Third Party & Independents Archives

David:

A couple of things I noticed (and one of the newsies commented on it also), there is something about Obama that just torques McCain’s jaws. He was clenching his teeth, squinting his eyes and putting a goofy pained smile on his face while listening to Obama. It looked painful to me anyway.

I also thought Obama was more forthcoming about mentioning when they agreed than McCain was, and gave McCain credit for his stance on some things. The reverse never happened. I thought Obama much more diplomatic and more able to see nuance instead of the black and white attitude of McCain. Just quick thoughts. I would like to watch it again, but hope to catch the others.

It was funny that Biden came on for the after discussion but Palin was noticeably absent, Guiliani representing the ticket.

I think that is telling.

David,

I agree with your analysis. After all the posturing they both of them made over the past few days, neither Mccain nor Obama had much to say on the economy. When Lehrer went after them about how the economic crisis would affect their presidencies, both of them fell back on talking points about spending and taxes.

A few other points…
Like the convention speeches, Both of them sounded much better then Bush and Kerry did in ‘04. Unlike Bush and Kerry, McCain and Obama don’t have such a disdain for each other. We heard “John” and “Senator Obama” instead of “my opponent” and “this President.”

McCain and Obama were able to go after each other a bit more because of the format (another improvement to the debates) but they were able to keep it civil.

But we didn’t hear anything new from either of them. There were no Regan-esq winning statements of Ford-esq loosing gaffes. I don’t think either one of them won or lost many voters tonight.

womanmarine, I agree, overall, McCain appeared to be more on the defensive. Despite tonight’s topic being his strong suit. His internal polling numbers must be telling him something we don’t yet see.

MSNBC is reporting that McCain called the President of Pakistan by the wrong name…..haven’t found verification yet, though.

The Traveler, yes, I don’t think either changed many voter’s minds or converted independent’s to their side with tonight’s debate, either.

The fun is going to start with the next debate. As much as I like Sarah Palin, there is much potential for gaffes from both veep candidates. Even so, historically speaking, veep debates don’t have much effect on elections. I think the election will be won or lost on the final two presidential debates.

Are the people who support BHO really interested in ramping up in Afghanistan after ramping down in Iraq? OBL is most likely in Pakistan, or possibly even Kashmir.

BHO had the advantage of having more natural looking makeup, but the double screen shots were bad for him. JMcC just looks really old. Reagan looked young by comparison with a depressed Carter.

There are certain things that stand out from previous debates, i.e., Nixon’s ashen face against Kennedy in 60, Ford’s struggle with Poland, Bentson’s seizure of Quayle’s not being Jack Kennedy, Reagan’s snipe about Mondale’s age, etc., but I don’t think debates have much influence on voters. Pundits focus on debates a lot, so some voters may be swayed by that. The media tries to guide voters in certain ways by talking down or up about who ‘won’ a particular debate…but, when you get right down to it, there hasn’t really been a debate since Lincoln/Douglas. All in modern times have been staged dog-and-pony-shows.

I watched the ‘debate’ this evening, and all I came away with was each candidate will only speak their own ‘talking points’ no matter what subject is on the table. I don’t blame them for that because any deviation from that and the media is all over them…again it seems the media selects our president every four years…sometimes I forget why I go to the poles. Katie or Brian or one of the others will actually tell many Americans who to vote for, and like sheep, that many will follow their advice. I don’t think the ‘talking heads’ hold much sway over voters…they influence each other more with their slash and burn positions more than they influence voters.

I was a little disappointed in Obama tonight…I expected very little from McCain, and he delivered as expected, but I had wanted Obama to be a better debater than he showed…perhaps my expectations were too high???

McCain is such a ‘little’ person…and, I’m NOT talking about his size, I’m talking about his merits as a human being. He left his humaness in the Hanoi Hilton. He really is small minded and petty. That came through more strongly than his astutness as a debater…

Just a few musings…

My own take on the debate:

Obama was way more specific and gave more points. Not sure why you think McCain did. After all, his points on foreign policy were the exact same ones the GOP has been dishing for the past eight years — and as we all know, they’re totally undiplomatic and horribly ineffective. The war in Iraq is still a complete mistake — one that we’re throwing way too much money at unnecessarily — and the surge hasn’t brought the GOP a victory. McCain isn’t fooling the majority there.

Personally, I thought McCain came across like an arrogant old bastard sighing and smirking the way he did. That may play to his base, but I doubt it does to anyone else. He looked enraged at one point when Obama ticked off those three things he’d been totally wrong about.

For a person my age, McCain was giving off a Get Off My Lawn/Abe Simpson vibe a good part of the time:

One trick is to tell em stories that don’t go anywhere - like the time I caught the ferry over to Shelbyville. I needed a new heel for my shoe, so, I decided to go to Morganville, which is what they called Shelbyville in those days. So I tied an onion to my belt, which was the style at the time. Now, to take the ferry cost a nickel, and in those days, nickels had pictures of bumblebees on ‘em. “Give me five bees for a quarter,” you’d say. Now where were we? Oh yeah - the important thing was I had an onion on my belt, which was the style at the time. They didn’t have white onions because of the war. The only thing you could get was those big yellow ones…

I noticed Obama smile slightly a few times when McCain went into Abe Simpson mode…

Talking about Reagan and reaching back into the past might work for the oldsters out there, but not for me. The POW thing was pathetic and shameless. He cares nothing about the troops despite his pandering claims and those in the military know this. I sense that anyone who is middle aged or younger and who has been keeping up with how crapily the GOP has been waging their wars, and who is currently watching as our financial futures and those of our children are being utterly destroyed, (thanks mostly to the actions of the Republican Party) — well, we aren’t likely to be impressed or reassured by most of what McCain had to say.

Did you notice how the man who graduated at the bottom of his class said to Obama, who graduated at the top of his “he doesn’t understand” a whole bunch of times? He also said “he’s a bit naive” once. This doesn’t fool me, and I doubt he fools too many others with this. Again, maybe that will appeal to older people who automatically think that anyone younger than themselves can be automatically written off.

