Calling that circus "the best debate so far" would be laughable if it wasn't so tragic. Who here at NPR wants politics to be about entertainment? Well, if so, that puts entertainment above informing our country with fair debate on the issues. I want the candidates plan presented so that Americans can make the best choice. On that, the debate failed miserably.

Sent by Darren White | 9:50 AM ET | 11-16-2007

""PLEASE YOUTUBE"" THE IRAN VOTE AND IRAQ WAR VET CLAPPING AGAINST ATTACKING IRAN WITH HIS MOM

Hillary also stated that she thought the american education system served us well ?? NOT ! !

AND THE TAX CAP

Hillary votes no to win votes but she won't speak the truth. Barack has the courage to speak the truth. Citizens need everybody to have drivers liscense so they can be monitored for insurance and accidents and alcohol related deaths. He also pointed out the need to PASS an imigration bill to get those people on a path to citizenship. They will be needed to feel like americans so they can keep our social secuirty system fluid.

Hillary also got BUSTED on her statement about not RAISING THE CAP on social secuirty because she says the tax increase will hurt the middle class!

Barack stated that the 6% getting paid 97,000.00 a year is NOT THE MIDDLE CLASS !

Hillary also got BUSTED on her vote for the kyle Lieberman and the mother and the Iraq war veteran son who clapped when the rest of the candidates pointed out they were AGAINST the Kyle Lieberman bill to make the Iranian guard a terrorist organization and how the bill also allows for Bush to keep troops in iraq !!

Yes Hillary got busted BIG TIME the truth always comes out.

Thank God we have a candidate like Barack Obama who speaks the truth and doesn't shift back and forth trying to get votes. Hillarys thinking people won't catch her shifting her point of view from one location (town) to another as she lies lies lies trying to sway the american voters !!

Hillary on pakistan http://www.liberaloasis.com/2007/11/clinton_on_pakistan.php

Here's Sen. Hillary Clinton discussing Pakistan at Thursday night's debate: = http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/15/us/politics/15debate-transcript.html?pagewanted=print

... there's absolutely a connection between a democratic regime and heightened security for the United States. That's what's so tragic about this situation. After 9/11, President Bush had a chance to chart a different course, both in Pakistan and in Afghanistan, and could have been very clear about what our expectations were. We are now in a bind, and it is partly -- not completely, but partly -- a result of the failed policies of the Bush administration.

So, where we are today means that we have to say to President Musharraf: Look, this is not in your interest either. This is not in the interest of the United States. It is not in your interest to either stay in power or stay alive.

Sure sounds like she wished Bush pushed for democratic reform in Pakistan, instead of propping up Musharraf's dictatorship.

But here's what she said in a debate from August, = http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/08/us/politics/07demsforum.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print

when criticizing Sen. Barack Obama's pledge to strike terrorists in Pakistan's border region if Musharraf would not act on actionable intelligence:

I think it is a very big mistake to telegraph that and to destabilize the Musharraf regime, which is fighting for its life against the Islamic extremists who are in bed with al Qaeda and Taliban.
Of course, as everyone now knows, Musharraf is primarily fighting for his life against lawyers and judges, not the tribal militants.

Sen. Clinton is not alone among Dem candidates in supporting Musharraf.

Both Sen. John Edwards and Sen. Chris Dodd have expressed support for Musharraf to maintain "stability."

Whereas Obama, Gov. Bill Richardson and Sen. Joe Biden

have been more consistent in supporting democratic principles.

Sent by Danielle Clarke | 12:46 PM ET | 11-16-2007

I'm not sure if this is the right place to make this comment but, if you click on the RealPlayer link to listen to this post read allowed it finishes with some one line summaries of important things each candidate said. During that part Chris Dodd's comment is misrepresented: Dodd did not say that Civil Rights [in all contexts] are less important than national security. He was talking about the role of the US in enforcing human rights in other countries. He said that the first obligation of the president is to protect America's citizens not Pakistan's, which was the specific context of the question.

