People can say what they want about Axelrod's restraint, but that strategy almost got him and John Edwards Iowa and the whole nomination four years ago, and that was beginning from a position far weaker than Obama is in today.  

Please don't make anything out of the debate because Hillary Clinton won't answer the question.

Here is another intresting interview that Hillary gave to a foreign news paper. She failed to answer the question and she sound more like George Bush.

so why hasn't Obama condemned the preacher for his 30 minute anti-gay speech at the end of the "Gospel"
fund raiser?

Obama, he's a new and different democrat, he courts the gop hate base!

come on Obamaites, defend Obama's silence on the hate homosexuals rant!
(what,you didn't read about? Why because it's another example of how Obama is not what he says he is)

Considering that Hillary has her own problem with anti-gay people, maybe that should all come out of the closet tonight.

When Hillary "celebrates" with an anti-gay preacher out in California, her side better hope they just let sleeping dogs lay.

So Obama is going for the jugluar.... he's a real different canidate how?

he won't pull out the troops,
he's said he'd invade pakistan unilaterally
he offers a weaker heathcare program than Edwards or HRC
he's inexperienced
He's never had a real job
He did nothing in Illinios congress
He voted for all troop funding
He misses controversial votes
He's homophobic (at least when it's convienent)

Much of Obama's initial appeal came from his positive approach to politics, not "going after" his oppponents.  To many voters, sick of the usual negative attacks upon candidates, this approach was fresh and encouraging.  He faces an almost no win situation in the upcoming debate.  If he forcefully challenges Senator Clinton, he risks alienating those initial supporters.  If he uses restraint in his remarks, he alienates those who want him to attack Senator Clinton's positions. So maybe he should just be himself and see what happens.

Another Clinton's talking point change the subject.

Tuck,

If you put half of the energy you spend making unsubstantiated claims about Obama into the promotion of your candidate, you might just garner a little respect. Until then...

Before Hillary starts "going after" her opponents....
She better have her own plans set in stone.

Jerry, are you telling me that anyone of the republican candidates are going to carry gay rights banner?  The difference between our candidates and yours, is that the Democrats will not stand in the way of gay rights, while Republicans are a bunch of homophobic hatemongers who want to write discrimination into the constitution.  Don't get me wrong, I know very well that Dems are notorious for saying they are the party for gay rights while at the same time, push us under the bus when we are in the way of other goals.   It's a matter of picking the lessor of two evils for us on this one.  Therefore, Obama's error with McClurkin seems a bit worse than Hillary getting an endorsement from an equally homophobic preacher.  Obama hired McClurkin. Hillary woke up one day and was told she got an endorsement from the other nut job.  It's not a perfect situation. But I would never vote for republicans since they are against any gay rights.

All the criticisms and.....and......shes going to be our next president. So, I guess many folks like her too.

Here is the link i promised you folks

http://www.ireland.com/focus/2007/clinton/index.html

Donnie McClurking at concert:


"Between sermonizing, singing, and raving about Obama, McClurkin repeatedly defended himself.

"I just said yes," he said of his invitation by the Obama campaign. "I didn't know so much was going to happen. I didn't know my yes was going to mean I was misunderstood and vilified. .. . Sometimes people can take your words and do this with them," he said, making a twisting motion with his hands as the crowd shouted Amens and cheered for him.

After another song, he specially addressed the issue of homosexuality, saying he had been "touched by the same feelings."

"Don't call me a bigot or anti-gay,' he said. "Don't call me a homophobe, because I love everybody. . . Let me tell you something, the grace of God is given to all men," he said to loud applause.

<<So Obama is going for the jugluar.... he's a real different canidate how?

he won't pull out the troops,
he's said he'd invade pakistan unilaterally
he offers a weaker heathcare program than Edwards or HRC
he's inexperienced
He's never had a real job
He did nothing in Illinios congress
He voted for all troop funding
He misses controversial votes
He's homophobic (at least when it's convienent)
>>

And this is different from Bill Clinton in 1992 exactly how?

I could care less against gay rights Pat.  Laws are written in the books for a reason; state governments either didn't want them to have rights or it was put up to a vote by the people and the people spoke.  If people in the Northeast and California and Oregon want to have gay rights, by all means, the people spoke and they have to pay for it.  The rest of us could care less about gay rights.  What happens in the bedroom between two men is of no consequence to me or anybody else for that matter.  The people have spoken in several states; gay people do not get rights.  If you got married in one of the states that does condone gay marriage, you are pretty much stuck in that state for the rest of your life, because if you move to a state that does not recognize gay rights, they may as well consider themselves illegal aliens because they have more rights then gay people.

