Right off from the start. Mr. Obama would you like to nuke Mrs. Clinton? Sounds like Tweety wrote the question.

Good luck with that Kevin, MSNBC already has the splash page done for Hillary's win.

Obama is toast. He is a wimp and will not stand up to Hillary.

i'm surprised they all didn't bow to Hill when the "debate" started.

She's getting drilled.

But not doing horribly.

Her eyebrows look kind of freaky, tho.

Chris Dodd is NOT WEARING A FLAG LAPEL PIN!
CALL THE PRESS
why does c dodd hate amurica?

Okay her explanation of the Iran vote was right on target.
She is right. It can't be war or nothing. I do like that she is not a wimp, willing to use diplomatic measures to deal with issues. I also agree about her assessment of Iran and the republican guard. They are state sponsors of terror and they are working on a bomb.

Crazy Biden or Statesmanlike Biden?

I always wonder which will show up.

well at least biden has his lapel pin on lol

More Dodd and Biden.

The other three are making them look good.

It's a shame Gravel isn't allowed to the debate. He and Kucinich are the rare voices of integrity we ever get treated with. Oh well, he hasn't raised enough money and we all know the free market is the best way to pick a winner.

Obama is boring me to tears.

Edwards has disappeared.

Rob in DC @ 24:

This is killing me! The online feed is down. What is happening!!!!

Funny it was working OK for the Republican debate.

curtilingus @ 29:

Rob in DC @ 24:

This is killing me! The online feed is down. What is happening!!!!

Funny it was working OK for the Republican debate.

MSNBC.com sucks

HEY, it's about time to ask Kucinich a question damn it!!!

Good attack by Edwards.

Russert is such a piece of shit.

The last question directed towards Kucinich is about his UFO experience ?

What the hell is that shit ?

Obama should have said he would go as an Ex Gay Preacher/Gospel singer.
Scariest thing I have seen in a while. He has a perfect model in his campaign.

Oh good Tweety is attacking Hillary in the first 3 seconds of his commentary.

352 jack jett Says: This entire evening was a total Hillary Bash.

As it should be because she is Bush-lite.

The same criminals that stole the election for Bush want to get Hillary AND BILL in the White House again.

I can't believe people are actually falling for this maipulation once again.

nativeokie @ 342:

Ron @ 335:

nativeokie @ 330:

Ron @ 328:

Right which then caused those insurance companies to raise malpractice rates on the doctors and drove them out of business. It is a vicious cycle. He does not get to stay clean on this one. He can change, he can grow but he made millions helping cause this problem.

He didn't cause the problem. The insurance companies caused the problem. Quit listeening to the Faux news pundits.

We will agree to disagree. He benefited from this broken system. He won huge over inflated lawsuits that did directly impact doctors. Yes insurance companies used any excuse to raise a rate, these huge lawsuits that trial lawyers brought and won helped them do it.

Oh and Fox News is not even programmed into my TV. I happen to have 3 trial lawyers in my family. I have some experience with this. They are all very wealthy and loved their ability to win multi million dollar lawsuits when in fact the reality should have been much lower awards. Remember that 30% is a big draw.

Name one of the suits he won that was over-inflated. Name one.

You are so full of it when you claim to know trial lawyers that "love" to get much more than the cases deserve. The system is rigged so that they have to be exceptional lawyers just to get fair value for a med-mal. Go ahead, have a young mother come in with a brain-damaged baby and look to you for help.

BTW, you pulled the 30% figure out your wazoo. Fees in med-mal cases are set by statute and are scaled. Med-mal's are also extremely expensive to pursue and, when you lose, you get not only get nothing in fees - you are out the tens of thousands you invested.

i've rooting for the republicans if hillary gets the nomination
i'd rather have someone i don't agree with in office than a corrupt crony like her

budda @ 370:

i've rooting for the republicans if hillary gets the nomination
i'd rather have someone i don't agree with in office than a corrupt crony like her

That analogy is totally fkd up.

everyone but hillary got a free ride tonight.

jack jett

nativeokie @ 375:

fiver @ 368:

nativeokie @ 342:

Ron @ 335:
B.S
We will agree to disagree. He benefited from this broken system. He won huge over inflated lawsuits that did directly impact doctors. Yes insurance companies used any excuse to raise a rate, these huge lawsuits that trial lawyers brought and won helped them do it.

