Hillary's Debate Moment

The most bizarre Gibson moment was after a lengthy video build-up for a question about the aging baby boom generation and Medicare and Social Security programs running out of money... Gibson turned to Hillary and asked her to set forth what makes her a better candidate than Obama. What?! Where did that come from? Hillary was obviously ready for Charley's soft ball. Makes me wonder about Charley Gibson's bias.

"OH Please, Tony where were you 16 years ago...?" <-- I was the one standing there with the sign in your face, saying "CHARACTER COUNTS," DV, and eight years later, you were the one standing there with egg all over your face after America's first elected IMPEACHED president signed the plea bargain, confessing his BIG LIE, to avoid being hauled into court on charges of perjury and obstruction. You remember, don'tcha, DV? It was shortly after he had pardoned Marc Rich.

So here we are again, and guess what? CHARACTER STILL COUNTS, which is why Obama beat your document-shredding girl's voluminous kiester in Iowa, and appears perched to do the same in New Hampshire. Put that in your report to Chillary Campaign Headquarters, and tell the Empress that her "victim of misogyny" message isn't resonating any better than her "victim of a vast Iowan conspiracy" did, or her newly crafted message of "change" is.

Um, Al Gore WON the popular vote in 2000.

So the likability issue did not decide the election.

I'm still undecided, so I don't have any axe to grind. I fact I can't even decide whether to us the word ax or axe.

I also don't know why I'm wasting my time responding to an exhaggerated comment by Jake Tapper about Hillary's "angriness". It's like a art critic explaining the meaning of a abstract piece of modern art without even talking to the artist.

I would suggest Jake find something more substantial to talk about and to be more insightful rather than being inciteful.

I'm not a Clinton supporter, but I don't see anything even remotely objectionable in her tone or delivery in this clip. I have no idea what the fuss is about. Are you sure you linked to the correct clip?

OH Please, Tony where were you 16 years ago when the first Bush had us at War, left Florida in a mess after a hurricane and left us a huge deficiets. That the Clinton administration pulled us out of. Oil prices wern't over the roof, as well as the other utilities during his administration. Which this is not about, this is about who can lead us. Obama may be a talker but he is not a leader and I will say it again. He will turn his back on us all, he is the type who will save himself before he jumps in to save you.

You voter's just need to wake up for Barak is lame and so will his presidency. Why don't you just ask the some in Illinois how they feel about him. He is a political ploy for all you Clinton haters.

They say that the yound voters want a change, well these young voters that want a change are all still living with Mommy or Daddy, spoiled these days and being a supervisor for my employment seen in the last several years in hiring, that the up and coming youth that is here is lazy, they have no work ethics for every thing has been handed to them. And because they are riding the Obama bandwagon we are holding our future in thier hands. Well that scares me. You might as well vote Brittnay Spears into office then if you are going to vote for Obama. Look at our world when a story about a pop queen is right up there with Election Coverage it is sickening.

It is also sickening that people keep implying about personal stuff when attacking Hillary. Are any of you married, you all lead perfect lives, have perfect brothers or sisters. Are Obama's parents saints, question were they even married, but oh talk about morals issues.

I am so sick of every one saying he is going to change things-what exactly do you think he is going to do come in and wave a magic wand and every thing is going to be better. NO! Nothing is going to happen, it takes years to recoup what this country has lost and it starts with foriegn policy and economic recovery for we are on the fringes of another cold war due to the Bush policy's we have gone back 30 years. With China, Russia and Iran becoming so powerful, while we continue to weaken.

What makes me sicker are all pundits falling into this Obama's bandwagon. I've lsiten to him and again he is lam, stuffy, and isn't right for this country. You can see it he can't lead, he may have voters backing him, but when congress and the lobbyist(seeing he already has one in his group) get to him he will be fresh meat. He is not strong enough for Washington.

He is not a leader and would be nowhere right now if Oprah did not back him. That was the only push he needed. Trust me one thing I have been able to go all these years is read people, and I am calling this one as I see it.

Plus men are afraid to have a woman president, when all countries middle east as well have had woman leaders.

Dems will be doing themselves in, if Obama is voted in.

I hate to say it, I am with the person who said that they will go to the republican fray if he should get in. For we will be sitting ducks in a dagerous world if he should be our president.

If Hilary were a man, or a woman who had not been married to a former president, no one would be considering her for a minute as a candidate for this office.

I am a very strong willed woman who would like nothing better than to see a female president of our country. But I would rather a woman be elected in spite of the fact of her gender. Because that would mean her policies and everything she stood for would be so compelling that her gender would be irrelevant. Indira Gandhi and gold Meir got to be Prime Ministers of India and Israel decades ago because of what they stood for, not because they were women.

When Hilary said that she embodied change because she would be the first woman president, she looked like an absolute idiot - like the total self-absorbed creature that she is. Does she think that trumps being the first black person to be president? Did she forget that there was another candidate who would be making history, if elected? The fact that Obama did not make the obvious reply showed just how enormously classy he is.

We do not need the polarizing presence of the Clintons in the White House again. For the last 16 years we have had our presidents ridiculed by the entire world because of their scandals. And Hilary is noticeably the only Democratic candidate playing dirty politics - she seriously does not at all get that the change Obama is talking about is everything she and her husband represent, as well as Bush and all his garbage.

I get sick and tired of how every time someone says something negative about Hillary then its assumed to be because she is a woman. Or if they say something negative about Barack Obama then it is assumed to be because he is black. Do I think that Hillary's response is a reason that she should not be elected? No. There are plenty of other perfectly good reasons why she should not win the democratic nomination--the main one being because she is unelectable. In this election she has poll-tested every issue before taking a stand, she has been the last candidate to offer up proposals and her proposals have been shallow at best. Her healthcare plan was a watered down copy of the Edwards healthcare plan which Edwards offered well before she did. She has attempted to pick up the mantle of change only after John Edwards and Barack Obama used it successfully. She claims to have taken part in all the good decisions during the Clinton presidency, but distances herself from the bad ones. If she was really as integral in the decision making of the Clinton Whitehouse, then perhaps she should be held to blame for Don't Ask, Don't Tell, which she says she would repeal, she should be blamed for the huge healthcare fiasco that absolutely did happen under her watch, NAFTA which has moved hundreds of thousands of jobs to faraway lands, and every other failure of the Clinton years--and there were many. If Hillary really wants to talk about flip-flopping perhaps she should re-examine the "changes" made during the Clinton presidency because her words aren't matching the actions that were taken in the 90s. The people who try to play the race card or the gender card, please. If you can not defend your candidate on anything other than what they have in their pants or what the color of their skin is then you should rethink your reason for supporting that candidate. In fact, perhaps you shouldn't even vote at all. 2008 is too important for some idiot who votes on individuals instead of issues to even cast a ballot...if that is the best you can do then stay home.

If it takes a village to raise a child, what does it take to get Chillary's deadbeat-dad brother, Tony Rodham, to pay the $75,000 he owes in child support?

Jake, I think Hillary's "anger" was directed at Edwards, not Obama. I really felt sorry for her for having fallen into Edwards' trap. We all know Edwards was a good trial lawyer, and is capable of eliciting the "desired response" from people using the the power of emotion.

Well, this useless opportunist got the response he wanted from Hillary. He should probably believe now that he has increased his chances of being picked as VP by Obama, should Obama succeed in getting the nomination.

Well, Obama isn't stupid. Obama will be "nice" to Edwards, but this dude will surely not be Obama's VP running mate. Obama knows how to play this dude, too.

Hillary's "anger" over Edwards' statements was justified, even in a public forum such as the debates. This dude has nothing good to show from all his years in public life.

"Heaven forbid that women should ever show anger and righteous indignation."

More like self-righteous entitlement in Chillary's case.

"PEOPLE WAKE UP-DON'T MAKE THE SAME MISTAKE YOU DID 8 YEARS AGO!!!!!!"<--DV fails to realize that Dems HAVE woken up and don't want to make the same mistake they did SIXTEEN years ago.

Hillary is ridiculous. What is her "35 years of experience?" Let's hear something specific. She said lots of thing like she had worked to promote [this or that] agenda" or she has been a champion of [this or that] issue. What has she actually done?

Her attempt to "change" health care the first time went down in flames and was largely criticized for being too closed-door, secretive and poorly managed.

So, for what I can see, she's 0-1 on change that she's attempted to lead (not just "champion" or "work for."

If close proximity to the President is qualification, we should vote to elect Barabara Bush. Look at the long "experience" and resume of her husband -- also a few choice activities he is not renown for.

She's so guided by polls. Change was absent from her talks until she got trounced in Iowa. Typical to her past, she then changes based on the polls and now she's about change.

I'm a lifelong Rebubican -- former Chicagoland precinct captan. I have a daughter named Reagan (which should be a hint of my preferences).

Barack Obama is the right person for the job. He's bringing people like me into the fold, independents and young folks that have been outside the system.

Let's abandon the cynicism of Hillary Clinton. Look at her past before wasting your vote on her. Remember - failed overhaul of healthcare, shredded docuements at her law firm, documents that "appeared" in her personal office about the "travelgate" matter, her betrayal of women when she attacked those that suffered uncomfortable encounters with her husband, lots of profits from futures (was that of an industry regulated by her husband), and nlots more.

Barack Obama!

Either a lot of you that are blogging are republicans, men, or under 30 and don't have a clue about the politics of the last 30 years. I have read a lot OF WHAT SEEM TO BE MALE ORIENTATED comments on this blog. The others obviously have not really gone to congress website and compared data. The others are just young and naive and if voting for Obama will be putting our country at greater risk than it is with the Bush Admin. Seeing we are hated all over the world all ready, he will just bolster this for he is just like the rest making empty promise awful lot of fluff. He is also cocky and brash and has Bushes go it alone attitude. He has no real talking points except change, but has no plan or action for change. And to attack Ms. Clinton on being angry(which she was not it was passionate). I like to see you all when you believe in something and want to fight for it. I think you all would act the same defense when being attacked and such scrutiny. You have Edwards who was kissing to Obama dreaming on being his VP for he knows he can't win it. Both are soft men who will crumble when it comes to it. Hillary has gusto to go up against those men. She is the only female in a field of men sitting in those debates and if that is not change then what is. Hillary was back in the 70's going up against Nixon and she has done a lot in her 30 years or so. More then Obama and Edwards. You voters need to wake up and take a good look at the world. It is not the same and she is a fighter not just a talker who is going to talk down to us but talk to us, she is the only one who is going to work for us. Obama and mark my words is a republican in democrates clothing. He will turn his back on us all, the middle class and america. It is not his time and by voting him in as canidate will bolster the republicans election strategy, and they will win in a national election. Remeber every canidate promises change-but America needs to change at a more moderate pace with the world being in such turmulant times. You all need to take a good look at history before you take America in a direction that we will not be able to turn back from. George Bush has already set our pace for a dim future, but don't turn out the lights entirely by voting for Obama. PEOPLE WAKE UP-DON'T MAKE THE SAME MISTAKE YOU DID 8 YEARS AGO!!!!!!

I completely agree with ard. For a very short while, my head was turned by Obama because he is clearly brilliant intellectually and has mostly good intentions. But then came the negative stuff out of him about the other candidates. Maybe that's politics, but I really did not like the way he did it and it made me not trust him. I do not think Hilary is perfect nor is anyone else. My main problem with her is that vote that seemed to allow us to go to Iraq. My second biggest problem is with any candidate who is not willing to fight hard enough to hold back the much too powerful and greedy insurance comapnies. That is why I actually love John Edwards the most even though I will probably vote for Hilary. I am not African American like ard but ard speaks for me. I am a single mother and a professional woman and I really worry when men, like you are saying you are, think that clip with Hilary expressing a bit of anger is over some imaginary line. I do not believe it is and I hope many more people will end up agreeing with me. Thank God she's human enough to get angry. What she said made sense to me. I was not intimidated by that bit of human emotion into being unable to hear what she said. Please listen again yourself...for content!

What is unfortunate about this blog run-off is that we are reduced to name calling the only female candidate because she showed fire. Obama can eye roll, do nothing and comes off as a hero. My family lives in Ill.(we are african american) and even they question his slick "look at me- the first african american man to... Is it that hard for all of us to actually see beyond skin color and gender and just pick a candidate based on the issues this country is facing? The world dislikes America, the economy tanking under the weight of war spending and national debt, men and women will come home from war and be tossed in a corner;gas prices and job loss will cripple the middle class... and we will have a President who has barely voted on a single issue or worse one how only cares about the right. These next 4 years will prove to be the most difficult time in our history- the world is just waiting to see if the "dumb americans" pick a jr. senator or a george bush redux.... Hillary, John (either one) is better than the two leading candidates.

I failed to see an instance when McCain or Obama seemed angry in this debate. Certainly neither of them screamed into the microphone. She seemed as though she was going to explode. She has greatly exaggerated her views of the "change" she has produced. These 35 years of experience hasn't produced very many results. I don't believe she could get anything done in 4 years by losing her temper. These aren't "double standards" these are just facts. She shouldn't be defended just because she is a woman.

Based on what I saw in the debate, anyone who is leaning toward Hilarity doesn't have a leg to stand on.

Why is it negative campaigning to state voting records that can be verified if bloggers weren't too busy thinking their opinion was more important than facts. Obama has used his first term as senator to run for president and let the people of Illinois down. He has voted less than any other candidate in the US Senate, let alone look at his "present" votes in the state legislature. If he has achieved so much why doesn't he list his accomplishments? His latest comment shortly before the Iowa caucus "This is the last time, now or never or something to that effect" kinda sour notes for someone who wants to serve the country. If he doesn't get his way first time around he quits, doesn't sound like someone who wants politics of hope, just his way or he won't play. And I don't work for anyone connected to politics, just a concerned citizen that believes I should know what I am voting for, not how good an actor they are. After all Opry has been coaching him. Haven't you noticed how much he has improved since she took over.

Do you realize how early it is? Let Obama take the lead and get exposed. Anyone who wants a Democrat to win better hope doesn't win.