I think after what happened (allegedly) to Larry Craig, no one in the GOP is going to carry the rainbow banner and I applaud them for it.  Gay issues right now in this election rank down around 49 or 50 in the top 50 things that we need to think about.

"If he forcefully challenges Senator Clinton, he risks alienating those initial supporters.  If he uses restraint in his remarks, he alienates those who want him to attack Senator Clinton's positions. So maybe he should just be himself and see what happens."

Dot,

I disagree. I think a lot of his initial supporters who were drawn by his refusal to attack personally aren't going to feel alienated if he goes after her - as long as he does it the right way. He doesn't have to attack her personally to point out that she is full of sh**. If they are like me, they see the need for him to "step it up" a notch. I think he needs to actually make the distinction on stage between personal attacks and disagreements with policy/strategy.

I think a lot of people are feeling this, and may be invigorated by it, rather than turned off.

G,

The questions should be, which Hillary are we going to see tonight? Is she the one that don't answer question or what?

".....Considering that Hillary has her own problem with anti-gay people, maybe that should all come out of the closet tonight.

When Hillary "celebrates" with an anti-gay preacher out in California, her side better hope they just let sleeping dogs lay.
jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Tuesday, October 30, 2007 9:54 AM).........."

Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha ha
Ah, yeah jerry, sure.....
We're all quite sure you're concerned with gay rights......HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
....then again, Gigolo Rudy 'G' DOES like to play dress-up in woman's clothes.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

The issue is, if Obama goes after Clinton's views, policies, and votes, Clinton's camp will spin it till it gets dizzy that all he is doing is attacking HER. The sad part is, up to now, it's worked. People haven't come to the realization that you can attack a person's opinion and position on a topic without attacking the person as an individual. People forget that this is called "debate". It doesn't help that the MSM like MSNBC will do nothing than take that soundbite from her campaign and shove it, or try to, down our collective throats.

He needs to just go out there and say "This is where I stand on A,B,and C. If elected, I will do X, Y, and Z to make those things happen. Senator Clinton won't answer questions about A, B, and C. How can she be trusted?"

For the good of the party, Obama and Edwards should not embarress themsselves by staying in the race. Hillary will be the one to take us to victory. The others should just audition for the VP spot and keep quite so we can work on the general election

Kos and the netroots have abandoned him

Gays, social security, and the loss of a real choice this primary
by kos
Mon Oct 29, 2007 at 12:57:42 PM PDT
"
This is truly an epic flameout by the Obama campaign, engaged in actions that are completely indefensible. Those of you who continue to try and rationalize it -- would you be making the same exculpatory arguments if it was George W. Bush doing the things Obama is doing right now? Or one of the rival campaigns? Somehow, I doubt the vast majority of you would."


http://www.dailykos.com/

His excuses are beginning to show...

"Mr. Obama said he was not concerned by a repeated spate of national polls showing lopsided support for Mrs. Clinton. “The national press for the last three months has written glowingly about her and not so much about me, so it’s not surprising,” he said. He described himself as an “underdog” running against a campaign that has “a 20-year head start when it comes to managing the spin of the national politics.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/28/us/politics/28obama.html?pagewanted=2&ref=us

But the reality is...

"Obama enjoyed the friendliest coverage of the presidential field; McCain endured the most negative. That was due in part to the media's focus on fundraising; Obama raised more than expected and McCain raised less."

This is the SECOND time the campaign is ramping up...

By RICK KLEIN
Oct. 1, 2007

"As Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., seeks to sharpen his differences with Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., his worst enemy could be . . . Barack Obama."

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=3675935&page=1

...in a month.

In the interview, Mr. Obama acknowledged that he had held back until now, though he asserted it was a calculated decision to introduce himself in early voting states before engaging opponents. He said he regularly took lines out of speeches prepared by his campaign that he felt were “stretching the truth.”

