Unification in Unity - a top PR job

Oh to have been back in New Hampshire for the extraordinary Unity unification of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. I would have been there like a dart of shimmering lightning - to read the mood, the faces, the nuances of this alliance. Unity turns out to be not too far from Nashua - just up the road to Hanover, out of Concord...well placed, albeit a small place. But a canny choice. The Primary State with a primary move in the Primary. A perfect piece of PR play.

My respect for Hillary soared as I watched her there on TV, gracious, generous-spirited and positive beside Obama. Accepting defeat and standing up for the larger benefit of the country is what courage and integrity are all about.

Obama also has been gracious. Well, if the words "she rocks" are really a political plaudit.
Michelle has been conspicuous by her absence - certainly on the footage being shown here in Australia on Fox. She has not been sighted on that dais. I try to imagine her state of mind but can't seem to move past my feeling that her streak of racist bitterness is too powerful for her to be happy about this turn of events. Vindication might be nearest to her response.

The Fox commentators are going to town on what a drawback Hillary brings to the Obama campaign in the form of Bill Clinton. I am just over this American hatred for Bill. I am over the whole anti-Clinton agenda which is just so full of sureness. In fact it is old fashioned poppy-lopping.

No one is going to find the perfect politician. Everyone is flawed. No president has a perfect record. It's a tough business. We seek the best thinking-on-the-feet, best informed, best-advised person for the job. It may well have been Bill Richardson.

I think Hillary's failure lies somewhere in the realm of her strategists - and a blinkered sort of limiting paranoia I observed in NH. As much as I enjoyed my foray into the campaign, I did not like the fact that some of those Hillary team workers thought that my venturing into rival meetings was in some way disloyal - when, in fact it was plain intelligent research. What the hell is wrong with people who want to be blind to their opposition?
Then there were some Hillary workers, I was told, who thought I was dangerous to have around because I am a journalist. Yeah, a journalist offering services to them! For free! A highly experienced journalist and a political animal with a lot of knowledge to share. Not all of them, I hasten to add, were so Just a thread of them who never even bothered to speak to me. Those ambitious and territorial young people looked a gift horse in the mouth. Even when I subbed their amateurish writing on the Hillary website, they were unprepared to accept professional help - and preferring to leave their errors in place.
There is a risk in having passionate, youthful devotees with closed minds throwing their weight around behind the scenes. That worried me from the outset.


I am heading back to the US tomorrow and will be keen to immerse myself in the feelings of the people. I'll be in the Southern states - a far cry from my beloved New Hampshire.
Then again, who could not love the South, eh?

And now we move our support..

And down she goes.
With elegance, eloquence and grace.

Behind her fine speech comes an unleashing of extraordinary anti-Clinton spite in the excited masses of online feedback. I have just been reading it on site after site after site. The non-Clinton supporters have no inch to give, no grace in their spirit and, as I have always maintained, they are more a product of the right wing marketing machine than they will ever know. But they are happy. For the moment. They are milking their venom glands and feeling some relief.

My heart goes out to Hillary and my concern goes out for the US and the world - for the race is just begun and, even though McCain ain't the sharpest knife in the drawer, he will prove formidable against Obama.

A chunk of me has long wished that, somehow, Bill Richardson could have stayed in the race.
Albeit he was Latino, he did not attract the media favour or the gushing cult enthusiasm of the handsome young Obama - but he was the more solid, talented, wise and able by a long shot. He was prime presidential material. He could have stood his ground against McCain.

We will have an interesting time watching how the GOP now changes its media slant on Obama. We will have an interesting time watching the ingenuous new political breed cope with it all. We will hope that, somewhere behind the sophistry, Obama has the true grit.
He certainly writes a nice book, albiet that he writes a great deal about the issue of being black. And, if he becomes president, the important factor will be that he is a black president. That fulfils his promise of "change". And, has he has just said, if perchance he wants to do something about health care, Hillary Clinton had a good policy and may be worth listening to.

