Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

The Debate: An Edge for Obama

Instant polls are, well, instant polls. You can take them with a grain of salt. But such polls often influence the commentary and what people think (or think they think) about presidential debates afterward. A CBS News Poll of 500 undecided voters tonight gave Obama an advantage over McCain. Here’s the top of Brian Montopoli’s account of the survey:

CBS News and Knowledge Networks conducted a nationally representative poll of approximately 500 uncommitted voters reacting to the debate in the minutes after it happened.

Thirty-nine percent of uncommitted voters who watched the debate tonight thought Barack Obama was the winner. Twenty-five percent thought John McCain won. Thirty-six percent saw it as a draw.

Forty-six percent of uncommitted voters said their opinion of Obama got better tonight. Thirty-one percent said their opinion of McCain got better.

Sixty-six percent of uncommitted voters think Obama would make the right decisions about the economy. Forty-four percent think McCain would.

This accords with my hunch that the key for Obama in this debate was to reassure voters who might be inclined to vote for him that he was comfortable and knowledgeable in discussing foreign policy issues. The very big edge he won on the economy suggests that it was helpful to Obama that the first 40 minutes of the debate focused on economics rather than foreign policy.

By E.J. Dionne  | September 27, 2008; 12:23 AM ET
Categories:  Dionne  | Tags:  E.J. Dionne  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The Debate: The Prime Minister and the President
Next: The Debate: Budget Balancing?

Comments

The fact that McCain couldn't even make eye contact -- something many of us associate with pathological liars -- is very disturbing. If you can't look other people in the eye, and you have a history of deceitful campaigning filled with brazen lies, it doesn't take much to see why you're not Presidential material.

Posted by: somerseten | September 27, 2008 12:39 AM | Report abuse

I'm an Obama supporter, so it is reassuring to read that the undecideds were impressed by him. I do wish that, just once, he had retorted to McCain, "What Senator McCain doesn't understand is that I DO understand that... "

It is Obama's style to give credit where he feels it is due. McCain's pit bull (with no lipstick) agressive behavior was annoying.

Posted by: dotellen | September 27, 2008 12:46 AM | Report abuse

Obama was fair, respectful, cool and level headed -- all the more admirable considering McCain kept using up valuable time slamming him instead of answering the questions put before him.

I would dare to say Obama conducted himself in a manner befitting a President.

Posted by: averagejane2 | September 27, 2008 12:49 AM | Report abuse

John McCain came across as a grumpy old man who was not even able to look his opponent in the eye. His references to Kissinger and Reagan show that he is a man who lives in the past and is clueless about how to address the problems facing this nation in the 21st century.

John McCain came across as a man who would not be an effective representative of the USA on the world stage. Therefore, it is time for him to find a nice nursing home in Arizona and retire to a life of peace and fantasies about the failed Reagan era.

Posted by: lavinsr | September 27, 2008 12:49 AM | Report abuse

Hey EJ Dionne put down that Toxic Obama
Kool Aid Pal,as Sen John McCain WON the
Debate and Kicked Messiah Barack Obama
Butt Good! Go John Go! All The Way To The
White House! Go Sarah Go! All The Way To
The White House too! McCain/Palin Rocks!
Obama/Biden Sucks! Face it EJ and Obamabots
your little pet Barack Hussein Obama and
Big Mouth Old Joe Biden Are TOAST! NOBAMA!

More Independent Voters 4 McCain/Palin 2008

Posted by: Jan1977 | September 27, 2008 1:12 AM | Report abuse

It drives me nuts that there are voters who haven't committed to a candidate yet.

Posted by: Booyah5000 | September 27, 2008 1:12 AM | Report abuse

I was disappointed that Obama's admission of agreement with his opponent on some points was considered a weakness by some pundits. I considered it a real strength and a good omen of how fairly he would treat, as President, the opinions of world leaders he negotiates with. Add to this not requiring an adversary's agreement with the US outlook before even beginning to talk. We certainly have had enough of "leaders" who strut, swagger, and bluster. No more axes and empires of evil, please!

Posted by: justavoter | September 27, 2008 1:19 AM | Report abuse

THIS was the debate McCain was supposed to WIN? Not only win, but WIN BIG?

Not so fast, my friends.
Obama stood toe to toe with the supposed foreign policy expert in this campaign.

Obama displayed just as much knowledge about the issues as McCain. Not a big win for Obama, but, as far as expectations go, a tie is a win for Obama here.

It would be like taking the Detroit Lions and making them play the All Time Steelers team, and it ended in a 21-21 tie.


On the economy, as expected, Obama won big.

Of course, on style, class, and temperment, Obama won real big.

Another bad night for McCain.

Posted by: jgarrisn | September 27, 2008 1:39 AM | Report abuse

At one point, Senator McCain stated that as president he would not ever again torture prisoners..Keith Olberman pointed this out..

This is an admission in public that our government has tortured prisoners..and McCain says specifically that as president he would never ever again torture prisoners..something to that effect...we can get the exact piece from the You
Tubes tomorrow...this is very important..because it is an admission that torture has occurred by our government...

International treaties that this country has entered into in the past preclude torture of prisoners .. The question I have for McCain is how does he know we have tortured prisoners and how does he define torture..?? Who has ordered the torture of prisoners..?? Can he testify to the alleged torture of prisoners...where has the torture taken place..??

We need answers..

Posted by: goodcake4 | September 27, 2008 1:59 AM | Report abuse

McCain came off contemptuous and angry “cranky” old man. McCain appeared to be annoyed and inconvenienced by the whole debate. I suppose he considers the presidency to be his birthright that he scoffs anyone who even questions him. He kept making snarky and irrelevant marks. I was really surprised that McCain would not even look at Obama.

On the other hand, Obama came off in command, well-informed, and congenial—in other words, Obama looked Presidential. And McCain looked angry, repetitive, and un-presidential.

CBS’s poll of 500 uncommitted voters who watched found this: 40% said Obama won, 38% said it was a draw, and 22% called McCain the winner. CNN had Obama winning 51-38% overall, winning on the economy 58-37%, and even winning on Iraq 52-47%.

This was clearly a homerun for Obama. He hit it out of the ballpark.

Posted by: JJames081 | September 27, 2008 2:07 AM | Report abuse

Very classy indeed Obama. I found him to be fair game, polite, respectful. To put it simply, very civilized.
There is no naivety here. Rude people tend to despise people with class. That's very true. It's because they don't know what to do with them, it's disturbing someone playing other rules.

These qualities make, I think, the greatest politicians.

Also, why I think he had an edge is because he allowed voters to glance at a possible future for them (health, education, science, better international relations etc...). Yes, there are elements of hope in his speech that are truly 'refreshing', 'new'.

Quite impressive.

McCain, seems ore in control though. But his message revolved too much around the war. He used too much 'pathos' (yuk), but eh! That works.

The war could be won and the son of this poor lady would still have died for nothing. And this fact is the US army's fault, not Obama's.

Posted by: think-of-it | September 27, 2008 2:29 AM | Report abuse

Obama won hands dowm......

From 'Fact Of The Matter"
http://www.need4trth.blogspot.com

Nation,

FUNNY HOW THINGS CHANGE IN JUST A FEW DAYS A FEW HOURS......

Tonites debate was interesting, very interesting. It was to say the least a TRAVESTY AND THE MOST EGREGIOUS demonstration of childishness,disrespect of the American populace, Senator Obama, and Mr. Lehr the moderator by John McShame It speaks to the fact that Senator McCain is living with UNTREATED POST TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER. All this bad behaviour coming from an Angry condescending FULL OF HIMSELF, prideful, unabashed, SHAMELESS LIAR and Warmonger who is 72 years old..
IT BECAME APPARENT TONITE THAT JOHN MCCAIN IS SUFFERING FROM PTSD...THAT IN HIS MIND HE IS STILL FIGHTING WITH THE FACT THAT HE BELIEVES HE CAME FROM DEFEAT IN VIETNAM WHEN HE RETURNED HOME that administration wouldn't allow him to win.

This is the reason that the so-called 'victory in Iraq' Senator McCain has taken on, an continues to support this occupation, no matter the cost of American Forces or Coalition members lives, no matter what the condition of our home front or our economy is. He is the one who is willing to destroy our existence and future in order to "CONTINUE A WAR' to victory. A war that exist only in his mind. He is a classic case of untreated PTSD. In McCain's trauma riddled mind the war in Iraq is the war in Vietnam. A war, that in reality has been ended for over 30 years. Iraq is McCain's Vietnam. I came to an understanding tonite that when McCain appears to humbly recount the desire for victory as he injects in conversations he has had with the troops, the adage "LET US WIN", He isn't speaking of the troops, he is speaking of himself. Senator McCain believes we failed in Vietnam by pulling out, when we did. He believes in his mind that if we'd only had a WAR CONTINUUM, we may have won.

A WAR CONTINUUM.....As McCain spoke about foreign policy it became a LECTURE and a small view into his true desired policy of A WAR CONTINUUM. He first leaked out bits and pieces in the past with statements like: Thursday, April 19, 2007

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- At a town hall meeting in South Carolina Wednesday, Arizona Sen. John McCain was asked if there is a plan to attack Iran. McCain began his answer by changing the words to a classic Beach Boys' song.

"You know that old Beach Boys song, Bomb Iran?" the Republican presidential candidate said. Then, he sang. "Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran." and the infamous statement: During a town hall meeting in Derry, New Hampshire last night, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) told a crowd of roughly two hundred people that it “would be fine with” him if the U.S. military stayed in Iraq for “a hundred years“:

Q: President Bush has talked about our staying in Iraq for 50 years — (cut off by McCain)

McCAIN: Make it a hundred.

