Senator Obama should have said yes, he would invite Barry Bonds to the White House, along with Hank Aaron.

Getting booed by the audience is not "staying above the fray", why the hell has "staying above the fray" become the repeated phrase in the news media since last night?  They were BOOING her.  BOOING.  

By your logic, when Biden blew off that Sago mine widow and offended the entire audience in a chorus of boos, he was REALLY staying above the fray there.  

One has to wonder why any criticism of Obama or Edwards in the debate is magnified for an entire week by the press, but when Hillary gets BOOED at an answer that culminates the biggest back and forth in the primary thus far, she's "staying above the fray".  

Absurd.  

Ugh, this is getting tiring. Domenico, Biden validated Obama's point on going after bin Laden as congressionally approved, current and open U.S. policy.

This invalidates Clinton's criticism of Obama and demonstrates her either as someone attacking just to attack or someone who doesn't know U.S. policy.

Same thing with the non-use of nuclear weapons against NGOs.

Does she know U.S. nuclear policy? We'll never know because "presidential candidates shouldn't talk about such things."

I think the rest of the players up there are sending the message that Hillary is their girl.  With all the questions about the lobby's and their money, this should come back to haunt her big time in the general election.  You would have thought that Hillary would have learned her lesson from Bill Clinton and all the grief he had to take about lobby's and the Lincoln bedroom, but some people never learn.  John Edwards at an AFL-CIO meeting is like Hillary Clinton at a Conservative right wing convention; it doesn't fit.  Edwards should have taken the night off with Gravel on that one.  Clinton is allowed (for now) to skip the hard questions since she seems to have the nomination all but sewed up.  But when she goes one on one in the general election, I'm sure she will not get the chance to duck the tough questions so easily like she did last night.

A man with crutches, a pension devalued by 1/3, and unable to provide healthcare for his wife, represented the millions and millions of hardworking Americans, who have reached their older years, and found that America, and in particular, the Bush Administration has turned it's back on them.  More Presidential hopefuls, both Democrat and Republican, need to see these folks, and hear from them.  We all know that George Bush is oblvious to the plight of the middle class, the working poor, the 50 million without healthcare, many of which are under the age of 18, and his lack of leadership illuminates this on a daily basis.  Politicans can no longer hide, deflect, spin, distort, and lie their way to victory, the electorate, thanks mostly to advances in technology, are now becoming visible.  Hillary is absolutely correct to use her time to illustrate the utter and complete failure of the Bush Administration, and further to drive home the point that to even remotely considering electing any of the GOP hopefuls, would only serve to continue the failed domestic and international policies of this stay the course regime.  George Bush sits at a <30% approval rating deservedly, and to elect a clone of him is not even in the cards.

Obama had a horrid first half of the debate. He stuttered, was unclear in most of his points, and said "ah..." wat too much. He only snapped out of it when Hillary and her attack dog surrogates started hurling zingers at him. He was expoecting that.

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Hillary could have been bood off the stage or refused to answer any questions and the news would be that she did great and did not hurt herself at all.

The conserative pundits are beating the clinton campaign drum in hopes that she gets the nomination. They feel they can beat clinton in the geneal election. I would not be suprised if Rush Mouth has a clinton bumper sticker on his car. It may not manner in the long run, because the election may come down to anybody but a republican.

EXCUSE ME...if I were Obama I'd say I'd answer the Bond question when the Media requires Hillary to answer ever other question that she dodged.

What is telling is that you choose that one instace to harp on when there were far more substantive questions that Hillay in your words'Stiff armed" everyone.  But of course it is GOOD when she does it.  Get a GRIP.  It is also telling who MSNBC chose to give the racially inflamed question to.

BTW Chuck have you made the correction to the Obama quote you did on a earlier post...just thought I would bring it to your attention AGAIN.  Wouldn't won't to be accused of media bias.

I don't think Senator Obama had a good debate, with one exception which was the Iraq question. It is a big deal to me that he was against the war in Iraq. Biden, Dodd, Kerry, Bill Clinton (all insiders) are going to be for Hillary. I don't think Obama will be able to stand alone against the Clinton machine. But I think he would make a really good president. He's not going to beat Hillary unfortunately. Chris Matthews should concentrate on all the candidates, not just the favored one. It's unethical. He should change the name of his program to The Hillary Clinton Program.  

She will always have the guys standing up for her, yet Barack Obama stands alone on his merits. Which is what we want. But Chris Matthews and the professional analysts on MSNBC just keeps focusing in on Hillary.

Barack Obama was against the Iraq War. How much clearer can he be????? Hillary was not, Biden was not, Dodd was not.

mpp you saw what I saw yep. Clinton was not booed. The crowd reacted to and agreed with her remarks about BUSH!

Hillary's chief strategist is a union buster -

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-penn7aug07,1,739538,full.story

But to the Paris Hilton MSM - it's all about candidates' images - not what's happening behind the scenes.
Hillary/Murdoch08

Paul Miller take a nap.

WooHoo! Edwards is THE union man!
MSNBC is showing the clip of the man who lost his pension - but NOT John Edwards' answer which brought LOUD cheers throughout the stadium when Edwards said his plan ties CEO pensions to workers' pensions.

Oh - and neither Hillary or Obama answered the question about why they voted in "secret" on the last Iraq supplemental. If they really oppose the war - why didn't they send out emails before the vote encouraging their supporters to contact their senators to vote "no"?  That's what a leader would do.

the differences between the cadidates were actually very minor and all showed a good positve vision for the future in stark contrast to the repubs vision of darkness and fear and fantasy.

Maureen, the reality of Iowa is VERY different than elsewhere. People get bombarded with so much information it's just a matter of momentum at the right time.

Clinton has played all her cards and all we'll listen for 6 months is "I'm experienced". It's up to Obama to show whether he can fight it. Edwards is a factor there too...

It's WAYYY too early

Rupert Murdoch and News Corp (Fox News) executives have sponsored Hillary fundraisers and are funding her campaign.

Murdoch did the same with Tony Blair in 1997 - endorsing Blair and assuring him positive news coverage from Murdoch's media Empire in exchange for Blair allowing him to keep his British holdings intact.

Murdoch was a secret member of Blair's cabinet...
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/57376

Murdoch bought Blair - now he's bought Hillary.
And MSNBC/NBC and other corporate media are bowing to Murdoch.

I am glad the unions provied a forum for discussion, most unionist work very hard not only for themselves but for all working people and for the union bashing repubs I hope they realize all their benefits and good wages are products of unions and when they vote for union busters do they realize they are committing economic suicide not only for themselves and families but for all America.

Biden did not blow off the Sago mine widow's question. He gave her his sympathy, and said he would enforce all of the recommendation of some committee, or organization (the name escapes me). He then acknowledged the President of the mine workers union in the audience, and complemented him by stating he has forgotten more about mine issues than anyone up there has ever known. After answering the question, i.e. enforcing the safety recommendations/ standards already in place, Biden went to the issue of getting Bin Laden. Interestingly the pundits have claimed this was a hit on Obama. I guess they saw it as Obama not knowing the current policy, but I saw it as a hit on those criticizing Obama, because if we have already codified the policy of going into foreign soil to get Bin Laden the criticism of Obama on this issue is disingenuous, or they (Hillary/Dodd) are uninformed.

After watching those sorry men carry the load for Hillary, I don't care what happens to the dems.  I like Obama and Edwards.  I can't stand Hillary and with the plagarist Joe Biden and the confused looking Dodd, we get what we deserve with the media all catering to Hillary.  What gives??  I sure hope all of America is not paying attention right now, because I am a proud dem and we will lose if Hillary is the nominee.  She is a power hungry liar and she is allowed to not answer questions and explain her vote for the war.  What are these moderators and media folks afraid of?  This is why we are in a war that should not have happened - folks didn't take on the administration and just followed in line like good little children.  How sad for this country.

Racially inflamed question?  If you mean asking if he would invite Barry Bonds to the White House, I don't see that as being "racially inflamed."  Would it be gender inflamed if Hillary was asked about inviting Marion (or however you spell it) Jones to the White House?  Would that make you happy?

