***********************************************************

               RENEW YOUR ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP WITH AAM!!!!

       SEND A CHECK FOR $25 TO AAM, P. O. Box 1016, MADISON, WI 53701

            MEMBERSHIP PERIOD:OCTOBER 1    -    SEPTEMBER 30

***********************************************************


>>> Error in line 12 of AAM.MAILTPL: unknown formatting command <<<
 -> . <-


This IHT.com article has been sent to you by: [log in to unmask]
I see teams pariring up in this article; Obama/Edwards and Clinton/Richardson. Do you?
------------------------------------------------------

At debate, two rivals go after defiant Clinton
By Patrick Healy and Jeff Zeleny The New York Times
Sunday, January 6, 2008

It was as if they sensed vulnerability.



Senator Barack Obama and John Edwards went after Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton as never before in a televised debate here on Saturday night. With Obama hoping that a victory in New Hampshire, following his first-place finish in Iowa, would make him difficult to beat in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination — and with Edwards looking to defeat Clinton in a second straight contest — they entered an alliance of convenience.



In an exchange that summed up the basic story line of the contest, they cast her as a candidate of the status quo who would fail to deliver the changes in government that many Democratic voters demand.



With the New Hampshire primary two days away, Clinton found her courage, likability and judgment questioned. But she fought back as she did when she was first lady of Arkansas and of the United States — with defiance and flashes of anger, pursing her lips, stiffening her back and staring intently at her rivals.



When it became clear that Obama and Edwards, sitting side by side across from her, were teaming up, Clinton sat up and pulled her coat tight as if preparing for battle.



A few minutes later, though, she softened when one of the debate's moderators took note of the fact that Clinton was getting double-barreled criticism from her rivals. "You noticed?" she said with a smile.



With all three rivals under intense pressure to show strength in the primary on Tuesday, they each unleashed their sharpest attacks of the campaign season. They held nothing back in their words and or in their body language; Clinton glared at her opponents and Edwards waved his left hand in her direction as he derided her as an establishment candidate. At other times, they seized chances to be nice to one another , with Edwards flattering Obama and Clinton being playful in discussing her likability.



But it was the charged series of exchanges that first unfolded between Clinton and Obama, who appears tied with Clinton here, that set the tone for the night. They began by sparring over details of their health care plans, but the dispute escalated into a showdown over leadership and courage.



As Clinton attacked Obama as waffling on the Patriot Act and Iraq war funding, she sought to make an ally out of Edwards. She suggested that Obama had hypocritically tried to paint Edwards as inconsistent on the issues. All eyes turned to Edwards, and he delivered a coup de grace — siding dramatically with Obama instead of Clinton.



"Any time you speak out powerfully for change, the forces of status quo attack," Edwards said, looking and gesturing toward Clinton. Referring to himself and Obama, he added: "He believes deeply in change, and I believe deeply in change. And any time you're fighting for that, I mean, I didn't hear these kinds of attacks from Senator Clinton when she was ahead."



Clinton, who has seen her longtime lead in New Hampshire and national polls shrink in recent weeks, made it clear that she was as much an advocate for change as her rivals. And she made the case that she had much longer experience in delivering it.



"Making change is not about what you believe," she said. "It's not about a speech you make. It is about working hard." And in a direct attack on Obama's theme of inspiring hope in Americans — and perhaps on Edwards's many promises of reforming government — she said, "We don't need to be raising the false hopes of our country about what can be delivered."



The fourth person on the stage, Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico, was reduced to playing the role of pundit.



"I've been in hostage negotiations that are a lot more civil than this," he said, sitting with Clinton to his left and Obama and Edwards to his right. He went on to defend Clinton, saying that experience in government counted — both for his candidacy and, implicitly, for hers — and that there was nothing wrong with citing experience as proof that a candidate can deliver change.



Advisers to Edwards and Obama said late Saturday night that they had not formally agreed to attack Clinton. They said it was a natural coincidence since both men are running as agents of change — and since Edwards, who was counting on a victory in Iowa, is looking for ways to set up a battle between Obama and Clinton, with him on the sidelines as the winner.



Edwards seemed to bend over backwards to share the spotlight that Obama has been enjoying since Iowa, and he tried to align their messages. At one point Edwards said, "Yes, Barack, I agree with you completely that we need to unite America."



In the second half of the debate, which was sponsored by ABC News and Facebook, Clinton was asked to explain why voters found her less likable than some of her rivals.



"Well, that hurts my feelings, but I'll try to go on," she said in a soft voice, her smile widening. "He's very likable, I agree with that. But I don't think I'm that bad."



Looking her way, Obama deadpanned, "You're likable enough."



"I appreciate that," Clinton responded, before launching into a sharp argument about the importance of this election.



"In 2000, we unfortunately ended up with a president who people said they wanted to have a beer with, who said he wanted to be a uniter not a divider — who said that he had his intuition and, you know, really come into the White House and transform the country," Clinton said. "And you know, at least I think there are the majority of Americans who think that was not the right choice."



Clinton's personal appeal emerged as a problem late in the Iowa race, as public and private polling found that people found her remote and, in the words of some voters, cold. And she admitted at a few events that she did not like talking about herself.



During the last days in Iowa, Clinton's team brought in friends of her friends to talk about her personal side, and they are doing the same in New Hampshire, where Clinton and Obama are now both competing for support from the same voters — young people and independents, who sided strongly with Obama in Iowa.



"Words are not action and as beautifully presented and as passionately felt as they are, they are not action," Clinton said. "What we've got to do is translate talk into action, and feeling into reality; I have a long record of doing that."



But Obama came back at her.



"The truth is, actually, words do inspire," Obama said. "Words do help people get involved."



Arguments over which candidate can best bring about change dominated the discussion. Even when the subject moved to Iraq, the candidates decided against engaging one another sharply.



With the fresh departures from the race of Senators Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware and Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut, the debate focused less on policy differences among the remaining candidates than the difference between their résumés and experiences.



For television viewers in New Hampshire, the candidates' commercials were featured back to back during the single break during the 90-minute debate. One contender who was excluded, Representative Dennis J. Kucinich of Ohio, compressed his argument to 30 seconds, saying the he was a Democrat — but not the sort of a Democrat that his rivals were.



Though he is for change, too.



http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/01/06/america/06dems.php

*** Send email to the list: [log in to unmask] ***
*** Access AAM list archives: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/AAM.html ***