But Mr. Obama, of Illinois, said the plan had always been for him to begin taking on Mrs. Clinton more directly in the fall. And he glared and responded no when asked if he lacked the stomach for confrontational politics. “It is absolutely true that we have to make these distinctions clearer,” he said. “And I will not shy away from doing that.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/28/us/politics/28obama.html?ref=us

His lagging, stagnant poll numbers have his bundlers and backers jittery and demoralized;

"His senior aides said they were now spending much of their day fielding calls from concerned donors and other supporters..."

"Morale at his Chicago headquarters, aides said, has been dragged down by the perception that Mrs. Clinton is lapping Mr. Obama."

His campaign had seriously underestimated his opponent...

"The interview came amid growing signs that Mr. Obama was looking for a fresh start for his campaign after nine months in which his aides said they were startled by the effectiveness of Mrs. Clinton’s campaign, and worried that her support was not as brittle as they had once believed."

The Obama campaign is trying to scale back expectations for his performance at tonight's debate,after spending days RAISING those expectations.
Many here have dismissed my use of polls and the hated MSM to assess the state of the race for the nomination. It is obvious that the Obama campaign (and donors) have more respect for the numbers than the faithful here do, unless you still don't believe that the campaign is in trouble.

Tonight will be interesting. We know how Edwards will come out...he's got NOTHING to lose, he's falling back in the ONLY state he can afford to campaign in and the ONE state he can't afford to lose, so he should come out with both rhetorical guns blazing. Edwards' dilemma?: The harder Edwards has gone after Clinton, the further behind he's fallen in the polls.How will he AND Barack be perceived if they seem to be attacking, or piling on Clinton? What if Edwards overshadows Obama?
The pressure is on Barack tonight, and he's going to be walking a tightrope. While I don't think he needs a knockout to turn the race around, a poor performance on his part could be a crippling blow, and open the door for one of the other anti-Hillaries to burst through.


Van

mike, hmmm, do you beieve there were troops in Iraq when Bill Clinton ran? Or that Bill was in his states congress? silly.


Crystal , why did you omit the quote where the preacher said "GOD SAVED ME FROM HOMOSEXUALITY"

??????

geez, talk about dishonesty, you set the record.

Tuck:

To address your points:

"he's inexperienced"-- Experience in what? I didn't think any of our current candidates has served as President of the United States before.

"He's never had a real job"-- He was a civil rights attorney and served as a community organizer, that fits the bill for me.

"He did nothing in Illinios congress"- His bill expanded income eligibility for KidCare and FamilyCare, the state health insurance programs for low-income families.So after Obama's legislation passed, more than 150,000 people did get health insurance.

He voted for all troop funding--Frankly, I would be upset if he didn't. The troops are there, you need them to have the necessary equipment to protect themselves. Funding also include their food, shelter, etc.

He misses controversial votes--As did ALL the other candidates at one time or another. What do you mean by "controversial votes", If you are referring to the Iran resolution that is water under the bridge, he spoke out against that bil a month before it was even voted on. So his position on the issue has never wavered.

"He's homophobic (at least when it's convienent"--How did you come to this conclusion? If you are referring to Donnie McClurkin, McClurkin has never said anything anti-gay and made it clear that those are not his feelings.

Anything else?

Tuck,

Why you hate Obama very much? Give me one good reason.

"I could care less against gay rights Pat.  Laws are written in the books for a reason; state governments either didn't want them to have rights or it was put up to a vote by the people and the people spoke.  If people in the Northeast and California and Oregon want to have gay rights, by all means, the people spoke and they have to pay for it. The rest of us could care less about gay rights."
jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Tuesday, October 30, 2007 10:37 AM)

jerry,

Substitute "African-American" or "civil" everywhere you have "gay". Then pretend it is 1950. Congratulations, you are now a racist. Not that that would bother you.

Let's remember that Obama is not running for Class president He's running for POTUS.  Pointing about policy differences is NOT abandoning the politics ofh hope, it's raising the level of debate!! That's something we all should welcome

Obama needs to campaign against the Republicans, not Hillary.  Tonight's debate will go to the candidate who can frame the general election. If Obama/Edwards go after Clinton they are just giving her power. They are saying "she's the important one." They should hammer the Republicans and say how they are going to straighten the country out after Bush's mistakes.If you see Clinton focus on attacking Bush, you know she will win the nomination and the general in '08.

Clinton and Obama - both extreme-left-wing liberals.  There is no difference.

Citizen J

I see your point and you may be right. I agree that he does need to demonstrate why voters should choose him and not Senator Clinton or any of the other candidates. The debate should be interesting.