Q: Is that … (cut off)

McCAIN: We’ve been in South Korea … we’ve been in Japan for 60 years. We’ve been in South Korea 50 years or so. That would be fine with me. As long as Americans …

You see Senator McCain really isn't concerned about the the SAFETY, PROTECTION, WELFARE nor PROSPERITY of our Nation. John McCain didn't mention the MIDDLE-CLASS once tonite. Not once. Why, We are not his concern. Economic concerns are not his, balancing our budget isn't his concern, diplomacy is not on his agenda, this is why he supports The Bush administrations FAILED POLICIES OF THE LAST EIGHT YEARS. Senator McCain isn't concerned about change or changing anything. No, Senator McCain is concerned solely with winning the war and crushing the shame of the defeat he felt and still feels about our strategy and failed war in Vietnam. I believe he lives this in his mind day in and day out. We can not AFFORD a president with such a Mental illness as this.

When McCain spoke tonite about war he linked nation after nation together, which we'd had war with or involvement. He mentioned failed American attempts at Colonizing, and all the many wars we've been involved in and then to add insult to injury, a look of PURE JOY crested his face. His desire is many more wars where we can use what he called "this new winning strategy", "THE SURGE". He mentioned using this strategy in Afghanistan and Pakistan. McCain when asked the question about our American standing in the world, in other words how our allies and even enemies see us, said, he'd skip that and went back on the his TIRADE about winning wars.

What constituency is he speaking too? What Ghost of soldiers from wars passed is he trying to sell this too?

I was offended, unimpressed, but not surprised. I was angered by his Blatant REBUSHAGAIN PARTY LIES. The Republican Party does not want to participate in the REAL conversation the American populace is engaged in. Senator Obama Pointedly and tactfully ripped the web of deception around the Iraq war and 'the surge" right out from underneathe the feet of the lying CHARLA TON extension of the RNC/GOP THE PUPPETTED MOUTHPIECE John McCain. When Obama stated "John You act like this war started in 2007 and not 2003.

DO NOT BE DECIEVED BY THIS REPUBLICAN PROPAGANDA ATTEMPT AT REDATING THE WAR AND OOUPATION IN IRAQ. THE SURGE WAS NOT THE BEGINNING OF THE WAR AND OCCUPATION IN IRAQ..
For those of you who do not know it, the Iraq war (2nd Iraq war) started as this Wikipedia article states:

This article is about the war that began in 2003. For other uses, see Iraq war (disambiguation).
Iraq War
The Iraq War, also known as the Second Gulf War, the Occupation of Iraq,[32] or the War in Iraq, is an ongoing military campaign which began on March 20, 2003 with the 2003 invasion of Iraq by a multinational coalition composed of United States and United Kingdom troops supported by smaller contingents from Australia, Denmark, Poland and other nations.[33]

Prior to the war, U.S. officials asserted that Iraq's possession and pursuit of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) posed a serious and imminent threat to U.S. national security.[34][35] This assessment was supported by the U.K. intelligence services, but not by other countries such as France, Russia and Germany.[36][37][38] United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission weapon inspectors found no evidence of WMD, giving support to earlier criticism of poor intelligence on Iraqi WMDs.[39] After the invasion, the U.S.-led Iraq Survey Group concluded that Iraq had ended its WMD programs in 1991 and had no active programs at the time of the invasion, but that they intended to resume production if the Iraq sanctions were lifted.[40] Although some degraded remnants of misplaced or abandoned chemical and biological weapons from before 1991 were found, they were not the weapons for which the coalition invaded.[41] The failure to find WMD in Iraq caused controversy, particularly in the United States.[42] Some U.S. officials also accused Saddam Hussein of harboring and supporting Al-Qaeda,[43] but no evidence of any collaborative relationship was found.[44][45] Other reasons for the invasion stated by U.S. officials included Iraq's alleged financial support for the families of Palestinian suicide bombers,[46] Iraqi government human rights abuses,[47] spreading democracy,[48] and Iraq's oil reserves,[49][50][51][52] although the latter was denied by other officials

Those are the facts. The surge was not the beginning of the War and Occupation of Iraq. Let no Republican Facist fool you.

ON THE ECONOMY JOHN MCCAIN AN THE RNC WERE NO MATCH FOR OBAMA, JUST DIRTY TRICKSMcCain adjudicated for the same failed policies of the last 8 years and that's no CHANGE, that's not even pocket change. McCain waxed weakly, deceptively, often using lies from his propaganda ad campaign as distractions and diversions from the dealings of the fact that he is one of the main components in the dereuglation mess.

John you said, "look at my record..." SO EVERYONE HERE'S A PEEK AT THE RECORD OF JOHN MCCAIN THE DEREGULATOR....
McCain’s comment on Monday that the “fundamentals of the economy are strong” was a gift for Democrats. Throughout the week, the Obama campaign has been able to seize on McCain’s foible by painting the Republican nominee as “simply out of touch” with the brick-and-mortar economy on Main Street. And this is not McCain’s only weakness at the moment on the economic front.

We are now learning that McCain has a long and distinguished track record in Congress as a staunch advocate of deregulation which will likely further damage his credibility with voters. Given his well documented history as a pro-deregulation lawmaker, it is hard to see how McCain will be able to convince blue-collar voters in Ohio, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania that he is the right person to address the current financial crisis on Wall Street. Below is a summary of citations documenting his long history as a pro-deregulation lawmaker in the Senate.


John McCain: The Deregulator

I don’t think anyone who wants to increase the burden of government regulation and higher taxes has any real understanding of economics and the economy and what is needed in order to ensure the future of this country.”
– John McCain [McCain Town Hall in Inez, Kentucky, 4/23/08]

McCain Is An Avid Supporter Of Lax Rules For Financial Institutions
McCain Supported A Banking Bill Because It Eliminated “The Tremendous Regulatory Burden Imposed On Financial Institutions.” While speaking in favor of bank deregulation on the floor of the senate, John McCain said, “This legislation takes a small but important step toward eliminating the tremendous regulatory burden imposed on financial institutions… One principal reason banks are unable to make loans is the bewildering array of statutory and regulatory restrictions and paperwork requirements imposed by Congress and the regulatory agencies. While a case can certainly be made that every law and regulation is intended to serve a laudable purpose, the aggregate effect of the rapidly increasing regulatory burden imposed on banks is to cause them to devote substantial time, energy and money to compliance rather than meeting the credit needs of the community.” [Congressional Record, 11/19/93; emphasis added]

McCain Supported A Bill To “Takes A Small Step Forward Toward Eliminating Unnecessary Regulatory Burdens Imposed On Banks.” While speaking in favor of bank deregulation on the floor of the senate, John McCain said, “While a case can certainly be made that every law and regulation is intended to serve a laudable purpose, the aggregate effect of the rapidly increasing regulatory burden imposed on banks is to cause them to devote substantial time, energy and money to compliance rather than meeting the credit needs of the community … This bill recognizes this fact, and takes a small step forward toward eliminating unnecessary regulatory burdens imposed on banks.” [Congressional Record, 11/19/93; emphasis added]

McCain Said The Best Thing Government Can Do For Business Is “Stay Out Of Its Way.” While speaking about the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act on the floor on the Senate in 2000, John McCain said, “I am convinced that the best thing government can often do to advance the fortunes of the private sector is to stay out of its way. I support this bill because it makes progress toward that end, by improving companies’ flexibility to hire the talent they need, while providing for the regulatory framework and new educational opportunities to protect and promote American workers.” [Congressional Record, 10/3/00; emphasis added]

In 1999, McCain Supported Phil Gramm’s Banking Deregulation Bill. In 1999, John McCain voted for passage of the Senate version of a bill that would eliminate current barriers erected by the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act and other laws that impede affiliations between banking, securities, insurance and other firms. The bill also would exempt small, non-urban banks from the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), revise the Federal Home Loan Bank system and require that owners of automated teller machines (ATMs) provide notice on the ATM and on-screen of any charges imposed for the use of the terminal. The bill passed 54-44. [S. 900, Vote #105, 5/6/99]

McCain Missed The Vote For Final Passage Because He Was Campaigning In New Hampshire. John McCain missed the final vote on Phil Gramm’s banking deregulation bill because he was campaigning in New Hampshire. [NPR, “Morning Edition,” 11/5/99; S. 900, Vote #354, 11/4/99]

McCain Has Based His 2008 Campaign On Promoting Less Regulation
McCain: “I Don’t Think Anyone Who Wants To Increase The Burden Of Government Regulation And Higher Taxes Has Any Real Understanding Of Economics.” During a McCain Town Hall in Inez, Kentucky, John McCain said, “When we come out of this recession and we will because I believe that the fundamentals of our economy are good … Sen. Clinton wants the government to make the decisions for you on your health care, I want the families to make the decisions on their health care. I don’t think anyone who wants to increase the burden of government regulation and higher taxes has any real understanding of economics and the economy and what is needed in order to ensure the future of this country.” [McCain Town Hall in Inez, Kentucky, 4/23/08; emphasis added]


McCain: “I Understand Why The AFL-CIO And Maybe Other Unions May Oppose My Free Market, Less Regulation, Right To Work.” During an appearance on Fox’s “Special Report with Brit Hume,” John McCain said, “I understand why the AFL-CIO and maybe other unions may oppose my free market less regulation right to work. I think we have honest differences of opinion. I respect those labor unions, but I’m sure that those differences are very intense and very real.” [Fox News,” Special Report with Brit Hume,” 3/12/08]

McCain: “Let’s Reduce Regulation.” While speaking about the economy in St. Louis, Missouri, John McCain said, “I’m asked all the time are we in a recession or not in a recession. And I don’t know the answer to that because it’s kind of a technical term… I do not believe we should raise your taxes. I think it would be the worst thing we could do. And that means to me I think the tax cuts need to be made permanent. When you’ve got a bad economy, the worst thing you can do is increase people’s tax burden. Let’s reduce it. Let’s reduce regulation.” [CNN, “Ballot Bowl, 3/15/08]

McCain: “We Need To Return To The Reagan Years… We Need Less Regulation.” As shown on PBS’s “Washington Week,” John McCain said, “We need to return to the Reagan years. We need to have fiscal conservatism. We need less government. We need less regulation. We need to end of spending spree which has eroded our base of Republican support.” [PBS, “Washington Week,” 1/25/08]

McCain Promised To “Give Them Lower Taxes, Less Regulation, Less Government In Their Lives.” As shown on CNN’s “CNN Newsroom,” John McCain said, “We’ve got to do the other things necessary to encourage business and give them lower taxes, less regulation, less government in their lives, and that means a simpler, fairer — tax code. The tax code in America is broken and it needs to be fixed.” [CNN, “CNN Newsroom,” 2/14/08]

To Fix the Economy, McCain Would “We’ve Got To Take Specific Actions, Keep Their Taxes Low, Less Regulation.” As shown on ABC’s “Good Morning America,” John McCain said, “That our economy is in terrible shape, that we’ve got to take specific actions, keep their taxes low, less regulation, get - start exploring and exploiting offshore oil deposits.” [ABC, “Good Morning America,” 7/2/08]

McCain Said The Difference Between Obama & Himself Would Be “More Regulation Or Less Regulation.” During a media availability in Phoenix, Arizona, John McCain said, “I think the important thing is that there will be stark differences between either Senator [Clinton] or Senator Obama and me because they are liberal Democrats and I’m a conservative Republican… whether we pursue the present strategy in Iraq or whether we — or whether we set a date for withdrawal, which will mean Al Qaida wins; whether we have more regulation or less regulation.” [McCain Media Availability via CQ Transcriptions, 3/3/08; emphasis added]

McCain: “Less Government, Lower Taxes, Less Regulation, Safer America Is What I Can Give America.” During an appearance on CBS’s “60 Minutes,” John McCain said, “I can make a case that a less government, lower taxes, less regulation, safer America is what I can give America. But I don’t underestimate the size of the challenge.” [CBS, “60 Minutes,” 3/9/08]

McCain Is Long-Time Supporter Of Deregulation
McCain: “I Am A Deregulator. I Believe In Deregulation.” While speaking about the cable and satellite television during an appearance on CNN’s “On the Money,” John McCain said, “I am a deregulator. I believe in deregulation.” [CNN, “In the Money,” 7/13/03]

MCCAIN THE BASIC PRINCIPLE OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY....MISLEAD, LIE, SMEAR, DECECIVE..

So now that we've gotten a small peek into the LYING MIND OF POLITICAL MANIPULATOR, once again we must remember the conversation the nation is engaing the candidates in today is definately not the republicans foretay. Our economy is suffering from the last 8 years of borrowing from China in the trillions, borrowing from Japan in the untold billions, waging a War and Occupation based on a mistake. Speaking of which John McCain is determined to keep your children and their childrens children, in debt and 'COMMITTED TO A MISTAKE". We AK no bones about it here at "Fact of the Matter".

Don't believe the pun dents, don't believe the Republican owned CORPORATE MEDIAS talking points, even if the press as they will probably deceitfully try, and give this debate to McCain. MCCAIN WAS NEVER REALLY EVEN IN THE REAL CONVERSATION THAT WAS THE DEBATE....HE WAS AUDITIONING FOR A DECEPTIVE PROPAGANDA AD. Not with us, the Nation, not even on the same page.

As far as the conversation of the debate was about The Economy, The war and Occupation in Iraq, (Our ultimate, to date, mistake),The middle-class, and money of the tune of 10 billion dollars a month we shell out to that mistake, and of course FOREIGN POLICY, John McCain is completely OUT OF TOUCH...HE IS LIVING IN HIS untreated PTSD SICKENED MIND THE ASSUMPTION OF THE UTTER DEFEAT AND LOST OF a war that ended over 30 years ago.

JOHN MCCAIN IS LIVING IN VIETNAM AND CRYING OUT, "I won't leave, I refuse to go back to America in dishonor, WE CAN WIN THIS THING GUYS, WE CAN KILL THOSE F------ G---.SEND THE TROOPS BACK, THE SURGE IS WORKING, WE'LL NEVER ADMIT DEFEAT AND LEAVE WITHOUT HONOR."

Yet, he dishonored himself yet, again as he stood for a LIE and tried to deceive the American populace with his MENTAL DELUSIONS

need4trth

Posted by: need4trth | September 27, 2008 2:53 AM | Report abuse

need4truth:

Do you really think anyone just took the time to read that?

Posted by: miken1984 | September 27, 2008 3:19 AM | Report abuse

I don't think majority of the people understood Obama when he agreed with McCain on some points by saying, "I beleive John is right". What Obama was actually doing is mocking McCain on the specific points by saying he's agreeing to the opposite of McCain's views and what he stands for. I'm sure most viewers probably didn't quite catch on to that but that's my perspective of how I saw it. By the way, I thought Obama did a better job tonight than McCain. He not only was respectful but he carried himself with coolness, poise and had a better knowledge of understanding where he wants to take this country.

Posted by: vena45 | September 27, 2008 3:24 AM | Report abuse

Am I the only one who thought it was strange that Biden, the Democratic vice presidential candidate, delivered the Democratic reaction to the debate, but Rudy Guiliani, former mayor of New York, spoke for the Republicans? If Governor Palin, the Republican candidate for vice president, can't speak for the Republican party here, how am I supposed to gather that she is ready to become president of the United States on a moment's notice?

Posted by: jwamsley3 | September 27, 2008 3:25 AM | Report abuse

The past two weeks McCain did real damage to public opinion of himself. Because of this tonight's debate was already about regaining the trust and public opinion he lost over the past two weeks with his behavior and attitude. He had to hit it out of the park tonight to return to his RNC poll numbers and he failed to do it. Mr. Non Congeniality proved he deserves the loosers place.

Posted by: siren1 | September 27, 2008 3:38 AM | Report abuse

I love how the expectations for McCain were lowered, saying he was the underdog in this. A month ago, the story was that McCain was the expert on foreign policy, and Obama was going to have a serious problem confronting McCain head to head on that. Turns out that McCain struggled to keep his own on his home turf. His handlers made a couple mistakes. First, they tried to have him repeat Reagan's performance, and the act was obvious. The "he just doesn't understand" bit repeated endlessly was an imitation of reagan's "here he goes again." And turning to personal anecdotes repeatedly was an obvious imitation of Ronald. It was a p***-poor imitation at best. *Especially* with this particular opponent, who talked substance and backed up points with examples at every turn... it made the anecdotes seem like cheap dodges of the issues. The repition of lines that we've heard over and over from McCain, like that bloody "Miss congeniality" statement came off badly. Bumper-sticker depth.

Posted by: phreejazz | September 27, 2008 3:43 AM | Report abuse

McCain's constant criticism of Obama as too naive and inexperienced for the presidency is self-defeating for two reasons. First, his Vice-Presidential running mate Sarah Palin is far more naive and far less experienced than Obama, as even prominent GOP supporters recognize. Second, with this VP selection, McCain's own bad judgement and impetuous decision-style is brought out in spades.

Posted by: gfel | September 27, 2008 4:18 AM | Report abuse

I analyzed the words and sentences which Obama, McCain and—why not?—Lehrer used in the debate. Have a look at the bubble graph (no. of words and length of sentences and words). I also made "word clouds." Interesting! Go to my Word Face-Off blog to view: http://wordfaceoff.blogspot.com/2008/09/barack-obama-vs-john-mccain-vs-jim.html.

Posted by: fdeblauwe | September 27, 2008 4:22 AM | Report abuse

After reading through these comments I find a lot of them are mentioning "How nice he was" or " "How rude he was". Wake up! This was a debate, not a patty cake session. I wish both of these guys would have been more specific in their answers, especially on the economy. But then, that's politicians for you, dance around and parry and thrust but don't dare give a concise answer.

Posted by: roncee | September 27, 2008 4:24 AM | Report abuse

McCain won hands down. He showed a much better command of the issues and showed why experience matters. It is so sad to read someone thinks that because Obama didn't mess up he won. What does that say? Or that all Obama had to do was look presidential...like we are electing a manequin. McCain actually IS presidential. He doesn't need to practice.

McCain = Experience we can trust
Obama = Not sure who he is

Anyway, the most memorable lines are:

"I have a bracelet too!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4r_jTgGeVU4

"McCain is right"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ec3aC8ZJZTc

And this from Henry Kissenger:

TWS Exclusive: Kissinger Unhappy About Obama

Henry Kissinger believes Barack Obama misstated his views on diplomacy with US adversaries and is not happy about being mischaracterized. He says: “Senator McCain is right. I would not recommend the next President of the United States engage in talks with Iran at the Presidential level. My views on this issue are entirely compatible with the views of my friend Senator John McCain. We do not agree on everything, but we do agree that any negotiations with Iran must be geared to reality.”

http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2008/09/tws_exclusive_kissinger_unhapp.asp

Posted by: joep1 | September 27, 2008 4:28 AM | Report abuse

Yes another edge for Obama.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5tZc8oH--o

Posted by: jace1 | September 27, 2008 4:44 AM | Report abuse

Many readers have mentioned this before, but I will say it again. Who can trust somebody who blatantly refuses to look you in the eye? Senator McCain never, and I repeat NEVER during the whole debate looked Senator Obama into his eyes. What does that say about a man who wants to become President? To me it spells dishonesty and somebody you simply cannot afford to trust.

Posted by: anders780 | September 27, 2008 4:50 AM | Report abuse

Wow, too bad you did not report that Obama had to walk out of negotiations today because he could not deal with the group and kept blaming others for failure to come to a conclusion.

It seems that all of a sudden these pseudo-positive reports are coming out so Obama can Cover His Butt about his failure to be able to do the simplest thing today to get the bailout problem solved.

Typical of this paper, they are also helping him to CYA.

Shame on you EJ. SHAME.

