"Nude" Skater Hits Rockefeller Ice
Straphanger Who Pulled Emergency Brake Comes Forward
Should MTV's Jersey Shore Be Cancelled?
Adam Lambert Says He's A Performer, Not A Babysitter
Boy with Asperger's Syndrome Rides Subway for 11 Days
Things were feisty during last night's Democratic debate in Las Vegas. The big story is how frontrunner Senator Hillary Clinton seemed to hold her ground by going on the attack. The NY Times said she "shifted to a much more assertive tone" and even the NY Post thinks she won the debate, though not by a knockout.
During the October 31 debate, Clinton stumbled while trying to explain her support-nonsupport of Governor Spitzer's driver's license plan, and rivals Senator Barack Obama and former Senator John Edwards seized the momentum to call her a flip-flopper and indecisive. So last night, when John Edwards implied that lobbyists owned her, Clinton said, "I've just been personally attacked again. I don't mind taking hits on my record on issues, but when somebody starts throwing mud, at least we can hope that it's both accurate and not right out of the Republican playbook."
And when Obama said, "What the American people are looking for right now is straight answers to tough questions, and that is not what we've seen out of Senator Clinton on a host of issues," Clinton parried back, "Well, I hear what Senator Obama is saying, and he talks a lot about stepping up and taking responsibility and taking strong positions. But when it came time to step up and decide whether or not he would support universal health-care coverage, he chose not to do that. His plan would leave 15 million Americans out."
Governor Bill Richardson tried to play the role of, if not peacemaker then, the peace bringer. "It seems that John wants to start a class war. It seems that Barack wants to start a generational war. It seems that Sen. Clinton, with all due respect on her plan on Iraq, doesn't end the war. All I want to do is give peace a chance." Hmm, sounds like he's angling for a cabinet position.
Update: WNBC's Gabe Presman thinks CNN did a terrible job with debate coverage: "Once again, the punditocracy won and the American people are the losers."
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
Bill Richardson is the man. Too bad he hasn't got a snowball's chance in hell.
too bad gothamist doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell in ever posting an article that's free of grammar and syntax errors.
It was pretty funny watching Obama not answer the same question just like Hillary did last time.
Hillary learned her lesson, though, answering in a clear "No" when the question was repeated to her.
I think everyone would have a lot more respect for political candidates if they were just honest and didn't dance around issues. It's pathetic how they truly try to please both sides and make no actual progress.
bottom line: they will say anything to get elected
Yes, Bill R. has quite an impressive dossier - it makes Giuliani look even more "unqualified" for the presidency.
Did Hillary have anything to do with Spitzer's timely withdrawal of his proposal...?
Droog:
You forgot to capitalize your first word, as well as the word Gothamist itself (although that may have ben a subtle statement about the regard in which you hold them). Also it's "of ever' not "in ever".
There. Now you're perfect, and can spend your life criticizing others. Fly high, little proofreader, fly high.
Hillary was clearly in combat mode last night and won the debate hands down. I look forward to a debate with Giuliani - if he gets past the primaries...
I have to give Hillary Clinton the benefit of the doubt.
It's very easy for her opponents to say they are decisive and make blanket statements about complex issues. However, she knows that any little random thing can pop up and ruin the best laid plans. She also knows that if you paint yourself into a corner on an issue and it doesn't turn out your way you are going to be torn apart by every monday-morning quaterback in America.
It comes down to the fact that she's a smart woman who has particular insight into a wide range of issues and procedure and she is able and willing to learn from her mistakes. Somehow I doubt she'll lead us into ego-driven quagmires like our current administration is doing.
P.S. LMAO@virgil. That was very well-said.
"This were feisty..." I mean come on, its the first word of the article!
Good god.
MT:
I'm just hoping no one notices that I misspelled "been".
virgil: wow, you should take that sarcastic act of yours on the road. and, um, hate to point this out, but aren't you criticizing me? genius! and really, if this is a blog that deals with the political, social and cultural happenings of new york (that is, it's journalistic in nature and intent), perhaps it should abide by certain copy editing norms.
I noticed after proofreading your post, but overlooked it the first time. I became distracted trying to figure out if "There." was a complete sentence.
My illiterate ass decided that it is. There. I concur. Although, it could have been integrated into the following sentence. Just like the last three sentences of this post including the current one.
GRAMMAR SLAMMER HAMMER!
Copyediting can also be one word.
Droog;
This isn't the New York Times; it's a blog, there are errors, and so what? I come here to get a quick look at things that are happening around the city, not to make sure that everything's been spellchecked. Personally, when I read that first sentence ("this were feisty"), I pictured a pirate speaking, and it made me laugh. But that's me.
You've got every right to point out mistakes, of course, but as long as you're doing it both rudely and ungrammatically, someone's going to call you on it. It may not be me; I can't be everywhere, but my monkey, Horatio, can, and he's a handful.
Droog: Thank you! Somebody's with me! Ms. Chung's continuously awkward sentence constructions, syntax errors, and limp-wristedly passive voice do not speak well of her Ivy League education.
Richardson is not ready for the world stage - he can't think on his feet - in the context of Pakistan, if he really believes that human rights trump national security (which he said with a grin and without qualifying his answer)then he is unelectable. He's a bit of Tom Hagen, not a wartime consigliere.
Barack was not impressive - his claim to have straight answers to tough questions was hollow. His language was stilted and incoherent - at times he seemed to be trying to talk his way back into rehearsed soundbites.
Joe Biden was the most comfortable and seemed to be more of a natural leader than the others. More importantly, he directly answered questions and is better versed in foreign policy than the others.
Arguing grammar issues on comments is as tired as Hilary's national health care plan.
I heart Bill Richardson.
Seriously, if you actually like Gothamist and know how to write, just email Jen when you see such obvious clams.
Sure, it's stupid, but she's at some desk at an advertising agency somewhere. You read this thing, so pitch in. A cleaner New York is up to you.
bklynd....best post I've seen in a long time.
As for the debate, the best part is that Obama plugged In N Out burger! We need that here big time.
Not kidding at all, I was going to make a day trip to LA just to visit the In N Out on Sepulveda.
i thought jen chung did this stuff full time.
Hey Midtown:
I think Barack hit one out of the park when he was the only person not to bite at the insipid stupidity of the "What's more importnant, national security or human rights?" It's a stupid question, he noted that they weren't diametrically opposed values, and moreover, pointed out that human rights were more important.
Mr. Tissue - I agree it was a bad question but keep in mind that the context was the current crisis in Pakistan.
The self-proclaimed Mr. "straight answers to tough questions" could have done better than providing a purely theoretical response ("not competing but rather could be complementary"...or words to that effect).
If he had followed up with specifics on how he would handle the current crisis as Biden and Dodd did) he would have looked more like a prospective leader and less like the smart kid at boarding school trying to keep his spot on the debating team.
I don't understand why the debate is posted on Gothamist. Given the primary calendar, the Demoncratic candidate will already be decided by the time NYers hit the polls. It is a bit frustrating that Senator Clinton 'represents' New Yorkers, but they will not have an opportunity to decide if we want her to represent us for President. New York could do what Michigan did, and move up the date, but then they might get the ban as well. It's a real shame, because Michigan already has enough problems without being disenfranchised.
Biden & Dodd '08
It'll happen, right? RIGHT?