Oh and Fox News is not even programmed into my TV. I happen to have 3 trial lawyers in my family. I have some experience with this. They are all very wealthy and loved their ability to win multi million dollar lawsuits when in fact the reality should have been much lower awards. Remember that 30% is a big draw.

Name one of the suits he won that was over-inflated. Name one.

You are so full of it when you claim to know trial lawyers that "love" to get much more than the cases deserve. The system is rigged so that they have to be exceptional lawyers just to get fair value for a med-mal. Go ahead, have a young mother come in with a brain-damaged baby and look to you for help.

BTW, you pulled the 30% figure out your wazoo. Fees in med-mal cases are set by statute and are scaled. Med-mal's are also extremely expensive to pursue and, when you lose, you get not only get nothing in fees - you are out the tens of thousands you invested.

Okay first of all I "claim" nothing, I know. Two uncles and once cousin are trial lawyers. Ambulance chasers if you want. They have all done some pretty crappy lawsuits and 30% is what they get (yes some are based on a sliding scale but not all). You are right if they don't win they get nothing, they don't lose often though (or at least they did not up until some recent reforms).
You bring up the brain damaged baby, that is a valid lawsuit. I am all for valid lawsuits. The problem has been that there are a lot of lawsuits that are BS. Coffee in the lap at McDonalds and such. Yes many are overturned but if you take all the 100K settlements (which don't got to trial or get press) just to avoid trial for BS stuff and add it up it helps drive the problems. Overall our legal system gets clogged by this crap and cost all of us money. We pay the courts time, we pay in insurance premiums and we pay because our doctors don't practice because they cannot afford it.

f Williams and Russert for hogging the airtime

Bob Roberts @ 369:

Kevin Simms @ 2:

Kucinich won easily! Oh wait, has it started yet? Who cares, I still say Kucinich is the winner!

Yes. You and the 1.2% of the voters who plan to vote for Mr. Kucinich ...

What is the point in ridiculing people for voting even though 'they're votes won't count', like you're saying. I'm proudly voting for Kucinich, I don't care if only 1.2% of others will too.

Matthews doesn't believe in UFOs.

Matthews is a fuck.

Bush Bites @ 338:

Think Dodd just bested Hillary.

I think so too just on the issue of consistency. I think Spitzer is in a tough position as governor and if Hillary came out for it now, the repugs would liken it to amnesty and kill her in the general election cycle. Leadership on issues like these are going to have to come from the states since the federal government can't come to an agreement.

I like Kucinich saying impeachment every chance he gets. I think Bush and Cheney should be held accountable if not in this current term then after they leave office. He and Richardson have hardly been talked to tonight. Business as usual.

For future debates the candidates may want to review House floor footage of Senator Bernie Sanders VT-(I) discussing what is really happening to the American People, jobs and their U.S. Economy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5wfNnV6vTU

http://www.economyincrisis.org/content/faq

Bob Roberts @ 369:

Kevin Simms @ 2:

Kucinich won easily! Oh wait, has it started yet? Who cares, I still say Kucinich is the winner!

Yes. You and the 1.2% of the voters who plan to vote for Mr. Kucinich ...

Yes. We, the 1.2% of the smartest voters America has.

With a year to go in this obscenely protracted campaign season, maybe the evil candidates will be struck by the King's Evil and retreat to scrape their boils! Hey, a Celt can dream, especially on the eve of the Old New Year.

fiver @ 389:

nativeokie @ 375:

....

Okay first of all I "claim" nothing, I know. Two uncles and once cousin are trial lawyers. Ambulance chasers if you want. They have all done some pretty crappy lawsuits and 30% is what they get (yes some are based on a sliding scale but not all). You are right if they don't win they get nothing, they don't lose often though (or at least they did not up until some recent reforms).
You bring up the brain damaged baby, that is a valid lawsuit. I am all for valid lawsuits. The problem has been that there are a lot of lawsuits that are BS. Coffee in the lap at McDonalds and such. Yes many are overturned but if you take all the 100K settlements (which don't got to trial or get press) just to avoid trial for BS stuff and add it up it helps drive the problems. Overall our legal system gets clogged by this crap and cost all of us money. We pay the courts time, we pay in insurance premiums and we pay because our doctors don't practice because they cannot afford it.

