Political Punch

All politicians are the same animal. Obama is not any loftier than anybody. It's all a matter of political expedience. There is no such thing as being "principled". Politics is the art of compromise. Obama is preaching a surreal form of politics that does not exist and he knows that. what he knows for sure he's got tons of followers who await to be baptised.

What you want as a political candidate depends on where you are in popular opinion. Incumbents generally don't need or want to debate challengers. In 2004, before Jack ("Seven of Nine's" sex-addled ex-husband) Ryan's candidacy imploded, Obama considered himself the underdog and wanted the public exposure. In 2006, Clinton considered her opponent as the underdog and reluctantly debated him, giving him the least attention. Now, two years later, she either considers herself as the underdog or believes she can gain votes by more debates with her opponent. Once again, what you want depends on where you sit.

i guess obama is afraid to get a reality check. they've only had a single one-on-one debate. obama doesn't have the advantage of the pile-on, so i can understand why he's running scared.

Oh, heavens save us. 18 debates already...my goodness. Why can't they wait until a winner prevails? Debate the darn Republican. He shouldn’t have caved into her at all. He should’ve held his ground. She drones on forever like a schoolmarm with students in detention, (with her ole condescending self). If he had to do it because of stupid media pressure, it should be only one. Why must he satisfy the monster media?!

*sigh* that’s okay; I’ll mute her when she speaks as usual

After 18 debates and refusing to debate on Fox suddenly Hillary is demanding a debate a week...on Fox! I would ask her why she got far more funds from special interests then any other candidate in eighter party then claims she will fight against them. I wonder how she expects to run a country when she can't control her husband or control her $100,000,000 campaign budget. Why does she use tears to get votes? Is that commander-in-chief-like? And this is just a primary!

Hillary Clinton wants more debates because no one watches her speeches, whereas, if Barack Obama is on TV, there will be millions of viewers.

The point of whether to have one more debate or 5 more is moot. Sen. Obama is wisely choosing against wasting our time by having repetitious debates solely for the national exposure.

Watching Senator Clinton is, as other commenters have suggested, a waste of time. She is simply regurgitating market research reports summarizing what voters want to hear. Her actions have been historically based on elections, which is a far too short-sighted approach. America will likely continue to exist for thousands of years, and term-based politics will embed more bureaucratic tumors in our government like the filibuster or like unchecked signing statements.

We need a president who will tell us what we don't want to hear, if necessary. We need a president who will make plans that reach farther than just four or eight years. We need a president who sees our nation as an historian does. We need another founding father.

Any suggestions?

I cant wait to see the dems. elect Jimmy Carter again... Oh! I mean Obama, I could use another 4 years of Washington not getting anything done except disatrous policies that will shove the U.S. closer to 2nd world nation status then Americans will wise up and Give Republicans a good 12 year reign to save the nation AGAIN.

If Barack Obama continues to refuse participation in televised debates on Fox and ABC as well as the offers to do local debates these stations should impose a policy of no further one-on-one interviews. In addition, print and broadcast media should inform him that their reporters will no longer cover his events.

It is apparent that Mr. Obama only wants to campaign on his terms: by means of rallies and speeches at which questions cannot be posed and through paid media over which he has total control as to content.

If, as he has claimed, he is so concerned about communicating with all voters, then he should be agreeable to as many debates as are offered. This is the only format whereby voters have a way to compare the candidates side-by-side, without campaign filters and spin, as such it’s the most fair and equitable approach.

Katherine,

That is great about Illinois, however, I was discussing the US Senate and his tenure there.

Check out his voting record there and then get back to me.

Project Vote Smart has all the info.

Sorry, I've been following politics too long to believe this is a man of 'change'.

In fact, when you look who he surrounds himself with....it screams status quo.

If you haven't figured that out yet....you simply haven't done enough research.

I don't understand any of you libs.

Obama is a light weight. And Hillary is just Romney with a (D) after his name instead of a (R). Matter of fact, I think the "R" in HRC actually stands for Romney.

Man its good that Willard is gone.

Huck will vanquish either of them.

Vote Huck for change.

Vote Huck early and often.