McCain was sarcastic and didn’t care about purposely lying about and mischaracterizing Obama’s statements and positions — but of course that’s nothing new.

Womanmarine,
I noticed that too, the body language expressed by McCain towards Obama. McCain really seems to dislike him. I don’t know what McCain’s hash is with Obama. Someone counted, and Obama expressed agreement with McCain seven or eight times. McCain could not bring himself to say anything like that, just that Obama did not understand. It’s a subtext that shows what kind of presidents each would be.

I thought both candidates did well, and it was pretty much a tie. Both are experienced debaters, and both know their lines from the campaign trail. I’ve heard both on tv before, and neither said anything surprising. The polls seem to give Obama an edge, but I’m not sure that’s anything other than partisanship.

The Traveler
Get out the popcorn! The October 2nd debate will be the most interesting and potentially amusing of the political season. Biden is notorious for his gaffes. When he was nominated, you could almost hear a collective sigh among Democrats. Biden is experienced, smart, articulate, and an able campaigner, and all in all a good VP pick; he is also a gaffe machine, and his nomination meant enduring the inevitable…

Palin, however, is truly in trouble. Unlike McCain, Obama, and Biden, she does not have expererience with high pressure debates or campaigning on the stump. She doesn’t know her lines- or maybe worse, she knows some of them, but she doesn’t know what her lines mean. Palin has the advantage in the battle of expectations, because expectations don’t get any lower.

She might do all right if she can avoid the style of tonight’s debate at all costs. She must avoid engaging Biden directly, and she must avoid anything freestyle. Of course, Biden will go at her and seek ways to force her away from rote answers. It should be pretty darn funny.

For me, the most significant thing about the debate was the proof that people should be getting their news from Jim Lehrer on PBS, not some corporate suckups working for Disney or Rupert Morlock.

Almost forgot to comment on this aspect of the debate:
McCain did not look over at Obama AT ALL. He loves to go on about how he has tried to work across the aisle, but he couldn’t even look at his opponent for the presidency straight in the eye once during this debate.
Obama did look at McCain, and frequently did address him directly.

McCain’s inability to look at Obama was very telling to me. I see three possibilities.
Either McCain hates Obama.
Or he is intimidated by him.
Or perhaps he is actually ashamed of how dishonestly he has dealt with a truly decent man who has tried his level best to run the clean, respectful campaign that he himself promised, but couldn’t manage to run?

>For me, the most significant thing about the debate was the proof that people should be getting their news from Jim Lehrer on PBS, not some corporate suckups working for Disney or Rupert Morlock.
Posted by: ohrealy at September 27, 2008 12:41 AM

ohreally,

Wow! Something we can agree on…Jim is one of the few top drawer casters in the business…damned shame he’s not where more folks can appreciate him, but then, if he worked for Murdock, et al, he’d have to toe the line just like those other wimps.

Yes, please verify if McCain misspoke a name. That will make everyone forget Obama’s non-existent world experience.
One thing that has been verified is that Obama used Kissinger’s name while telling a lie. Kissinger doesn’t seem too happy about that either.

Other than that, I noticed in between all the “uh’s”, Obama seemed to agree with McCain a lot. Also, I thought this was supposed to be a cake walk for Obama? So why did McCain have him on the defensive most of the night. And when asked what he will cut because of the current situation I think he added a few give away’s. Empty suit, big spending liberal. Obama may need to figure out a way to get Hillary on the ticket.

Andy,
“… I thought this was supposed to be a cake walk for Obama?”

The polls seem to indicate that is correct. And like I said, I thought it was a tie.

“So why did McCain have him on the defensive most of the night.”

McCain was aggressive, that’s true; at the same time, he wouldn’t look Obama in the eye. He seemed stressed (which is understandable). Obama, on the other hand, seemed somewhat relaxed in spite of all the pressure, and confident enough to agree when McCain made a good point. Obama was willing to look McCain in the eye and address him directly, which McCain could not do.

I think that is the heart of the debate. In terms of content, both McCain and Obama did pretty well. The polls show Obama won in a cake walk not because of anything either one of them said, but because in a side by side comparison of style and tone and demeanor, Obama demonstrated that he is the better leader.

Fox poll showed McCain won 85% to 15%…it’s true but I’m kidding. Not that I put much into polls but how reliable are these polls taken minutes/hours after the fact?

I did notice McCain not looking at Obama. Once he looked over with a smile after delivering a zinger, almost like “what do you think about that”. I think it’s mostly him trying to portray a superior presence for the job at hand. And yeah he’s stressed he’s been working, this is his first day back campaigning…when’s Obama going back to Hawaii for another vaca?

“I will not set the visitor’s schedule before I’m elected, I don’t even have my own seal yet.” That was a good line.

Where is Governor Palin? She is losing because she isn’t showing up. She could not do worse imo.

This one was a draw. However, I think McCain planted a seed of sorts with undecides by showing experience on a range of matters.

Why the debate was even this important at this stage of the game is beyond me though.

Barry should be 15% ahead and coasting to victory but instead, he is in a fight with a pit bull.

The Barry crew’s position won’t change and neither will the McCain crew’s position change based on that debate.

There wasn’t a “gottcha” moment here.

As I have said all along, when the Republican machine starts carpet bombing Barry the last couple weeks, THEN the fun will start.

I have a feeling that we are gonna learn a whole lot more about Emil Jones, Bill Ayers, and Mr. Resko very very soon.

Even though Barry is 4 inches taller, McCain still connected on some decent jabs.

Draw.

Wow! From the Drudge Report….He has McCain the winner…

MCCAIN

65% 140,224

OBAMA

32% 69,589

NEITHER

2% 4,850

Total Votes: 214,663

Eagle - with the kind of people that go to the drudge report, I wouldn’t put too much stock in that poll. MSNBC’s had Obama 79% (59,159) McCain 21% (15,726).

