ABOUT FIRST READ

First Read is an analysis of the day's political news, from the NBC News political unit. First Read is updated throughout the day, so check back often.

Chuck Todd, NBC Political Director

Mark Murray, NBC Deputy Political Director

Domenico Montanaro, NBC News Political Reporter



First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Posted: Monday, November 19, 2007 9:21 AM by Mark Murray
Filed Under:

From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Julia Steers
*** The battle for Iowa:

For the next 45 days, until the caucuses take place there, the Democratic presidential race will be all about Iowa. Their campaigns will spend millions of dollars, air countless TV ads, campaign for hundreds of hours, and knock on thousands of doors -- in a state with a population of less than 3 million and where 93% of the residents are white. Indeed, the top Democrats are all in Iowa today. Clinton campaigns in Knoxville, Waterloo, and Vinton; Edwards stumps with Jackson Browne and Bonnie Raitt in Davenport, Iowa City, and Cedar Rapids; and Obama visits Clarion and Fort Dodge.

*** Stepping it up: The reason this has become the central battleground in the Dem contest: It’s the only place where Clinton isn’t leading by a substantial margin. And her campaign, as the New York Times wrote over the weekend, seems to be worried: It has doubled its staff, is increasing its advertising in the state, and promises that rarely a day will go by without either Clinton or that OTHER Clinton stumping in the state. One of two things will happen in Iowa on January 3: Either Clinton wins, and she steamrolls through the primaries on the way to the nomination. Or she doesn’t, and the candidate with a majority of the advantages -- in polls, in endorsements, and with the most famous last name in the Democratic Party -- looks vulnerable and it becomes a two-person fight to the finish with the candidate who wins Iowa.

*** Rudy's new focus on Iowa:

Clinton isn’t the only New Yorker who is stepping things up in the Hawkeye State. So is Giuliani. Is it now two races in the GOP contest for Iowa: Romney versus Huckabee for first, and Giuliani versus Thompson versus McCain for third? What is Rudy up to here? Is this about killing off Thompson in Iowa to get him out of the way in South Carolina, a state the Giuliani folks believe they can win if Thompson isn't a factor? Remember, Dukakis used a third-place finish in the '88 caucuses to claim "victory" and prove viability outside of the Northeast. There is good news for Romney in Giuliani’s stepped-up activity -- it'll make a victory there worth more. But it also puts more pressure on him to win.

*** Is Obama letting folks see him sweat? What a difference a week makes. Last Monday, everyone was buzzing about Obama's stellar J-J performance. But after Obama’s less-than-stellar debate performance late last week, one can sense another one of those momentum switches. His campaign screamed to the top of its lungs after Bob Novak reported that the Clinton campaign was sitting on allegedly scandalous material on Obama. Then Obama got into a spat with an Iowa voter -- which he rarely does -- over national security and illegal immigration, which is one of those "looks worse on video than in print" stories.  About the only good news for Obama this weekend is that the spat over the Novak story did appear to change the subject from the debate. That debate (at least for now) looks like a three-day story. By comparison, the Philly debate turned into a two-week-plus story. By the way, there's no truth to the rumor that the Clinton research shop has nicknamed its Obama war room: "The Barack Study Group." But it is a joke making the rounds of unaffiliated Dems...

*** Huck’s Delta Force:

So you’re Mike Huckabee. Your poll numbers begin to soar in Iowa, and the media start paying attention to your campaign. What do you do? You air your first TV ad in Iowa (at a buy of $60,000), and it features Chuck Norris. The ad is certainly buzz-worthy; after all, no one represents toughness -- and fitness -- better than Chuck Norris. But for a candidate desperately trying to be taken seriously as a potential president, does using Norris in your FIRST TV ad, convey enough seriousness? 

*** Roger and me: NBC/NJ’s Matt Berger reports Giuliani gave a hearty laugh on Sunday when asked if his campaign is receiving preferential treatment from FOX. "Roger [Ailes] is a close friend of mine, he's been a close friend of mine for a very, very long time," Giuliani said. "I don't receive -- gosh, all you have to do is look at it and you can figure out I don't receive any different treatment there than any place else. The reality is that you have a lot of friendships, and to suggest you get preferential treatment because of them is just not right.” Interesting that Giuliani didn't dispute the closer relationship he has with Ailes. Is that something that will bug the rest of the GOP field? If Ailes is providing even "Kitchen Cabinet" type of advice, it's more advice than he's giving any of Rudy's opponents.