Go HUCK Go.

Clinton is in dire need of free advertising because she is broke. We have watched 18 debates, and we have all heard her over-rehearsed yammering drone on ad infinitum. Voters need to familiarize with Obama. Clinton's name recognition and Bill connections have dragged this thing out long enough.

Obama does not have Edwards defending him any more. It was getting sick seeing Edwards attack Hillary and praising Obama. What was Edwards doing running just to support Obama in the debates. Edwards took the early states from Clinton

I am ambivalent about McCain. I want to know more aout the savings and loan scandal. I remember that it cost the US taxpayers over 500 billion in the 80's and that McCain was one of the Keating 5 and in the middle of the whole mess. Am I not remembering correctly or is this something that could be important in the election???

Mona, are Americans too stupid to know when Obama was elected to the Senate, and when the vote was taken?

Evidently, you knew the difference, as did many others on this forum. So, is everyone here smarter than the average American?

Spineless - a "present" vote in Illinois is a "yes" vote. It signifies that the legislator does not agree with the bill in its entirety. So, try another one.

Oh Hillary! Bill blew if for her in South Carolina. Do not blame Obama for not wanting to waste time with the Clintons -- hearing Hillary KACKLE! Hope that the Clinton era is finally coming to an end -- WITH ALL OF THEIR SURROGATES!!

I am supporting for more debate. It's not because that I am currently support Clinton, but the public has little knowledge about Sen. Obama.
For sure, the Obama supporter will tell that go to his web site, but that is different. Any strategic, advisor can be the author. The public need to know what is his thinking in person. After all, that what they are voting for.
I know it sound unfair, but let 's face it. The Repulican already have their candidate, and we are still fighting.
Whoever win the nomination process, will need to be able to bring the other side of the party into the general election. The supporter of the loser will not jump into the bang wagon, if they don't feel comfortable enough with the winner.

>

Oh yeah - just like he did against Bush in 2000, right?

Hooray, a much needed balanced story after the Obama cult posting from earlier today.

Bottom line is it's human nature to want to debate when you're the underdog. I think Obama's agreed to two at this point. But I certainly would not do it on the Clintons' terms. It's gonna drive her mad to not be in the driver's seat right now. She needs all the positive attention she can get, but he's got the momentum.

Obama's in the driver's seat for now no matter how much the Clintons try to spin it.

They'll try to call him a chicken, but so much of their crap is hitting the fan these days that not much sticks anymore. And a lot of it rightfully is landing back on them. South Carolina.

At the end of the day, folks, let's remember that we are the United States of America. We're better than throwing mud at each other and calling each other names. It's for this reason among many that I think Obama is what we need to move us in that healthy direction.

Great list Cortez, may I add that they took campaign contributions from China and transfered advanced military technology to them which now enables them to hit us with ICBM's. They also failed to respond to WTC1 bombing, the USS Cole, Kovar Towers, and allowed the bodies of our troops to be dragged thru the streets of Somalia with no reponse. They bombed Kosovo who was no threat to us just to get a scandal of Bills off the front page. These people belong in Pelican Bay Prison for the rest of their lives.

I look forward future to debates between Obama or Clinton vs. McCain. Especially the topic about who is ready to be commander-in-chief from day 1.

P Hill,

Check out Obama's 'not voting' votes and tell me he is going to stand up against big business.

He doesn't even have spine enough to vote on the subjects you know he will support after the election if President.

Please...it's just another Obama fairy tale.

Even Edwards was nailing Obama on the subject of having big business at the table on health care.

Spineless, hypocritical Obama is supposed to protect us from big business.....when he can't even protect himself from a vote! LOL

"McCain represents PRECISELY the opposite of why Obama (and even Clinton) are attracting such large crowds."

Yeah, duty, honor, integrity.

Nobama NoWay!

Michelle Obama was on the board of a private label US food company (Treehouse) that makes 16.1% of its 2006 sales to Walmart. Hardly the same as being on the Board at Walmart, sitting idly by while they actively fight unions. Or taking vacations on private jets with the owner of sleazy telemarketing firm InfoUSA (I was personally harassed by one of their reps just last week!). Or selling her campaign donor list as well as the Clinton library donor list to Walter Karl, a subsidiary of aforementioned sleazy marketing firm. Hillary's gonna fight back against the corporate machine. Right. And I have a nice bridge for sale.