Posted by: username | September 27, 2008 5:10 AM | Report abuse

A bad week for McCain , just got a whole lot worse. Lets see , we have Rick Davis , McCain dropping like a rock in the polls. Then he pulls this political stunt of supposedly suspending his Campaign and claims he has to run back to Washington to save the world. But he failed to mention that he is not part of the committees that were dealing with the bail out , and therefor wouldn't have any input anyway. Then the congressional leaders come out and make statements about not needing McCain or wanting him. McCain shows up in Washington and screws up the entire frame work of the agreement. A very Conservative Republican comes out in MSM calling for Palin to step down for the good of the Republican Party because she is way out of her league , which once again points towards McCain's very poor judgment. Then McCain flip flops again , and decides he better show up for the Debate and ( LOST ).

Posted by: cakemanjb | September 27, 2008 5:13 AM | Report abuse

From:
Head of State
http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/09/obama-wins.html

Saturday, September 27, 2008
Obama Wins

CNN Poll of Debate Watchers:

Who won:

Obama: 51%

McCain: 38%

Cite:
Head of State
http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/09/obama-wins.html

Posted by: caraprado1 | September 27, 2008 5:40 AM | Report abuse

McCain's continued rambling discourse when Obama was speaking, his lying, his refusal to even give his opponent so much as a direct look, shouted old angry man.

Whether he's past his prime, or merely too temperamental to be POTUS isn't important. He simply won't do.

Posted by: dutchess2 | September 27, 2008 6:06 AM | Report abuse

WOW! So old WAPO OBAMA SHILL EJ DIONNE has
overdose on too much Obama Kool Aid and
is back into more delusions about his pal
the Fake Messiah Barack Hussein Obama being
able to debate Sen John McCain without his
Obama Magic Teleprompter and that Barry Baby can talk effectively without going duh,huh,er,da,dah,mmm,oh like a little two
year baby and which is what the Obamabrat
is just a cry baby whining loser as Sen
John McCain WON THE DEBATE..So it looks
like that old United Negro College Fund
TV Commerial was right about "A Mind Is A
Terrible Thing To Waste"and its too bad that Cocaine Addict/Drug Dealer Obama and
EJ Dionne both wasted their minds as well.
Oh! Oh I forgot now all the Liberals and
Obamabots will be calling me racist and
launching endless personal attacks at me!
NO WAY OBAMA & BIDEN NOW OR EVER!

Posted by: Ralphinphnx | September 27, 2008 6:09 AM | Report abuse

This exchange of ideas was useful but not the defining moment that many wished for. Before this evening I wrote to the Obama staff suggesting that he adopt a forceful presentation. It is my belief that many "Americans look upon the President as a father figure who appears decisive and strong, who presents himself without hesitation whether this be true or not. But Biden in his hour must not appear threatening to little Ms. Palin. The more she speaks, the worse off she is! Shakespeare said the world is a stage with players ranting and raging (paraphrasing)--so true in politics where Style and Presentation are All!

Posted by: luckeyduckey | September 27, 2008 6:21 AM | Report abuse

I find it strange and amusing that most true attacks against a candidate are against McCain and most of those attacks are poorly written abuses of the English language. Look, I'm all for people speaking other languages, but damn, if you're going to be all anti-immigrant about it, well... chinga tu madre and yer momma dranks donkey sack!

Posted by: stephaopi | September 27, 2008 6:22 AM | Report abuse

brilliant:

"I'm an Obama supporter, so it is reassuring to read that the undecideds were impressed by him. I do wish that, just once, he had retorted to McCain, "What Senator McCain doesn't understand is that I DO understand that... "

true: "Obama was fair, respectful, cool and level headed -- all the more admirable considering McCain kept using up valuable time slamming him instead of answering the questions put before him.


salient:

"International treaties that this country has entered into in the past preclude torture of prisoners .. The question I have for McCain is how does he know we have tortured prisoners and how does he define torture..?? Who has ordered the torture of prisoners..?? Can he testify to the alleged torture of prisoners...where has the torture taken place..??


"abuse of the english language?"

how about abuse of the american ideal?


back to basics, bellzbubba

Posted by: forestbloggod | September 27, 2008 6:43 AM | Report abuse

The fact that Obama was less disdainful than normal isn't a home run. Why didn't he respond to the fact that he never pursued contact or meetings with the generals or even a visit to the war zone, until a drive-by this past summer, years after his arrival in the senate. The debate was reasoned and civil. He could have simply addressed this lingering question.
Just tell us why - we get that you are opposed to the war. Many agree with you. But are you opposed to first-hand info, to meeting troops and to seeing the region? Is it safer and easier to read about it in the NY Times and base your opinions there?
Obama seemed a little Urkel-like to me. Didn't want to get his feet wet in the war zones, can see it fine on his flat screen TV while he sips organic iced tea.
Has a wuss factor...many of those troops would have liked to meet him. He needed to expose himself to the world, not ideas.

Posted by: OrlandoNan | September 27, 2008 7:01 AM | Report abuse

Your right, she's right, he's right. That guy is not even John McCain. It's Sean Assad Goldstein, and he owes me $11.00 for a cornbeef sandwich I bought him last Tuesday. Lets all take a deep breath America, these guys are just politicians and only interviewing for a job. Both of them are good men, and want, what they believe, is best for the country.

Posted by: obomafan | September 27, 2008 7:02 AM | Report abuse

Anyone thinking Hussein Obama won anything in this debate just doesn't get it. McCain is easily the best person for President in this race.

Posted by: Chazwinners | September 27, 2008 7:03 AM | Report abuse

the choice is clear, thoughtful cool headed diplomacy
vs intimidating gunboat bullying.

tax cuts for the rich........

a rising tide of support for the middle class.

OBAMA IS MY CHOICE

Posted by: JudgeAlan | September 27, 2008 7:03 AM | Report abuse

I am a Obama fan,but in all honesty,I thought John McCain,did a much better job with the debate.Obama in his first few answers was very nervous and used the phrase(and)about 15 times,this breaks up any speach and makes it seem he is reaching for the answers instead of knowing the answer.McCain came off much better than I thought and impressed me with his direct approach.This is not to say I would vote for McCain.I am voting for Obama,because we do need a change,and I would like to give him the chance to change things not only in this country,but worldwide.If McCain gets in the world will view it as just another Bush,but if Obama gets in the anti us feeling around the world will change in just one day,McCain cannot do that!!!!We are not an island and we do not stand alone,we used to be the GREATEST country in the world!!!!

Posted by: rucrazy2 | September 27, 2008 7:06 AM | Report abuse

Obama smoked McBush!

McBush appeared old, frail and as if he was about to collapse of a heart attack.

Interesting that McBush never looked Obama in the eyes or even in his direction, but rather looked downwards and towards the left. Anyone with any understanding of behavioural science knows that this behaviour is a sign of lying.

Posted by: kbuckingham777 | September 27, 2008 7:08 AM | Report abuse

Trying not to wear those partisan glasses, I did not see any "home runs" hit last night. Obama came off a little better, but McCain wasn't the senile old man he expected. A lot has been made about "eye contact". At times both candidates weren't looking at one another. Flatly stating it means "he's lying" is not true. It's not a general rule, and this wasn't a normal situation. For all I (or anyone else) knew, it could have been the TV lighting hitting them square in the face.

Posted by: rmpatera | September 27, 2008 7:12 AM | Report abuse

I cannot believe some of the Obama blogs. He is a loser, get used to it. I could have answered the questions, if I was given a week to read them and have my staff write the answeres for me. He cannot win, so get over it and join the rest of American for Country and Peace. Obama cannot lead his dog, if he has one.
When are people going to realize this underground connections and call him out on them. Enough is enough, I am tired of hearing him talk. Go bye Obama it is time to go.

Posted by: rfiskum | September 27, 2008 7:40 AM | Report abuse

I forgot to say one thing. Why hasn't anyone asked Obama about his drug use. Is he still on drugs? Sometimes with he speaks his speech is slurred which indicates his may be on something a little stronger the pot. Once a drug user always a drug user. Just like an alcholic, once your hooked, you cannot have another drink, the same with drugs, i.e. Marajuana.

Posted by: rfiskum | September 27, 2008 7:47 AM | Report abuse

attention voters me think palling be best president she got experience like when she stopped by un building they let her say hi to leaders plus alaska is near russia and palling commanded troops to attack russia and build nice brige to somewhere with pork pretty good leader plus she got nice big hair and safety goggles look hot and she miss america beauty queen so please vote for palling i wanna ride her holy rollercoaster palling macaine o8!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: DaveMiner | September 27, 2008 7:48 AM | Report abuse

"News ... Knowledge" and instant polls - isn't that the definition of oxymoron? It is depressing to see the Post and their columnests follow cable 'news' lead and spend time reporting people's knee-jerk reactions as 'news'. It is also dissapointing that the media seems to be complaining that the debate was too thoughtful - not enough 'knock-outs' or 'zingers'. I thought this was the news business, not the entertainment business.

Posted by: rnelson10 | September 27, 2008 7:51 AM | Report abuse

The war has been on for FIVE YEARS and I don't think McCain has a clue what comes after the surge.

Bomb, bomb, bomb..?

Posted by: poortrekker | September 27, 2008 7:52 AM | Report abuse

need4truth:

Do you really think anyone just took the time to read that?

I did....brilliant analysis!

Posted by: Rubiconski | September 27, 2008 7:55 AM | Report abuse

Wow,the more I watch these two it is becoming very clear what kind of President each of them would be. McCain is talking 'vetoing EVERY spending bill that comes across his desk' and a 'spending freeze, exception of the military and veterans' is anyone really listening here? hello? can you say USA = Impoverished Military State under McCain? This would be utter disaster for the USA, disaster. You think there is growing poverty and joblessness now under Bush, McCain would bury the USA for good. Obama is the clear choice now, he offers intelligent, desperately needed progress and investment in the American people and workers. He offers solutions to education, health care, the housing and economy crisis, getting out of the money pit that is Iraq and investments in US manufacturing and green energy jobs. These are the kinds of solutions America sorely needs, anything less would be suicide for America. No way, no how, no McCain.