I call B.S. You got this straight off T.V. The McDonalds' coffee reference proves it.

Some things they never told you about the McDonalds' coffee case on T.V.:

1. The Plaintiff suffered third degree burns on her lap (third degree burns are defined as charred skin);

2. The Plaintiff underwent 18 surgeries on her lap as a result of these burns;

3. The McDonalds in question had a history of serious burns caused by their coffee;

4. One of the items produced by the Plaintiff was a memo from the McDonalds' manager which, despite the prior injuries, instructed the staff to not turn down the temperature because the coffee would stay fresh longer.

What you know about this case is what McDonalds wanted you to know. Funny, but even though this case received national attention, none of the facts I've just listed got any network coverage. We were meant to assume that somebody just spilled normal coffee and received millions. Juries aren't idiots, they had reasons for their verdict - but McDonalds made sure you didn't hear any of them.

Oh, and Plaintiff's aren't "clogging" any courtrooms. The insurance companies are the masters of delay. All they have to do is delay a case for four years with a 25% return on investment and they, effectually, don't have to pay a thing.

And there is zero correlation between increased payment on suits and rate increases. There is, however, an amazing correlation with the timing of large scale rate increases (often on doctors and especially O.B./Gyn's) and large losses in the market (e.g. the dot-com bubble).

Furthermore, all the prior claims were settled with the stipulation that the terms remain confidential. No one will ever know exactly how much negligence McDonald's admitted to, nor the amount of payment to make the people shut up and go away and live with their disfigurements.

=====================

Most lawsuits involving injuries are not frivolous. Most people barely get enough to pay medical expenses. Tort reform is even cancelling or setting ridiculous ceilings on punitive damages for pain and suffering. Okay, you're miserable every day because that bastard ran into you head-on, but we'll only pay medical, that's all. That's not justice, that insurance companies getting their way. One of the highest costs in lawsuits is overpriced experts who testify. Nothing is perfect.

For frivolous, see george w. bush v. Enterprise Rent-A-Car. For the most whacked-out lawsuit of all, see bush v. Gore.

"Give this president an inch and he will take a mile."

So true...

no questions for Kucinich... are you kidding?

I didn't realize Richardson was there.

they are chewing her up. written in the language of the neocons... good for edwards

You would think they would have access to a better make up artists. Their skin looks like an oil slick...very shiney.

I want to marry Barrack.

jackjett

I just think Edwards and Obama sound naive about the world.
Hillary is right in her stance. You must have something to negotiate with when you go against a regime like Iran.

In the end they are actually dangerous. Saddam never was much of a threat to anyone but his own people (and Iran). Now the people of Iran may be wonderful people but they are ruled by a very radical group of Islamic Clerics who love money and power. Best we go after that first.

The more the Bushist fascist reichwing Talibangelicals and their know-nothing-Naderite supporters support Hillaryhating and Hillarybashing -- the more i think that they and their ilk totally SUCK.

Big time.

And must be stopped, at all costs.

Bush Bites @ 37:

"Give this president an inch and he will take a mile."

So true...

The way I heard it, give him an inch and he thinks he's a ruler.

Chris from Ohio @ 391:

"Debate organizers excluded former Sen. Mike Gravel of Alaska on grounds that he did not meet fundraising and polling thresholds."

And they call this a democracy.

My candidate! Shredded like habeas corpus! Disappeared! Before the first primary vote has even been cast!

And what about the guy that coughed up a million bucks so Gravel could be heard? NBC should get its license pulled! What fucking right do they have to determine what candidates we can hear? What a violation of the public trust!

I can't be the only one who can't stand Hillary, NBC's candidate.

StirFry @ 393:

budda @ 370:

i've rooting for the republicans if hillary gets the nomination
i'd rather have someone i don't agree with in office than a corrupt crony like her

Oh my god ! You're right! What are we all thinking!? Let's caucus right here , right now! Huckabee!

If that's the case, Im going for a batshit crazy candidate. Tancredo anyone?

Senator Chris Dodd will have his Talk Clock up to tally which candidate (or moderator) is getting the most time.

