I think it is important to state who started it. In this case it was Obama. If hillary had let it go then it would have been considered as weakness.

Wolf ,

You did a great job in the Debate last night. It was good to see some action.

I liked the debate. It was fiery, not angry. You several times repeated questions when they wandered off and you can't be held responsible for a certain guy who likes to talk over people.

I think that Obam's flerting tactics with the Republicans was silly in Nevada.

Regan was a neo con. Obama is getting desperate.

"As riveting as the back-and-forth might be, it wasn't the point of the event: I hope the people watching Monday night came away from this debate in South Carolina with a better understanding where the candidates stand on key issues."

Unfortunetly I didn't do that. Instead, I became more confused on their positions, and just grew tired of their bickering. Instead of a debate on policies, it felt more like a session of who-can-throw-the-better-retort. It almost seemed imature

I feel that Wolf & the co-anchors done a good job the only thing that bothers me is that they knew that certain questions that were ask of Obama & Clinton would create a FIGHT so why not take responsibility. Instead CNN spins it like they had nothing to do with it or had no idea it would happen & critique the debate with a negative tone toward Clinton..I like a firey debate so I thought it went fine, I think giving the candidates time to respond to accusations is a good thing. I think Edwards was the most impressive, I know now I will not vote for Obama in our primary on Saturday if he can not handle a debate and take on a fight that he started with Clinton we do not need him in the white house. I also found that his message has no substance just a bunch of words…I can not blieve 50%+ of the black voters in SC are going to support him.

I have one complaint. You let Obama away with too many "Wait a minute. This is important." moments. This unecessarily ate up the clock and particularly took time from Edwards.

Otherwise, this was a very revealing debate. The Obama strategy failed miserably. Obama continued his ploy of taking things out of context to make his case. Most people look things up for themselves online or have someone do it for them. Obama also betrayed a very controlling and arrogant attitude. No unity candidate in Obama.

I think we learned that Obama is not ready for 08

Thanks CNN!

Let's get out of the school yard and into some serious discussion on how to save our beloved country . We have had enough of the Republicans, the Party of Fiscal Discipline. YEAH! RIGHT!

I am Hispanic and I support Hillary. In the debate last night she was very presidental. If Sen Obama wants to succeed where past black candidates have fail, his campaign must be a biracial one.

South Carolina offers a large black electorate, by February 5 white women and latino's will out weigh the strength of black voters.

I am sick of all the drama. But good job, Wolf!

To Vince in LA (first post)….I am very well educated and will be supporting Hillary.

No more Obama for me! GO HILLARY

Yesterday, at debate Barack Obama accurately predicted that the stock market may have a problem tomorrow due to some other country's stock market having low numbers and Wolf shot back, no one knows what will happen on the Stock Market tomorrow. Well, apparently, Obama DID and was able to have the foresight to connect the dots and prove that he is encomically astute!

Fireworks was started by the CNN woman asking questions - when she asked Obama what his response was to some of Hilary's comments. This question opened up the whole debate to backbiting. I was not interested in the she said,did /he said ,did. This should have been cut off immediately and the candidates told to simply answer the questions as they are asked. i was interested in what the candidates planned to do about resolving economic issues, wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, health care and other issues.

Before any more debates are held, I think all potential moderators should take lesssons from League of Womenn Voters. They appear to be the only ones that know how to moderate a political debate.

Bottom line…………By putting Bill Clinton in the white house to be second opinioned on everything Hillary says is going backwards not forward. FACT….his bully pulpit is much larger than hers will ever be!!!!

I wanted to include this but was called away. I'm sure Wolf is a good guy but we somebody else do the debates. There is just to much kid gloves in these debates. People want meat and potatoes in this soup, not broth. Why don't you try Dobbs or someone that might push the envelope. We might as well find out now how they will be tight spot than to find out later they with unacceptable results.

As a lifelong Democrat, I was ashamed to see the political and personal bickering between Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton during the South Carolina debates. This type of deeply rooted negativity from members of the same party is unjustified and should cease and desist immediately. While both candidates charged each other over records and personal relationships, few issues were directly addressed and this is what should matter the most. Mr. Obama said it best when he stated that “no one’s hands are clean” in the election — a responsible assessment of the landscape in which they all play in. It would behoove all Democratic candidates – and that includes former Sen. John Edwards as well, to stop with the personal attacks and focus on America and its stunning and profound issues. So many people – Democrat, Republican and Independent are turned off by this type of nasty back and forth that instead of uniting the country as Mr. Obama touts will actually do the opposite. It is also unfortunate that Sen. Clinton cannot see past the irresponsible rhetoric that her husband and former President Bill Clinton is bringing into her campaign. It is unnecessary for Mr. Clinton to polarize what is already a heated contest between three worthy Democratic individuals.

I have read tons of comments on message boards and web sites supporting all three candidates – most downplaying other candidates that they do not support. When will we get past the bickering and arguing as Americans and realize the dangerous shape that the economy is in, as well as the fact that we are in a war. Support the candidate of your choice, but leave the personal, frivolous and school yard attacks to children and stay focused on the prize that is getting a Democrat in the White House on Jan. 20, 2009.

God Bless.

Vince Los Angeles, CA
please stop cut and paste. Just because you can doesn't mean your right or smarter than anyone else.

Nobody takes responsibility for anything these days.

Well Hillary didn't stay on topic nor respect her time limits. I guess you did a little better this time Wolf but really can't anyone shut her up and make her be respectful of the other candidates.

Oh….I forgot this IS Hillary we are talking about. She has no respect for anyone but herself and Bill. What a sleeze.

I think what we are seeing is Obama and Clinton's strategy of eliminating John Edwards from the Presidential Democratic campaign falling apart before our very eyes. You did nothing wrong. Obama and Clinton are the ones that made the fools of themselves. It is obvious that each one of them is more concerned about their own egos and agendas than the fact that most of middle and poor Americans are fighting to stay alive. I wish, in fact I challenge CNN to show John Edwards talking policy as much as the American media (including CNN) spends time watching Clinton and Obama in the kindergarten sandbox throwing sand/mud on each other. Who would want either of these two children to be President of the UNITED STATES.

Wolf, I totally don't like how you do your job, but last night was the first time I've ever been ok with your performance.

Thank you for keeping out of it and not being controlling.

to howard: Dobbs instead of Wolf. Nope, Wolf did very well, Dobbs?! At least Wolf does ok from time to time in The Situation Room, Dobbs?! I have yet to see him do anything well. His opinionated comments are unruly and uncalled for, unprofessional and unwise.

Wolf does a much better job.

