First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Jerry Norton, Wilmington NC — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 14:46:17 GMT

NBC/NJ’s Matt Berger reports Giuliani gave a hearty laugh on Sunday when asked if his campaign is receiving preferential treatment from FOX.

Oh, this is rich. NBC, who is the lead cheerleader for Hillary, asking if another candidate is getting preferential treatment.

NBC better watch out though, CNN is catching up to them for getting on the Hillary bandwagon. Anyone that has Gergen and Carville on as "unbiased" commentators after last weeks debate has got to be in the running for The Hillary Butt Sniffer of the Year Award.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Chris, Loomis, Ca — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 14:54:39 GMT

I've noticed (like everyone else) that Huckabee has been rising in the polls. It seems like the media actually believes he has the opportunity to win now.

Huckabee is just a regular guy with an incredible message. I checked out:

www.mikehuckabee.com
and
www.hucksarmy.com

and got some good info. I didn't know that Huckabee was a supporter of the fair tax...kinda cool.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Class Warrior, D.C. — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 15:22:56 GMT

What a surprise! The next Bush clone is cronies with the head of FoxNuts. Who'da thunk it?

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Ben, Las Vegas — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 15:25:49 GMT

No More Drama! Vote Obama!

With an Ex-Presedient stumping for her, Bill's Campaign staff "analyzing" the other candidates on Clinton News Network, Big Corp's giving Big Money, the best the media can do is gin up a siwft boat attack and highlight a spat? How many people have been arrested protesting sHillary?

No More Drama! Vote Obama!

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Steve Turner Cedar Falls Iowa — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 15:26:20 GMT

In order to match Huckabee and his 'Texas Ranger', Chuck Norris, Mitt plans on issuing oversized 'American Ranger' badges to all his staff. His personal guards will also wear converted Eastern Bloc giant 'General Hats', and will 'Duck Walk'.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Arshad, Newburgh, NY — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 15:28:49 GMT

That CNN debate was a joke. The whole country knows it. CNN filled the audience with Hillary supporters, arranged a few political activists in the name of "undecided voters", allowed the audience to engage in rude behaviors by interfering other candidates in expressing their opinion, and then arranged ex-Clinton employees to do the post debate spins........and this is billed as a Clinton victory??!! I mean what media think about people? People have a functioning brain and their own judgment. They can look through the media bias and filter the right information.

On the Novak report, Obama did it right. Clintons are playing old dirty politics. They are using left and right media to play their dirt. Regardless Obama win or loose, he is a man of principle and integrity and he should stand tall to defend it. What kind of crap is that: I have dirt to throw on you and i won't say it. I will allow it to pay in people's mind forever. He asked release the dirt and say you are not behind it. It's fair. Novak might be a right wing journalist, involved in cases like Valerie Plam identity disclosure. I don't like him, don't agree with him on substance but I don't think he is a liar. I can't say the same about Clinton campaign because history is the witness, this couple is full of shameless lies. They can tell lie looking into cameras, under oath. I will take Novak's word any day over Hillary's. And I am a registered democrat.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Steve Turner Cedar Falls Iowa — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 15:29:02 GMT

Unnamed sources claim Karl is 'Swifting' for Mitt, now.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

lane filler, Spartanburg, SC — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 15:29:35 GMT

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Shadow, Hamden, CT — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 15:41:18 GMT

I would argue that the backlash from the CNN debate's bias coupled with the possibility of smearing Obama has turned the momentum back against Clinton, just as it was in the two weeks following the Philidelphia debate. There's no way to argue that Clinton benefitted from the Novak exchange; any campaign put in Obama's position, including Clinton's, is best off confronting the rumors and asking others to denounce the story. I'm sure if the roles had been reversed in this controversy, Obama wouldn't have taken three or four responses to have denied any involvement, nor would he complain about having to deny it. Letting a Republican smear fester because Democrats are unwilling to deny involvement is no primary strategy, let alone a general election strategy, yet the Clinton campaign thinks this is the proper way to deal with these things.

