Nevada Presidential Candidate Debate Highlights

(Continuing in our public service mode, below are selected highlights from the Democratic presidential candidate debate in Las Vegas, Nevada from last night. Because MSNBC is viewed by so few folks – usually less than a million viewers during most hours – why not extend their audience to a few thousand more?)

by Rick Rockwell

Prior to last night's debate, the candidates declared a truce regarding the debate over racial equality and the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., which had been the focus of the past week or so. However, questions still arose concerning those topics.

Perhaps the most interesting part of the debate is below, when a heckler interrupts. It seems the heckler is trying to say Brian Williams and Tim Russert two white guys should not be asking any questions dealing with race. Of course, the heckler's comment is racist. If white reporters had not asked questions about race in the past how would the civil rights movement have been reported on through television or other media? How would integration have been covered? The heckler seemed to forget the Clinton and Obama campaigns had interjected race into the center of the primary season, and that reporter Natalie Morales, who was asking the panel questions that had been sent via e-mail, also relayed a question that dealt with race.

Here's one of the final parts of the debate dealing with the military, veterans issues and nuclear power.

Again, Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) was barred from the debate. To read more about that, please go here.

For those who want more background on the campaign, please check these archival posts:

(Photo of Hillary Clinton campaigning in New Hampshire after a debate by Griffin Nozell / Marc Nozell via Flickr, using a Creative Commons License.)

Add to Technorati Favorites

Subscribe in a reader


Gary said...

The choice in this election is simple. If we want a president who will lead America to the big, bold changes we need and change the conversation in America, Democrats should choose the candidate who has led the field in ideas and shaped the conversation in this race so far.

On the Democratic side, John Edwards, although never the front-runner, has been driving his party's policy agenda. He's done it again on economic stimulus: last month, before the economic consensus turned as negative as it now has, he proposed a stimulus package including aid to unemployed workers, aid to cash-strapped state and local governments, public investment in alternative energy, and other measures

The fact remains that the Edwards campaign has set the domestic policy agenda for the entire field. He was the first with a bold universal health care plan, the first with an ambitious climate change proposal that called for cap-and-trade, and the leader on reforming predatory lending practices and raising the minimum wage to a level where it regains its lost purchasing power

John Edwards has led the other candidates in standing up for progressive change. In this campaign, the other candidates have followed John's lead in talking about the special interests -- but the special interests understand the difference between rhetoric and reality. That's why corporate lobbyists are united against John Edwards.

Here's the bottom line in this election. We need a president who has the vision to put forth bold, progressive solutions to the challenges facing America in the 21st century. John Edwards has shown he has that vision -- and he has led on it throughout this campaign.

John Edwards has stated that, as president, he will require the use of safe, renewable energy sources like wind, solar power and biomass to generate 25% of the nation's electricity by 2025. In the first 100 days of his presidency, John will send legislation to Congress to halt global warming and achieve energy independence.

John has promised to invest $1 billion a year to develop the ability to permanently store carbon emissions and ban the construction of new coal plants that cannot capture their own carbon.

And, as president, John Edwards would invest an additional $1 billion to help U.S. automakers advance the latest technology -- including biofuels, hybrid and electric cars, ultra-light materials and drivetrain improvements -- to ensure the world's most fuel-efficient cars are made in America by union workers.

And because John Edwards has not accepted a dime from Washington lobbyists or special interest PACs, he has a bold, transformational plan to take on the big oil companies, polluters and power companies to address the great environmental challenges of our lifetime.

John Edwards is the only one that will fight poverty and bring health care and education to the poor & middle class of America. John Edwards would be the best President for all of America, anything less will be as bad as keeping Bush in office forever.

America deserves honest men of integrity that will fight for all Americans, and Edwards is a true patriot that can make America great. He has the substinance, determination, and will to fight greed, corruption and end the outsourcing of our jobs.

His economic, education, health and welfare policies are now being copied by all the canidates. Edwards spoke out months and even years before the others.

America needs to think about why the "Washington Greed, Corruption, Large Corporations and Media" are trying to make this a two candidate Democratic race?

Edwards is the only Democrat able to win the Presidency, as polls have showed that any Republican nominated will beat Clinton and/or Obama.

An Edwards presidency will create American jobs for Americans by ending the outsourcing of our jobs lost through NAFTA and CAFTA. It will end the greed and corruption of large corporations and Washington politicians.

End the $700 million per day wasted in Iraq and invest in America, America can prosper in a global economy without outsourcing our jobs

Vote for jobs for the workers of America, healthcare and education for the middle class by endorsing a true patriot of integrity and honesty for America, John Edwards

Anonymous said...

I like that Edwards supports working class people a bit better than the others but I don't like that Edwards stood strongly with George Bush in voting in favor of the Iraq war. This vote ruins him as the "anti Hillary" candidate.

Edwards won't be able to get past Obama or HIllary this year and there's no way he gets the running mate either this time around.

Good man but the vote on Iraq among other things finishes him.

Rick Rockwell said...

I like the populist fire that Edwards brings too, but he exemplifies exactly what is wrong with the Democratic field. His record is littered with votes that he has to explain now (not just his Iraq War vote but his nuclear energy vote too) and he shows it takes more than populist promises to change this country. None of the front-runners has a great legislative record. I see nothing that proves they can deliver on the promises of change they breathlessly tell me about every five seconds.

Check out Edwards' profile by Congressional Quarterly. It is so thin on accomplishments after he gets to the Senate, it tells you he is very qualified for one thing: to campaign.

© iVoryTowerz 2006-2009

Blogger Templates by OurBlogTemplates.com 2008