Similar Plotlines In Dem Debate Sequel

Vaughn Ververs: Tension Increased In New Hampshire Debate, But Story Remains The Same

(CBS)  This analysis was written by Vaughn Ververs, senior political editor for CBSNews.com.

---

This is the summer of sequels at the box office and Sunday's Democratic presidential debate fit right in. The scenery and local audience in New Hampshire was far different than these candidates addressed in South Carolina last month and the dramatic tension reached a slightly higher level. But the basic plotlines remained unchanged.

Former North Carolina Senator John Edwards cast himself once again in the role of the aggressive progressive, determined to claim the party's anti-war, anti-Bush mantle, mostly at the expense of front-runner Hillary Clinton. The senator from New York stuck to her script, refusing to apologize for her 2002 vote authorizing the invasion of Iraq and parting ways with Edwards on the war on terrorism. And Barack Obama stayed true to his practical idealism, with a twist of added policy heft and quick wit thrown in.

Just minutes into the debate, the three found themselves in a sharp exchange over the war in Iraq and terrorism when Clinton pointedly disagreed with Edwards' characterization of the war on terror as a "bumper sticker" and a mere "political slogan." Clinton not only refused to endorse that view, she came dangerously close -- for a Democratic candidate -- to complimenting the Bush administration. "I believe we are safer than we were" before 9/11, she said before adding: "we are not yet safe enough."

As it has been for nearly the past four years though, it was the war which provided most of the spark and starkly demonstrated one of the major fault lines in the Democratic race.

While Clinton and Obama sought to explain their recent votes against the Iraq funding bill, Edwards struck hard, criticizing both of the senators for "quietly" opposing the administration's policy on timelines for withdrawal, insisting: "it's the difference between leading and following."

For her part, Clinton sought to cast the war as a unifying issue where Democrats have the upper hand, despite nuances in their approach. Noting that nearly all the Republican presidential candidates support the war, Clinton said, "the differences among us are minor. The differences between us and the Republicans are major."

But it was Obama who took offense at Edwards' line, refusing to cede any ground in the staunch anti-war camp. Alluding to Edwards' original vote for the war, the senator from Illinois told Edwards: "The fact is that I opposed this war from the start, so you're about four and a half years late on leadership on this issue."

Edwards returned to the original authorization for the war when he and Clinton were both asked to explain how they felt comfortable enough to vote for it when they did not read the entire National Intelligence Estimate first. Clinton tried to brush past the issue, saying she had enough information while Edwards explained in more detail, adding: "one difference we do have is I think I was wrong."

[jbb333]

I will admit that I am a Clinton supporter, but I will also be voting for any Democrat over any Republican in the general election. What I can't understand about the demand for Clinton to say how wrong she was is this: In march 2003, when we invaded Iraq, only 18% of the nation was against that decision by the Decider. So about 80% of the nation themselves supported invading Iraq. Now they don't.
In my opinion, Clinton's stand now matches most of the rest of the country -- Bush evaded her and about 50% of the voters who are now against the invasion of Iraq, in terms of his intentions when given the authorization.
I don't understand why Democrats can't understand this one concept of Senator Clinton's: BUSH lied.

[bobgee_1999]

This is going to be one hillarious election. There's no candidate in either party that anybody really supports, and all either have little experience, questionable pasts, or some obvious impediment to being elected (one's female, one's black, one's a Mormon, and one is a neo-con loon named after an amphibian). Ya'll slug it out.

[formrusmcsgt]

What I can't understand about the demand for Clinton to say how wrong she was is this: In march 2003, when we invaded Iraq, only 18% of the nation was against that decision by the Decider.

Posted by jbb333 at 07:28 AM : Jun 04, 2007

Firstof all jbb333, your numbers are skewed. 28% of us opposed this debacle from the outset, not 18%.

And secondly, Hillary's refusal to admit that she made a mistake is important because we don't need to replace one stubborn, arrogant leader with another.

[pwrslm]

I will admit that I am a Clinton supporter, but I will also be voting for any Democrat over any Republican in the general election
Posted by jbb333

Its pretty obvious that Americans dont use good sense to pick thier elected leaders. If party politics were ever going to work, they would have done so by now. Both Demo and Repub parties are corrupt, they both decieved us. Look at the so called campain finance reform laws, or should I say, the lack of effective laws that should be in place, or should have been, except for the intentional disregard and lack of respect to the law that both parties are guilty of.