Go Kucinich. Get rid of NAFTA, it's done nothing poitive for America. Does anyone have anything to show NAFTA has helped economic growth, in America not Mexico? Made us more secure? And what is this SuperHighway I keep hearing whispers about??

TravelGate, HilleryCare, WhiteWater, and now a 2 billion dollar bailout for the banks?? You know the money won't go to real people, it's a hedgefund bailout. Guess what if your 'hedge' was wrong you lose. If you signed an intest only loan thinking you could flip the house in a year and can't - ITS YOUR FAULT. No bailout, go live in a cardboard box...

All the blog questions on the debate could be in first thoughts. Come on blog after blog on the debate ,that is all but over for demacrats, get used to hilliary.Iraq and the lack of news coverage from iraq remember the inbeds as i like to call the media where are they now.How can the surge work but they waited until 4years had passed before they tried it . If the surge is working why not more troops ,nobody thats talking tough on the war is signing up for it.How about giving up your rights cause your cowards,a justice system run by a lying touturer,there are a lot more thing to blog on than a debate where sea biscut has a better chance than Kucinich.

Coy-Right on!

Attention all blinded by emotions. The republicans are terrified and despise any Clinton in office. They are lying through their teeth if they say they want Hillary as the nominee. She can and will beat ANY repub nominee. Repubs(especially right wingers) are petrified that she will win, and you can watch them all implode on election day. Hint: Just listen to our Jerry- he HATES, I repeat is ready to implode if a Clinton gets in again. Hmm...President Hillary Rodham Clinton has a nice ring to it.

The public wants answers on tough issues. Our expected expenditure of $1 Trillion on Iraq is not only exhorbitant but comes dangerous close to criminal when you consider what needs to be cut to afford that immoral war. The Iraq War has cost innumerable lives and damaged so many more, and all we have to show for it is an Iraqi government that is in total dissaray. We could be in Iraq for the entire 21st century and never see peace. The Bush Administration needs to be held accountable for this debacle and if criminal charges result, so be it... prosecute them for their crimes against humanity.

The health care issue is incredibly important as we have the worst life expectancy of any advanced country and yet one of the highest costs for our health care, which is mostly private, insurance company based and paid for by employers and employees alike. Preventive care is lacking, which could reduce overall health care costs by "investing" $1 and not having to pay out $9 or more later on.

The economy is languishing even though Wall Street is still advancing overall. There are too many people underpaid, too many manufacturing jobs lost to countries that now produce inferior (and dangerous to the public) products and too many service jobs now residing off-shore. The beneficiaries are the companies, who should be making record profits due to the many cut-backs. However, executive salaries are incredibly high with little being done to help out their middle-class workers who are told they're lucky to have jobs and accept a 1-3% raise every year. Real inflation has been present since 2000 due to the lack of salaries keeping up with the (arguably) low inflation during this period. I am sure everyone has seen less real income since 2000. Where have the tax cuts gone? Where has the incentive of the wealthy to use their windfall to benefit the economy gone?

If the Dems can address these issues with answers that show they will instill change and dramatically improve our country, then they need our support.

Bickering amongst themselves this early does nothing to advance their cause. Hopefully, once the squabble ceases and we nominate a solid team to win the White House, we'll show the world that the Dems and the US can unite behind someone to lead us into the future with considerable change. What we have now as our future (and what the Republican candidates propose) is untenable, ineffective, immoral and just plain wrong.

Again there is a disconnect between how we see things and the pundits see it.
I thought Obama won.  The Bonds thing was a dumb question and I did not think it a big deal.
While the pundits picked Clinton the winner, probably way before the debate ever began, I think getting boo'd is not a winning thing.  If anyone else got boo'd, like edwards or Obama, the media would have screamed it and played it over and over and declared them the real losers.
But, we all know how the game is played.  It is all about the fabulousness of Clinton and everyone else be damned.

