Debate at Drexel

Kerry Frentrup — Tue, 30 Oct 2007 23:22:12 GMT

I was glad to see taxation issues for the wealthy reported by Tom Brokaw last night. The press seems to have forgotten however that we are at war. Republican regressive tax cuts have enabled those least willing to sacrifice for their country and most willing to gain financially and politically in wartime to elect and hold three branches of government and virtually all military power. The war is funded entirely by funds borrowed from overseas. Tax cuts have amounted to 51% of the deficit. Fifty-four percent of the Republicans' initial tax cut was spent households with incomes over $1 million and 97% of a following one went to those with incomes over $200,000. Average households received $740.00 over 6 years.
Our soldiers are trapped in a hopeless Republican war,
facing the horrors of combat,longer deployments, and ever growing threats of grave injury and death. The President thinks they are winning nonetheless by just staying there, suffering without sacrifice from the American people. His characterization of waging an intolerable war is "supporting the troops", which he freely uses to get more "emergency supplemental funding" (more borrowing). Republicans believe they can achieve neo-con fantasies on fairy-tale money and Christ will lead the way.
All of the Republicans are tax-cutters, happy to let Democrats take the rap for needing to fund programs that are fairly necessary. And the press seems happy to let Republicans pretend that there is no war going on that Americans need to concern themselves with in terms of any financial sacrifice whatsoever. In fact as far as they are concerned it is moral and acceptable to gain great wealth from the government in wartime. The press never seems to remember that we have never had tax cuts in wartime, and that in war this is a spending issue, not a taxation issue. This president has had no real financial restraint in his policies. He should have the courage he expects from our soldiers to ask taxpayers to support them and their efforts.
There are so many aspects of this issue and facts pertaining to it that the press is ignoring for some reason. It is a cruel hoax to let American voters believe that they might be paying taxes for the war effort when actually they might be supporting tax cuts for the rich. Our soldiers are worthy of discussion and debate about regressive wartime tax cuts. Please reply if you have time.
economic information from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorties www.cbpp.org

Debate at Drexel

Lisa McNeil,Alpharetta,Georgia — Tue, 30 Oct 2007 23:25:39 GMT

Good Evening Mr.Williams, Looking forward to the Democratic Debate this evening moderated by you and Mr.Russert. I'm sure it will be an eventful evening. Always enjoy the history lesson from Andy Franklin. Now on to the broadcast. Mr.Williams you and Mr.Russert will certainly have good time questioning the candidates. You both will do an excellent job! It is really sad to hear the number of soldiers lost in the war in Iraq. They are all such brave and dedicated men and women. God Bless them all! Lisa Myers report about the Blackwater investigation of the September 16th incident shows how many misjudgements were made about the incident's investigation. The contractors involved in the incident know what happened and if they did something wrong they should admit it. It they are not guilty than they should be cleared of charges. I just wonder about those who refuse to cooperate. If you didn't do anything wrong than you should not be worried about answering questions. Mr.Fletcher's report about the migration of the wildebeest and how climate change has effected the animals just proves what you stated Mr.Williams that we all share the planet together. It was sad to see that young wildebeest who was hurt limp along near his mother. Very sad that he did not live. The lions need food to survive and sometimes it is sad that other young animals have to be sacrificed. Although I did like the young little lion cubs. Your forgiven Mr.Williams for showing that footage during the hour you did. Finally, the "Kids Now" segment about parents getting pro trainers for their young children in different kinds of sports. I think it is too much pressure to be competitive. These parents are pushing way too hard. I agree these kids are being robbed of a childhood of being able to have fun and not be so serious all the time. I took dancing all my school life and beyond. I loved ballet and all forms of dance, but my mother never pushed me hard like these parents by hiring pro trainers. I danced because I loved it not from being pushed into it. These children show talent in their respected sports. Just let them enjoy it. If they want to continue the sport through high school and college than terrific. Let them decide. Thank you for the broadcast Mr.Williams. I will see you and Mr.Russert for the Democratic Debates. Peace to all!

Debate at Drexel

Stephanie Umbro, Maine — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 00:06:38 GMT

I wish you well on the debate tonight. I am sure that it will be done with all the professionalism we've come to expect from NBC & MSNBC. I, however, will not be watching. Forgive me, but I'm already experiencing voter fatigue and its not even '08 yet. There's still a very long year ahead of us.

I liked the story behind the headline that I was too young to read when it was printed. Just goes to show you how "bad" it can be when people put words in your mouth!