Wolf, on the Universal health care question, you seem to imply that Hillary's plan advocated illegal immigrants getting health care because Edwards was quick to say he thinks all Democratic candidates plans did not include illegal immigrants. Does Hilllary universal plan include illegal immigrants?

Wolf

You did a great job last night.

I think it is important to distinguish this from an actual debate. This was glorified Springer. It makes me wonder if any of these so called journalists have ever even seen a real, actual, moderated debate. Probably not. Real journalism is dead, and has been dead for a long time.

The debate was well handled. I thought the freedom was well worth any criticism. I was starting to feel like CNN was too biased towards Obama. Thanks for letting everyone know just how bad he is.

Wlof, I think you did a great job on this. In the first few debates, you came accross as a Hillary supporter. In the last debate, you appeared as a JOURNALIST, just doing your job. I think what you did on Monday was great and this should be used as a benchmark for future debates on a journalistic stand point.

The only problem that I had was that Wolf did not follow-up on what the candidates were saying or ask them to clarify what they meant. There were a number of statements by Obama on credit card interest rates, single payer health care, and Rezko for example.

I felt that this was the most issue centered debate so far. Yes ,there was bombast, but there was real substance on Iraq,the economy and health care. Significant differances in the 3 candidates became obvious last night. Wolf and the others did a great job.

Wolf, you are my least favorite moderator…of all time. You and CNN are descending into the pathetic realm of sensationalism and pointed sound-byte questions that lower the level of discourse and discredit the presidential election process. I know CNN is eager to compete with Fox (your graphics have become even more seizure enducing than theirs - congrats!), but your desperate quest for ratings, drama, and headlines has finally caused this viewer to decide to tune out.

I'd give that round to Edwards

President George Bush…President Bill Clinton……President George Bush's son George Bush becomes President George Bush…….. and now we want President Bill Clinton's wife to become President…… yeah thats sounds like the America I want. Hey, Laura you can be next…..

Wolf did a great job. Sometimes when there is two people needling each other, it is wise to let them release their anger and from there they become good friends.

Hillary Clinton is a total joke.

Leave it up to the democrats to put her in as a nominee.

Experience? Give me a break!

We are waiting for her fat ass. We are going to slap her down and wipe that smirk off of her husband's cheating face!

Clinton and Obama both made me disgusted. The only one who showed any maturity was Edwards. Too bad he is not one of the media rock stars. He got short changed as usual regardless of what Jack may think.

Wolf–why didn't you call them on the fact that none of them has ever done ANYTHING in the real world? Edwards has taken money from people, Obama organized campaign rallies and HIllary–we all know what she didn't do.

We need someone who understands the economy.

Obama's plan to freeze interest rates would eliminate banks from lending. It would not happen–banks would invest their money elsewhere.

Socialism didn't work–look at France (I lived/worked there for many years) it sucks. 23% sales tax, 50+% income tax, tariffs…on and on, and no economic growth–French leave the country to find new lives in America.

We need Mitt Romney–someone who has taken financial disasters and turned them into successes time and time again.

Mitt understands how government intervention damages our economic prosperity, why companies leave the US and what can be done to make the USA competitive so that companies and jobs stay here.

Experience? Mitt Romney

I think Clinton came looking for a fight. And I think Edwards was so desperate that he chose to attack Obama and do a double-team with Clinton. I do think there should have been some rules - if there were any, they weren't enforced. It was like a free-for-all and they all came off as quite childish. I would also like to see a facts check report published after this debate, and all the debates - so we know who made valid points, and who is twisting words and spreading lies. I know some things that were already disproven were brought up several times during the debate.

A debate is not supposed to be a test of who can yell the loudest or make the most insulting comment at their opponent. It is supposed to provide information on the candidates and where they stand. There was not much information out of this debate - more like misinformation, tantrums, finger pointing, and threats to tell mommy.

Obama sounded and looked like he was making it up as he went along..Too much stammering..Jack, ny,ny, you're right, Obama started in on Sen. Clinton with the remark of her being on the board of Wal-Mart…She had to bring him back down to size..Thank you, Wolf, I learned alot last night.

Fortunately edwards did a wonderful job of hitting the issues and contrasting everyones positions. He controlled the debate far more than the moderator and where we discussed policy details last night it was largely his doing. Not only did he hit his positions he contrasted with the other two forcing them to talk issues and defend positions. He showed there are differences in platform between them. Something alrgely ignored in media coverage.

I can't recall a nastier debate people were throwing roundhouses for the head. That is obama and clinton were.

And here I thought that the Democrat contenders were all supposed to be friends now. Their friendship lasted about as long as the promise of a return to civility and trust in government did when the Democrats took back both sides of Congress.

I thought it made Sen Edwards look a lot better, with Sen Obama second, and Sen Clinton way too prickly.

That said, why are the other candidates still in the race not allowed on stage? Keeping Kucinich out is as silly as not talking about Ron Paul while you in the MSM tout both Guiliani and Thompson who both get fewer votes.

Wake up and stop trying to choose for us. We want to choose - not have the media do it for us.

Wolf-

Great job. You actually allowed us to see the candidates for who they are. Clinton came across knowledgeable about the issues, tough on approach, and calm on the attack.

Obama came across of the typical washington politician promising everything under the sun. Obama needs to ask himself, who IS really against healthcare? against jobs? against education? This guy is an empty suit. No substance whatsoever. He should go back to being a state rep or city councilor or whatever the heck he was. Where he can fool people with his largesse.

I thought the debate was one of the best I have ever seen. It was time to anrrow the field and let the front runners have it out. People are still in limbo on Clinton and Obama, and I think they may even be weighing Edwards. It was time that some of the dirty laundry got cleaned, and it was time for them all to stand face to face and talk this out.

Wolf, EXCELLENT job! You did exactly what you should have done in the process of the candidates hashing it out!

wolf - you did a good job last night, making sure the candidates had enough time to refute false claims and lies by the other candidates, keep up the fair and good work!

It was more of a heated "conversation," but much more to the point and informative. I enjoyed it very much! Anything that gets them really talking about issues and what's really on their minds works, as far as I'm concerned!

Thanks for all your efforts.

I agree with Russ in WA. I was beginning to like Obama, but last night felt Edwards was the hands down winner. He at least tried to stick to policy. I have never liked Hillary, but Obama's antics made me as mad as her's did last night.

So, maybe Edwards 08?

And Wolf, you were fine. Many of us got a pretty clear picture of these candidates last night.

I found last night's debate lively, illuminating and encouraging. No matter which of the three wins — and I hope it is one of these three — I believe we will have a first-rate president. All are bright, committed to their ideals, hard-working and articulate. The discussion was not ranorous, in my view, just rowdy — something to expect in a high-stakes, highly emotional situation. None of them can let a comment go by that might come back to haunt them if left unanswered or unchallenged. The brass ring is the Oval Office, and this crowd jostling to get on the Merry-Go-Round knows you have to use elbows to get to the horses that move up and down.

