I have to admit that I missed the Democratic Presidential hopefuls debate last night; I was in the throes of reviewing Plato's "Apology of Socrates," where Socrates is on trial for upsetting the status quo with his questions--he says that he has been ttrying to find someone wiser than he and concludes he can't because he alone knows that he doesn't know things but the others even believe they are experts outside their professions. Along with "Apology" I was looking at Erasmus' "Praise of Folly." Here the goddess Folly argues how important she is to people by being the origin of all madness, which lessens human anxiety when we can laugh at fools. Folly also points out that all people suffer forms of madness or are foolish at times. I find these more enlightening than the "madness" of what profession politicians say after years of rehearsal at "knowing" the answers to our questions. From what I gather on the Internet, not much was really covered last night--the "real" news is how each candidate's team put the spin on the outcome. From MSNBC I have noted how each candidate "really" did.

Mike Gravel, former Sen. of Alaska, told reporters, "I've been blanked out by the media," but seemed to think that his debate performance had broken him into the big time. Gravel may be this season's Howard Dean.

"If he had more time I think he could have expanded more on some of his ideas," said Rep. Xavier Becerra, D- Calif. there to spin for Senator Chris Dodd.

Strategist "Mudcat" Saunders of the John Edwards campaign complained that, "There weren't enough questions about economic fairness."

Steve Murphy, a consultant with the New Mexico Governor Richardson campaign declred, "Bill Richardson alone among the major candidates running on the Democratic side is for withdrawing all of our troops from Iraq. There is a very clear distinction between him and all the other real contenders."

Representative Dennis Kucinich claimed victory, saying "I was able to demonstrate a clear difference between myself and my colleagues from the Senate who voted for the war."

From the camp of Senator Barak Obama came the line that Obama "looked strong and confident."

However, one former Republican congressional staffer, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said, "Obama bombed, he was flat. He seemed so unsure about his answers. Hillary was very disciplined; she seemed aiming at the general election audience."

And that is how it "really" was.