The Grown-Ups Take the Stage at the Democratic Debate: By THE EDITORIAL BOARDOCT. 14, 2015 It was impossible not to feel a sense of relief watching the Democratic debate after months...

KHH1

By THE EDITORIAL BOARDOCT. 14, 2015

It was impossible not to feel a sense of relief watching the Democratic debate after months dominated by the Republican circus of h**ers, ranters and that very special group of king k**lers in Congress. For those despairing about the future of American politics, here was proof that it doesnt have to revolve around candidates who p***e themselves on knowing nothing or believe that governing is all about destroying government.
Civility was a big winner on Tuesday night, and the discussion of real issues was refreshing. But what stood out most was the Democratic Partys big tent, capable of containing a spectrum of reality-based views. All five candidates including two refugees from what had been the Republican Party, Lincoln Chafee, a former Republican senator, and Jim Webb, Secretary of the Navy in the Reagan administration have real records. They also have real differences on important issues national security, foreign policy, gun safety, financial reforms. Those differences illuminate the choices that have to be made in governing, some likely to be successful, some ineffective.

The debate probably wont change much in the polling. Hillary Rodham Clinton reminded us why shes the front-runner, with her experience, command of the issues and strength in communicating ideas. She seemed both at ease and fearless. It helped that the candidates actually valued time to discuss issues. One of the biggest applause lines was Senator Bernie Sanderss quip to Mrs. Clinton, the American people are sick and tired of hearing about your damn emails. Supporters of Mr. Sanders embraced his passionate critiques, but his performance may not convert those skeptical of his ability to broaden his appeal.

The biggest point of agreement was on income ine******y, the central theme of the Sanders campaign and one that was been put on the top of the agenda by the other candidates as well. The question, of course, is how to reduce it in an economic system that has been moving toward ever greater ine******y. Mr. Sanders said he would change the tax code to have the wealthiest pay a lot more, with new revenues going to education, free college tuition and health care for all. Mrs. Clinton would also raise taxes, and said she supported reining in the excesses of capitalism so that it doesnt run amok, though its not clear what that would take, given the trajectory were on.

There was agreement on the need to raise the minimum wage (Senator Sanders proposes $15 an hour; Mrs. Clinton gave no firm number) and specific views on how to improve financial reform efforts break up the big banks or improve the Dodd-Frank financial reform bill. Regarding unauthorized immigrants, there was agreement that they should be allowed to purchase coverage on the health exchanges, but Mrs. Clinton, unlike the others, did not support giving them government subsidies.
On guns laws, there was great divergence. Mr. Webb has earned an A rating from the National Rifle Association; Mr. Chafee and Martin OMalley, the former governor of Maryland, have Fs; Mr. Sanders said he had received a D-minus, but had a tough time explaining his v**e against the Brady Bill. He seemed so determined to continue pandering to his gun rights constituency in Vermont that he got lost in the odd idea that he is more in touch with rural v**ers than the governor of Maryland and ended up undermining his image as the righteous t***h teller.

On foreign affairs, there was disagreement over the American role in the war in Syria and against the Islamic State. Mrs. Clinton supports a no-fly zone in Syria, an idea opposed by Mr. Sanders and Mr. OMalley. Likewise on surveillance and security issues, Mrs. Clinton defended her support for the Patriot Act, which allowed the National Security Agency to create a vast secret surveillance program, while Mr. Sanders opposed the act and said he would shut down the program.

These are healthy and necessary disagreements on difficult challenges that America faces. There is no one way to achieve a more economically equitable and just society, but these Democrats have that common aim. Their discussion showed a capacity to absorb facts and adjust plans to consequences. The Republican candidates may have a lot of fun campaigning for office, but they havent a prayer of knowing what to do if they ever entered the White House.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter, and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter.

