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



Viva Las Vegas: The MSNBC debate

Posted: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 9:20 AM by Domenico Montanaro

The Washington Post: "After a week of bitter intraparty disputes over the issue f race, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) extended an olive branch to Sen. Barack Obama  (Ill.) on Tuesday night and declared that she and the other Democratic presidential candidates are ‘all family’ in a nationally televised debate." More: "Obama and Clinton, in one of their sharpest distinctions of the  night, offered starkly different visions of the presidency. Obama said he believes that the job is about ‘having a vision for where the country needs to go’ rather than ensuring the ‘paperwork is being shuffled effectively,’ while Clinton emphasized the need for understanding how the system works. ‘I do think that being president is the chief executive officer. I respect what Barack said about setting the vision, setting the tone, bringing people together,’ Clinton said. ‘But I think you have to be able to manage and run the bureaucracy.’”

The Wall Street Journal says, "The debate seemed to do little to shake up the race; as with other forums, the candidates found much to agree on and kept their sniping at the edges. The three candidates showed general agreement on the Iraq war  (for ending it), the proposed Yucca mountain nuclear waste site in Nevada  (opposed) and the need to find alternatives to oil. Mr. Edwards, as he has in the past, said he opposed expanding nuclear power."

The New York Times adds, "The low-key tenor of the debate would seem to belie the dynamics of the race: Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama involved in a pitched fight for the nomination and Mr. Edwards struggling to break through. Clearly, Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama came in deciding to lower the volume from the overtones of race and gender that had shadowed their contest for the past week and worried many Democrats - including many of the candidates’ advisers - that the back-and-forth could imperil both candidates."

The Boston Globe: "Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, meeting for the first time after a blistering series of attacks and counterattacks centered on race, downplayed their feud in the latest Democratic debate, insisting that overzealous supporters had fueled a battle they refuse to fight with each other."

The New York Daily News focuses on Clinton and Obama's discussion of management. "Obama opened the door to the issue on the campaign trail Monday, admitting he was averse to managing the day-to-details of government bureaucracy... But Obama insisted vision matters, and that Clinton was taking the wrong lessons from Bush." The paper also notes Obama accusing Clinton trying to score "political points" by talking about terrorism and al Qaeda. "The clashes peppered an otherwise muted debate, dedicated to Latino and African-American issues and aired nationally on MSNBC."

Obama may have touched on it rather gently last night, but the New York Post makes it its focus: "Latest 'O' blow: Hill plays the fear card on terror." Obama leveled "a harsh charge that Democrats usually save for President Bush."

Looking ahead to South Carolina, the Columbia State front-pages the following with a photo of a sullen-looking SC Rep. Jim Clyburn. "Democrats call a truce: Candidates pledge to end racially tinged talk; Clyburn reaffirms neutrality." The AP also quoted the Rev. Jesse Jackson, an Obama supporter as saying, "November is the Super Bowl. I don't want the best candidates on the bench because they are so angry at each other."

If you are wondering what Clinton's campaign decided to push post-debate, then check out her talking points at her post-debate rally… Seemingly energized after the sedate debate earlier last night, Clinton rallied supporters at a local high school here, driving home the message that the country needs a competent leader to manage the government, NBC/NJ’s Mike Memoli reports. Joining a diverse group of more than 20 women -- including “Ugly Betty” actress America Ferrara -- on the platform in the center of a crowded auditorium, Clinton offered a booming hello and asked the audience how they liked the debate. She said she’s running for president not just on her experience but on the voices of those she’s met.
 
Later, Clinton said that the job of the president is not just to “set big goals” and unite the country, but also “to manage the government” and get results -- a not-so veiled reference to Obama’s answer at the debate about his management style “We’ve gotta have a president who is hands on, saying to everybody in these bureaucracies, you’re accountable to the American people,” she said. Clinton added that if she was president when Hurricane Katrina hit, “we would have been on it” and “been taking care of people.” “It was a disgrace the way the president of the United States mishandled that terrible disaster,” Clinton said, setting off a huge ovation and chants of “Hillary! Hillary!”