Sent by Andrew M | 3:58 PM ET | 11-16-2007

Thank you to Danielle Clarke who, unlike the fluff piece from Ridley and the rest of NPR's debate segment, offered some real coverage AND analysis of the debate which as usual I did not hear from NPR. No the newscasters at NPR are too busy displaying fashionable cynicism about the Dem's to point out a few facts about the Republican field which offers a choice between some small-time, morally-debased tyrant who is also a serial adulterer, an anti-science ignoramus from Arkansas who believes that the Biblical creation fable is literally true, an empty suit, and a sleepy grand-pa who doesn't much like to work too hard or think too much - and most of whom engage in the usual Republican fear-mongering.
No, NPR is so busy with the stylish cynicism directed at the Democrats that they kind of forget to include a few facts about the education, experience, and even principles of this field of Democratic candidates. Like Obama was a constitutional law professor at University of Chicago for 10 years (hey, you think he might offer a wider expanse of mind and maybe do a better job than Bush or any of the current Republican candidates?? Maybe we might still have habeus corpus? And no Guantanmo? And no torture ??? oh, that???s right, Garrels got a ???good??? scoop from three tortured human beings when she was being the brave journalist in Iraq so torture comes in handy for NPR). And most if not all of the Democratic candidates have law degrees, much experience in Congress, and, dare I say it, some even have what could pass for principles. Like saying that human rights might be something America might want to pay attention to or that it might be just a little bit immoral for so many American children to go without health care while the corporate fat cats get richer and richer cause the system is fixed. Or hey maybe when a president lies us into a war and gets a bunch of people killed for no good reason, he might deserve to be impeached to establish the immorality of the act?
But you won't hear those facts on NPR news much - they are too busy being fashionable - or biased. If only NPR had directed some of that cynicism at the lies put out by this criminal administration during the lead-up to the Iraq invasion, maybe some hundred thousand deaths and countless agonies could have been averted. Hey, do I have to say it, NPR - the ones really deserving of your cynicism are the Republicans - and NPR. It will be very interesting to see if this comment is posted.

Sent by J. Hamilton | 1:14 AM ET | 11-17-2007

That was the most entertaining, informative, and succinct political debate summary I've ever read. Thanks!

Sent by ADT | 7:48 AM ET | 11-17-2007

Why are we Democrats letting the media tell us who our party nominee should be? Why are we rolling over again like we did when Bush decided it was a good idea to go into Iraq? Just because Hillary can buy the nomination doesn't mean we have to sell it to her. Hillary is no better than Bush in my mind. She has voted with him on Iraq just about every step of the way to appease the conservatives in this country. I feel ashamed of our party for letting CNN and MSNBC frame the primaries as they have so far. Biden is my choice because he far and away surpasses Hillary with answers and REAL FORTITUDE vital to resolve the issues challenging our nation. Hillary is not good for this country. She has not stood up for us because she is afraid that if she does, she'll lose her funding. The Democratic nominee needs to be worthy of this country and our party. Hillary does not measure up to either. Democrats need to take the lead for once and rally around a real "playa" that the world can respect, not the machine with alot of expensive bells and whistles. Her universal health care plan is not the only issue on the table. Democrats need to stand up and fight for the best choice instead of taking what's being spoon fed to us by Wolf Blitzer and the rest of the "made media".

Sent by Lisa Murad | 8:36 AM ET | 11-17-2007

Hillary and the Anti-War Egg On Your Face:

Hate to burst your bubble, Rube. If I can borrow the late, great Hunter Thompson's nickname for gamblers who never understood the game, but it wasn't the late, great circus showman P.T. Barnum who coined the phrase, "There's a second born every minute." That dubious coinage distinction goes to a Chicago Irish conman named Mike "King Mike" McDonald. At the turn of the century Chicago that was rebuilt after the great fire, Mike Cassius McDonald ran a gambling establishment christened as the "Store." Not only was the "Store" the biggest and best casino operation of circa 1900 Chicago, the establishment was also informally known as Chicago's unofficial "City Hall." The story goes that "King Mike" McDonald merely sold the rube sucker phrase to P.T. Barnum.