JMHO Loc: Utah

KHH1 wrote:

By THE EDITORIAL BOARDOCT. 14, 2015

It was impossible not to feel a sense of relief watching the Democratic debate after months dominated by the Republican circus of h**ers, ranters and that very special group of king k**lers in Congress. For those despairing about the future of American politics, here was proof that it doesnt have to revolve around candidates who p***e themselves on knowing nothing or believe that governing is all about destroying government.
Civility was a big winner on Tuesday night, and the discussion of real issues was refreshing. But what stood out most was the Democratic Partys big tent, capable of containing a spectrum of reality-based views. All five candidates including two refugees from what had been the Republican Party, Lincoln Chafee, a former Republican senator, and Jim Webb, Secretary of the Navy in the Reagan administration have real records. They also have real differences on important issues national security, foreign policy, gun safety, financial reforms. Those differences illuminate the choices that have to be made in governing, some likely to be successful, some ineffective.

The debate probably wont change much in the polling. Hillary Rodham Clinton reminded us why shes the front-runner, with her experience, command of the issues and strength in communicating ideas. She seemed both at ease and fearless. It helped that the candidates actually valued time to discuss issues. One of the biggest applause lines was Senator Bernie Sanderss quip to Mrs. Clinton, the American people are sick and tired of hearing about your damn emails. Supporters of Mr. Sanders embraced his passionate critiques, but his performance may not convert those skeptical of his ability to broaden his appeal.

The biggest point of agreement was on income ine******y, the central theme of the Sanders campaign and one that was been put on the top of the agenda by the other candidates as well. The question, of course, is how to reduce it in an economic system that has been moving toward ever greater ine******y. Mr. Sanders said he would change the tax code to have the wealthiest pay a lot more, with new revenues going to education, free college tuition and health care for all. Mrs. Clinton would also raise taxes, and said she supported reining in the excesses of capitalism so that it doesnt run amok, though its not clear what that would take, given the trajectory were on.

There was agreement on the need to raise the minimum wage (Senator Sanders proposes $15 an hour; Mrs. Clinton gave no firm number) and specific views on how to improve financial reform efforts break up the big banks or improve the Dodd-Frank financial reform bill. Regarding unauthorized immigrants, there was agreement that they should be allowed to purchase coverage on the health exchanges, but Mrs. Clinton, unlike the others, did not support giving them government subsidies.
On guns laws, there was great divergence. Mr. Webb has earned an A rating from the National Rifle Association; Mr. Chafee and Martin OMalley, the former governor of Maryland, have Fs; Mr. Sanders said he had received a D-minus, but had a tough time explaining his v**e against the Brady Bill. He seemed so determined to continue pandering to his gun rights constituency in Vermont that he got lost in the odd idea that he is more in touch with rural v**ers than the governor of Maryland and ended up undermining his image as the righteous t***h teller.

On foreign affairs, there was disagreement over the American role in the war in Syria and against the Islamic State. Mrs. Clinton supports a no-fly zone in Syria, an idea opposed by Mr. Sanders and Mr. OMalley. Likewise on surveillance and security issues, Mrs. Clinton defended her support for the Patriot Act, which allowed the National Security Agency to create a vast secret surveillance program, while Mr. Sanders opposed the act and said he would shut down the program.

These are healthy and necessary disagreements on difficult challenges that America faces. There is no one way to achieve a more economically equitable and just society, but these Democrats have that common aim. Their discussion showed a capacity to absorb facts and adjust plans to consequences. The Republican candidates may have a lot of fun campaigning for office, but they havent a prayer of knowing what to do if they ever entered the White House.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter, and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter.

By THE EDITORIAL BOARDOCT. 14, 2015 br br It was... (show quote)

Grown ups????? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHJAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! Thanks for the laugh! It was a love fest for Hillary! All the other candidates did nothing but prop her up, and exonerate her on the email scandal! It is obvious from that sham of a debate that Hillary will be the nominee.

The Democraps vision from that debate:

- Open borders - anyone can come in
- More welfare
- Free healthcare
- Free college tuition
- Get rid of anything burning oil
- No guns
- Bigger government
- Higher taxes - paid by the rich
- Smaller military
- All infrastructure rebuilt/repaired

$19T in national debt is not enough, so let's run it up to around $40T! What a joke.

KHH1

We'll see if it is a joke at Hillary's inauguration....3 straight...and then we'll see who AMERICA thinks is the joke.....once Hillary tilts the Court left.....scalia and Thomas will be the real jokes.....and I can retire from even worrying about politics...because it'll be a wrap...you heard it here first.....

