None of the real meaningful issues were discussed.

Shame on ABC and Charlie Gibson. I thought he was a better person than that. A better journalist. I guess I was proven wrong.

WOW - bitter Obama supports reacting to what clearly was a defensive and weak perforamce by Barack last night. When pressed on truly contraversial issues (which the GOP will use in the general), he tried to appear above the line by implying that these questions are more of the same old politics he's against. REALLY?? Does he expect us to believe that? Has anyone read the transcripts from the daily media conference calls where the Obama camp brings up the same kind of "trash talk" about Hillary? He's a Washingon politician just like all of them...pull the wool off your eyes. If I have to choose a Washington politician (which is our choice in all three candidated), I'd prefer one that has some experience in playing the game, and who doesn't appear weak under fire.

Now see, I don't see it that way. I think Obama should have actually come out a little harder and a little clearer maybe on the "bitter" remarks - I totally understand what he was saying - people don't even necessarily need an excuse to vote on issues about guns or religious issues (some would call abortion a religious issue, some a moral issue). I know several people that will dismiss a candidate on those very issues if their views don't match up with what they believe. That is all Obama was referring to - how people vote/ on what issues they vote - not that the literally cling to guns and Bibles. And I feel MOST people, whether college-educated or not understood those points - unless they swallow Clinton and McCain's views blindly.....

Yes he may be a politician, but I do feel he is WAY more ethical than Hillary - just my opinion of course. I have a feeling there is a lot more dirt to be dug on Hillary, and I am sure the Repubs will easily dig it up and flaunt it.

Regardless - we do have to unify to make sure McCain does not win. We cannot afford more war and more loss of life. Does anyone remember that this is one of the longest wars???????

Peace

The ABC alleged "debate" moderated by George Stephanopolous & Charles Gibson was nothing but a "high tech lynching" of Barack Obama!!! No credibility what-so-ever! I had my High Def DVR set for each Sunday to record the George Stephanopolis program and set to record ABC evening news each day but no longer. They are so bias when they want to be and to depend on other networks for questions is pitiful -

The media has taken a hold of this, and has driven a wedge. Contrast their reporting of Republican nomination with the Democratic nomination.

Mcnaab - tha's because they already have a presumptive nominee AND it boosts their ratings to have the Democratic primary draw out like this......

Agree with the question....this debate was terrible. The questions (particularly at the beginning) were laughable, if they weren't embarrassing. I mean, come on....questions on lapel pin? Does anyone else not find this ridiculous? Rather than help inform and educate the electorate on the issues, the media is serving to debase the discourse. It was the worst debate yet...very disappointed in ABC.

Has anyone read this article? Well written unbiased article by David Coleman, Huffington Post, about the BITTER comment.

www.huffingtonpost.com/da.....re_b_96553.html
This article sure made a lot more sense to me, then the article written by Mayhill Fowler.

Mayhill Fowler's article was the quintessence OF and equal to the sound bits of the Rev.

The minute Fowler said "HER" editor (the pronoun HER got me at hello) in New York wanted to publish the "much to do about nothing article" drew a conclusion that HER EDITOR is probably a Hillary supporter in New York and did Hillary a favor by publishing it. Compare the two articles and judge for yourself.

Mayhill Fowler's article:
www.huffingtonpost.com/ma.....ha_b_96188.html

Mayhill Fowler said herself : she said. "I talked it over with my husband, and like many people, he didn't see anything wrong with the remarks. He didn't think it was newsworthy." SO, WHY DIDN'T SHE LISTEN TO HIM?

The previous debates were shameful. Just watch SNL...

I don't think it was as bad as some of the past ones: at least they let Barack talk and respond to some of the things she said, some of the previous ones they let her go on and on forever and cut him off for either a commercial break or to go onto the next question. Though they did ask stupid questions about things that have been resolved months ago: like the lapel pin thing.

While I admit this was a bad debate for Obama, he did do a lot of "um" & "ah" when responding to the hosts. It was a definit defining moment in the campain. ABC wasted a huge amount of time on trivial nonsense that had no bearings on the real issues this country is facing. What were they thinking? Were they confused on what kind of event they were hosting, and mistakingly think they were airing a poorly written soap opera? This farce of a debate told me nothing more then ABC needs to stop calling themselves a "news" cast that is "covering the 2008 election". All they are covering is tabloid headlines. While I am still undecided on who I will vote for in November, because the media does keep sidelining the issues to cover mud-slinging and petty non-issues like lapel pins, and I haven't gotten what I feel is sufficient explanations on REAL valid issues. I must say that I feel Obama showed himself to be very professional and carried himself in a presidential mannor. Each time he got hit with a tabloid question he would try to stear the debate towards the real issues in his responses, by reminding the 'Hosts' that the things they were asking were ridiculous and what were important to voters were things like - economy, healthcare, the war, social security, etc. He may have allowed himself to get flustered and stumbled in his answers, but overall he carried himself well. I only wish Hillary had stepped up and tried to debate the issues straight out the gate they way Obama did. Instead of standing there with a smug smile gloating about the way they were attacking him with tabloid questions. Almost as if she was enjoying the attack so much, she felt it warranted ignoring the real issues and reasons for the debate. I have to admit, while still undecided I was very disappointed in Hillary's behavior.

Such dis-appointment from a huge fan of Charlie Gibson!!!! This would be expected from off mainstream media, but not the #1 rated evening news anchor!!!! Although George's background, in the Clinton White House is well known, he displayed a total lack of neutrality required of journalists. I gave him more credit and have been a fan of his sunday morning show, but no more.

Based on the majority of comments and blogs, the voting public really do get it and don't need to rely on the so called 'expert political' analysts and spin provided by the media for the sake of entertainment. The most important "CHANGE" this election year should be that we listen to the candidates (skip the commentary that follows), compare their policies, do the research (check the credibility of sources), bypass the media spin, and follow our heart when going to the polls to place our vote!!! United WE Stand!!!

That was a disgusting display of bias and favortism against Obama. Hillary was already prompt to answer questions seen with her cheat sheet. Obama came to debate with nothing but his suit on and a presidential look with attitude.

Shame of ABC