No, we need a new party that is willing to put forward a solid agenda that demonstrates the protection of the people, not for indistry lobby.

Billy Bob was 100% backed by Hilly Bob, and to boot, she had just as much of her hand in the whitewater bag and Billy Bob. You cant trust either one of them, they are no better than thieves in the night.

[book54552134]

What these people say in debates like this (whether Democrats or GOP,) one should believe nothing they say.
Once elected, they will do exactly as they wish or what is beneficial to them politically at any point in time.
Clinton's advancements are particularly worrisome. Despite what she says, except for woman's rights, she will not support the positions of the liberal base of the Democratic Party.
Still, after 8 years of Dubya and 12 years of Reagan/Bush I, even she seems to be the better choice of evil vs a GOP candidate.

[kiwinioe]

jbb333:
1. we're electing a leader not a follower
2. Clinton had access to the entire text of the National Intelligence Estimate before voting for the war, but did not read it. If you don't think she should apologize for her vote, maybe you'd accept an apology for voting without reading all the available information and then continuing to say her vote was based on her understanding of all available information.

[truthspeake1]

Hillary has become a politician...she was a better First Lady!

[drummer94]

Lets see. She "stuck to her script." He used "quick wit". He got his foot pulled from his mouth for"bumper sticker" and "political slogan." One gets easisly upset and emotional. And the repubs ain't got nobody. Sheesh! Gonna be one heii of an election cycle.

[formrusmcsgt]

Hey Hillary you're not fooling any of us who actually pay attention to your flip flopping and know that you are out for yourself only and your own political power.
Posted by singinrick at 08:05 AM : Jun 04, 2007

I would like to agree with you rick, but the fact that this broad is leading the polls shows that you are as wrong as you can be about her ability to fool people.

[processor2]

YAWN !!!!

...

[hugepeter]

"the differences among us are minor. The differences between us and the Republicans are major." very good comment.If you blog or have a webpage check out http://www.widgetmate.com

[omega39-2009]

What these people say in debates like this (whether Democrats or GOP,) one should believe nothing they say.
Once elected, they will do exactly as they wish or what is beneficial to them politically at any point in time.

Pity we couldn't put them under oath and then prosecute when its revealed that they lied. We might get some real answers to real issues this way.

[pepperp1]

Good debate but it is time for the bookends to go.........Blitzer was weak..

[hugepeter]

"we are not yet safe enough." is that too risky.If you blog or have a webpage check out http://www.widgetmate.com

[antoniof123]

For all you neo cons out there that are now trying to say you are or were a Dem and are not voting for this one or that one. You are just too funny. First of all it is impression that will win the election not what you know. It was stated the best in the after the interview by one of the voters and this is the impression that America got. Two for one, you elect Hillary you get Bill, and like it or not neo cons. If Bill could run this election he would win hands down. Face it he won twice in a row and with the majority vote. So for some reason I don't think he would have a problem this election against any one of them even his wife.

But the fact is he can't run but his wife can and she has already stated she is going to use him in a very large capacity. So with that said you have a high probablity of having your next President be a woman how is the wife of one of the most popular Presidents in history. His approval rating is higher than any other and his approval rating in the world is the highest of all. So can it your opinions at this point are still too early too tell.

But you could try doing what you neo cons do best throw a lot of mud and hope that it sticks.

[far_point200]

Will the real Jane Fonda please stand up!

[usa1881]

Nothing but the usual BS from the Democratic Candidates. I wish one of them really stood for something besides "opposing the war but supporting our troops". What a bunch of marlakey.

Hillary is still a cold, calculating NOTHING and Obama still carries water for Mr. Byrd.

My vote will go to Fred Thompson - he's got character, courage, integrity - something that NONE of the Dems have. Sure would like Sam Waterston to be his running mate, though.

[usa1881]

Nothing but the usual BS from the Democratic Candidates. I wish one of them really stood for something besides "opposing the war but supporting our troops". What a bunch of marlakey.