I've made up my mind to support John Edwards. Nothing against the others, but I think Edwards has the qualities of a successful President: he's sharp, he can turn on a dime, i.e. react to changing conditions if he has too, he's tenacious, persuasive, and he understands for the country to succeed we have to be united. That means the working class has to feel its their country too and the super rich have to commit to a bigger concept than endlessly removating their bloated McMansions.

the real question is are you a democrat and are you going to support the canidate we pick if not dont bother calling yourself a democrat,call yourself an edwardian party or the barack party whatever party you want to call yourself maybe a libermanian.I dont care just dont waste your breath saying your a democrat unless you agree at the end of the process the best person won and we support them.

"Barry Bonds Politics"

Quite frankly I don't give a damn.

NewsFlash*
Hillery wants 2 billion dollars to bailout her hedgefund cronies!! Says she the one with experiance to deal with real estate fraud. Cites WhiteWater on resume. Also has some cattle futures and a bridge to a village raising a child to sell.

Same old politics as usual..

It was a great debate or forum as some say.The union has taken the brunt of the Bush administration.Republicans hate unions(my god they are working people---scary)Watching the republican debate was very boring---they must be so very careful to defend the rich,the lobbyists and especially this nasty Bush administration.Republicans talking about a landslide election for themselves is stark raving imad--------only if they have their usual fixes in place.They are probably tapping the Dems phone lines as we speak.

KENN, actually I agree with you.
I wish there were no such things as polls. It sways opinion in the media. We had a Rove Machine, we now have a Clinton Machine. That's a fact. I did not want as our next president someone who voted for the Iraq War, but that's what we're going to have. This country hasn't learned a damn thing. I will not speak ill of her again. Nor will I watch Chris Matthews ever again.

I want to thank all of those on this blog for enlightening me to the media bias for Clinton. I was slow to embrace this thought...but it has become ever so blatant. Last night was by far Clinton's worst debate. She was shrill and evasive and was booed by the crowd. (by the way, she has been getting booed a lot lately.) And her attack dogs Biden and Dodd were no better. Among the top tier, Obama was clearly the winner. Kucinich did equally as well. I will agree that Hillary did well in some of the earlier debates. but last night was NOT a good night for Clinton...no matter how you spin it. I really wonder if the media talking heads watched the same debate as I. I also wonder if these talking heads are beginning to be out of touch with the rest of the country. They just don't seem to know what plays well outside the beltway.

While I suppport John Edwards for all the reasons Amy B mentioned, I will support whomever is chosen at the convention next year... even if it's Clinton or Obama. I will always be a Democrat as any alternative is repugnant to my ideals. I like the idea of Hillary running, as she is incredibly intelligent and I like the idea of Barack running since he's also incredibly intelligent. Both are minority candidates and both have a solid backing of supporters. Both could be excellent in the White House. I personally like John Edwards as he is also quite intelligent and has some ideas on health care that are just what we need. He has also apologized for his initial support of the war on Iraq (not "in") and is not a part of the established DC mentality even though he has been a US Senator. I also like Bill Richarson as he is quite a qualified man with great ideas and also is quite intelligent.

Any of these candidates could serve the US very well in the White House. The tone of our country would change and the world may even grow to respect our government once again (as individuals, Americans are generally respected and loved around the world). We need one these candidates as our next President and I will completely and enthusiastically support whomever is chosen.

Hey Mark,
Just heard on the radio that the Chinese are saying that if we impose any tariffs on them they will dump the vast amounts of U.S. Treasury bills they have been buying up and send us into a recession. (Ain't the global economy great! Not very smart of them since we would stop buying their products and we are their largest trding partner.)
I hope you can put this story up, I would like to see what the reaction is here.  Thanks, and you do a good job--GO HORNS!

When I heard it, I thought Obama's response to the Barry Bond question was a good diplomatic answer.

Now for something substantive that First Read should have brought up--Hillary's response to the next question of the Lightning Round, which was about Katrina. In the final minutes of the post-forum coverage, a pundit whose name I don't recall, who called himself a member of the "Truth Squad" or something like that, said that Hillary hadn't been truthful when she said in effect that Bush doesn't care about New Orleans.