I wonder if Obama supporters will back Hil if she gets the nomination and vice versa if Obama gets it ? I understand the fighting that takes place in a primary, however we must prepare ourselves for the bloodbath that will come in about eight or nine months. I will be voting for niether of these people nor frankly any democrat. I am not a racsist nor anti-women, but i don't believe either is yet electable, due to the ignorance of many people in this country. The ten second sound bite may be the death blow to us all.  

"The debate should be interesting."

Dot,

Yes, the debate should be interesting. I think Obama will perform well. What will be more interesting than the debate for me will be the spin that comes afterward. If Obama isn't aggressive enough, will the MSM start getting their White House press passes from the Clinton campaign? If Obama performs brilliantly, will the MSM try to downplay it to minimize his effect, or will they start to realize that Clinton doesn't have the nomination sewn up? I guess we will see.

Dear Chuck Todd and Friends—

I have hardly been critical of you guys and have noted that this blog is pretty solid and pretty fair.  It’s your job to be critical of the candidates and expose both their goods and their bads.  Maybe if you lean one way, it’s overcompensating to obscure any biases you might feel towards or against any candidate.  Presidents do such all the time, Truman took a political lashing by acknowledging but not supporting Israel as a way to mitigate his conscience.

I can see that you are stacking the plate for Obama to take a fall from the media, whatever will sell headlines.  Yes, he did raise expectations, and he will follow through.  It is perplexing to me why the media pounced on him for sharpening his criticisms of Clinton and truthfully starting to draw distinctions with her policies and politics.  Richard Wolff of Newsweek said he is doing just that.  And yet, it’s a bad decision according to the media to raise the expectations.  Meanwhile, Clinton keeps expectations low by obfuscating her policies, controlling the media’s message, playing dirty and somehow routing scandal after scandal; and she IS PRAISED BY THE PUNDITS FOR THIS.  IT IS JUST LIKE TONY SNOW WAS PRAISED AS THE WHITEHOUSE PRESS SECRETARY UPON HIS DEPARTURE AND FOR WHAT?  HE SPUN ANSWERS, HID THE TRUTH OR OUTRIGHT LIED SO MUCH SO THAT NOBODY TRUSTS THE PRESIDENT ANYMORE.  I’M AN AMERICAN CITIZEN AND I’M SICK OF IT.  WHY DOES THE MEDIA IDOLIZE THESE CHARACTERS?  WHY IS NO DISCLOSURE BY OUR LEADERS EMBRACED, WHEN IT IS THE MEDIA’S JOB TO PROVIDE ANSWERS?  AND THEY WONDER WHY THE MEDIA’S APPROVAL POLLS SOMEWHERE NEAR THAT OF CONGRESS.  Sorry, I’m getting worked up.  I CAN UNDERSTAND IDOLIZATION BY DEMOCRATS.  BILL IS A HERO TO THEM AND THEY CAN’T SEE WHEN A CLINTON DOES WRONG.  THEY DON’T WANT THE TRUTH.  IT’S AS IF BUSH HAS SO DEMORALIZED EVERYBODY, THAT WE CAN’T FATHOM A BETTER TIME THAN THE 90’s.  BARACK OFFERS THAT POSITIVE MESSAGE TO SAY THAT ITS TIME TO MAKE A BETTER FUTURE.  THE UNITED STATES HASN’T PEAKED YET, WE JUST NEED A FRESH FACE IN THE WHITEHOUSE.  THAT IS THE POLITICS OF HOPE!  THE POLITICS OF HOPE ARE NOT THAT HE WILL PASSIVELY LET HIS OPPONENTS WALK ALL OVER HIM.  HE’S GOT HEART AND HE’S GOT PASSION, TWO THINGS OUR COUNTRY DESPERATELY NEEDS.

Granted, debates are not Obama’s forte, and I think you hit the nail on the head as to why.  In today’s market we prefer a 60 second sound bite to somebody who is pensive, a thinker.  As George W. Bush acts impulsive and reactionary, Barack H. Obama thinks about the best course of action—what is really in the interest of national security, how can he bring the country together to make some tantamount and very real changes like climate change, healthcare reform, social security reform, correct racial inequality.  He actually thinks and comes up with solid policies, and it would be amiss to ignore that—that’s wisdom and that’s leadership.  He has proven himself to be a good man, who believes what he says.