As for Michelle Obama, I have yet to find hope. I can only see the most divisive woman yet to arrive in politics - protected by the racist card. The racist card says that blacks are rightful to have a hate agenda against whites but that whites are racist if they criticise blacks.
Interesting to see a book by Shelby Steele A Bound Man: Why We're Excited About Barack Obama and Why He Can't Win, rushed through to cover this issue. Noel Pearson reviewed it for Online Monthly. This is really worth a read, dealing as it does with the phenomenon of white guilt and the moral high ground African Americans perceive therein.

We have the white hate church and the white hate preacher - who has refused to step down. The Obamas say, at the 11th hour, under immense pressure, that they have left that church and its militant ideology. Huh? Who is looking at the politics of that change of, um, policy? Um, is this consistent, loyal, honest...? Didn't Obama say that Reverend Jeremiah Wright was his "mentor"?
Oh, we won't look at it now. It is not an issue in the campaign. Let it flow through to the keeper. It was always more important to dislodge Hillary.

Nonetheless, they are raving ranting religious zealots from a hate church.

My reservations about Obama are not going to go away easily. He will have a lot of proving to do for me. Michelle Obama more so.

He was the one and only Democratic candidate with whom I did not make the effort to shake hands. He was the one and only Democratic candidate from whose appearance I chose going for a coffee over staying around afterwards. I left plain disappointed with him. Hence the consistency of my stance here in the blog.

I was there in the room with him. I listened. I watched. I arrived full of hope.
At that time I had not committed to Hillary. I could just as easily have been on his team - until I sat there and listened and felt the emptiness of his rhetoric.

Now, of course, I will now do the right Democratic thing - I will support him utterly against McCain.
And pray that all my misgivings are misplaced.

Hooray for Hills

Pennsylvania! Oh, blessed relief.
The 10 per cent margin between Hillary and Barack keeps Hillary in the race and allows America the time it needs to clue up.

Not that Michael Moore has clued up.
What a shock to receive his newsletter urging his fans to vote against Hillary Clinton.
But Moore, while a brave agitator and man of causes, is no political Einstein. He is a big on the naive side, I think. And in this case, he is holding a grudge against Hillary's error of judgement in voting for Iraq. He is joining the Fox-revved mindless mob who refuse to hear Hillary's oft-reiterated words "if I knew then what I know now".
Moore has never failed in prescience?
Guess what?
He is lacking prescience right now!

The man is throwing the baby out with the bathwater. So fie upon him.

Of course, Barack Obama is a fine candidate. The Democratic Party threw up a lineup of stunning candidates - Richardson, Biden, Edwards et al. Each of these men had outstanding merit. Obama does, too, although I am not so sure about his wife.

Hillary has an edge on all of the other candidates - and she has proved, with this long campaign, that she has guts and stamina on an Olympian scale.
One watches the relentlessness of the campaign and just boggles at how long and hard it is - a marathon to end all marathons. She has impressive self-discipine - which is the hard edge that the Right Wing pundits forever decry. Pity they don't have a bit more of it. Self-discipline involves self-sacrifice.

I continue to believe in Hillary Clinton and am delighted at this strong win.
I think the Democratic race needs to claw its way on simply so that the American public can overcome the Right Wing mantras about Clintons - and see this strong, courageous, well-informed and experienced woman is what the country really needs.

Fingers and toes crossed as the game moves on.

Obama on the rise and rise and rise

Hillary already has been begging the country just to remember that the important thing for November is to vote Democratic. There must be change of Government. She is a wise woman and, I fear, she can see the writing on the wall.
It is not looking too good for her. She will have to pull a rabbit out of the hat - as the media keeps gnawing at her image, carrying on about botox, making ugly kerfuffles over Chelsea, sniping about Bill... making up whatever it can get away with.
It's rough.

Of course, many of the Obama simpletons who are bouncing around, high as kites on the novelty of a political experience, think that "change" is something Obama has invented.

They think that "change" is a policy!

I am very sad watching the latest Caucus figures emerging, still boggling at how utterly stupid the very essence of caucuses are. Only 2 per cent of the registered Republicans turned up at their Washington caucuses? The weather was bad? They did not bother with their political responsibility. I just hope those Republicans stay indoors again in November when the big election is on. Their political apathy will be useful then.