If Barack refuses to debate Hillary,
she'll be forced to debate Bill on
nationwide TV. They can argue which
end of their personal ideological dipole should be the real force in
a Democrat administration. If she
"wins" we will never know.....if HE
"wins" she'll cry.

Nobama Noway!

Go McCain!

former granite stater - were you aware that Mc Cain refused to accept the early release offered him by his captors? Yup. He could have gone home FOUR YEARS earlier. But he didn't. He wouldn't leave his boys and refused to hand the enemy a propaganda victory. He endured FOUR ADDITIONAL YEARS of beatings and deprivation. I'll follow a leader like that. He understands, aspires to and mostly achieves the highest leadership ideals.

You are obviously all Obama lovers. You have nothing good to say about Hillary so why don't you just shut it! I relish the chance to get to see another debate so that I can see Obama stutter and stammer. He's not so great when you take away his chance to orate. So he can give a good speech,big deal. I can give a good speech about hope and peace etc. I sure as heck am not qualified to be president and neither is he!

Posted by: lani bing | Feb 7, 2008 4:47:27 PM

Hillary CERTAINLY isn't qualified. She needs to come clean about so many things, there just is not enough time to do it.

My Dad is a pilot. Does that mean I am qualified to fly?

I am not a Mc Cain fan, but I think in a McCain/Obama match up, Obama will get his hat and his ass handed to him at the same time and he will never know what happened. Obama has loads of dirt that will come out in the first shake of the carpet....If McCain learned nothing else in the Hanoi Hilton, it is how to hold up himself and be ruthless against someone who is trying to defeat you.

Even Hillary would have to "Vince" McCain to assure a victory.

To Katherine, there is a difference on taking a stand and misleading the American voter. When we all watch the debates and listen to his stand on the Iraq War he intentionally leaves out the fact that he was not in a position to vote. Instead he misleads thousands of Americans into thinking Hillary voted "yes" and I VOTED "no"

Muchas gracias, Cortez, for reminding us of the FACTS on the Clinton White House. You are very up on the specifics, as well - tho I recall most of what you have chronicled was in the major newspapers. This is what we will hear this fall w a Clinton nomination! It will be totally over for the Dems -- worse ever than Gore & Kerry. The Dems will lose the supposedly "unloseable" election. I'm also happy that you hearkened back to the drug use in the White House. I know SS agents who confirmed that at the time --- it's clear that the Clintons were aware (and possibly participants??) There was so much dirt swept under those heavy Oriental rugs. It will all be aired again by the non-McCain associated Republicans who will do everything in their power to prevent HRC from returning to 1600 Penn. Ave. They'll give Barack Obama a hard time, too - no doubt about it. But, he at least gave up drugs when he grew up, loves his wife, and attends church regularly. He's actually a regular guy, and a lot of people (including Clinton campaign principals) took money from Tony Rezko - if that's his worst sin, he will be a choirboy compared to HRC. McCain also has a pretty clean past, best we know of it. Thanks again for reminding the millions of Americans who have forgotten a short 10 years ago!!

Yes, nailed by old man McCain. You don't think a man scorched by the amnesty debate isn't going to be able to pick apart Obama's contradictions on that topic? LOL

You also forget he is a 'Maverick' candidate that democrats could see themselves voting for in past elections. He has made several attempts to work with Democrats since then.

He can also go after Obama and his ethics issues on his house, while poor folk froze, his 'not voting' votes, and the funding the war while being against it, isn't really being against the war, and neither is threatening Iran in debates.

And yeah, McCain is a lot more ruthless than you probably know, while Obama has a lot to exploit. You seem to forget McCain was swiftboated by Bush and then towed the party line just for this chance at the White House. A man who fought to leave other POW in Vietnam, to tow the party line back then, is still a ruthless man. Obama won't know what hit him if the Republican machine and McCain get ahold of him. And psst....have you noticed how quiet it has been for Obama from the Republicans? Not a good sign.... ;)

Hillary loves how Democrats take on the toughest issue facing our country unfortunately the Democrat solution is always implement a socialism solution. Big government program followed by massive tax increases. Socialism is not what this country was founded on and Democrats are Socialists.

Mona, if Iraq were a non issue, it would not have been raised as a question in the debates.

HRC could have made it a non issue by stating why she supported invasion, when a third of Americans viewed it as a mistake, and now does not.

There is nothing wrong with changing a position. There is something wrong with trying to play both sides to the middle by stating it by parsing words to create a position that never existed.

And to those who say Obama was not in the Senate at the time of the vote - that is correct. However, Obama took a public stand, which he did not have to do.

Mona
Welcome to the life that we on the right face every day. Clinton got all the great press and the media covered for him. Bush has been getting beaten to death for doing many of the same things that Clinton did (warrantless wiretaps, military use without UN approval etc.) Hell, it was Clinton's EO that declared regime change in Iraq as our policy.

Anyway, now the Clintons are getting a feel for what it is like EVERY DAY to be on the right.

I would agree to a debate if she would agree to release some of those white house records about her experience she has been bragging about but never showing any proof and blaming her husband for not releasing them!

Where do these politicians get all their millions, I wonder. Hilary wasn't a millionaire just a few years ago, I know that for sure.

With all due respect Obama isn't a breath of fresh air. He had to sue candidates off of the rolls to win.

His house and the Rezko's land next door reek of stench of 'politics as usual'.....and worse. He knew Rezko was being looked at, yet his first call when his family found their home is to Rezko. That means you are calling the $$$ man.

Most men have enough honor to buy their children's homes.

Obama doesn't.

He doesn't even have enough honor to say anything past....'we dotted all the 'i's and crossed all the 't's...'

Sorry, but I really see nothing that has changed in Illinois. Nothing.

Not even the influence peddling that bought his children their home or the poor who froze, changed. Thanks to Obama and Rezko.

NEWSLASH: Obama has debated Clinton 18 times. Sheesh.

Obama's going to get nailed by old white McCain? What a joke.

McCain represents PRECISELY the opposite of why Obama (and even Clinton) are attracting such large crowds.

The only policy issue that isn't clear for me - despite the question being asked at the last debate and about 5 times by Stephanopolous - is how Clinton plans to enforce her health mandate.

All you who want 5 more debates: I challenge you to name some other issue that isn't already crystal clear for both candidates.

NObama doesn't want to debate because that's where his weaknesses are exposed. He has to keep up the image to the easliy fooled Obama zombies that he will give them something new and different in the White House. The truth is, he IS the establishment candidate and sold out on his democratic party by touting the republican ideals. A vote for him is a vote for more of the same. America, wake up...

In response to Katherine, Obama's position about the Iraq War is the most non issue in this debate yet everyone seems to give it life. He was not a U.S. Senator when the resolution was voted on. If he was already a U.S. Senator not a state senator then he should get all bragging rights to that but he wasn't in a position to make a difference. Its like a voter who complains about everything but doesn't vote!!!

Oops, sorry GetReal. That was to Lani Bing. And I dont even stammer. . .usually.

Hill needs the free airtime...She 'loaned' $10million to her campaign to get it started from her Senate coffers and now another 5...Wonder where those $$ came from-arms dealers, lobbyists, big pharma!!!! Why would Obama use his draw to give her attention...he is nice but not a fool.
Debates are a yawn and everything has been covered Ad Nauseam.
To make matters clearer..hclinton is a policy wonk from the old school---people want CHANGE...You hire a wonk -You elect a LEADER. Obama's the ONE

I agree with '2009 Where Are You', Obama is going to get nailed against McCain.

The press have been hands off and he has proven he really isn't all that great on his toes in a debate. He goes for the "feel good" applause line about not wanting to scapegoat an entire race of people. Yet, contradicts himself in the same answer by saying that they can't continue to 'undermine US wages'.