*** Rove the writer:

Nothing is going to be more fun than attempting to read between the lines of Karl Rove's Newsweek columns. His inaugural piece has a fascinating anecdote about Hillary Clinton and a West Wing mirror, and he uses it to paint her toughness and make the case that Republicans shouldn't just assume that simply running against her is a campaign message. What is Rove proposing exactly? Run on issues that Democrats usually run on, including the economy and health care. But the most fascinating thing about Rove's column is what he didn't write about: Bush. Not a single mention of his former boss’s name. An accident? Unlikely. The subtle message? The GOP nominee cannot run on Bush (but it appears Rove isn't ready to concede that the Republican has to run against Bush). Or is that for a later column?

*** On the trail: Elsewhere today, Giuliani holds a fundraiser and press conference in McAllen, TX; Huckabee raises money in Ohio; Kucinich, in New York, also raises money; McCain delivers a speech in New Hampshire and then holds a press conference in Boston before heading to Philadelphia; Paul is in Nevada; Richardson campaigns in New Hampshire; Romney is in Boise, ID before traveling to Seattle; Tancredo hits a fundraiser in the Dallas, TX area; and Thompson is in Mississippi.

Countdown to Iowa: 45 days
Countdown to New Hampshire: 50 days
Countdown to Michigan: 57 days
Countdown to Nevada and SC GOP primary: 61 days
Countdown to SC Dem primary: 68 days
Countdown to Florida: 71 days
Countdown to Tsunami Tuesday: 78 days
Countdown to Election Day 2008: 351 days
Countdown to Inauguration Day 2009: 428 days

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

It is always good to ignore news organizations that you don't agree with.
J. Hollings Rouse, Clayton Missouri (Sent Monday, November 19, 2007 11:48 AM)

________________________
You Betcha'!! Also Foxnuts etc......  My choice buddy!
Some of what I have written the past few days was never supposed to see the light of day.

Some will be drawn to the "underground" aspect of what I have said.

Others will dismiss it, questioning the credibility of someone who has been a target of credibility attack here by those with an interest in keeping me quiet.

Others will attack.  Notice that most of these will be making personal attacks as if they themselves have been threatened... they are not neutral people, believe me.  They work here, but not for MSNBC.

This attack mode is for purposes of intimidation.

I am nevertheless grateful that First Read and MSNBC have allowed many points of view here.

Especially, I am appreciative that, whatever the moderators may think of what I write, they have allowed me an uncensored forum from which to speak.



I think H P Boston is protesting Rove, not Newsweek. I could be wrong though, as I am not H P Boston.
CitizenJ (Sent Monday, November 19, 2007 12:12 PM)

-------------------------------------
You got it CitizenJ my money, my choice, my protest.
The only vote I have is with my feet, and my money.
I choose where to go and what to buy.
Oh and I have not driven a Ford lately, don't ask!
Do you honestly and sincerely believe that Republicans have the market cornered on "spin and vitriol"?  
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
You BETCHA"!!!!!
No matter how staunch you are either one way or another, it's important to keep your eyes and ears open to opposing view points because, they might be right.
J. Hollings Rouse, Clayton Missouri (Sent Monday, November 19, 2007 12:38 PM)

___________________________________________________

Ah could be wrong!!
Are we to believe that what Karl Rove, one of President Bush's top advisors and personal friends, writes about the Democratic candidates is unbiased?  This man is rather devious and always seems to have his own agenda--so why take him seriously?  I'm not sure he merits a national forum from which to spout.
Dot, Illinois (Sent Monday, November 19, 2007 12:35 PM)

---------------------------------------
Exactly Dot, thank you.
Some of what I have written the past few days was never supposed to see the light of day.

Some will be drawn to the "underground" aspect of what I have said.

Others will dismiss it, questioning the credibility of someone who has been a target of credibility attack here by those with an interest in keeping me quiet.

Others will attack.  Notice that most of these will be making personal attacks as if they themselves have been threatened... they are not neutral people, believe me.  They work here, but not for MSNBC.

This attack mode is for purposes of intimidation.

I am nevertheless grateful that First Read and MSNBC have allowed many points of view here.