A century and then some later we come to find out that the "Store" is the Silicon Valley entrepreneurs who concocted a nationwide anti-war scam to underscore the George the Younger years of the presidency. Two terms of the dot organization money making brilliance later, with the Democratic Party having been used as the magnetic ruse from which the suckers hung their hats and polished their anti-Bush chants and slogans, we come to the punch line of the first great American political practical joke of Hillary Clinton as the '08 champion of the anti-war voter.

Have you noticed that no one is watching television as the other Democratic pretenders debate the "Woman." A massive collective umbrella of a yawn has domed the continental landscape. It was even more than synchronicity that the last debate was held in Las Vegas, the rube capital of black jack lost souls. The jig is up, the punch line wasn't all that funny. For all of Hillary Clinton's senate career what separated her pattern of voting from George Bush's pattern of dictation is that Hillary is..ta da..a woman. That subterranean plot of reverse subconsciousness has alienated the female voters. Now Hillary has ticked off the white and black voters alike, while the Hispanics will continue the Republican vote tradition.

Somehow the sucker plot of the long running anti-war money making scam was supposed to pull off a legerdemain of the proportions of the matchmaking of Penn and Teller to David Copperfield, and to the ghost of Harry Houdini for the metaphysical and theologically oriented uncreative voting mind. The big disappearing act has been the American public when the Democrats come to debate the "Woman." The Democratic Convention is in danger of being a hall as unfilled as a minor league hockey game played in Los Angeles. The Democrats might have to invite Ann Coulter to give a speech in order to pull any ratings.

If America isn't anything by an entrepreneurial nuclear ship of state, it's a collective of part time voters who won't let on that now they know they've been had by the anti-war scam. The ruse churned the coins for the past seven years. There's no doubt about that line item accounting. The right and the left shadow boxed like the yin and yang of smart winking, and hoodwinking of television and radio sideshow barking. The anti-war movement became a storefront church passing a collection plate, until the end result of putting Hillary Clinton as the last late, great choice for Democrats as George Bush retires off into the sunset to play golf with his dad, and his dad's golfing buddy, Bill Clinton.

As Blackwater turns to Whitewater, you got to love that Arkansas sense of humor. Though, now that New Yorkers are waking up to the reality that they've been had by the deep south, and you know how New Yorkers look down on rednecks, you got to wonder when New Yorker Democrats will rebel by burning down their precinct polling booths.

Hillary won't even be able to take New York in the electoral college scheme of things. Nixon took forty-nine of fifty states from George McGovern back in '72, at the height of the Vietnam War. The only state McGovern took was Massachusetts, and that being in the shadow of Watergate, at that. With Mitt Romney having served a term as governor of Massachusetts, the Republicans should be able to take all fifty states this go round of '08. And that includes Utah, which was the second state in American history to nominate a Jewish governor.

It was a hell of a practical joke, the seven years of the anti-war entrepreneurs pasting the Democratic Party with the tag of being the anti-war black faced monolith the pre-Neanderthals beat like an ersatz drum on to the tune of "Thus Spake Zarathustra." The Democrats should really hold their convention in Atlantic City, along with the ghost of Charles "Lucky" Luciano, to put the final touches on the most ignominiously bad joke of Iraq.

Have you noticed that the brotherhood of the American media is slowly sidling away from the Hillary egg on the face throwing contest? There may not be a first string correspondent volunteering to cover the Democratic Convention. They'll all be covering the Barnum and Bailey Circus born sucker reunion.

Fred Call

Sent by fred call | 9:43 AM ET | 11-18-2007

I heard this first on the radio and just happened across it on the website. Great HST-style of writing. From Vegas , no less. Getting the story is the story.