I think that the first debate was pretty much a draw. McCain kept his temper in check - though you could see that he was steaming a few times. McCain couldn’t paint Obama as risky.

McCain tried to be aggressive but was kind of wimpy about it as he wouldn’t even look into his opponents eyes. Obama missed a lot of opportunities to land some haymakers on McCain. McCain unsuccessfully tried the “you don’t understand” stuff but Obama always responded showing how well he understands.

This debate was close enough that you will think the candidate you agree with won. No knockouts. The one edge I would give to Obama other than being right on the issues was that this was supposed to be McCain’s strong suit and Obama more than held his own.

The next two will be interesting. The VP debate will be a Palin train wreck if she can’t do any better than the pathetic answers she gave Katie Couric.

Pat Buchanan on MSNBC this morning - If you score it on points it’s a close win for McCain though he thought that it was a clear victory for Obama as he showed that he was tough enough and knowledgeable enough to be president. Yeah I know Buchanan is a raving liberal but …

I don’t understand how anyone could vote for McCain, but what scares me most is his plan to cut spending in Washington… cut out the earmarks! That’s like someone trying to save the household budget by trimming soda pop from their spending. Fine, that’ll get you 1% of the way there. What a joke! AND he tried to pin the budget mess on Obama.

Sorry boys and girls, the fair and balanced Fox News (hahaha) poll and the Drudge poll notwithstanding, the all-important independents and undecideds gave this one to Obama… big time.

McCain and the Republicans in general should do themselves a favor and lose the smug, smart-ass looks and comments. Every time McCain gave his little condesending remarks and looks at Obama, you could see the independent line from the focus group go negative. Their own base is the only ones who think this stuff is good. Recall the recent Republican convention… making fun of Obama is not going to work if the people are able to see Obama and make up their own minds. It only serves to make the Guilianis, Palins, and McCains look small minded. It may have taken awhile but GWB did lose that smug little smirk of his. You can fool some of the people some of the time….

Right now, McCain is behind. With the Palin pick being increasingly seen as a mistake and the “suspension” being seen largely as a political stunt, McCain needed a big win to change the momentum. He’s currently at risk of being seen as preferring “Maverickness” to stability.

For Obama, the big goal he had was to appear presidential and knowledgeable. The concerns about his inexperience and “otherness” are still strong, so he needed to show that he was intelligent, ready, serious, and presidential.

I thought both looked largely ready to be President. Even if Obama got under McCain’s skin a bit more, neither had a home run and neither had a major blunder. That plays much better for Obama - he needed just to show that he was in the same ballpark of competence on foreign policy as McCain, and he did it. McCain needed to show that he’s more competent and not erratic. He succeeded on the second, but not on the first.

When it comes down to it this election is about old vs new. Do we continue down the same path that is letting us down or do we pursue new avenues of approach. As I see it, tonight McCain offered nothing more than an understanding of current policy. He failed to recognize or admit that it is flawed. In this he did not gain any ground nor did he lose any ground other than maybe with those of us who see a great need for new direction.

We know that on the other hand Obama believes in and presents a new avenue of direction. An avenue of re-prioritizing and and an approach of diplomacy before striking. In this Obama won with those who are looking for change. He held his own and presented himself as a capable leader with equal knowledge of policy and situations. I think he also showed better in the personality department. You could see that McCain was really fighting rage on a few occasions. Plus McCain would not look up or at Obama when presenting his spin on half truths. This is what some people do when they know they are being less than honest. It showed with McCain.

By my reckoning at this point this as I mentioned earlier still stands at old vs new. Which does the voter want. I think that right now the biggest disadvantage McCain has is Palin. If she can not prove to be anything other than a hockey mom (and I am being very kind here). Advantage Obama.

I’m a little confused; did we watch the same debate?

Several of you have spoken about the smile on McCains face, some even calling it a “smug, smart-ass look”. I saw a split screen of BHO with a arrogant condescending smile on his face every time McCain drove home a point. BHO was looking at Lehrer with one finger up in the air, looking like a school kid about to ask the question, “may I go to the bathroom”.

It has also been mentioned several times, that McCain would not look BHO in the eyes. I have my doubts that McCain was intimidated or afraid of BHO and to say that is ludicrous. McCain was not on the stage to be BHO’s friend. BHO wanted to lull McCain into thinking they were buddies to the point where he called Senator McCain, “John”. On the other hand, McCain kept it professional and called BHO, “Senator Obama”.

Eight times BHO agreed with McCain and yet some of you believe McCain should have returned the favor by agreeing with BHO. Why debate, if they are both going to stand and agree with each other.

McCain was easy on BHO. He could have hit him much harder on a lot of issues. I am no debater and no politician, but I was throwing jabs at BHO, while watching it myself. Any further attacks by McCain would have been viewed as racial attacks.

I think McCain got his point across that BHO is inexperienced and a typical tax and spend liberal.

Today the facts will come out on some of the lies BHO told. He says these things so many times on the campaign trail that I believe he actually has started to believe them. From 95% of taxpayers, to his statement about talking to terrorists with no pre-conditions, and his statement about Kissinger (who has already denied BHO’s statement).

McCains answers were clear and crisp and BHO stuttered and stammered. Which is typical, when he doesn’t have a teleprompter in front of him.

BHO’s goal was to provoke McCain into showing a temper, which he did not do.

When it comes to the economy, I am amazed that BHO could stand there and say he warned everyone of these economic problems and CEOs should have their bonuses controlled and yet he has Raines and Johnson as part of his campaign. Both of which left freddie and fannie with millions.

As far as McCain’s looks, I thought he looked healthier than any time before, of course makeup helps. He was energetic and did not look tired. For a man of 72 years, he has kept up a very strenuous schedule for several months. Did someone say BHO was going on another vacation?