This pundit's referring to himself as a member of the "Truth Squad" is suspect--because his pro-Bush bias was showing when he lied in Bush's favor. Hillary's answer to the Katrina question was excellent. She is telling the truth about Bush's lack of caring about New Orleans, which Bush and his GOP minions have been allowing to die.

Nearly 2 years later, the struggles and suffering in Katrina's and Rita's aftermath continue--and since storm survivors have no voice of their own and no special interest groups sticking up for them, and since Louisiana, whose life was snapped in half by the storms is a small, poor state in flyover country, this is being censored from nightly newscasts and other mainstream media outlets.

Per a study released yesterday by the Louisiana Recovery Authority and reported in this morning's Washington Post, hurricanes Katrina and Rita caused far more dislocation to Louisiana's population than previously estimated, with tens of thousands more people being forced to relocate than previous population counts have suggested. According to the study, a vast amount of churning occured as people not only left wrecked homes, but were forced to leave intact dwellings to find jobs elsewhere and others moved into abandoned homes. "We knew the storms fundamentally upended the lives of individuals that had their houses wrecked," said Andy Kopplin, director of the Louisiana Recovery Authority. "Now we've seen how the fabric of each community has been unraveled by major migrations in and out, as major economic disruptions have taken hold."

Said David Bowman, director of research for the Louisiana Recovery Authority, "This study shows a massive disruption of the population that has not been indicated in other data."

Also released yesterday was a survey by Mark J. Schafer and Joachim Singelmann of Louisiana State University of residents of FEMA trailer parks. It found that while 55% of the residents had been employed full-time before the hurricanes, now more than 2/3 are unemployed. About 1 in 6 of female residents said she had been a victim of domestic abuse, more than 30% of residents reported property being stolen, and almost 1 in 5 reported being threatened with physical violence. And not surprisingly, many residents were experiencing depression--much higher than depression levels typically found among welfare recipients. Many residents said that, as unpleasant as the conditions in the trailer parks are, they cannot afford to return to their old neighborhoods. Kopplin said, "For the families who have been there [in the trailer parks] long-term, it is an extraordinarily difficult experience. This is not the way the federal government should be housing disaster victims."

You would think that with the 2-year anniversary approaching, you'd be hearing more about how survivors are faring in the mainstream media, including news of these studies, but NBC Nightly News didn't see fit to air anything. Instead, they found the time for a fluff piece on Bush mouthpiece Tony Snowjob's struggle with cancer. Nightly's bias is showing--obviously they're sucking up to an Administration who doesn't want attention paid to the fact that many in Louisiana are still in a world of hurt.  

Hmmm. Phone tapping the Democrats.... Lets see they are watching international calls to Americans. So maybe they can catch the Syrian president calling Nancy Pelosi for another bootlicking.

It is amazing how many of you out there do not have a life. If you wasted any time watching that you are all losers and it is no wonder that you moan about life all the time.  There was nothing to be gained and the outcome is always preordained by the MSM.

We spent hard earned money out to dinner and school shopping, stimulating the economy, not shopping at Wal Mart either. Enjoying being Americans after a vacation in So Cal.

The usual hard luck stories and non answers to unimportant questions and the nonsense soundbites on the news. This is what you get when the political circus starts way too early, no substance.

Go outside breath the air, get some sunshine and get a life. If you complained less and did more you would be happier. Take resposiblity for your life. If you do good then pat yourself on the back and if you screw up then learn from it and move on, because it is not someone elses fault.

They all make me sick but Edwards is the only one who induces anything terminal. I'll probably eventually recover from the others though Obama's constant harping on Hillary's Iraq war vote is getting real old. O.K. Obama, you've made your point (a couple thousand times). Hillary voted for it, she got bad information like we all did, she was wrong, she's admitted she was wrong. Enough is enough, especially since it's not like you were in the Senate and voted against it yourself.

If you read between the lines, you can tell Jerry is starting to sweat. The Dems are drawing lots of attention. Especially Hillary. No one even cares about the Repubs debates, cause they know our next president will be a liberal dem.

I thought all of the Democratic candidates looked bad, and Hillary was terrible.