I’m just asking that you give my man Barack Obama a fair shake.  Yes, he did raise the expectations, but if he delivers, if he does what he says he will do, if her draws clear distinctions with Clinton without resorting to playing dirty politics, if he makes real and solid points—true points, if he jumpstarts and re-initializes his campaign, then you have to declare him the winner, because he would have done what he said he did, met those expectations.  Gone are the days when Hillary Clinton can be declared winner by just showing up, she has some real answers to give.  She can’t be winner by drawing heat from her opponents, THAT IS A NEGATIVE AND IS A REFLECTION OF HER POLITICS AND POLICIES.  Don’t let her slide by undetected.  I said it last time, you can’t simply declare her the winner for not screwing up, BUT IF BARACK OBAMA DELIVERS AND BOOSTS HIS CAMPAIGN, HE WINS.  BIG RISK AND BIG REWARD—that’s what this is, period.

--NSMSNBC

*Deep throaty voice*
For I AM THE OBAMANAUT, AND I SUPPORT THE TRUE JUGGERNAUT OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY, Barack Obama.

Excellent point Citizen J.  

Axelrod might on his way to being the new Bob Shrum.  Tied in Iowa???  That is definitely glass is half full talk... especially when the glass has a great big hole in the bottom of it.

Have any of the other democratic debates been sponsered by an organization other than MSNBC?  

Tuck, says:

"Crystal , why did you omit the quote where the preacher said "GOD SAVED ME FROM HOMOSEXUALITY" "

I didn't purposely omit any quote, that quote didn't come in between nothing that I put in my reply. What are you talking about? Anyway, there is nothing wrong with his statement, how is that anti-gay?, if that is what he said. Either way, that is HIS opinion, based on HIS own experiences. The important thing to note is that he has never been ANTI-GAY. I am not one to question his relationship with God, but he is not BIAS toward gays and I think that is the important fact. You are trying to paint an overtly negative picture of A man of God, I am not saying don't state your point of view but I am saying, I don't think it is wise to lie to get your point across.

Why is it all the trolls are idiot, illiterate, ignorant, ranters. Who hires all you sociopaths and pathetic third grade readers and writers?  You give this blog a bad name with your school yard taunts and d- minus grades, unsatisfactory get along attitudes!
All you children have been

Hillary Clinton is scared to engage in real debate. No more dodging of question.

It's tough for the Democrats to dislike each other or be that far apart on any issues. My guess is they all see how screwed up the USA is from Dubya/Dicki, and they just want to get back to the Constitution...the Old Constitution.

The question that Tim Russert asked democratic candidates was"Can you get ALL TROOPS out of Iraq by 2013" and of course as you know the rest is history. Obama promised that he will have all COMBAT TROOPS out by 2013" That means he will end military combat by 2013 because if there is no COMBAT then what is the meaning of war? We have troops stationed around the world, does that mean they are at war?

Obama notes that his health care plan is 95% like Edwards and Clinton. I hope he outlines that 5% because that 5% is very important. That fundamental difference is that he does not mandate individual insurance requirements because he believes it limits choices and puts too many socioeconomic limits on the ones who do not need it.

Obama believes anyone above $97,000 would need to be taxed to make up the gap for social security. Edwards believes it should be $97,000 to $250,000. All the democratic candidates do not believe in privatizing social security. What is Hillary's plan? Is it the same as Edwards plan? Is it fiscal responsibility? If so, doesn't that apply to health care and her 401k plan as well?

James,

We all know where Obama and Edward stand on the issues. I still don't know where Hillary Clinton stand.

"Clinton and Obama - both extreme-left-wing liberals."

No more extreme than drag queen Giuliani.  Wake up and smell the perfume!!!

Amy you nailed it.  Hammer the destroyers of our country and win, Bush & Co need a whooping. Tonight lets bring out the wood the hammer and the nails an skewer Bush!

Go get 'em Hillary. the repukes are so afraid of you they are blubbering like babies on this blog.  Even the Dem opponents are peeing their pants trying to trounce you.  The water balloons they throw are hysterical. They are so unfair and unbalanced, gossip and lies and empty threats.

Go get 'em Hillary. the repukes are so afraid of you they are blubbering like babies on this blog.  Even the Dem opponents are peeing their pants trying to trounce you.  The water balloons they throw are hysterical. They are so unfair and unbalanced, gossip and lies and empty threats.

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