Also, the conclusion that Clinton will stay in a two way race after losing Iowa is flawed. If she comes in a distant third in Iowa and tanks nationally, we could have an Obama-Edwards final two. This is only one of a few likely scenarios, of course, but it's ridiculous to dismiss it as the punditry seems so eager to do.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

vanreuter, NY NY — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 15:44:59 GMT

Daily First Read Truth-Pak-

Trust no one...
The following sites devote as much time and space to Denis Kucinich and Joe Biden as they do to the big three. Whether you are a dem or republican, liberal, moderate or conservative, your candidate is represented equally at these sites. Forget about Big Media and the MSM, create your own narrative.

We don't need anyone to spoon-feed information to us about the candidates or the election, it's right there for everyone if you know where to go. Campaign money, donors expenses, go here

http://www.opensecrets.org/ Opensecrets.org is "Your guide to money in U.S elections."

Just about every poll from every pollster, averaged out, with a link to the source
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ Is THE source for political junkies, with links to every major political site on the right, left and center.

What the candidates actually have said about the issues.
http://www.ontheissues.org/default.htm This is a Great site! Every candidate on every issue!

How the candidates have voted and their LIberal/Conservative ratings
http://nationaljournal.com/voteratings/sen/lib.htm?o1=lib_composite&o2=asc#vr Has the voting records for all members of congress, and their Liberal/Conservative ratings.

http://votesmart.org/index.htm Here's what they say at the site;
Thousands of candidates and elected officials. Who works for you? Who is seeking your vote? Project Vote Smart, a citizen's organization, has developed a Voter's Self-Defense System to provide you with the necessary tools to self-govern effectively: abundant, accurate, unbiased and relevant information. As a national library of factual information, Project Vote Smart covers your candidates and elected officials in five basic categories: biographical information, issue positions, voting records, campaign finances and interest group ratings.

http://www.govtrack.us/ Do you take transparency seriously? Consider how important to you an open and transparent government is to a healthy society. More work needs to be done to make Congress open. Make a statement to your elected officials by joining now 200 others in signing a pledge for transparency.

Van

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

John B, Des Moines, IA — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 15:48:06 GMT

A major reason for the HRC campaign to put on a push in IA is her weakness in the "second choice" category. In the caucuses your candidate isn't considered "viable" if he/she pulls less than 14% of the participants at a given caucus location. That means most of the supporters of second tier candidates must join another candidate's group or leave without being counted. Very few of the supporters of second tier candidates indicate Clinton as their second choice. As far as viability goes, why does ANYONE still listen to Novak? Of course when you still treat Novak as a legitimate columnist instead of a political operative it becomes acceptable to hire the ultimate political operative, one who's smear tactics, lies, and underhanded methods are known to all and admired by a few. Shame on Newsweek for hiring Karl Rove.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Daniel, NY — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 15:50:22 GMT

Democrats crush Republicans in a new general election poll from Missouri, as they win all 12 general election match-ups! Link and numbers: http://www.campaigndiaries.com/2007/11/democrats-strong-in-minnesota-and.html

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

K David, Cherry Hill, NJ — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 15:51:14 GMT

I am really dissapointed in obama! he actually took novak's word over hillary! I mean really he trusts NOVAK over HILLARY?. what is hapenning to this brilliant man.
1st he takes advise from chris mathews -"hit her hard" then advise from carl rove and now from Novak. who is next kenneth star? you bet

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Sierra, SF — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 15:53:41 GMT

'...after Bob Novak reported that the Clinton campaign was sitting on allegedly scandalous material on Obama...'

Imagine, Hillary hining about 'Republican style' 'mud'....
They're accursing others of doing WHAT THEY'RE DOING !!

The "The Barack Study Group." ??
Mark Penn is hard at work with his Karl Rove imitation.

People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones....
Remember Whitewater ? Travelgate ? Monica ? Norman Hsu ? planted questions ? a packed house in the Nevada debate ? Peter Paul ?

Opposition research on fellow Democrats ?
Does anyone remember the previous debate ?
Merle Stanley started talking about COCAINE...
My, my the Clinton cult plays rough...

Expect OTHER DEMOCRATS to support Hillary if she gets the nomination ? After a dirty and divisive primary ?

Hillary Clinton, 15 years of dishonesty, scandals and divisiveness

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

MK,MO — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 15:54:36 GMT

if the democratic party wants to win the general elections edwards has always been the only dem candidate that can accomplish that, and still is.

it's time to forget about the novelty candidates and their entertaining tabloidish appeal, nominate edwards to defeat the evil republican empire or get used to the term, president giuliani

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Sierra, SF — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:01:30 GMT

Shadow, Hamden, CT: '...Also, the conclusion that Clinton will stay in a two way race after losing Iowa is flawed. If she comes in a distant third in Iowa and tanks nationally, we could have an Obama-Edwards final two. This is only one of a few likely scenarios, of course, but it's ridiculous to dismiss it as the punditry seems so eager to do...'

Shadow, I suspect/hope that if Hillary does poorly in Iowa, it will affect her in New Hamphire.
The buzz is gone and someone else is getting that buzz.

If Obama finishes strongly in Iowa and New Hampshire and Hillary does poorly in both, she might lose her African American support in SC.

In saw a column is the LA Times saying the secret of Iowa and New Hampshire is that there are A LOT OF UNDECIDES !!
These last few weeks couldn't have moved them to Hillary !!

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Sierra, SF — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:08:55 GMT

I think I've finally come to my senses. I now fully support Hillary as president.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Diogenes — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:12:59 GMT

Unlike human beings who either dupe others or are duped, dogs will give an honest bark at the truth.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Bee — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:17:47 GMT

am really dissapointed in obama! he actually took novak's word over hillary! I mean really he trusts NOVAK over HILLARY?. what is hapenning to this brilliant man.
1st he takes advise from chris mathews -"hit her hard" then advise from carl rove and now from Novak. who is next kenneth star? you bet

K David, Cherry Hill, NJ

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

Even a blind man will trust Novak over Hillary Clinton. The Clinton machine will do anything to get elected.

Her campaign has leaked story to her greatest enemy in the past – Drudge Report
They are also behind the madrasa story line…. We all know what the Clinton campaign is up to and it is better for Obama to stay on offensive regarding this kind of mud coming from Clinton.

As a matter of facts, Novak is more credible than Hillary Clinton.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

erik — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:22:16 GMT

Seems to me that Obama's da-ned if he does and da-med if he doesn't with the media.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

T. X. Peccini, registered expat voter in Nicosia, Cyprus — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:23:42 GMT

I guess the neo-con Republicans have accomplished what they set out to do: vilify the Clintons so much so that people actually start to believe it. Yikes, even 'registered democrats' now believe their spin. Relax... We are so used to 's(p)in' and vitriol from the Republican conspiracy machine (going all the way back to Lee Atwater in 1988) that some simply cannot fathom that Hillary Clinton is running a smart campaign, earning people's votes one at a time, and really has some good ideas. Another difficult concept for hardened conspiracists (dems and GOPers alike) to grasp: there are a lot of decent people out there that also happen to strongly support Hillary Clinton for President.
How is the media affecting this race? Chuck Todd provides the voter with the perfect example: his comments on MTP yesterday which are reiterated nearly ad verbatim above, "One of two things will happen in Iowa..." Where does Todd get this information? From his crystal ball? Should Obama win in Iowa, how does this disqualify Edwards? Or Biden? Why does this result make this a two-person race? Should Clinton win, why should that disqualify all the others? Are all the talking heads going to then go home? Not likely. This horse race is ENTIRELY created by the media. Let's get back to basics: we have a 50-state primary race and those candidates collect delegates who then nominate a candidate to run for President. Let the best candidate win, Todd! Please ease up on the hyperbolic prognostications!