He left off Gravel: 0 time. That's a crime.

fiver @ 332:

nativeokie @ 325:

Edwards is screwed. He made a living making this a problem for doctors.

B.S. Doctors are more immune from suit than anyone. Insurance companies drive up their rates to increase profits or to make up for investment losses. Put down the Kool-Aid.

BTW, negligent doctors and hospitals kill more people every year than car accidents.

You are absolutely correct. I saw a University Study last year that compared malpractice premiums to the the returns in the stock market. When the market is doing well, malpractice rates are flat. When the market falls, malpractice rates go up considerably. It's all about gouging doctors to bulk up insurance carrier profits. It has nothing to do with claims. Several states have also tracked this phenomenon with the same results. This is a GOP talking point pushed by the insurance industry to cap law suit judgements.

Question; What are your priorities candidates? Do you want democracy now...then first Impeach and reestablish the rule of law or live in corporate anarchy. If impeachment is of off the table so is freedom.

I'm sooo glad shill russert asked Kucinich that question on his experience and belief in UFO's. Wow..talk about relevant to not a f*cking thing!! What an ass wipe. This whole debate was worthless...and to make it worse, MSNBC was taken off our cable network list for today, for some "UFO reason".

disgusting!!

neamhni @ 85:

nativeokie @ 76:

I am confused. They feel slamming Iran is bad, may destabilize the region, don't want to threaten them. In the next breath they threaten Pakistan, a country just waiting for an excuse to implode.

Good point! Good point!

Pay attention - they didn't threaten Pakistan - they said Bush was stupid for good all hot over a pint of uranium when Pakistan has tons! Only proves that the Iran threat was intended to raise oil prices which it did!!!

Damn it. I missed it (MSNBC "streaming" sucks, btw -- I don't HAVE Internet Exploder).

So did Edwards do pretty well? I just sounds like it was all about Hillary and Timmy keeping the topics on Republicans instead of Democratic policy (really... they shouldn't let him moderate anymore, or boycott).

Bush Bites @ 119:

nativeokie @ 109:

I have to say the Hillary bashing is getting old. The other democrats are sounding like the republicans now. She is holding her own and even if you don't like her at least she sticks to her guns.

I don't think she is a republican but she is a moderate. She is not a left leaning liberal (although I am surprised by that). She is really in the middle, I think the majority of America is there also. I am far more liberal than her but I also tend to agree with her on the foreign policy stuff. In the end, we want a Democrat to win. I can't see Edwards or Obama winning a general election.

I agree Hill's not doing bad.

But I think she should be bashed.

See how she holds up.

This is nothing compared to what the Repubs will put her through.

The problem is that it's terribly petty logic. When you're drowning, grabbing onto someone else so that you can attempt to climb up is not going to work. It just brings everyone down.

NOW MATHEW IS ALREADY ON THE AIR AFTERWARD SAYING SHE IS FOR IT, WHICH IS A BLATANT LIE. HE KNOWS SHE STOPPED SHORT OF ENDORSING THAT IMMIGRATION PLAN OF NY. HE IS BEGINNING TO BE A LIAR LIKE LOU DOBBS AND THE FOX CHANNEL, SEND HIM TO FOX HE WILL FIT IN NICELY THERE. IN BETWEEN HANNITY AND O'RILEY.

Kevin Simms @ 2:

Kucinich won easily! Oh wait, has it started yet? Who cares, I still say Kucinich is the winner!

I guess this means Kucinich will be the nominee.
Of course I think I'm the King of Poland so take
it from there. :-)

Daver @ 421:

God, how can you people choose Hillary Clinton as your nominee? It's pretty obvious that she has no policy initiatives whatsoever (or maybe thats what people like about her?) and only cares about becoming President not the American people. I'm from Canada and even I can tell that she is the most disingenuous person of all the Democratic candidates. How can you possibly change the system when you have been a key component of that system for twenty years? I would take any of the candidates over her.

I'm with ya! I honestly think she's a republican! She's a warhawk! The last fuckin thing we need is another saber rattler in office!