Posted by: Hillary08 | September 27, 2008 7:57 AM | Report abuse

Can someone explain why Obama kept calling Senator McCain, John? He also called him Jim and Tom at one point? Can he not remember his name? And correct me if I am wrong, but at one point Obama referenced Tom Carper from Delaware as a conservative Republican. Isn't Carper in fact a Democrat? You would think that Obama would remember this as Joe Biden is also a Democrat from Delaware. I have yet to hear the media address this mix up

Posted by: rk9404 | September 27, 2008 8:06 AM | Report abuse

From:
Head of State
http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/09/anger-entitlement-and-contempt.html

Saturday, September 27, 2008
What A Debate Reveals: Anger, Entitlement and Contempt

What I found shocking reflecting on last night's debate was how angry and entitled McCain was, in a very open way.

McCain's manner was one of that who believed he should not even be on the same stage with this person. This indicates a person of extreme rights and extreme wrongs, not a statesmanlike persona, but an angry and impulsive one.

McCain carries strong ideas of what a liberal is, ideas that very little from his cherished ideas of who betrayed the nation during the Vietnam war. A stock character, driven and created by his own rage, carried, as it has been since the '70s, with a virtual ideological blindness--blinded by a contemptuous rage--that there are others who cannot understand the world the way he can. This is not judgment, but angry certainty. This is not readiness, but a just-contained rage that he should be confronted by such ideas.

You can see it in his constricted "can you believe it" rage at one who disagrees with him. This kind of contemptuous, angry dismissal of others ideas leads easily into the impulsive decisions of the last few months--generated with barely contained contemptuous rejection of those who would reject his ideas--only the most recent forms of those essential constructs--a contemptible media, easily fed with false notions and panaceas, as he believes they were earlier in his life; intellectuals, whose reason and deliberation is contrasted with the sharp, impulsive action that for his life has constituted a certain knowledge, and an angry, certain need to sweep away those who would stand in the path of righteous certainty.

What is beautifully ironic is how McCain maintains this contempt even as he switches from one position to another in the opportunistic second--this is when the look of contempt and entitlement turns, for a moment, to anxiety and panic.

Soon, however, the gaze is back. No matter what the new position is--impulsively determined, desperately grasped--if only "they" knew better. If only "they" knew the truth.

This kind of ideological rigidity and certainty (note how Obama could not contain himself from smiling when McCain attempted to compare him to Bush in that regard) combined with impulsive decision making, from the "gut" of sure knowledge, is what has created the outcomes of the past 8 years.

It was--in a setting where one would not expect it to be, where one would expect McCain to contain it--glaring apparent last night.

This is an amplification of the last 8 years rather than a change.

We do not need to experience this type of decision making again.

Cite:
Head of State
http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/09/anger-entitlement-and-contempt.html

Posted by: caraprado1 | September 27, 2008 8:17 AM | Report abuse

joep1,
Obviously you have difficulty recognizing subtlety. What Obama was saying by saying "I have a bracelet too" was that he too has been speaking to families and the message he is getting from military families is that they want their families out. But you are a member of the ignorant masses who would believe McCain did a good job. McCain just repeated the mantras of the Bush administration and in fact he seemed to try to outbush bush. McCain was frequently off-track and in clumsy ways tried to insert comments that he thought would resonate but instead fell flat. McCain looked like a washed-up nasty little man. Obama appeared presidential. He did this by being respectful but forthright and by citing facts. Obama's arguments while not perfect at times were much more thoughtful and measured.

But I'm pessimistic. Most Americans are morons like you and will vote for more of the same failed policies.

Posted by: commentator3 | September 27, 2008 8:17 AM | Report abuse

Has the Washington Post SOLD OUT to the greedy Corporate America?

Senator Obama by far showed that he would steer away from the power mongering military minded America which brought 8 years of war and destruction to not only America but the world. McCain (should really be General McCain) is the King of Deregulation which fed into the hands of corporate greed and brought us here.

Obama showed his stature as a leader of the most powerful nation on earth - leading by the best example of what a democracy means. A democracy is not forced down other countries' throats because it is to our interest to do so. A democracy does not call it a surge, when soldiers are ordered to just enter homes without checking to see who's inside and shooting, a democracy does not have an ugly head that drops bombs, kills hundreds of civilians and just says OOOPSSS - Obama is absolutely correct in saying that if our excuse to go into Iraq which had none of our attackers and NO TERRORISTS - now we have created and escalated even more terrorism. Terrorism is a result of countries angered by an America who constantly drops into countries and thinks it can dictate to them by the force of arms and the excuse of terrorism that they have to give America what it wants, or else.

You have a McCain who has always supported this ridiculous war in Iraq - had nothing to do with the terrorists, and by far was the least of bad examples of dictatorships. With all that was wrong with it, it was a functioning, vibrant country. Now they can't even get a decent road or clean water...GIVE ME A BREAK. McCain supporters are supporting the continuation of this.

McCain Keeps talking about WINNING this WAR. As though winning is key. What are we children playing checkers???!!!

To bring Democracy to a country???? Give me a break. This is Capitalism talking. We killed, bombed their people with our who are angered by the US who thinks of what's best for America, not a certain sector of America, before he acts.

Wake up American, even the Washington Post has sold out to Corporate Capitalism. They keep putting McCain in a more positive light - instead of TELLING IT LIKE IT IS. My God did I get that drilled into my head in a school of Journalism I went to in America?

Posted by: Allie2 | September 27, 2008 8:34 AM | Report abuse

mccain couldn't even look at obama when he was lying. i thought that was very striking.

my mom and dad said, why won't he look at him?

i said, b/c he has a conscience and used to be an honest man and probably can't lie while staring at a man.

to me, that was the most interesting part of the debate's back and forth.

Posted by: fiddle25 | September 27, 2008 8:38 AM | Report abuse

Imperious fits McCain to a fault. Arrogant also fits. His constant referring to "I know better" because he traveled to various countries over the years sounded more like I know foreign affairs because I can see Russia from Alaska. McCain's attempt to put Obama in short pants with his constant "he doesn't understand" fell short when Obama showed he does understand. Obama A-, McCain D.

Wake up America! You are not living better nor are we better protected under the Republicans nor will we under McCant.

Posted by: beachbum1938 | September 27, 2008 8:41 AM | Report abuse

Rfiskum, if I took your logic then John McCain is still a womanizer, drunk and party animal who had more demerits at Annapolis then any candidate. Should I also say "Adulterer"...

Posted by: beachbum1938 | September 27, 2008 8:45 AM | Report abuse

Senator McCain showed maturity,aplomb, and wisdom.Obama acted like a petulant, surly, immature adolescent.

Posted by: tsapp77 | September 27, 2008 8:51 AM | Report abuse

I take a CBS poll with a grain of salt. I thought Obama had his rhetoric memorized very well but really didn't say anything new only the same rhetoric that has been coming from the dems for the last two years or more. I still do not believe that he has a grasp on foreign policy. His sound bites are good but if you really listen he is quite the empty suit.

Posted by: sque1 | September 27, 2008 8:57 AM | Report abuse

Senator McCain showed maturity, wisdom, and aplomb. Obama acted like a surly,petulant,immature adolescent.

Posted by: tsapp77 | September 27, 2008 9:04 AM | Report abuse

It was obvious that McCain would not look at or make eye contact with Obama. It is common knowledge that McCain has dislike for Obama. Maybe McCain was protecting himself from one of his famous temper showings. Not a good display for a POTUS.

Posted by: ernieson | September 27, 2008 9:27 AM | Report abuse

An excellent win for Obama. McCain's unpleasant, nasty, condescending tone is very annoying. He clearly believes that he, Big John McCain, is a better man. Well, he ain't.

Obama addressed many of his comments to middle class voters like myself. For McCain, he believes that he is middle class. And that is why McCain is going to lose, and lose big, in November.

Posted by: storageboy | September 27, 2008 9:29 AM | Report abuse

Jan1977 - By definition, if you have decided to side with one party or the other, you are no longer independent. Unfortunately, that's not the only thing you are wrong about.

Clearly your articulate, concise and well thought out commentary, "Obama/Biden Sucks!" shows that you are an intellectual giant. The bad news, is that you are only a giant among the other Rush Limbaugh lemmings that post the Republican talking points wherever they can.

I recommend that you try thinking for yourself. I'm sure it will hurt at first, but if you push through the pain, you may find you enjoy it.

You know what they call a Republican that thinks for himself - a Democrat.

Good luck and in the future, please try to remember to take your meds. It may help to keep from continually making a fool out of yourself.

Posted by: xconservative | September 27, 2008 9:31 AM | Report abuse

Obama smirked alot and looked angry. He did not win this debate. Mccain looked much more Presdiential than Obama and only teenagers and college folks are quick to hit the text messaging buttons. This is not AMERICAN IDOL folks. NOBAMA !!!

Posted by: JUNGLEJIM123 | September 27, 2008 9:39 AM | Report abuse

The way I figure it, either the economy or the war has to be your top issue this election. So here is an look at the two candidates using direct quotes and non-partisan refererences, and video where applicable.

