Democrat Presidential Candidates Debate

On Thursday night, Democrat presidential wannabes participated in the first official debate of Election 2008.

It wasn't really a debate. It was more like an interview with podiums.

ORANGEBURG, S.C. -- Democratic presidential hopefuls flashed their anti-war credentials Thursday night, heaping criticism on President Bush's Iraq policy in the first debate of the 2008 campaign.

"The first day I would get us out of Iraq by diplomacy," said New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, one of eight rivals on the debate stage.

"The first day"?

Is Richardson kidding?

Would January 20, 2009 count as his "first day" as president if elected?

Does he mean January 21, which would be his first full day?

In any event, Richardson is making a campaign promise that he can't keep.

That statement sounds like something a 5th grader would write -- "What I would do if I were president."

Richardson was far from the only candidate to make stupid comments.

"If this president does not get us out of Iraq, when I am president, I will," pledged Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.

The question is when. When would Hillary get us out of Iraq? After we win or in time to lose? In her second term?

She's not very specific. It's sort of like when Bill Clinton said that he wasn't alone with Monica Lewinsky. Hillary parses her words, too.

Does the country really want the old Clinton song and dance routine?

I know I don't.

But Clinton found herself on the receiving end of criticism moments later when former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards said she or anyone else who voted to authorize the war should "search their conscience."

Edwards, in the Senate at the time, also cast his vote for the invasion, but he has since apologized for it.

I don't get why Edwards and his supporters make such a big deal about his apology for voting for the war.

What's his apology for? Is he apologizing for poor judgment? Is he apologizing for being unable to assess an important issue? Is he really saying that he's sorry he's unfit to make wise decisions?

Of the eight foes participating in the debate at South Carolina State University, four voted earlier in the day to support legislation that cleared Congress and requires the beginning of a troop withdrawal by Oct. 1. The legislation sets a goal of a complete withdrawal by April 1, 2008.

"We are one signature away from ending this war," said Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill. He said if Bush won't change his mind about vetoing the bill, Democrats need to work on rounding up enough Republican votes to override him.

In addition to Obama and Clinton, Sens. Joe Biden of Delaware and Chris Dodd of Connecticut also cast votes in favor of the legislation.

Every Dem senator voted for surrender.

Every Dem senator voted to help our enemies by pinpointing an official date to mark U.S. defeat in Iraq.

Former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel and Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio also participated in the debate, lesser-funded contenders who seemed most eager to challenge their rivals.

Of course, they're more eager to challenge their rivals.

What do they have to lose? NOTHING.

This is funny:

While Iraq dominated the debate's early moments, Edwards was asked about having paid for a $400 haircut from campaign donations rather than from his own wallet.

"That was a mistake, which we remedied," he said. A wealthy former trial lawyer, he recalled once having gone to dinner at a restaurant as a young child and having to leave because his father could not afford the prices.

"I've not forgotten where I came from," he said.

Edwards deflects from putting $400 dollars of campaign donations into his hair by telling a lame story about having to leave a restaurant because daddy couldn't afford it.

Edwards may not have forgotten where he came from, but he sure has left it behind him and embraced a different, incredibly indulgent lifestyle.

He had to direct attention away from his hair. Anyone looking at him has to conclude that Edwards was ripped off for paying $400 for a haircut like that.

Asked about a recent Supreme Court ruling that upheld a ban on so-called partial birth abortions, several of the contenders replied they would not impose a litmus test on their own nominees to the high court.

At the same time, they stressed their support for abortion rights, and said their appointees to the bench would reflect that.

I don't know if this is poor reporting or if the candidates dodged the question.

They were asked about the Supreme Court's partial birth abortion ruling.

If this AP account is accurate, none of them directly addressed the issue.

Asked about a recent Supreme Court ruling that upheld a ban on so-called partial birth abortions, several of the contenders replied they would not impose a litmus test on their own nominees to the high court.

At the same time, they stressed their support for abortion rights, and said their appointees to the bench would reflect that.

And look at the way Obama spoke about Iran:

"I think it would be a profound mistake for us to initiate a war with Iran," Obama replied. "But have no doubt, Iran possessing nuclear weapons will be a major threat to us and to the region."

I know the candidates were bound by strict time limits in this debate, but I get the feeling that even if he had more time to explain his position on Iran, he wouldn't need it. Does he have a plan for Iran?

Obama is so short on substance.

Not surprisingly, Bush's Iraq war policy found no supporters on the debate stage.

"I am proud that I opposed this war from the start," said Obama — a jab at those on the stage who voted to authorize the invasion.

"The president has a fundamentally flawed policy," said Biden. "The president should start off by not vetoing the legislation he says he will veto."

Dodd said Bush was pursuing a "failed policy."

Of course, there were no supporters of the President's Iraq policy.

The President is against surrendering Iraq to al Qaeda and other thugs.

All the Senate Dems on stage voted for America's defeat in Iraq. I wonder if John Edwards and Bill Richardson were jealous that they didn't get the chance to cast a vote to ensure victory for our enemies.

Overall, the debate was boring and predictable.

It was like a practice session, a warmup. The candidates weren't fighting to win. They may have thrown a few jabs here and there, but they weren't trying to land a knockout punch.

The debate was a waste of time and a waste of the jet fuel that it took to fly the candidates to South Carolina.