It is clear that the Dems are trying to block drilling for oil. Their latest bill allowed drilling in areas where there is very little oil and blocking states from any of the revenue. Harry Reid even tried recently to slip ruling in a bill that would block all offshore drilling. The american people (by 70+% are in favor of drilling) and yet BHO came out with the same old liberal talking points, “you can’t drill your way out of this problem”.

BHO looked like a man who had crammed for an exam the night before. He had all the talking point answers, but delivered them with no conviction.

These are just my thoughts:

“I’m a little confused; did we watch the same debate?”

Probably Oldguy, perhaps most of us had our partisan glasses off and the kool aid in the frig, if you try that the next time you might see what others see.

“These are just my thoughts:

Posted by: Oldguy at September 27, 2008 10:00 AM”

Yeah we see your worn out talking points and misinformation from to much Faux , thanks for confirming your actual thoughts.

The debate was basically a draw and our choice is guns and butter, more of the same McCain or butter and guns, hope for the future Obama.

oldguy

We all viewed the same debate. We all were looking for pluses for the people we support. Fact is little changed here. Obama did quite well. McCain did quite well considering his age and obvious health issues. McCain needed to knock it out of the park. He did not. Obama merely needed to exhibit and demonstrate that he has knowledge, recognition, understanding and an ability to react quickly in a responsible matter. In other words he needed to demonstrate an ability to lead. He did that. As I see it and I think just about everyone except perhaps Faux news and dimbaugh would agree those who support McCain will most likely continue to do so. Those who are looking to move away from the past were looking for Obama to convince them that he can be a credible leader. I think it is very obvious that he did exactly that last night.

There are voters who will be looking to FactCheck to see who they will vote for. Here are the highlights of FactCheck’s take on the debate:

* Obama said McCain adviser Henry Kissinger backs talks with Iran “without preconditions,” but McCain disputed that. In fact, Kissinger did recently call for “high level” talks with Iran starting at the secretary of state level and said, “I do not believe that we can make conditions.” After the debate the McCain campaign issued a statement quoting Kissinger as saying he didn’t favor presidential talks with Iran.

* Obama denied voting for a bill that called for increased taxes on “people” making as little as $42,000 a year, as McCain accused him of doing. McCain was right, though only for single taxpayers. A married couple would have had to make $83,000 to be affected by the vote, and anyway no such increase is in Obama’s tax plan.

* McCain and Obama contradicted each other on what Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen said about troop withdrawals. Mullen said a time line for withdrawal could be “very dangerous” but was not talking specifically about “Obama’s plan,” as McCain maintained.

* McCain tripped up on one of his signature issues – special appropriation “earmarks.” He said they had “tripled in the last five years,” when in fact they have decreased sharply.

* Obama claimed Iraq “has” a $79 billion surplus. It once was projected to be as high as that. It’s now down to less than $60 billion.

* McCain repeated his overstated claim that the U.S. pays $700 billion a year for oil to hostile nations. Imports are running at about $536 billion this year, and a third of it comes from Canada, Mexico and the U.K.

* Obama said 95 percent of “the American people” would see a tax cut under his proposal. The actual figure is 81 percent of households.

* Obama mischaracterized an aspect of McCain’s health care plan, saying “employers” would be taxed on the value of health benefits provided to workers. Employers wouldn’t, but the workers would. McCain also would grant workers up to a $5,000 tax credit per family to cover health insurance.

* McCain misrepresented Obama’s plan by claiming he’d be “handing the health care system over to the federal government.” Obama would expand some government programs but would allow people to keep their current plans or chose from private ones, as well.

* McCain claimed Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower had drafted a letter of resignation from the Army to be sent in case the 1944 D-Day landing at Normandy turned out to be a failure. Ike prepared a letter taking responsibility, but he didn’t mention resigning.

I thought it was a good debate and for the most part, they had similar views on policy but differing on how they would implement it. I liked Obama’s view on changing America’s image in the world, which McCain did not allude to, something that desperately needs to be done.

On a second point, I think American’s should understand the Israel problem and our connection to it. McCain is by and far so pro-Israel that they apparently can do no wrong in his eyes, Obama is a way more diplomatic on this front in that he sees Israel for what it is, an extremely powerful nation in a religious and political hotbed.

Take this from a guy who’s been to Syria, Israel dosen’t need the US’s help, at all. Maybe 45 years ago they did. Not anymore, they’re ppossibly the most self sufficient nation until you reach northwest to Turkey or Greece. And the fact that they flout their military and political power over their neighbors, who in turn politicize that into a fanatical need to “remove” Israel, the situation gets worse. From that point, we get tied down to Israel from the “golden child” syndrome, where all who threaten her are evil and she’s the good guy.

It would help America’s position in the Middle East, and the world to just cut off our brother relationship with Israel and treat them just like France or Germany, while keeping rogue nations and terrorist groups in check.

Both candidates went into the debate with expectations of how they would do, especially from the other side.

Judging from all that was being said by the left, on this blog, just a few days ago, I had very low expectations about McCain. People just ranted about the cowardly McCain not showing up. I even stated that if McCain goes to the debate, all the talk was moot. Wasted typing and talking.

Guess what, he did, and that just goes to prove most on the left have no idea what they are talking about.

They were wrong 3 days ago and they are wrong today.

Jon, that shift in Middle East policy would very much increase America’s flexibility and enhance our mediator role in the future.

Excellent commentary and great food for thought and discussion.

olduy

Judging from all that was being said by the left, on this blog, just a few days ago, I had very low expectations about McCain. People just ranted about the cowardly McCain not showing up. I even stated that if McCain goes to the debate, all the talk was moot. Wasted typing and talking.

A few days ago McCain put his campaign on hold and said he would not attend the debate. What the hell are people supposed to think? He took an opportunity to grandstand. It really did nothing for him. Maybe he hoped Obama would follow suit giving McCain some sort of perceived advantage by way of being more authoritative. Obama did not even for a second capitulate. It could also be argued that just perhaps McCain thought it best that Obama not be allowed 90 minutes of free town hall forum time. Who really knows other than McCain and his handlers. All the rest of us can do is speculate as to motivations. At any rate it is over and the results are what they are.