Especially, I am appreciative that, whatever the moderators may think of what I write, they have allowed me an uncensored forum from which to speak.




Mark Thieme (Sent Monday, November 19, 2007 12:49 PM)

---------------------------------------------
Geezzzz I am rotflmao!!!! We are all your BFF!!!! LOL
Edwards is campaigning with old rock stars, which says something about his appeal; he appeals to angry old hippie baby-boomers like me, who are tired, tired, tired of seeing the same old sh$$ decade in and decade out.  And we see Clinton as just more SOS.  And we're really, really angry about what Bush and the Republicans have done to the country and its standing in the world, brought down its morals withthings like internment camps and torture,treating the Constution, the Bill of Rights and the Geneva Convention with the same contempt Hitler or Stalin would,backed the super-rich.  We've seen it all our lives and we're livid about it.  We don't have suficient numbers to put Edwards over the top, unfortunately...but you Repugs and you Clinton sameoldsameold Dems better remember us...We're out here, and we're mighty damn pissed.
Thanks CitzenJ - the point was that some radical people tend to shut off any news organization they do not agree with because of one thing, in this case, Rove. No matter how staunch you are either one way or another, it's important to keep your eyes and ears open to opposing view points because, they might be right.

J. Hollings Rouse, Clayton Missouri (Sent Monday, November 19, 2007 12:38 PM)

I have no problem with reading opposing viewpoints. I do it all the time. I just don't think Karl Rove represents an opposing viewpoint. He represents a very small fraction of an otherwise respectable political party. Unfortunately for Republicans, this small fraction now represents the party as a whole, and they are suffering for it.

I'm not really part of the read Newsweek/don't read Newsweek conversation. But I see no problem with protesting a magazine who is publishing a demogogue's articles. Again, I can't speak for H P Boston, but for me, not subscribing to something because of Rove has nothing to do with not wanting to hear opposing viewpoints; it has to do with Karl Rove. At least, that is what I get out of it.
This story of Obama getting into a spat w/ a voter is completely out of context. Obama had a meaningful, passionate discussion about terrorism and how he would protect the country and was by no means yelling at an elderly voter.

After the "spat" the voter said Obama was a "smart man" but was leaning republican because of immigration.

This is insulting journalism, & faulty reporting, MSNBC.
How come no Obama supporters are mentioning his confrontation with the woman in Iowa?  I saw it this morning, and he was pretty harsh with her.  
Carrie, Eastern Iowa
---------------------------------------------------

Yeah right...another spin from Clinton's talking head. How about the report from Nytimes? Read it for your self and stop using Clinton's talking point.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/11/19/obama-takes-terrorism-deadly-serious/

Yeah...Obama hates whites... like his mother, his grandparents, his campaign manager, and half his campaign staff.  right.  that makes sense.
Now HP

Take your meds and take a nap.  You are getting a tad hyper ma'am.

(BTW, who is this "we"?  You are not a Clinton troll... nah!)

You described the "confrontation" between Obama and a voter as looking worse on video - I just watched the video and I am pretty sure I see it very differently than you did.  He just was emphasizing the facts, and didn't even change the volume of his voice significantly.  And the voter who asked the question complimented Obama.
Name one instance that Obama has "attacked" Clinton on anything that wasn't policy oriented.  Where is your source for your accusation?  You have none.  So stop spreading this nonsense and these lies.  I can understand why you support Hillary...use tactics of fear and division just like the repubs.  
Just read Rove's analysis of how to beat Hillary, etc.

While some of this was basic boilerplate political strategy... he goes a long way on the word "brittle."

That is a good one coming from him.

I am disappointed in Newsweek in identifying him as a contributing whatever.

This guy is brilliant, but only to himself and a few folks who admire the wonderful job GWB has done.

Not an ounce of credibility there.

Why would anyone care what he has to say?

What were they thinking?



Obama's real secret is that he's a tranny!
Oh, and one more BTW HP,

Pretty much everyone here knows who your BFF is and the games you play together.  Transparency!

In fact, it is incredble how much you parrot your BFF.



Are you a parrot?



There'll be plenty of surprises and shock this comming election.
Obama smokes. Enough reason not to vote for him
Steve Turner Cedar Falls Iowa: '...Unnamed sources claim Karl is 'Swifting' for Mitt, now...'


