Clark Was Fucking Destroyed in the Debates-gone, history, out of here

[Starpass]

Jeusushfuckingchrist. As a 58 year old broad and a poltical science graduate, I have to confess that I was totally blindsided tonight. I cannot believe that I was fucked by the media--I kinda prided myself on being smarter than they are. They have hyped for days that this is the "make or break Clark". Fine--bring it on. They killed him by NOT BRINGING IT ON!! They set the stage for America and then they, in essence, didn't fucking ask him one fucking question!!!

Fucking whore Brian Williams started the evening by questioning Clark on his "I'm a democrat" declaration. I don't care who you are for, he did a great job on this. And that was basically the last chance these fuckers gave him on any issue. Now, I'm not parinoid. It was so goddamn obvious over the 2 hours. In fact, in the end, one of them (I think Mosley-Braun) let it fly about how she was not called upon in this debate. And, they basically blew her off and dismissed it after giving the impression that they were slaves to the "clock" and balanced--not even close. In fact, if you are an Edwards supporter you have to be fucking furious yourself....they gave shit time to Edwards. And so I can see the analyists tonight and the the slime bag Luntz focus group.....hey, Wes was a total failure, blah, blah, blah. Goddamn it. When they gave him the mike he was excellent. But the didn't GIVE him the fucking mike. So, the whores can say "he didn't rise to the occasion" Well, you gotta give him and Edward and Braun, etc. at least 3 minutes of the fucking hour to say something!! And if you are a supporter of candidate X or Y and are rejoicing, then you better sober up...because they just told you how they will destroy your candidate when he faces the greatest president in the history of the USA!!! This was a very cleaver build up, set up. And then they give Clark/Edwards/Braun and several others no chance to get on their "debate". No Dem better rejoice in this----the pack is hunting and destroying. I'm not lint picking...it was so obvious that even my non-political husband that I made watch this because of Clark said "so..fuck this. I'm not watchint anymore. I haven't heard this General speak more than once this hour". The whores just set us up and out-smarted us, gang.

[gully]

1. UHM, I support another but cut the guy some slack, he's only just begun!

*sheesh*

Reminder: Our candidates are 'human beings' mmmmk?

[charlie]

5. Did even read her post?

She's not ragging on Clark. *sheesh* yourself...

[gully]

29. I got lost in the 'fuckin' stuff. Tends to turn me off frankly.

Sorry about the fuckin misunderstanding. ;)

[Clark Can WIN]

42. Mee too

My dad always said that excessive profanity was the sign of a lazy intellect. Perhaps it's true, perhaps it's not but alot of people simply can't get through it and the point falls on the floor.

I'm no prude but f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f gd f f f f f f gds f f f f f f f f f f f


gets old.

Edit for clarification.

[legin]

47. I think Starpass

has one of the best writing styles here, it may be different to Will Pitt's but it is certainly very readable and interesting. It flows.

[liberalnurse]

46. I do the same thing....

I find it a much easier read if they, posters, use multiple short paragraphs. :)

[DemVet]

90. I wasn't going to say anything, but....

.....I agree. One can make a valid argument without too much profanity. Using it carelessly dilutes all the strong, emotional emphasis when one finally does use it. :)

[Name removed]

44. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

60. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Starpass]

9. Gully -don't give me the shit

The polls said Clark was the leading candidate and beating Bush. I can see if he was "barely on the scale". They gave fucking Dennis more time then they gave Clark. So, tell me, what was their intelligent, thoughtful rational??? They put Dean on every show becaue he was the front runner. They told us this was "make or break for Clark" and then they fucking didn't ask him shit. Before you think "great, blah, blah good for my man Dean" wake up and grow up because your man dean is going to be disebowled by these fuckers at a later date. They are minipulating us....have a beer on Dean 'cause they are just waiting to slit his throat.

[gully]

32. Uhm, perhaps because Clark doesn't have clear positions yet.

He said himself he needs more time to refine, define his agenda. I think they were being kind to him actually. Why ask him loads of questions when he just entered the race 9 days ago.

They took it easy on him, as they should have IMHO.

[janekat]

74. I'm actually beginning to think that at least some media MIGHT like him

am I on drugs??? Could this be too much to ask for???

I mean - I'm thinking that how could ANY of them STAND the current administration? Most of them at least SOME of the stuff we know about the creeps. How could they possibly stomach them anymore? The sheeple I can understand - they don't know all of this stuff....