Oldguy:

They weren’t wrong. McCain tried to back out of the debate, Obama wouldn’t so McCain pretty much had to show up.

jon, David

It would help America’s position in the Middle East, and the world to just cut off our brother relationship with Israel and treat them just like France or Germany, while keeping rogue nations and terrorist groups in check.

This is something that has always interested me. I have often had the same thoughts. But just being a novice with regard to history I am hesitant to jump in. However I would love to see an article on this in another thread.

oldguy
concerning fannie and freddie - what about McCain’s campaign manager who was taking money from freddie mac as recently as august - when we are talking conflict of interest McCain has more to explain than Obama.

McCain has absolutely no credibility on energy independence. What has he done in the last 26 years other than vote against every alternative energy bill that came up for a vote. Sorry, Obama is right, we can’t drill our way out of this problem. When we produce only 3% of the worlds oil and use 25% there is no way that the math works out. So if we increase our domestic production we might get up to 3.5% that still leaves us woefully short. Just because the American public is in favor of it doesn’t mean it’s a good idea. I suspect the reason the public is behind it is because the pro-drilling crowd hasn’t been honest as to exactly what that means - people think that we would actually see that oil when in fact it is unlikely that we would - it would go to the highest bidder on the world market enriching only the oil companies. If the GOP had listened to Jimmy Carter we would have been well on our way or even totally independent from foreign oil now, wouldn’t have started a stupid war in Iraq, probably wouldn’t have had troops in the middle east ticking off Al Qaeda and spurring 9-11. But no, they laughed at him - Reagan took the solar panels off of the White House roof as one of his first acts as president to show the oil companies that he was on their side. Well, are our soldiers in Iraq laughing? Are the families of 9-11 victims laughing? They laughed at Al Gore and called him “Ozone Man” when it turns out he was right. Now our ice caps are melting, sea levels are rising, and important species in our food chain are disappearing. Now we are supposed to believe that the GOP is going to lead us to energy independence? Don’t think so. There is nothing about McCain that leads me to believe that he is serious about energy independence.

Oh yeah, I forgot - he a maverick, he bucks his party … NOT!

I thought Obama took it too easy on him about Iraq and the so-called “war on terror.” He even said that McCain was against torture when he hasn’t done anything other than go along with Bush’s use of torture - though he did admit last night that we did torture people (a war crime) - at least a start.

McCain tried to paint him as inexperienced and if you consider saying the word “inexperienced” counts then I give you the point. If you consider that every time he tried Obama showed how much he knows about the issues and how wrong McCain is - then no point given.

I also disagree that Obama sounded like he had crammed for the test. That is your VP candidate who gives incoherent, pathetic answers littered with random talking points from trying to cram too much information into a mediocre intellect.

My compliments to all on Watchblog -

We are sometimes contentious, sometimes ready to go for the throat in a literary manner…but I look on the thread above and see (with few exceptions) simply objective statements. It’s under such conditions that we can truly learn from each other.

I got to see less than a half-hour of the debate, but I must admit McCain was doing better than I thought he would. I did see that Obama was ‘trying to reach across the aisle’ and that McCain was not…but that didn’t really register until I read the comments above.

ohrealy - “Rupert Morlock” - gotta smile at that one….

Glenn:

Absolutely. I believe most of the posters to this thread watched the debate with an open mind, and are posting without much partisanship. I know that’s what I tried to do.

I wish we could all take an honest (unpartisan) look at the candidates.

David, jon - I agree about our relationship with Israel. They are an ally but they aren’t perfect either. As long as we are perceived by the rest of the Middle East as carrying Israel’s water then we will have limited credibility as a mediator. Israel is more than capable of taking care of themselves they no longer need an older brother standing behind them. Middle East history is the one area where I logged few hours as an undergrad or a grad student so my understanding of the issues are more related to the colonial powers.

Glenn - I agree - I still grade the debate a draw other than my partisan biases. No knockouts but some good punches landed by both sides.

> It would help America’s position in the Middle East, and the world to just cut off our brother relationship with Israel and treat them just like France or Germany, while keeping rogue nations and terrorist groups in check.

This is something that has always interested me. I have often had the same thoughts. But just being a novice with regard to history I am hesitant to jump in. However I would love to see an article on this in another thread.
Posted by: RickIL at September 27, 2008 11:55 AM

RickIL,

I doubt if we can divorce ourselves from Israel for one reason…if it wasn’t for us (Harry Truman), there would be no Israel. How can we justify divorcing our own child?

Israel may eventually wish to separate from us, as do most fledgling children from their parents, but unless Israel become more delinquent in their actions, we really can’t justify separation from it…

The debate was a draw…but I’m still disappointed in Obama for not jumping on McCain, every time McCain touted his foreign travels and experience. All ‘O’ had to say was…if your travels and foreign experience is so important, why did you select a running mate, who is a heartbeat away, with even less of it than me. That would have been on the order of, “You’re no Jack Kennedy”…

Careful with those thoughts RickIl, they kicked a talk show guy off the air in Denver for asking the same thing a few years back.

I’ll let you in on a little secret, the world is still laughing at Jimmy Carter. To my shame I voted for the clown. It was at that time in history, when unemployment was very high, interest rates were in the 20’s, americans were held captive by the same radicals that BHO wants to break bread with, and america was looked at as weak. So much for Jimmy, and now he is just a loose cannon trying to justify his existance.

It does’nt matter where the oil comes from, if it is placed on the market, the price will drop. Those of us in the midwest, flyover country don’t have the pleasure of riding scateboards or bicycles to get around. Our transportation runs on fuel, and we get our supplies from trucks that run on fuel. Until the car manufacturers can build affordable alternative vehicles, and until we can pull in a station that sells these alternative fuels, I guess we are stuck with oil.