I thought Wolf showed the right balance between letting things run and keeping them moving.

It was so obvious that O'Bama was ready to fight but it was Bill Clinton who had handed him the material for his challenge…This made it appear that Barak was being tortured by the Clinton. It created a double whammy for Hillary who had to defend not only herself but to defend her husbands remarks. I have had tremendous respect for O'Bama but that respect evaporated with the debate. He totally minulipated and monopolized the debate with an attitude that spoke louder than words. The attitude? "I have never been intensely involved in Civil Rights but I have somehow EARNED the right to be President." Thus far, we do not know what he has actually done to EARN that right.

Thank you Wolf Blitzer for keeping as much civility as your were able considering the candidates, two in particular, appeared bent on keeping the atmosphere charged with their vitrolic banter.

As a declined-to-state voter, and more importantly as a citizen of the USA, I am concerned about the lack of productivity by our elected officials, in particular all of the federal and my states legislatures.

I am looking for a candidate (wouldn't it be nice to have several) who are move concerned about constructive discussion of critical issues affecting our nation and our place in the world verses their petty sand box bickering and "i am better than you are!" The "one up manship" dialogue and in particular the period when Senators Clinton and Obama kept talking over each other to get their jab in, was embarassing! And certainly not presidential…even kids in sand boxes are usually more civil.

Also as a woman, a professional and a member of the original class of baby boomers, I am sorry to see Senator Clinton loose her decorum when going one on one when trying to get her point across. I wonder how she would handle negotiations with another world leader who just might not like her ideas?

Thank you for all of the thoughtful coverage of all the many topics you address on the Situation Room and your Sunday show.

Mr. Blitzer,

Your work last evening was exceptional. You let them speak and your follow-ups were spot on. It was good to see them so engaged …as we knew they would be after the Nevada / Bill / Churches weekend.

Please ask more questions of the candidates if you feel they have either dodged the question or haven't answered to your satisfaction. We are watching and listening. I enjoyed your sense of humor and did I see you smile?

Thanks CNN for helping us all understand the differences between these brave and courageous Americans as they realize their ambitions. What a great nation we have!

Rick
Port Orange, Fl.

Wolf, I have both positive and negative feedback for you.

On a positive note: you did a good job letting the candidates speak at the debate. I personally don't mind a heated debate and believe that America is richer when there is uncensored discourse.

On a negative note: I am very tired of CNN's biased coverage. It is increasingly clear to me that all of your commentators (perhaps with a couple of exceptions) are rooting for Obama. For example, Wolf, when you were asked on LKL who was ahead in the polls, you hedged and avoided answering but finally said Clinton by a narrow margin. Wrong, Wolf! Look at RealClearPolitics.com and you'll see that Hillary's current lead is 8.7%. A Rassmussen poll 2 days ago gave her a 10 point lead. Another example: Although Clinton beat Obama by 6 percentage points in Nevada, you went along with the spin that it was a "split" decision, while at the same time calling McCain's 3-point win in South Carolina a clear victory.

Many of us bloggers have commented that CNN has been way too easy on Obama, both on your website and on the TV. Lately I have found FOX to be more balanced, believe it or not!

So please make an effort to be more like the objective journalists you were trained to be and provide factual news reports, not slanted sensationalist reports.

We needed to hear this debate. For some canidates, personality, poise, and charm seem to go away in political debates such as CNN's. You helped uncover what some of us needed to see. Thanks and keep up the good job!

The fighting began with Hillary, and all of you should ask yourselves, who signed
NAFTA into law? BILL CLINTON! He signed that into law instead of fighting for universal healthcare for Americans.
So remember when we were told we would hear a sucking sound well now we have it. No jobs, no money!
I will not vote for Hillary if she is the Nominee for the Democratic Party,
The Clintons are only about power and if you think she will get anything done remember the fights of the 90's.
Also her comment about Obama taking responsibility about his votes she should talk, she voted for the war, she voted for the bankrupcy bill, so give me a break!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
She is so poll tested it is unreal, and when she said she found her voice I guess it was Bill's and I voted for him twice.

That was a debate? Hmmmm….Wolf, maybe you should go back to high school and check the rules for debate. Those three just pitched their rehearsed stump speeches with occasional jabs at each other. Nobody came away feeling better about America or the candidates.
Better luck next time, Wolf.

Wolf,

I want to say that first…you letting them actually debate the issues or even doing the mud slinging without the 90-sec soundbite limitation was worthwhile. Normal debates are usually 5-7 minutes per candidate and sometimes with round robin and open debate sections. It was clear that the clock watching was bothering all of the candidates and there was no reason to put them in straight jackets.

They are also adults and not children, so they should be able to show some decorem on their own and your job is moderator…not referee.

The only area I think that needs to be done better is ensuring equal time as best you can. Edwards was the one who mostly got the short end of the stick here and you could definitely have said a few times…"Let's give Sen. Edwards some additional time for his comments to be fair." If the debate time is within 5-10%…no problems, but beyond that you must step and an force more equal time.

Enough is enough, Wolf! From now on, wear a referee shirt and use a whistle, PPPLLLEAAASE!

Wolf,

You did a poor job. The issues, the issues, the issues Wolf. Forget the cat fights, who the hell cares.

What are the issues in America today and shut them up when they loose focus. Poor job in the last debate.

Joe McCormack

I think it's disingenous to say that there are only three candidates remaining. Simply because your news organization CHOSE to only allow three candidates to debate does not mean that somehow Dennis Kucinich is off the ballot. You specifically said "three standing" and I think you should apologize and correct yourself as a good journalist would - Kucinich continues to stand for the nomination, whatever your opinion of his polling numbers.

No one's disputing your right to tailor your debates - I think it's underhanded, but it remains your right. However, you shouldn't pretend that another candidate simply doesn't exist - it shows clearly your bias and institutional disregard for democracy and accuracy.

I think it would have been nice to include John Edwards the first hour. You shouldbe aware that Mr. Edwards seems to be a worthy cadidate , with worth while ideas. as an undecieded, I would have liked to hear more from him. I have boiled it down to Sen Clinton or John Edwards. I like Obama, but Hilary sort of chewed him up pretty easily. Makes me worried that he couldn't stand up to the GOP and their nasty campaign stuff. And they are desparete, so they will come out fighting. Thank you,

Include DENNIS KUCINICH in the debates.

Stop asking petty questions about race and start asking more meaningful ones.

