Like Maria Said Paz

Sunday, June 30, 2019

5 great Linda Ronstadt performances

Income inequality in the U.S. has grown over the past several decades. And as the gap between rich and poor yawns, so does the gap in their health, according to a study published in JAMA Network Open Friday.

The study drew from annual health survey data collected by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention from 1993 to 2017, including around 5.5 million Americans ages 18-64. The researchers focused on two questions from the survey recommended by the CDC as reliable indicators of health: 1. Over the last 30 days, how many healthy days have you had? 2. On a scale of 1 to 5, how would you rate your overall health?

What they found: Across all groups, Americans' self-reported health has declined since 1993. And race, gender and income play a bigger role in predicting health outcomes now than they did in 1993. Overall, white men in the highest income bracket were the healthiest group.

Which is why, Joe Biden, we don't need to just stick with ObamaCare. ObamaCare is b.s. We need real healthcare, we need universal healthcare.

Let's do five great tracks from Linda Ronstadt.

1) "Rock Me On The Water." Linda beautifully interprets this Jackson Browne classic.

2) "Long Long Time."

3) "Willin."

4) "Tracks Of My Tears."

5) "Tumbling Dice," "Poor Poor Pitiful Me" and "Love Me Tender." Yes, this is three but it's all from the film FM.

"Iraq snapshot" (THE COMMON ILLS):

Friday, June 28, 2019. The second debate takes place and Joe Biden plays the ghoul.

20 of the 25 candidates seeking the Democratic Party's presidential nomination have participated in Wednesday and Thursday's debates: US House Rep and Iraq War veteran Tulsi Gabbard, former US House Rep Beto O'Rourke, Senator Elizabeth Warren, Senator Amy Klobuchar, Senator Cory Booker, US House Rep Tim Ryan, former US House Rep John Delaney, NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio, Governor Jay Inslee, former HUD Secretary Julian Castro, former US Senator and Vice President Joe Biden, Senator Bernie Sanders, Marianne Williamson, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, Senator Kamala Harris, US House Rep Eric Swalwell, Andrew Yang, Senator Michael Bennet, John Hickenlooper and South Ben Mayor Pete Buttigieg.

The clear winners?

Women.

All six women demonstrated leadership and spoke to real issues. Three e-mails felt that 'winners and losers' were in some way lessening the debate. Yeah, I read the headlines on some of that garbage passed off as 'critiques.' For those in the press who've apparently suffered head injuries, let's be really clear: A 'debate' that limits the participants to one minute responses and possibly a 30 second follow up is never going to be a debate. It's speed dating at best.

All you're going to be able to do with that format is determine whether or not the person appears ready for the White House.

All the women -- Tulsi, Elizabeth, Marianne, Kisten, Amy and Kamala -- passed that test.

Now each one has their own issues and agenda and you may or may not support those. But in terms of showing presidential merit, all women succeeded.

Why didn't the men?

There were so many failures and they were the men. With six women participating, that left fourteen men. There were over twice as many men as women on the stage both nights. But the bulk of the men were embarrassments. They didn't just come off poorly, they were embarrassments.

Is Tim Ryan really qualified to be president of the United States if he doesn't know who attacked on 9/11? Is Tim Ryan really qualified if he doesn't know who al Qaeda is?

That's the sort of mistake that should end a campaign immediately.

Women didn't make that mistake on the stage -- in fact, it was Tulsi who corrected Tim and corrected the record.

Tim Ryan's not the only guy that was an embarrassment.

Enter Joe Biden.

Look, Donald Trump has put us in a horrible situation. We do have enormous income inequality and one thing I agree honestly can make massive cuts in the $1.6 trillion in tax loopholes out there and I would be going about eliminating Donald Trump’s tax cuts for the wealthy.

He declared that last night. He declared that in response to Bernie's

We have a new vision for America and at a time when we have three people in this country owning more wealth than the bottom half of America, while 500,000 people are sleeping out on the streets today we think it is time for change, real change.

(By the way, using NYT transcript.)

Donald Trump put us in that situation?

Most of the transfer took place in the eight years Joe Biden served as vice president.

Were this really a debate, the moderators (if they weren't whores) would have pressed him on that. They didn't. On those rare times when he was pressed, it was usually by Eric Swalwell -- although Kamala had her own moment with Joe where enough was enough and she wasn't going to take his spin on immigration.

REUTERS in January 2015:

Barack Obama enters the final two years of his presidency with a blemish on his legacy that looks impossible to erase: the decline of the middle class he has promised to rescue. [. . .] Federal Reserve survey data show families in the middle fifth of the income scale now earn less and their net worth is lower than when Obama took office.

