It was at Ayers' house that Obama's state Senate candidacy was launched in 1995; Obama continued to serve on a nonprofit board with Ayers after the Times article appeared.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/04/the_rules_change_for_obama.html

Must read, more importantly for those who are still undecided.

Did McCain just blame Bush for screw ups in Irak?

He usually attributes setbacks in Irak to the failed "Rumsfeld Strategy." And does not mention Bush....ever.

But today he added GWB to the mix, i.e., the Rumsfeld/Bush Strategy screwed things up.. So it looks like he is now distancing himself from Bush and Rumsfeld.

I believe that the Wednesday night debate, moderated by ABC, has succeeded in lowering the level of political discussion to new lows. And this has nothing to do with whom I favor. This has to do with an intelligent presentation and discussion of issues relevant to the future of our nation. For example, the debates managed to make the Ayres issue one of McCain's prime talking points on this Sunday's "This Week".
Oh, by the way, I didn't see any of this Sunday's round table participants on "This Week" wearing a lapel flag pin. Should the question be asked whether the participants love America or are proud to be Anerican? I don't think so, but that was one of the questions raised at Wednesday's debates.

To Jack: For your information the undecided are not interested on "Ayers issue". They have different issues to ponder, which will make their life better, of which will drive them to make their final decision.

Character of a President is very important. Obama's links to his pastor, Resko, Ayers, Farakhan and many more radical people should make people think twice is this the person whom we want to be our president.

Vote for anyone except OBAMA

Peace - I am sure you will not vote for someone who has links with the people who cuase 911. Will you?

Ayers set bombs and attacked the Pentagon, the Capitol and other public buildings. Obama has ties with him and I am sure lot of Americans will not vote for the same reason for Obama.

A great show today! I thought that the interview with Sen.McCain had the perfect tone and was extremely informative. AS usual, the round table group was worth hearing. The new set and graphics are a welcome update, as well.

One last thought about the ABC-moderated debate which came to me watching Mr. Stephanopolous' interview today. I think the overall problem with the line of questioning followed by Mr.S and Mr.Gibson at the debate was that they used great (and inportant)'interview' questions. However, in a debate a moderator is supposed to 'moderate' the discussion so that the topics compare and contrast the candidates rather than confront the candidate as a devil's advocate. Today's interview with Sen.McCain simply shows how useful that technique is when used by a skilled interviewer like Mr.Stephanopoulos in the proper setting.

Wow George. You blew the debate and then tried to justify it somehow. You and your roundtable circled the wagons instead of admitting to trivilizing the debate process.

I watched the debate and I was shaking my head in dismay at the poort effort on your part for the first hour -- like most the country.

Admit you messed up and move on.

All this coverage of the Pennsylvania primary and no one in the media -- I mean no one, local or national -- is mentioning that in this state registered independents canNOT vote in the primary -- conservative estimates that that's 30% of the electorate -- so how are they figured into "who won/who lost/who would carry PA in November?"

The moderator, George , is trying to appear as if his conduct at least week's debate was not deplorable. The elderly and disconnected gang that appeared on his program this morning did not do much to dispell my thoughts that these talking heads are far removed from reality.

When was the last time any one of these folk talked to a person making under 30K? May be they should spend more time talking to the mail-room clerk. There has been much talk about elitism of late and, not just this network, but others as well, appear so out of touch with main street. They pontificate about what the average voter might be thinking but have no sense of what an average voter looks like.

What has become distressing is the fact that networks and cable stations have begun to manufacture news. For instance, voters who look and think like me, do not care about a lapel pin. It does not alay the fear about job loss or feeding one's family.

Finally, George worked for the Clintons and any appearance that he was taking sides casts the network in a bad light. And every body that have I have spoken to thought he was doing everything he could to help Hillary.

Karl - Do not cry becoz Obama got cornered.

We need to know about a person's character before making him/her a president. Obama's character is flawed and it got out during the debate.

Vote anyone except OBAMA. Cannot afford to have Radical people in white house.

Since Obama admitted he would raise the cap on social security, the internet is buzzing about his raising taxes on people making more than $100K. Problem is, the example of a fire fighter + a teacher paying more taxes is wrong.

The cap is per person, not per household. Unless the firefighter and the teacher each make >100K, their taxes are not going up with this one.

My husband hits the cap every year. Even HE thinks it is unfair. So regressive.

Agree with "Greg in Canada", and then some!

George, why the wagon-circling about the debate on today's show?