NBC/NJ’s Aswini Anburajan reports on a couple of nuggets from last night’s spin room. First, David Axelrod, Barack Obama's chief media strategist, joked last night that there were "no peace negotiations, no rounds of talks" between the Obama and Clinton campaigns on the "truce" they have declared regarding discussions of race in the campaign. However, once Obama decided to publicly call for a truce, Patti Solis Doyle, Clinton's campaign manager, called Axelrod and said that the Clinton campaign also planned to issue a statement. "We'll see how long it lasts," Axelrod said wryly to the reporters clustered around him.

Second, Obama's communications director, Robert Gibbs, told reporters that as the campaign moves forward to the February 5th states, they will rely heavily on their volunteer base to do the work of getting out the vote. He claimed that the large number of small donors the campaign has across the country was a sign that their volunteer base was far larger than any other campaign's. But he also acknowledged that voters were far more unfamiliar with Obama and his message, and the campaign could not rely on retail politics the way they did in smaller states. Gibbs said, "We'll have count on national coverage a lot more," to which reporters immediately pounced and asked, "Does that mean more media avails?"  Gibbs, wouldn't answer.

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

Democrats Debate in Las Vegas

Who Won the MSNBC Democratic Debate in Las Vegas?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=1548

.
Obama has a very ladi dadi attitude about how if he were president he is going to change it all and Clinton says  ok  we will implement change, but it has to be done within the bureaucracy and she is 100% correct. Do you think that all the powers that be in DC are going to hang up there hats and go home if Obama becomes president, UNLIKELY. Although many argue she is a part of the machine, and rightfully so, she certainly knows how it works and can tinker with it. Obama's vision is a bit fairytale like and unrealistic, and although in an ideal world, his vision would come to fruition, we all know that this is the real world and I say lets hand it over to someone who knows hows washington works, but who also sees the need for change.
Edwards spoke the least and said the most. He is so right about nuclear power, immigration, job creation, funding college education...well, I think he is right for hard-working, AMERICANS (notice he never uses the terms brown, black, white). Edwards has my vote in 08!!! Hillary good job but quit using John's, Plan for One America, as if it was your own. Obama you are witty but for the candidate with the most speaking time, you said absolutely nothing.

GO JOHN GO!!!
Hillary won the debate hands down.  Both Obama and Edwards were also great.  I am proud Democrat to have these three exceptional candidates to choose from. I just want to say how bad Russert and Williams were as moderators.  I don't think they should be allowed to be moderators anymore.  The first 40 minutes was a waste of time.  As for Chris Matthews fawning over Hillary after the debate.  Please.  Just because you got the memo that you are sexist, doesn't mean you need to go overboard with praise for her.  This race is still close and once again, Matthews decides he is going to predict who wins the nomination after 3 states.  Hasn't he learned anything?  

Hillary was awesome.  She knew the issues and had indepth answers and solutions to the problems Americans face.  I think the debate did show that all the Democrats are on the same page on Iraq despite the MSN article that said they were sparing over Iraq.  I didn't see that at all. There really is very few differences in the three candidates.  I just thought her experience really showed.  I do want to point out to Obama that Social Security isn't taxed, so you can't give tax relief to people receiving it.

Either way, Hillary, Edwards,or Obama, the Dems will win in November.
With the Clinton's being called racists and using their talk to tick off the African American vote, i can see why they would ask for a truce.  They played the race card and it backfired on them, now they are asking to play nice.  This should last for a day....
Is Hillary trying to scare me into voting for her? The only thing that scares me is four more years of The Bush/Clinton Era.
Another debate, and no real questions for Senator Clinton. Maybe some kind Nevada or South Carolina citizens could ask these questions, since the media won't . . .

You ridiculed President Bush for begging Arab countries to drop the price of oil, yet what would you do differently? How did the first Clinton Administration prepare America to rely less on oil?

After your (detailed) explanation of how terrorists test new leaders, what is it about yourself that will keep the terrorists from striking?

If you are such a hands on CEO type that demands accountability, why are you unable to keep your surrogates from (repeatedly)spreading (the same) slurs about Senator Obama?

Name one thing that went wrong in the first Clinton Administration that you actually had any involvement with?

Can you please detail some of the "changes you have already made" in your oft repeated "35 years of experience" that are not from your term as a U.S. Senator?