What happened to the ENVIRONMENT and global warming?

Hey Wolf,
Not bad at all, finally a debate! A little fire under the kettle never hurt. Now that we know both Clinton and Obama can bite back it feels like we can actually start talking about the issues like Edwards has been doing. We want to know when and how they will deal with the issues in the first hundred days!!! It's a long way to the White House now give us definite plans!!!!
Yeah Wolf!!!

Wolf…Great Job!! Letting them cut loose allowed us a better glimpse of how they handle conflict and stress–and recovery from mistakes.

The format was superb…we could really see what the two leading contenders were like with their hair down and their fur up!

I'm please my personal choice–Edwards kept his cool–and I believe his responses and overall presentation was the most Presidential.

Although I am pleased with their agendas–I do not believe they will achieve universal healthcare–because of the mandatory enrollment requirement.

Most American's will fear another program like social security on the horizon…and neither of the candidates involved healthcare organizations, pharmacies, insurance, hosptials in their plan–which I believe is a mistake. If we're to change healthcare–we must involve the providers/sustainers/facilitators of that care. I would prefer a commitment to try–rather than an unachievable golden carrot for voters.

Regarding the economy–only Edwards was not in favor of the current hot topic: paying government money to Americans to go out and stimulate the economy. This is the most ridiculous idea I've seen. The way to fix out of control debt–is not more debt. This is tantamount to using your credit card to pay your mortgage–and is not a good way to manage family finances–nor government finances. For that I am pleased–I guess that makes him a fiscal conservative when compared to Obama and Clinton!!

I really like Wold Blitzer is always lookign for the most sensational piece of news and it does nto surprise me that he woudl let HIllary go on the attack for more than 2 minutes creating falsehoods and making accuations on such minor details as to what content is posted on Obama's website. What on earth doe sthat have to do with the issues.

Conversely even when a candidate did not answer the question yo unever went back and asked them to answer it. I can't stand Wolf Blitzer in case you couldn't tell and I would prefer to watch MSNBC over CNN any day of the week. The only bright spot is Anderson Cooper.

Surely I'm not the only one who noticed that Obama was so into himself and what he was going to say or so nervous when he walked on to the stage last night that he forgot to shake hands with Blitzer! The moment was very awkward and Wolf had to walk over to Obama to shake his hand. The job of President is the most demanding, stressful job in the world. Obama's awkward moment last night is very telling about whether he is ready for the job.

C'mon, Wolf, you just know that she hates anybody who just might defeat her…

I agree with you Wolf. I still prefer Hillary over Obama. I think that he is
mudding his own waters with his vague half truths…he's lawyering.
Hillary and Bill want him to actually be truthful if he really wants to run our
Country. I still do not think he as the knowledge and experience to do it!

While Wolf may have done fine I think debates as a whole accomplish very little. I learn almost nothing on a candidate's positions because no one will focus on the questions and moderators rarely call candidate's on the carpet for giving prepared speeches to questions no one asked. The fact that we have had more debates this campaign than ever before and still very little substance beyond three or four sentences is disheartening.

I don't want to choose a president based upon witty comebacks and questions on former President Clinton's dancing ability. What I want to hear is why Obama is considered inexperienced but Hilary's only got one term under her belt. (If you are counting her experience as first lady then I think we might as well throw all the other first ladies into this race). I want to hear where the money is coming from for suggested programs, etc. These debates don't provide enough information - only entertaining sound bites for the media.

People are making WAY too much of "conflict." Of course, the candidates are going to attack one another's records and policies. Grow up, folks. Frankly, it was good to hear both Clinton and Obama refute/explain the charges. In my mind, Obama seemed less riled and had better explanations. Edwards held his own as well. Having researched some of the original accusations since, I'm a bit disappointed that Bill and Hillary took so many of Obama's comments out of context. What that says to me is that Hillary must not have too much ammunition to use against Obama. I was leaning toward Hillary, but the more I learn, the more I'm moving in Obama's direction.

This despite the bickering, this was one of the most significant debates in recent memory. The candidates were forced to defend their records, explain their positions on important issues like the economy and healthcare. Barely a mention of the war, however. I hope we don't forget this important issue.

Wolf…you're the man.

Trust me, all of you will get what you paid. I can't wait to see us Americans complaining about the Clinton's scandals over the next few years. Do you honestly think the Congress would want to work with HRC? I don't care if the Congress is controlled by the Democrats. They differ on how some issues. Hey, she is very presidential. Let's be honest! HRC would be some corporate lawyer somewhere if she wasn't married to Bill Clinton.

Comments on this blog suggest that Hillary actually accomplished her GOAL:
Make Obama look and sound LIKE me (Hillary) so that everyone will turn out to HATE him just as they hate me (Hillary).

Next day, go out there are teel the world that Obama is equally as diversive.

Make Edwards look good in the debate, and then join forces with him AGAINST Obama after the debate. Does anyone recall the brief meeting between Clinton and Edwards after the debate?

Well, the Clintons have fooled you again, idiots!!! and you have indeed fallen for it!!!
Good luck because she cannot fool Independents and moderate Republicans, only naive democrats!

You know what drives me crazy is the free pass some of you guys give Obama! Why isn't he or his campaign held to the same standards as Hillary's?? So are you people saying Bill Clinton is the only spouse of the presidential candidates on the campaign trail stumping on the part of their spouse?? I do not think so, I hear Michelle Obama speak at rallies, just as we have seen Mrs. Edwards doing the same thing. Moreover, both of these women constantly question Hillary's record, so what is the difference?? WHY THE DIFFERENT STANDARD? So Mrs. Obama and Mrs. Edwards can attack Hillary, question her record and stump on their spouses’ behalf, but if Bill Clinton does the same things as these women for his spouse, he is accused of being the one running for President. How is this fair? Make sure your litmus tests are fair and given equally to each candidate. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

ApolIo, I am impressed by Mitt Romney's and resume and believe he is likely the most qualified leader in the field of candidates. Unfortunately, the man has no integrity. He panders to voters, telling them whatever he believes they want to hear, His newly found conservative values are a facrce and his promises to bring auto jobs back to Detroit during the Michigan primary turned my stomach. What will he promise the people of Florida? 4 years free of hurricanes?

We need a president with the courage to stand up and do what's right for the country and the wisdom know just what that is.

The debate was fiery at first, but it needed to happen. Obama needed to respond to all the mischaracterizations and misquotes the Clintons have slung his way. What would it look like for the future president of the United States to sit by and not stand up for himself. Sure he took some low blows at her, but that's fair game as she and Bill have been playing games with him in these past few weeks. People please. Listen to Hillary Clinton on the issues. She's the one with no substance and no direct answers to questions. She meaders around the question and vaguely answers them. She wants the power that a seat in the White House will bring. She will not follow through on anything she's promising. Four more years of the same political crap. I don't think so.