So the Iraq War is your top issue:

First, you do understand that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Do you recognize that there were no terrorists in the country before we invaded in March of 2003? If not, here are some good references:

NBC: Report: 9/11-Iraq link refuted immediately - Security - MSNBC.com www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10164478 - Cached

FOX: FOXNews.com - The Connection Between 9/11 and Iraq - Brit Hume ... www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,97063,00.html - 53k - Cached

The Washington Post: Al Qaeda-Hussein Link Is Dismissed (washingtonpost.com) www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A46254-2004Jun16.html -

The 9/11 attack was launched from Afghanistan, why invade Iraq? Obama said then that Iraq was a “dangerous distraction,” and that the “war on terror was never in Iraq, its in Pakistan and Afghanistan.” His opposition to this war from the beginning has been well documented, but here one:
Obama calls Iraq war a 'dangerous distraction' - CNN.com
www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/15/obama.iraq/index.html - 86k - Cached

I defy anyone to argue that Iraq didn’t take our eye off the ball of the real terrorst threat. Even today, 9/24/2008, our generals on the ground in Afghanistan are asking for more troops to fight terrorists, but we can’t supply another 2,000 troops until the spring due to our Iraq commitments. We currently have 140,000 troops in Iraq. Read this article quoting our Defense Secretary who says “we need to think about how heavy a military footprint the U.S. ought to have in Afghanstan…” and goes on to say “despite requests from commanders in Afchanistan, the military has no additional forces to send there.”
Gates sees no more troops for Afghanistan until spring - CNN.com
www.cnn.com/2008/US/09/23/gates.afghanistan/index.html?eref=rss_latest

Now McCain is a war hero, no one can take that away. But for all his experience he has been dead wrong on this issue from day one. Here he is with Dick Cheney in 2003 making the case to go to war. He says we will be “greeted as liberators.” Here’s video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKFL-Mz4rto

More than 5 years later McCain wants a lot of the credit for the surge policy. Lets give him credit where credit is due, both on this issue and on his heroism for this country as a POW in Vietnam. He also has famously said he would follow Bin Laden “into the gates of hell,” which I like, since Al Queida and Bin Laden are the real threats, and what I want our leaders focused on, instead of the Iraq distraction.

McCain, in a speech this spring said that if we elect Barack Obama “We will risk the confused leadership of an inexperienced candidate who one suggested the bombing of our ally Pakistan.”

FOXNews.com - Obama Fights War on 2 Fronts as McCain Steps Up Attacks ...
www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,331550,00.html - 56k - Cached

Here is Barack Obama’s quote that McCain was responding to: “If we have actionable intelligence aboukt high-value terrorists targets and [Pakistan] President Musharraf wont act, I will.”

Tough talk on Pakistan from Obama | U.S. | Reuters
www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN0132206420070801

So it sounds like McCain will go into the gates of hell, but not across the Afghanistan/Pakistan border. Ask yourself, how committed should America be to killing the terrorists who attacked us.

There has also been a lot of talk about Barack Obama’s plan for withdrawl from Iraq. McCain has called it “cut and run,” and “putting politics ahead of country.” Well, here are what a few prominent world leaders say about the plan:

Bush: In reversal, Bush to accept Iraq withdrawal timetable - Yahoo! News
news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080822/ts_alt_afp/usiraqbush - 52k - Cached

Iraq leadership: Iraqi PM Supports Obama's Withdrawal Plan, Al-Maliki Approves Of ...
cbsnews.com/stories/2008/07/19/iraq/main4275137.shtml?...

McCain himself: ABC News: McCain on 16-Month Iraq Exit
abcnews.go.com/Politics/TheNote/story?id=5453293&page=1 - 94k

We got him on video there. Make sure you draw no distinction between McCain and Obama’s Iraq plans, since right here we can see how similar they are.

The question comes down to, who was right from the beginning, and who pushed to go into Iraq and take our attention away from the real threat? And where should our focus be now?

So the economy is your big issue:

You are aware his economic adviser said only a month ago that America had no real economic problems, but was instead in “a mental recession” and called us a “nation of whiners.”

ABC News: Obama Blasts McCain Over Advisor's 'Mental Recession' Comments
www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=5350099&page=1 - 96k

This is particularly important since McCain will rely on economic advisors more than past administrations, and this was the person who was writing his cue cards. Case in point, remember when McCain said “I don’t know economics that well.”

What McCain's investing strategy reveals about his character. - By ...
www.slate.com/id/2189898 - Cached

He obviously must not, since a month ago he said “the economy is fundamentally strong.” This was echoed by President Bush, as well, as this video shows:

YouTube - McCain: Out of Touch
www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRV8Q9IBDxk - 118k - Cached

Of course McCain is offering tax cuts. But watch this video showing how in 2003-2005 he was against the Bush tax cuts due to the costs of the war as well as “the disproportionate amount that went to the wealthiest Americans.” He went on to say “"I think we would be making a terrible mistake to go back to the '80s, where we cut all of those taxes and all of a sudden now we've got a debt that we've got to pay on an annual basis that is bigger than the amount that we spend on defense."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/24/AR2008042403456.html

This is probably why he is ducking the presidential debates on Friday. These issues, his 8 houses, and tax cuts that exceed Obama’s only for the wealthy ($603,000, if you want to put a dollar amount on it.) To bone up on economics McCain was reading Alan Greenspan’s “The Age of Turbulence.” Greenspan himself, in a recent interview, said he (a republican, mind you) couldn’t support McCain’s tax cuts that would be “financed on borrowed money.” John McCain prior to the presidential election would have agreed with him; prior to 2006 he had a clear record. Turns out that despite all the talk he really would rather win an election than do what he believes in.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26689925/

The same article goes on to say that his proposal to end earmarks on legislation to balance the budget would be a ‘drop in the bucket.’ Also “While McCain opposed the 2003 cuts and previous Bush administration tax cuts from 2001, he now says he would leave them intact. Obama has said he would repeal Bush tax cuts benefiting families making over $250,000 annually to pay for programs and provide middle-tax class relief.”

If nothing else, maybe you want to take one more look at these candidates…

Posted by: RoryinMichigan | September 27, 2008 9:42 AM | Report abuse

I am really looking forward to the VP debate on Thursday. I have my bible, and my pentacostal gobbledeboop decoder ring ready. Sarah is a really wack Pentacostal - sort of wack on top of wack - so she will be a challenge to decode.

Here's a little sample: "I can see russia from john mccain is a real american hero i shoot moose"

Posted by: storageboy | September 27, 2008 9:48 AM | Report abuse

I have a different take on McCain's inability to look his opponent in the eye: He's lied about Obama and he knows it.

Think about McCain confronting Bush at the end of the 2000 primary when Bush refused to look McCain in the eye.

I really believe McCain would like to think of himself as being "honorable", yet he's discarded his values to try to win at all costs. He's trying to justify his actions to himself, but his conscience is showing the opposite.

Obama, on the other hand, used strong points against McCain- wrong to get us into Iraq, wrong to give huge tax cuts to the wealthy and ignoring the real economy of the middle class, wrong about deregulation, wrong to joke about bombing other countries- yet Obama was so secure in his positions that he could look McCain in the eye and tell him he was wrong.

I heard McCain implying that he would get us into another war like the one in Iraq, despite everything that has proven going into Iraq has actually made us weaker in the world.

Posted by: ladyvet | September 27, 2008 9:55 AM | Report abuse

I was satisfied with Obama's performance. You could see that he was going out of the way to sound polite & respectful, lest he be called disrespectful & an "uppity n*****". For saying Sarah Palin "good lookin" he was called disrespectful.
However I would have liked it better if he had said in his closing statement, that his judgment is better than the next person's experience. Dick Cheney & Don Rumsfeld had about 50 years experience between them. But for their "experience" & bad judgment 4100+ American soldiers would be alive today... not to talk of the economic hit.

Posted by: sarvenk63 | September 27, 2008 9:58 AM | Report abuse

The more I see and hear Obama, the more impressed I become. Obama really seems to have a level head and the opposite or Bush and McCain.

McCain seemed almost shifty and ready to punch you in the nose. I got the impression McCain did not want to be there and I did not like McCain slamming Obama every chance he got.

IMO

Posted by: beenthere3 | September 27, 2008 10:08 AM | Report abuse

I certainly didn't see a clear winner. Obama scored major points on economic issues, as did McCain on foreign policy issues. Who looked more presidential? To me, it was Obama. McCain's refusal to look at Obama (while grinning, no less) was anything but presidential.

I get very annoyed when candidates purposely and grossly mischaracterize their opponents' views. Even though they both did it, I thought McCain pushed this tactic to the limit of acceptability. I also wasn't too comfortable with Obama calling McCain "John", especially since McCain referred to Obama as "Senator Obama".

The debate didn't change my mind. I would have seriously considered McCain's candidacy had he picked a more serious VP candidate. I really like McCain and I have a lot of respect for him, but his choice of Sarah Palin as a running mate was a game changer for me. I simply cannot take her seriously.

Posted by: gerard2003 | September 27, 2008 10:12 AM | Report abuse

There was nothing new or informative in the debate, just a chance to evaluate demeanor. On that score, Obama was an easy winner. McCain reminded me of my 1968 Chevy, just before I traded the clunker in, belching black smoke out of the exhausts and on the verge of a complete breakdown.

Posted by: RCFriedman | September 27, 2008 10:27 AM | Report abuse

Maybe this is just me but every time McCain said "Obama just doesn't understand" I heard "Obama just doesn't understand that the world is still in the 20th century"

Also, McCain's answer to Black Sept budget cuts was shocking: government programs will be largely shut down, unless you are a veteran. New roads, bridges and other infrastructure are pork barrel projects that will be vetoed. There will be no more pretense that the federal government is for the little guy or for making life better for the next generation (not entirely convinced the baby boomers in positions of power can see beyond their own generation).

Posted by: bpkell | September 27, 2008 10:33 AM | Report abuse

Obama didn't do what I wanted him to do. He didn't chide McCain for making angry, hot headed statements about Putin -- when someday soon the next President will be sitting across a table from Putin negotiating the elimination of "loose nukes" that threaten U.S. cities. He didn't point out that a President has to be steady and level-headed under pressure. He didn't say that McCain's Hail Mary approach to decisionmaking was the game plan of losers, not the game plan of a great nation. Yet -- Obama got these points across subliminally, through his demeanor, and through the way he has conducted himself this week. This is why I am just a middle level manager in a pharmaceutical company, and Barack Obama is about to become the 44th President of the United States.