That debate moderation job you and Charlie Gibson did was simply put the single worst and most embarrassing moment in debate leadership I've ever seen -- and I am a habitual debate watcher. I'd rank it worse than the job Gwen Ifill did a few years back. Thankfully for her you've now outpaced her in "worst", as I hold her in high regard as a journalist for PBS's News Hour.

To have the entire first half and them some up just on questions of a stupid and needless nature, you guys should be ashamed.

Why not try to raise the level of political discourse? Why not cover some policy issues and then throw a question at the end asking either if they'd like to comment on the petty stuff?

Sadly, you took that debate to a new low in American journalism with the incessant and petty line of questioning to both candidates right out the gate, and never let up.

Say you blew it, and move on.

If you don't somehow get why you blew it, then spend some time reading the criticisms of your "performance".

And boy oh boy you must know by now they are out there.

Good point, Paul. George Will made several egregious mis-statements about Obama's positions and things he said (or didn't say) in the debate. George S. didn't "moderate" McCain at all. He let him ramble and dissemble and filibuster. The show lived down to my recently lowered expectations.

After watching This Week, it is clear to me that the Roundtable members never contemplated that the freedom trilogy of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" encompassed the possible election of an African-American male to the Presidency of the United States. The words of some, like the Roundtable members, reflect an escalating dread, as this prospect emerges. Their disparaging comments about and characterizations of Sen. Obama illustrate an animus toward this prosepct they are no longer able or willing to suppress. Had I been unable to see the faces on the television screen, I would have sworn I was listening to FOX, not ABC.
On a related note, the recent democratic debate moderated by Gibson and Stephanopoulos represents the ultimate abdication of professional responsibility and is irreconcilably at odds with ABC's professed allegiance to the highest journalistic standards. ABC should be ashamed. Asking Sen. Obama whether Rev. Wright loves America was an absurd triviality. Someone who had no knowledge of the U.S., and whose first introduction to America was the recent ABC-hosted debate, would wrongly conclude from the first hour of the debate that there were few substantive problems in our country that required the attention of the two remaining Democratic candidates for the presidency. Most Americans easily recognized this strange irony, with two notable exceptions, Gibson and Stephanopoulos.
ABC News, you owe the American people an apology. This Week, you do too.

I have to agree with the consensus opinion on the recent debates hosted by George Stephanapolis & Charles Gibson. It was pot shot city. The truth is it got us no closer to finding out who could best represent America as our President. These debates are important but ABC and other news agencies only scratch the surface of the important issues. No effort is made to ask questions that will require in depth answers.

Instead of creating endless soundbite moments when the real election is finally here in the fall why not stage entire debates with one issue at a time discussed. One entire 2 hour debate on the economy, one on environmental issues, one on Security issues which would include our role in Iraq, how we deal with Iran, where the candidates stand on the issue of constitutional protections vs. the needs of our law enforcement and intelligence communities. These debates could be moderated by Charles Gibson or George S. but also have a panel of experts that would provide instant 'fact checking.' This would be the only way to put the candidates on the spot to present a clear and well detailed plan of action for their time at the White House. These endless superficial soundbite moments and trivial questions are pointless and do not advance our ability to pick the best candidate for the job.

I meant "Good point txdemo." Each individual needs to break the $100k mark for the payroll tax change. And George Will SURELY knows that! Shame on him.

This week this Sunday GS and others seemed to say that the blowup over the debate was just Obama supporters and MoveOn.org. Are you sure? In my informal office poll which included supporters of each of the candidates, everyone, and I mean everyone, thought that the worst performance of the debate was on the part of the moderators. Face it. I like Charlie and George, but they should go to school on this. People are tired of the flag lapel pin type of political bull.

I think the ABC debate was a good one. We need to know about candidates's character before making them presidents. Obama has a flawed one and it came out clear in the debate.

Moreover Obama also did fair well in the later part of the debate when issues related to Economy, Iraq and others were asked.

Overall Obama failed in the debate.

Since for some reason the ABC site will not allow me to post the following remarks on Wednesday's debate I am posting them here.