[juajen]

81. Nah,

Starpass is right. They're trying to floor him.

[Art_from_Ark]

50. Now wait a minute

Weren't you the one who started a thread a week or two ago ragging on DUers for not showing more support for the one candidate who represents true Democratic values-- Dennis Kucinich? And now you're calling him "f*cking Dennis" and calling yourself a Claark supporter?

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

52. *cough*

[Oracle]

69. Wow! What a fucking call. Good on you...Art_from_Ark

[cosmicdot]

62. gave ... Dennis more time -- I didn't watch, but caught glimpses ...

... and, it seemed each time I did, they were saying: sorry Congressman, your time is up ... beep ... in mid sentence ... he was cut off ...

glad my glimpsed impression was due to my poor timing

I do know the media hasn't given all 10 candidates equal glamour pictures and similar coverage

[ronzo]

2. Annnnd MARK!

who had 39 minutes in the pool?

[maha]

3. People see what they want to see.

You wanted to see Clark destroyed, and by golly, that's what you saw.

I think everyone did well.

[Girlfriday]

10. Read the post!!!!

CNBC SCREWED him but not giving him equal time! I agree, and because of that I wasn't impressed with him, and I'm sure others will feel the same.

[maha]

38. I did read the post.

1. Person who wrote the post needs lessons in English composition.

2. I'm sure everyone who had a "favorite" candidate felt his/her candidate got cut short on time.

3. Others will not feel the same, unless they were so predisposed.

[Starpass]

48. maha...I will take under consideration the composition and development

of sentences, paragraphs and overall composition. Forgot to tell you that I have a double degree--Pol Sci and English 'cause the prof back in the 1960's told me that no fucking broad could make a living in politics. I was to be a good little English teacher. The spot checkers are what is wrong and fatal to this idiot party.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sfecap]

4. I heard Clark answer a number of questions...

Not very well...but he was asked.

In fact one mod had to remind him to answer the question that was asked of him.

In fact, Edwards did really well. He gave excellent answers...

CMB did get screwed, however.

[starscape]

6. guys.. I think she's saying...

Did I read it wrong? I think Starpass was saying that the mods didn't give Wes a chance.. with the questions they let him address.

Am I wrong?

(the guy with the similar name)
-ss

[VolcanoJen]

13. Honestly... this is a great post from Starpass, although I'm afraid...

people have jumped to conclusions and think she's fuckin' attacking fuckin' Wes.

}(

Smilin' at the language,
Jennifer

[starscape]

17. sometimes I think that people just read the subject lines...

... and go berserk.. I've seen it a lot recently.

But still, from what I've read in the transcript I think Wes came off just fine, so far...

[Dookus]

24. Pottymouth...

I'm tellin' Skinner

[WilliamPitt]

86. Disagree

We saw as much of him as the others...and the focus necessarily went to Dean, Kerry and Gephardt who have a much longer history of debating and clashing with each other. Clark is just getting started. I think he did fine.

[RichV]

88. Agreed.

Attention shifted to Dean, Gephardt, Kerry often because they attacked each other in their responses and were therefore given a number of rebuttals. If you'll recall, the only real rebuttal Clark was given was a Sharpton comment that didn't even address Clark at all. Just how I saw it. I really enjoyed the debate.

[Pepperbelly]

Wesley scares them ...

and they will do what they can to torpedo him.

He did get to take that BITCH Gloria Borger to school RE" corporate responsibility when he gave a very succinct answer and she asked for more detail and he hammered her with mucho stuff that she had clearly never heard of before and then followed it up by noting that the most important aspect was what he'd say initially.

That pleased me. Her mouth puckered up like a chicken's ass. :D

[Stevendsmith]

28. Oh God, I DESPISE Gloria Borger!

n/t

[coralrf]

58. Wesley does not scare you...

by your own words it is "they" that scare you as they will go for Clark. Sure they will. So what?

He is absent your fear.

[grasswire]

7. are you nuts?

I watched with three people who had never seen him before. Two of them gave him front runner status. One leaned toward Gephardt but was intrigued by Clark.

I think your lack of objectivity has clouded your power of observation.