Will you be able to control your tendency to get "impatient" when people don't see things your way when the time comes to work with the same Republicans you have been fighting for so many years>

I am a strong Hillary Clinton supporter. I enjoyed the Las Vegas debate more than any of them, because the three candidates were civil to one another. I appreciated their ability to treat each other with respect and kindness and still deliver their individual messages without upsetting and confusing and even infuriating the viewers.
Although I felt it was clear that Hillary proved herself clearly the leader we need in this debate, I will say that Sen. Obama and Sen. Edwards gathered respect last night in a clearer playing field of positive demeanor and unity in respect.
It was VERY NICE TO SEE NO COMBATITIVENESS in a world already fighting out in the field. It was nice to see RESPECT and DECENCY allow a viewer to see who they think is the right candidate and respect the position, however different, of the others.
I now genuinely feel that they are all three very fine people who believe strongly in their own way in what is to come and how.
I applaud the media for FINALLY ASSISTING IN DECENCY and get the muddied air clear so we can all focus and make our judgments.
I find very interesting Hillary's characterizing the role of POTUS as that of "Chief Executive Officer".  I think its a BIG mistake.

Seems to me this was President Carter's claim as well.  At meetings with members of Congress, Carter was clearly in command of the facts and figures --- so clearly in command of them that he frequently failed to remember the true purpose of the meeting.  In other words, he was caught up in the minutiae of government.

What we clearly need is a President who is formulating vision and direction for this nation and providing the leadership to take us there. Thus the more correct role of "Chairman of the Board".

Hillary just doesn't get it.  But that's okay --- Barack does get it....bigtime!
It was so obvious last night in the debates.

Hillary CLinton is  strong knowledgeable qualified experienced  and ready to lead from day one.

She will not be like Bush...LIKABLE, FIGURE HEAD while others actually govern.  

I'm definitely voting for Hillary.  
Nashville fan:

I can add a few more questions...

Senator Clinton, a panel has suggested that the gas tax be increased by $.40 a gallon to fix the bridges in this country.  Are you in favor of this proposal and if you are, how can you say you want to help the lower and middle class when this tax would hurt them the most?

Senator Clinton, you recently tried to have a $1 million dollar earmark given to a Billionaire so he can build a memorial dedicated to the Woodstock Music Festival back in 1969.  Can you say with a straight face that a Billionaire really needs help from the federal government when building such things?

Senator Clinton, if you are indeed elected President, will you give up your positions in such companies as Media Matters and other outlets you either founded or helped created?

Senator Clinton, you recently stated that "no woman is  illegal".  Are you saying that only female illegal aliens will be allowed to cross the border into our country?

I could go all day.....
Nuclear energy is the best way to cut our dependence on oil.  It isn't popular to support, especially in Nevada, the nations dumping ground for waste.  But we do need to follow the technology and find a way to better handle the waste byproduct.  We are running out of oil, and there isn't any way that wind, solar, or biofuels can replace it.  This is another example of Obama saying what is right even when it is unpopular.
It's finally time for a smart, informed on policy, strong leader as president aftr George Bush.

We need a chief operating officer who provides vision as well.

Clinton clearly is that person

Didn't think I'd ever say this, but I'm voting for the best leader and it is Hillaty Clinton
There is much documentation for the facts that Hillary has been involved in social issues for a very long time. Repeating the same nonsense Nashville_fan will not get you any points just makes you a schill for the other side. Keep it up though you make me snicker everyday when you make the same non points. Issues speak volumes, republican attack points is for a person who would say anything and not move forward. Change comes from within. History shows that the outsider candidate becomes an insider or becomes a talking head with empty words.
Can't believe much a politician says during the primary, pick your battles with issue oriented discussion or become a verbal political yard sign!
The nomination process is almost over, and this is hillary's to lose and here's my take on all three candidates last night:

Hllary- delivered a knockout punch and obama needs to pick himself up now before he can get restarted...she delivered an allstar performance on every issue and solidified the fact that she is the most qualified of the three...she was right on- on every issue and the one on one questions played right into her hand, she was brilliant...they say that al gore was a great debater- well, hillary was gore-esk

obama- debate inexperience showed through and thats not his fault its just the way it is...he bumbled and stumbled on 2 issues that he wasn't prepared enough on and the debate experience comes from doing some of these types of debates....its like the olympics balance beam- hillary just scored a perfect 10 from the judges and obama tweaked his ankle twice on turns; he didn't fall off but he did just enogh damage to score an 8.5 or 9......he's not battle tested and we know from experience- you perform like this in a debate and it will come back to haunt you because any little mistake at this point is magnafied

