Surge!

Charlie Gibson directed a taunting "will you admit the surge worked?" question at Hillary Clinton and she gave the exact right response -- she admits nothing, the purpose of the surge was political reconciliation, reconciliation hasn't happened, the surge failed.

UPDATE: Good for Obama, too, complaining that "the bar of success has gotten so low" and pointing out that we're now where we were two years ago, which was a bad place to be.

Comments

Well, it hardly matters, given that Gibson has just told us that there's a 30% chance of a terrorist nuclear attack on an American city under the next President, which, f***, makes the whole debate seem irrelevant.

Posted by El Cid | January 5, 2008 9:45 PM

This is ridiculous, "Without the surge, they wouldn't be counting votes, they would be counting bodies." Gibson should also inform us that universal healthcare is too expensive and gays are immoral.

Posted by minderbender | January 5, 2008 9:48 PM

Edwards is dominating this debate.

Posted by Andruw | January 5, 2008 9:49 PM

Gibson is an unbelievable lightweight. He makes Chris Matthews look good.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | January 5, 2008 9:51 PM

Pretty disgusting debate about Iraq. Everyone's talking about how awfully inconvenient and expensive this war is for Americans - not a single mention of the utter devastation of a third-world country. The closest they came to acknowledging the moral abyss of the occupation was whining about how it was ruining America's reputation.

Posted by Mick | January 5, 2008 9:54 PM

ABC news wants HRC to win. It is so obvious that I question the Freedom of the Press ammendment. Bill C. criticism did it task. The media is sucking up to the Clintons. They have no choice.

Posted by eorse | January 5, 2008 9:54 PM

Shorter eorse: "The tone of one single questioner in a single debate is a such a clear indictment of all media everywhere that we must repeal the First Amendment to the Constitution."

Posted by Brian | January 5, 2008 9:57 PM

eorse, just shut the fuck up already.

Posted by Bill | January 5, 2008 9:58 PM

It must pain a lot of people that when a debate format is designed to requires a candidate actually demonstrate knowledge and competence that Hillary Clinton wins. This format does not allow mere speachifying.

Posted by ken | January 5, 2008 9:59 PM

That eorse guy is such a useless sack of shit. Go away.

Posted by JFD | January 5, 2008 9:59 PM

Ken: It must pain a lot of people that when a debate format is designed to requires a candidate actually demonstrate knowledge and competence that Hillary Clinton wins.

Competence = Iraq War vote ?

Do you think the voters agree?

Posted by hlah | January 5, 2008 10:03 PM

>

Are you 12 years old?

The media favors the Clinton's.? Ken Starr and Mars says hello

Hope you sleep well

Posted by Andruw | January 5, 2008 10:04 PM

Seriously...

HI!

Posted by Ken Starr | January 5, 2008 10:12 PM

Is it just me or did Bill Richardson just call Barack Obama the new JFK? An obvious reference to Obama in the question of "Is youth a detriment?" and Richardson immediately and flat-out states, "No. JFK was only 42, he's my hero, he's one of our greatest presidents because he inspired people." Seems a very pointed comparison.

Posted by jbryan | January 5, 2008 10:14 PM

The best answer of the night was Edwards pointing out that while he will certainly listen to the informed opinions of military commanders, as commander-in-chief, the president is in charge of making decisions in Iraq, not a general.

And then he pivoted to a perfect answer on how the surge had failed to work by the measure that even GWB agrees on.

Posted by Clark | January 5, 2008 11:13 PM

What a question! Why didn't Gibson just ask, "Do your parents know you're gay yet?"

Posted by keptsimple | January 6, 2008 12:08 AM

Is it just me or did Bill Richardson just call Barack Obama the new JFK? An obvious reference to Obama in the question of "Is youth a detriment?" and Richardson immediately and flat-out states, "No. JFK was only 42, he's my hero, he's one of our greatest presidents because he inspired people." Seems a very pointed comparison.

Bill Richardson is determined to be the veep. Just try to stop him - he dares you!

Posted by Woody Bombay | January 6, 2008 1:15 AM

Bill Richardson is such a giant doofus. WTF was he doing up there (yeah yeah, it's a democratic election) other than mucking things up for the real candidates? A total vanity fest for him. "I'm the only one up here who blahblahblah..." Yeah Bill, your role is to make the actually viable Dem candidates look inexperienced and vulnerable. You might as well just tell people to vote for Rudy; after all, he's "balanced a budget" and bossed a payroll just like you.

Posted by Bill | January 6, 2008 7:37 AM