Daver @ 421:

God, how can you people choose Hillary Clinton as your nominee? It's pretty obvious that she has no policy initiatives whatsoever (or maybe thats what people like about her?) and only cares about becoming President not the American people. I'm from Canada and even I can tell that she is the most disingenuous person of all the Democratic candidates. How can you possibly change the system when you have been a key component of that system for twenty years? I would take any of the candidates over her.

This is called an ad hominem attack. Its fallacious, and therefore completely irrelevant. Why? Because you attack her character rather than her arguments (policies).

What is very clear from your statement is that YOU don't know what her policy initiatives are. Its not that difficult. Go to her website and read them.

Then go to Obamas and read his.

Then go to Richardson's and read his.

Then compare, contrast, and see that they are basically all the same.

And, if you really think she is just more of the same...you didnt live through Bill's administration, and then Bush's. Either that, or you just have no analytical skills whatsoever.

nonbeliever @ 423:

liberalNmoderation @ 422:

Daver @ 421:

God, how can you people choose Hillary Clinton as your nominee? It's pretty obvious that she has no policy initiatives whatsoever (or maybe thats what people like about her?) and only cares about becoming President not the American people. I'm from Canada and even I can tell that she is the most disingenuous person of all the Democratic candidates. How can you possibly change the system when you have been a key component of that system for twenty years? I would take any of the candidates over her.

I'm with ya! I honestly think she's a republican! She's a warhawk! The last fuckin thing we need is another saber rattler in office!

Ok I'll ignore Dave since he doesn't cast a vote here in the states and ask you. If Hillary is the nominee and she's up against Giuliani or Thompson or Romney in the general election, what will you do?

Against any of those schmucks she'd get my vote for damn sure...she'd be the lesser of two evils.

nonbeliever @ 428:

liberalNmoderation @ 427:

nonbeliever @ 423:

liberalNmoderation @ 422:
Ok I'll ignore Dave since he doesn't cast a vote here in the states and ask you. If Hillary is the nominee and she's up against Giuliani or Thompson or Romney in the general election, what will you do?

Against any of those schmucks she'd get my vote for damn sure...she'd be the lesser of two evils.

Fair enough. I can tell you as a New Yorker that you don't want the fascist bully Giuliani in the White House. Aside from Ron Paul, all of the other repug candidates agree with Bush and would definitely take us into Iran if elected.

Hillary isn't my first choice. My first choice isn't running (Gore) but I don't think she's the warmonger alot of us in the left and middle try to paint her as. Assuming she is the nominee and is elected with a stronger Democratic majority than her husband had she may end up having a more progressive record than Bill Clinton did and I liked the Clinton years.

Ah the Clinton years....good times good times...seems to me the only people who hated the Clinton era are the 24%'ers, lol
I'm with ya on Gore as well, I think he'd be an excellent prez. As for Ron Paul, I don't know much about the guy except that he SEEMS to be a classic Republican, not what the neo-cons have bastardized the republican party into these days...I'm for Kucinich, though I admit he's a long shot, but it's still early, and maybe the Americans can see in time, that he's the one Dem, that isn't beholden to any corporation, SIG, or PAC...he's a statesman, and that scares the shit out of the DNC!

StCyrlyMe @ 395:

Senator Obama was the clear winner. He got his message out without the nasty foul image they promote. His mannerism and ability to express exactly what he will do for this country when he becomes president and the knowledge that he will not burden us with the secretes in our government (illegal i might add), we currently have.

He has proven that by being the ONLY presidential candidate that has presented his personal TAX STATEMENTS for our view, which is very important. This open and honest act among other issues he has presented, explains the enormous support of people of all walks of life and colors, he has all across this country. We are tired of the games.

He did himself well and is well on his way to a very close but successful conclusion and this is not to say that he will win, but he is so close it terrifies the powers that be and this is a truth that really needs to be uncovered and more in the open if we had truthful media that were not on this crusade of deciding for us. The people are going to call it as it is and we are not allowing these coroporations lead by Bush to choose our president..

These national polls that give Senator Clinton such a big lead over all others consist of only about twelve hundred people and they are all over this country.

We are going to get a very different outcome during the primaries. I am positive he will not get the real support his deserves from media , which is not going to stop him from the inevitable in the eye's of his supporters. We are going to keep the $5 donations pouring into his campaign, to make sure he is well financed to achieve the ultimate goal.

