Now its all just talk perhaps – but hell the others are not even talking about things I want.

I did not like Obama’s talk on Health Care, I think Edwards is right and handled it correctly (one that he is not attacking Obama as the media likes to set thing up as, and that Obamas plan could possibly a compromise that ends up working for most people) – but his heartfelt story about the poor man who could not speak for over 50 years waiting for surgery…unbelievalbe in America. The part I did not like about Obama’s talk is that it was all about giving lobby people a seat at the table (no… not every seat) – but what the hell I don’t get a seat at the table and did not think his answer had to center on making his compromise sound uplifting. I found it a bit false in that people started to eat it up and clap and he got into it to try and preach (the crowd lifting him rather than the other way around). I guess it was his supporters, but what made it odd to me was that his answer was not all that good or uplifting – but people were treating it that way. I missed the first 35 minutes, so one this point I watched Clinton, Edwards, and Obama very closely as this is an example of the things I am interested in and will likely make my choice on three items: War, Env, & Health (and someone who upholds their oath of office).

I used to be going for Obama, but started to go more toward Edwards or Hillary. I think last night put Obama as a distant third to me. I imagine some of this is bias as I started to go that way already. I am going to look in each of the threads and search on the candidates names to see what kind of impression supporters of the different candidates went.

One more point – I agree that both Fox & CNN were boosting Hillary, and setting up Obama as the only possible 2nd place person (activly putting down Edwards). I do not like this and think it fairly transparent – and what a big supris, the one currently viable candidate that would do something for the 90% of us gets spit on repeatadly.

I will also say that I feel a bit like I am missing out in that I want to support a woman or minority for President since I know they are capble and know it is long overdue…but I find myself boosting the wite male… I guess one has to look beyond that and just go with who you trust, and who’s puts out a platform that you can stand on.

Last point – the debates (at least early on) would not be as good without the DK and Gravel.

There are more than two people running for president. This is more than a contest of firsts — first woman and first black man. I like Edwards, who seems to get overlooked by the ‘firsts’ contest. Loved his video submission.

When it comes to the Clintons we need to understand the past so we do not repeat it. It will not be enough, for sure, to criticize the Clintons in yet a third term for getting nothing done and setting up the Republicans to win again, just as in the past.

Next time I hope CNN mixes up the age, gender and ethnic diversity of the questioners. I would say that 70% of those who were aired as questioners were male and between the age of 25-50.

One of the elephants in the room at the debates has been the Israeli Palestinian conflict. How many times will this critical issue not be discussed, debated. The Israeli Lobby is happy with that. I am sure the candidates are perfectly happy too.

Kucinich has recently challenged the I-Lobby and he was slammed by the lobby.

I just realized that this debate took place at the Citadel — interesting. It’s the moral equivalent of the Repugs debating at Oberlin.

or maybe Kent State ?

janda @ 161

It doesn’t have to be. Vermont’s state sales tax is set up so that their is only a tax once necessary items such as clothes reach a certain price.

But it excludes capital gains taxes, and other taxes on non-comsumption items.

As your wealth increases, consumption forms a proportionally smaller percentage of your income or expenditures.

It’s regressive.

Why don’t they tax capital gains? Letting wealthier people off the hook that way is crazy.

Of course, you are talking about state taxation and not federal. I suppose there is a difference.

I do like Senator Clinton’s observation that a lot of jobs would be created if we really tackled global warming.

Al Gore gives that line more convincingly.

Gravel is pushing a consumption tax over the income tax?

That’s beyond stupid. It’s a regressive policy that falls most on the backs of the poor.

Taxed on income, taxed on consumption, those who spend everything they make are being taxed more regressively either way.

Gotta think more creatively as a progressive!

Marion in Savannah @ 258

I just realized that this debate took place at the Citadel — interesting. It’s the moral equivalent of the Repugs debating at Oberlin.

My oldest daughter went to Oberlin great school. Great education, diverse and they are committed to helping people financially. Would like to see the Republicans debate at Oberlin. That is a great idea

Not exactly. The actual equivalent would be for the Dems to debate at Bob Jones University.