Meanwhile, Obama is going from strength to strength in these evolving primaries - and I see Teddy Kennedy rubbing his hands together because he will have control. I see Oprah priming up to dub herself a president-maker responsible, with her new best buddy Michelle Obama, for a bright new black agenda.
I see a lot of people around Obama, pulling strings - but I do not see a man with great depth of potential in his own right.

I never did - not from that first encounter in NH, when I went to the Seniors Centre to get up close and personal with him, to listen to him and see what he was all about. That was when my hopes melted away in a puddle of Obama rhetoric. He is a sophist. He is a sophist. There was no "there" there.
I left feeling a bit empty and disappointed.

It made the deciding factor for this old political animal. I had been to see and hear Hillary and I needed to know how Obama matched up. And there was a man with no real policy. Just fluent sophistry. That was the point at which I phoned the Hillary Campaign and offered my services.

So, of course, I think my choice is the right choice.
I think Hillary Clinton is absolutely exceptional - a very able woman with an informed grasp on almost every aspect of most ever domestic and international political issue. That is pretty rare and I'd challenge any other candidate to match her erudition.

Sadly, the common voter neither knows nor cares. Many have some media-induced idea of a Clinton agenda. They have believed what the media has told them - that she is cold and ambitious, which are taken to be evils in a woman, albeit strengths in a man.
The media wins.

The media has marketed Obama as a favoured Dem. It suits the precious youth demographic which is all the media wants to know about. His is quite a marketable commodity, of course.

Obama is really very nice in myriad ways. He is superbly fluent, like an elegant preacher. His books are fantastic. I rather fell in love with him when I read him.
He is tall and handsome.

But the very "change" business that the media has marketed and the young have embraced with such enthusiasm, is still turning me off.

Give us a break!
Elections are all about change. They are for change

What actual change is Obama promising? Just change.
His policies are more philosophic than political nitty gritty. He promises hope. Nice things. He promises to bring the cost of living down with tax breaks and to raise the minimum wage. He does not want anyone to be poor. He wants college to be affordable..so long as students work for the peace corps in return. This is their pleasant payback for tuition. Of course this is very appealing to the young.
Obama is very appealing.
The young are rapt.

Now, in the grand scheme of potential presidents, he is a pretty classy possibility. There is no doubt about that.
The Democratic candidates made a lineup of exceptional individuals. Bill Richardson, Joe Biden, John Edwards...and, of course, the brilliant Hillary Clinton.
Each one had fine potential as a president. America can be proud that it can, in fact, line up such an array of pure class.

Counting down, holding breath

The countdown is on. Even from this vast distance I can feel the hype in Nashua as the primary voting day approaches.
I've seen the support bases out and about in New Hampshire - the Obama crowd versus the Clinton crowd versus the Giuliani crowd.
They are different beasts. Obama would seem to have made up a vast amount of distance catching up to Clinton as the vote approaches but I still wonder, having looked over that supporter base, if they are really all viable voters. Something about them reminds me of the Howard Dean phenomenon in the last election. An ephemera of enthusiasts.

The Clinton camp has always looked stronger insofar as Hillary has a large body of older, earnest voters who are serious about issues.

Perhaps I am saying that the voters mirror the candidates.

The Giuliani mob was besuited and staid. McCain's were strongly veteran families. I did not get a chance to see a Huckabee crowd. I wonder if I could have coped with all those creationists. Perhaps it's better I missed that lot.
The Edwards and Richardson crowd were more mixed and I sensed that there were many among them just checking out the candidates. They both are impressive, as it happens.

But now the crunch comes and the wheat will be sorted from the chaff.

But perhaps not immediately. Winning in Iowa or New Hampshire may be seen as a very good sign but the race is still only partly run. There are 50 states, all with different rules and regulations in the electoral business, and they will have to have their say - right down to the conventions. Perhaps there will be hung votes.

We can only wait and see, knowing that at the grassroots level of the campaigns, those phones will be running hot, emails will be flying, door-knockers will be out - and I, sadly, will not be among them.