Joe is the past. He demonstrated that onstage last night. He has nothing to offer. But, reality, his past isn't anything America wants to return to. We deserved better and we may have fallen for 'hope and change' eleven years ago, but why should we today?

He has nothing to offer. Except being a ghoul. His third response of the night, supposedly about US healthcare and what was needed, was the following:

Look, this is a very personal to me. When my wife and daughter were killed in an automobile accident my two boys were really very badly injured. I couldn’t imagine what it’d be like had I not had adequate healthcare available immediately. And then when my son came home from Iraq after a year he was diagnosed with terminal cancer and he was given months to live. I can’t fathom what would have happened if, in fact, they said by the way the last six months of your life you’re on your own. We’re cutting off. You’ve used up your time.

First, December 1972. That's when the car accident was. What kind of a ghoul is crafting debate promises off their dead spouse and their dead child from 47 years ago?

Ghoul.

He only has the past.

More to the point, his answer is total b.s. The costs of healthcare, he insists, are very personal to him. Why? Because he might have been stuck with big bills. He wasn't, he was already a member of Congress so he had all the insurance anyone would ever need. But he can relate because if he hadn't been in Congress and had that great insurance, he might have had a big bill.

Might have had.

No, that doesn't say you relate.

It does say that you've grown so pathetic that you will trot out your dead wife from 47 years ago to try to get sympathy.

What else does he have to run on?

Clearly, nothing.

Yes, John was an embarrassment and should have been booed off the stage last night but -- make no mistake -- the biggest idiot on stage was Joe Biden.

Is anyone reviewing Joe's past debate performances? I have. Look at 2008 and 2012 and you don't find Joe using his dead relatives as props. You do find, in 2008, for example, debating Sarah Palin, Joe declaring (Gwen Ifill moderated):

Gwen, I don't know where to start. We don't call a redistribution in my neighborhood Scranton, Claymont, Wilmington, the places I grew up, to give the fair to say that not giving Exxon Mobil (NYSE:XOM) another $4 billion tax cut this year as John calls for and giving it to middle class people to be able to pay to get their kids to college, we don't call that redistribution. We call that fairness number one. Number two fact, 95 percent of the small businesses in America, their owners make less than $250,000 a year. They would not get one single solitary penny increase in taxes, those small businesses. Now, with regard to the -- to the health care plan, you know, it's with one hand you giveth, the other you take it.

So, in 2008, Joe was all on board, he was going to address income inequality and he was going to ensure "fairness." But that never happened. Eight years he was Vice President and it never happened.

Never.

So why the hell should anyone believe a single thing he promises on stage these days?

He's either a liar or a failure. Actually he could be both. But what is clear is that his past debate promises never came to life and, past as predictor, the current ones won't either.

Last night, Eric Swalwell offered what should be the chant against Joe:

And I’ve seen the anxiety across America where the manufacturing floors go from 1,000 to 100 to one. So, we have to modernize our schools, value the teachers who prepare our kids, wipe the student debt from any teacher that goes into a community that needs it. Invest in America’s communities, especially where places where the best exports are people who move away to get skills. But, Jose, I was six years old when a presidential candidate came to the California Democratic Convention and said, it’s time to pass the torch to a new generation of Americans. That candidate was then Senator Joe Biden. Joe Biden was right when he said it was time to the pass the torch to a new generation of Americans 32 years ago.
He’s still right today. If we’re going to solve the issues of automation (PH), pass the torch. If we’re going to solve the issues of climate chaos, pass the torch. If we’re going to solve the issue of student loan debt, pass the torch. If we’re going to end gun violence for families who are fearful of sending their kids to school, pass the torch.

"Pass the torch, Joe, pass the torch!"

Joe is the man who, in the 2012 debate with US House Rep Paul Ryan, declared of Bib Netanyahu, "Now, with regard to Bibi, he's been my friend for 39 years."

Joe needs to be called out on Iraq. The press hasn't done that. He's actually got a very public moment that everyone's either ignoring or has missed. An e-mail asked when I was going to go into that and not just hint about it? Not ahead of a debate with one minute responses. I doubt seriously that the press will run with it. They didn't in real time. It was a Committee hearing and I don't remember one reporter being present. We covered it in a snapshot and noted it was an important hearing. We mainly highlighted someone no longer in the US Senate. But we did note Joe and his comments.

And the press should have noted Joe. But they ignored it.

We'll cover it here and it will probably be ignored by the press as it was back then. But it would be stupidity to bring it up ahead of the one minute response debate.

Joe's past is out there and it didn't play well in real time but it plays even worse in retrospect.

