Tim Russert and Brian Williams ... the Bush Au Pair headlining the MSNBC

[flordehinojos]

BEAT ON HILLARY BASH.

First of, anything headlining Tim Russert and Brian Williams as moderators, cannot be called a debate. MSNBC's presentation tonight of the nine (or however many there are) democratic contenders for the presidency of the United States was not a debate. It was a Beat on Hillary Bash.

Sometimes they'd beat on her directly, as in Russert's question, "will you allow light into the papers of conversations between you and your husband when he was President?" Excuse me Tim Russert, but i've not seen you ask any Bush if he or she would allow any light to come into any of the papers, or any of the investigations, 9/11, attorneygate, blackwater mercenaries, torture, or whatever they want to keep secret. so, why are you asking it of conversatons between hillary and bill? then too, that was your way to get the ball rolling for Obama, Edwards and others to continue beating on Hillary ... with one exception: a true gentleman, and perhaps the only real diplomat in the whole bunch: Richardson who had the balls to state that this Hillary Bashing/ these personal attacks on her/ were making him feel uncomfortable, because while everyone on that stage should be laboring to define themselves and their clear differences between them, the way to do just that was not really the personal attack mode against Hillary.

Then, too... Kucinich made me proud when he told you Bush Au Pairs that media had to watch what you say regarding Iran, just as much as those politicians in high places do, since the media holds part of the blame for the saber rattling and green light on Bush's invasion/occupation of Iraq.

Edwards whined too much.

Obama had nothing to offer but Hillary attacks.

Dodd gave himself more importance than he should have and Biden did too.

Debate? No. This was not a debate. This was a Bash Fest prompted by a sprinkling of some of the most asinine questions ever. In a debated No moderator would be needed as candidates would DIALOGUE between themselves and we would get to hear real, thought out answers. Not smarmy thirty seconds sounds bite.

In the end, i think the two of you ... the Russert/Williams Bush Aupairs gave yourselves much more importance than you really, really, really have.

[JDPriestly]

1. That was nothing compared to what Hillary would meet if she made it to the general election

and had to face the Swiftboaters. If she could not handle that, how in the world will she handle the real thing?

[emilyg]

7. She handled it admirably.

[saracat]

2. Wrong.This was the best Debate yet.Russert asked "real " questions and put Queen Hillary on the spot

She collapsed under pressure.The consensus by the talking heads and all the blogsphere is that Edwards won.He called Hillary out and she showd her true colors. She validated all her accusers.

[emilyg]

8. I didn't see Hillary collapse. This will cost Edwards.

[saracat]

11. Yeah.She handled that question about drivers licenses so beautifully! Not.

Edwards and Obama nailed her.She has been very good in the Debates till now.She was okay tonight till she blew it in the last two minutes.Edwards will benefit from this.He got media attention and it was positive.He said what many have been afraid to say.And Hillary proved him right.

[ShortnFiery]

3. No, NOT Bush or even Republican - But "status quo" corporate enabling journalists. n/t

[alittlelark]

4. Whaaa... they 'beat up on HRC'

I didn't see that. I saw her getting the lions share of the questions.... and screwing them up.

[TahitiNut]

6. I find it annoying that some seem to think she deserves less confrontation ...

... maybe because she's a "girl." It seems some of our old cultural habits have some vestigial filters.

I'd just love to hear what Ann Richards (may she R.I.P.) might say about that. :evilgrin:

[emilyg]

9. Probably the same thing Hillary will say - "bring it on"

[ShortnFiery]

16. No, IMO, only neo-cons say "Bring it on." But perhaps neo-liberals in the DLC have their version?

In no situation would I consider Ann Richards in artfully TAUTING her enemies. :(

For some reason, "Bring it on" doesn't instill confidence in me as a citizen when it comes from our illustrious President, no matter which party. :thumbsdown:

[saracat]

12. Me too! She is always playing the "gender card".I don't think that is real feminism and it is really

annoying to me.

[ShortnFiery]

14. She said both "My husband" and "Bill" within the same minute.

I know that there are "a few" very well matched husband/wife teams, but this aspect of what I fearfully consider Political Royalty seriously freaks me out. That one aspect, more than anything else (getting Bill's same DLC staffers back in her cabinet), will TRASH any semblance of a true democratic republic.

Our Government was not meant to be rotated among only a handful of politically powerful families. :(

[TahitiNut]

5. "true gentleman"?? (Methinks I sense a whiff of Amy Vanderbilt sexism.)

You characterize the attacks on her policy positions, campaign finances, and voting history as "personal attacks" ... and nothing could be further from the truth, imho. If you want an example of 'personal attacks' just reveiw the Swiftboating of Kerry (or Max Cleland) ... slanders on his character and integrity. That's NOT what Hillary caught.

[jaysunb]

10. I'm no Hillary fan, but...

I thought tonight seemed like a pre planned ambush on Sen. Clinton. I'm not surprised though. :evilfrown:

[ShortnFiery]

13. "a pre planned ambush on Sen. Clinton"

:rofl: I hope Mark Penn figures out that the forgoing opinion is a non-starter?

Really, that's just comical. HRC can no longer pull at our sympathy strings - she can't depend on "her husband" to take all the flack - HRC, the person, must stand up and thoughtfully counter these attacks. She, HRC herself is the only one to blame for her poor performance ... NOT her opponents ... nor those mean ole' corporate journalists who always go for the throat. To say otherwise is IMO, one seriously LAME argument that will get belly laughed out of Dodge. :shrug:

[FrenchieCat]

15. I agree that anyone who would call that a debate needs

some drugs for their problem.

The Media Conglamorate won again.

We lose.

[ShortnFiery]

17. Hey I'm stone cold sober and that was one excellent debate. Best one so far.

Perhaps we come at this from different perspectives?

But no, Mark Penn will proclaim that "the media" and HRC's mean opponents unfairly attacked HRC. How very sad? HRC's strategists and supporters need to understand that "the gender card" can't be played any longer - it's all played out. :thumbsdown:

[FrenchieCat]

18. Yeah, well considering that if it was up to you, America would never have had

George Washington as America's first President....I'd agree with you, that yea-Ah doh......different perspectives for sure!

[ShortnFiery]

19. Non-pertinent tangential point? But no, Royal Political families are becoming very

disconcerting, if not outright threats to the continuation of our Democratic Republic.

Many people are willing to admit this. Serving as a Congressional representative used to be considered "a privilege" NOT a way to GOOSE one's career into the wide and corrupt world of lobbying. :crazy:

[DCKit]

20. Russert was a serious hardass with Dodd on Meet the Press on Sunday.

I don't know why he bothered unless, despite the fake polls, Dodd is still a contender.

BTW, I am HIGHLY suspicious of the poll numbers. They neither look or feel right. I've seen HRC as much as 25 points ahead of Obama with Edwards totally in the dumper and just don't believe it.