newsobserver.com projects - Bob Schieffer - Comments

Re: The debate is on?

markjohnson — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 21:45:44 -0400

Comment used as advertising for a retail outlet deleted. MJ

Re: The debate is on?

tayiestv — Sat, 26 Apr 2008 07:57:22 -0400

America has enough from the useless and non productive empty talks. Debate can be very informative, engaging and invigorating when it focused on issues that directly will effect the American people. I don't care what Barak Obama had for breakfast or what his breacher had preached. But I do care if he is trust wordy therefor I ask can we trust the next president? which one of the three candidates you think is trust wordy?

Tayie Rehem
http://www.soultv.net

Re: The debate is on?

rojo7449 — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 19:29:23 -0400

Delightful. Obama scheduling was intended to mess with PA, but also to put enough distance between the NC Debate and the NC Primary. He wanted the additional time to undo the damage she would do to his lead because she's so much more effective debating. He won't get away with anymore of his "what she said" responses with the tact this campaign has taken of late.

His politics isn't only as bad as politics have ever been, he's taken it to a new LOW.

Re: The debate is on?

captsfufp — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 08:12:15 -0400

I'm not saying this is the reason, but, from my perspective, the appearance from the Obama campaign is that the point of having their first proposed debate was to take Sen. Clinton out of Penn. before the April 22 primary, to ensure she doesn't further increase her lead in that huge state, especially in regards to her popular vote.

Now that a post-April 22 debate has been proposed, suddenly the Obama campaign has schedule problems. That's politics, and that's strategy. And that's fine. But no more of this "new kind of politics" and "we can win anywhere" message, since both are obviously not true.

Re: The debate is on?

FFC1304 — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 06:47:41 -0400

Hmmm, I guess NC is not as 'important' in this election as they led us to believe. I'd appreciate both of them just staying the hell out of our already democrat corrupted state. STRIVE to be SMARTER than a democrat.

Re: The debate is on?

SamuelWait — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 21:28:27 -0400

Why won't he agree to debate? Come on. We deserve to have them debate in NC!

Re: The debate is on

natdug — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 17:36:22 -0400

Where does one go for tickets?

Also, why is there no local media representative among the moderators?

As much as I LOVE Raleigh-centric things...

blculbre — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 09:07:15 -0400

n/t

As much as I dislike Raleigh-centric things...

captsfufp — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 22:05:59 -0400

It IS central in the state and more accessible to most people than Charlotte.

...even if it's at NC State. I suppose... (Pirates! Pirates! Purple and Gold!)

Re: Clinton announces debate, ad buy

blculbre — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 15:14:01 -0400

Anyone can see,
Raleigh's where it needs to be.

Re: Clinton announces debate, ad buy

mrstedger — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 15:11:16 -0400

Hmmm… Charlotte might be better? Wouldn't want Katie to get confused and announce she's live from Raleigh-Durham!

Re: Clinton announces debate, ad buy

natdug — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 14:22:39 -0400

N.C. State is obviously the best choice.

Clearly.

Re: Clinton announces debate, ad buy

jjsmith2 — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 14:21:03 -0400

N.C. State is obviously the best choice.

Re: N.C. debate sounding debatable

FFC1304 — Sun, 16 Mar 2008 08:06:22 -0400

nah, just enlightened and smarter than a democrat, thats all...Oh yeah, and I take blood thinner, so bursting blood vessel liability is greatly reduced. thanks for your concern, are you a government employee?

Re: N.C. debate sounding debatable

Isaac136 — Sat, 15 Mar 2008 17:45:04 -0400

FCC, I don't mean this in a terrible way, but sometimes I think you're just bonkers. And, as I've pointed out before, I'm concerned that you're going to bust a blood vessel at your keyboard.

Take it easy now.

yer friend
Isaac