Debate at Drexel

Andrea N.C. CT — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 03:16:02 GMT

There is hope for us after all even if space aliens dont rescue us. Absolutely one of the best national debates I have had the pleasure to observe. Brian and Tim did an incredible job in peeling back the layers of prepared text and letting us get a goodlook at what is underneath the hype. Cant stress enough what an excellent job Brian and Tim did tonight. Thanks guys. You have serve we the people tonight with dignity class and wit. My children and grandchildren thank you both. You guys brought back the P in Press for professionialism. I applaud you both for your efforts to make a difference.

Debate at Drexel

Marilee Hyman, Pismo Beach, CA — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 03:22:54 GMT

Thanks to you, Brian, Tim Russert and NBC for tonight's Democratic forum. Your questions were excellent and just what I wanted to know the answers to. I've been on both sides of this kind of forum locally...as a meet-the-candidate moderator asking the questions and as a candidate running for office having to answer questions on the spot... both jobs were tough, challenging and valuable to finding the best candidate for office. The forum defined issues, demonstrated the ability to react, and defined the process of a democratic free society. It works!
Again thanks to your contribution to the American democratic process and open government.
Well done!
Marilee Hyman

Debate at Drexel

Norman Charles, NYC — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 09:59:36 GMT

For the second night in a row, NBC News has taken a secular story and refracted it through the prism of Christianity. On Sunday, a story about surviving the California wildfires was inappropriately presented as a matter of Christian faith. On Monday, it was Lee Cowan's report "Caught In The Middle". The story was purportedly about the diminished buying power of the thirtysomething generation, as compared with their parents' generation. So why was this story given such a heavy Christian theme? It began with Christians praying in church, an all-too-common sight in NBC News stories. We then heard comments from the church's pastor. You could have interviewed an economist or financial advisor, but I guess you felt that a pastor could offer a better view of the American economic situation. The story then ended with more footage of Christians praying in church. In fact, almost 30% of this story took place in church. Why do you continually contrive ways to inject Christianity into secular stories? When will NBC News stop pandering to the Christian right? A secular story deserves to be treated as such, not as an excuse to spread the word about Jesus.

Debate at Drexel

Jon Paulson Princeton NJ — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 11:30:53 GMT

Dear Mr Williams, The debate was one of the best looks America has had at this field. I applaud the work of Mr Russert and yourself for the well chosen questions. The election is a long way off but those first votes are around the corner.

I must take issue with the reporting on your training for children report. This is a niche industry for the wealthy and seemed little more than a commercial for a Connecticut facility. No facts to substantiate it as growing market and there wasn't one remark from one of the athletes you profiled. I hate to criticize but I expect more from your program. The Wildebeast report was tops.

Contratulations on a fine evening.

Debate at Drexel

Jim. Lincolnville, Maine — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 11:43:19 GMT

I turned you off! Yup. Your questions at the Democratic Debate were so entirely lame (and so frequently aimed at encouraging candidate-bashing) that I finally changed channels. Shame on you!

Like many Americans, I tuned in expecting you to ask probing, insight-provoking questions so I could better understand each candidate's stand on the country's foremost issues: the federal deficit, troop withdrawal, energy policy, Social Security and Medicare reform, national security, and so on. Instead, you folks asked questions about UFOs!

You did the country a disservice. "Ms. Candidate, so-and-so attacked you as wearing shoes that are out of style -- what do you say to that?" Who cares?!

If you're going to make a sound-bite, "squirm-your-way-out-of-this-one" circus out of an important debate, I'd rather watch rereuns on another network. And I did. Keep Tim Russert away from televised debates -- he's not an asset. And hire staff able to formulate much better questions. Or let Larry King do the job.

Debate at Drexel

Walter Reeves, Hanover, NH — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 15:30:29 GMT

You and Tim Russert were grossly unfair to Hillary Clinton on last night's debate. I am no fan of hers but both of you pointedly and unfairlay focused on her in the early questioning. I understand that she is regarded as the front-runner but it is not your role to try to expose one candidate's positions over others. In a "debate" with this many paricipants, it would seem fair to cover a wide range of topics, giving each person the chance to offer his/her answer. Later, when the nominess have been chosen, the pointed questions will be more helpful to voters.

Debate at Drexel

P.W. Boobosch, Portland, Oregon — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 17:32:58 GMT

It's really a shame that with MSNBC now moved to a digital signal only (at least in the Portland area) fewer people had the benefit of watching last night's debate. It really would be nice if these debates were aired on local channels so that a wider audience would be able to watch. Just a thought.

