dateline: Charleston, SC

Over a year before you need to have your voting vision in site, untill then plenty of clowns will come and go. The only way to make change is to get rid of
the current circus in Washington, All OF IT.

FYI -- Information

Obama and possibly Hilary and Edwards saw questions prior to debate

FYI - President Bush is not running in '08

Question - Did any candidate answer tough questions? NOT!

These questions of the American people... screened and brought to you by CNN!

CNN may as well just have asked the questions. No Republican challenges such as issues of school choice, the budget, abortion, affirmative action, death penalty, etceteras. Gotta love it.

Did any one of the candidates give their plan to keep the U.S. Safe? To remove the illegals in this country? To destroy the Terrorists? No what tough questions did they answer? NONE!

Did anyone else see the puppet strings behind Obama and Edwards being pulled by George Soros

I liked the format of the debate, and cannot wait to see the Republicans flub their way through -- the democrats are very fortunate to have formidable and intelligent candidates and I think it took some of the rhetoric away from these debates -- I think Obama showed more strength than previously -- on the whole more of an atmosphere of a town hall meeting was created -- would like to see this type of debate after the primaries, between the Democratic and Republican candidates.

The Libs are never asked hard questions, Come if they were they would have to admit they want defeat, Higher taxes, Sex for children, Socialized Medicine umm they would actually have to state they want to bring Marxism here. Thus they are never asked questions, come on a flip flop will break if you flip it too much.

For those who complain about Iraq, did you know victory is close, see the Iraqis are now turning on the foreign Al Qeada terrorists.

And I guess we should withdraw from the US because over 16,000 Americans were murdered here.

I think that average people ask dumb questions. But then, so do the professionals. I guess I prefer the professionals dumb questions to those of average peeps. And the candidates rarely answer the questions directly, anyway. (Witness the responses to the republican running mate question.) The questions are almost inconsequential.

Didn't watch the "debate" last night and have no regrets about it. As Chuck stated above, form over substance. BTW the Edwards clip about the media focusing on trivial issues and not hitting HARD, again and again, on important issues like the carnage in Iraq (count on approx. 100 more dead American servicemen each month on into the horizon) is right on the mark. Show the families of the killed/dead soldiers mourning their dead relatives EACH night on WNT if you want to have a believable and meaningful show.

That the critic you cite in your blog equates what "good television" is--personifying questions with real people, avoiding talking heads--with how successful the "debate" was speaks volumes as to what was considered important yesterday evening. The use of YouTube videos was certainly a novelty with intentional (and sometimes unintentional) humor, and the recorded questions indeed made for "good television."

Ultimately, though, the program was a triumph of form over content and was certainly no debate. (Think JFK and RMN in 1960, where each candidate vigorously challenged the other's views and opinions.) All of the candidates continued to answer the parts of the questions they wanted to answer, ignoring everything else, and there was little or no follow-up or follow-through on the recorded questions. All in all, a technological novelty, but about as substantial as cotton candy.