Edwards- unfortunately he wasn't going to be judged on how well he did but on how poorly the others did, and hillary just shined...he gave a very good performance and shoowed himself to be the heart and soul of the party; he actually has the best democratic platform at this point but may not get it through....he fumbled once on the calling the pakistan leader question and we were left scratching our head saying "what did he just say", but because he's been through these before you could see that he rolled with his own punch and was able to get out of the question without too much damage and actually ended up giving a pretty good answer

overall- if all three are still standing after super tuesday, my former home state of Pennsylvania is going to pick the winner and whoever wins PA will win the nomination and ultimately the presidency....PA is the only April primary and it is a very big state with alot of delegates; like California and New York, PA has a big cross-section of voters....we're going to see some big double digit wins now for hillary; and obama and edwards are going to have to ask themselves and each other what do we want to do because there will be a Clinton in the whitehouse next year,  hillary is going to steamroll now and sit back and run on her strongest stuff- health care, children, education and the economy;  she can now take the high road on all the racial stuff and the insults that really don't matter anyway
First Read: Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) extended an olive branch to Sen. Barack Obama  (Ill.) on Tuesday night and declared that she and the other Democratic presidential candidates are ‘all family’


All "family"? Maybe The Addams Family. Aren't debates supposed to be contentious and be a platform where the candidates show how they are different from each other? The town meetings and forums they have are contrived enough, so now the debates are going to be staged too? Not very informative.
.
In the debates:

Obama seems to believe tht the essential role of a preident is to profide vision, inspiration.  He says he is NOT a chief operating officer or a leader who would actually run the government,

Clinton seems to believe that the essential rolke is to provide vision, etc., but also to run the gov. because the buck stops here.  She points out that Bush was incapable of that task and therefore left the running of trhe gov. to others and he has failed.

BUSH DID NOT RID HIS PEOPLE OVER THE PLAME-GATE EPISODE AS HE SAID HE WOULD-----HILLARY DID NOT RID HER GROUP OF JOHNSON AFTER HIS SLURS ABOUT OBAMA.  WHATS THE DIFFERENCE?  SHE SEEMS LIKE MORE OF THE SAME OLD CRONIESM.
BUSH DID NOT RID HIS PEOPLE OVER THE PLAME-GATE EPISODE AS HE SAID HE WOULD-----HILLARY DID NOT RID HER GROUP OF JOHNSON AFTER HIS SLURS ABOUT OBAMA.  WHATS THE DIFFERENCE?  SHE SEEMS LIKE MORE OF THE SAME OLD CRONIESM.
I can see why some people support Hillary, she was definitly in control during the debate. I was irritated with Edwards for just repeating his usual lines, but if people are hearing him for the first time, they might be more impressed. Also, the more I listened to him the more I realized I agree more with his positions than with the others, for instance that the perception we are occupiers in Iraq is very dangerous. I think Edwards really "gets" it, which is why I sent him money not too long ago. Still, I love Obama, I think his intelligence is very deep and insightful and he will truly grow in office. I have turned into an Obama supporter after following this campaign closely and weighing all the pluses and minuses of everybody.


In times of relative prosperity, we can have a president who is into the visionary thing rather than detail...Reagan.  



But in times of megapolitical challenges, we need a pres. who is willing to lead in a much more concrete and involved manner.  We need a person of action who understands the issues....Roosevelt and Lincoln

Hillary this kind of leader.
Why didn't Russert ask Obama about his questionaire from his Ill days when he said:

I am oppose to the manufacdture, sale, or even POSSESSION of a handgun in ILL?
I don't think Cryllary is a racist.  She is a power hungry person ready to run over anyone, regardless of race, to win.

The debate was lame at best.
Obama seems weak on leadership I'm sad to say.

No matter whether you like her or not, there is no doubt that Hillary Clinton would hands down be the smartest best prepared leader and president.

