Obama, Clinton Debate Each Other »
Posted by: not2needy 6 months, 3 weeks ago186 Comments Report this Story
LOS ANGELES - Democrats Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton kicked off their final debate before Super Tuesday contests on a cordial note, and reached out to backers of former rival John Edwards in their scrappy chase for delegates.
Read Full Story at news.yahoo.com
Join the Discussion 
+ Add Comment
Comments So Far: 186
-
-
0%
ecotourusa6 months, 3 weeks ago
sniffle...
:(
this bleeding heart stuff is starting to get to me.
it's the root of our demise. (I used to be democrat all my life, and I jumped ship to vote for Ron Paul in the primaries)
I'm disgusted the herd is heralding clinton, obama and mccain...just what the media wanted from us.
please wake up AMERICA!!! DON'T YOU SEE WHAT WE ARE DOING?
Reply-
0%
mesodude6 months, 3 weeks ago
"it's the root of our demise. (I used to be democrat all my life, and I jumped ship to vote for Ron Paul in the primaries)"
--I don't believe for one hot second someone who claims to have been a "democrat all my life" would suddenly turn around and vote for a guy who is anti-choice, against stem cell research funding, voted against SCHIP, and voted FOR Bush tax cuts for the ultra wealthy? The neocons who want "limited government" ( iow, unlimited, unencumbered and unregulated rights to turn a buck). Ron Paul wants to destroy government entirely. Why the hell would a Democrat jump parties to elect him? Whatever--feel free to write me back someday when you finally elect that perfect President who fulfills your every need want and desire.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
not2needy6 months, 3 weeks ago
FTA:
"I was friends with Hillary Clinton before we started this campaign. I will be friends with Hillary Clinton after this campaign is over," Obama said
I admire Obama for saying that! I wonder if she feels the same way!
Reply-
0%
Blackacereturn6 months, 3 weeks ago
I think she does, and it's nice to see that they are moving away from the dirty politics. Ron Brown did this when he was party leader and help Bill win...Let's hope they stand by each other and which ever one get's the nomination the other should do whatever it takes to help them win!
Reply
-
0%
Blackacereturn6 months, 3 weeks ago
second - Seems to me like you should have ask that question of bush. lOOK AT THE MESS HE HAS MADE, AT LEASE WITH HIL THERE IS A TRACK RECORD OF A GOVERNMENT THAT WORKED NOT ONE THAT INCREASE THE DEBT BY 3 TRILLION IN LESS THAN 8 YEARD. uNDER HER HUSBAND WE HAD ONE OT THE BEST ECONOMIC PERIOD IN THE HISTORY OF OUR NATION. lET'S SEE WHAT BUSH DID....UMMM NEVERMIND THIS IS TOO EASY. lOOK IF YOU HAD ANY BRAINS YOU WOULD SHUT DA HELL UP, IF I VOTED FOR BUSH I WOULD!
Reply -
0%
Blackacereturn6 months, 3 weeks ago
War on Terror, there is a war on terror being waged by whom not bush? The war in Iraq serves for one good, all the terrorist went there, less planning, The Americans were right there in the open to pick them off like flies. And I am sure Hill will do whatever it takes to stop terror if she won!
The stupidity in that question is this...you on the right act as if the terrorist are only after you and yours. They don't care if you are Repug or DEM they don't care about your race color or creed the only thing they care about is that you are an American so i cant see how it's more important to the GOP and less important to the DEMS.
It's a Dumb question!
Reply-
0%
mesodude6 months, 3 weeks ago
"DO NOT EVER ASSUME ANYTHING! ya see, you're only assuming that Hillary will continue the war on terror."
--Some things are self-evident. You already know the Democratic Party's position regarding the so called war on terror. We want to begin winding down in Iraq, we want to go back and finish the war Bush cut and ran away from in Afghanistan. We need to regain the trust and the respect of the international community (unless we want to be fighting on our own for the foreseeable future). We want to repair our broken down military and overall stop being so militaristic. For starters...
Reply -
0%
Blackacereturn6 months, 3 weeks ago
If i thought for a second you were worried about Hils action
on terror I wouldn't have taken you for granted. However here is a reminger, 9/11 happened under your watch not the DEMS...you have spent a lot of time trying to convince the world that's not the case but guss what chubby bush was in the White House and the Congress were GOPers when the terrorist did what they did to this nation.
