10 million people watched the debate last night. Whoever won, it's good for the democrats

[Cant trust em]

Are there any comparisons to what the republicans drew during their debates? I'd look this up but I'm kinda busy right now.

[BlooInBloo]

1. Only because people (not DU Clinton supporters) realize that it's the media who LOST...

... Glenn Greenwald's post is up - wonderful as usual...

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/04/17/debate/index.html

My favorite (unintentionally revealing) media commentary about the debate is from The Washington Post's Anne Kornblut and Dan Balz, who devoted paragraph after paragraph to describing the substance-free "issues" that consumed most of the debate -- Obama's "remarks about small-town values, questions about his patriotism and the incendiary sermons of his former pastor . . . gaffes, missteps and past statements" -- and, at the end of the article, they added:

The debate also touched on Iraq, Iran, the Middle East, taxes, the economy, guns and affirmative action.

It's just not possible to express the wretched state of our establishment press better than that sentence does.

[EFerrari]

3. LOL! Right on as usual. n/t

[NJmaverick]

2. If it had been a REAL debate, it would have been good

instead those two asshole moderators turned it into a republican attack show.

[LSparkle]

6. The "moderators" debated Obama more than Clinton did ...

Talk about "piling on" ...

The fact they didn't even bother to ask her about Mark Penn lobbying for the
Colombia free trade deal -- as well as her husband doing the same -- showed
that they weren't playing "fair". Do we really want a president who CAN'T
see the conflict of interest in a situation like that????

[RaleighNCDUer]

8. To be fair, we don't know if she can't see the conflict of interest

because nobody asked her about it.

I would like to have heard her response.

[uponit7771]

4. 10 million people saw how stupid StephAhDickLess and Gibson are

[CoffeeCat]

5. Stephanopolis and Charlie....

...were concerned about one thing--and one thing only.

They didn't want to end up as parodies on SNL.

Stephanopolis was afraid that Chris Kittan would play George Stephanopolis as
Mango--salivating all over Obama.

So, they tried to play bad asses, but they just ended up looking like low-rent dorks
who think flag-pins are more important than a crumbling economy and a failed, lie
based war.

Nimrods.

I hope SNL skewers them.

It would be too easy,

Stephanopolis: "So, is it true Senator Obama, that your cousin's, dog-groomer's former
roommate was once arrested for failing to renew his dog license?"

Obama: "What? I...don't..."

Charlie: "ANSWER THE QUESTION SENATOR OBAMA!!! AMERICA WANTS TO KNOW!!!

Hillary: "If I could Charlie...I would like to say.............that I am........outraged. Unfortunately...this
issue directly speaks to Senator Obama's......<sigh>.....electability....and unfortunately.....<tilt head to the left>....
to his credibility as well. The American people deserve a President who undersands them....and their dogs."

Oh, we could go on forever, couldn't we?

[Cant trust em]

7. Too bad I can't rec a response

I would love for someone to tell me that "Do you think Rev. Wright loves America as much as you" isn't a joke of a question.