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Diogenes — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:27:59 GMT

"I am just looking for an honest man."

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Betty Combs, Cedar Rapids, Iowa — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:29:23 GMT

Hillary rocks ! Rock on ! hillaryclinton.com

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

H P Boston — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:30:21 GMT

I regularly purchased and read Newsweek, I will not do so now. I will not even read it on the Internet.
Never will I knowingly have one cent go to rove.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Simon, Des Moines, IA — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:30:28 GMT

I will take Novak's word any day over Hillary's. And I am a registered democrat.

--

Whoever says that proves that he or she is a Republican:-). Only people fooled by Novak are either dumb people or Republicans!

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

HILLARY 08 — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:34:03 GMT

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

H P Boston — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:36:59 GMT

T. X. Peccini......Great post, it is the truth and a sad fact of America. The country runs on HYPERBOL!

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

REG; East Valley Phx. AZ — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:37:24 GMT

Van: re. First Thoughts: Viva Las Vegas vanreuter, NY NY (Sent Friday, November 16, 2007 4:46 PM)

I feel like I’m one of the candidates with all this back and forth stuff. My last response on Friday seems to have somehow been lost, probably appropriately ‘on the cutting room floor’, but there really is no need to dwell further on debating our objectivity/bias over Hillary. Just let me say that I believe objectivity shouldn’t be blind and rather it needs to be honestly seeing and accepting the truth, while in contrast selectively viewing and interpreting things may be loyal but it simply is not objective.

It isn’t important but, if I can be allowed to read between the lines, I think I can identify our actual differences without faulting either. Your strong focus and concern seems to be to have the Democrats win, likely even favoring Hillary, while my desire is simply to see change that insures we won’t have ‘more of the same’. The subtle difference lies in the fact that I am really not a Democrat. In fact, before voting for Al Gore (against GWB) I hadn’t voted for a Democrat since John F. Kennedy. I even was a registered Republican for many years, believing that “the best government is the least government” and that “government should only do for the people that which they can’t do for themselves” but even then I never voted for Nixon and probably should be best classified simply as an Independent (currently registered as “Undeclared”). Presently, consistent with Democratic style, I can see where we really need some significant government spending on domestic concerns to offset the several years of neglect, like with our infrastructure and so much else. And we definitely don’t need more of anything like Bush/Cheney/Rove with supporting cast dishonestly pursuing their private agenda for Special Interests and a select few while they arrogantly give the average American apathy, subterfuge and the costs. However, it really isn’t the party that I focus on rather what is important to me is the quality of the individual and how I think they will perform. Today I sincerely hope Hillary Clinton does not become the Democratic candidate just as much as I hope that neither Rudy Giuliani nor Fred Thompson become the Republican candidate, and all for the same reasons. Simply said, as I see it (my opinion) you just can’t trust them; you can’t trust them to get out of themselves and do what is right for the majority, as for them it is all about them.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Simon, Des Moines, IA — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:38:54 GMT

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Simon, Des Moines, IA — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:39:08 GMT

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Ron, TX — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:40:55 GMT

Obama handled this like an expert. He was able to QUASH the story in no time, and has Clinton backtracking. Novak says his sources were DEFINITELY democratic and part of the Hillary campaign. There are no Republicans involved. People are actually buying into Hillary's chirades that this shows his inexperience? At any threat of a "rumor" or a swift boat tactic, it should be put to death. Obama put it to death. How is that inexperienced? He didn't "fall for a Republican tactic"... he QUASHED a Republican tactic, one that Hillary Clinton's campaign has been linked to. Hillary Clinton's campaign has a habit of sending dirty news about the other dem candidates to news sources (see the Salon article others are talking about). It's no secret that Bill and Hill play dirty politics.

But Hillary is right, it IS a Republican tactic, SHE should STOP doing it! Obama QUASHED it. He excelled at STOPPING the Republican tactic. How silly of him!

Great job Obama. Just proves that experience and judgment go deeper than a resume...

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

H P Boston — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:41:51 GMT

am really disappointed in obama! he actually took novak's word over hillary! I mean really he trusts NOVAK over HILLARY?. what is happening to this brilliant man.
1st he takes advise from chris mathews -"hit her hard" then advice from carl rove and now from Novak. who is next kenneth star? you bet

K David, Cherry Hill, NJ
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I agree K David, imagine any sane person even reading or listening to a scab like novak.
Obama should sue him for slander!

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Rick,ky — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:44:46 GMT

J. Merle Stanley writes in his 10;53 entry on Clinton v barack "I cannot, and will not be held hostage to vote for someone like that ( concerning barack). This is exactly how over 50% of american's feel about hillary. How do we as democrats retake the Whitehouse with That kind of support?

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

It's the Bee — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:44:48 GMT

Just in time for Christmas. hillaryclintn.com

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

J. Hollings Rouse, Clayton Missouri — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:48:25 GMT

I regularly purchased and read Newsweek, I will not do so now. I will not even read it on the Internet.
Never will I knowingly have one cent go to rove.

H P Boston

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

It is always good to ignore news organizations that you don't agree with.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Bee — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:48:58 GMT

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.

I am sure the Clinton campaign will do anything to get elected. Why can't you post all your stupid comment and put my name on it.

Shame on you for being unethical ... I know when the real Sierra, SF shows up - she will put the whole fake sierra to rest.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Mitchell Feldman, Vestal, NY — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:50:01 GMT

Sierra, I know that the post listed in your name at 11:08 was bogus. But your point on South Carolina, in the post before, is right on.

I'll state the last part more strongly. The Hillary 'inevitability propaganda' is directed primarily at the Afro-American vote in SC. Because of sensitivities (and understandably so) to disenfranchisement, it was hoped that spreading the perception that the nomination was over before the voting, would dissuade African-Americans from voting for Obama. The thinking went that if they perceived that their vote was to be wasted on a candidate who was already going to lose, they would not wish to throw it away.

Michelle Obama has pointed out something like this in her interview with Mika Brzezinski. She felt that once black voters understood that Barack can actually be nominated, he will handily win the African-American vote in SC (and also in the larger states across the nation). This is critical and I hope black voters understand that their vote for Obama will make the big difference in the nominating process. I know Mark Penn understands that without black voters Hillary's campaign is doomed.
Obama '08

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

diane — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:50:59 GMT

You guys at FR must be kidding! Obama was being swift and strong. for one, it is a matter of reputation and it is also a matter of swiftboating.
I read this article posted on another thread about Novack on Fox news and compared this what Nixon did and Hillary learned those nixon tactics well in the early 70s.
Obama showed that he will not stand for swiftboating attacks on his character and he is not going to let Hillary walk away. He called her on it.
And, CNN may have cleaned up their debate tape but, did rerun it this weekend and guess what. obama did answer the question on licenses at first but, Blitzer would not accept it and keep pushing like he did not answer.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Steve Turner Cedar Falls Iowa — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 17:04:04 GMT

"Sponge Bob for President! He's Waterboard Proof!" (Sponge Bob didn't approve of this commercial.) -Independent Party News Service

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

H P Boston — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 17:07:03 GMT

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

CitizenJ — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 17:12:08 GMT

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)

I think H P Boston is protesting Rove, not Newsweek. I could be wrong though, as I am not H P Boston.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Richard, Washington State — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 17:15:26 GMT

T. X. Peccini:

Chuck Todd is a political analyst with an opinion. Unlike you, he's a professional. He and other pundits tell you what they think based on how they see things and like it or not, they see more and have access to more than you do. That is their job.

I think you have invested too much emotion in what you apparently perceive as First Read's machiavellian influence on the election process and their ability to control the minds of the voters. (Queue in melodramatic horror movie laugh.)

Your use of the word "hyperbolic" is just a bit comical, as well, considering what precedes it in your post.

