What kind of debate do you want to see from Clinton and Obama tonight?

The half ton elephant in the room is global warming. Yet where is the question about it? I am posting this AFTER hearing the debate. The only thing that came close was developing clean, green technologies for employment. They should have gone on to addressing phasing out old carbon-polluting technologies which cause illness and death close to home as well as deterioration of Spaceship Earth's life support. Perhaps mentioning global warming directly is considered a form of fear mongering. The difference between erratic claims concerning terrorists (not the true stuff, the fake) and the very real crisis of global warming is that taking speedy, effective actions are an imperative. Few want to believe or admit that. Also the aforementioned outrageously compromised election systems that deny votes to winners should have been at the top of the list of questions.
Pat Williams

Is anybody besides me sick of having to pay Brighthouse, Cox Comcast etc for cable TV only to have commercials crammed down our throats. THEY SHOULD BE PAYING US TO WATCH THIS CRAP!

Dear President Obama,
When u begin your first term would u please take a suggestion. Find another way to communicate with the people besides the corporate monied media such as CNN FOX ABC CBS NBC NYT etc. They will only pollute your message and margainlize u and us like they always have. WHO THE HELL NEEDS THEM. LETS FIND ANOTHER WAY. IF WE DONT THEN WE R at their mercy. I CANT TAKE IT ANY MORE!

I don't see why Buzzflash has to "PUSH" ONE candidate or the other ,They need to keep their opinion to theirself ,and let the people decide .Let the people decide based on what the Candidates intend to do if elected .The Media are the one's that elect the President ,and that is "WRONG"

"The Obama supporters are be-boppin and scattin all over the place and I'm losing it"
HAHAHAHAHAHA

I'd like to see Hillary stop lying for a change.

I'd ask: How many of Bush's policies, programs and signing statements will you undo.?

And: How will you end the war on drugs, and bring some sanity to the issue?

I think we'd all like to hear a true debate, and to hear more about how the candidates plan on tactically handling all of these issues. And I think all of the questions posed here are great. But when I think about it, I already have heard them address these issues in sound-bite format... which is all that will be allowed again tonight in a debate that will follow the format of all the other ones we've seen. In a format that has strict time limits on candidates' responses, that encourages back-and-forth mudslinging, and has SPEED ROUNDS for crying out loud (as if it's a gameshow!) what else can we really expect but the same non-detailed sound-bite answers we've already heard. How is anyone supposed to be able to get into detail on such complex issues as a national healthcare plan, the solvency of social security, or getting us out of Iraq when you're limited to a one or even several minute response?

Here's what I'd love to see:

Instead of having 18 debates that sling 50 questions at the candidates and give them a minute or two to answer each one, I think these same 18 debates could be devoted to one or two crucial topics each. For example, you'd have one debate on their healthcare plans and the issues surrounding the solvency of government managed medical programs like medicare and the pharmaceutical plan for seniors. Then you'd have another on the plan to get us out of Iraq and foreign policy overall.

I'd give each candidate 15 minutes or so to outline their plans with - and this is important - the rule being that they stick to outlining their plan only and not get into pointing out problems/differences/etc. with the other candidates' plans. I wouldn't even mind if these initial segments were pre-recorded to rule out the possibility of getting lured into spending half of the time they should be using to outline their plan to trash what the other candidate just said. Having them pre-recorded might even allow them to be augmented with charts or other graphics that may help citizens easily and quickly understand the crucial details of how their plan works. (After all, I do realize that having each candidate drone on with specifics for 15 minutes or more has the potential to put most viewers to sleep... which is, by the way, why it's not done in stump speeches, Hillary! Stop blaming Obama for not being all speech and no substance when you and every other politician do the same on the stump!)

After those initial segments, each candidate would have a few minutes to offer rebuttals or further distinguish their plan based on what the other candidates have presented in their initial segments. I think one rebuttal round would suffice, but two at most.

Then, the last half hour (possibly more) of the debate could be dedicated to questions from citizens in the audience about their specific concerns on the topic at hand, and could be directed to one specific candidate or all candidates to answer.

I think until we get to some sort of format like this that offers the candidates the time to say more than, "I will get us out of Iraq," or "I will create new jobs," then we can only expect more of the same: tired sound-bites and no substance. I understand that a few of the early debates may need to be broader, so that early primary states get an overall view of the candidates before voting. But to be subjected to 18 of these debates that have been essentially the same thing over and over again is nothing short of ridiculous. I'm a political junkie and even I am tuned out by now!

I expect dignified debates. Verbal brawls turn me off. Just answer the questions and don't dance around them to glorify yourself. And don't throw darts at the other candidate's ideas.

I'd like to hear Obama and Clinton answer one question in particular: Do you intend to pursue GW Bush and Dick Cheney's violatons of our constitution?

Personally, I'd like to see the pair led away in handcuffs and orange jump suits next January. Let the investigations begin (unfettered.)

What will you do to ensure - from this point (not after the Bush cuts attempt are implimented) -
- receipants of Medicare & Medicaid (MediCal) - will continue receiving their 'sustainable life lines' Of these two benefits??'

Food and energy costs are rocketing, & Bush insists using corn (ethanol production source). It is driving-up the cost of our STAPLE FOOD products.
Wheat has doubled in price in one year!
What would you do to curtail planting more corn, more exploration of
Brazil's ability in this AREA, RECOGNIZING that the nation has only enough food on hand to feed the nation for +/- 60 days in an emergency.