Obama says he is taking the high road during his campaign. But yet he continues to make attacks on Hillary as well. He certainly didnt take the high road last night and he apparently still isnt.

Wolf,

Most entertaining debate I've seen in a while. Great job. Oh and anyone saying that Obama isn't truthful needs to go back and look and the Clinton record on telling the truth. To quote the man "It's a fairy tale, give me a break"

Comments on this blog suggest that Hillary actually accomplished her GOAL:
Make Obama look and sound LIKE me (Hillary) so that everyone will turn out to HATE him just as they hate me (Hillary).

Next day, go out there are tell the world that Obama is equally as diversive.

Make Edwards look good in the debate, and then join forces with him AGAINST Obama after the debate. Does anyone recall the brief meeting between Clinton and Edwards after the debate?

Well, the Clintons have fooled you again, idiots!!! and you have indeed fallen for it!!!
Good luck because she cannot fool Independents and moderate Republicans, only dumb democrats!

I enjoyed the debate. However, I do not understand why the democratic candidates are never asked about illegal immigration. This is where you let us down, by not asking about all issues important to us.

Obama said he was against the typical Washington politicians…he sure acted like a typical Washington politician last night.

Wolf, I have a simple request.
The next time you have a debate, don't allow the candidates to talk about the other Democratic candidates. A simple rule. If they start, their mics are cut off.
Then ask them each about their plans for the economy, health care, Iraq, etc.
No comparisons to another Democrat's plans - just theirs.
You or Anderson are more than welcome to question perceived shortcomings in all of their plans - but they will not be allowed to criticize each other.
That would lead to an educating conversation on the differences between the candidates.
But that won't happen will it, Wolf?
Because that's boring. When I saw an ad for one of the earlier Democratic debates you actually had a boxing ring bell go off. You guys want them to fight and create drama. How long did you guys milk the "racial spat" after Obama and Hillary had already agreed to a truce over MLK?

I have watched several of the democratic debates and found this one to be informative, enlightening, and even entertaining. The format allowed for both a traditional and relaxed atmosphere. Blitzer did a good job of moderating without being a distraction.

I was a big supporter of Senator Clinton before the debate. However, after watching the entire debate last time I must say that I have changed. I am now a BIGGER and more of a solid supporter of the Senator from New York. She handled her own after Obama started the criticism. I agree with Hillary, it is clear that Obama was rehearsed and scripted because he said he didn't agree with Reagan and so on and Hillary corrected him by saying she did not say Reagan…hahah. Folks, look at that part of the debate again.

If Obama doesn't have his rehearsed speeches and scripted then he is without his luster and coherence. Hillary has proven to have substance and strength! She is what the country needs. Senator Clinton is experienced and can challenge the republicans and win!

I am an African-American male in my 20's and I support Sen.Clinton! Not every Black will vote for Obama!

New Jersey for Hillary

Wolf,

I think you did a great job. There several times you tried to interject and return them to the question at hand. However they were not listening to you. As for Obama, yaaaaahooo.. he needed to say his peace. Hillary needs to run her campaign.. Bill needs to conduct himself as a spouse of a CEO, better yet like a future first lady… so funny. Sorry I cant see that happening…. Does Hillary really trust him to keep the cigar holders use as they were intended and that he will keep his pants on while she is attempting to lead this country on her experience of being a first lady. I see a movie in the making and it wont be pretty.

But honestly Wolf, you and LOU Dobbs seriously need to consider running as a team. You two would be fantastic when compared to the rest of the pack. Step out and be leaders if you will please.

No one really respects anyone who does the zinger thing, Both Obama and Clinton have their faults. Obama has more fluff to offer. not sure what he stands for in all the issues. Both of them never mention much about terrorism and what they are actually going to do with stopping up our borders. Secure borders make for a more securer nation. As all of us know, politicians say one thing and do another when they are running for the highest office in the land. Just to get the votes. They say what they thing we need to hear. Then when they get in, its whos giving the most money and filling up various pockets. There is no perfect president anywhere. The Republicians are turning into liberals. Spend, spend, spend.

All I can say Wolf…is thank you!!!

I think you did us a good service by letting them good head to head. Now we can see their underbellies!!!

The so-called "debate" convinced me more than ever that I won't participate in this election at all.

Come on folks, let's face the facts, OBAMA THREW THE FIRST PUNCH, DID YOU EXPECT HILLARY TO FALL FROM THAT PUNCH? instead she showed everybody what she had, and Obama couldn't take it, the old saying is If you play with fire, you will get burned. Obama got burned. Obama came out on stage looking like a whipped Chipmunk who is in over his head. HILLARY 2008, ALL THE WAY TO THE WHITE HOUSE. NO ONE KNEW WHO OBAMA WAS UNTIL 2007, WHAT HAS HE DONE TO HELP THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. GO BACK TO THE SENATE AND GET SOME EXPERIENCE. TRY AGAIN IN 2020.

Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary defines debate as:
(n) a contention by words or arguments: a: a formal discussion of a motion before a deliberative body according to the rules of parliamentary procedure; b: a regulated disussion of a proposition between two matched sides.

What transpired last evening fits neither of these definitions.

As an independent voter, I tuned in last evening to find out where each of the three Democratic contenders stood on specific issues. Unfortunately, most of what I heard was childish bickering.

Substance, specifics, respectful give and take on issues….that's what most Americans want. The candidates, CNN and Wolf Blitzer did not deliver. It was a waste of my time.

Leave it to the first poster to throw out the "who started it garbage"… It shows just how petty the Clinton followers really are.

Wolf did a great job! Who can control high school kids ready to fight?
Drop Edwards next time. There isn't a reasonable man or woman who believes he can win now. Therefore he should be dropped.
My comments about the debate. Disclosure: I am clinton supporter. Barack is a smart, decent guy, who is running a decent campaign. Hillary is a better politician, more ready to take the heat from the republicans. I am having some doubts about that being effective in the 21st century. But if politics look like what they did in the 90s, she will be more effective.

You did a great job last night, Wolf, along with Suzanne and Joe Johns. I really didn't like all the bickering but I thought there was a more substantial discussion of some issues, particularly healthcare, than ever before. It certainly wasn't boring as past debates have been. You're a great moderator.

While I think the debate was enlightening, it was not because of the issues (though I will say the healthcare discussion was much needed to alleviate confusion). No, what was most enlightening was the conduct of the candidates, which I think Wolf allowed to shine through independent of prodding from reporters. It's a difficult job to moderate a debate such as this, and I think overall it was helpful.

