In one sense, this debate was like all the others. Nothing memorable happened, which in the long run helps Hillary Clinton, who continues to put in competent, if passionless, mistake-free performances. The star performer of the evening was Tim Russert, whose probing "Meet the Press" type questions elicited more information and disputes between the candidates than any of the previous efforts by other hosts. (Maybe he should be the candidate in 2012.)

Though there were exchanges that drew distinctions between the various candidates and Hillary, no one really went after her (save Russert). Barack Obama was the same as he has been before, which is the identical pose that has gotten him into a position where he's now far closer to the pack than he is to the front-runner. He needs more passion and more vision if he's ever to make a move and distinguish himself from the field. He's calm and reasoned to a fault and it's no longer helping him.

Of the rest, John Edwards did the best at stressing his own themes, offering a populist alternative (save for his over-the-top defensiveness when Russert asked about the haircut and other missteps). Joe Biden also showed leadership by - surprise! - actually answering the questions. If voters are looking for an alternative to the Clinton-Obama race currently framed by the press, they may find an opening. But in the end, these multi-candidate debates make it very difficult for any one candidate to shine or make a move and, alas, no one did - except the moderator.

Still, it would be nice for future debates if Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel decided to take a few months off.