Posted by: FactsRStubborn | September 27, 2008 10:39 AM | Report abuse

need4truth and others who post War and Peace or in all caps. Nobody reads you. If you want to be read be short and to the point and for cripes sake, don't use all caps.

Posted by: msgrinnell | September 27, 2008 10:44 AM | Report abuse

I thought it was an edge for McCain. The drudge report has it 68% for McCain and a lowly 30% for Obama.

These guys who write these stories don't know much about anything. They just parrot political and special interest talking points.

This ought to shake you up a little bit: http://www.thexreport.com/the_prague_connection1.htm

Here is something else everyone should see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khuu-RhOBDU&feature=related

In the above note link, this pastor says Obama was born trash and is an emissary of the devil. (you have to watch it in its entirety)

Posted by: esperito | September 27, 2008 10:55 AM | Report abuse

Hey EJ Dionne put down that Toxic Obama
Kool Aid Pal,as Sen John McCain WON the
Debate and Kicked Messiah Barack Obama
Butt Good! Go John Go! All The Way To The
White House! Go Sarah Go! All The Way To
The White House too! McCain/Palin Rocks!
Obama/Biden Sucks! Face it EJ and Obamabots
your little pet Barack Hussein Obama and
Big Mouth Old Joe Biden Are TOAST! NOBAMA!

More Independent Voters 4 McCain/Palin 2008

Posted by: Jan1977 | September 27, 2008 1:12 AM


//

Another cooly reasoned argument from the right.

McCain is too old, too parochial, and too backward-looking. Palin is simply not qualified for higher office. This ticket is doomed.

Posted by: Attucks | September 27, 2008 10:58 AM | Report abuse

I saw something very clearly in last night's debate (Sept 26) that I don't think Obama's campaign is emphasizing nearly enough. Time after time, Senator Obama prefaced his remarks with "I agree with Senator McCain ..." McCain's camp tried to mock him on this, but I take it to mean that Obama does not blindly form his policy just to be the anti-McCain. Meanwhile, even when McCain was saying essentially the same thing as Obama, McCain framed it as a disagreement, along the lines of, "Senator Obama says that today is Friday. Well, *I* say that today is *Friday* and I've seen Fridays and lived through Fridays, and I personally know Henry Kissinger who knows a thing or two about Fridays..." McCain is a man who sees life in terms of perpetual conflict and confrontation. If there isn't a fight, he will pick one (witness his disruptive behavior in returning to the Senate this week and blowing up any sort of deal on the bank bailout). This goes way beyond lipstick and flag pins and all -- this is THE fundamental difference between these two, and it's the primary reason I am backing Obama.

Posted by: n_mcguire | September 27, 2008 11:01 AM | Report abuse

In my work I've attended many administrative meetings and seen many styles of negotiation. I observe that the most successful negotiators are those who are calm, respectful, and analytical. Ignoring or dismissing one's adversaries is no way to garner their help, and belittling them only turns them into bitter, long-term enemies. An "analytical" approach means providing a way to sort through complex issues, so that points of agreement can be brought out, and disagreements be whittled down. In a president, I hope for a person who can rally the public, but I also expect a person who can negotiate effectively. After Bush, I would even prefer a person who can negotiate competently over one with whom I simply "agree." Fortunately, on most issues in this election I happen to agree with the candidate whom I think is the better negotiator.

Posted by: JPMinNC | September 27, 2008 11:14 AM | Report abuse

I’m an independent. I watched the debate to determine who I’ll vote for. Although Obama seemed presidential, McCain clearly won this debate. All in all, I feel that either candidate would make a good president but there is no doubt, in anyone who isn’t bias, that McCain won round one and by a fairly good margin. I’m still undecided though.

Posted by: DinkyDow | September 27, 2008 11:28 AM | Report abuse

On foreign policy a slight edge to McCain, on domestic policy an Obama slam dunk. McCain rudely cut off many of Obama's rebuttals which will cost him more than Obama's answers. Obama did not use the experienced military committee man does not listen to the top military men. McCain was against Shinseki on Iraq, Fallon on Iran, the Joint Chiefs on the surge , drawdown and Afghan buildup as well as talking with enemies. Confronting the Bear cost Saakashvili dearly and they now control the Georgian pipeline. Cheney and McCain were for confrontation while Rice, Gates and then Obama took a different view. The civil war there was the reason Russia sent peacekeepers to begin with and they have taken the Russian side in the conflict. Not much we can do with EU dependent on the Bear for her energy needs. The Taliban are killing policemen in Kabul, so much work to be done in that theater. Petraeus' Obama may be right statement seems to me the new centcom commander needs troops as fast as possible in Afghanistan and he is hedging his bet. McCain enjoyed a temporary reprieve with Palin, but now the game is over. She does not hit a home run against Biden, game over.

Posted by: jameschirico | September 27, 2008 11:46 AM | Report abuse

**Can someone explain why Obama kept calling Senator McCain, John?**
It's his name

**He also called him Jim and Tom at one point?**

Jim Lehrer was the moderator, there was reference to a Tom in the transcript

" Tom — or John mentioned me being wildly liberal. Mostly that’s just me opposing George Bush’s wrong headed policies "

**And correct me if I am wrong, but at one point Obama referenced Tom Carper from Delaware as a conservative Republican**

He mentioned Tom Coburn, who is a conservative republican from Oklahoma.
(You asked me to correct you if your were wrong...)
So now that I did all that research for you, are you ready to vote for Obama or is there something else you're still confused about?

Posted by: dijetlo | September 27, 2008 12:12 PM | Report abuse

They both gave their best performances,
and they are both 300 percent better than W., so things are definitely looking up.

As a strong Obama supporter, I have to say that
McCain performed absolutely fantastic for a man of 72.
McCain was effective at reducing expectations of his performance,
or even whether he would participate at all.

It wasn't enough. Obama was great.
They both look ready for the job.

Posted by: julian2 | September 27, 2008 12:16 PM | Report abuse

Obama was supposed to be a skilled debater, but there was little evidence of that in the first debate. And Obama's misstatement of Kissinger's position on negotiations without preconditions can be explained only by saying that Obama is not very knowledgeable. It's turning out that Obama's performance as a mediocre undergraduate student may be a better clue to the man than his grades in law school.

Posted by: ThisIsReality | September 27, 2008 12:21 PM | Report abuse

"Sixty-six percent of uncommitted voters think Obama would make the right decisions about the economy. Forty-four percent think McCain would."

Is there something wrong with your math? Or did some people vote twice?

Posted by: lavdad2 | September 27, 2008 12:22 PM | Report abuse

Here’s my prediction:

McCain’s last two weeks have sucked, to wit: “The economy is fundamentally sound”/Ric Davis/dropping in the polls/”suspending the campaign”/Couric’s interview with Palin/ interfering with bailout negotiations/reversing his decision to attend the debate/not “knocking it out of the park” in the debate that was supposed to be his strength & Obama’s weakness . . .

Sometime in the next week, and definitely before the vice-presidential debate, McCain will pull another “maverick” stunt in an effort to turn his sinking campaign around: Palin will resign from the campaign, citing some lame excuse like “my family needs me.” This will probably drop two seconds after the details of the bailout agreement are reached, so it can get obscured to some degree. After McCain Saves America by voting for the bailout package that he’ll claim he helped engineer, he will then pick Lieberman or Giuliani as his running mate. It won’t matter that they’re too liberal for all of the religious conservatives; the Republican Party will be so desperate to win the election, they’ll get on board immediately, and spin Palin’s withdrawal as “honorable” and “family focused”, and the new VP will be “battle-tested and experienced”. This will postpone the vice-presidential debate indefinitely (perhaps cancel it permanently), and focus the media back on the McCain campaign.

The decision to remove Palin will be as cynical as the decision to add her in the first place: to take the spotlight off of Obama, and torpedo his rising poll numbers. With less than 40 days to go, it might be the “October surprise” everyone’s been waiting for.

Posted by: pfallsgirl | September 27, 2008 12:27 PM | Report abuse

As an Obama supporter I watched the debate with an air of nervousness (Obama had not been assertful and too nuanced in previous debates). He had learned his lessons well as it turns out. This self attached superiority of McCain's knowledge re foreign affairs was exposed ...leading him to mouth the frustrating "Sen. Obama does not understand....)" on multiple occasions.

Posted by: mendonsa | September 27, 2008 12:43 PM | Report abuse

This race maybe over after the Palin/Biden debate. With WA, CO, MN, WI, MI, PA, NH, NJ, and NM going to Obama he already has 273 needed for election. McCain needs NV, CO, MO, IN, OH, VA, NC and FL to win. He wins NH and all except CO it is a tie that McCain wins with 27 states having a Republican house vs 22-23 for the Democrats.

Posted by: jameschirico | September 27, 2008 1:01 PM | Report abuse

John McCain clearly won the debate last night.

Baracky Hussein Obama seemed to be extremely nervous.

Democrats for John McCain and Sarah Palin in 2008.

Posted by: hclark1 | September 27, 2008 1:08 PM | Report abuse

I thought McCain came off better than I expected, given the large number of factual mistakes that he has made on nearly every topic recently. However, his demeanor and approach seem much more appropriate for a Senator than a President. Obama acts Presidential, is clearly very well informed, and obviously more intelligent than McCain.

Then there are the policy distinctions, which are stark. Basically, if you like what Bush has done over 8 years then support McCain, but if not, you should obviously support Obama. The only thing McCain appears to want to change, is to get rid of earmarks. That is his idea of change?

Posted by: ncarver1 | September 27, 2008 1:28 PM | Report abuse

Though Senator McCain shook off the confusion of the past week to give a fairly coherent performance last night, I had to wonder about the effectiveness of his President Eisenhower anecdote. Remember, as a way of showing accountability, McCain recalls how Eisenhower wrote two letters the night before the Normandy invasion: one congratulating the troops if the invasion succeeded and one offering his resignation if it failed.

I wonder if McCain wrote two letters when he selected his vice-presidential running mate. And, after Governor Palin pulled another no-show for the usual post-debate partisan spinning, which letter he's got in his hand right now.