Olden McGroen Loc: Texas

KHH1 wrote:

By THE EDITORIAL BOARDOCT. 14, 2015

It was impossible not to feel a sense of relief watching the Democratic debate after months dominated by the Republican circus of h**ers, ranters and that very special group of king k**lers in Congress. For those despairing about the future of American politics, here was proof that it doesnt have to revolve around candidates who p***e themselves on knowing nothing or believe that governing is all about destroying government.
Civility was a big winner on Tuesday night, and the discussion of real issues was refreshing. But what stood out most was the Democratic Partys big tent, capable of containing a spectrum of reality-based views. All five candidates including two refugees from what had been the Republican Party, Lincoln Chafee, a former Republican senator, and Jim Webb, Secretary of the Navy in the Reagan administration have real records. They also have real differences on important issues national security, foreign policy, gun safety, financial reforms. Those differences illuminate the choices that have to be made in governing, some likely to be successful, some ineffective.

The debate probably wont change much in the polling. Hillary Rodham Clinton reminded us why shes the front-runner, with her experience, command of the issues and strength in communicating ideas. She seemed both at ease and fearless. It helped that the candidates actually valued time to discuss issues. One of the biggest applause lines was Senator Bernie Sanderss quip to Mrs. Clinton, the American people are sick and tired of hearing about your damn emails. Supporters of Mr. Sanders embraced his passionate critiques, but his performance may not convert those skeptical of his ability to broaden his appeal.

The biggest point of agreement was on income ine******y, the central theme of the Sanders campaign and one that was been put on the top of the agenda by the other candidates as well. The question, of course, is how to reduce it in an economic system that has been moving toward ever greater ine******y. Mr. Sanders said he would change the tax code to have the wealthiest pay a lot more, with new revenues going to education, free college tuition and health care for all. Mrs. Clinton would also raise taxes, and said she supported reining in the excesses of capitalism so that it doesnt run amok, though its not clear what that would take, given the trajectory were on.

There was agreement on the need to raise the minimum wage (Senator Sanders proposes $15 an hour; Mrs. Clinton gave no firm number) and specific views on how to improve financial reform efforts break up the big banks or improve the Dodd-Frank financial reform bill. Regarding unauthorized immigrants, there was agreement that they should be allowed to purchase coverage on the health exchanges, but Mrs. Clinton, unlike the others, did not support giving them government subsidies.
On guns laws, there was great divergence. Mr. Webb has earned an A rating from the National Rifle Association; Mr. Chafee and Martin OMalley, the former governor of Maryland, have Fs; Mr. Sanders said he had received a D-minus, but had a tough time explaining his v**e against the Brady Bill. He seemed so determined to continue pandering to his gun rights constituency in Vermont that he got lost in the odd idea that he is more in touch with rural v**ers than the governor of Maryland and ended up undermining his image as the righteous t***h teller.

On foreign affairs, there was disagreement over the American role in the war in Syria and against the Islamic State. Mrs. Clinton supports a no-fly zone in Syria, an idea opposed by Mr. Sanders and Mr. OMalley. Likewise on surveillance and security issues, Mrs. Clinton defended her support for the Patriot Act, which allowed the National Security Agency to create a vast secret surveillance program, while Mr. Sanders opposed the act and said he would shut down the program.

These are healthy and necessary disagreements on difficult challenges that America faces. There is no one way to achieve a more economically equitable and just society, but these Democrats have that common aim. Their discussion showed a capacity to absorb facts and adjust plans to consequences. The Republican candidates may have a lot of fun campaigning for office, but they havent a prayer of knowing what to do if they ever entered the White House.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter, and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter.

By THE EDITORIAL BOARDOCT. 14, 2015 br br It was... (show quote)

========================================================

And by "grownups", you mean "old white people". Hmmmmm? I didn't see much DIVERSITY on that stage. Hmmmmmmm? Isn't that the cudgel that the Dems have been beating the GOP over the head with for last 10+ years?