However, it is NOT difficult to ask intelligent, pertinent questions. Asking Barack Obama if he thought Bill Clinton was the first African-American president of the United States? Seriously? While race is an issue in this campaign (maybe made more so by the media), questions such as these serve to detract from real policy debates. After all, that's what you hoped for from this debate, right Wolf?

The debate was exciting. I was sure glad to see Obama take a strong stand.

Or maybe, Mr. Blitzer, moderating debates is not your cup of tea.

Wolf did a great job last night, trying to be fair and truly listening in order to get it right. Great job, Wolf!

For the record, Obama began the mud slinging with the Walmart comment, and Clinton took it up a notch with the "slumlord" comment.

Very good stuff! Never a boring moment!

It's interesting to see how many Hillary supporters are responding here & claiming "Obama started it!" Seriously, Hill has been on the attack, both advertently and inadvertently outside of the debates, while Obama has been forced to defend himself. Up until this debate, he's been remarkably restrained; it is now time for him to defend himself and his record. Are the Obama supporters' responses being deleted?

Personally, I was willing to vote for Hillary if she was the Democrat to run, but after her recent behavior and her dirty tactics, I don't want her representing my country. Besides, didn't she used to be a Young Republican back in the day?

I think that debate last night was an excellent example of what we can look forward to with the democratic and republican nominees. And last night Hillary could have beat em. She was strong and forceful and never waivered. Obama stuttered and said I I I and um um um and wait wait wait - he was totally shaken up. The republicans (John McCain) will have him for lunch.

Hillary showed she can be tough and stand her ground without stuttering. Obama was a shaking mess.

Hillary is getting my vote. She can beat ANY republican nominee

I thought it was a great debate. I didn't like the attacks, but that is the nature of the system. I appreciated that there was plenty of time for the candidates to speak.

I thought the CNN team handled the intensity of the debate quite well. I didn't care for all the bickering, but it did make me see the true character of each candidate. I started liking Edwards more because he didn't get dragged in to the fight between Hilary and Obama and actually talked about the policies. It made Hilary looked presidential with her ability to stand up to the attackes with class and some great zingers. I think the looser was Obama with his "this is really important" and "last point I have to make" which ended up being nothing substantial. He seemed to be on the defensive and didn't really answer any questions. I do think CNN should have stopped Obama rambling and let Edwards answer some questions and rebuttals. I like Obabma as a person because he seemed to be very charming, but I have yet to see what he can do as President.

Wolf,

Here's my problem with the way you or any of the Media do these debates. You always seem to looking to start a fight between the candidates, raise some controversy, improve ratings.

Why not ask a serious set of questions about policy and governing philosophy?

Ask for an explanation to their approach to solving the nation's problems. Ask them about energy policy, fiscal policy, national defense etc…

Maybe to boring for the viewing public?

Wolf,

I thought you did a decent job. However, I was annoyed when you took time to ask Obama if he wanted to respond to Hillary's comment about his slum lord connection.

I suspected that Obama was a smooth talking orator with little substance and he proved it last night. He came across as a cry baby, accusing Hillary of misrepresenting his statements and record. Well what did he and his camp do when they took Hillary's comments about Martin Luther King out of context.

Also, Obama blew it when he came in to the debate prepared to get back at the Clintons. He brought up Reagan's name and she didn't even mention it in the debate!! He is not ready to be president. He's bedazzling people with you know what!!

"Jack ny, ny January 22, 2008 2:21 pm ET

I think it is important to state who started it. In this case it was Obama. If hillary had let it go then it would have been considered as weakness."

Are you 12 years old? Seriously, that was the argument I used when I got into a fight with my siblings growing up.

aware January 22, 2008 2:34 pm ET

I have one complaint. You let Obama away with too many "Wait a minute. This is important." moments. This unecessarily ate up the clock and particularly took time from Edwards.

Otherwise, this was a very revealing debate. The Obama strategy failed miserably. Obama continued his ploy of taking things out of context to make his case. Most people look things up for themselves online or have someone do it for them. Obama also betrayed a very controlling and arrogant attitude. No unity candidate in Obama.

I think we learned that Obama is not ready for 08

Thanks CNN!

Dear aware, (obviously you're not that aware)

What debate were you watching? Did you not see "Broom Hillary" ranting and raving. Of course, you all along were planning "not" to vote for Obama because of his race. It has nothing to do with experience because if it did, tell me what experience does "Broom Hillary" have?" What public office have she been elected to before New York? You un-informed critics are just plain out ridiculous in your blatant racist views.

We know who won the debate last night no matter how any body will spin the whole thing but I will just say this.OBAMA won the debate.and he will be the next president of the united state of america come jan 29.

I would really have liked more light and less heat last night. The debate had little substance with the exception of John Edwards answers. The play-ground sniping at one another done by Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama was really contemptible and did nothing to illuminate their positions on the issues.

Hillary shows her true colors by deflecting criticism, refusing to give any straight answers, and she has really made all the Dems vulnerable now to McCain…..by her deplorable tactics…

She is very despicable and very low-class…..she is a true politician, since she has shown to be very politically calculating and insincere…..

Don't delude yourself in thinking she cares….for latinos, bush was also attempting to garner the latino vote, and now he would kick everybody out…..instead of helping them become citizens……why not vote for somebody who actually has some morals for a change???? instead of hill/bill…..

I don't know where you people get this idea WE LIVE IN A DEMOCRACY. IN FACT WE LIVE IN A REPUBLIC. STOP SAYING IT ISN'T FAIR IF A NEWS CORPORATION INVITES SOME AND NOT OTHERS. That IS fair in a democracy, which we DO NOT LIVE IN.

If you do not like our Democratic-REPUBLIC then either LEAVE the country, or LEAD A MOVEMENT THAT WILL TRANSFORM THE U.S. INTO A DEMOCRACY.

Both candidates (Clinton and Obama) lost any possible vote from me with their bantering. It's McCain all the way.

Excellent job, Wolf. I truly appreciated seeing more of the candidates' personalities, and I gained more of a feeling of them and their positions.

Last night's debate was really great. I loved seeing the emotions of all three candidates. There were moments when I felt like I was eaves-dropping on a private meeting — the candidates were so into their arguments. Writers' strike? Whatever! I could watch debates like this every night.

Wolf I was very happy that you actually let them go back and forth. Without any back and forth, it's nothing more than a televised stump speech. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz boring!!!

Without any back and forth, it's very difficult for people to really understand where the candidates stand. You need the back and forth to peel back the onion, to make people really answer the question, to get to the bottom of something, and to actually here a reply to the other candidate's criticism.

