: DD | January 22, 2008 11:48 AM
Sad to say I didn't even finish reading this because of all the typos, misspelled words and incomplete sentences.
And this is a major newspaper? No wonder you're losing money.
Posted by: julie | January 22, 2008 1:06 PM
Who cares? I did not watch the debate because Dennis Kucinich was excluded. Without him the debate becomes a he said she said bickering contest between Clinton and Obama and the public ends up hearing nothing at all on their so-called universal health plans, Iraq/Iran war stances, GAY marriage stances, the NAFTA, CAFTA, WTO nightmare, repeal of the USA Patriot act and IMPEACHMENT.
Don't let the media stop YOUR questions from being answered! You are being duped into watching an expensive infomercial for the media's choices for President. Demand that Kucinich remain in the debates or end up hearing more of the same bickering created by the press to sell headlines.
Posted by: Voter69 | January 22, 2008 2:13 PM
Bottom Line:
Like all of you. I know that health care is the most critical, and important issue facing the American people. Now, and in the coming elections. And like the vast majority of the American people, I want HR 676 (Medicare For All) passed into law NOW! "Single payer, Tax Supported, Not For Profit, True Universal Health Care" free for all as a right. Like every other developed country in the world has. See: http://www.house.gov/conyers/news_hr676.htm
“HR 676:
For church goers: less money to insur. companies and more to the church- lots more.
Srs on Medicare: save way over $100/wk. Because no more medigap, long term care & dental insur. needed. No more drug bills.”
But if we the American people fail to bring enough pressure on our current politicians to get HR 676 passed into law before the elections. We will have to identify, and replace all the politicians standing in the way of passage of HR 676. And, I think the best first place to start is with the politicians that blocked the bipartisan SCHIP bills for the kids. Passed by congress twice.
But what about the President. It was Bush after all that blocked the bipartisan SCHIP bill passed by congress to assure more health coverage for Americas kids. So which of the presidential hopefuls do I think will be most supportive of implementing the demand of the majority of the American people to have HR 676 (Medicare For All) passed into law immediately!
We have some very fine presidential candidates who would make good presidents. But none of the top Presidential candidates directly support HR 676, the only true Universal Health Care plan. So I am supporting Hillary Clinton. She is the only top candidate that has ever actually fought for universal health care before.
I have enormous admiration, and respect for Hillary Clinton. She fought a pitched battle against overwhelming odds back in 1993. To prevent this disastrous health care crisis that is now devastating the American people, and America. She fought so hard for the American people that she risk almost completely destroying her husbands presidency. I haven't forgotten her heroic effort. If any Presidential hopeful for universal health care deserves my support, it's her.
Also, if we the American people fail to bring enough pressure on our government to give us HR 676 which we all so desperately need NOW! Then we will need the most skilled politician we can get on our side to broker the best health care plan for the American people that we can get. Though it will be less than we need, and less than we deserve. The politician I think to best do this is Hillary Clinton. The Clinton's are probably the most skilled politicians in American history.
The insurance industry, and medical industry that has been ripping you off, and killing you has given Hillary Clinton so much money because they fear her. They have also given Barack Obama so much money because they fear Hillary Clinton. They think they can manipulate Barack Obama against the best interest of the American people better than they can manipulate Hillary Clinton. There is no race issue with Hillary Clinton. The Clinton's are the poster family for how African Americans want white people to be towards African Americans.
As always, African Americans are suffering, and dieing in this health care crisis at a much higher rate than any other group in America. The last time there was any significant drop in the African American death rate was when Bill Clinton was president.
My fellow Americans, you are dieing needlessly at an astounding rate. In higher numbers than any other people in the developed world. Rich, and poor a like. Insured, and uninsured. Men, women, children, and babies. And we the American people must stop it. And fix it NOW! Keep Fighting!!! Never! give up hope. There are millions of lives at stake. Bless you all... You are doing great!
Posted by: jacksmith | January 22, 2008 8:25 PM