The Dems had a woman. A woman that continues to remind everyone that she's a woman multiple times every time she speaks. Why? First, to play the victim card and second, she knows that many of her lemmings are v****g for her simply because she has a vagina. No other requirement necessary. See for yourself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uf7MR0f4XDI

Conversely, the GOP debates included: A 100% African-American,Two Cuban-Americans, an Indian-American and a Woman. The woman has never played the "woman card". Neither have the other minority candidates played the minority card. Seems like the GOP has the Dems beat, but you'll never hear a word of it mentioned from the media. Nope.

When BO was elected...all of mediadom was all a-tingle because we had elected the "first black president" blah, blah, blah. That was the only qualifier for him. That, and being a Marxist. If you're black and a conservative, you have trumped up charges of rape or lude and indecent behavior and smear tactics hurled at you.

JMHO Loc: Utah

KHH1 wrote:

We'll see if it is a joke at Hillary's inauguration....3 straight...and then we'll see who AMERICA thinks is the joke.....once Hillary tilts the Court left.....scalia and Thomas will be the real jokes.....and I can retire from even worrying about politics...because it'll be a wrap...you heard it here first.....

No inauguration for Hillary, except in your l*****t libtard r****t mind, pal.

KHH1

Olden McGroen wrote:

==================================================... (show quote)

Convince America....I could give a s**t less about the GOP or what you are stating...just being honest with you.....and if you want to do something...nominate other then a white male....or the rest was just toady window dressing..............as they used to say...the only diversity at the RNC is the black church choir singing in the background.....

KHH1

JMHO wrote:

No inauguration for Hillary, except in your l*****t libtard r****t mind, pal.

Just be sure you're around when it happens...I was told the same about BHO in 2012...see how that worked out huh? :roll: :roll:

JMHO Loc: Utah

KHH1 wrote:

Just be sure you're around when it happens...I was told the same about BHO in 2012...see how that worked out huh? :roll: :roll:

Yep, can't wait to jam this one up your ass...should be fun. Because of the total disaster BHO has become is precisely why Hillary will not be president. If she belongs anywhere, it is prison. But, then you lefties love corrupt, incompetent, pathological lying, criminals for your candidates...says a lot about you, pal, and your ilk. You love candidates that can't lead horse to water.

Hell, your inept party could only get half the viewers that the GOP got. People are fed up with all the crooks in your party, pal.

America Only Loc: From the right hand of God

KHH1 wrote:

We'll see if it is a joke at Hillary's inauguration....3 straight...and then we'll see who AMERICA thinks is the joke.....once Hillary tilts the Court left.....scalia and Thomas will be the real jokes.....and I can retire from even worrying about politics...because it'll be a wrap...you heard it here first.....

Hahahahahahahah lalalalalala lololol HOE HOE HOE!

You Janitor's NEVER get anything done right....and of course, HILLARY will be in Prison before the e******n.....

How are your Kmart Flip Flops?

You are still so unhappy...because...you are still Black and Nappy!
Weeeee hahahahahhahahaahlalalalalalololololol

Welfare Hood Rat Kevin....KHH1 HAS no FUN ! WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE wooooooooooooooooooot ALL ABOARD that COON express.......Kevin COON that is....the Janitor Engineer with the Dagwood Vocabulary and the brain dead life! HOOOOOOOO WHOOOOOOOOOOOT!

WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

yessar dar Boss Menz....I doez as my Massa axe of me ta doo.....

The Kevin KHH1 Monkey Express....PHD Trainology!

Master Mopper Janitor Award for KHH1

Master Mopper Janitor KHH1 Kevin, in ACTION!

KHH1

JMHO wrote:

Yep, can't wait to jam this one up your ass...shou... (show quote)

you all have a clown show...very entertaining.....not much else....you'll see........

JMHO Loc: Utah

KHH1 wrote:

you all have a clown show...very entertaining.....not much else....you'll see........

No, we watched the clown show last night...and, it was a real knee slapper...lots of clown acts.

