More Dim Debate Reaction, Hillary Bombs Something?

What, and it wasn't in the testicle lockbox? The Politco has analysis on the Dim, er uh, Dem Debate. It appears Hillary had shades of Shrillary:

When Hillary Clinton has a bad night, she really has a bad night.

In a debate against six Democratic opponents at Drexel University here Tuesday, Clinton gave the worst performance of her entire campaign.

It was not just that her answer about whether illegal immigrants should be issued drivers’ licenses was at best incomprehensible and at worst misleading.

It was that for two hours she dodged and weaved, parsed and stonewalled.

And when it was over, both the Barack Obama and John Edwards campaigns signaled that in the weeks ahead they intend to hammer home a simple message: Hillary Clinton does not say what she means or mean what she says.

And she gave them plenty of ammunition Tuesday night.

Asked whether she still agrees with New York Governor Eliot Spitzer’s plan to give drivers licenses to illegal immigrants, Clinton launched into a long, complicated defense of it.

But when Chris Dodd attacked the idea a moment later, Clinton quickly said: “I did not say that it should be done.”

NBC’s Tim Russert, one of the debate moderators, jumped in and said to her: “You told (a) New Hampshire paper that it made a lot of sense. Do you support his plan?”You know, Tim,” Clinton replied, “this is where everybody plays ‘gotcha.’ ”

John Edwards immediately went for the jugular. “Unless I missed something,” he said, “Senator Clinton said two different things in the course of about two minutes. America is looking for a president who will say the same thing, who will be consistent, who will be straight with them.”

Barack Obama added: “I was confused (by) Senator Clinton's answer. I can't tell whether she was for it or against it. One of the things that we have to do in this country is to be honest about the challenges that we face.”

Barry, what Shrillary will do is look to see how much the ChiComms gave her and then make a decision that benefits them.

Earlier, when Clinton was asked whether she had made one statement on Social Security publicly and a conflicting answer privately, she ducked the question, saying she believed in “fiscal responsibility.”

Fiscal responsibility to a democrat means raid, raid, raid. Would you mind going into specifics, or is it a super secret plan, like Kerry's to get us out of Iraq four years ago?

And when Russert asked her if she would make public certain communications between herself and President Clinton when she was first lady, she responded weakly: “Well, that’s not my decision to make.”

Perhaps just as bad was her general tone and demeanor. All of her opponents seemed passionate about one issue or another. But Clinton seemed largely emotionless and detached, often just mouthing rehearsed answers from her briefing book.

Gosh, sounds about like her bedroom performance, given that Bill had/has such a wandering eye.

Anyway, guess who is getting the blame from the Clinton camp? TIM RUSSERT! Yep, it is Tim Russert's fault. From Drudge:

CLINTON INNER-CIRCLE BLAME 'UNFAIR' MODERATOR TIM RUSSERT. 'HE BORDERED ON THE UNPROFESSIONAL,' TOP HILLARY ADVISER CHARGES. 'HE BROKE DEBATE RULES AND WAS BELLIGERENT'..

Yes, he must have been consorting with Karl Rove and Michelle Malkin again....Damn that VRWC! How dare he not just annoint you queen. Give me a break. This woman does not have the qualifications, nor the demeanor to be President. She shouldn't even be dogcatcher.