Debate at Drexel

Jackie Rawlings Riverside California — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 17:44:47 GMT

The report on kids being trained was very interesting as that's what foreign countries do with young kids. I like the way God does it best just letting a kid be born with God given talent. Most kids in America will never see a trainer, as it's the love of the sport and the gift of God that makes them great. Michael Jordan and Jessie Owens come to mind now there's talent with God as a trainer.

I read the comments about the debate and the attack on Hillary. It is strange to ask a question about a candidates shoes when we have service men/women dying in an invasion. At lease I hope the international Leaders and people around the world now see what happens when the best qualifed candidate it attacked so the GOP can get another chosen follower in Office. Oh my goodness Edward R. Murrow is shocked at this one. I respect all the candidates in both parties but one stands alone in this field. We made a mistake twice in electing a President and we're paying for that mistake. While the Media does what it can to eliminate the Dems and push the stupid GOP candidates, the White House is asking Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter to help with the Middle East problem. I think the American people have had enough of the spin/blame/lie game and have already made up their minds. It's time for change quick. We need honesty and those who put America first and not a party. It is somewhat funny how the Media attacks both Bill and Hillary Clinton then Bill is asked to help in both Katrina and now the Middle East. If only the Media would ask what happen to all the taxpayers money the White House can't account for in the audit. No it's just better to ask about Hillary's shoes. At lease we see other countries value smart qualifed woman as Presidents.
To all the Fathers remember this is how your daughters, wife or even Mothers are treated when the dare to reach for the top. Yes I know none of these commentators will want their wives treated with should disrespect and want their daughters to dare to dream to become what ever they want in life. When I was young woman were told certain jobs were not for females such as Astronauts or Speaker of the House even Journalist. I wonder if NBC ever thought what it would be like if change hadn't happen.
Let the American people chose wisely and may the best qualifed Man or Woman win the US election for President.

Debate at Drexel

Virginia, Ruskin, Fl — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 17:52:26 GMT

I have to agree with Jim, Lincolnville, Maine. The very first question ask of Obama was to start him attacking Hillary. Whats the matter with you reporters?? Why don't you stick with the real issues, give everyone else on the stage a chance. I wanted to hear more from Joe Biden, how many times was his name called, nothing compared to the 3 front runners, the whole thing was very annoying due to the questions that was ask. I was a fan of yours and Tim Russert,please stick to the issues instead of trying to create fights between the candidates. This country doesn't need the media dividing the people, George Bush and company has done a good job of it.

Debate at Drexel

A.Brocco, Albq., NM — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 17:57:12 GMT

Interesting debate, but not great. Suggestion, do away with "Who won?" Those results were no more accurate than telephone results on "Dancing with The Stars". Too easy for an organized group of Liberals or NeoCons to dominate the results. I wonder how Obama or Edwards would have held up for two hours if there were 6 women firing questions at them. Though Hillary did a good job early on,she got frustrated after 3/4 of the debates,and no one can blame her. Conservative righwing nuts are going to say she showed she can't think on her feet at quickly as a president needs to. Oh yea, well all rightwing nuts need to take a close look at your "quick thinking" and lying president. He is an embarrassment. The media and you need to focus on that a little before you show concern for Hillary not being quick enough.
The best line was from Joe Biden... "Rudy relies on a noun a verb and 911" in his speeches.
Question: If Hillary gets the Demo.nomination and Rudy gets the Rep. nomination, which of the two will prevail in a head to head debate? If you think Rudy, think again.

Debate at Drexel

Chanan, San Francisco, CA — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 19:11:01 GMT

I was seriously disappointed last night by the way Brian Williams and Tim Russert largely ignored Joe Biden. I understand Biden's not in the "top tier" of candidates, but that's got to do as much with journalists ignoring him as with anything about Biden as a candidate. In the few minutes alloted to him last night, Biden said more of substance than all the rest, and said it more forcefully. Why do the media get to decide who's a legitimate candidate and who isn't? Biden would have more name recognition, and hence more polling success, if reporters allowed him equal time. But, paradoxically, he won't get equal time until he's got better name recognition and polling success.

Debate at Drexel

Bill P., Richmond, VA — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 20:08:05 GMT

Brian: Glad to see your latest post included a more personal behind-the-scenes look at how NBC (and more specifically you) is preparing for the night's broadcast. This is the kind of insight that has made me a regular reader of this page and made the Nightly News feel more like "my" newscast. As your posts have become a little more sporadic lately, I hope this blog does not stray from the formula that made it so engaging when it began. Looking forward to SNL. Thanks.