Hillary is still a cold, calculating NOTHING and Obama still carries water for Mr. Byrd.

My vote will go to Fred Thompson - he's got character, courage, integrity - something that NONE of the Dems have. Sure would like Sam Waterston to be his running mate, though.

[usa1881]

Nothing but the usual BS from the Democratic Candidates. I wish one of them really stood for something besides "opposing the war but supporting our troops". What a bunch of marlakey.

Hillary is still a cold, calculating NOTHING and Obama still carries water for Mr. Byrd.

My vote will go to Fred Thompson - he's got character, courage, integrity - something that NONE of the Dems have. Sure would like Sam Waterston to be his running mate, though.

[usa1881]

Nothing but the usual BS from the Democratic Candidates. I wish one of them really stood for something besides "opposing the war but supporting our troops". What a bunch of marlakey.

Hillary is still a cold, calculating NOTHING and Obama still carries water for Mr. Byrd.

My vote will go to Fred Thompson - he's got character, courage, integrity - something that NONE of the Dems have. Sure would like Sam Waterston to be his running mate, though.

[usa1881]

Nothing but the usual BS from the Democratic Candidates. I wish one of them really stood for something besides "opposing the war but supporting our troops". What a bunch of marlakey.

Hillary is still a cold, calculating NOTHING and Obama still carries water for Mr. Byrd.

My vote will go to Fred Thompson - he's got character, courage, integrity - something that NONE of the Dems have. Sure would like Sam Waterston to be his running mate, though.

[nolalou]

In most recent presidential elections, you could pretty much figure out in advace who the major party candidates were going to be. Not so this year, and to be honest, I'm not overly enthusiatic about any of them. I do know I not vote for any of the Republicans in the race, since just about all of them support the war in Iraq.

As far as the 'promises' they make on things like universial health care, or imigration, they seem to forget that a President is not a dictator, whatever they propose has to get past congress. Hillary of all people should know that. Look what happend to Bill Clintons health care proposals once the big money drug companies spent millions to defeat it!

[jn122736]

Obama, with CBS%u2019s help, is deftly playing the typical political con-game with the vote for/against the Iraq invasion.

Obama%u2019s sole bona fides are his expounded, blown-out-of-proportion, speech at a democratic convention and the continued hero-image building by the MSN. Remember, the MSN is mostly corporate owned/controlled now.

%u201CHe reminding voters that he alone of the major candidates opposed the war from the very beginning.%u201D The natural conception of that by voters is to assume that he would have voted against it. But since Obama did not have access to the same information that the others did, and was not in a position to vote one way or the other, his claim is based solely on hindsight and is questionable at best. We have to accept his word that he would have voted against it.

Clinton refuses to admit she was wrong in voting for the invasion and even says we are safer because of it. I can%u2019t see any change in policy if she is president.

Edwards has said, repeatedly, that he was wrong and would have voted against it if he had it to do over. Once again this is hindsight, and he could be saying that just for campaign purposes. However, at this point in time, and given the choices, I would prefer Edwards as the democratic candidate.
But like many others posting here I would vote for any of the above over a continuance of a republican controlled administrative department (presidency).

[downtowner97]

Ron Paul is the only candidate willing to say that we bring Muslim hatred on ourselves by meddling in the Middle East and failing to understand the cultures of the people there. Respecting Muslim nations is the only way to guarantee our security.

We respect Pakistan. We don't occupy Pakistan. We ask the Pakistani government to hand over terrorists, and they do. Pakistan has nukes. Iraq wanted to be treated like Pakistan. Iran wants to be treated like Pakistan. Iraq sought nukes. Iran is developing nukes. Does all this make sense to anyone?

[gunownerdan]

Dr. Ron Paul would very easily beat any of these democratic candidates.

[gunownerdan]

Dr. Ron Paul would very easily beat any of these democratic candidates.

[nottellin1]

Dem or Rep, no candidate gets my vote except the one that votes against immigration reform and get tough at the border.

[crystalblue3]

Go Obama!!! woot!

[processor2]

Whatever happened to the DEMOCRAT party concept of:

"Ask NOT what your party can do for you, but rather, what YOU can do for your country"

?????