Sent by Brent A. Larsen | 10:40 AM ET | 11-18-2007

Indeed. Clinton's dollars allow her to get the media's ear and eye, and suddenly she's been crowned? Edwards is the only democrat with the experience and the fortitude to actually make some serious changes to this nation.

Sent by Leila | 4:27 PM ET | 11-18-2007

If we want 'em to continue treating us like idiots..oh, they will and enthusiastically. The question of who wins each of these things has become tedious and...enabling, once again.
I hadn't seen any debates so far in this cycle, only heard the follow-ups, analyses and sound bite plucking, which, so far, made most reporters/producers sound pantingly eager, once again, to keep the campaigning and the debating a dismayingly thin, sad-ass game of elbow-throwing, "point" scoring with simplistic gotchas, and highlighting rankings of the candidates' media-conscious aggressiveness.
So now I've watched one, or watched a portion of one until I bailed with my eyes rolling. I witnessed for myself how the questioners/moderators, right from the start, are, once again, refueling the nonsense engine, making themselves and their habits look ridiculous, choosing angles and subjects that are about 80% unhelpful and are shamefully wasteful of the attention and air time, emphasizing who's attacking who and revisiting exchanges that already goosed the confrontational flavor. The "horse race" nature of campaign reporting is perpetually decried, but the same players keep shoving most of the substance -- which doesn't have to be dull -- to the margins, and sustaining and celebrating the imbecilic slapfights at centerstage. Candidates/campaigners do, of course, need to demonstrate how they respond, defend, take heat and advocate, but this is dismal dodgeball and noisy BS, with the teams of campaignbots, the candidates themselves and the media directors joining hands to bray for more of the offensive same.
How much money? How much correct-pitch schoolyard moxie? These are evidently the most crucial questions to be answered in assessing the people who want to be president.

Sent by PH | 10:35 AM ET | 11-19-2007

The real looser thatnight was CNN. Wolf blitzer and the woman in the audience made a bigger mockery of our political situation. The questions were poorly worded, and his instanace on yes-no answers to complex topics was ego-centric. Boo to you, wolf blitzer.

Oh, and I wish Obama had done better too, but he's just afraid to engage hillary. I'm shifting my support toward edwards. Sure, I would love to have a black or female president, but neither of them are the best candidate.

Sent by Alex Johnson | 2:51 PM ET | 11-19-2007

???America was profoundly afraid of the Negro Revolution. In the secret councils of our sleep, we were ready to do anything to stop it. War in Vietnam was the quickest way to slow it down.??? Norman Mailer

The Bush/Clinton Years

We as a people have come to read too many blogs as though trying to decipher the Rosetta Stone and understand ancient hieroglyphics.

Unfortunately, bashing government has become far too easy. The Left has become as strident as the Right. Two extremes do not offer a lot of pleasant choices for the middle.

George Bush is going out of office soon. There should not be any impeachment proceedings or any other such dalliance to delay the electoral process.

As voters, we should be looking toward the ???08 election as the end of the Bush/Clinton years. There is no time machine to take us back to redo the past. We can only go forward from here.

Asking to bring down your government is akin to being wary of what you ask for. Whatever has been done right by our government, and whatever has been done wrong by our government, has not been the best or the worst the world has to offer.

Yes, there are people out there doing things better than we have done. At the same time, there are people out there doing things a lot worse than we have done.

The concept of bringing down your government can lead to anarchy and chaos. A breakdown of the system can open the door to some very nasty people. People who???ve committed far worse crimes than our government has been accused of committing.

So, in ???08, let???s put an end to the Bush/Clinton years and look for something else to start anew from.

We don???t need to strictly vote either Republican or Democrat. Let???s go for the candidate who offers to cut the past for a new direction.

Fred Call

Sent by fred call | 11:58 AM ET | 11-20-2007