What about S 1959 and the issue of illegal wiretapping of telephone & E-mail, Bush continues to seek, limiting as American citizens, the staggering loss of our civil liberties?

Why aren't Hillary and Obama pressing for Bush's impeachment?

TO CLINTON: How do you justify your vote FOR:

YES on Iraq, & do you still blame Bush for your vote?

YES on Kyl-Lieberman,

yes on Cluster bombs. Do you deny voting FOR the continued use of these?

Your 'yes' vote is a direct conflict to Obama, who was against ALL of these.

What have Obama and Clinton have planned to ensure that the upcoming election isn't stolen yet again by voter caging, inadequate poll resources, and especially vote-flipping voting machines.

I HAVE WATCHED, READ & LISTENED TO CLINTON & HER SYCOPHANTS CONTINUE TO DREDGE HER SWAMP FOR IMPLIED NEGATIVES TOWARD Sen. Obama, while blaming him for doing likewise, which he has not done, much to his credit.

IF (stretch) Clinton has not directed various character assinations of Sen. Obama, why has she not PUBLICALLY DENOUNCED THEM? Hers are acts of COMMISSION & OMISSION, what is her response to what she will do to STOP these activities, instead of fueling??

For everything she denies, she has inspired her myopic followers to their own destructivness, including last nights Gregg County for Obama Headquarters Vandalized.

At an early point I would have considered voting for Clinton, before I learned more about the Illinois Senator - UNTIL - Bill's fingerwagging hostility, and her scurilous duel-personalities that have been on parade.

IS HILLARY CLINTON BI-POLAR or PARANOID SCHIZOPHRENIC, which her 'sign off' of the last debate portrayed?

Expanding on the moderator through a true debate dialogue between the candidates. No canned stump speech sound bites.

I hate to say it, but the West Wing debate between Jimmy Smits and Alan Alda would be perfect. A damn shane that our fictional presidents and presidential campaigns are head and shoulders above the real thing.

Letting the two actually engage in a real debate - ("debate" is a term that has substantive meaning to lawyers) - would be a novel and valuable contribution to the electorate's understanding of the candidates and their positions. I think the last one held in the US was the Lincoln-Douglas debate.

"In the part of this universe that we know there is great injustice, and often the good suffer, and often the wicked prosper, and one hardly knows which of those is the more annoying."
- Bertrand Russell -

I'd like to know why neither of them have taken election fraud seriously?

There have been 8 long years to trash the electronic voting system and the recent primaries have shown what a disaster the November elections will be.

I'd like to hear what Obama and Clinton have planned to ensure that the upcoming election isn't stolen yet again by voter caging, inadequate poll resources, and especially vote-flipping voting machines.

I'd like to see them discuss some of the real issues mentioned in an editorial in today's NY Times, such as:

Signing statements -- both candidates have said they will use them, but the Am. Bar Assoc. has called for an end to the practice, and McCain says he'll never use them. Both should explain why the Bar and McCain are wrong.

Social Security -- it will go into deficit during the next president's term. What will they do about it?

To Clinton -- will she raise taxes on the hedge fund and equity fund managers who pay less than we the people?

To Obama -- reconcile his anti-NAFTA views with the views of economists that free trade is good for growth.

To both -- what is their answer to the Bush administration's non-stop fear of terrorism campaign over the years and what it has wrought (wiretapping, hijacking Congressional powers)? How do they intend to restore the country to normalcy?

And on and on. I'd like to see them avoid "The Silly Season." But that might be too much to ask.

What kind of AG is needed, and work to be done.
Exporting of jobs what needs to be done.
Our infrastructure needs.
The price of oil and gas what needs to be done now.
Campaign finance and voter protection.
The list is endless that really hasn't been explained, but we will most likely hear the same talking points (they are important).

I want to hear that there will be jobs, jobs, jobs....

I long to see a real debate, one that addresses the real issues that are destroying this country. Food and energy costs are rocketing, and the Bush administration's insistence to use corn to produce ethanol is driving-up the cost of our staple food products. Wheat has doubled in price in one year, yet we are still planting more corn, while the nation only has enough food on hand to feed the nation for approximately 60 days in an emergency situation.

What about S 1959 and the issue of illegal wiretapping of American citizens, and the staggering loss of our civil liberties? Why aren't Hillary and Obama pressing for Bush's impeachment?

There are too many important issues that our Presidential candidates refuse to touch, and it's exactly those items that need to be included in any meaningful debate - something that unfortunately, won't happen. Hillary and Obama are both "establishment" candidates and will do nothing to rock the boat even though that's exactly what this country needs - truth and honesty.

William Cormier

it doesn't matter what is said at the debate,the left are going to make sure their massiah OOOBAMA is the winner,all the right wing media has been down grading hillary for years and it looks like the lefties got on the band wagon,you people have been used by the right to kill hillary's campian,slap yourselfs on the back,you have just put john mccain in the white house,and when that happens,have the morals to end this web site,because your as much to blame as the rightwing

How is he/she going to control the out of control military/industrial complex if elected? The insurance industry? Pharmacueticals? Media conglomerates? Energy/oil? What kind of accountability is he/she going to impose on the war profiteers? Will he/she allow open bid contracts? Will he/she aggressively prosecute the former administration for lying us into war? How about Cheney's energy manipulation, among other things? re-investigate 9/11? The 2000 election? These are some of the things inquiring minds want to know.

And then what sort of world? It'll be up to us.

dalandis

I would like them to discuss what is going to be done about
getting rid of all the political hacks that are trashing our
nation,the incompetant idealogues.