By the way I loved Senator Bidens blast on the republican misfit in Guleannie(or what ever) He is a joke and republicans should be embarrassed to even present him but the democrat that will face him is most assured to win big time.

What message is that exactly? That it's ok to attack people for the way they vote, when he doesnt' even show UP to vote, to put his opinions on record? yea, right.

Oh, Dennis is there......

(He was hidden behind Richardson.)

I want to know why I should not vote for Hill. I already know why the war is stupid and why Iran is wrong. Oh oh Kucinich getting a Question.

http://video.msn.com/?mkt=en-us&brand=msnbc&tab=m5&rf=http://www.msnbc.m...

jack jett @ 34:

You haven't missed anything from Kusinich and very little from Dodd......Is Gravel even there?

Gravel scored too low in the polls and doesn't have enough cash to be considered. Besides, all he does is get angry and waste time in a boring debate. I still can't watch arrrrrgh.

Dennis gets the first applause of the night.

But it was weak.

MSNBC is doing fine on my TV

Good point HulksHeros. Net neutrality showing up in access to the political process. Unless you belong to "this" club for "x" amount of dollars, you cant watch.

The more i watch Hilary, the more i realize what a Republican she is. It's making me ill.

Nicole Belle @ 36:

whb @ 10:

It's a shame the live feed doesn't seem to be working online... I would love to watch, but msnbc's video doesn't work...

You might try going directly to MSNBC.com to see if you can pick it up. It's not always successful hyperlinking from another site.

I tried that and got a message saying the video was unavailable. I'm using Firefox.

Kucinich for president in 08.

OK, Obama just brought up civil liberties.

MSNBC does not acknowledge the existence of any browsers other than Explorer. You can only view the political process if you use Microsoft's Explorer, or pay money to receive MSNBC on the tube.

Josh @ 430:

fiver @ 137:

Just because you've been married to a mechanic for thirty years doesn't mean you can fix my car.

Well it depends...did you go to "mechanic school" (aka Law school) and then had a baby, while serving on several large companies' boards, and then proceeded to live in the White House, visit 82 countries on "peace missions," get in deep with studying heathcare reform, learn how to politically handle criticism, and still come out to win a seat in the US Senate, twice?

jus sayin.

Just saying what? She went to law school, yes, but hasn't held a single position since then that was not directly related to her being married to Bill.

She had to go to Arkansas to find a bar exam she could pass; her first "job" was at Fayetteville Law School (where Bill just happened to teach); she got a position with the Rose Law firm after Bill became Attorney General (real tough interview, I'm sure); and made partner in two years (after Bill was made Governor). Every other position she held (most especially those on the Boards of companies like WalMart) was directly related to her being First Lady with a law degree. And name one major accomplishment she had, legal or otherwise, after being given all this nepotistic privilege.

George W. Bush founded and was CEO of an oil company, directed a Baseball team, and was Governor of Texas. He did well at none of these positions, nor would he have had them if it weren't for daddy's name, money and connections. HRC is exactly the same. She keeps riding her husband's name and connections with nothing to show for it. She "got in deep" with healthcare all right, and because of her ego and incompetence, the U.S. is still the only industrialized nation without a national system over a decade later. She's been in the Senate, yes, but as a Bush lap dog. She voted both for war in Iraq and to give W and excuse to attack Iran.

BTW, as you should be aware, Obama was told before he left that Lieberman/Kyl would not be voted on that day and the decision to bring up the vote was made at the 11th hour. Come to think of it, at least she has some skill at dirty tricks.

Hillary will clean their clocks.

How many damn debates can they have???

Is anyone getting debate overload???

It isn't even 2008 yet! I'm sick of 'em already!!!

Hillary has the double digit lead. And who is she going up against? Rudy? The thrice married guy who is currently married to his mistress? And who is pro-choice? He's gonna beat Hillary?

Dream on, Klingon. Hillary will win in 2008!

Hillary did not win last night. In fact she was almost shouting her answers, and did you guys see the way she was murdering poor Mr. Obama with her eyes. Also, she's acting like she's already the nominee with her "when I become President...." . Hillary is a tyrant, she had her turn in the 90s as first lady. Now she needs to step aside and give someone else a turn.