A final serious question:

Do you honestly and sincerely believe that Republicans have the market cornered on "spin and vitriol"?

I know I see things differently than you, but is there any question at all that the Democrat "machine" has vilified George Bush since the day he entered office and continues to do so on a regular basis? It even showed in the last debate. Whenever a Democrat had a mind fart or didn't have an answer, the fallback was to vilify Bush and Republicans. Did anyone else notice that? Then again, it's such a clever ploy that it might have gone unnoticed by the audience who nevertheless responded positively to every instance.

Do Republicans regularly raise the ghost of Bill Clinton, or the Clinton's in general? Absolutely. The difference is that I'll admit it.

You live in a fantasy world if you think the Democrats are any cleaner. Further, although it shouldn't be news to you, we all think the media treats our guys and gals unfairly. It just depends on whose ox is being gored.

What I've observed in First Read, and I have no horse in the Democrat race, is that they pretty much piss off all of you at one time or another. When you think about it, doesn't that mean that they are covering all the bases?

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Jane Urbandale IA — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 17:18:04 GMT

K David, Cherry Hill, NJ
I am really dissapointed in obama! he actually took novak's word over hillary! I mean really he trusts NOVAK over HILLARY?. what is hapenning to this brilliant man.
1st he takes advise from chris mathews -"hit her hard" then advise from carl rove and now from Novak. who is next kenneth star? you bet"

David, Novak's a hack, but he's never been accused of claiming a source said something that they didn't say.

Hillary's campaign has been planting questions, they get caught, they first deny it, then when left with no choice they admit it, but claim it was an over zealous staffer. Sure it was, the staffer on his own made a nice binder complete with subsections on what type of question to ask from what type of person. They claimed it never happened before, until a minister comes forward and states that he was asked to pose a specific question at an event, and refused saying it didn't seem right. Clinton's campaign responded that staff member just asked a friend (the minister) to ask a question. The problem with that when they contacted the minister for comment, the minister said he had never met the Clinton staffer before.

Wake up Hillary supporters, support her win at all costs Karl Rove tactics, but don't be blind to their existence!

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Richard, Washington State — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 17:20:42 GMT

H. P. Boston:

I don't subscribe to Newsweek now and if I did it was over 30 years ago. I'm strongly considering getting a subscription now. I'll probably neutralize your vote in the general election as well.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Marbw — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 17:27:38 GMT

He didn't get into any spat. The lady complimented Barack Obama and stated that she was a Republican-leaning voter. She said that Saddam had something to do with 9-11, and Barack Obama stated that his interest in protecting this country for his daughters and our children is paramount. The lady wasn't tase'd or dragged out of the room(like some other pols responses we have seen these past few weeks).
Nice try though guys. Watch the entire exchange between them. Overall I am leaning to you guys more than cnn at this point(even though sometimes I shake my head at your non-story stories).

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Dot, Illinois — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 17:35:06 GMT

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.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 17:35:45 GMT

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.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

John B, Des Moines, IA — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 17:37:43 GMT

Richard, Washington State; Consider the content of the messages of those you think "vilify" GWB. It's aimed at his POLICIES and his RECORD, not his PERSON. Except of course for his lack of intellectual curiosity and rigor, which even his supporters acknowledge. On issue after issue it becomes obvious that he is taking the nation in the wrong direction. Quite simply he is the Worst. President. Ever.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

J. Hollings Rouse, Clayton Missouri — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 17:38:10 GMT

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

docrock,tx — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 17:41:26 GMT

Let's see,Obama attacks and slanders Clinton,then begs :don't swift boat me Hillary!".Then the genius attacks a voter and verbally abuses her?Wake up people,he will set race relations back to the 1950's.This man is a Rcist that HATES whites.He scares me more than David Dukes.Vote Biden,at least he has integrity,which is very lacking in this popularity,money race.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

H P Boston — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 17:45:08 GMT

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!

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Mark Thieme — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 17:49:50 GMT

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.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

H P Boston — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 17:52:32 GMT

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!

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

H P Boston — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 17:54:07 GMT

Do you honestly and sincerely believe that Republicans have the market cornered on "spin and vitriol"?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
You BETCHA"!!!!!

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

H P Boston — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 17:55:44 GMT

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!!

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

H P Boston — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 17:59:20 GMT

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

H P Boston — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 18:05:25 GMT

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Class Warrior, D.C. — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 18:09:42 GMT

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.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

CitizenJ — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 18:15:59 GMT

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.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Marcus, National City, CA — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 18:17:26 GMT

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.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Bee — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 18:17:35 GMT

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/

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

josh, Oakland, CA — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 18:20:46 GMT

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

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Mark Thieme — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 18:24:10 GMT

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!)

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Ruth Bethinger, New York, New York — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 18:36:22 GMT

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.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

ST from JC — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 18:36:49 GMT

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.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Mark Thieme — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 18:43:25 GMT

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?

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

TheQueenBee! — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 18:49:31 GMT

Obama's real secret is that he's a tranny!

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Mark Thieme — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 18:50:17 GMT

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?

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Ken L — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 18:55:39 GMT

There'll be plenty of surprises and shock this comming election.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

pat huntington ny — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 18:57:42 GMT

Obama smokes. Enough reason not to vote for him

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Sierra, SF — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 19:09:44 GMT

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 !!

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Sierra, SF — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 19:17:05 GMT

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

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Mark Thieme — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 19:18:36 GMT

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.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

SB — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 19:23:03 GMT

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.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

J. Hollings Rouse, Clayton Missouri — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 19:23:12 GMT

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.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Carrie, Eastern Iowa — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 19:28:14 GMT

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

vanreuter, NY NY — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 19:43:01 GMT

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

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

vanreuter, NY NY — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 19:43:03 GMT

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Mark Thieme — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 19:48:31 GMT

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Tan Nang, Altanta GA — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 19:51:25 GMT

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.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Jane Srini — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 19:53:42 GMT

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

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Richard, Washington State — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 19:56:47 GMT

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.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Bee, NH — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 20:00:02 GMT

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?

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

MK,MO — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 20:02:41 GMT

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.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Bee — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 20:03:07 GMT

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.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

MK,MO — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 20:12:21 GMT

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.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

CitizenJ — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 20:13:18 GMT

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.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

kenn — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 20:37:37 GMT

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.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

docrock,tx — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 21:02:57 GMT

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.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Keith H. , Takoma Park, MD — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 21:23:24 GMT

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.......

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

docrock,tx — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 23:12:40 GMT

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.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

eSPO — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 00:28:16 GMT

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

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

REG; East Valley Phx. AZ — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 01:59:57 GMT

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).

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

ayak — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 03:00:16 GMT

docrock ; you sound like an ignorant desperate redneck
you are probably uneducated

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

John M, CA — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 04:25:18 GMT

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.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Bruno Houston, TX — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 12:41:09 GMT

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

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

docrock,tx — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 14:42:48 GMT

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.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

H P Boston — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 15:11:09 GMT

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!

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

H P Boston — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 16:16:04 GMT

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.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

Mark Thieme — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 17:22:15 GMT

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.

First thoughts: the battle for Iowa

nmerrill, Waterloo, Iowa — Sat, 24 Nov 2007 00:47:13 GMT

I am a recent republican convert so that I can vote for Sen. McCain here in Iowa. No one has polled me since then and I welcome the hang-ups from Hillary and Barak. Polls are meaningless people is the message I want to deliver. There are many like me here in Iowa who don't slap on bumper stickers or have a candidate with the campaign money of the GNP of nations but WE ARE tired of the lip-service of the 2 "leaders" in polls. Therefore I would encourage all to research and support Sen. McCain he has proven experience and I have met him and can personally vouch for his character. You should have seen him handle a screaming red in the face antagonist with a cool calm demeanor that I know I don't have in me.