Hillary sounds to me like she is plagarizing the "communist manifesto"
Hillary also sounds like Venezualan's communist president, Hugo Chavez, when she speaks of nationalizing the health industry and energy, too.

LET'S BRING BACK
"Ask NOT what your country can do for you, but rather, what YOU can do for your country"

...

[processor2]

Whatever happened to the DEMOCRAT party concept of:

"Ask NOT what your party can do for you, but rather, what YOU can do for your country"

?????

Hillary sounds to me like she is plagarizing the "communist manifesto"
Hillary also sounds like Venezualan's communist president, Hugo Chavez, when she speaks of nationalizing the health industry and energy, too.

LET'S BRING BACK
"Ask NOT what your country can do for you, but rather, what YOU can do for your country"

...

[davidchery]

Why are democrats arguing about the war in Iraq? It's like republicans arguing about Social Security, or like men arguing about abortion. A waste of time, jibber-jabber, there is no answer. Hello! They didn't vote for the war. They voted to give the president the authority to make war. If they really wanted to, they could take it away. This is the Bush war, he's the decider, and he decided to take us into something we couldn't win. There is nothing to win. And health care? As long as oil companies can charge whatever they want for a gallon of gasoline, and doctors can charge whatever they want for an exam, they will fight a public system. Too much money involved, folks!

[infidel_us]

We're gonna tax "the rich." Who are "the rich?" According to Muhamad Obama, it's people who earn over $250k/yr. That's ALL these losers know how to do.....take away from the producers and give it away to the slackers. Right out of the communist manifesto. Figures it's broadcast on the (C)ommunist (N)ews (N)etwork!

[infidel_us]

As long as oil companies can charge whatever they want for a gallon of gasoline.....
Posted by davidchery at 12:21 PM : Jun 04, 2007

Home grown terrorists and home grown communitsts - both equally distructive. . In case you're interested, Exxon makes about $0.08 (that's 8 cents) on a gallon of gas. How much do the FEDS MAKE?? 50-60 cent per gallon... and all the do is skim it off the top!

I suppose you believe that socialist Hillary when she says she wants to "TAKE" those profits and use them for funding alternative energy research? HA!

[lars008-2009]

NOW CAN WE KILL THEM???
If they can kill us, we can kill them

Qaeda warns of attacks 'worse than 9/11'
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=070530102648.wuwa6k96&show_article=1

Hizbullah Deputy Sec-Gen Sheikh Naim Qassem: We Have Jurisprudent Permission to Carry Out 'Martyrdom' Operations, Fire Missiles on Israeli Civilians From Ayatollah Khomeini
http://memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD154907

Switching Sides: Inside The Enemy Camp

But then in 2000, well before his arrest, something happened which would make Abas question everything he believed in: a fatwa, a religious edict, was issued by Osama bin Laden.

"It should be understood that killing Americans and Jews anywhere found are the highest act of worship and the highest form of good deeds in the eyes of Allah," Simon quotes bin Laden.

Abas and his fellow commanders were ordered to read the fatwa to their men and make sure they carried it out. The others obeyed, but Abas refused. It was his moment of truth. He firmly believed that jihad was to be fought only on the battlefield in defense of Islam; he had always been taught that the killing of civilians had nothing to do with holy war and that it was forbidden.

The fatwa justified killing non-Muslim civilians everywhere.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/05/04/60minutes/main2761108.shtml?source=RSSattr=60Minutes_2761108
American Al Qaeda Member Threatens Attack
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/05/29/terror/main2865282.shtml

[stevepdx1]

"My vote will go to Fred Thompson - he's got character, courage, integrity - something that NONE of the Dems have. Sure would like Sam Waterston to be his running mate, though.
Posted by USA1881"

I have no problem with someone voting Repub if you can at least support your beliefs with thought and reason.

But voting for two actors - Thompson and Waterston - is completely idiodic

There should be an IQ test before they let people vote

[madash3ll]

Having not seen the candidates that much, last night was my chance to form an opinion on some. Right off one thought came to mind; I can't see where all the hype about Obama comes from...unless last night he was medicated. Clinton was (as expected) totally gray...never black or white to her! She's one of those people who can't be wrong simply because she won't take a side. There was certainly not a winner to the debate...Biden should get acknowledged for being the most truthful and forthcoming of the lot. But, the American people are the true losers here if they are forced to choose a President out of the dismal group assembled to debate last night. I'm certainly going to hope I see something that I can believe in on Tuesday, because I refuse to believe that what I've seen so far is the best the people of the US can be offered.