[Starpass]

grasswire--fucking wake up. I'm a Clark supporter and I was

fucing nuts over their build up that this would make or break Clark and then they barely talked to him. I heard NOT ONE answer by Clark that wasn't great and pumped my fist in the air...he was very, very good. But I was so pissed that they kept going back and forth between a certain group who were killing each other and never got to him or others. And I'll betcha' the fucking whores tonight will say "Wes wasn't much"....the fuckers won't let us know that they never let him talk!!!!!!!!!!

[zekeson]

57. The two sources I have been exposed to post work

NPR and AOl lead with the coming out of Clark. NPR noted there was debate, then gave some clips of Wes. AOL start screen has a Hillary story with Wes as subtext - mentions the debate, gives Clark the most mileage, then a nice comment or two on Dean.

My analysis so far is that they collected the soundbites they wanted - Clark is getting good press from this one - no one else mattered much (to the mediawhores). NPR didn't even fucking (got my obligatory FUCK in there :))broadcast the damn thing.

[Bertrand]

8. Clark wasnt destroyed

for one thing, nobody posed any real in-depth challenge to him. Youre projecting. Calm down and get a glass of water.

[KittyWampus]

18. "nobody posed any real in-depth challenge to him"

That was Starpass's whole point for starting this thread!

And she was right!

They didn't ask Clark, Edwards or CMB very many questions.

The format of the debate allows them to cut some candidates short on how much time they have to present thier postions.

[Bertrand]

33. Exactly

but that doesnt constitute being "destroyed." Actually, I think that was probably Clarks goal because he is trying to present himself as the one that's "above" party infighting and directed his entire criticisms at Bush. I think He does a disservice to his campaign theme to get involved in bickering with others. We'll see if that works in the long run or not.

[montanacowboy]

21. This is an important point

I did not see the debate - but, she is right - as long as the RW whore media press are in charge of these debates, we are at their mercy and they know it.

Wait till the final dem goes up against the worst president in history, and they knock the shit out of him - with their snide sneers and superior attitudes, telling us what a great job W did and how ineffectual the democrat was - blah blah,,,he had the wrong color suit on, or too much makeup. blah, blah

we need, must, get these debates set up by people who are much more in tune with our side - or else we will be toast.

[VolcanoJen]

11. My goodness!

Well, fuckity-fuck, Starpass!

}(

It's definitely in the best interest of the whore media to bring Clark down a notch or two right now, but don't worry. Every time they try, his numbers rise. It's an interesting phenomenon, and it has yet to be seen how long he'll remain the "flava o' the month."

Once the field is narrowed down a bit, we'll get real debates. For the time being, however, only one person lost today's "debate":

Smirky McFlightSuit. :-)

[Cush]

14. lol

"Smirky McFlightSuit"

I love it :-)

[RichM]

15. I don't agree. Maybe you're mainly reacting to the weight of 10 different

people on the stage. The debate was 120 minutes, with a few commercial breaks tossed in. That leaves maybe 10-11 minutes for each, EVEN IF there was no time for questions. IOW, nobody really got too much time, nor could they, due to the constraints.

I'm not saying it was a great event that's beyond criticism. It's just hard for me to imagine how 10 candidates can participate, in such a way that all get a generous amount of face time.

[Starpass]

22. they neatly handled that similar to the CA debate

they let people go back and forth with each other on the attack mode. So about 4 of them got TIME and could go back and forth and they cut the rest out, including Clark. I saw a hell of a lot more of: Gephardt,Lieberman, Kerry, Dean and Graham than any of the others. Like I said--if they want to go with standings in the polls, fine,. But they just had polls that showed Clark leading and the only one of two ahead of Bush with Kerry being the other. Kerry got more time than Wes, but not by much. They were hell bent to showcase the others and then they dared tell us they were slaves to the clock. They outsmarted us....and hoped we wouldn't notice.

[KoKo]

36. Starpass didn't see the BIG TEN.....and what they were saying....Focused

on Clark....as the "White Knight." Those of us who have watched ALL the debates...saw it as a "continutation."

Not looking at the ONE CANDIDATE.....but at ALL TEN for the Message.

This wasn't a "Make or Break" debate.....it was still......Getting to know You....Getting to like the Way You Think.....Getting to Know you........and I like your style......(Just put it to music....and you will get what I say!) :-)'s

[lanlady]

16. I don't follow you at all, Starpass

Are you blaming the moderators or the candidates?

[Starpass]

30. lanlady--I'm talking Brian Williams and these moderators

It was a joke. After waiting like a half hour for them to ask Clark anything.........after the build up that this was his big night. Hell Wes might as well have taken the paid speech he gave up for this shit.