So, he essentially lies to black folks about the fact that Latinos were used to undermine their unions in LA. When they asked for a very reasonable pay raise...in the VERY city it happened within (just ask the Janitor's union). Simply to pander to the Latino vote, which he then immediately throws under the bus with the wages quote.

He will be torn apart by the Republican machine. When he contradicts himself in the same 'feel good' answer, over the very people he is pandering to.

Ugh!

Is anyone really listening to this guy?

Let's face it- if you're ahead, you don't need more debates to state your case. If you're behind, and cash-strapped to boot, you need the exposure, just to keep yourself in front of the electorate. Personally, I don't need to see any more; I've watched what, sixteen already? If you are not familiar with their stands on the issues, go to their websites. They are all spelled out clearly enough.

GetReal- the stammering just says the man can give an answer to a question without giving a canned response. And, surely, you are not suggesting that "stammering or stuttering" has anything to do with good or bad policy ideas, intelligence, or the ability to make sound executive decisions. Grow up. . . And if anyone doesnt know his policies, it is their own apathy causing this-- listen to the debate -- or better yet, get involved enough to visit the websites of these candidates.

I really appreciate this article!!! I am a Hillary supporter and I suppose I could defend her but the fact that this article reflects on BOTH their positions around debates is so refreshing!!! Thank you ABC!! I have never been SO angry with the media until this democratic primary. Everyone especially MSNBC gives Obama a free pass on everything. I sometimes understand it to be they are afraid to scrutinize Obama for fear of being labeled racist but its okay to attack Hillary. After all it is easier to fear a black person than it is to fear a woman.

Ok, Hillary wants debates, basically,she wants free TV time, now that she is broke. Let us first debate the following:

Interesting: Hillary Clinton has been telling America that she is the most qualified candidate for president based on her 'record,' which she says includes her eight years in the White House as First Lady - or 'co-president' - and her seven years in the Senate. Here is a reminder of what that record includes: - As First Lady, Hillary assumed authority over Health Care Reform, a process that cost the taxpayers over $13 million. She told both Bill Bradley and Patrick Moynihan, key votes needed to pass her legislation, that she would 'demonize' anyone who opposed it. But it was opposed; she couldn't even get it to a vote in a Congress controlled by her own party. (And in the next election, her party lost control of both the House and Senate.) - Hillary assumed authority over selecting a female Attorney General. Her first two recommendations, Zoe Baird and Kimba Wood, were forced to withdraw their names from consideration. She then chose Janet Reno. Janet Reno has since been described by Bill himself as 'my worst mistake.' - Hillary recommended Lani Guanier for head of the Civil Rights Commission. When Guanier's radical views became known, her name had to be withdrawn. - Hillary recommended her former law partners, Web Hubbell, Vince Foster, and William Kennedy for positions in the Justice Department, White House staff, and the Treasury, respectively. Hubbell was later imprisoned, Foster committed suicide, and Kennedy was forced to resign. - Hillary also recommended a close friend of the Clintons, Craig Livingstone, for the position of director of White House security. When Livingstone was investigated for the improper access of up to 900 FBI files of Clinton enemies (“Filegate”) and the widespread use of drugs by White House staff, both Hillary and her husband denied knowing him. FBI agent Dennis Sculimbrene confirmed in a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in 1996, both the drug use and Hillary's involvement in hiring Livingstone. After that, the FBI closed its White House Liaison Office, after serving seven presidents for over thirty years. - In order to open “slots” in the White House for her friends the Thomasons (to whom millions of dollars in travel contracts could be awarded), Hillary had the entire staff of the White House Travel Office fired; they were reported to the FBI for 'gross mismanagement' and their reputations ruined. After a thirty-month investigation, only one, Billy Dale, was charged with a crime - mixing personal money with White House funds when he cashed checks. The jury acquitted him in less than two hours. - Another of Hillary's assumed duties was directing the 'bimbo eruption squad' and scandal defense: ---- She urged her husband not to settle the Paula Jones lawsuit. ---- She refused to release the Whitewater documents, which led to the appointment of Ken Starr as Special Prosecutor. After $80 million dollars of taxpayer money was spent, Starr's investigation led to Monica Lewinsky, which led to Bill lying about and later admitting his affairs. ---- Then they had to settle with Paula Jones after all. ---- And Bill lost his law license for lying to the grand jury ---- And Bill was impeached by the House. ---- And Hillary almost got herself indicted for perjury and obstruction of justice (she avoided it mostly because she repeated, 'I do not recall,' 'I have no recollection,' and 'I don't know' 56 times under oath). - Hillary wrote 'It Takes a Village,' demonstrating her Socialist viewpoint. - Hill ary decided to seek election to the Senate in a state she had never lived in. Her husband pardoned FALN terrorists in order to get Latino support and the New Square Hassidim to get Jewish support. Hillary also had Bill pardon her brother's clients, for a small fee, to get financial support. - Then Hillary left the White House, but later had to return $200,000 in White House furniture, china, and artwork she had stolen. - In the campaign for the Senate, Hillary played the 'woman card' by portraying her opponent (Lazio) as a bully picking on her. - Hillary's husband further protected her by asking the National Archives to withhold from the public until 2012 many records of their time in the White House, including much of Hillary's correspondence and her calendars. (There are ongoing lawsuits to force the release of those records.) - As the junior Senator from New York, Hillary has passed no major legislation. She has deferred to the senior Senator (Schumer) to tend to the needs of New Yorkers, even on the hot issue of medical problems of workers involved in the cleanup of Ground Zero after 9/11. - Hillary's one notable vote; supporting the plan to invade Iraq, she has since disavowed. Quite a resume’. Sounds more like an organized crime family’s rap sheet.