You keep saying the terrorist hasn't killed Americans since 9/11. Well I have news for you ass wipe. Those solders, our boys and girsl that they are blowing to bits because your idiot friends in the White House refuse to spend the my tax dollers on giving them propper equipment instead of stuffing their pockets, they are americans you IDIOT. The bush administration hasn't protected Americans from terrorist they just move the targets to the homeland of the terrorist. You go to the VA hospitals and then come back and tell me that they have!
Reply
-
-
-
0%
not2needy6 months, 3 weeks ago
Also FTA:
"I want to acknowledge a candidate who left the race this week who did such an outstanding job ... elevating the issues of poverty and the plight of working families all across the country. And we wish him and Elizabeth well," Obama said.
Clinton said the Republicans are "more of the same" and, gesturing toward Obama, she said, "We will change our country.")
Could that mean that which ever one is nominated, would chose the other as their VP!?
Reply-
0%
Beau78906 months, 3 weeks ago
Somehow I doubt that either would choose the other as his or her VP, n2n. VPs ar often chosen to broaden a candidate's demographic. I wouldn't be surprised to see one of them choose Bill Richardson, though, unless they were saving him for Secretary of State, which will be a really big job in the next adminstration.
Reply -
-
-
-
0%
ecotourusa6 months, 3 weeks ago
"The Republicans are toast."
just wait to see what comes down the pike...you think it's only the repubs who are toast???
Reply
-
-
-
-
0%
AnteUp6 months, 3 weeks ago
not2needy ~
100% correct! It's mid-morning EST and CNN's anchor, Tony Harris, is ranting about having a cavity this morning from all the saccharine from last night's debate. He goes on to yell,"Where's the fireworks?" "Come on, they made some kind of calculation in a smoky back room" - "It was such a choreographed dance between the two of them" !!
This is news? This is unbiased analysis? This is BS!
The media is denying us news - in favor of tabloid journalism. You want tabloid journalism? Fine, it's okay for people to have that too - but where do those of us who
want news to INFORM us go?
One limited but excellent source is: therealnews.com
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
0%
Justice4All6 months, 3 weeks ago
I'm hoping for Obama and someone else. I don't care much for Clinton.
Reply
-
-
0%
jordan116 months, 3 weeks ago
Well, it's over. And I enjoyed watching two grown up's after all these years of childish nonsense. I was also in awe of this debate. A black man and a woman, debating for the nomination of their party for the Presidency of the United States. It's gratifying to have lived through the times I've seen, & live to see such change. Wow.
Reply -
0%
TimALoftis6 months, 3 weeks ago
good debate on the issues. Also a historic event. I had a lump in my throat at the onset... seeing a female and a African American sharing the stage knowing that one would be nominated by the Democratic Party for President of the United States.
As to the winner...overall probably a draw. Both candidates made their points quite well.
seeing the two there made me think ahead to as what Wolf Blitzer eluded to as the 'Dream Team'. My guess is that if senator Clinton wins the nomination she might very well ask Obama to join her. As for Obama asking her? I am not so sure...he may choose Richardson instead.
Reply-
-
0%
ETproductions6 months, 3 weeks ago
I suspect that Obama would turn to Clinton first, and only consider others if she is not willing to be #2 on the ticket, or if it's a near ties and Edwards ends up being able to broker the convention with his delegates, and he wants to be the VP. Candidates always choose the running mate that is most able to help them win in the general election.
I doubt it will be a brokered convention. I further doubt Edwards wants another turn at running for VP. If anything, I'd guess he'd like to be the Attorney General. And I think he would be light-years better than Gonzales or I-can't-say Mukasey in that slot.
Reply
-
-
0%
nostalgia6 months, 3 weeks ago
What about Evan Bayh as Clinton's VP? Didn't she select him as her National Campaign Co-Chair?
Reply -
0%
RedstateLib6 months, 3 weeks ago
If she gets the nod she needs Obama. He has energized a large number of people who haven't voted before and if he isn't on the ticket many of them might just stay home in Nov.
Reply -
-
0%
ETproductions6 months, 3 weeks ago
Clinton clearly has more experience than Obama. She's older. But if that's the single best argument she has for the Presidency, she looses to McCain.
Looking back over history, who were our great presidents? George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, FDR.