Actually, Steve he's working for Hillary now !
He's changed his name to Mark Penn
Clever boy, that Karl !!
HILLARY 08: '...I think I've finally come to my senses.  I now fully support Hillary as president.
Sierra, SF (Sent Monday, November 19, 2007 11:08 AM)

----------------------------------------------------
Bee agrees with you Sierra.  You two are making great progress....'

Thanks, van you're as honest as your candidate !!
The Clinton Clones are having 'fun'
Think you'll get REAL DEMOCRATS to vote for Hillary if she gets the nomination ?
Think, again
I trust Robert Novack and Matt Drudge more than I trust Hillary Clinton.

Hillary Clinton, 15 years of dishonesty, scandal and divisiveness
Speaking of incredible...

In spite of the Clinton Wehrmacht, I would still recommend them over ANY republican.

Republicans have sold out America, ruined our international reputation and credibility, trashed our ideals, sold our future, and killed a lot of people.

I once told Senator Mark Hatfield that I would vote for him if I lived in Oregon because of my respect for him as a person, even though, on principle, I had never voted for a republican.

Senator Hatfield... I still love you man, but I could vote for you no mas (unless you dropped that awful (Rep) from your name).

No more republicans...

Those Democrats who would refuse to vote for Hillary and give us any of the bench-warmers running as republicans deserve no respect at all.

And take this from someone who has been slimed personally by Hillary agents... as Randy Newman said about Lester Maddox, "he may be a fool but he's our fool."


They may be crude, but they eat republicans for
breakfast.  Good enough for me.



I think that David Schuster really misrepresented Senator Obama's exchange with an Iowa republican this morning on Morning Joe.  

I'm not sure why, but Mr. Schuster tends to take a very negative tone when discussing all issues Obama.  Perhaps he should have read the account in the Des Moine Register, where the republican woman was quoted as saying, "he's very smart, but I still think I'm voting republican".

The sound quality on the video was very poor, making it seem that the exchange was more sharp than it actually was to those in the room.

David Schuster needs to chill out a bit.
I have no problem with reading opposing viewpoints. I do it all the time. I just don't think Karl Rove represents an opposing viewpoint. He represents a very small fraction of an otherwise respectable political party. Unfortunately for Republicans, this small fraction now represents the party as a whole, and they are suffering for it.



Suffering?  Suffering how?  House and Senate are nearly split with the Democrats in the majority of both, and taking most of the blame for the non-action. Republican President. SC is leaning to the right for the first time in generations. Hillary has the lead for the Democratic nomination, that will bring out all the living and most of the dead Republicans to vote against her. If that's suffering, I'd like to see what the good times look like.
Bee:  I actually watched the clip myself, thank you.  Unlike you, I can actually think about things rationally rather than screaming at the top of my lungs "Hillary sucks!!!" at regular intervals.

But keep on screaming, sweetie.  The louder you get, the more I laugh.
MSNBC (PRAVDA) Continues to allow a discredited EDP to haunt these pages while refusing to allow me to post proof of my many attempts to resolve the matter directly with Mark Murray and the editors of this blog, to the point of actually DELETING several posts last week. This is why I have taken to calling the editors here, "comrades", and MSNBC, "PRAVDA".

This EDP has posted accusations that I had hijacked their computer, that I was a dangerous man (I am lol), that I was posting under one of their screen names, that they had lawyers looking into ME, and finally that they were in contact with Mark Murray about ME.

I supplied my personal info to MSNBC in the email, along with DOZENS of insane posts generated by this EDP under several screen names. All I have asked is to
verify the source of the posts to prove that the EDP has indeed been the source of ALL of them.

If MSNBC and the editors of this page had any honor, they would at the very least acknowledge my many attempts to resolve this matter, and whether or not they have been contacted, or are in contact with this EDP as they have claimed.

I defy MSNBC to post my request here, to follow-up either  here or via the 2 email addresses I have provided.

I have been accused of hijacking the EDP's computer, on this BLOG. Why did you allow that to post?

It was alluded that the EDP had damaging personal information on me (which was obviously untrue, for many reasons) that they planned to release.

"We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others."

MSNBC posted that garbage, but when it came to allowing me to publicly challenge this crap, they censor me publicly and refuse to respond privately.

Even if you don't post this, I know SOMEONE has to read it. I have been asking you to simply help me get to the truth. What must I do to get ANY response from you?