I am pleased to weigh in on this sideshow. (I won't even call it a debate.) From the very first "question" that wasn't even a question to the very end it was obvious that ABC News had some ulterior motives here (or they need to seriously get control of their "talent"). The fact that this fiasco was carried out in Philadelphia with the articles of the Constitution being read during the segment intros is sickening. The entire thing was more like an entertainment news segment with lots of questions posed in a way to capture "gotcha" moments. I mean really, "Do you think Reverend Wright is as much a patriot as yourself?" What?! I am amazed that nobody at ABC took the time to consider that in the interest of keeping the debate fair and balanced having George Stephanopolous as one of the moderators posed more than a minor conflict of interest. But my biggest beef rests solely with Charlie Gibson. Any middle schooler knows that a debate consists of a question posed to one of the participants, a specific time allotted for the individual's response, time alotted for rebuttal, and then (at the unbiased discretion of the moderator) perhaps a follow up question is asked or the individual is permitted to clarify their position. In NO WAY is the moderator given the leeway to interrupt the participants during their allotted response time. (I count this happening at least 15 times on the official transcript, and unfortunately for you, George, you are responsible for at least two such interruptions.) Certainly the moderator is NOT permitted to attempt to chide, cajole, or reframe the respondent's answers to reach said moderator's pre-determined answer. I lost count of how many times this technique was used! Charlie, you need to stick to interviewing starlets and pop stars. You did more to ruin the face of journalism than that fellow who plagiarized his reports in the New York Times. If you send me your address, I will gift wrap a copy of Robert's Rules of Order for you. I cannot believe you squandered an opportunity to have a serious discussion on such important topics as the war in Iraq and the testimony of Gen. Petraeous, the economy, the fact that 25% of New Orleans citizens are homeless years after Hurricane Katrina, nuclear weapons and Iran, China and Tibet, our country's educational and health care systems, taxes, poverty, foreign relations, etc., in favor of lapel pins, dated and tenuous relationships to political outsiders, relatively minor political gaffes and more when what the country deserves is to know what these people THINK not how they respond to "truth or dare" style questions.

Sen. McCain says he’s going to be the farmer’s “worst nightmare” and Mr. Stephanopoulos lets it pass. Sen. McCain performs a riff on some well-practiced talking points on the Ayers issue and Mr. Stephanopoulos, allows it to run virtually unchallenged as if it’s political improvisation. George Will thinks it’s capital gains tax that’s the real deal gaffe and brings it around twice. Mr. Donaldson and Ms. Roberts suggest that Sen. Obama's supporters need to grow up, when they should have said network news leaders have lost their journalistic mojo and will soon lose their relevancy. Circle the wagons as you will, but it’s over for this type of nonsense. You’re essentially lost and irrelevant because you insist on covering this election as if it were a reality TV show, replete with taped whisperings and nefarious alliances. We know better.

I watched in amazement at the interview with McCain today. After the debacle of the debate, i.e., flag pin means patriotism, I could not believe that McCain wasn't called out for not wearing one. Or is it just assumed that McCain is patriotic and anyone with the name Barak Hussein Obama isn't.

Seems your newscast is just as "fair and balanced" as that other one. Fox.

Every Knows the Candidates Platforms and their what they wish they could do if elected.

This debate was the best ever. People got to meet the real candidates. The real People they are. What they are made of. How they handle themselves. what kind of Character they have.

Question your choice of candidate if you feel they did not do in the debate. if you learned something about them you do not like, then thank goodness you seen it now.

Don't run your mouth off about the people hosting or asking questions. It is not their fault you candiate said or acted like they did.

Time to Wake up and Grown up Americans.

We need a strong President. One who can answer difficult questions, who does not bulk under pressure. Who knows their stuff. Who is Proud to be an American. Who is Proud to Show they support their country the people. Some one who will defend you and me, and this Great Country, with their life if need be.

Obama is not the one. Obama is not cut of to be president. He has proven that.

A vote for America is a vote against Obama.

Sharon - I agree with you 100%. Everyone knows the policy statments of Obama and Hillary. You can infact find them online if you want on their website.

Character of a person is very important and this debate accomplished that.

Sorry to say, Obama's character is flawed and radical.

When ever I have heard this show talk about taxes it seems they argue to keep the elite medias' taxes from going up. Maybe we should look deeper into capital gains increase revenue from decreasing rates. Perhaps this means they were hiding these gains until the tax decreased. This is still just minor issue. The payroll tax cap needs to be eliminated, this only effects individual incomes and will have no effect on average individual and certainly will not negatively affect police, firemen or teachers as Hillary and George Will assert.

The show today was evidence of why I watch every week. However, that non-stop spinning, moving, starbursting and shimmering logo in the bottom right hand corner has got to go. It is distracting and aggravating. It not only displays disrespect to those who come on the show to give their perspectives, it is an insult to the intelligence of the viewers. Shows of this callibre should bring attention to the content they present, not serve as overt advertising for the network and its websight.