George Washington had no experience in Government. Before his term, there was no government to have experience in. He was clearly a gifted leader. His ability to write and to speak helped him take a rag-tag group of rebels and rally them to defeat the most powerful army on earth at his time.
Thomas Jefferson had some experience in state government and as an Ambassador and VP, but he was mostly a farmer.
Lincoln's claim to governmental fame was a failed bid to win a seat in his state's legislature and a rather disastrous single term in the US House of Representatives.
FDR's experience was limited to a stint as a state legislator and being the assistant Secretary of the Navy.
Reply-
0%
ETproductions6 months, 3 weeks ago
Now, what characteristics did all these leaders possess that pushed them head and shoulders above the rest? They were uniquely gifted at writing and speaking. They could rally support to a cause. They faced extraordinary challenges, and managed to rally the American people to surmount those challenges.
With all the bewildering problems facing America today, things that have grown worse under both party's management, we desperately need a leader who can think independently and who can speak and write. The LAST thing we need is another politician who puts a finger into the wind and shifts positions according to each new poll.
Reply-
0%
AnteUp6 months, 3 weeks ago
ETproductions ~
You have a very valid point comparing the lack of experience
at our beginnings. There was a fire in the belly of our
Founding Fathers. But as I've said before - it's the team
they bring with them that is crucial. Washington could never
have pulled it off so well without Monroe and Adams and
Franklin,etc. Abigail Adams wrote to "her dear friend"(John) - many times advising that the new government "not forget the women". They could have done a little better by us - they should have heeded her words - but watching PBS (3-disc set) "Liberty" - The American Revolution - I am not complaining. What they achieved was astonishing!
We could do with a little LEADERSHIP - intellect and
(real) compassion........and NO MORE SPIN!
Reply
-
-
0%
1-2-Oscar6 months, 3 weeks ago
You forgot FDR's four years as governor of the nation's largest state. Several of the programs he made successful on a national level, such as the CCC, were expansions of things he had done as governor of New York.
Washington, as head of the Continental army, had more executive experience than anyone else in the new nation in 1789. As commander he had to deal with the political realities, too, in seeking support and appropriations from the Continental Congress. He had also served in Virginia's House of Burgesses. Jefferson had been a strong and innovative governor of Virginia. By the standards of their day they were both among the MOST experienced men available.
Reply-
0%
ETproductions6 months, 3 weeks ago
There is no need to split hairs over the exact level of experience Washington, Jefferson and FDR each had. My point is there are many who have served in the White House with a deeper resume but with dubious results. These men excelled not because of their experience but because of their abilities and their character.
How much experience does Dick Cheney have today? If experience is the only measure that matters, we should draft him to run. He has executive experience in industry and a world class resume in Washington, serving in Congress as the House Minority Whip, and in the Executive Branch for 5 years as Secretary of Defense and 8 years as Vice President.
There is hardly anyone alive today that has his depth of private sector plus governmental executive experience. Does that mean we should draft him and forget Hillary because she has NO executive experience and her resume pales in comparison to Cheney's?
Reply
-
-
0%
Mdiar6 months, 3 weeks ago
You could have mentioned the youngest President in US history, Theodore Roosevelt! Bull Moose '08! He also had very little experience, serving as a Governor and a Representative for a bit, and then VP for a few months. Theodore Roosevelt is consistently ranked among the top President's. Oh, like the other Roosevelt, TR was also Assistant Secretary of the Navy. Figured I'd give you another example and another Roosevelt!
Reply-
0%
ETproductions6 months, 3 weeks ago
He made it to Mount Rushmore. That's good enough for me. He was a true outdoors man and his love of the Wild Country led him to establish what we now call environmentalism, but then didn't even have a name.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
pcknowledge6 months, 3 weeks ago
This was an excellent debate. They both made an effort to bury the hatchet & present a united Democratic party, especially by saying positive things about Edwards as well. Still managed to point out their individual differences on policies in a cordial manner.
I do think they would get many more votes & most likey win the election for the Democratic party if they ran together. As President & Vice President.
Reply -
0%
Justice4All6 months, 3 weeks ago
The key issue for me is who voted to give Bush authority to go to war. Obama is the only one who voted against it and he did so at a time when it was politically unpopular. Clinton took the easy way out.
I would like a president who makes tough decisions and does not follow special interests. Obama is the only one that fits that description.
Let's don't forget that Hillary stood by Bush on his war until it became politically unpopular.
Reply