Van
MSNBC (PRAVDA) Continues to allow a discredited EDP to haunt these pages while refusing to allow me to post proof of my many attempts to resolve the matter directly with Mark Murray and the editors of this blog, to the point of actually DELETING several posts last week. This is why I have taken to calling the editors here, "comrades", and MSNBC, "PRAVDA".

This EDP has posted accusations that I had hijacked their computer, that I was a dangerous man (I am lol), that I was posting under one of their screen names, that they had lawyers looking into ME, and finally that they were in contact with Mark Murray about ME.

I supplied my personal info to MSNBC in the email, along with DOZENS of insane posts generated by this EDP under several screen names. All I have asked is to
verify the source of the posts to prove that the EDP has indeed been the source of ALL of them.

If MSNBC and the editors of this page had any honor, they would at the very least acknowledge my many attempts to resolve this matter, and whether or not they have been contacted, or are in contact with this EDP as they have claimed.

I defy MSNBC to post my request here, to follow-up either  here or via the 2 email addresses I have provided.

I have been accused of hijacking the EDP's computer, on this BLOG. Why did you allow that to post?

It was alluded that the EDP had damaging personal information on me (which was obviously untrue, for many reasons) that they planned to release.

"We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others."

MSNBC posted that garbage, but when it came to allowing me to publicly challenge this crap, they censor me publicly and refuse to respond privately.

Even if you don't post this, I know SOMEONE has to read it. I have been asking you to simply help me get to the truth. What must I do to get ANY response from you?


Van
HP...

Wake up ma'am.  Don't sleep away prime time slime time!

Didn't mean to intimidate you and your co-joined twin BFF.

That hysterical laughter is really pretty entertaining... Can you do it on cue?

I know you are tired, lord, yes you are, but the show must go on!



Any liberal that ignores how Rove thinks is just cutting off their nose to spite their face.  Love him or hate him, the man is a political genius. If you want to hide in a cave and not hear things that you disagree with, I guess that's your business.
Dear Van,

Thank you for the websites that attempt to bring in some "polite honesty and factual checks in arguments or criticisms" - rather than crudeness and rudeness which seems to be ample on this list of comments. I am shocked by the mud slinging on this webpage than intelligent exchanges. So thanks for directing my attention to more intelligent polite mature and classy discussion groups.

Best wishes,
MS
John B, Des Moines:

I wasn't talking about the individual vilifiers that write messages on this post on a regular basis who indeed get very personal.  But they are idiots, so they don't really count.  You can figure out who they are and who they are not and they have representatives from both sides.

I'm talking about the respective party communications and advertising departments whose job it is to create a negative image of individual candidates and their positions and policies in the interest of electing their people.  

It's a nasty game and I'm just saying the Democrats do not take a back seat to anyone.  And I say again that if you believe otherwise out of some sense of moral superiority vis-a-vis Republicans, then you are living in a fantasy world or a parallel universe.

So there.



Bee:  I actually watched the clip myself, thank you.  Unlike you, I can actually think about things rationally rather than screaming at the top of my lungs "Hillary sucks!!!" at regular intervals.

But keep on screaming, sweetie.  The louder you get, the more I laugh.

------------------------------------------------

We know you're bias and I don't look forward to your talking point memo. To assert that someone can think from them self is bogus in my opinion. If you are that great you'll have been a journalist, perhaps, better than Jeff Zeleny

Anything else?
Mark Thieme / 'Those Democrats who would refuse to vote for Hillary and give us any of the bench-warmers running as republicans deserve no respect at all.'

mark the hillary is as republican as giuliani, she has sold out to the same lobbyists that backed bush, I mean come on chief you think they are bankrolling clinton because they think she is going to turn against them if elected? hillary already admitted the insurance and pharmaceutical companies helped her write her healthcare plan, the military machine is even backing her, which explains why she made that vote on iran, she has already sold out the american citizen chief and hasn’t even been nominated, and I don't believe you can't see that.

vote for edwards or obama not bush-lite, because that’s what she is, business as usual in d.c., we need the change that she does not offer.

and buy the way voting for a candidate just because they claim to be a dem or repub is rediculous, hillary is a good example why. take a good look at what she really is, she should be running on the republican ticket.
Obama smokes. Enough reason not to vote for him
pat huntington ny