Reviewing his past debate claims and promises this morning, it's really obvious how quickly the press moved on to different topics and turned their eyes. Do none of Joe's comments have consequences? That claim should be front and center today. But everyone acts like it never happened. Crazy Joe friends for 39 years with a War Criminal.

Joe has had decades -- not years, decades -- to change things. He has nothing to point to with pride. So he lies and pretends there were no deportation issues/crimes under Barack and he gets away with lying for the most part.

America deserved better than the eight years of Barack and Joe. And Joe's promise to return us to that period is apparently an offer to leave us hanging from the cliff.

Marianne Williamson was the clear winner of the debate last night.

Millions of American children live in chronic trauma and we should be rescuing them no differently than if they were victims of a natural disaster.Millions go to school every day hungry, in schools that don’t even have adequate school supplies to teach a child to read. #Bigtruth

45 replies66 retweets413 likes

31 replies31 retweets172 likes

We are going to turn from a dirty economy to a clean economy, we’re going to have a Green New Deal. We’re going to create millions of jobs. We’re going to do this within the next twelve years because I’m not interested in just winning the next election. #BigTruth #DemDebates

175 replies128 retweets1,096 likes

Marianne Williamson did not speak for the first 27 minutes of #DemDebate2. But when she finally did, everything she said was awesome.

191 replies453 retweets2,262 likes

I have had a career harnessing the inspiration and the motivation and the excitement of people - masses of people. #BigTruth #DemDebate

122 replies130 retweets1,107 likes

"@jacindaardern has said that she wants New Zealand to be the country that is the best country in the world for a child to grow up.  And I want to call her and say girlfriend you are on because I want the United States to be that too." #DemDebate

267 replies289 retweets1,591 likes

"Mr. President, if you're listening, I want you to hear me, please. You have harnessed fear for political purposes and only love can cast that out."

Watch Marianne Williamson's message to President Trump in her closing statement #DemDebate2

271 replies349 retweets1,604 likes

Thanks to you I was on stage tonight. Help qualify me for the next debates & join me in a great revolution of consciousness, by which we achieve historic changes and make the world a better place. bit.ly/2xf3Ts0 #DemDebate #BigTruth

378 replies278 retweets1,488 likes

And that gets back into not just Big Pharma, not just health insurance companies, it has to do with chemical policies, it has to do with environmental policies, it has to do with food policies, it has to do with drug policies.. #BigTruth #DemDebate

49 replies160 retweets852 likes

So I, sir, I have a feeling you know what you’re doing. I’m going to harness love for political purposes, I will meet you on that field, and sir, love will win. #DemDebate #BigTruth

144 replies182 retweets965 likes

This man has reached into the psyche of the American people and he has harnessed fear for political purposes. So, Mr. President, if you’re listening, I want you to hear me please. You have harnessed fear for political purposes and only love can cast that out. #DemDebate

63 replies183 retweets921 likes

I have an idea about Donald Trump. Donald Trump is not going to be beaten just by insider politics talk. He is not going to be beaten just by somebody who has plans. He is going to be beaten by somebody who has an idea of what this man has done. #DemDebate

149 replies181 retweets1,100 likes

We just wait ‘til somebody gets sick and then we talk about who’s going to pay for the treatment and how they’re going to be treated. What we need to talk about is why so many Americans have unnecessary chronic illnesses, so many more compared to other countries. #DemDebate

160 replies413 retweets1,832 likes

If you think we’re going to beat Donald Trump by just having all these plans, you’ve got another thing coming. #BigTruth #DemDebate

135 replies181 retweets865 likes

Decades of failed United States intervention in Latin America from Guatemala to Honduras and more has created the conditions that spur migrants to come to our border. If we don’t deal with the root causes we can’t expect the pressure on our southern border to change. #BigTruth

41 replies264 retweets883 likes

And the Democratic Party should be on the side of reparations for slavery for this very reason. I do not believe that the average American is a racist, but the average American is woefully under-educated about the history of race in the United States. #BigTruth #DemDebate

113 replies257 retweets947 likes

Child advocacy is not being addressed with the attention and care it deserves. Sign our petition now to stand for our future.

16 replies55 retweets238 likes

All of these issues are extremely important, but they are specifics, they are symptoms. And the underlying cause has to do with deep, deep, deep realms of racial injustice. Both in our criminal justice system and in our economic system. #BigTruth #DemDebate

38 replies127 retweets522 likes

We need reparations. We have not yet done all that it is morally incumbent upon us to do in order to heal the ugly wound of slavery.

57 replies181 retweets505 likes

And what President Trump has done is not only attack these children, not only demonize these immigrants, he is attacking a basic principle of America’s moral core. We open our hearts to the stranger. #BigTruth #DemDebate

31 replies141 retweets632 likes

I propose a $200-$500 billion plan of reparations, with the money to be disbursed by a council of esteemed African American leaders over a period of twenty years.