[janekat]

19. If you REALLY support Clark you're not helping your candidate much

unless someone logs in to this thread and reads the WHOLE post - they will be under the impression that your candidate did terribly in the debate. Not a GOOD way to help him....

I don't think I'd do THAT again if I were you.

[starscape]

31. yikes...

"I don't think I'd do THAT again if I were you."

creepy...

LOL

[janekat]

35. sorry - that wasn't meant as as threat...

More like "oops I guess I won't do THAT again." Not a good move...

[coralrf]

67. I second that..

nt

[Julien Sorel]

20. Relax.

It's going to be a long race, with ups and downs, and unfair press, and too fair press, and everything in between.

I still think the race hinges on Clark's ability to win over his pool reporters -- if he can do that, the race is over, if he can't then it's likely to be a tough fight, but Dean's money might win it for him.

[janekat]

23. delete

[Gloria]

25. Tweety opined to Alan post debate that Clark reminded him of

"the guy who ran with Perot." (Turner?)

Clark didn't stand out for me at all. Edwards seemed alive, Dean was OK.

There are so many of them, it becomes a blur. However, I hate the format. They should ALL answer the same questions...Braun WAS overlooked...

PS--you saw the set up on tax INCREASES....I liked it when I heard "go back to Clinton plan" or similiar.....this bait and switch game over "raising taxes" MUST BE won!!

[diplomats]

34. That would be Admiral Stockdale

Tweety's full of crap, as usual.

[Gloria]

40. Oops..yes Stockdale, sorry....

I knew there was an "s" in there,....came up with Stansfield Turner by mistake!!!LOL

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

26. This is why even if one DOES NOT LIKE DEAN, they should be thankful

for the grass roots infrastructure he has set up with meet ups and conference calls to get the word out. The more we harness the power of the internet and have an infrastructure ready and do the FOOTSOLDIERING necessary....the more we can overcome the media disadvantage.

[Renew Deal]

27. I am glad for the Dean grassroots.

The Clark campaign can use it in his run against Bush.

[Starpass]

39. yep, Blearcher, ah how many million of the mass voters are

surfing the net for poltical news?? The "net" will elect squat. But these bastards who control the news will feed people whatever crap they can manufacture. They can say Clark lost the debate and isn't a factor.....without telling the people they barely asked him a damn question!!--see what I mean? The primary may be won on the net--big fucking crap. The ELECTION to replace Bush isn't going to be won on the net and these creeps know it. It will be won on what info they care to share with the Amurekan people on the nightly news....and they are already setting a background of distortion. As I said, don't rejoice, any of you. Your candidate is tomorrow's dog meat. And that's exactly how they will serve him to the country. The need is to swamp these asses with demands that ALL these candidates get "real" equal time....not their interpretation of equal time.

[coralrf]

73. Starpass...it aint your night.

Try this link:

http://www.isoc.org/oti/articles/0197/quintana.html

The net will elect "squat" if there is a candidate so named. It is hot right now and I cannot imagine that google does not work on your computer.

[diplomats]

37. Starpass, the title of your thread almost gave me a heart attack

(just kidding). Thank goodness I read your whole post! I haven't seen the debate; I'll watch it tonight.

[imax2268]

41. Faux News debates...

did the same thing...many of the same candidates were ignored...not clark since he wasn't in it yet...

typical...

[Trek234]

43. Can't blame them

I wouldn't give Clark time either.

[Starpass]

45. Trek--keep that warm thought in your mind because I'm sure

they are going to be loving, attentive, caring and giving time and intelligent consideration to your candidate. They were just doint their civic duty to rid us of that evil, Satanic Clark to pave the way for your Holy Man. Get a life........you're next!!!!!!!

[Donna Zen]

51. NBC and CNN

both said Clark held his own. The sound bite they played was the original "proud Democrat" riff he opened with.

He did well on SS and the corporate board questions (excellent). Actually, if he has that kind of knowledge waiting in the wings, he should just let it them have it.

Also, Sharpton got in two fine plugs for Clark...he did the officer and a gentleman, plus the dig about Clark being a better Dem. than many on the stage who had been in party longer.

Question(s): Any thought about who really irrates Sharpton? Why? Does the sparring actually help the candidates?

If Clark is to take this to the next level, he will study this event and improve. That is the book on the man, so we shall see.