After the joke joke uniter not a divider days according to GWB when he ran for president, it would be refreshing to have a REAL LEADER who can restore respect around the world and a president who knows what the hell they are talking about.
Obama may be able to expertly deliver a "prepared" inspirational speech, but it's a different story when he's being interviewed.  Never heard so much hemming and hawing, and he seemed to get lost in his answers...couldn't hold a thought and stay on point.

Clinton, on the other hand, is always prepared and gives unhesitant, intelligent, well-informed answers to all questions.  She won the debate hands-down.  She WILL be ready on DAY 1.  Very Presidential.

Edwards is just too angry, and we're tired of hearing the words "mill worker" and "corporate lobbyists".  His money from "trial lawyers" is, in my opinion, much the same as lobbyist money.  Give it up, John.  You already had your chance.  It wasn't your time then, and it certainly isn't now.



Barack was so weak in the debate, it is not even funny. While hillary looked like she was ready to be president "on day one" (like she claims), obama looked like he was not. I think she benefited from that.
OH please Nashville_fan, how far back do you want to go?  Why did Reagan and Bush 1 not do anything about our reliance on foreign oil after the Saudi's turned off the spigot in the 70'S?

Yes, there is something unseemly about an American president going begging to the Saudi's.  Supposedly the Saudi's are great friends of the Bush family and our allies, yet they gave Bush the bird didn't they.
..and then he turned around and sold them billions of dollars of weapons so they can protect themselves.  Who are they protecting themselves from? Iran?  Unlikely.  Those weapons will come back to bite us in the butt, just as always.  So when the world runs out of oil they'll be able to protect their oil fields against countries like the United States.
With the Clinton's being called racists and using their talk to tick off the African American vote, i can see why they would ask for a truce.  They played the race card and it backfired on them, now they are asking to play nice.  This should last for a day....
jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Wednesday, January 16, 2008 9:48 AM)

-----------
Your posts are full of lies and distortions...typical republican.
Hillary Clionton has so much going for her.  She has a very bright mind, she expresses herself wonderfully well, she has a winning manner about her.  Clearly, she can work accross the aisle.  My concern is the occasional lack of judgment.  

Her vote in favor of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard resolution is stuck in my mind.  It strengthened the President's hand in respect to the preemptive war doctrine to the extent that he now defines it as the right to go to war against any nation that "thinks" like the Iranian militants think.  No mention of anything like the "clear and present danger" test.  

The preemptive war doctrine is very dangerous thing.  Especially is it so in these present times of hard ball for political profit, spin doctors, and misinformation games. We all know that.

So, it was a serious lapse on Hillary's part and it worries me.  
The only way the democrats will win in Nov. is if the nominee can get crossover votes from republicans. The only democratic candidate who can deliver those votes is John Edwards. Republicans will not cross over and vote for for either Clinton or Obama just like they didn't cross over for John Kerry.
Jerry/Corpus Cristi....
Speaking of cards, the Repubicrooks seem to be playing with a deck full of JOKERS.
It will last longer than a day Jerry, and Hillary wasn't the only one who tried the race card.  Remember Jesse Jackson Jr.
However, I thought all candidates were both classy and substantive last night.  No matter how much the moderators tried to stir up the pot - and they sure tried - not one of the three would bite to continue the schism.  They have come to realize that it will only be to the detriment of all three and the party as a whole to show disunity on anything that is not a policy issue.
I couldn't believe the press this morning ho-humming about the 'boring' debate, just because they weren't at each other's throats.  
Actually, if you were listening, there was more substance in this debate than I heard in all the others combined.
Another commentary this morning was how their eyes glazed over during the discussion of America's financial institutions seeking foreign capital to keep afloat after the subprime debacle.
Hello?   You've been begging for substance and relevancy and this has your eyes glazed?
Dubai ports anyone?
Chinese holders of American debt?
The terrorists won't have to sneak in over the border if this keeps up.
They'll just buy their way in.
All this who is more qualified reminds me that I cast my first vote at21 for Truman.He inherited the presidency suddenly on FDR'S death and was clueless to that office even to having the atom bomb.The times were against him but he saved this nation in war and peace. I consider him the greatest president in my time. No other president achieved success in crisis as this man with little education who taught himself.
All of this back and forth and the end result will be someone from the royal famaily will be President of the U.S in the end. It is the Clinton's turn to run the country and that means Hillary. What we should be discussing is which member of the Bush family will be President in 8 years, and then which royal family member will be President after that. Let stop pretending and just do away with elections. It is a waist of time and money. HRC has already won the Presidency.
Democratic Nevada Caucus - Prediction Time!