68 replies142 retweets406 likes

Both of those things are a crime, and if your government does it, that doesn’t make it less of a crime.  These are state-sponsored crimes. #BigTruth #DemDebate

30 replies127 retweets565 likes

Marianne Williamson nailed it when drew the connection between health policy and environmental policies. Our issues are connected and we need a #GreenNewDeal. #DemDebate #ClimateDebate

Marianne Williamson

49 replies362 retweets1,444 likes

If you forcibly take a child from their parents’ arms, you are kidnapping them. And if you take a lot of children and put them in a detainment center, thus inflicting chronic trauma upon them, that’s called child abuse.  This is collective child abuse. #BigTruth #DemDebate

532 replies967 retweets3,504 likes

All three women last night did a better job than any of the men. Eric was the best of the men. Pete needs to grasp that the world may love a lover but we don't necessarily elect one as president. In other words, congratulations on your marriage, now please find another topic. Hint, it's not a dead relative. Pete is proof that the debates of this style won't deal with reality. The racism in his leadership as mayor was briefly and softly touched on by Rachel and he was allowed to spin like crazy.

But the moderators biggest problem?

Sexism. Male or female, why did they let the men continue? Kirsten was repeatedly told to pipe down. But if you didn't pipe down, if you were Joe Biden, for example, you were rewarded for that. You were called on to speak or just allowed to.

There was a moment in the debate where Kamala was attempting to speak and yet again the moderators allow a man -- and it wasn't his turn -- to speak. And the look on her face as she registered that was priceless.

Time and again, when a vocal 'scuffle' emerged, they might chastise a man but they went with them, they let them speak.

Women really had to fight to be heard. Kirsten and Kamala fought hard and I'm not sure how that looks to the viewers. Marianne did what she does best, draw the attention away from nonsense. By being a steady figure, she draws your attention and doesn't have to enter the fray to get it.

The following sites updated -- and community sites offer their takes on the debate:

Antiwar.com Original

‘What Does War Have To Do With Me?’

7 hours ago

Thomas Friedman is a Great Man

Some Tweets from Margaret Kimberley

8 hours ago

Ann's Mega Dub

Some Tweets from the Green Party

8 hours ago

Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude

how much work has joe biden had done?

8 hours ago

Like Maria Said Paz

John Hickenlooper

9 hours ago

Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills)

Did Joe kill his family?

9 hours ago

Trina's Kitchen

If your government does it, that doesn't make it less of a crime

10 hours ago

SICKOFITRADLZ

Uh, Bernie, do you know there are women on stage?

10 hours ago

Ruth's Report

Sweat on John Hickenlooper upper lip was very Richard Nixon

10 hours ago

On the Edge

Democratic Debate Part 2

12 hours ago

Mikey Likes It!

Justin Raimondo

12 hours ago

Gorilla Radio

Gorilla Radio with Chris Cook, Bonny Glambeck, Greg Palast, Janine Bandcroft June 27th, 2019

15 hours ago

Blog of Rights: Official Blog of the American Civil Liberties Union

Arkansas Politicians Continue to Push Abortion out of Reach. So We Sued. Again.

15 hours ago

Latino USA

With The Help Of Nuns And A Lawyer, A Paraguayan Indigenous Group Wins Back Their Ancestral Territory

16 hours ago

The Official Jody Watley Website

Jody Watley – Classic Image of The Day. Rolling Stone Magazine Fall Fashion Issue.

17 hours ago

Washington Week

Featured Panelists: June 28, 2019

18 hours ago

Thursday, June 27, 2019

John Hickenlooper

I'm saying this not as a psychologist, but as a TV watcher -- am I the only one who thinks John Hickenlooper looks unhinged?

Again, I'm not diagnosing him using my professional license. I don't believe in that.

But I am saying he looks like he is crazy, seriously unglued.

He would have been the most unimpressive on stage tonight if it weren't for Andrew Yang.

What does he believe in?

Who the hell knows, he was all over the map. I thought he was one of the climate candidates? If he was, he wasn't on the stage tonight.

He was scattererd and scatter brained.

I was impressed with Marianne Williamson. I thought she won the debate. I loved her challenge tonight, that Donald Trump has used fear and hate and that she would answer that with love and she would win.

After her, I would say Senator Kirsten Gillibrand and then Senator Marianne Williamson.

The men?

Bernie was probably the best but it wasn't a real competition.

The men were lackluster. Only Bernie and Eric Swalwell conjured up leadership with their performances.