The Clintons are crooks, always have been always will be. Obama is a breath of fresh air. Lets avoid sliding backward in the Clinton slime and elect a fresh, young leader with inspirational ideas.

What's new... Her positions change constantly.

He's proposed 2 more debates in the next month, and she'll agree unless she starts to pull ahead in the polls.

BTW -- rush limbaugh is encouraging his supporters to donate to Billary's campaign so that the repubs have an easy road to the white house.

We've heard all that we need to hear. Evident of a last minute attempt to get free advertising.

Madrigal771 - Your brain should be telling you that Obama is stronger against McCain than Clinton is. If it's Clinton, then the Rush Limbaugh-types will unite behind McCain just because they hate Clinton, and McCain will get all of the independents, with young voters staying home as usual.

If it's Obama, then the Republicans will be less motivated, the independents will go Democrat, and a whole wave of new voters will show up (and be brought into the party for years to come).

That's a formula that both your heart and your brain should appreciate. All of the superdelegates (who want to win above all else) are going to figure that out too and shift to Obama.

That last one-on-one was all most people needed to see. What more could they debate about at this point? Does she want another debate like the one in SC?

Give me a Break, Hillary has been very specific on the ISSUES however some people have been missing in action and have no brains

Okay folks; me again. You can go ahead and blame me for this debate deal as well. Let’s see: gas, milk, employment, war, healthcare, stock market crashes dating back to ’29, illegal immigration, education,… did I cover them all.

Well, Dick and I are about finished with our work. In fact, we might retire early since no one seems to care or want us around. You got some guy going around like a Cult Leader saying he is going to CHANGE the world, but hasn’t stated how, where, why, or who is footing the tab. Good luck with that one.

Adios amigos,

BIG YAWN...did someone say something about more debates? I think the lines of demarcation are solidly drawn. You've either seen the 18+ prior debates or you've done your own due diligence--we've only been in hyper-politico mode for the past 2 years. By this time, we should all be well informed voters with a clear vision of what we want in '08. I'm for CHANGE.

Desperation?

That is going to be in November when Obama is up against McCain and he looks like Gomer Pile next to Dwight Eisenhower.

Clear Channel Media Monsters are just holding back the 10 tons of dirt they have on Barack, and come September 1rst, it's WWIII.

The Rezko scandal will suddenly have 'brand new details never before published'.

The University of Chicago Hospital rip off and pay raise - that will be headline news come September.

Ethics Bill? He had nottin' to do with that bill and come September, the entire country is going to get an ear full of the details on how he ran a misleading and dishonest ad more 6 months.