I am a stauch Republican, but I found last night both entertaining and educational.

Go Obama!!!

Wolf:

Well done last night, my friend. The candidates came out swinging and people enjoy that the same way they love to see a fight at a hockey game.

I thought you done a good job Wolf but I was disappointed that Illegal Immigration was not brought up. The democrats need to let us know exactly where they stand on this.

The cable news networks can't make up thier minds what they want to raise thier ratings. Six weeks ago all we heard is. Why or when will Obama take Hillary on. Now it's all the bickering between the candidates coming out of your mouth. When ever you interview someone you don't ask about someone's plan or what the will do about a paticular situation. The first thing you do is play some snipitt of something that the media has orcastrated and then draw them in to an argument. Only the ratings matter. Let's devide the country I need ratings say's the media. Signed by Wolf, Candy Crowley,Lou Dobbs, and all those following campaigns.

Ruby
Az.

Wolf, next time, try to control the candidates rhetoric a bit more. Last night was a useless exersize in nonsense. The back and forth did nothing to clarify their positions on the issues that actually MATTER to voters. Perhaps the debates should be scratched in favor of town hall meetings with voters asking the questions.

It was like Hillary TV and not pretty! All I can say is if we put her up as our candidate then we are going to loose!! She has shown her true colors so Our side will not be as motivated to vote for her and the GOPers have been licking their chops just waiting to make fools of the Clintons so they will Unite their warring factions to vote against her…Just like what happened with John Kerry! I almost wonder if Skull and Bones connections ARE thicker than blood?

i did not watch the debate but i know that if it continues like this democrats will lick their wounds again when john mccain is innaugurated… if getting married to a president is experience then barbara bush is the one we should be voting because she gave birth to a president and also married one.

My only criticism of the debate last night is that I wish you or one of the questioners had asked Senator Obama if he thinks that he has a problem with Latino and women voters. And if so, what he plans to do to address it if he wins the nomination.

Obama needed to come out and fight! Which he did very well! He was quite presidential! Hilary, I still don't trust! Edwards might have scored some points but not position to the point of him being a force to reckon with. Obama should pick Edwards as his running mate.

SIMPLY STATED WOLF DID NOT DO A COMPETENT JOB AS EDWARDS WAS NOT GIVEN EQUAL TIME.

Just once in the debates I would like them to address all of the job leaving the US ans the impact on all americans.

I disagree with Mr.Blitzer, I thought he did a terrible job of controlling the debate. The behavior of Mrs.Clinton was horrible, but Obama was the instigator most of the time. Both of them came across as not looking very presidental. Obama never answers a question. I can't help but think the most qualified Democratic candiate is John Edwards who actually has the audacity to stick to the issues and discuss policy. Edwards or Bill Richardson would have been better choices for President. I encourage fellow Democrats vote for Edwards and let Clinton and Obama know they both came across as idiots last night.

Wolf, I hardly recognized ya. Without the swirling graphics, multiple monitors, skewed camera angles and the exaggerated tone of importance, you looked rather diminished. I suggest CNN drag you back to the studio and step up the spin cycle.

WZ

If Bush is where he is, the cause is the Clintons, people ran away from them and grabbed the first idiot they found.

Now the Clintons are back and believing they are wanted.

Wolf has always been fair and impartial in all his reporting. To know Wolf is to know nothing but the truth. Unfortunately, in last nights debates he had to sit by and listen to the lies of Hillary Clinton.

The debate was the best I've seen. You did good, Wolf. I hope people paid a little attention to John Edwards. He seems to be the only one who wants to address the problems without getting personal about the other candidates.
Allen from sunny Hartwell, GA

Wolf,

I watch the entire debate with great interest. It was one of the best so far. Yes, Clinton and Obama scratched each other's eyes out, but they also talked about the issues and that is what it's all about. You did a fine job at letting them get things off their chest.

Thanks.

I loved last nights debate..for the first time Berrack had to try to answer questions rather then rely on slogans.. like he will unite us..sounds like Bush's slogan..the uniter not the devider..we all know how well that worked out. Wolf, for the first time I thought you did a great job.

Did most of you even watch the debate? Yeah, Clinton and Obama fought like cats and dogs and yeah they kinda got to their points but John Edwards Was AMAZING. He's right! Where does any of that fighting and blaming get any of us?
If it keeps up this way Americans brand of democracy will be like feudalism with running water no time.

Blitzer was absolutely horrible - I read this article and, were I him, would tout the fact that he's hosted so many debates previously. I stayed up until 5am watching the interview (I live in Eastern Europe) and thought how unfair the debate's moderator was to John Edwards (I should note that I am not supporting Edwards) and how the change of topic questions were so poorly aligned and misdirected. I.E. Poor Edwards sat there and waited for Clinton or Obama to "have their chance" to reply to the personal attacks, and then when the mediocre moderator would finally intervene because it was going on too long, one of your other two people would direct the questions to either Obama or Clinton.

And CNN, seriously, why make such a big deal about the candidates "sitting down" for the second half of the debate - after seeing the free-for-all first half, that was the only difference.

You should be disappointed in your efforts as moderators and hosts.

Wolf……You did a great Job. The Candidates where just as good. They willingly and not so willingly exposed themselves. Best Debate I have seen in Years. Keep up the good work. Was a MSNBC viewer until they change into idol worshipers of Obama. They for me now are comparable to FOX. Chris Matthews has a problem with women in power, station has become a real turn off. All I have left is CNN C-Span and PBS . Oh, and of course the net. They are all good candidates. You brought out some terrific answers.

I think Wolf Blitzer did a great job as debate moderator last night.

Wolf, you wrote: "now that there are just three candidates left, as opposed to nearly three times as many."
You know that's not true, Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel are still running, but your network and you have decided to make the American public believe that they're not running, That's very dishonest.

With all the childish behavior and finferpointing the Dems are looking for the fastest , surest way to give the White House back to the GOP. The old "mine is better than your's" "Oh Yea" performance from Clinton and Obama last night will do little to unite the party and will result in a split in the party supporters that will result in neither candidate winning the general election.
It is amazing how the quest for power has led to such destructive behavior and the smear campaigns by both groups seems to suggest that their leadership styles warrant a closer look.
Joe

Take away from last night: if you believe in universal health care and can't stand Hillary…support Edwards!

To Tyler,

When attacked by the clintons and do not respond, YOU ARE GONE.

Obama did good by exposing these vengeful pair of pathetic human beings " The Clintons"

The debate showed that Clinton is just a naggy old hag and far from capable of being president of the United States. She lacks any vision and can't even control her own husband, how will she run a country with 300 million people? I don't care which other candidate people support, just realize that Clinton is useless.

very ininteresting debate yestersay. however there were 3 contenders not 2 . and the "3d." {edwards} covered more intersring subjects for the american voters although he was not given equal time in

I think this debate and the debate anchored by Charlie Gibson in New Hampshire were both excellent. There is much to be said for hearing the candidates without interruption. Also seeing their demeanor, and how they react in these situations, is as revealing as what they say.

Wolf, I think you handled this one better than the UNLV debate in November. The exchanges were good last night. I also think it was Barack Obama's best performance yet. His debating usually doesn't live up to his speeches, but he outshined Clinton and Edwards last night.

Wolf, great job! This is the first debate that I learned some thing from. I loved that the glove were off and finally Obama had to answer some tough questions. And I think they all got their points out. Anyway give yourself a pat on the back for a good job!

Hillary's politics is all what we have accustomed to and we need a new page in our republic if we really care about our next generation…

First debate that showed me anything worth seeing or hearing And I must say it was clinton all the way. And I do beleive at this point that if the election was set for 2/5 Clinton would win hands down. Hope they keep it up at least this way the nation will pay attention to what the candidates have to say finally

I just wish someone could explain to me how Obama plans to accomplish the things he says. Change in Washington and rehotric about "reaching" across the isle rekindles nightmares of W's first run.

Can Obama speak? Sure. Is he an Idealist? Yup, so was Carter. I've yet to hear him explain WHAT he will do as President other than bring forth some magical change that every politician claims they will bring to the White House. I'm more concerned with how he will do it. I guarantee it won't be done by standing on principal and refusing to participate in Washington politics, afterall, were electing one man to one office, there is still a Senate and House full of status quoe politicitans to convince, and Obama doesn't strike me as the type willing or able to get much done.

…but he can speak…I'll give him that

I watched the entire debate last night and have read nothing regarding Edwards. He was the only candidate in control of his emotions. He was able to focus on the needs of the people. I was very disappointed in Clinton and Obama. They spoke over each other and at times, I couldn't even understand what they were saying. Unfortunately no credit was given to Edwards.

I was very impressed with Edwards succinct discussion of predatory credit card and payday lenders and how their practices substantially hurt the black middle class. I would vote for Edwards, if I wasn't already committed to McCain.

The media has to stop promoting political circus acts. Having had a black woman mayor, and a woman governor, both disasters, I ask that we stop voting for the novelty. Just because someone is black and/or a woman does not constitute a automatic qualification for a job like President. And the media has to stop promoting these plotlines like "Ooh, if (he's/she's) elected, they will be the first (black/woman) to hold that position."

Wolfe I think you did a pretty good job on trying to keep the answers on point. Next time i think it will help if no questions are asked related to either candidates past or any recent attacks they may have launched. Next time we need more information on exactly how the are going to attain these campaign promises. Unversal heath care will be very hard to accomplish if the Senate only had 55 democratics since most if not all Republican are dead set against. Also didn't CNN have a poll that said Hillary would have a harder time defeating Sen. McCann than either Edwards or Obama??

Wolf,

I have been a loyal viewer of your program for many years, but I think last night’s debate was less than admirable. I got the impression that your hands were tied by trying to be politically correct, especially as far as Obama was concerned considering the venue. You allowed Obama to change the subject whenever he wanted without responding to the question asked. I think that was a disservice to the viewers.

I don’t know if it had anything to do with MLK day, but even the questions seemed skewed in Obama’s favor. I’d like to ask why there were so many questions regarding Bill Clinton? Last time I looked Hillary was the one running for office. She should not be penalized for having him as a husband; I think she has already paid that price.

I understand that you wanted to step back to allow a dialog, but you stepped back a little too far and that dialog turned into schoolyard bickering. If these two cannot even get along and respect members of their own parties how can they hope to work with the Republicans or even other world leaders?

I think it is time for the media to stop being politically correct and start getting answers to questions based on what is best for our country.

I remain an undecided Independent, however, after last night’s debate I am taking a closer look at the Republican candidates.

I agree with you, Wolf! Let the candidates fly, as you did. Good job. At one point I almost forgot there was a "moderator" which I think is just fine. We are at a point where it's critical to hear and see the candidates as they can present themselves, and I think it was fine. I'll bet John Edwards agrees with you - he was able to scrap with the best of them!

Keep up the good work.

Wolf, with all due respect, I think this whole editorial is a bit pompous. Who cares about your role in the debate? This is just another example of what's wrong with modern media - it's all about the personalities at the expense of real news. Please stop injecting yourself into the story to boost your celebrity. Also, you pundits, collectively, need to lose these ridiculously clichéd boxing metaphors. It sounds and reads like a high-school newspaper. That said, I think that in spite of the viciousness of the attacks in last night's debate, it was still the best yet of this election cycle. It seems that the candidates have finally had time to get their plans and platforms in place, and we're getting more detail, more meat - more information that's actually useful to voters in making an informed decision about who's best to lead our country. And, lastly, let's be honest, Wolf. While you did let the candidates have more room to stretch out last night, you were constantly attempting to interrupt (usually unsuccessfully). Just watch the video.

It is amazing that you do not have Bill Clinton falling asleep behind Martin Luther King III…on Martin Luther King, Jr. Day!!! Some of my friends make fun of me for taking the "Clinton News Network" serioulsy…I am starting to understand their point.

I remember when Bush looked at his watch during a debate with Clinton in '92. I was amazed that he could be so "out of touch" in a Presidential Debate. Obviously, you CNN was amazed also…as evidenced by your coverage.

What is the difference here? This is why you guys continue to lose credibility. If you can't cover it…then at least be honest about why you won't cover it.

First Black President falling asleep in a Black Church during a Sermon by the Son of one of the most influential Black Americans, of the 20th Century…and you have nothing to say?

Ignorance? Incompetance? Apathy? or Calculating?

I have been an Obama supporter through this campaign- to this point. However, after last night, a feeling that's been slowly growing in me over the last few weeks became very clear: Obama has very little to say. It took me a while to notice, but it's becoming clearer and clearer that, of the 3 candidates, he is the least specific, the least idealistic, and the least capable of just giving a straight answer. It's funny (not really) how it seems like the people who really delve into the heart of issues and seem to have very specific plans, solutions, and ways to pay for them (biden, dodd, and now edwards), get the least face time and move to the back of the pack. It seems to me that America really loves candidtaes who just spout rhetoric and fight with each other. Sad.

Wolf,

I am so happy to have someone with your integrity in the process. I think you did well. I did not like that Obama kept on interrupting and intimidating the mediator to let him answer questions in triple the time he was allotted, but the other candidates held their own.

I am happy.