"Iraq snapshot" (THE COMMON ILLS):

Thursday, June 27, 2019. Democrats debate and the media wrongly hails Julian Castro who flopped in the debate and flops this morning on CNN. [The section that starts with "******" and ends with "****" was added this afternoon to this morning's snapshot.)

One debate down, one to go. 25 candidates are seeking the Democratic Party's presidential nomination. 20 of them qualified to take part in the two debates. Tonight's debate -- broadcast on NBC, MSNBC and TELEMUNDO -- will feature Senator Bernie Sanders, Marianne Williamson, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, Senator Kamala Harris, US House Rep Eric Swalwell, Andrew Yang, Senator Michael Bennet and South Ben Mayor Pete Buttigieg.

That will be tonight. Last night US House Rep and Iraq War veteran Tulsi Gabbard, former US House Rep Beto O'Rourke, Senator Elizabeth Warren, Senator Amy Klobuchar, Senator Cory Booker, US House Rep Tim Ryan, former US House Rep John Delaney, NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio, Governor Jay Inslee and former HUD Secretary Julian Castro took the stage.

The big losers?

Chuck Todd and Rachel Maddow suffered a technical glitch. They moderated the second hour of last night's debate which included a technical glitch that caused them to go to commercial. News anchors Jose Diaz-Balart and Lester Holt and talk show host Savannah Guthrie had handled the first hour with little problems; however talk show hosts Chuck and Rachel were not so fortunate. As Chuck attempted to ask a question, audio from elsewhere (Chuck thought from the control room) was preventing everyone from hearing Chuck's question.

"What is happening?" a confused and nervous Rachel Maddow asked. By contrast, Senator Amy Klobuchar was laughing at the glitch. Chuck and Rachel rushed to commercial while NBC attempted to fix the issue.

After that?

Julian Castro came off the worst.

"If you did your homework," he snarled at Beto O'Rourke at one point. But itwas Castro who hadn't done the homework. I'm not referring to his position, I'm referring to his inability to express his position. Most people did not know what the hell he was talking about.

You cannot go to an issue like immigration and start in the weeds. This is not an issue that we speak of honestly or fully. Regardless of your position on the subject (mine is similar to Julian's), you have to walk people through. Julian didn't. Many viewers were likely unsure what he was advocating for but were clear that he attacked Beto and, worse, he attacked some viewers.

If you were watching and had not invested heavily in immigration, you could not decipher the position he was indicating, his remarks to Beto also applied to you, "I think you should do your homework on this issue. If you did your homework on this issue you would know that we should repeal this section."

That was a huge mistake. Julian failed to express his position in clear language and then he offered that insult to Beto which did not go over well with viewers because any confusion they had, per the candidate, was because they hadn't done the work required.

And backing up my point, CNN brought on Julian for a victory lap that quickly turned into an embarrassment as he was unable to calmly and clearly convey his position. He fumbled repeatedly and gave a completely false response -- call it a lie. This did not begin with Donald Trump, the current response to immigration. Barack Obama was called the deporter in chief. These are facts but Julian doesn't want to address them. He can't explain his position clearly in a debate and even when given the opportunity to do so with a friendly interviewer, he falters. He was so sure that he looked impressive but many may not shared that opinion.

In the debate, Julian also came close to tears and did that help anyone? Julian's already the shortest man on the stage and it appeared Elizabeth Warren was at least as tall as Julian and maybe taller. So the visual there deserves exploring. Cory Booker also teared up -- while discussing shootings -- but he was tall and towering and he connected it to the personal.

CNN had Julian on this morning because he was the number one searched candidate after the debate. That doesn't mean support for him. However, assuming that it did, their chart showed that the second most searched was Tulsi Gabbard and the third was Beto O'Rourke.

If Julian scored so well and the searches were a result of that, it's difficult to grasp how Beto would be number three since they had the exchange.

It's also difficult to grasp how CNN and others work so hard to ignore Tulsi. Tulsi Gabbard definitely made a strong impression in the debate. This despite Chuck Todd's little snit-fit.

One of the most significant moments in the two hour debate was prompted by Rachel's questioning.

MADDOW: I’m going to pick up — I want to pick up this point, and I want to put this to Congressman Ryan. Today the Taliban claimed responsibility for killing two American servicemembers in Afghanistan. Leaders as disparate as President Obama and President Trump have both said that they want to end U.S. involvement in Afghanistan, but it isn’t over for America. Why isn’t it over? Why can’t presidents of very different parties and very different temperaments get us out of there? And how could you?