[infidel_us]

.......too fvck!n' funny....
Posted by veteran71 at 01:32 PM : Jun 04, 2007

Here's another one of those hallucinating dems hitting the crack pipe once too often. :)

[lars008-2009]

Posted by stevepdx1 at 01:28 PM : Jun 04, 2007

Character is far more important than intellect in making a man a good citizen Theodore Roosevelt

In any moment of decision the best thing you can do is the right thing, the next best thing is the wrong thing, and the worst thing you can do is nothing. Theodore Roosevelt

I would rather go out of politics feeling that I had done what was right than stay in with the approval of all men, knowing in my heart that I had acted as I ought not to. - Speech to the New York Assembly 1884 Theodore Roosevelt

Our country offers the most wonderful example of democratic government on a giant scale that the world has ever seen; and the peoples of the world are watching to see whether we succeed or fail.- Saratoga, New York September 27, 1910 Theodore Roosevelt

We believe in all our hearts in democracy; in the capacity of the people to govern themselves; and we are bound to succeed, for our success means not only our own triumph, but the triumph of the cause of the rights of the people throughout the world, and the uplifting of the banner of hope for all the nations of mankind. - Saratoga, New York September 27, 1910 Theodore Roosevelt

Avoid the base hypocrisy of condemning in one man what you pass over in silence when committed by another. - Cambridge, Massachusetts March 11, 1890 Theodore Roosevelt

[stevepdx1]

Lars008 - not sure I get your point

Teddy Roosevelt was a great man and has some wonderful quotes

Sorry, though - He would not recognize the repub party of today

I'll bet you don't recall his quotes on conservation and protecting the environment, do you?

[lars008-2009]

demonic-rats lead The Chorus of Useful Idiots

Leftist Support of Islamist Terror

Most shocking is the outright sympathy of many leftist-liberals for Islamic fascism. They said little about the murder of 500 Russian civilians, many of them children, but screamed week after week because some Arab savage at Abu Ghraib prison wore a bag on his head. They cared nothing about the beheadings committed by the Islamo-savages or the execution of 12 Nepalese. David Horowitz gives an excellent discussion of who this "Left" really is. He calls them neo-communist, I call them Leftist-Liberals. I'm a classical Liberal myself and I feel it's time to remove this irrational element that has been allowed to poison our good name.
http://www.sullivan-county.com/immigration/list.htm
The Chorus of Useful Idiots
http://www.sullivan-county.com/immigration/thornton.htm
Supporters of Muslim Terrorism on the un-Religious Left
http://www.sullivan-county.com/id2/index1.htm
Exposing Leftists' Radical Islam Connection
http://www.sullivan-county.com/immigration/left_islam.htm
Definitions, Lies, and Losing Your Head
http://www.sullivan-county.com/immigration/def_lies.htm
Shocking (Liberal) Silence
http://www.sullivan-county.com/immigration/leftist_silence.htm
See no evil: Why the Left is blind to suffering
http://www.sullivan-county.com/immigration/no_evil.htm
When is violent speech still free speech?
http://www.sullivan-county.com/immigration/speech.htm

[stevepdx1]

Lars008

thats all you've got, seriously? The old trick of trying to say that Dems like terrorists, so better vote for republicans is getting stale

Of course the Dems want to protect us from terror and they will probably do a better job of it when we restore our credibility throughout the world.

Trying to say that only the repubs can protect us is tired, smacks of desperation and is simply not true

No run along back to the sean slannity message board

[jsilver2th]

Boy Wolf really let us down on the big debate-

(1) Why the put up job on the so called questions from audience members? No sooner did one or two speak and Wolf totally re-ask the question changing it entirely- hope those people enjoyed bring your props. Also, what's with the set up first two questions with people with family members in Iraq and their little speeches- So it wasn't questions from the public at all it was what Wolf thought they should have asked if you had his brains.

(2) Then Wolf talks right over a lot of answers thanks to lousy electronic or manipulation- you could almost understand it and I can't wait until some blogger picks it up to show how old Wolf completely manipulated things. They owe Gravel and Richardson apologies especially. All in all it was a big let down but when some bloggers get done trandscibing your "off the air" banter CNN is going to be exposed as real manipulator with its own agenda- can't wait.

[lars008-2009]

what do you call an organization that:

kills you if you don't join it...

http://islamqa.com/index.php?ref=82201&ln=eng&txt=islam%20law%20kill%20kaafir

kills you if you leave it...

http://islamqa.com/index.php?ref=696&ln=eng&txt=kaafir%20kill

kills you if you don't do what they tell you to do..

http://islamqa.com/index.php?ref=6035&ln=eng&txt=kaafir%20kill

kills you if you speak against it%u2026.

http://islamqa.com/index.php?QR=22809&ln=eng

kills anybody that is not a member of it...

http://www.hauns.com/~DCQu4E5g/koran5.html

still practices slavery

http://islamqa.com/index.php?ref=12562&ln=eng&txt=slavery

still practices pagan rituals...

http://answering-islam.org/Silas/pagansources.htm

allows the r a p e of babies and animals...

http://www.homa.org/default.asp?TOCID=2083225445

a. satanic cult???
b. islam???
c. all the above???

Our Prophet commanded us to fight the kaafirs when we are able and to attack them in their homelands and to give them three choices before we enter their lands: either they become Muslim and be like us, sharing our rights and duties; or they pay the jizyah (poll tax) and feel themselves subdued; or they fight, in which case their wealth, women, children and homes become permissible as booty for the Muslims.
http://islamqa.com/index.php?ref=13759&ln=eng&txt=before%20islam%20arabia%20pagan

[jsilver2th]

Hey lars008:

Whatever kind of rituals they practice they are not "pagan" rituals-

[jsilver2th]

For your edification here's an excerpt from Wikipedia: "Paganism (from Latin paganus, meaning "an old country dweller, rustic") is a term which, from a Western perspective, has come to connote a broad set of spiritual or cultic practices or beliefs of any folk religion, and of historical and contemporary polytheism religions in particular.The term can be defined broadly, to encompass the faith traditions outside the Abrahamic monotheistic group of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam."

See Paganism broadly means religions OUTSIDE Judaism, Christianity and ISLAM...

There is no need to insult Paganism linking it to your laundry list of evils...

[lars008-2009]

Hey lars008:

Whatever kind of rituals they practice they are not "pagan" rituals-
Posted by jsilver2th at 02:14 PM : Jun 04, 2007

yes they do... they practice many of their same arab pagan rituals they did beofre muhammad ali baba decided to worship only the moon god allah...

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=arab+paganism rituals islam

[jsilver2th]

lars: Oh well if you are going at it like that then you should realize many of the common Christmas practices are Pagan rituals as well...

[processor2]

Whatever happened to the DEMOCRAT party concept of:

"Ask NOT what your party can do for you, but rather, what YOU can do for your country"

?????

Hillary sounds to me like she is plagarizing the "communist manifesto"
Hillary also sounds like Venezualan's communist president, Hugo Chavez, when she speaks of nationalizing the health industry and energy, too.

LET'S BRING BACK
"Ask NOT what your country can do for you, but rather, what YOU can do for your country"

...

[processor2]

Whatever happened to the DEMOCRAT party concept of:

"Ask NOT what your party can do for you, but rather, what YOU can do for your country"

?????

Hillary sounds to me like she is plagarizing the "communist manifesto"
Hillary also sounds like Venezualan's communist president, Hugo Chavez, when she speaks of nationalizing the health industry and energy, too.

LET'S BRING BACK
"Ask NOT what your country can do for you, but rather, what YOU can do for your country"

...

[processor2]

Whatever happened to the DEMOCRAT party concept of:

"Ask NOT what your party can do for you, but rather, what YOU can do for your country"

?????

Hillary sounds to me like she is plagarizing the "communist manifesto"
Hillary also sounds like Venezualan's communist president, Hugo Chavez, when she speaks of nationalizing the health industry and energy, too.

LET'S BRING BACK
"Ask NOT what your country can do for you, but rather, what YOU can do for your country"

...