Shall we say Hillary’s link to whitewater is enough reason not to vote for her? Or her vote to authorize the war is enough reason not to vote for her? Make a pick.
vanreuter, NY NY / van please disregard the posts that you don't agree with, that's the way it works here, think of the turmoil that would ensue if the editors starting giving out addresses and personnel info, it's a blog, statements should be taken very lightly, the liberty to post what ever comes to mind is what keeps it entertaining, which is what it is supposed to be.
Suffering?  Suffering how?  House and Senate are nearly split with the Democrats in the majority of both, and taking most of the blame for the non-action. Republican President. SC is leaning to the right for the first time in generations. Hillary has the lead for the Democratic nomination, that will bring out all the living and most of the dead Republicans to vote against her. If that's suffering, I'd like to see what the good times look like.

J. Hollings Rouse, Clayton Missouri (Sent Monday, November 19, 2007 2:23 PM)

The House and Senate are evenly split because the Republican Party lost their majority due mostly to the incoherent policies of Rove/Bush/Rumsfeld/Cheney.

As for who is getting the blame, check out these party favorability numbers from Gallup:

                Democrats    Republicans
Favorable:          54%           40%
Unfavorable:        37%           50%
No Opinion:         10%           11%

Our Republican President's approval rating: 31%

The Supreme Court is leaning to the right because of this Republican President. It has nothing to do with public approval.

If all of that isn't suffering enough for you, just wait until November '08. And while the Republicans are suffering politically, the whole nation continues to suffer in the parts of life that really matter.
HEY FIRST READ did you forget the republican primary .Its alot more divided than the one that seems to dominate your first read subjects .Thanks for letting me finally say something to the republicans.Have fun electing a dirty scoundral well that is what wife 1 and 2 think or how about the guy who sold his soul, anything on macain ruining his chance kissing bush .How about a subject like "Why didnt Bush endorse Macain after all macain did for BUSH in 2004"Or what do mormons really belive ,special underware other plants come on its like scientology,You can go on and on or you can keepubbing two sticks together and hope there is a story in there somewhere.
   I repeat,Obama is a petty racist,and Hillary is running on Bill's coattails.Vote for Biden,and if he's not the candidate,vote for McCain.Many will vote FOR Hillary because of Karl Rove(the Traitor),but it's simply another tactic by lobbyists and the Religous Right,(Taliban).I listen to my Pastors sermon,but I would trust him just about as much doing Brain Surgery as I would f letting him tell me who to vote for.Remeber separation of church and state?This idea is still relevant,as I do not wish to live in a Theocracy.Any organization that encourages it's flock to vote for a certain candidate should lose their Tax-Exempt status.
I'm not sure why people think that the Media (NBC,CNN, ect.) are jumping on the HRC bandwagon.....It is within their financial interest that there is a primary contest on both sides so they have something to write about.If Hillary bags it early, they only have the republican race to consider.......
 Josh,oakland:since you are so well informed,exokain why Saint Obama never mentions his "white "mother,refuse to take the oath of office on a bible,And then has the gall to say he won't waer a flag pin just to fit in?Your deductions are brilliant,but try to listen to something besides Barack propaganda and Fox news.Go Joe Biden,the ONLY intelligent choice.by the way Vanreuter,I totally agree,as I have been censured quite often,but somehow questions about my parentage and personal attacks somehow slip through untouched.I post faithfully,and use the sams name(doc)I have carried since the Mekong in 1970.I never post anonomous.
As I have predicted,many times here, The polls are closing and Barack Obama is leading in Iowa, this is a huge bonus because when the other candidates begin to drop out Barack will reap the benefits. Barack showed great poise when dealing with loaded questions from Wolf Blitzkreig and a obviously pro- Hillary audience. The American people are starting to see Barack Obama for what he is. A very intelligent man that is dedicated to restoring our faith in the great country. Barack is a man with a  moral and ethical center and his campaign is an extension of his convictions. He will not pander to the American people he tells it like it is and is respected for it Barack Obama will make history and will make all of us that long for a change very proud proud to be Americans once again
I am amazed and dismayed by both people who use slurs to express their dissatisfaction with a candidate and by those who advocate that a candidate's personality shouldn't be faulted.  Those who use slurs and cheap unfounded emotional shots really define themselves far more than they do the person they are talking about, you might say Karl Rove style.  And then those that put a candidate's personality off-limits are simply covering over the most fertile ground for input to the discernment process.  If all we are allowed to judge is what they say, is on their stated positions regarding the issues, then we are literally asking to be misled, to be manipulated, you might say George W. Bush style.  Yes we need to be objective and fair but we really each should determine what we think of the candidates' personalities, their integrity, honesty, sincerity, whether they have real compassion, any humility are able to get beyond their egotistic self-focus and so on, as only that and an objective evaluation of their history (which often isn't all it seems)is really what we have.  We have to realize their words just don't mean all that much, remembering how often promises go unkept or are just excused and rationalized away.  No one buys a car or invests their money or seeks council from an individual unless they   trust they really have their best interests at heart and this better be at least as important as that this time around or else we are going to have 'more of the same'.  And the determination should not only be objective but it also needs to be independent of others' influence, it really needs to be our own decision (ignoring all the subterfuge that is thrown around).
docrock ; you sound like an ignorant desperate redneck
you are probably uneducated
So in a week the debate went from being a win for Obama that separated him and Clinton into the top tier to a "less-than-stellar" performance?  Then there were the smear games; Hillary got her hand caught in the cookie jar on this one.  Did she actually think Obama was too cowardly to respond, perhaps because he didn't  do much about the silly madrassa smear?  Remember, Novak has stuck to his story - this thing has legs.

