Chris' question about Bill Clinton in the WH was an un-necessary softball for no reason other than giving them a chance to rant against Hillary. Hell, I'm not even for her and I think that was BS.

99% of the audiance were rich white people. 100% of the individuals on stage were rich white males. What % of the population do they represent?

The debate moderated by Chris Matthews was far better then the democratic debate. Questions were evenly spread throughout all the candidates, which was not the case with the Democrats, where the "front runners" received the majority of the questions.

The question about Hillary and Bill Clinton was a waste of time. My husband and I talked about how Chris Matthews would somehow get the Clinton's involved in the debate because of his obvious dislike for them.

The Democratic debate was handled with more dignity for all candidates and reasonable time was given for snswers and interruptions were at a minimum by questioners. Tonight, questioners interrupting and pacing on stage was disruptive - they should not have been the focus of the debate. I am a Democrat and was disappointed in tonight's presentation. I wanted to hear and see the candidates. Please - consider a better format with time/respect for all candidates in any debates in the future. I will vote for a Democrat, but want all candidates to be treated with respect and time to express their viewpoints. I felt I was at an MTV show for hyperactive students with short attention spans. You can do better, MSNBC!!

Just one comment on the debate in general. I decided to watch to get familiar with the possible candidates. Unfortunately, their names were not displayed each time they spoke. I wanted to put a face to the names I've been hearing about and it did not happen for me.

I second Carolyn's remark about the question about Hillary and Bill Clinton. And in my view the Terri Schiavo question was also a waste of time. This time should have been used for a far more important, substantive domestic issue that unconscionably has not come up in either of the debates, but needs to. Not only does it affect far more people and a far larger area of the country than did the Terri Schiavo tragedy, an allied issue has future ramifications for other parts of the country. That issue is Katrina and how the Administration has been handling it and storm recovery, which is allied with national disaster preparation and response in general. MSNBC has an excellent blog called "Rising from Ruin" which should be required reading not only for the candidates (both Republicans and Democrats) but also for Matthews, Williams, and anybody else who might moderate such a debate in the future. They especially need to take a look at the striking, sad photos in the story "Memories or Hope?" in which the bits and pieces left standing of what had been homes on the Mississippi Gulf Coast are shown. These photos bear mute testimony not only to the force of the storm but also--and more importantly--the fact that the area's recovery is being neglected and storm survivors have been abandoned by an incompetent government which has obviously washed its hands of them. Anyone thinking Katrina is "yesterday's news" and is not a valid campaign issue must see these photos. They will learn that Katrina is still a current issue 20 months later and that the people in the storm zone are still in a world of hurt. There are other reasons Katrina needs to be added as a debate topic; for brevity, I'll just cite one. Recently it came out in the Washington Post that during Katrina's aftermath, the Bush Administration either turned down offers of aid or squandered aid sent by foreign countries. Worst of all, this aid included rescue craft--which was turned away at the very time that New Orleanians were stranded on their flooded rooftops and calling for help. It's as if the Bush Administration had cruelly wanted people in Louisiana to die. Now for disaster preparation and response in general--yes, individuals and families do need to stock up on supplies and come up with a plan in case of disaster. However, even the most careful preparation can only go so far--I recently read a blog entry by someone in inland Mississippi where Katrina had hit. She and her family had prepared, but their supplies ran out because Katrina's effects lasted much longer than they'd anticipated. So in case of a disaster of Katrina's magnitude--or, in the new normal, a terrorist attack--the government should have a way to help when private citizens' efforts and those of states and communities fall short. Each candidate should be asked how he or she feels this country should prepare for and deal with future major disasters as well as how he or she will manage Katrina (and Rita, Wilma, and other storm) recovery.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):