The road to the White House now goes through Nevada because Saturday's statewide caucuses will help to clarify presidential nomination races in both major parties.

Who do you predict will win the Nevada Presidential Caucus?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=1551

.
"I don't think Cryllary is a racist."

To a point she is. Earlier last year, polling showed that she had the black vote wrapped up, and she didn't pay too much attention to the details of maintaining that group of people. Now that she is losing that vote to Obama, it's been Hillary on stage with every black person she can find. She seems to only pay attention to blacks when it suits her needs.
We should recognize one fact: When you are president of the United States you can buy all the experience and expertise you want. What the POTUS needs is intelligence, curiosity, and excellent judgement. And what he or she needs be able to do is translate their vision to the American people in a way that informs and inspires. You don't need a CEO in the Oval Office. That's what Bush claimed to be and look at the mess he's made of things. The clear choice to lead this country, not just shuffle papers, is Barak Obama. He can bring the country together in a way no one else can, and Hillary least of all.
Obama won the debate with an outstanding performance.  His remarks on the economy and the role of fathers were the best answers of the night, and what really stuck out was that Hillary and Edwards would be going into a general election having to explain why they've changed positions on issue after issue; Obama's consistency sets him apart, and that became abundantly clear last night.

That said, all three did extremely well in what was substantively the best debate of the season.  Even Hillary Clinton, whose debate performances have been generally overrated, did very well, never raising her voice inappropriately or harshly.

If I had to grade each candidate in the debate:

Obama 98
Edwards 96
Clinton 93

Lynette - I don't think you fully comprehended Obama's comments on bureaucracy. To put it in business terms, he's saying a president needs to be like a chairman of the board more than like a chief operating officer. I think history supports this statement.

In modern history, President Carter was heavily criticized for being too involved in bureaucratic processes below his office. Those critics say it slowed his ability to respond to issues across the board, because once a president starts micromanaging, bureaucratic managers tend to wait for micromanaging on other issues.

This criticism also was directed toward President Clinton for the first 18 months of his presidency. It ended when he replaced his chief of staff, and Leon Panetta is credited for getting Bill Clinton out of micromanagement mode.

The thing to remember is the executive branch is huge. Its probably too large with too many layers of management to ever function efficiently, but that is what it is. Most people inside the executive branch are civil servants, who continue working from one administration to the next, regardless of party affiliation. These people don't need a president to tell them how to do their jobs. They need upper management to set priorities and goals, and that management comes from the president's appointees (who presumably are getting their broader priorities and goals from the White House), and then they need intermediate management (again mostly at the civil servant level) to oversee daily operations.

In a sense, this is why the experience question is irrelevant. A president doesn't keep the trains running on time. He tells his administration where he wants the trains to go, and they make it happen. Judgment is much more important than experience. Probably the most important acts of judgment most presidents ever do is determining which appointments to make and from whom to receive advice.
All this who is more qualified reminds me that I cast my first vote at21 for Truman.He inherited the presidency suddenly on FDR'S death and was clueless to that office even to having the atom bomb.The times were against him but he saved this nation in war and peace. I consider him the greatest president in my time. No other president achieved success in crisis as this man with little education who taught himself.
John Edwards was given about 3 minutes of speaking time in the last 20 odd minutes. And the two specific questions about Yucca and the Bankruptcy law seemed intended to expose him (what Senator's voting record wouldn't?). Post and pre debate coverage all but avoids mentioning him. Fortunately, Edwards may carry Nevada on the 2nd Amendment question in last nights debate, which of course none of the paid blabbering heads can comment upon as part of the Hillary/Obama sell.
Hillary won this debate....I will be caucusing for Hillary this Saturday!!...GO HILLARY
I'll say this, if American/democrats wanted real experience wouldn't Dodd and Biden still be in this race.  They completely trump Hillary in experience and they didn't get the votes to remain in the race!!!
I feel Obama was the winner last night. He was reasoned and thoughtful in his answers. He just looked "presidential!" Very, very impressive.  
Little Benny Franklin wrote:

"There is much documentation for the facts that Hillary has been involved in social issues for a very long time. Repeating the same nonsense Nashville_fan will not get you any points just makes you a schill for the other side. "

Thanks for the shout out! I am sorry if you don't like my questions, but of course that is not the same as answering the question, is it?