Unless it is the goal of the left to completely shut down the country! Which I believe is the goal.

All ‘O’ had to say was…if your travels and foreign experience is so important, why did you select a running mate, who is a heartbeat away, with even less of it than me. That would have been on the order of, “You’re no Jack Kennedy”…

I felt the same way a few times. But I think that emanates more from my inability to contain emotion. About half way or so through last night it dawned on me that cloning McCains vindictive side would not do well in portraying a person who can reason while under attack. Nor would it present the image of someone who is able to communicate well. One sided communication generally leads no where good as the last eight years have shown.

j2t2

Careful with those thoughts RickIl, they kicked a talk show guy off the air in Denver for asking the same thing a few years back.

It is good for the world that my thoughts are not in anyway allowed to influence it. :-)

oldguy

Unless it is the goal of the left to completely shut down the country! Which I believe is the goal.

Don’t be ridiculous. Everyone knows oil will be playing into this factor for a long time to come. What we want is a choreographed process which no longer allows it to be an obstacle to progress. A phasing down of need over time which will allow the U.S. and the rest of the world independence and choice. We can’t allow the influence of oil to interfere in that process. They want it that way because they do not care to share in profits. They also realize that the more of their product that is in storage the less demand there will be for alternatives. The problem is that if there is no clear need for alternatives the process will once again be put on a shelf until such time as we can no longer meet demand for oil. I, we, those of us who are looking long term solutions simply do not want to see the process stopped once again at the influence of oil. I personally have absolutely no problem with more drilling so long as we stay focused on moving away from it.

>Unless it is the goal of the left to completely shut down the country! Which I believe is the goal.
Posted by: Oldguy at September 27, 2008 12:49 PM

Old,

Yep, that’s exactly what we want alright…what a silly thing to say…All the additional drilling we can do would only increase the world supply by about 3 or 4 percent. If you get a Kroger Plus shopping card you can save that much on each gallon of gas right now, and save part of the planet from further rape. But, to steal your thunder…raping the planet is what you dudes on the right are after…right, Righty?

Let me be the first to say that the obvious missing element in this debate was:
A THIRD PARTY CANDIDATE!
Are there no third party candidates running in this race or are they being shut out completely this time?
Perhaps the media has done such a good job propping up Obama that they realize they don’t need a third party candidate to be a spoiler to get their glory boy in the white house.
I’m really very disheartened that, in a third party column, none of you have mentioned the fact there is no third party candidate presence in this campaign.
Perhaps Watchblog should have just two columns to represent the media lapdog positions the posters in this column have obviously taken.

Oldguy -

Have you watched the prices lately? Have you seen gas from where it was three years ago? Have you seen its effect on food and commodity prices? Do you really think it’s been less than four percent every year since 2001?

Do you really believe that?

If not, then who’s been lying to you? According to some - and I haven’t been able to find a truly reliable source yet - if the inflation rate is calculated in the same way it was during the Carter administration, the current rate of inflation would be about 11.6%.

Think about which claimed rate of inflation is more accurate the next time you go buy gas or shop for groceries….

http://www.seeingtheforest.com/archives/2008/04/inflation_is_11.htm

“John Williams, who spent more than two decades as an economic consultant to Fortune 500 companies, said the government figures understate the true rate of inflation.
According to Williams, if the government measured inflation based on pre-1982 methods, it would be running at 11.6 percent right now, or 7.3 percent using pre-1998 calculations.”

Please note that this convicts Clinton, too.

The verdict is in the pro’s have decided and the winner is:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/gradingthefirstpresidentialdebate

“Unless it is the goal of the left to completely shut down the country! Which I believe is the goal.”

Oldguy why don’t you think about putting the kool aid down and turn ther radio off? The nonsense your spouting only serves to show how blind obedience to the movement has left you unable to tell reality from far right fiction.

We’re in big trouble whoever the next President is.

In the mean-time, Congress is heaping another trillion dollars (or more, including INTEREST) in debt onto the already huge debt, which will delay the melt-down another year perhaps … long enough to get through the election and get re-elected. Cha Ching!

j2t2,

You are violating our rules in your last comment to Oldguy. Critique what he says, not him, or lose your privilege to participate here.

Some good commentary on the debate from Michael Seitzman

John McCain displayed himself for all to see as a deeply angry, petty man, locked in a blood-war somewhere deep in the rice paddies of his frustrated and confused mind. He personalizes every conflict to the point that he can’t even look at his opponent, as if by ignoring him he might be able to deny the man his dignity. What McCain doesn’t realize is that the only person who surrendered his dignity was the one who shamefully displayed contempt in a forum designed to promote civil discourse on the most important issues of the day. And those issues are far too important to all of us to be obfuscated by the kind of pettiness we hope to never see in our leaders. Those who aspire to lead us are supposed to be the best among us. They are supposed to transcend and rise above those they would hope to lead. McCain’s is the kind of behavior that wouldn’t even be acceptable in a high school debate, let alone one between candidates for the highest office in the land.

Ironically, the very thing the McCain campaign is now crowing about as an example of McCain’s victory — the fact that Obama granted his opponent the courtesy of pointing out the places where they agree — is the very quality of leadership that McCain continues to falsely claim as his own. “I have a record of reaching across the aisle,” is the repeated line. He claims to have made a career of putting “Country First,” yet we only see him engage in behavior that has divided this country for far too long, effectively putting country second and putting McCain First. If he truly endeavors to unify us, then the first thing he needs to do is to stop turning every disagreement into a battle between heroes and villains.

Watch Barack Obama in that debate and you see a man who is confident but not arrogant — hence the regular acknowledgment of his opponent when they agree. He is sure of himself, yet thoughtful in the way he explains his position. He is more than capable of being Commander In Chief, yet just as interested in being Diplomat In Chief. Standing on that podium next to a fading shadow of our past, Barack Obama rises as a clear signpost to our future.

McCain has reduced himself to being his own history book, more interested in listing the stamps on his passport and forcing our collective groans at every mention of his maverickness and his POW imprisonment, than he is in providing us a vision of any real future under his leadership. Never mind the new cold war John McCain promises us with our enemies, what about the one he promises to perpetuate with our fellow Americans? Ask yourself this question, can you even imagine that kind of mannerless, undiplomatic, insulting discourteousness from Barack Obama? Not a chance. Obama’s unwillingness to display anger may be something that his critics see as proof of his inability to win, but it happens to be the very quality that proves he can lead.

Glenn, he is not the only one. The keynote speaker of “When Greed turns to Fear” notes these fudging of the formulas by our government to keep horrible numbers by former calculations from showing up in the public media.

What is worse is that the government is not even keeping two sets of books like Capone did, one for the IRS and another to truly tell him what he is earning and who is skimming. Our government is building policy on their own false calculations, compounding the errors well into the future.

Weary Willie, you are not the first. You must have missed my comment yesterday.

Sorry about that, but the early bird gets the credit.

Oldguy I am sorry for critiquing you, please accept my apologies.

Managing Editor sorry I will curb my tongue.

I scored the debate a tie which goes to Obama since the subject was foreign policy.

oldguy -I never got the chance to vote for Carter was too young but I got to vote for a woman for VP already so I feel no pull to do so this time :)

It is highly unlikely that oil prices will do anything different if we even double our production since demand worldwide is going steadily up. China and India are going to more than use up any increased production from drilling offshore and in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. It won’t really make a dent.

No one is talking about shutting down the country just being realistic about the solutions. Drilling won’t really solve any problems and has an environmental cost too. I know that the drilling proponents have said that offshore drilling is safe but there were significant oil spills after Katrina and Rita and if there are more platforms in the Gulf it equals more spills when the Cat 5 hurricanes blow through. One sure way to make sure we don’t do anything about energy independence is to elect PALIN/mccain so the oil companies can continue writing our energy policy.

Keep laughing at Carter but he has a lot more credibility around the world than the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. If the GOP hadn’t laughed at his plans to explore alternative energy sources and made sure nothing was done in the intervening 30 years we wouldn’t be beholden to Middle Eastern countries for our energy. Several wars would have been averted and hundreds of thousands of people would be able to go home to their families tonight instead of being dead. I don’t find that funny at all.

Though if McCain wins I’m sure we’ll be in good hands with Sarah Palin in charge of energy policy she seems to have a good grasp of the issue. I would say she was at least as well versed on energy policy as she is in foreign policy so we should be ok.

I still haven’t heard what John McCain has done to move towards energy independence in his 26 years in the senate.

Some more good commentary from Robert Shrum

Barack Obama was crisp, reassuring and strong — in short, presidential, as he has been throughout the financial storm of the past two weeks. McCain was not as bad as he has been recently; but much of this debate was fought on what was supposed to be his high ground. As the encounter ended, Obama not only controlled the commanding heights of the economic issue — and he not only held his own on national security — but clearly passed the threshold as a credible commander-in-chief. McCain kept repeating that Obama doesn’t “understand.” But he clearly did. McCain made up no ground.

Btw, a note on McCain’s tendency to tell Obama “he doesn’t understand”: Did any of you catch how McCain said this to Obama, and then claimed that Pakistan was a “failed state” before President Musharraf came to power? That simply isn’t true. So it was an enormous mistake for McCain to have made — and it proved that he doesn’t have a real grasp of Pakistan’s history, and would therefore have a very poor understanding of that nation. This really stood out for me last night, because it is a very bad time for our president NOT to have such knowledge.

The worm to you, Mr. Remer with my apologies.
Did any others expand on your comment? Did anyone in the Third Party column acknowledge the absense of Third Party Candidates? Or did they continue to choke on the two candidates the media has been shoving down our throats for the last two years?

You know those two, don’t you? The two that aren’t going to change anything.

On the economy, both lost. Neither would respond to the repeated question by Jim Lehrer regarding spending cuts. Neither was willing to alienate any voters who may be receiving tax dollar benefits. Both were grossly dishonest with American voters regarding how they will deal with the deficits about to double with the bailout resolution.

VV, as I have said many times, McCain is a man whose knowledge and expertise lie in one field only, military history. World history? Not! Economics? Not! Constitutional history? Not! Sociology? Not! The NOT list is infinite.

Obama’s academic area of knowledge and expertise is in Constitutional Law. But, he has demonstrated some knowledge of economics, sociology, geography, foreign current events, grass roots development and organizing, (definitely), and speech writing. Then a long list of ‘Nots’, including no doubt, military history.

Still, the scale appears very tipped to Obama’s side. Obama is a man who is still learning volumes, while McCain’s knowledge can’t even keep current foreign affairs straight or up to date, as in knowing just who it was Iran was training and sending back into Iraq.

Oh, my bad. McCain is also well versed, and an expert in, torture. As if our president requires that expertise.

Craig, that seems to be how predominantly objective analysts are rating it too, including Gergens, Pat Buchannan, and Chris Matthews.

Reading comments with many saying how nice it would be to have watched the debate with a neutral eye. Of course, that’s nearly impossible to do, so we go into it with our own opinions already firm.
McCain looked very old and very tired, and comments have been made already that “he is tired”, “he has been campaigning”, or that he has been averting financial crises. Well, guess what folks……..that would only be one small portion of a Presidential resume’. If just the campaign process is going to debilitate him, what can we suppose actual duties would do?
I feel that he showed arrogance with a snotty twist. His smirks were captured by the cameras, for all to see. Obama remained pretty cool, didn’t seem to let McCain rattle him, but did get frustrated with some of his blatant misstatements.
Even those critics who found it difficult to score different than a tie, they did admit that it gave Obama the edge all around.
I am already wondering what grand scheme can be presented to waylay the VP debates to protect “Sooper Sarah” ?? That is going to be one entertaining time…..to say the least!

Megan Ortegas, a Republican strategist interviewed on MSNBC argues the debate last night was between a professor and a student, Obama being the student.

Anyone see an opening here against McCain? This is desperation at the height of folly. Do Republicans really want to go down this ‘student’ talking point rhetoric? This is akin to planting landmines without mapping them for the return trip.

Kissinger Backs Direct Talks ‘Without Conditions’ with Iran at Presidential level.

ABC News’ Rachel Martin Reports: Former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger today told an audience in Washington, DC that the U.S. should negotiate with Iran “without conditions” and that the next President should begin such negotiations at a high level.

The former Nixon and Ford U.S. Secretary of State early in the year indicated his belief that the U.S. should hold direct talks with Iran when speaking to Bloomberg Television.

Kissinger spoke at a CNN sponsored forum at George Washington University along with other former Secretaries of State Madeleine Albright, James Baker III, Warren Christopher, and Colin Powell. The leaders were asked to pinpoint the major challenges the next president will face around the world and to offer advice about how to handle those critical issues. The secretaries named the fight against terrorism, restoring America’s reputation abroad, re-building the country’s economic power, and global climate change as atop priority.

David:

I think we are not back to Obama’s election to loose.

David

Anyone see an opening here against McCain? This is desperation at the height of folly.

I have noticed for sometime this penchant by McCain to treat Obama as the student so to speak. I have wondered if it is intended or just the result of the ‘ol “been around the block a few times” syndrome. No one with a lot of seniority in any work environment wants to be upped by a newbie. At any rate if he pursues it I do believe it will backfire. McCains failure to acknowledge Obama’s ability and treat him with due respect will speak to his character and will not bode well for him. I think people will see it as a communication weakness, a character flaw that would inhibit his ability to listen and hear without bias.

Max, but, but, but, McCain has ‘known’ Kissinger for 35 years, Max. What the hell does Kissinger know about what he said? McCain knows what he wanted to hear and he told the world what he wanted to hear last night in the debate. Why are you trying to taint McCain’s wishful fantasies with facts and quotes.

Shame on you, man! Don’t you know there is an election to be stolen here with lies, distortions, and a touch of Alzheimer’s perhaps?

Craig, yep, I think we are.

Two reasons. Poll shows 52% of Americans now view Obama as best equipped to handle Iraq from here, compared to 47% for McCain. That was McCain’s last stand, and it has fallen.

Second reason is that ALL the polls are off by a 2 to 4% in Obama’s favor if the young registered voters turn out. They are a cell phone generation and few polls on them alone show a majority in favor of Obama. There numbers are not reflected in the polls.

Oh, yeah, and the third reason. Palin. She may have solidified the base, but the polls show she is rapidly becoming an albatross for McCain’s campaign amongst independent voters who just can’t see her stepping into control of the Oval Office if McCain kicks the mcBucket in office. Not to mention the potential onset of Alzheimer’s displayed by McCain last night in saying Pakistan was an unstable nation prior to Musharraf, and his complete lapse of memory regarding Kissinger’s words regarding high level talks with Iran without preconditions.

RickIl, Dana Bash, who has been following McCain’s every step, said, McCain rehearsed that debate extensively, especially the “Obama just doesn’t understand” routine, over and over.

The refusal to make eye contact with Obama and share some personal courtesies, and the Extremely Phone smiles as Obama repeatedly pointed out McCain’s having been wrong on his assessment of invading Iraq, pretty much communicated the falseness and hidden side of McCain that he rehearsed so hard to try to hide.

No ordinary American would stand their and smile while being told they were wrong, again and again, having their misstatements repeated to them in front of 42 million people. It felt and looked phony and demonstrated that McCain was hiding his real self from public view in order to get elected. It does not instill trust in those trying to make up their mind on the candidates.

David:

RickIl, Dana Bash, who has been following McCain’s every step, said, McCain rehearsed that debate extensively, especially the “Obama just doesn’t understand” routine, over and over.

Thanks for posting this, David. I had a hunch that might have been the case — because he used the line so darn many times. And good heavens, what an Giant Assh*le that makes John McCain!!! Sneering Belittlement as a preconceived debating tactic — designed to meet his strategic goal of beating Obama.
Oh but wait a second — Democrats aren’t supposed to know the difference between a tactic and a strategy according to John McCain, are we? No, he seems to expect us all to be about as brain-dead as his VP Haaakey-Maaam, aka The Lipstick-Pig.

VV, David

I was doing a little research into the vp debate and came across this little nugget of light hearted levity. It bought a little smile to my face and also a shake of the head in acknowledgment of just what I think Palin has bought to this race to date.

Joe’s one of the best-dressed vice presidents that we’ll ever have,” Obama said today at a rain-soaked rally at Virginia’s University of Mary Washington.

“One of the reasons I am so proud to be with Joe Biden, it’s not just his fancy foreign policy expertise, it’s not just because he’s a sharp dresser,” Obama said earlier in the day in Greensboro, N.C., then pausing when he spotted some cheering ladies in the audience.

“I noticed a lot of women have been talking about Joe lately,” said the Illinois lawmaker. “I noticed that. See, these girls right here!”

Of course these little snippets were meant to imply a subtle notion that looks might be Palins strongest suit. And they were having a little fun which is a good way to exhibit that they can have a sense of humor along with the needed intellect to lead this country.

The republican national committee did of course offer the standard “why did Obama previously claim Biden unprepared” statement.

BTW, according to polling it appears the winner of the debate was….

Jim Lehrer

Polls show Obama won that debate. A classic, in the manner of the JFK - Nixon debate, in which Nixon won the verbal points, but, JFK won the appearance and feel debate.

Obama instilled more confidence, (polls show it) and appeared more bi-partisan (polls show it), and appeared more presidential (polls show it).

Leher was not a debater, but the person asking the questions. He did well in that role.