I would like to make some observations about today's roundtable discussion:

First, it would have been refreshing in this climate of "post-criticism repositioning" by candidates to hear news journalists take responsibility for legitimate criticism offered by their audience. While much criticism exaggerates the offenses committed, there is usually a kernel of truth in at least some of it. I would have appreciated hearing four people whom I respect in the news world acknowledge that perhaps the superficial questioning on topics which frankly most of us are sick of hearing about regardless of whom we support in this election went on more than a little too long.

Secondly, an interesting and logically fallacious argument was offered to defend this line of questioning. There seemed to be general agreement with Kokie Roberts' assertion that people don't decide whom to vote for based on the issues but rather on whom they "like" and/or whom they "trust", and therefore, the questions which were asked on Wednesday evening were appropriate. Well, wow, what do we do with people in this country who, for some strange reason prove the fallaciousness of that statement? This is a universal affirmative statement which (1) logically cannot be shown to be true. I am a person and, speaking only for myself, can tell you that I am KEENLY interested in the issues as well as in whether I believe I can trust one of these candidates more than the others. This is all that needs to be shown to successfully refute your claim. While I perfectly understand that decisions are not made by voters who are just like me, it seems you are ready to say that I am just like every other voter, and all of us together are really not interested in the issues.

Further, you all, (2) offer as the only support for this claim that voters recognize the president has not much to do with how decisions about issues are really made. Really? The last eight years, it seems, show that the person in the White House would seem to at least seriously challenge this supporting claim. Yet, you do not explore this topic in any depth, either, but rather, offering no real substantive evidence for the truth of either of these claims, assume their truth, and serve these assumed truths up as justification for 45 minutes of questioning which cannot and does not offer any further elucidation on the subject of either Obama's patriotism or Hillary Clinton's basic truthfulness.

Your argument, rather, implicitly patronizes those of us who objected to your persistent, unhelpful line of questioning on Wednesday evening, and in a way makes your seemingly honest reflections this morning seem more like after-game rationalizations for points lost.

Further, you have characterized American voters at large in ways which are hugely offensive to those of us who tune in to your program and others fairly regularly to learn something about these candidates' views on issues which seriously affect our lives. You reveal to me that you may be as out of touch with at least some of this nation's voters as those among the candidates whom you would like to characterize as elitist.

You know, in my work, I make the best guess about how things are and should be. I act on what I think is the best information, and I try to take my hits a bit graciously when I'm wrong. This isn't easy, and I don't always manage to do this well. You would gain much credibility with me and with other serious, intelligent voters if you would just take your hits, learn from your mistakes and move on to learn more about how some of us voters actually DO think. I am a teacher in a small, private college in Washington State. I wrestle with my students every day about their responsibilities as citizens to take issues seriously and to rise above this kind of simplistic, self-protective conversation. Your collective professional judgment earlier this week in choosing to keep us all mired in the quick-sand of whether the wearing or non wearing of a lapel pin honestly makes someone more or less patriotic, and whether overstating the danger of one's previous experiences makes one generally less truthful, combined with your seeming inability this morning honestly to face the limits of your own logic have made my job just a little bit harder.

Added to all this, and I apologize for the length of this response to your program, I have watched over the last several months John McCain, Hillary Clinton, AND Barack Obama wrestle with their tempers in the face of persistent, difficult, and sometimes, frankly, gratuitously sensational questioning. I have no problem with the idea that Obama needs to take it on the chin like everyone else, but let's not lose sight of the fact that every one of these considerably-talented persons has had and likely will continue to have this very human struggle. Let's not just say ONE of these people may not make a good president because of this defensiveness. If the criticism holds for Obama, then it needs to hold across the board for each of the other two. Let's face it: ALL of them (and all of us as humans) must deal with this problem.

On a positive note, I appreciated the content of George's interview with John McCain. Your questions were questions about the issues, and you graciously allowed McCain time to make his positions as well as some of his reasoning clear to the audience. This is JUST what we need. Tough questions along these lines are helpful to the audiences you serve, and I would agree that both Obama and Clinton need to take responsibility for their own answers to these kinds of questions as well. Unfortunately, all of this brings me back to last Wednesday evening and an opportunity almost completely lost: Clinton made some enormously important assertions about how she would deal with Iran and other countries in the Middle East in the face of any threat to Israel. Yet, by the time you all got to this part of the conversation, the evening was nearly over, and most of our public conversation since last Wednesday evening has been about (1) Obama's ability to stand the heat in the kitchen and (2) criticism of ABC's handling of the event. As Americans we are better than this, and we owe it to our children and their children simply to remember this.