CNN puts on the Debate ritz

No need to consult the map or ask for directions to Saint Anselm College where the big Democratic Debate takes place tonight. It was more like following a colourful breadcrumb trail - campaign posters and groups of chanting supporters raising the profile for their chosen presidential candidates marked the route through the back streets of Manchester, NH. If the roadside turnout reflects voter popularity, John Edwards is leagues ahead with his bunches of banner-waving people. Then again, if spread of lawn placards is the indicator, Bill Richardson had won the front yards of Manchester, prongs down. On the other hand, if size is the winning quality, Hillary just stood right out. Her signs were few, but absolutely huge.

As we swung into the College campus drive, just past the New Hampshire Institute of Politics, the supporter crowds chanted raucous welcome.

The media parking area was a bit of a suprise. It was as big as an oval and already crammed with cars. We were directed down and in, a long way, ending up parked beside a shock of pink rhododendron at the far end. Of course it was raining - so we donned the old rain gear and shuffled off through the long wet grass. Blech. My smart sneakers are not waterproof.

It was quite a walk to the Press Centre where, despite the door being right there, we were told to walk the perimeter of the building and approach the credentialling room from the other side. More rain. More shuffling through long, wet lawn. Then the queue to get in. Security is tight. We went through the full airport routine - emptying pockets into plastic trays, having bag contents scrutinsed, walking through screener arches, getting the wand once-over...

And then it was the credentials. No problem at all, and a cheery welcome from CNN's delightful Mara Gassmann, with whom I had been liaising for access to this event.


"Seats are allocated," we were told. "You just have to find them."

Oh, dear. Who could have imagined the scale of this thing! Where to begin looking when faced with row upon row upon row of tables and chairs laid out in the Carr Center - a room so caverous and vast it felt like like Centennial Hall on steriods.

And there, laid out on the trestle tables, were the names of America's top journalists..the NY Times, the Boston Globe, the Washington Post... Bruce swooned.

We figured that, as antipodean ring-ins, would not be in their midst. I headed for the back of the hall, and sure enough, in the back row, there were Bruce's and my name between Le Monde and, how nice, NewsLtd Australia! CNN has very thoughtfully placed our terrific NY correspondent, Stefanie Balogh, beside us! Camaraderie, no less! Beside us is Le Figaro and De Spiegel along with the London Telegraph. In front of us are Japan, Sweden, China and Switzerland. The world media, in other words.
Thus do we sit with the vista before us, beautifully placed to see the ebb and flow of almost 800 journalists - along with scores of TV monitors all showing CNN's coverage of the event.

An hour and a half before showtime, dinner was served. CNN has spared no expense - hot Atlantic salmon and Chicken kievs, masses of veggies and rice, cakes, bread, fruit... The head caterer assures me there are no trans fats, either. Yippee.
It is all presented with classy, china-thin disposable plates and even very upmarket disposable silverware. CNN has done this all before and does it with style.


Journos are meandering all over the place, looking for their seat allocations. Just chatted to a Washington blogger - he wanted to ask me the same things I wanted to ask him. In the end, we agreed that Bill Richardson may be the candidate to back if one was looking dispassionately at the big picture.

And this is what we are here to do.

The quiet trail

Another frustrating hiatus. Apart from much playing of songs, everything seems quiet in the Hillary camp. Not even a word of protest about the recent claim from the Obama campaign that it created a precedent by going out canvassing in NH last weekend. Although we have not been called back to continue canvassing for Hillary, it is very much on the record that the first doorknocking was us on the May 12 "Hillary Day of Action".

There has been no word from the Union Leader on my application for tickets to the Democrat Debate - and, I note, the option to apply for tickets now has been removed from the paper's website.
I've not heard from Senator D'Alessandro following my email asking for access to his forthcoming house party for Joe Biden, either. So it is all very quiet.

Barack Obama was in NH as were Bill Clinton and George Bush Snr - but there was no chance to get along to those events since they college commencement speech engagements. Bill is doing a fundraiser appearance for Hillary in Boston, but at $100 a head. Not going to that.
Newt Gingrich is in Manchester signing his new book at Wal*Mart, of all places. That is of zero interest to me. John Edwards has been in the state, but concentrating his appearances in the north, which is far to drive. Rudy Giuliani is in Vermont. Yawn.

It was amusing to read in Nashua's Sunday Telegraph of what the presidential candidates had cited as "alternate career choices.

Hillary said she'd work for causes in a university or foundation.
Barack Obama said he'd be an architect.
Chris Dodd said he'd be a teacher.
John Edwards claimed he'd be a mill supervisor.
Dennis Kucinich said he'd be an astronaut.
Bill Richardson said he'd be a Yankees player.
Sam Brownback said he'd be a farmer.
Rudy Giuliani said he'd be a sports announcer.
Mike Huckabee said he'd be a rock'n'roll bass guitarist.
John McCain said he'd be in the foreign service.
and
Mitt Romney said he'd be an auto company chief executive.

Hmm. A few tongues-in-cheek and a few very telling disclosures.

Bill Richardson's six-day plan

First things first. The increasingly controversial date for the New Hampshire Primary was the subject of Bill Richardson's introductory remarks. He'd just heard that it was going to be on January 8 - in response to the impertinent move forward of Florida from March to the last Tuesday in January.
"You should be the first Primary," declared Richardson, adding that this sudden scrunch of Primary dates put great pressure on the campaigners.
New Hampshire house parties are very informal and interactive - and immediately someone pointed out that NH is first "by law". Assorted very early dates were jovially suggested.

Then the New Mexico Governor launched into his address, prefacing it with some of the ways in which he believed he was the most outstandingly qualified of all candidates for the presidency. These were not only his administrative experience as a state governor, but his extensive CV as a Congressman and the country's Secretary of Energy - not to mention his time as a UN diplomat wherein he had liaised with leaders in world trouble spots such as Iraq, North Korea, Cuba and Sudan.

From these experiences he had learned the essence of making peace with enemies and turning them into friends and, indeed, the most pressing thing he'd do as new President would be to bring people together in a bi-partisan thrust to terminate the "nightmare" of the Iraq War.

As a succinct format, he cited his policies in the form of "six issues and what I would do with my first six days in the White House".
Day 1 would be Iraq. He would not only withdraw the forces but he would install diplomacy and an all-Muslim peacekeeping force and apply some of the $400 billion war into "the domestic needs" of Iraq.


Day 2, Richardson would dedicate to Energy Independence, liberating the country from the 60 per cent oil import statistic and the "stranglehold" that "unfriendly" countries have over the USA. He would call on private and public investment in a blitz of auto greening with all cars at 50mpg. "I don't care what Detroit says," he challenged. He added a list of energy alteratives including green buildings, solar roofs on schools...
"You gotta sacrifice. It's a sense of community because energy efficiency is for the common good. We generate 25 per cent of the world's pollution," he said.
Interestingly, his state, New Mexico, is the only US state which abides by the Kyoto Protocol. This man has a track record.
He gave fulsome credit to Al Gore for his service in informing the country about the urgency of environmental reform, adding: "Al, stay out of the running."


Day 3, said Richardson, would be for education. Here he absolutely soared in recognition of what the US really needs to bring itself back to the future - science and math! India and Korea have left the US, and the rest of the world, behind in these vital subjects. Australia needs to pick up its socks, too. Richardson is on the ball in knowing that this is the foundation of a knowledge economy. He also spoke of languages and, particularly, the arts - to engage "and stimulate the mind". Yes!

Day 4 he allocated to his National Health Care plan to which he gave scant outline, since, he explained, the complexities and funding thereof requires lengthy extrapolation.


Day 5 was for his job-generation plan. "The Democrats would be the party of economic growth and science and math," he underlined. "The Democrats have been the party of the poor, which I endorse, but do you what what? We have forgotten the middle class."
He went on to speak of tax incentives for new technology and employment iniatives with an emphasis on renewable energy, technology and aviation. "The future is renewable energy," he reiterated.
When someone interjected a question about nuclear power, he acknowledged that it was non-pollutant but still worried about disposal of its by-products. It was not an energy option of his choice.

Day 6 would be devoted to "restating our commitment to civil rights". Richardson strongly supported "a woman's right to choose". "If you have different sexual orientation, I'll be on your side," he added. He sought "fair immigration laws and not that wall - that's not American".
"We're a nation of immigrants," he emphasised, suggesting that immigration regulations should incorporate speaking English and passing background checks.

The American voting system was also a target. Only 48 per cent of Americans voted in the last election. "One of the problems is that we don't trust the ballot," he said. "I want a shift back to paper."
The New Hampshirites interjected that they had a paper trail here, despite an electronic ballot.

Richardson finished by saying that he knew he was an "underdog" in the Democratic Presidential candidate polls "but I've got nine months to go - and a lot of house parties".

And, just to add levity to his list of credentials, he confided that "I'm holder of the world handshaking record - 13,000 hands in 8 hours. That record used to belong to Teddy Roosevelt".

The party guests were keen to question the New Mexico Governor - and threw some tough ones at him, particularly about tax, Iraq, mental health and health funding. He fielded them all with amiable ease, at home on all issues, it seemed.



And he added some interesting snippets - insight about North Korea which he has visited no less than six times and which he still finds very different in thinking.
He told of talking to President Bush about negotiations with North Korea and the way in which using China as an intermediary was a mistake since the North Koreans hate China.
Bush replied: "Bill, I don't talk to countries that exhibit bad behaviour."
Richardson retorted: "Pretty soon you're only going to be talking to the Vatican."
He half-expected an angry response from the President, he said. But no. George Bush thought it was funny.

The Richardson campaign aides were keen to get him moving along - next stop an interview with CNN. Richardson, however, was reluctant to short-change these voters and his lingering to answer personal questions, shake hands and sign his book was clearly agitating his clock-watching aides, as we slipped quietly out the door ahead of him.

A good man, I'd say, who came across poorly in the Democrats' television debate. Gun supporter or not, he shone as an example of the extremely high quality of candidate being fielded by the American Democrats. If only politics was dominated by such people. If only.

Governor Richardson on house party tour

The house party is one of the particular characteristics of New Hampshire primary campaigns and it turns out to be Governor Bill Richardson's favourite form of exposure to the voter. Or, so he said, after being introduced to the crowd of locals who had gathered at the home of John and Marie Anne Knowles in the neighbouring township of Hudson. The Knowleses both are elected members of the New Hampshire State Legislature.

John Knowles had kindly agreed to squeeze me in to the already well-subscribed party in their pleasant, book-lined home set on a sweeping cul de sac in a rather gracious and spacious modern housing estate cut into the New Hampshire woodlands. Richardson is not a front-runner at this stage, but he is a former Ambassador to the UN and US Energy Secretary and most definitely a superior presidential candidate. Interestingly, he also is half-Latino. His Mexican mother graced him with swarthy good looks which, frustratingly, are very hard to convey in photographs.

It seemed a particularly civilized group of thinking people at the party - one felt that one would like each one of them if given the opportunity. The Knowleses had turned on a spread of sweet and savoury snacks along with wine, soft drinks and, amazingly, casks of hot coffee from Dunkin' Donuts.

Candidates usually are running late on these hectic campaign schedules and, indeed, Richardson has been criss-crossing NH at a rate of knots for three days. But he was only a few minutes late to the party and a round of applause went up as he entered the living room.

And the debate verdict is...

There they stood behind their oddly tapering lecterns under the kitsch, over-arty red, white and blue MSNBC debate set - Hillary Clinton, the tiny one, Barack Obama, the tall one, and then John Edwards, Bill Richardson, Chris Dodd, Dennis Kucinich, Joe Biden - and who the hell is that other fellow?

I'd never heard of Mike Gravel, the former senator from Alaska.
Well, we all know him now. The man who said he felt like a potplant perched at the edge of the lineup turned out to be the star of the debate. Talk about fresh blood and fresh perspective. He is an old-fashioned sage. A no-bull man! A realist.
Terrorism, he asserted, "has been with civilization from the beginning, and it will be there till the end. We're going to be as successful fighting terrorism as we are fighting drugs with the war. It doesn't work. What you have to do is to begin to change the whole foreign policy."
On Iran and nuclear threats, he noted that the US was the greatest violator of the Non-Proliferation Treaty. "We signed a pledge that we would begin to disarm, and we're not doing it. We're expanding our nukes. Who the hell are we going to nuke?" he blustered.
He also said this:
"We have no important enemies, We've got to deal with the rest of the world as equals. Who are we afraid of? We spend more on defence than any other country...the military controls not only the budget, it also controls our culture." Wow!

Straw polls following the debate have given Gravel a surprising surge.
On Daily Kos, he has zoomed to a 10 per cent vote, ahead of Kucinich, Biden, Richardson and Dodd - but behind Hillary, Obama and Edwards.

I was pleased with Hillary Clinton, however. She was my winner. She has a confident clarity. Her voice has a headmistress timbre, so we pay attention. She is emotionally controlled - calm and rational. She also is comprehensively informed on any topic you throw her. She can think on her feet. She is diplomatic, always knowing what not to say as well as what to say. She has been criticised for this, but, hell, that is what politics is all about.
She also has been endlessly criticised for insufficient mea culpa about voting for the War on Iraq. How many times does she have to regret it? How many times does she have to say that, if she knew then what she knew now, she would never have done so? Anyway, she said it all again - and was criticised all over again by the likes of Edwards and Kucinich.
It was a rather delicious irony to note that she was the most generous-spirited among the candidates, ready to give credit to others.
Oh, yes, she stood right out.

John Edwards lost ground for me in the debate. He says his $400 haircut was "a mistake which has been remedied now". How? He paid the campaign fund back? That is really not a remedy to the primping vanity of $400 haircuts. Edwards went on to defend his "privileged" millionaire lifestyle by claiming not to have forgotten his roots and went into a Southern boy, Down Home childhood tale of how the family left a restaurant when his millworker father realised he could not afford to pay its prices. I think we have had enough of these cornball anecdotes from Edwards. I, for one, have heard them all before. Furthermore, he was the only candidate to suggest that he felt a need to consult his "Lord" .

Dennis Kucinich also lost ground. I had respected his uncompromising leftist views - but in the debate, he showed a bitchy streak I did not like, sniping at his peers, glancing at Hillary and saying "apologies aren't enough". What the hell? Apologies are enough - and forgiveness is all. Kucinich also admitted to being a gun-owner. Hillary was one of the few who indicated never having owned a weapon, at the same time reiterating careful placations to the mighty gun lobby. Everyone seems to do this.

Bill Richardson is known as the darling of the gun lobby. He is a Westerner and he owns guns - but thinks the screening processes for gun purchase are lacking, as evidenced by Cho and the Virginia Tech shooting.
I found Richards a bit bombastic, something of a hothead and too fond of speaking in lists. From this quaint pressure-cooker appearance, I wouldn't put him in the White House.

Joe Biden is charming and he looks the way a president should look. When asked about his greatest mistake, he said it was in "overestimating the competence of this administration" and "stupid enough to believe that I could influence George W Bush's thinking". He brought the house down when, accused of "uncontrolled verbosity" and being a "gaffe machine" and asked if he would have the self-control for the role of president, he said simply "yes" - and not another word. Silence.

Chris Dodd pointed out his considerable qualifications for the job of president but was underwhelming in debate, especially when he spoke on civil unions versus same-sex marriage. He is for the former and against the latter. I liked his idea of diplomacy rather than war, and his quote: "This administration treats diplomacy as if it were a gift to our opponent; a sign of weakness, not a sign of strength".

Barack Obama was my biggest loser. He seemed extremely nervous, which is forgivable. But he also seemed arrogant. He never makes a speech that does not mention his wife and children, which is beginning to grate - and, gratuitously, he mentioned them again. His big mistake in my book was when he went to town on Iran, showing that he has swallowed, hook, line and sinker, the current media campaign to turn Iran into an immediate threat. It is rather reminiscent of the Iraq and "weapons of mass destruction" campaign. Obama said that he believed that Iran was a nuclear threat as well as the largest state sponsor of terrorism in the form of Hezbollah and Hamas and therefore was a threat to the security of the USA.
My conclusion is that Obama is, indeed, the young and inexperienced candidate - and it showed. He is simply not ready for the presidency.

Hillary is.