Crumbling infrastructure, lets see.  Federal budget spends over 60% of investments (taxes to you liberals) on entitlement programs. You say Iraq war money should be spent on bridges, well total budget is somewhere less than 10% of total budget. How come no one sees that lower taxes brings in alot more money to the treasury than increasing taxes, you would have to take an Econ 101 class to begin to understand, and our government schools don't teach that anymore or our students don't learn English first.  "What a Country", where else can you jump over the Whitehouse fence as an Illegal Alien and be picked up and given FREE Healthcare, Education for family, a Bus Pass, subsidized housing, food stamps and the list goes on.  What happens one day when no conservative is there to pick up the tab, maybe the super rich liberals will pick it up. Did you know that most if not all of US States are "flesh" with money, an example Minn has a surplus of over $2.5 Billion, but they are building a new stadium for the vikes and twinkes, a Viking ship museum in Morehead at over $50 million and the list goes on.  Every state is doing it. This is just wearing us out all of this talk talk talk.  Mrs. Bill Clinton isn't the answer everyone of the Democrat candidates are "Tax and Spend Liberals" and they will sink the ship.

What the hell does Barry Bonds have to do with the presidency?  Why should Obama have to answer such a silly question?  Because he's Black?  

Obama is sinking so fast, not even his handlers can bail fast enough to keep him afloat.  Terms such has "naive" and "inexperienced" stick for a reason.  Usually because they are somewhat true.

Like it or not, Hillary is coasting to a Democratic nomination win.  Obama has no chance to be her vp choice either.  1) Obama comes from a Blue state that the Democrats already have wrapped up 2) She'll select someone from the South to try to pick off a Red state.   3) One senator has not been elected to the Presidency in 45+ years, no way two Senators on the ticket would ever win.

Either way, she'll go down in flames with who ever the Republicans nominate.  People in this country will not support 24+ years of Clinton-Bush rule.

Mikeeg and Nick, well put. Also, I will support whoever get nominated from the dems. Here's how I'm looking at the election: We are supposed to be the 'greatest country on earth,' ok, how come Brazil can be energy independent, Canada has universal health, and we, the 'greatest country' cannot? Those are just 2 changes I hope dems can bring.
Also, in general, the dem candidates plans to get us out of iraq vary, but not that much. Who ever gets elected will get us out of that costly, ridiculous, immoral war. So I am not casting my vote based on just that issue.
One issue that I want to hear more debate about is immigration... do the candidates want to crack down on employeers, the physcial border, what? I am completely in support of LEGAL immigration. However, these illegals are changing the fabric of our nation, taking us away from our 'melting pot' mentality. They are setting up there own communities, are not willing to learn the language (in general terms), do not want to integrate into our society. This concerns me greatly. If they came here and wanted to become Americans I would embrace them, but they want to be Mexicans living in and reaping the benefits of America. Im not saying they should forget their own culture or language, im just saying they should embrace ours, if they want us to embrace them. (sorry got a little carried away) I am looking for a candidate who shares this view, b/c I see this as a great threat to our American way of life.
Last thing... I think Biden would be a great Pres, but lets face reality, he's 2nd tier, so Im hoping going with Biden for VP!

So in Kenn's opinion, you can only call yourself a Democrat if you're for Hillary. WOW!! Kenn, please keep saying these things. Cause I'll be glad to switch to an independent before voting for Hillary.
She cannot bring Dems./Indep./Repub. together like Obams/Edwards ticket can. I hope Barack continues to compaign whether he gets the nomination or not, which he will. He's got the money. AND plenty of supporters who would love it.

Hot Dam, is the best you have? Oh yeah, your candidate is Clinton... guess that is the best reply you have.

Well, you can always post the address to the Clinton website a few hundred times, rather than face the obvious indicators that Clinton has no clue about U.S. policy and is far from ready to become commander in chief.

"It Wasn’t 756 -- But It Had Plenty Of Fireworks"

I would have sworn that last night's debate was the 756th of this campaign.

Dems, Vote democratic and we will turn this country around for the best and the repubs can't stand it! Go Clinton, Obama or Edwards!

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):