RYAN: I appreciate that question. So I’ve been in Congress 17 years. And 12 of those years I’ve sat on the Armed Services Committee, the Defense Appropriations Committee or the Armed Services Committee.
And the lesson that I’ve learned over the years is that you have to stay engaged in these situations. Nobody likes it. It’s long. It’s tedious. But right now, we have — so I would say we must be engaged in this. We must have our State Department engaged. We must have our military engaged to the extent they need to be.
But the reality of it is, this president doesn’t even have people appointed in the State Department to deal with these things, whether we’re talking about Central America, whether we’re talking about Iran, whether we’re talking about Afghanistan. We’ve got to be completely engaged.
And here’s why, because these flare-ups distract us from the real problems in the country. If we’re getting drones shot down for $130 million, because the president is distracted, that’s $130 million that we could be spending in places like Youngstown, Ohio, or Flint, Michigan, or rebuilding — or rebuilding…

MADDOW: Congresswoman Gabbard, I’m going to give you 30 seconds, actually, to jump off what he said. He described engagement as the problem.

GABBARD: Is that what you will tell — is that what you will tell the parents of those two soldiers who were just killed in Afghanistan? Well, we just have to be engaged? As a soldier, I will tell you, that answer is unacceptable.
We have to bring our troops home from Afghanistan. We are in a place in Afghanistan where we have lost so many lives. We’ve spent so much money. Money that’s coming out of every one of our pockets, money that should be going into communities here at home, meeting the needs of the people here at home.
We are no better off in Afghanistan today than we were when this war began. This is why it’s so important to have a president and commander-in-chief who knows the cost of war and who’s ready to do the job on day one. I am ready to do that job when I walk into the Oval Office.

TODD: Listen, I’m going to go down the line — I’m going to go down — I’m going to go down — I’m going to go down the line here. You know what, you felt — you felt like she was rebutting you. Get 30 seconds, go.

RYAN: Thank you. You’re a very good man. I appreciate that.

TODD: Fair enough. I hear what you’re saying. She invoked your name.

RYAN: I would just say, I don’t want to be engaged. I wish we were spending this money in places that I’ve represented that have been completely forgotten and we were rebuilding. But the reality of it is, if the United States isn’t engaged, the Taliban will grow. And they will have bigger, bolder terrorist acts. We have got to have some presence there…

GABBARD: The Taliban was there long before we came in. They’re going to be there long before we leave.

RYAN: And they were — yeah, exactly. Well, we were.

GABBARD: We cannot keep U.S. troops deployed to Afghanistan thinking that we’re going to somehow squash this Taliban that’s been there, that every other country that’s tried has failed.

RYAN: I didn’t say — I didn’t say squash them. I didn’t say squash them. When we weren’t in there, they started flying planes into our buildings. So I’m just saying right now … we have an obligation…

GABBARD: The Taliban didn’t attack us on 9/11. Al Qaida did.

RYAN: Well, I — I understand…

GABBARD: Al Qaida attacked us on 9/11. That’s why I and so many other people joined the military, to go after Al Qaida, not the Taliban.

RYAN: I understand that. The Taliban…

TODD: Go ahead, Congressman. Finish up, 10 seconds.

RYAN: The Taliban was protecting those people who were plotting against us. All I’m saying is, if we want to go into elections, and we want to say that we’ve got to withdraw from the world, that’s what President Trump is saying. We can’t. I would love for us to.

GABBARD: You know who’s protecting Al Qaida right now? It’s Saudi Arabia.

Rebecca Morin (USA TODAY) picks some winners and includes US House Rep and Iraq War veteran Tulsi Gabbard:

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard

Gabbard was arguably an afterthought going into Wednesday's debate.

But the Hawaii representative exceeded expectations. Her answers were clear, concise and she had palpable stage presence.

She did not shy away from addressing her past stance opposing same-sex marriage.

“There is no one in our government at any level who has the right to tell any American who they should be allowed to love or who they should be allowed to marry," she said, pointing to how some Americans could also "relate to the fact that I grew up in a socially conservative home" and "held views when I was very young that I no longer hold today."

Gabbard also had a moment when talking about foreign policy, a topic that has been controversial for the congresswoman given her views on Syrian leader Bashar al Assad.

During a heated exchanged with Ryan, Gabbard pointed out that the Taliban did not attack the World Trade Center on 9/11.

"That's why I and other people joined the military," she continued, "to go after Al Qaeda. Not the Taliban."

Tulsi scored. And by CNN's 'metric' -- Google searches after the debate -- she really scored. Is there a reason so many in the press refuse to give her credit for her accomplishment?

CNN noted that she mentioned her service in the military five times during the two hour debate -- and noted that with a smirk.

She's an Iraq War veteran, why shouldn't she mention it and why is CNN smirking about a woman being a veteran?