CDM Loc: Florida

KHH1 wrote:

By THE EDITORIAL BOARDOCT. 14, 2015

It was impossible not to feel a sense of relief watching the Democratic debate after months dominated by the Republican circus of h**ers, ranters and that very special group of king k**lers in Congress. For those despairing about the future of American politics, here was proof that it doesnt have to revolve around candidates who p***e themselves on knowing nothing or believe that governing is all about destroying government.
Civility was a big winner on Tuesday night, and the discussion of real issues was refreshing. But what stood out most was the Democratic Partys big tent, capable of containing a spectrum of reality-based views. All five candidates including two refugees from what had been the Republican Party, Lincoln Chafee, a former Republican senator, and Jim Webb, Secretary of the Navy in the Reagan administration have real records. They also have real differences on important issues national security, foreign policy, gun safety, financial reforms. Those differences illuminate the choices that have to be made in governing, some likely to be successful, some ineffective.

The debate probably wont change much in the polling. Hillary Rodham Clinton reminded us why shes the front-runner, with her experience, command of the issues and strength in communicating ideas. She seemed both at ease and fearless. It helped that the candidates actually valued time to discuss issues. One of the biggest applause lines was Senator Bernie Sanderss quip to Mrs. Clinton, the American people are sick and tired of hearing about your damn emails. Supporters of Mr. Sanders embraced his passionate critiques, but his performance may not convert those skeptical of his ability to broaden his appeal.

The biggest point of agreement was on income ine******y, the central theme of the Sanders campaign and one that was been put on the top of the agenda by the other candidates as well. The question, of course, is how to reduce it in an economic system that has been moving toward ever greater ine******y. Mr. Sanders said he would change the tax code to have the wealthiest pay a lot more, with new revenues going to education, free college tuition and health care for all. Mrs. Clinton would also raise taxes, and said she supported reining in the excesses of capitalism so that it doesnt run amok, though its not clear what that would take, given the trajectory were on.

There was agreement on the need to raise the minimum wage (Senator Sanders proposes $15 an hour; Mrs. Clinton gave no firm number) and specific views on how to improve financial reform efforts break up the big banks or improve the Dodd-Frank financial reform bill. Regarding unauthorized immigrants, there was agreement that they should be allowed to purchase coverage on the health exchanges, but Mrs. Clinton, unlike the others, did not support giving them government subsidies.
On guns laws, there was great divergence. Mr. Webb has earned an A rating from the National Rifle Association; Mr. Chafee and Martin OMalley, the former governor of Maryland, have Fs; Mr. Sanders said he had received a D-minus, but had a tough time explaining his v**e against the Brady Bill. He seemed so determined to continue pandering to his gun rights constituency in Vermont that he got lost in the odd idea that he is more in touch with rural v**ers than the governor of Maryland and ended up undermining his image as the righteous t***h teller.

On foreign affairs, there was disagreement over the American role in the war in Syria and against the Islamic State. Mrs. Clinton supports a no-fly zone in Syria, an idea opposed by Mr. Sanders and Mr. OMalley. Likewise on surveillance and security issues, Mrs. Clinton defended her support for the Patriot Act, which allowed the National Security Agency to create a vast secret surveillance program, while Mr. Sanders opposed the act and said he would shut down the program.

These are healthy and necessary disagreements on difficult challenges that America faces. There is no one way to achieve a more economically equitable and just society, but these Democrats have that common aim. Their discussion showed a capacity to absorb facts and adjust plans to consequences. The Republican candidates may have a lot of fun campaigning for office, but they havent a prayer of knowing what to do if they ever entered the White House.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter, and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter.

By THE EDITORIAL BOARDOCT. 14, 2015 br br It was... (show quote)

Without Mr. Webb on the podium there would not have been anyone representing America...

KHH1

America Only wrote:

Hahahahahahahah lalalalalala lololol HOE HOE HOE! ... (show quote)

**Trying to compensate because he knows he is dealing with someone way out of his league...you have to try and bring me down because you are unable to lift yourself up.....if you were really sharp...you could dismiss me on an academic basis and make me look like a "janitor" instead of calling me one...from Rockwell, to the mayor's letter, to my engineering documents, to that persuasive life-changing letter..I've always been on top...was raised that way....can even go as far back as high school and show you the 4-year academic Moody scholarship.....I could post awards and accomplishments all day long....and dare you to come close to being able to do the same....I could care less about any of it because it came with ease.....but I just wanted to give you a taste...and if you would accept my MBA-level challenge...I would turtle wax your azz to the extent you would not even come back to OPP...you ,know that.....and that is why you name-call and post monkey pictures.........because you are a loser azz coward who will not step up to the plate and meet the challenge head-on....