In other news, Obama just had his best poll in Iowa - showing he's up 4 points in one poll (and down only 2 in most others, an improvement since the last debate.)  I classify that as a very good week.
Arshad, Newburgh, NY,
        I totally agree with you. I'm glad to know that so many others could see the CNN debate for what it really is, A NIGHTMARE and not only a joke. It baffled me to see people like Wolf Blitzer acting as Hillary's Cheerleader. Like in Basketball, Wolf Blitzer was just setting Hillary up for slam dunks throughout the debate and at the other end of the court he effectively blocked Obama and Edwards with his interjections.

Please, don't even get me started on the crowd. Ironically it was the same week mared with the planted question.

It baffles me that come election day this same Blitzer guy would be up there with fanatics like Dobbs projecting the winner of the election.

I stay objective, I tune in to MSNBC, CNN, FOX etc to get different perspectives. I've lost fate in CNN. They have already chosen there winner even before the elections are held. Sadly for this country, CNN is the most viewed news channel.

America sit tight and watch CNN gradually unveil your next president "Hillary." If you think its a joke Visit the CNN website and tell me whose name you see on every political news, every major link, every day, every week.

The past 6 and some yrs is a bad dream. Hillary is a Nightmare, America only by the time you wake up it will be too late.

                VOTE FOR CHANGE
ayak,You sound like an ignorant coward with no moral fortitude trolling blogs to feel secure.When I read about some pansy trying to make themselves look or sound saavy,you make me want to puke.As for being desperate,you betcha!I would like to see my country use logical arguments in discourse,not personal attacks and "spin doctors".Don't tell me,you"re an Obama fan.Have a nice life.Try not to choke yourself with a chad while voting.Allways assuming you vote.
HP...

Wake up ma'am.  Don't sleep away prime time slime time!

Didn't mean to intimidate you and your co-joined twin BFF.

That hysterical laughter is really pretty entertaining... Can you do it on cue?

I know you are tired, lord, yes you are, but the show must go on!




Mark Thieme (Sent Monday, November 19, 2007 2:48 PM)
-----------------------------------------------------
Mark Thieme, I am not ready for "prime" time.
You are the star of the show, you keep on keeping on.
You have totally bested me, I have perished from laughter at your foolishness!
The holiday is almost here I have places to go, people to see, no time for the slime.
I am outta here, maybe next year.  You know how that goes, now I am here now YOU are not!
Happy Thanksgiving to all!
I hope it is a happy family day for everyone. My friend has a son in Iraq and we will add her family to mine for the holiday, comfort and support on the menu.
I am on duty at the local food pantry today. Still need more donations and volunteers. Many people are hungry in America, if you can help please do.
Here I am HP!

Seriously, I applaud your efforts at the food pantry.

I am sure we agree there are things that aren't really all that funny.

Hunger for one.

Thanks for doing something about it.

Happy Thanksgiving.


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

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

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=472729

First Read e-mail alerts


Sign up for First Read alerts
The first place for key political news and analysis

Syndicate This Site

Add First Read to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google