Another winner would be Amy Klobuchar who came off as someone who thought on her feet, as someone you could relate to and as someone who could make a one liner work. Julian could learn a thing or two from her. Senator Elizabeth Warren was largely lost in the second hour of the debate -- lost by the moderators. She did better in the first hour where she was more of a focus. In all, she probably did everything she needed to in order to establish her credentials.

For the most part, the candidates and the moderators zoomed in on issues that really mattered so they can all get an earned round of applause for that.

*************
All set off between the two "***" were added at 1:30 pm same day. We had to speak to a group first thing (8:00 AM EST) so the snapshot was rushed. A few are asking about Elizabeth Warren in e-mails.

Warren came out strongly for Medicare For All. That is the most popular position on one of the biggest domestic issues. Only Mike deBlasio also came out strongly for Medicare For All. Elizabeth talked about real solutions and talked about the country's future. She came off forward looking and, on stage, was a leader. The second hour focused less on her but that's fine, she'd already made a strong impression in the first hour.

Amy, a few e-mails asked about. Since Bully Boy Bush ran in 2000, we've heard 'the one you'd most like to have a beer with.' Did it exist before Bully Boy Bush? It may have. I might have missed it. For the record, I wouldn't have had a drink with BBB (nor would I have done a line of blow with him). But if that's a metric -- and the press has insisted it is -- Amy won that. Near the end, she declared:

Three things to know about me. First, I listen to people and that’s how I get things done. That is my focus. I have a track record of passing over 100 bills where I’m the lead Democrat. And that is because I listened and I acted. And I think that’s important in a president. Everything else just melts away.
Secondly, I’m someone that can win and beat Donald trump. I have won every place, every race, and every time. I have won in the reddest of districts, ones that Donald Trump won by over 20 points. I can win in states like Wisconsin and Iowa and in Michigan.
And finally, yeah, I am not the establishment party candidate. I’ve got respect, but I’m not that person. I am the one that doesn’t have a political machine, that doesn’t come from money. And I don’t make all the promises that everyone up here makes.

But I can promise you this. I am going to govern with integrity. I’m going to (OFF-MIKE) I’m going to govern for you.

She was completely believable. She was personable, she was real, she was often hard hitting and frequently funny while hitting hard. Considering some of the press she has received, her performance may have been the biggest surprise of the night.

Tulsi? I thought Tulsi did an excellent job. Throughout, she did an excellent job. Look at her first exchange, for example:

HOLT: All right, thank you. I want to put the same question to Congresswoman Gabbard. Your thoughts on equal pay?

GABBARD: First of all, let’s recognize the situation we’re in, that the American people deserve a president who will put your interests ahead of the rich and powerful. That’s not what we have right now.
I enlisted in the Army National Guard after the Al Qaida terror attacks on 9/11 so I could go after those who had attacked us on that day. I still serve as a major. I served over 16 years, deployed twice to the Middle East, and in Congress served on the Foreign Affairs and Armed Services Affairs for over six years.
I know the importance of our national security, as well as the terribly high cost of war. And for too long, our leaders have failed us, taking us from one regime change war to the next, leading us into a new cold war and arms race, costing us trillions of our hard-earned taxpayer dollars and countless lives.

This insanity must end. As president, I will take your hard-earned taxpayer dollars and instead invest those dollars into serving your needs, things like health care, a green economy, good-paying jobs, protecting our environment, and so much more.

I applaud that. I'm for equal pay. She really didn't talk equal pay, you can argue. But you're not going to have equal anything when all of your money goes overseas to support never-ending wars. I thought her answer was accurate and needed. I think the debate focused on real issues -- and I will give Savannah, Lester, Jose, Chuck and Rachel credit for that -- as noted earlier, Rachel sparked one of the best exchanges of the night with her question. But I'd argue that Tulsi and Elizabeth both deserve credit for focusing on issues and on the really big ones.

I'd argue that Tulsi, Elizabeth and Amy all came off presidential. I don't think the same can be said of all the men on stage. The women did their job very well. I might not have agreed on every position but they advocated for where they stood and did so clearly and they looked like leaders.

Of the men?

It was a very unimpressive group.

I thought Cory (whose politics I don't care for -- he's to the right of me) was surprisingly effective. I've seen him speak but this was my first exposure to him in a debate. I was surprised by how well he presented himself and his positions.

After him? I'd argue Beto did well. I thought that when I watched the debate, I thought so as we spoke to four different groups (people who will be voting in November -- will be, not likely) this morning.

The media is in love with Julian. I'm not seeing that with the people. We're speaking in New Hampshire. In New Hampshire, women and men (that we spoke with) felt that Julian was rude and trying to stage conflict.