Yes, a percentage of the media will try to screw Clark out of the race, because the GOP beyond "the big lie" have no clue how to run against him. While many DUers hate his Reagan vote, it actually works very well for Dems in a general election. "Hey...I saw the light, now you can too." A devastating message for bushco to run against.

When is the next debate?

[Trek234]

56. They did a favor for us all today

Clark needs to be humiliated as much as possible in the coming weeks. He will only bring us defeat in 04. I don't expect the people who are caught in the Clark fever (the vast majority of DU) to see it today. But come 04 with either a damning Clark loss or a win with another candidate you'll change your mind.

Clark can pretend he belongs at a democratic debate, but he needs to let the real democrats with a chance of defeating Bush do the talking. We can't risk a deafeat because Clark wants to play his game.

In fact Clark got to talk, and he was asked a question worthy of the joke candidate that he is - and that's what he is - a joke. Fortunately the vast majority of people outside DU can see that.

I would take Lieberman over Clark - and I mean that with all sincerity. At least it would be a less pathetic display come November. We'd probably get more votes too.

I think Clark should get the Nader treatment and be banned from all Democratic events because of the loss he represents in 04. If he was an actual serious candidate that truly wanted democrats to succeed he would have been at such events months (and dare I say years) ago. He should have been out getting support for democrats when they needed it most. (see Iraq resolution and a number of other issues) Instead he sat at his cushy job at CNN doing nothing. Even Nader did more during those times to help democrats. That should tell you something right there.

And this isn't about "my candidate" either. I'm concerned about a loss in 04, and if ignoring Clark helps prevent that loss then it's fine with me.

[coralrf]

66. No progressive talks like you Trek...

None. That was puke talk.

“”"I think Clark should get the Nader treatment and be banned"””. Progressives don’t ban. The Bush administration does that.

As for your predictions, those are your emotions speaking. Not your intellect as you can have no way of knowing who will win this thing.

A few Democrats have become annoyingly like pugs in their attack on Clark. My take on it is Clark came on strong and there is now a good chance that Kerry, Dean or whoever has no sure shot. In any case the argument can be made that if Clark is the guy in 2004 it will be as much talk like yours as Clark's abilities that causes him to lose if he does so.

“Any DEm over Bush in 2004.” That is how progressives talk.

[Trek234]

82. Hmm

"Progressives don’t ban"

That must be why Nader was present at the debates, right? Must have just lost his invite in the mail...

"“Any DEm over Bush in 2004.” That is how progressives talk."

Agreed - so we should get a real dem that can win this thing.

I don't believe Clark can win - and it's not my emotions speaking. (do you think I have something personal against Clark? Please) I have a 20 point list of exactly why he is at a serious disadvantage compared to Dean, Edwards, Kucinich, Kerry, etc. I won't post it however, as no Clark supporter has ever been able to answer it and I doubt that will change today.

[kayleybeth]

71. This is just sad.

Bush is the one who needs to be humiliated, not one of our own candidates.

[Trek234]

83. I agree

But we need to defeat Bush in 04.

This is no time to be playing games throwing in this novice who has never won an election in his life. Too much is at stake.

The Clark supporters might not care about another four years of Bush so they can carry out this little experiment that they have, but some people don't care to take such chances.

[bearfartinthewoods]

95. NOT a vast majority by a long shot....

last poll i saw showed he has peeled off 30% of the deanies and 30% of the Kerries but he is not in the majority position.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

49. Don't Panic

It sounds like the media didn't share your view, and the AP is reporting quite evenly (if anything slanted slightly positive toward Clark, IMO) on our guy. Tons more people will see that story than watch the debate.

DTH

[Q]

53. The RWingers own the American media...

...what else can you expect? And this is only a preview.

- I'm going to be pissed if Dems act surprised when this happens during the presidential debate and when the Neocons steal the 2004 election. It's not as if you haven't been warned.

[knight_of_the_star]

54. Link for a recording of the debate?

I want to see for myself what happened before I jump to any conclusions. Anyone have a link for this?

[Donna Zen]

55. Washington Post

From LBN thread:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A317-2003Sep25.html

NEW YORK -- Retired Gen. Wesley Clark presented his credentials as a Democrat on Thursday with a biting attack on President Bush, then joined nine presidential rivals in a mix-it-up debate over tax cuts, Medicare and the job-shedding economy.

