Tuesday, October 30, 2007

Another Dem debate liveblog

You know, debate fatigue is setting in--especially on the Democratic side. They're just not as pander-prone as their GOP counterparts. Anyhow, tonight, the Dems are debating at Drexel.

Like Ted Koppel, Brian Williams seems unable to change his facial expression as he speaks.

Barack is asked about his pledge to be more aggressive against La Hill. It's kinda weird that Barack would accuse her of sounding Republican, given his current chumminess with "ex-gay" Donnie McClurkin. Barack is not sounding too inspiring or eloquent. What are these "sharp contrasts" he speaks of? C'mon, dude, what's going on here? I've liked what he's said in the past--definitely. And he's got points about La Hill.

La Hill rebuts: "I don't think the Republicans got the message that I'm voting with them." She noted the last GOP debate, which was all "Hillary Hillary Hillary" instead of "Reagan Reagan Reagan." Truth to tell, La Hill, like Barack, usually votes on the side of the angels. But that Kyl-Lieberman vote? No, just no.

Now Edwards, talking about how Bush has "destroyed" the relationship between the president and the rest of the world. Edwards calls out La Hill: "She defends a broken system." And of course, he also calls her on Kyl-Lieberman.

Hillary responds by pointing out her record. Could she please explain Kyl-Lieberman?

She brings up fiscal responsibility. Yay Hill. But is this another debate about La Hill?

"Let's start taking the tax cuts away from the wealthy!" she says. Clearly socialistic words to the GOP.

Tim Russert asks her about Kyl-Lieberman. She says, "I'm against a rush to war." She points out when she said Bush had no authority for war. "I am not in favor of doing nothing," she insists. She says the GOP wants a false choice between war and doing nothing and speaks of "vigorous diplomacy." She said it was a show of support for economic sanctions. She said it was a non-binding resolution. But she insists that they're missing the point, which is to stop Bush et al. from pre-emptive war. Don't think I agree with this. Designating the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist group? No. Just no.

Chris Dodd is correct. It's a dangerous resolution. He points to Cheney's current saber-rattling. And the Republicans who opposed it.

Biden doesn't sound happy with Kyl-Lieberman either. He notes the fact that oil prices went up afterwards. "We've emboldened [Bush]," he said. Wow. Biden is being concise. He's also pissed at the 76 Senators who voted for the thing. He says it contributes to the "urban legend" in the Middle East that the US "is on a crusade against Islam."

At least they're moving away from Hillary-bashing.

Hillary insists that Congress needs to rein in Bush and pushes the "vigorous diplomacy" frame re Iran. "Everything should be on the table, not just their nuclear program....You need both carrots and sticks....I want to start diplomacy."

Edwards steps in re Kyl-Lieberman, saying it "looks like it was written by the neocons."

Russert remembers Richardson's running. He says that he would negotiate with Iran. He points to the moderates in Iran and believes in compromise. He believes in talking to hostile nations (Iran, Syria, North Korea).

Remember Kucinich? He's also running. "I want to know when this Democratic Congress is going to stand up to the president" and impeach the prick. (No, he didn't say "prick.") There's applause. Man, I wish Kucinich was be Speaker of the House.

Dodd points to Pakiston as a problem area. Richardson mentions enriched uranium and loose nukes. He emphasizes diplomacy.

Most of these guys are saying the right thing...except La Hill regarding Kyl-Lieberman.

Kucinich says the media has to be careful regarding frames. Yup, he's a blogger's dream candidate. He'd negotiate with Iran. He'd encourage them to give up nuclear power as well as nuclear weapons.

La Hill says she opposes the war but does NOT oppose the soldiers. When she's president, she'll bring the troops home, so she says.

Obama's done nothing but respond to and critique La Hill. Edwards wants voters "to understand you have choices." Edwards says La Hill is more of the same.

What's the issue here--Iran, Iraq, or Hillary Clinton?

0 comments: