First Presidential Debate

[dgriffin]

I know, I know ... I broke my own rule of not paying attention until Halloween ... but I couldn't help myself.
Kudos to Jim Lerher for the format, if he was responsible. It fostered more give and take in the debate and made it more immediate.

Each candidate had their own points to hammer and it would seem as though each was successful. I was just watching the "afterward analysis" and Obama said, "I agree with John," 7 times, while McCain said of Obama, "he doesn't understand (about foreign policy)" 8 times. The real differences seemed to be on Russia and bringing the troops home from Iraq.

McCain didn't once look at Obama and constantly refused Lerher's encouragement to engage directly. Obama did look at McCain, but often with an almost sneer.

Not being a presidential adviser (not that I haven't offered ), there's one debate strategy I don't understand. It may be successful politics to make misleading charges in campaign ADVERTISING, where the opponent doesn't have an opportunity to answer (e.g.: Charge: He voted against babies. Answer:No, I voted against 12 year olds having babies.), but when the guy is standing there next to you and you know he will refute it with a perfectly reasonable explanation, it would seem ill advised to employ such tactics in a debate. Obama did a few of those. McCain did a lot of them in tonight's debate.

McCain talked over and was frankly what in some circles might be called rude in doing so. There was an interesting discussion in one of the analysis programs about whether the tactic would be seen as that of a forceful, take-charge executive, or just simply bad manners and unfair. But what I noticed was that, either way you perceived it, Obama could only look frustrated and even a bit smaller as McCain droned on. And Obama's only other recourse would have been to get nasty. I have to believe this was thought out in advance by the McCain advisors.

Overall, I'd say McCain did very well and was leading in this first round. But since this was a Foreign Policy Debate and Obama could have easily bombed it, I'd say he acquitted himself very well, although I don't agree with his views.

[Clipper]

They both did well, and while McCain talked over the top of Obama, I noticed that Obama kept focusing on lumping McCain in with the present administration. John McCain is related to the present administration by party association only. John has been a true "maverick" and has made very few brownie points with his criticism and lack of cooperation with some of Bush's efforts. I think McCain will make a much better president than Bush has been, and with his compassion and his knowlege of world affairs, he will put us back on an even keel in the eyes of the world.

One point that Obama made was that we had lost some respect in the world as offering the best educational opportunities to the people of the world. I think it is time to quit educating the world and putting shoes on those walking barefoot in Africa, until we manage to educate all of our own children, and can afford to put roofs over the heads of homeless veterans and treat their PTSD. Let Oprah and Obama build schools in the "Old Country" while McCain insures that my grandchildren have the opportunities that Obama wants to insure we continue to donate to foreigners. While my school taxes rise, we cannot afford to keep building schools in third world countries.

McCain is "dead on" when it comes to his intended policy for winning the war on terror. His experience in world affairs, coupled with his long tenure in the Senate, makes him the safest bet to insure our safety. His diplomatic experience will regain any respect lost during the last few years. He will mend fences with those that favor the US, and not kiss the asses of those that want to take, but not give in return, like France.

It is no secret that I favor McCain for president, but I thought that it was too obvious that Obama kept wanting to relate McCain to George Bush and Bush's policies, when in many cases McCain has been adamantly opposed to the president.

It is very doubtful that either will accomplish much of what they promise, but I am enthused with the idea that McCain is not talking like a republican, and not talking about giving us another 8 years like Bush, as Obama indicates would be the case.

While I am not a dyed in the wool Republican, and consider myself more or less a moderately conservative voter and an independent, I see McCains agenda, and his experience to be what I foresee will put us back on track while preserving the mission to be victorious in Iraq and Afghanistan. Either candidate is taking on a plate full of problems and only time will tell if either of them is capable of sorting it all out and bringing bi-partisan partnership to reality in solving the problems facing the country. The other remark from Obama that caught my ear, was his remark on the "spending freeze" suggested by McCain. He said that McCain proposed using a hatchet when a scalpel was needed. I took that to mean that McCain would make across the board and critical spending cuts, funding only necessary programs, while Obama would use his scalpel to play partisan program cutting and preserving his pet programs and those of the democratic party. Just my narrow minded view of the debate, and I am sure I was prejudiced in favor of McCain before the debate began, while I was hoping to hear something I liked from Obama. Just didn't happen this time around. We will see what Obama has to say in the next debate. Maybe his strong points will be McCains weak points. It was evident tonight that McCain was much more in tune with the american public and world affairs simply through his level of experience and his seniority in the senate and in life. I still need to see what the final product is when the Bail Out is finalized. THEN we will see where the two candidates stand on the subject of the economy and on the bailout. So far it is all proposals and still has sticking points that need to be settled from both sides of the aisle.

[dgriffin]

Sept 27, 2008 3:48:55 GMT -5 Clipper said:

One point that Obama made was that we had lost some respect in the world as offering the best educational opportunities to the people of the world.

... and when he made it, I turned to my wife and said, "But I don't see the students turning around at our borders and going home." Nor the rest of the masses. It could be we have not lost much worthwhile respect in the world. Rather, their envy has turned vocal. And if George Bush sent a few billion to the Europeans, they would be renaming the Oktoberfest the BushFest.

BTW, I think McCain did a GREAT job explaining to Obama ("you don't seem to understand..." hahahaha) why it is a bad idea for a US President to sit down to "negotiate" with the head of a pariah state. No doubt Obama has a sense of that, too, but to say it he'd have to cross his "inclusion" supporters.

[lucy]

The one thing that I hate about Obama is that he is always comparing us to China. Does anyone else notice that??? China has this and we don't, blah blah blah...... Does he want to turn this country into a communist country?

[Swimmy]

I noticed that McCain only started talking over Obama after Obama initiated that tactic. I also noticed that when obama grew frustrated with how the debate was going, he would address McCain by his first name. Yet, despite any disagreements McCain had with what Obama said, McCain always addressed him Senator Obama and maintained a respectful demeanor. Also, I noticed it more of Obama rudely interrupting McCain where McCain waited until Obama finished his dialogue before McCain began his.

[dgriffin]

I think Obama is smarter than one might guess from the way he postures to his constituency ... liberals. That said, he does come from a different set of political/philosophical beliefs than McCain. Obama is more "inclusive" in his perspective and hopes to win others to his side with "better" ideas and rhetoric. Some view him as naive, others think worse. (Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina said of Obama after the debate last night, "You may call him naive, I think he's dangerous."
I don't believe Obama is suggesting we should be more like China, one of the worst totalitarian regimes in the world. Rather, I take his point to be, "if China can do thus and thus, why not this great country of ours?" He might also be posturing for any business interests he hopes to pick off in the election. China is a huge market and business interests get jittery when reminded of Tienanmen Square. Some businesses couldn't care less about human rights, as long as the humans are consumers.

[Clipper]

I don't think so much communist as a leaning toward socialist. I have been blasted on many fronts for my fears on the subject of his socialist leanings.

His healthcare program is a perfect example of socialized medicine, and government control of one more part of our lives.

We will only see if he actually leans towards a socialistic agenda, if and when he is elected. I personally don't want to take the chance. I will put my eggs in McCain's basket, and feel confident that we will maintain our defenses and maintain our stature as a world power. He is already known around the world and respected by our allies. Obama made a feeble attempt to meet and greet, mainly for campaign purposes with his non-productive trip to Europe and Iraq.

I would imagine that his hesitancy to mix with the troops when he was in Iraq stems from the fact that most of our troops believe in their mission and want to achieve victory, and that would not make good photo ops for his opposition to the war, and his plan to push for premature withdrawal.

I think McCain said it all when he kept repeating "he just doesn't get it."

As I said before, we will see what happens with the next debate. I am truly looking forward to the vice presidential debate. Biden is a liar and a flip flopper. He spoke in Ohio against clean coal, and the very next day came to SW Virginia and spoke to a union group of miners and praised clean coal and coal burning power plants. It was a blatant case of saying whatever is necessary to garner support, and to lie when necessary to appease an audience. Obama would have been better served to have kept Biden in the background, and silent.

I am hoping that Palin will come out swinging, and prove herself to be a formidable and savvy opponent for Biden. Her inexperience on the international level may have dissappeared through serious and intense study of the issues. Sarah Palin's experience level in the leadership arena far out shines Obama's, and that trumps any attempt by Biden to make her look foolish or uninformed.

Truth be known, she is as qualified to be PRESIDENT as Obama is, much less vice president. Obama has made his play strictly on researched information on the issues, and a lack of actual experience. Palin can do the same research and be as qualified to hold the office of president as Obama is.

I think that we would find that the Democratic party has put Obama up there to be a puppet to be controlled by the senior party members, and he will have to depend on those more experienced to make critical decisions. We do not need a chief executive and commander in chief that will be led about by Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, or John Kerry and Ted Kennedy. We do not need a president that has to be schooled by the old guard has beens, while receiving on the job training.

That is simply my own opinion, and I respect the right of those of you who would disagree. I have long since dropped any animosity toward Obama's arrogance etc, and simply don't think he is qualified to lead us out of the problems we face on the world stage today, either domestic, economic or issues of defense and wartime strategy.

But then we all know what they say about opinions.

[dgriffin]

One other thing that occurred to me as I watched the debate was how the process can become the message. (As in Marshal McLuhan's "The medium is the message.") I know McCain is a reformer, but I don't think I ever heard him propound quite so strongly about reform, and what he would do when he got to Washington, as when forced to differentiate himself from Obama during the debate. The result is quite a lot of expectation if and when McCain is elected. That's good, I think. He'll have to fulfill his promises or suffer the ignominy of the elder Bush's "Read my lips;no new taxes" debacle.

[dgriffin]

Clip, I'm a little concerned about the Biden/Palin debate, actually. I will be happy if McCain is elected and I think Palin can handle the vp job. Inexperienced vice presidents are as numerous as political candidates (I almost said A-holes) and are always chosen for election purposes anyway, not for their experience, even though the "heartbeat away" mantra persists. (Look at Harry Truman, one of my favorites, who certainly rose to the occasion.) Vice presidents during an election are the icing, not the cake.

But I would think that Sentor Credit Cards Biden from Delaware (where all the credit card companies incorporate to avoid taxes and to support Biden) might be a formidable debater.
I think Palin can hold her own if she doesn't misstep. Obviously, Biden will argue his experience and belittle hers. I hope she distances herself from such arguments she has made such as having foreign policy experience by living next door to Russia. She's going to have to get more real than that. I have the hope she will do so, because that's what McCain did last night and it worked. For me.

[Clipper]

McCain has historically been a maverick, and a free thinker. He has historically spoke out strictly based on his own beliefs and sometimes out of line with the party.

I have faith that McCain would be effective in garnering support for budget cuts. It would be a matter of garnering enough support and proposing cuts deep enough that negotiation would result in an acceptable and effective level of decreased spending.

Cutting spending is a critical issue at his point in time. McCain has the right idea in cutting everything but defense and absolutely critical items and programs. Obama seems to think that the precision scalpel incising is the way to go. To me that is interpreted to mean that we will cut those programs that are not issues of importance to the supporters and lobbyists that bankroll the party's candidates.

I ended my career and retired at an early age from DOD because of brave cuts in defense spending at the end of the Cold War. Now we need to trim all the fat and crap in all the other areas, while focusing on maintaining a high level of defense, and insuring moneys to achieve a formidable defense while winning the war on terror.

I am still reserving judgment on the bail out plan until it is finalized. Hopefully it will be a bi-partisan plan that will be effective over the long run.

Whoever wins the election, they will be saddled with the economic crisis from day one, and will have to work hard to insure resolution during their term in office. It is going to be a political ball and chain to whichever candidate is victorious.

[dgriffin]

Anyway, here's another famous woman getting ready for a big fight.

[dgriffin]

What was the comment McCain made last night about spending being like a drug? Something about entitlements being addictive?

[dgriffin]

Here it is:

"We Republicans came to power to change government, and government changed us. And the -- the worst symptom on this disease is what my friend, Tom Coburn, calls earmarking as a gateway drug, because it's a gateway. It's a gateway to out-of-control spending and corruption."

Note, too, the first sentence.

There were other references to the insidiousness of spending. I found a transcript of the debate here:
www.iht.com/articles/2008/09/27/america/27transcript.php

If you click on "printer friendly" you get the entire debate on one page that you can copy into your favorite word processing program for searching, etc.

[Clipper]

Exactly, and that is an observation that gives me confidence that he will address that issue up front and with zeal.

[dgriffin]

I hooted when I heard this one!

"Now, Senator Obama, you wanted to know one of the differences. He has asked for $932 million of earmark pork-barrel spending, nearly a million dollars for every day that he's been in the United States Senate."

A million dollars a day!