Julian doesn't have a national presence, he's short, balding, has glassy eyes and either feral teeth or baby teeth (I thought baby teeth but a number of people referred to them as feral). Those are a lot of gaps to overcome.

Wally says I have to include something. This is from 2005, from Ava and my "TV: Jessica Simpson and Nick Lachey Reporting for Two Hours of Self-Love:"

Jessica Simpson, we can't figure out. There have been plenty of big boobed starlets over the years. But they usually didn't suffer from short legs, knobby knees, eyes set too close together and a nonexistant ass. Or at least not all four. If you're wondering why we're appraising her physical appearance, it's because what else is there? She's not a singer in the sense that she moves people with her voice and she's not racked up a lot of hit singles unless you use the term "hit single" very, very loosely. She wants to be an actress and, with her voice, pursuing other avenues is strongly advised.

One person told us she was Ann-Margaret. That's simply not true. Margaret had (and has) talent. She also had an endearing personality that wasn't village idiot of the entertainment world. Another person told us she was the new Raquel Welch. While it took time for Welch to warm up and demonstrate that there was a brain and soul inside, there's no arguing that, from the start, she was beautiful. Unless the camera catches her at exactly the most flattering angle (3/4 face, shot from above), Simpson doesn't even qualify for pretty.

We feel she's a newly discovered species, the non-star star famous because a magazine cover tells you that she is. The ultimate sign of how non-reality based our nation has gotten. A possible argument for some new creationist "theory" of non-intelligent design.

Maybe the talk about the disappointment of Dukes of Hazzard is premature? But we're told she's laughable (not in the good way and supposedly her nose didn't film well), that females complained about the hairdos on Sean Williams Scott and Johnny Knoxville (they do look like dorks). People are saying the film will be lucky to do as well at the box office as the film version of Beverly Hillbillies.

We're sort of hoping the talk is wrong. Someone willing to do a "special" for the troops that highlights themselves and equates their "service" to a "Tour of Duty" knows no bounds. If Dukes of Hazzard flops, we're frightened to imagine what Simpson has planned next. She's like Pia Zadora with more desperation and stamina. The only thing worse than picturing what new harm she can inflict upon the nation is realizing that there's a good chance Nick Lachey will be at her side to assist.

Wally says Julian Castro is the Jessica Simpson of politics.

Again, not one group we spoke to contained a single person impressed with him. Each group contained many people who were bothered by his 'antics' on stage.

I have not seen any debate coverage either then what CNN offered as this was being posted this morning. Frank Bruni was on CNN gushing over Julian. But I'm told online at his paper, he's praising Elizabeth Warren. That's Frank, he's the bi-polar commentator.

The press wants Julian to do well. (Julian is a Clintonista centrist. He is not left. You can argue he's left on immigration. But since that's the only issue he's left on, I'm not sure how much that will help.)

The people we spoke to did not feel "Shorty" did very well at all.

There was a politician in Texas who was a joke for carrying a step stool around with him -- not Beto, this is far before Beto and Beto is actually tall. But this politician would put down the step stool before any camera shooting could take place, he'd put it down and stand on it. He was a joke. During one election cycle, he ran as a family man -- despite the fact that his wife had already filed for divorce. That detail the press was willing to ignore (yes, he was a Republican).

Point being I laugh whenever I think about his obsession with appearances but people are obsessed with appearances. He was right. And Julian might need to factor that in.

Or, to steal from the Jessica Simpson critique of 2005, some politicians are problematic in appearance. But they usually don't suffer from being short, balding, glassy eyed and feral teeth -- or at least not all four.

Julian can take comfort in the fact that Tim Ryan was the loser. The exchange we highlighted above? It was cited throughout every group we spoke to. Multiple people brought that up. The feeling was it's over for Tim Ryan and we heard "he should drop out" repeatedly in each group.

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

Tonight, the eyes will be on Joe Biden to see whether or not he fumbles. Margaret Kimberley (BLACK AGENDA REPORT) notes:

For now the dim bulb former vice president is hidden. He makes few appearances and doesn’t talk to the press. That is because he is as they say “gaffe prone.” He isn’t just a cynical opportunist, he is also stupid and can’t be trusted to be unscripted with the media. No wonder Democrats miss Obama, who is very smart and could convince everyone that he was on their side. They are now left with the dregs, an old school party hack who can’t hide his mediocrity.
The 2020 election will end in disaster for black people no matter who becomes the next president. Dumping the democrats is the only solution to what ails us. They don’t want to change and they aren’t even likely to win. If Biden crashes and burns another puppet will be presented as the savior. Black misleaders will prop up that person too and their constituents will be the losers.

The following sites updated: