1. Obama  2. Edwards  3. Clinton

Hillary Clinton looked petty, overbearing and shrill. Bad news for her. Sometimes, I thought she was trying to stare him dead during the first half of the debate.

It was a great relief to see Obama no longer taking crap from the Clintons. He did look a tad hesitant at times in the first half, but comfortable, even humorous in the second half. Finally, he adequately communicated the reasons why he thinks his health care ideas are superior.

John Edwards' finest debate, though. He will take votes away from Hillary in South Carolina.

I'm sensing an Obama/Edwards ticket in the making, if Obama wins the nomination.

Deborah White
Liberal Politics at About.com

I'm watching it on C-SPAN. Her remarks were quite powerful and direct. Oprah's never been one to mince words...  Obama just came onto the podium.

Oprah feels that the issues (and one candidate) that she supports trasncend partisanship, but deal with morality. Said she's voted for as many Republicans as Democrats.

I actually think her endorsement will make a difference, especially in South Carolina.

Deborah White
Liberal Politics at About.com

Good, interesting post, Chris!

I am a Christian, and my faith is based on the Christian call to social activism (epitomized wll by the Sermon on the Mount, and the book of Luke).

I totally "get" Obama, and how thoroughly infused his politics are by his social activism faith, and vice versa. The two go hand-in-hand.

Great to know that Democrats who are not necessarily religious are "getting" Obama's thinking, and are not friggtened away by someone who is openly religious.

Well said! I saw snippets of the Couric-Edwards interview... and was disgusted by her cruel, gossipy questioning of Elizabeth and John Edwards.

Now I understand why Couric's CBS news program is sinking like a rock to the bottom of a lake. She's a horrible interviewer, and certainly no journalist.

Katie, go back to soft "news," where you can flash your legs and be center of attention again.

Your intrusive cruelty under the guise of "journalism" blackens the name of responsible journalists. At best, you have very bad judgment.

I'm watching, too. This guy is a flaming jerk.

Rep. Sherrod Brown, for three reasons:

1. I am entirely in-sync with his stances, and fully support his candidacy for the Senate.

2. I watched the Brown-DeWine "debate" on Meet the Press yesterday. DeWine is a Rove-Bush style campaigner, with lots of nastiness, name-calling and pettiness, and all the wrong views . Couldn't stand him. (He's just plain creepy, too. )

3. The race is apparently close.

Lutheran... past of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, which is the "liberal" part of Luthernism. Same denomination as Rep. Sherrod Brown.

I am in California, and have watched this race with confused interest. Both Senators Feinstein and Boxer clearly endorse Angelides or Westly, which is enough for me to support Angelides, as well as is endorsed by Unions for firefighters, nurses, teachers and the like.

But what frightens and repels me about Westly are his smarmy, fuzzy attack ads on TV, which are short on authenticity and facts, and quite long on pretty, feel-good photos of beaches and smiling, pretty people. Westly ads look like Republican ads of past.

Do good things, Scott!  We will be watching and waiting for your return to MyDD.

-- Deborah White

Seriously!

My only fear is that Rove will be scapegoated for many administration failings, including Iraq, and run out of Washington. And that the public would buy the wingnut line that with Rove excised from the administration, that all is once again trustworthy.

Which is entirely logical for this administration....