KHH1

JMHO wrote:

No, we watched the clown show last night...and, it was a real knee slapper...lots of clown acts.

Trump and Christie.....barnum and bailey material.....

archie bunker Loc: Texas

KHH1 wrote:

By THE EDITORIAL BOARDOCT. 14, 2015

It was impossible not to feel a sense of relief watching the Democratic debate after months dominated by the Republican circus of h**ers, ranters and that very special group of king k**lers in Congress. For those despairing about the future of American politics, here was proof that it doesnt have to revolve around candidates who p***e themselves on knowing nothing or believe that governing is all about destroying government.
Civility was a big winner on Tuesday night, and the discussion of real issues was refreshing. But what stood out most was the Democratic Partys big tent, capable of containing a spectrum of reality-based views. All five candidates including two refugees from what had been the Republican Party, Lincoln Chafee, a former Republican senator, and Jim Webb, Secretary of the Navy in the Reagan administration have real records. They also have real differences on important issues national security, foreign policy, gun safety, financial reforms. Those differences illuminate the choices that have to be made in governing, some likely to be successful, some ineffective.

The debate probably wont change much in the polling. Hillary Rodham Clinton reminded us why shes the front-runner, with her experience, command of the issues and strength in communicating ideas. She seemed both at ease and fearless. It helped that the candidates actually valued time to discuss issues. One of the biggest applause lines was Senator Bernie Sanderss quip to Mrs. Clinton, the American people are sick and tired of hearing about your damn emails. Supporters of Mr. Sanders embraced his passionate critiques, but his performance may not convert those skeptical of his ability to broaden his appeal.

The biggest point of agreement was on income ine******y, the central theme of the Sanders campaign and one that was been put on the top of the agenda by the other candidates as well. The question, of course, is how to reduce it in an economic system that has been moving toward ever greater ine******y. Mr. Sanders said he would change the tax code to have the wealthiest pay a lot more, with new revenues going to education, free college tuition and health care for all. Mrs. Clinton would also raise taxes, and said she supported reining in the excesses of capitalism so that it doesnt run amok, though its not clear what that would take, given the trajectory were on.

There was agreement on the need to raise the minimum wage (Senator Sanders proposes $15 an hour; Mrs. Clinton gave no firm number) and specific views on how to improve financial reform efforts break up the big banks or improve the Dodd-Frank financial reform bill. Regarding unauthorized immigrants, there was agreement that they should be allowed to purchase coverage on the health exchanges, but Mrs. Clinton, unlike the others, did not support giving them government subsidies.
On guns laws, there was great divergence. Mr. Webb has earned an A rating from the National Rifle Association; Mr. Chafee and Martin OMalley, the former governor of Maryland, have Fs; Mr. Sanders said he had received a D-minus, but had a tough time explaining his v**e against the Brady Bill. He seemed so determined to continue pandering to his gun rights constituency in Vermont that he got lost in the odd idea that he is more in touch with rural v**ers than the governor of Maryland and ended up undermining his image as the righteous t***h teller.

On foreign affairs, there was disagreement over the American role in the war in Syria and against the Islamic State. Mrs. Clinton supports a no-fly zone in Syria, an idea opposed by Mr. Sanders and Mr. OMalley. Likewise on surveillance and security issues, Mrs. Clinton defended her support for the Patriot Act, which allowed the National Security Agency to create a vast secret surveillance program, while Mr. Sanders opposed the act and said he would shut down the program.

These are healthy and necessary disagreements on difficult challenges that America faces. There is no one way to achieve a more economically equitable and just society, but these Democrats have that common aim. Their discussion showed a capacity to absorb facts and adjust plans to consequences. The Republican candidates may have a lot of fun campaigning for office, but they havent a prayer of knowing what to do if they ever entered the White House.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter, and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter.

By THE EDITORIAL BOARDOCT. 14, 2015 br br It was... (show quote)

A chimp can come up with socialist ideas. Take a banana from that chimp, give it to that chimp.

A smart chimp would figure out how to grow more bananas.
Nuff said.