Debate at Drexel

Pat Fagan East Syracuse, NY — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 23:12:03 GMT

Talk about Clinton bashing. How about Tim Russert? I always thought that his fat bonuses from Clinton hater Jack Welch were payment for Russert churning every Bill Clinton story the radical right could create when Bill was President. Is Mr. Welch still passing out bonuses in retirement? And what a cheap shot at Kucinich. Neither you nor Russert nor the other cantidates would repeat the "I" word. I would suggest that more Americans support impeacehment of Cheney and Bush that you think, despite NBC's unwillingness to discuss it. My view is that NBC News is little more than a public relations arm of GE.

Debate at Drexel

Brian James, Pittsburgh, Pa. — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 23:58:16 GMT

If this was a debate please don't have any more. This was like the WWE, nothing but attacks, no information about what they would do if they were elected. I started to watch with the hope of learning what could happen if one of these candidates were elected. But all you wanted and you got was a fight. I could see that from your very first question, thanks for nothing. Do us a favor don't have any more debates, just put on the WWE for your ratings. Because news must not be a good ratings draw, your turning into Fox News.

Debate at Drexel

Jake Gidas, Orlando, Fl. — Thu, 01 Nov 2007 17:18:04 GMT

Its not the debate forum that's the problem here, It's the questions that are asked by the moderators.

I do not know for a fact, but I would assume that these questions were written by newspeople, not people who have actually managed large organizations (which is what the president does)

My ideal candidate for president is not someone who positions themself as having a solution for every problem in the world, supported by memorized facts (or selective facts)to support a platform. No one has all of the answers. The greatest economic minds in America have debated social security and they have not yet found a solution. Why do we assume a politician would?

I am more interested in a candidates vision of America for the future, their goals and their methods for achieving those goals.

For example;

Is it the role of America to spread democracy through out the world?
How big or small should government be?
What is the role of government in the world today? Where should it begin and end?

All I hear about is more legislation and more spending to support ones platform.

I am also interested in their leadership skills; 'do they have what it takes to get the job done, regardless of what the profess in the campaign?'

Nancy Pelosi is a prime example of this. She can't convince anyone to do anything, in spite of her self righteous attitude.

The way to get away from candidate bashing is to debate goals and strategy. This forum debates tactics.

Lastly, please bring some facts to the table. The media should be able to do this. We shouldn't rely on candidates to tell us the facts - or their version of the facts.

What are the facts on the deficit? Trade imbalance? Why not a chart or two to illustrate this, with information provided by the people who collect this date?

Did Mitt Romney raise or lower taxes while governor? He either did this or he didn't. Why do they debate it? (yes I know this is a Republican thing...but that debate is no different)

Focus on the big picture....the tactics change anyway...and they should. It is an ever changing, dynamic world. A President needs to be fluid in execution, firm on goals and strategy.

Debate at Drexel

Kerryf — Fri, 02 Nov 2007 03:27:21 GMT

My comments appeared first in this blog, addressing the issue of regressive wartime tax cuts for the rich. I am writing here because I believe that someone in a responsible position in a your news organization reads these, because you invite readers to participate. I have serious complaints against the press, which I think merit considerable attention.

Debate at Drexel

Norman Fairhurst, Columbia, MD — Fri, 02 Nov 2007 13:53:48 GMT

Dear Brian, My wife and I were both disappointed by the tone and questions posed to the Democratic candidates by yourself and Tim Russert. It was obvious from the start that you were both promoting discord rather than a discussion of the issues. Mr. Russert, in particular, when asking for a pledge from the candidates on Iranian nuclear weapons, moved into dangerous territory and was rightly admonished by Mr. Kucinich. The fact that the candidates agreed to the format that required 30 second responses (to a 1 minute question) confirms the power of the press. Too bad the press abuses their power and demands a 30 second reponse to issues that require a thoughtful answer. Each candidate deserves equal time to be heard on each issue. Regrettably you and Mr. Russert were pursuing controversy and did the public a disservice.

Debate at Drexel

Richard P, London — Sat, 03 Nov 2007 02:20:22 GMT

Hillary actually got a bump up in the polling after the debate. She will squeak through in Iowa, win New Hampshire, and take everything through February 5 except perhaps Illinois and Idaho.

If Rudy is the nominee, her current aggregate lead over him (about 3 points) will widen once people get a good look at his record -- Hillary has been vetted by you media folks, while Rudy has been merely lionized. If the nominee is McCain, he will lose respectably. If the nominee is anyone else, it will be a seismic landslide for the Dems.

In November she will take the Gore/Kerry states, Virginia, West Virginia, Ohio, Florida, Arkansas, Iowa, New Mexico (she leads Rudy in all of them), and pick off a few oddballs like Louisiana and Nevada.

You heard it here first.