Please provide this "documentation" of Senator Clinton's experience . . . if I am going to be asked to support Senator Clinton if she wins the nomination, I would think that my questions deserve an answer, even though Senator Clinton is not my preferred candidate.
Just because Obama isn't as aggressive as Hillary does not make him weak.  Hillary is fake, and manipulating.  Obama was on target when he was asked questions, but Hillary had more time to think her answers through.  She will lose to the Republicians easily.  Obama will become more aggressive at the next debate in South Carolina.  He is still a winner.

Obamas Support
What world am I in this morning?  I hadn't committed to a candidate yet.  Actually, I was leaning towards Obama.  Until last night's debate.  Obama's shabby performance last night on the economy was appalling.  This country is in serious economic shape, and it's not getting any better.  And, Barack Obama can't even find his pen or organize his papers!  What?!  Being a CEO, a bureaucrat is NOT his thing!  OMG -- he seriously needs to get a clue.  Hillary dessimated him on the debate last night, especially regarding being ready to take the helm as President from Day 1.  I do NOT want another George W for our next President -- relying on the expertise of "others" for advice.  And, that is all we would get with Obama.  He clearly is NOT ready to lead as our next President.
the deabte was a real snoozer because they are all playing it safe.

NBC/MSNBC got the debate they wanted, which was, not devate at all.  If they really wanted a debate thye would have let Dennis Kucinich join in.  What are thye afraid of?....A real debate.
["Obama and Clinton, in one of their sharpest distinctions of the  night, offered starkly different visions of the presidency. Obama said he believes that the job is about ‘having a vision for where the country needs to go’ rather than ensuring the ‘paperwork is being shuffled effectively.’

Clinton said. ‘But I think you have to be able to manage and run the bureaucracy.’”]


--Finally, people and the campaigns are waking up to the true distinctions between the campaigns (because really isn't necessarily policy).  These two candidates have flagrantly different styles and approaches to problems.

--I think the comparison between Barack Obama and George W. Bush and the style of government is a fair comparison.  They are both men of ideals and visionary.  But that is where they diverge.  B.H. Obama seems to have an uncanny abilitiy to sift through the bureaucracy and make the wise policy decision--he actually uses his advisors as a strength.  And that is where his wisdom and his judgment comes from.  For me, that's a positive.

--Furthermore, drawing out the comparision, that would make Hillary Rodham Clinton more like Dick ... Dick ... ahhh ... Richard Cheney!!!  Dick Cheney is the detail guy, he's the guy who can manage the bureaucracy.  So the question is, would we be better off with Dick Cheney as President?

--On a final note, I am merely comparing leadership styles.  It would be foolish to compare policy or judgment for either Clinton or Obama to Dick and George.
Here is a very serious issue for Barak Obama, and if you disagree please post why. Jeremiah Wright, the pastor of Obama's United Trinity Church of Christ honored Farrakhan just last month?

Farrakhan has repeatedly made hate-filled statements targeting Jews, whites, America, and homosexuals. He has called whites “blue-eyed devils” and the “anti-Christ.” He has described Jews as “bloodsuckers” who control the government, the media, and some black organizations.
Do you know some of these satanic Jews have taken over BET [the Black Entertainment Network]?” Farrakhan said in a speech on Nov. 11, 2007.
The month( Dec. 2007) after that speech, Obama’s minister and friend, the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. and his Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, honored Farrakhan at a gala, bestowing on him its Rev. Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. Lifetime Achievement Trumpeteer award.
This is serious business and Senator Clinton would not associate with Farrakhan or Jeremiah Wright yet
Obama was married by him and his kids baptized by him.
How does this help divisiveness in America?
Ron Kessler from the Washington Insider wrote the article - go here to read it http://www.newsmax.com/kessler/obama_wright_farrakhan/2008/01/14/64332.html


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=581959

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