Thank you for hearing my sentiments.

I do not know why Obama supporters are bitter... they cannot take a small amount heat on their candidate.

I think this is nothing new, the black people are kind of that way ... blaming everything on race. If they do not get something blame it on race. If they fail on something blame it on race.

Grow up Obama supporters. Admit, your candidate failed in the debate and move on.

I was curious if as a "journalist" George Stephanopoulos would try to discuss the debate controversy in balanced way but he again showed his lack of journalist integrity by stacking the discussion panel with friends on whose opinion he knew he count. Where are the critics? George Stephanopoulos is frankly a hypocrite or even a coward. If some newsmaker is on his show he makes sure that the critics viewpoint is presented but when he is the newsmaker he hides behind his friends.

George, good program this morning. But I noticed a circling of the wagons, so to speak, with the "classic" roundtable. Feeling the heat from Wednesday? No doubt, it was obvious. That debate was a disaster as a debate. I'd give it a 3.5 on a scale of 10. The poorest of this political season. Next time hire CNN or Fox to do it for you. Funny too, we'd just switched to Gibson from CBS but now may go to NBC for news.

McCain is in left field about Iraq. If the elections coming up are going to ban groups with Militias' than all groups need to be banned. The election will be a fraud. We have installed an Iraqi government that is controlled by pro Iranian militias. The Kurds, Sunni, and Shiite all have militias.
As for Reverend Wright, if I were to denounce all ex Marines, i know, for making stupid statements I would have no ex Marine friends. You should also judge McCain by the racist and elitist statements of many of his republican supporters.

I made a point of not watching

George-did you possibly find time during McCain interview to ask his response to article NYT today re:military "analysts" spewing Pentagon propaganda? McCain is closely allied w/military & must know these PR shills. Is covert propaganda coming from our gov. ethical/legal? Are networks/cable news just an expensive Pravda?

MORE OBAMA LIES!

Charlie Gibson told Obama: "In 1996, your campaign issued a questionnaire, and your writing was on the questionnaire that said you favored a ban on handguns."

Obama denied filling out the questionnaire. HE FREQUENTLY HAS AMNESIA!

Clinton adviser, Howard Wolfson, added: "Perhaps he could explain how his handwriting could appear on it without actually seeing it?" Wolfson added during a Thursday conference call with reporters.

On another issue, Obama’s excuse for WILLIAM AYERS is he was only a young boy when Ayers bombed the U.S.

Why didn’t Obama tell the REST of the story?

In the 1990’s, Obama (AS AN ADULT MAN) served on a board with Ayers, the Woods Foundation, which was a paid, “underline PAID”, directorship position. They worked together and attended fundraisers together. Ayers held fundraisers and was a contributor to Obama’s Chicago campaign, plus the Obamas and the Ayers visited each other quite often. ENOUGH SAID!

Obama’s associations with Wright, Ayers, Sinclair, Farrakhan, the Black Panthers, Rezko, Meeks, Malley, Auchi, Khalidi, McPeaks, Nadhmi, Said, and Michelle Obama, among others, deserve being vetted. What’s their fear? DON’T FORGET THESE PEOPLE.

BE CAREFUL WHO YOU VOTE FOR!

three remarks about This Week's program today.
1 Pastor Hagee does not support the Jewish people he is merely trying to speed up the Apocalypse. I wish George had followed up on that or had given John MCCain a copy of Kevin Phillips book The American Theocracy.
2. The Boston Globe, Washington Post and the Philadelphia Daily news do not agree with your cronies. So you are not off the hook on debate performance.
3. George Will should read Fact Checker on Capital Gains tax. Charlie and he are only partially right. It stimulates temporarily at least a short term increase. Long term is less certain

Lovely set, classic round table nostalgic. Now, when are you going to hire a professional moderator?

In Response to: For McCain

To everyone on this site: Why hasn't anyone objected to his bigoted post(?)

"...the black people are kind of that way ... blaming everything on race. If they do not get something blame it on race. If they fail on something blame it on race."

Besides, does anyone really still believe only black people are for Obama???

Get_a_Clue - I do not know about that. But it is clear 85% of Blacks are voting for him just becoz he is black. I am sure that can be thought of as blacks been racist by whites.

Great article here.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/04/why_not_blame_obama.html

Obama lie .. Nominates himself as President.

Its funny all his ads in PA and OR are running it.