Bush is "a man who recklessly cut taxes, who recklessly took us into war in Iraq," said the newcomer to the race and his party, confronted with favorable comments he made about the Republican president as recently as 2001.


This is the AP release

[Starpass]

59. smiling, Donna....I'm glad someone saw the quality and not

the quantity that the tv whores are going after. I'm surprised at Kerry doing this in a post-debate interview. He knew they gave Wes no time and no questions. But when We talked---he done did good!!!!!

[mpsteve]

61. TOO MANY PEOPLE ON STAGE!!!

Moseley-Braun, Kucinich, Sharpton, and Lieberman have to go! I like Graham, but he just can't get it going.

None of the top people are getting enough time.

This is about the time when somebody, wiser than me, says, "It's only September 2003!"

[Oracle]

77. I support Kucinich...I just sent him some more money...why

should Kucinich go? He is the ONLY progressive liberal running...I say the fucking moderate clones got to go, the ones the DLC and the media and you, think we should vote for.

[trogdor]

96. They should do a round robin.

One on one, 12 min. at a whack. Four contests in an hour plus commercials. Do this as many times as is necessary to give everybody a chance to debate everybody else. You could do this over two or three months, and you'd get 8 out of ten on a given night.

[coralrf]

63. Starpass....open your eyes..

Susceptibility to GOP smoke and mirrors seems to be endemic in DU and baby you got the fever.

"they said it was make or break time" Yup they did. Of course it is not true as the guy has 14 months to make or break but they need a quick kill in so far as Clark is concerned.

You bought it. Clark did not.

Shrub is at an all time low. Clark is just out of the gate and clearly has the goods to nail Shrubbit. The RNC needs a month or two to get Bush back in shape to fight so they try to put Clark on the ropes before the sound of the first bell.

You bought it. Clark did not.

NO MEDIA PERSON or GOP OPERATIVE controls Clark's destiny. The VOTERS do. The media have long been accustomed to being perceived as credible in their predictions. The predictions are in fact not predictions anymore but instructions.

You bought it. Clark did not.

Perhaps you have never been a soldier Starpass but I have. Clark sure as hell has. When in Vietnam I was a LRRP or long range recon patroller. We went out in small numbers. 2 to 5 and penetrated deep into VC territory with instructions not to engage but report what we saw. Our mission was to set up the big attack or the major operation.
Clark was on a LRRP mission last night. He knows a bit more about his enemy now. The mediators. He knew that he was never going to be given a shot at a "debate" but made the most of what was there. He "improvised". a soldiers first order. That was no debate.

You bought it. Clark did not.

[Starpass]

76. coral--I didn't buy anything........my post just was telling you what

the country will buy as the media sells. AL IS A LIAR----enough said. You think they learned that gem all by themselves??? The media sold it to them. Al WON--yep, but Florida would not have been necessary if people didn't buy that lie. His election should not have even been close. They are selling Arnold all day today and last night. They (MSNBC, for example -- part of the CNBC crowd) set us up for "the proving of Wes Clark" and then they refused, in essence, to talk to him. That sets up the observations: He didn't say anything. I didn't buy it. That's why I posted what I did. But Amureka buys it every day with their morning begals.

[LastDemInIdaho]

64. Too many "fuck" words

I lost the point of your speech.

[Oracle]

78. You may be fucking right!

[LeahMira]

94. I agree...

Takes away from the strength of your message also. A little pepper makes the meal intriguing. Too much makes it unpalatable.

[CWebster]

65. Hey, it isn't in his best interest to be asked alot of questions right yet

I didn't see the entire debate, but I thought he held his own during the segment I saw. Composed and articulate, although lacking in substance. Not a bad presentation overall- but he still makes me uneasy. His voice has a slight resemblence to Reagans in cadence, but as the person I watched it with noted, he isn't any dummy.

Dean is still my first choice, he may be rougher around the edges but his authenticity appeals to me and he has grown during the campaign. He is a solid Democrat.

Aside from his remarks on environmental issues, the impression I had of Kerry is that he has regressed, and he doesn't look well.