Nuclear Regulation Bill for his donor Exelon. It was an Excellent non-regulating bill for Exelon - and the Repos are going to scream POLITICS AS USUAL - NO BETTER THAN CLINTON.

Demonizing Wal-Mart, were you Obama? When your wife made almost $200K from partnering with Wal-Mart. Sure she quit, but you ran ads about Clinton while keeping mum on Michelle. September will be HYPOCRIT month, and guess who will be the poster boy?

And guess how many gullible Americans will be falling for these ads, and oh so many others unbeknownst to us now?

100's you can be sure.

So keep supporting the Barack. You can only really run for President once in the Democratic party (The Repos desperately ran Regan two or three times before he made it) and lose. So his political sky-jumping will end at the ripe ole age of 46.

Should've been content to build up some time in office and some defense on the qualification question.

25 years in office, powerful Armed Services leader, military hero with honor and distinction? Obama is going to beat McCain? I am a Democrat for godsakes and I don't even think he deserves to defeat McCain out of shear experience and nerve to vote when it counted most.

130 Sissy No Votes? Against a War Hero?

Good luck. You'll need it when Obama is searching for a new job. Maybe all you supporters can come to his aid and find him one. It darn sure won't be President.

If there were to be any more debates between Senators Clinton and Obama what would they debate about, which one is the biggest socialist?

HRC is simply looking for a forum that will allow her to talk endlessly in circles. I get the feeling she likes to hear her self talk. I don't know why Wolf Blitzer and co. allowed her to be long winded on every answer. All she does is muddle the issues. I know that's a tactic on her part. The longer I talk, the smarter I sound. Sorry HRC, this voter is not fooled.

Obama is scared that Hillary has better stands and arguments on the issues , he is a coward, why not except the debates? Why? because he knows he has weak policies and is all talk, he speaks out of his ass and is not specific, even i can deliver an inspiring speech but it doesn't mean I'm the right candidate to be president, merits matter and Obama falls short, Name one thing he has accomplish. Thats why America elected an idiot and now they are suffering the consequences. We as Americans voted for BUSH because he was likable right? Not on his merits and what he had done for society, AMERICA don't make the same stupid mistake VOTE with your brain and not with your heart.

the fl/mi "wins" were wins, and the obamaites would be screaming that if their guy had won. and he doesn't want to debate any more because he's very bad at it and he hopes the voters in the upcoming states won't have watched his bad performances in the earlier debates, all the stammering.

regis, all Obama's policies are on his website. Since you have internet access and apparently, know how to read, what's stopping you?

How about a debate between Bill and Hillary?

She can say why she supported the war; he can say why he opposed it. She can say why she is critical of Kazahkstan's government; he can say why he loves Kazahkstan's government. She can say No Child Left Behind is a great law; he can say it was a train-wreck. She can say her campaign is all about her; he can say her campaign is all about him.

Obama held his own in the last debate, lani. He's not a policy wonk like HRC, but he won on the Iraq issues, when HRC wouldn't admit she'd made a mistake in supporting the war, or that she did so because, for a New York senator not to have done so would have been political suicide.

Obama should debate since we know nothing about his policies...great speaker....Texas won't by his crap

If anyone really believes that Clinton wants more debates to focus on the issues they're a dolt. There is no better publicity then having 5 debates when the money starts to run out.

If Hillary wants to give the voters of Maine and elsewhere a chance to get to know her, then she should just open up the Clinton presidential archives and disclose all of the donors to the Clinton library.

That would tell us something we don't already know, unlike another debate.

You are obviously all Obama lovers. You have nothing good to say about Hillary so why don't you just shut it! I relish the chance to get to see another debate so that I can see Obama stutter and stammer. He's not so great when you take away his chance to orate. So he can give a good speech,big deal. I can give a good speech about hope and peace etc. I sure as heck am not qualified to be president and neither is he!

After 18 debates - I have watched them all -I don't need to hear anything more from Hilary Rodham Clinton.......

Shameless. What could they possibly debate that isn't already well-known?

This is just like the Nevada lawsuit thing and the FL/MI "wins" - reeks of desperation.