OBAMA falsely claims to be the "PRESIDENT" in TV COMMERCIALS in OREGON!

http://www.hillaryclintonforum.net/discussion/showthread.php?p=61042#post61042

Obama lies .. Nominates himself as President.

http://www.hillaryclintonforum.net/discussion/showthread.php?p=61042#post61042

Why is the media not talking about this? They made a big deal about Hillary's 3 AM ad...

George, you and your panel are so out of touch with the world , that I won't watch you anymore. Assuming the questions to Obama were fair, why didn't you question Hillary on the Clinton library donations? . Were you afraid of James Carville and the other Clinton goons.?
I think most Americans are fair-minded and you and Charlie played dirty. You demeaned the process and demeaned yourelf. Obama tried to act with dignity and tried to get you two jokers to get to the issues. As for Hillary, she wallowed in the dirt. She might get some short-term benefit , but in the end she can't wash off all the dirt , that is why her unfavorable ratings go up.
As a PS, I hope Cokie Boggs Roberts read Frank Rich's op-ed in the NYT today. I read somewhere that about 25% of the electorate is under 30. Her dismissive remark is reminiscent of Marie Antoinette. She should also read Caroline Kennedy's op-ed before Super Tuesday.

George, you and your panel are so out of touch with the world , that I won't watch you anymore. Assuming the questions to Obama were fair, why didn't you question Hillary on the Clinton library donations? . Were you afraid of James Carville and the other Clinton goons.?
I think most Americans are fair-minded and you and Charlie played dirty. You demeaned the process and demeaned yourelf. Obama tried to act with dignity and tried to get you two jokers to get to the issues. As for Hillary, she wallowed in the dirt. She might get some short-term benefit , but in the end she can't wash off all the dirt , that is why her unfavorable ratings go up.
As a PS, I hope Cokie Boggs Roberts read Frank Rich's op-ed in the NYT today. I read somewhere that about 25% of the electorate is under 30. Her dismissive remark is reminiscent of Marie Antoinette. She should also read Caroline Kennedy's op-ed before Super Tuesday.

Sen. McCain happened to say that we don't need health care for pre existing conditions. Because we have something called Medicaid for people with pre existing conditions. Sure we have medicaid, and you CAN get medicaid if you are totally bankrupt and have less than 1500 dollars in assets, and no hope of getting a job. What about the people with preexisting conditions that are trying to live a normal life, without paying huge amounts for health care (such as 1600 dollars a month and cannot afford it). Do I have to go through my entire retirement, my house equity, and everything I own to get medicaid? I am willing to pay a normal amount for health care, but do not want to bank rupt myself to do it. That's why I want the Democrats in office in January next year!

And they say McCain is not elitist and out of touch?

And McCain, since he appreciated and sought Hagee's support, obviously wants WWIII in the Middle East, so Jesus will come and all the Jews will be flung into hell. Where the heck did Hagee ever get the idea that God did not love the Jewish people? I read this and almost got sick. I am a Catholic/German American and I have never heard this kind of tripe from any Evangelicals that I've heard. McCain had better distance himself FAST because I would sure not vote for him with these kinds of ideas floating around.

I like George's new digs, but I think "In Memoriam" was much less effective visually (and it is a visual segment to a large extent)because there was none of the striking red/black design. I think the red/black that has been used previously commands reverence for such an important part of the show. In memoriam didn't stand out; it wasn't special. I'd like to see the rich red/black design return. Thanks, Joan

I like George's new digs, but I think "In Memoriam" was much less effective visually (and it is a visual segment to a large extent)because there was none of the striking red/black design. I think the red/black that has been used previously commands reverence for such an important part of the show. In memoriam didn't stand out; it wasn't special. I'd like to see the rich red/black design return. Thanks, Joan

Obama supporters will attack anyone who questions his character. Why? I don't get it. None of these same people seem to have a problem with the attacks on Hillary or even McCain for that matter, but question Obama on his character and watch out folks! Listen, Charlie and George are both very honorable, fair and balanced reporters. They asked questions that go to the candidates' character. That is extremely important. Has this country forgotten that a President was impeached on a character issue? Obama is an unknown. We need to know more about him. When questioned about the flag, Obama made it about the flag pin, but in reality it is more about the fact that sometimes he doesn't salute the flag. Is that not a problem for you Obama supporters? It ought to be! I really don't get this love affair. It seems everytime I turn around the bar is raised higher and higher for Hillary. First, it is said that she must win PA, then it is said that she must win PA by double digits. If she does, then where will the bar be set next?

Obama supporters will attack anyone who questions his character. Why? I don't get it. None of these same people seem to have a problem with the attacks on Hillary or even McCain for that matter, but question Obama on his character and watch out folks! Listen, Charlie and George are both very honorable, fair and balanced reporters. They asked questions that go to the candidates' character. That is extremely important. Has this country forgotten that a President was impeached on a character issue? Obama is an unknown. We need to know more about him. When questioned about the flag, Obama made it about the flag pin, but in reality it is more about the fact that sometimes he doesn't salute the flag. Is that not a problem for you Obama supporters? It ought to be! I really don't get this love affair. It seems everytime I turn around the bar is raised higher and higher for Hillary. First, it is said that she must win PA, then it is said that she must win PA by double digits. If she does, then where will the bar be set next?

I find it interesting that McCain collects Social Security. Will he continue to collect it if elected President? Should Senators collect Social Security before they retire? His household is worth approx 100 million, perhaps he should propose an income cap for collecting Social Security. McCain's age should concern all of us. Do we really know when Alzhiemers Disease affect Reagan?
McCain does have a bad memory. He did say that Iraq would be easy.

One more point, not to get off the topic of tables and backgrounds . . . to JK:

Why do you (or anyone) think black people are voting for Obama just because he's black? Besides, 85% of blacks are still less than 20% of the entire U.S. population. He couldn't win with just black voters. Especially the black votes in Utah, Idaho, Alaska, Vermont, New Mexico, Hawaii, Wyoming, Maine, Minnesota, North Dakota . . .

. . . this election is SO not about race!!

I read the article posted by, Why not blame Obama.
My problem with the debate is that the policy questions, particularly on tax, were inaccurate. Gibson etal, where confused about income levels of the American public. They asked questions on complicated subjects that would be hard to answer in 2 minutes. Gibson was concerned about his own portfolio not the middle class. Capital Gains, at best is a complicated subject. Read Obama's response again it was an honest response and very close to the mark.
Hillary a duck hunter? come on. McCain didn't receive special treatment because of his daddy being an Admiral? Come on. GW didn't have records disappear becuase his daddy was president who ran the CIA? Come on. Obama is the only one who is not an elitist.

Truly, the way his supporters idolize him, quite frankly, it scares the heck out of me! Idolizing a human being ths way is wrong! I don't know what will happen if Hillary wins the nomination. I believe she should win. I do not believe Obama can win the general election. I do, however, believe that Hillary CAN win, and if nominated, WILL WIN! C'mon superdelegates, get on board with Hillary! Obama will prove to be a real problem for this country. Mark my words!

Obama Flips Off Hillary Clinton.. Is this the kind of person we want as our President?

HERE are 2 videos of OBAMA in 2 venues in NC. Note different people behind him in each video. He raises his finger exactly when he mentions Clintons name. How can he and his supporters deny it? And, say we are grabbing for straws!!!! I think they are so braindead, they can't discern that there are two venues where he did the same thing.

http://tinyurl.com/5dr8bx

and

http://tinyurl.com/6bfnlk

Obama you are dirty.

He thought that was "cute?" I don't. It's dirty! This man should not represent the US at anytime, anywhere for any reason or in any capacity! Imagine what people in other countries are thinking when they see Obama flip off Hillary! I think we will lose a lot of respect around the globe should he become our President!

Reminder for George Stephanopoulos et al.:

Tough question: Mr. Obama, if mainstream economists are right, and growing the U.S. economy will not be sufficient to solve our looming fiscal crisis, how will you secure Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security for this and following generations? What spending will you cut? What taxes will raise?

Not tough question: Please repeat your well-worn response to why you aren't guilty-by-association with [fill in the blank].

Interesting question: Ms. Clinton, whatever the degree of your involvment in actions or decisions of you husband's administration, you were in a position to learn a great deal about the job of the President and international affairs. Can you tell us about some of the things you learned that were the most enlightening.

Distraction: It is abundantly clear to everyone now that you greatly exaggerated the degree of danger involved in your visit to Bosnia. Please repeat once more your carefully crafted response about how that happened.

I voted for Obama after a lot of back and forth and serious consideration. I was pleased when my daughters voted for Hillary. Your and Mr. Gibson's disregard of the critical issues we face for the future of humanity, Americans, and most poignantly(sp?), Pennsylvanians was a shock. The circling the media wagons was predictable. Hiding behind the public's skirts by putting down the outcry against the debate as the response of "Obama supporters" is just sad.

George, I'm just curious: where was John McCain's flag lapel pin today? Why didn't you ask him about it? Doesn't that make you wonder if he's a "real" American?

Come to think of it, George, where was yours?

Newseum?
With the recent performance of George S. and the This Week crew, I see it more as the Nauseam.

The viewers are too informed to
tolerate the babble of what passes for political pundits.

Geroge is at any time better than Tim Russet or the another Obama sucking gay Chris Mathew.

Please see these videos and decide.

Obama Flips Off Hillary Clinton.. Is this the kind of person we want as our President?

HERE are 2 videos of OBAMA in 2 venues in NC. Note different people behind him in each video. He raises his finger exactly when he mentions Clintons name. How can he and his supporters deny it? And, say we are grabbing for straws!!!! I think they are so braindead, they can't discern that there are two venues where he did the same thing.

http://tinyurl.com/5dr8bx

and

http://tinyurl.com/6bfnlk

Obama you are dirty.

It's so painfully clear: time to let the League of Women Voters take the debates back from the networks.

There was a time when: A)There were limited numbers of debates, insuring greater public attention; B)The questions asked had true bearing on issues important to voters; and C)Those debates were widely televised, with NO commercial distractions.

What we saw last week was corporate "news" bungling their obligation to help keep the public informed. Trivial, biased, manufactured-controversy lines of questioning; advertisements; and one host who worked for a candidate's spouse, for God's sake. Ever hear of conflict of interest? Ever hear of incompetence? Does anyone at ABC have a journalism degree? If so, your professors are doing backflips in their graves.

What a disgrace. And now this commercial break.

Obama Flips Off Hillary Clinton.. Is this the kind of person we want as our President?

This is an out-and-out, desperate lie. Don't fall for it.

The folks at The Roundtable, particularly Donaldson, seemed to think that only Obama supporters are upset over the structure of the last debate. It either shows a lack of willingness to really look at the posted comments, or the desire to spin to fit their preconceived notions. George should have invited at least one panel member that would have expressed the frutration cited in thousands of blog postins, and among some of America's most respected journalists. Instead he chose to let his regulars "get his back" back so it will minimize the anger that is felt. George, you need to know that the damage is done. A vast segment of the viewing audience that had always seen you as an independent voice, now have a different perspective, and like myself will seek their news elsewhere.

Quailster - may be you can use MSNBC, they are very fair.

Good Luck

George, keep up the good job. Character of our presidents are very important. We do not want another Bush in the white house.

How can you say it is a lie? Can you see? It's as plain as day. There is nothing wrong with my vision!

ss

Obama did answer the question about Social Security.
He suggested eliminating the cap which will minimally impact 6% of Americans. Hillary dodged it and said she would find creative ways to fix it. IE Reduce beneifits, increase the tax rate, raise retirement age, or do nothing. If democrats who support Hillary who won't for Obama, it seems you don't care for anything democrats support. Why don't you just become Republicans.The Republicans have gotten virtually every thing they have wanted for last 16 years. Look what it has gotten us the White House needs scrubbed clean of Republicans. The House and Senate as well. The Republican Party needs to be punished for the mess in Iraq. They don't stand for less government but rather incompetent government.

I was surprised by George's change in questioning McCain today - he actually asked about issues! However, this did not jive with his rationale for grilling Obama in the debates because he is the "frontrunner" and needed to be tested by fire. So I EXPECTED McCain to be asked tough questions such as 1) Why did you not release your wealthy wife's tax returns? 2) Why have you delayed in releasing your complete medical records; we know that you are energetic today, however the American public needs to know the oldest president in history will not likely die or become ill in 8 years of service.(Has a history of 4 episode of melanoma; one requing 5.5 hours of surgery.) Also, point out his father died of a heart attack at 70! Regarding character - when you met your current wife were you seperated from your first wife and three children or still living at home with them? Why did you son Andy NOT tell you or your wife he enlisted at age 17 in the Marines until after he had done it? Why did he not join the Navy that 3 generations of McCains have been in?

Anyone who worships at the altar of Obama and believes that Charlie Gibson's motives were anything but decent is an obvious poor judge of character. Anyone with eyes can see that Charlie and George are decent men who were just trying to do their jobs and inform the public as best they could. If the candidate was anyone but the whiny Obama, these complaints never would have happened.

I see that the followers of Obozo the clown are still blaming ABC because their candidate came across as the dork that he is.

It is fitting that the Sunda