[DancingBear]

68. And now for something completely different

I watched most of the debate, and can't say I was particularly dismayed by the amount of time given to Clark (I actually didn't notice any real discrepancies w/regard to time, but since others did perhaps I wasn't paying attention). The reasoning for this is that he has had 9 days to prepare for EVERYTHING - not just this debate, but for the whirlwind of policy questions, economic positions, idealogical concerns, and everything else. Suppose that Clark was given the lions share of time, and answered in fragmented bits and pieces (not having ample time to formulate well researched positions this was entirely possible). Ah, then the knashing of teeth and furrowing of brows would begin - Geejus. H. Christ in a chicken basket they asked him everything! They were deliberately trying to trip him up, knowing how little time he had to prepare!

I prefer what happened today, thank you, and I believe we'll be hearing plenty more from Wes in the future, when it counts. Even though most of us here live for stuff like this, I can pretty much guarantee that 95% of the voting public had no clue there was a debate today.

I shall now end with the obligatory gratuitous use of the word "fuck".

Fuck.

[Julien Sorel]

84. Well, all I can say in respond to that is,

very well thought out and said.


Oh yeah, 'fuck.' Definitely, 'fuck.'

[juajen]

85. Welcome to DU, DancingBear

Since my earlier remark, I tuned in to the debate that was being repeated on MSNBC. I thought Clark did really well, and, I, too, am glad they went light on questions for him. He does need some time. In all fairness, the other candidates have had time to hone their positions, get used to the limelight, etc. Clark did extremely well.

Somewhere on here there was also criticism of "Tweety's" aftershow. I disagree with that poster's assessment. Tweety took up for Clark's newness as a dem; and, even the dreaded Peggy Noonan, I think, was pretty fair, especially for her. All in all, a pretty good assessment of the show. A tad critical of Dean, but supportive also. Tweety was fairer to Clark on his switch to Demland than most of the posters on this forum. Hoorah for Tweetybird. T'was a good show and pretty "fair and balanced". OMFG, will I be sued by Fxo?

I believe, collectively, they all thought that Kerry did very well. So, did I. Kucinich was very strong tonight. This pleased this DK supporter very much. He actually got a chance to talk. CMB was right in protesting that she didn't get many questions

[childslibrarian]

70. This post was f****ing idiotic

I certainly hope this isn't what we have to look forward to in the next year.

[newyawker99]

87. Hi childslibrarian!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[AmeriCanadian]

72. ... Sadly, I agree

:-(

[Skittles]

75. WHERE IS IT DECREED

THAT F***ING WHORES HAVE TO ASK THE QUESTIONS??? It's so obviously REPUKE QUESTIONS. :puke:

[Starpass]

79. Yep, Skittles, it seems like our debates are a bit overstaffed

with republican moderators. Why don't the Dems just do away with them and have a general 2 hour free for all brawl or people from the audience asking the questions with MANDATORY amounts of time assigned to each candidate.

[Capn Sunshine]

80. Understand who funded this one

WSJ. CNBC. They have an obligation to their base to have the whores there. But, damn that Gloria Borger annoys me.

I have to spend all morning with both these media. Pity me.

[Ruby Newsbee]

89. I watched but couldn't take it all the way through.

I thought Clark sounded like Clinton. Kerry smacked the shit out of Dean a few times and made him look like a whiner reduced to "angry man" defending himself. Sharpton as always was hilarious and wasn't afraid to tell it like it is. Braun WASN'T called on enough, neither was Sharpton or Kucinich... and it seemed obvious to me that Kerry, Daschle and Lieberman were a tag team against Dean. You're right about Edwards.

[RichV]

92. Daschle

Eh? What, was he shooting spitwads at him from the audience? ;)

[Ruby Newsbee]

93. LOL

I meant Rep. Dick Gephardt. Please forgive me, I'm on my first cup of java!

[trogdor]

91. Mosley-Braun hits one out of the park

I was watching the replay of the debate last night (until my other half changed the channel to Sex and the City), when Carol Mosely-Braun was asked the question, "what is the definition of 'rich'?" The question was first asked of Rev. Al Sharpton, who gave a rather muddled answer, but Mosley-Braun's answer was quite refreshing indeed. Instead of attempting to give an answer, she threw it back on the questioner, stating that this is the sort of question conservatives ask liberals trying to goad them into an unproductive argument and later accuse them of waging "class warfare."

This answer is, of course, 100 percent correct. The sad thing is, I have NEVER heard that kind of answer from a Democrat before, and I applaud Carol Mosely-Braun for giving it. This is the kind of thinking we desperately need in the Democratic Party. It's a damn shame she can't win.

Maybe the nominee will pick her for the #2 job. He could do a lot worse.