Posted by: tsawyer_mv | September 27, 2008 1:30 PM | Report abuse

After all those dishonest commercials, it's no wonder McCain had trouble looking Obama in the eye.

Posted by: McBain1 | September 27, 2008 1:37 PM | Report abuse

The big comment that Obama omitted when McCain was talking about all the things he voted for and against (many of which went his way) is "And look where we are now ..." If the things McCain voted for/against that did not go his way were in opposition to his own party, then what does it say about McCain's ability to persuade others? If the things McCain voted for/against passed, look at the results -- not good!

If Senator-lacking-congeniality pisses people off with his all-or-nothing approach to things, it will be a continuation of the Bush debacle.

I really liked two points Obama made last night:
1. The money being spent on Iraq is contributing to the economic woes of this country.
2. His "most liberal voter" record was earned opposing the very things that are bringing this country down -- which John McCain supports.

I would like some assurances from Obama that he will work with the Joint Chiefs and the officers on the ground regarding the withdrawal from Iraq to maximize the safety of the troops that remain. I don't care if that means leaving the Iraqi factions to kill each other in some provinces -- just as long as the troops have enough coverage where they remain -- and can access transportation quickly enough to get the h*** out of there.

Obama missed an opportunity when Jim Lehrer asked him a question using the phrase [approximation] "...your rule as president". That was an opportunity to say, "I will *lead* as President and seek congressional cooperation. There have been entirely too many attempts in the last 8 years by the current president to 'rule' the country -- to its detriment!"

Posted by: nadinac | September 27, 2008 1:43 PM | Report abuse

Who is McCain to tell a member of the senate that he doesn't know the difference between tactical and strategy. Did he think he was talking to Palin. Instead, of telling OBAMA he doesn't understand he need to pull out a map and show Palin the distance between Russia and Alaska, and while you are at it, let her also know that the big deep ocean is not a border.
It's time for SENIOR McCain to retire. since he can see KGB in Putins eyes; we the American people see (DCA)Dumb Chick from Alaska.

Posted by: ClintonVoter4Obama | September 27, 2008 1:57 PM | Report abuse

let's look at the war in iraq through the eyes of osama bin laden:

1. binladen's goals are to bring down the united states and become the new caliph based on the fundamental principles of the islamic faith.
2. his strategy was to engage the united states in war in afghanistan, where he believed the united states would be defeated, as had been the soviets and the british in the 19th century.
3, his tactics included the attack on 9/11.
4. the united states responded with the predictable invasion of afghanistan.
5. but the united states made the strategic blunder of also invading iraq, probably to binladen's surprise and delight. the invasion has weakened the united states, which fits into binladen's plan and forwards the achieving of his goals. the war in iraq has cost binladen a minimum in resources and has not adversely affected the taliban's war in afghanistan. in fact, it has done the reverse.
6. the moment US troops entered iraq, binladen won the war in iraq. we have wasted treasure, lives, and our standing in the middle east. we have made it more important to prop up anti-democratic regimes in egypt, saudi arabia, and pakistan for the sake of the war on terror than to spread democracy.

while mccain fumes about achieving victory in iraq, the reality is, binladen has already won the war in iraq.


Posted by: sapo477 | September 27, 2008 2:04 PM | Report abuse


I thought the debate was pretty even.

But if the best Dionne can give Obama is "an edge," then McCain must have thoroughly trounced the Illinois senator.

Posted by: WylieD | September 27, 2008 2:20 PM | Report abuse

McCain supporters who earn less than $250,000 a year are ignorant sheep who are easily manipulated by the rich.

Obama clearly won the debate speaking substantively and knowledgeably about the issues.

McCain is the only thing worse than Bush. No ideas, no solutions, no change for America's image around the world.

Hey America, did you realize that we are broke and living off credit from China? You think that's working pretty good?

Vote McCain for more if the same, the continued decline of America.

Posted by: sodesper8 | September 27, 2008 3:13 PM | Report abuse

If anybody had any doubts about whether McCain is a racist, last night's debate proved it. His disdain and contempt for Obama was so offensive it was painful to watch. Even if you tried hard to forget the fact that he voted against the MLK day holiday, his racist behavior towards Obama forced the issue. Does anyone believe that he would behave that bad towards any other white candidates?? Absolutely not.

Posted by: motherforobama | September 27, 2008 3:43 PM | Report abuse

McCain will not be respected on the world stage. He is a broken record hanging on too much to the past. His behavior is erratic over the past week and his abandonment of his first wife shows he is just an opportunist. He has been shallow and ungracious during the debate despite Jim Lehrer lop sided handling given him more air time. McCain should seriously look around the several homes he has and retire quietly and not being a public nuisance on the economy.

Posted by: juzsmart | September 27, 2008 4:19 PM | Report abuse

Jan1977:

Barack Obama's middle name is not "Hussein". If you can't write anything intelligent, don't write anything at all.

Posted by: sweladi | September 27, 2008 4:32 PM | Report abuse

username:

You should check your facts. Neither of the Presidential candidates have anything to do with the negotiations. They are not on any of the committees. They can input suggestions as heads of their parties but the ONLY action they take is voting on the final product. This is the reason why McCain "suspending" his campaign (which he did not actually do) to go to DC was just a political move in order to get focus on him again. It just didn't work!!!!

Posted by: sweladi | September 27, 2008 4:52 PM | Report abuse

I was disapointed. Obama for all his fans should have done allot better and be ahead by far in the polls. McCain is just not steady enough. Sorry, he just looks scared and not in good health.
We have much to address in this country and neither candidate has what it takes.
Vp's do not look good either. 'We' the public are the losers because of a lousy 2 party system.
I am voting independent and enocourage others not to accept what your handed -Remember-they work for you!

Posted by: crrobin | September 27, 2008 6:06 PM | Report abuse

One thing we do know is that Obamba is against business. The only thing he knows are people rallies. How is this guy going to run our economy..

Posted by: robinhood2 | September 27, 2008 6:07 PM | Report abuse

McCain is ashamed of America because he thinks we lost the war in Vietnam ... well maybe we did, our ultimate goals were never reached and the north did eventually take over the south - I guess we did lose.

He doesn't want the same thing to happen in Iraq, he seems to think victory at any cost is preferable to another Vietnam. His pride and shame are more important to him than they should be, and I personally don't givasht about his hurt feelings.

He seems to have agreed that we shouldn't have gone in there in the first place ... but says we can't pay attention that to now because we are there.

McCain, you putz, if we don't pay attention to the mistakes of the past .... duh. I get tired of the republican mendacity on this issue.

I don't trust the man anymore. He has sold his honor to win the nomination, his one redeeming feature.

After his behavior last night, his public display of disdain for his opponent, it strikes me that he's making the same mistakes about Obama that Hillary did. She assumed she would win, she assumed it was owed to her, she assumed it was her right.

I think she had too many asskissers in her campaign to be able to see reality, and I think McCain has made the same mistake.

Posted by: barferio | September 27, 2008 6:14 PM | Report abuse

Seriously? Obama didnt offer more than 3 facts the entire night. McCain listed bill after bill, conflict after conflict. Obama never answered any of the questions. He is a great debater, but offered no substance.

And to sweladi:
not that it matters, but Barack Obama's middle name is Hussein...it is factually accurate.. although i dont know why people care

Posted by: matteucs | September 27, 2008 6:20 PM | Report abuse

Dionne's competing with Robinson as to who will be the Minister of Propaganda in the Obama regime.

Slight edge right now to Dionne.

Posted by: info42 | September 27, 2008 6:37 PM | Report abuse

No country for lieing old men. Vote Obama, he's a ten!

Posted by: sunrise2 | September 27, 2008 8:00 PM | Report abuse

John McCain’s arrogance, disrespect, and condescension towards Obama in tonight’s debate, and his very refusal to even look at him, is precisely how the American government has historically belittled and behaved towards other nations, and precisely why so many of the world’s people resent and hate us.

It is McCain, not Obama, who “doesn’t understand.” It is McCain who “doesn’t get it.” It is McCain who would countinue to apply that suicidal mentality in his foreign policy.

Do you remember John Bobbit? After his wife, Lorena, severed his manhood, which was surgically replaced, he became hell-bent on making a porn movie to demonstrate that was he still "intact," after that terribly humiliating and (literally) emasculating incident. No one cared, nor forgot what his wife had done to him. McCain is no different.

Emasculated in the air over Vietnam, then mentally and physically broken by his captors in prison, he is now hell-bent on demonstrating his "manhood" through the pornography of continued unprovoked warfare, and reckless economic policy. This angry, hostile, man is simply unfit for the presidency.

Eric Silver
OutsidersDC.com

Posted by: EricSilver | September 27, 2008 8:00 PM | Report abuse

McCain is a weak man. he is full of the bravado that has sunk this country the last 8 years. fake man. weak man. castrated man. just like bush. pathetic, outrageous liar that is representing the rich to get richer. how could anyone with an income of less than 250,000 a year support McCain? he is perhaps smoother than obama but in my eyes he represents the castrated fake man that is all bluster and no balls, no heart, no sensitivity...i don't trust him to lead effectively in any way. he is too old, too full of himself. he disrespects the common man of America..do not be fooled working man. he is a fake.

Posted by: rayreyns | September 27, 2008 8:58 PM | Report abuse

i am watching the fox GOP cheersquad. It is funny so I am not whining like the poor victimhood GOP.
It beggars belief that Hannity can never ever ever ever give oBAMA ONE little point. This clown Hannity is just a joke. He is no journalist. He had better watch out because his grubby boss is not an idealogue- he will switch over to the winnng side as he did in UK, Australia and NZ. He strongly supports the powers that be in China with his Star network... and they are a Communist dictatorship.

Hannity thinks he's got it made babbling his GOP propaganda points. His grovelling to sARAH THE DILL moose disemboweller was sickening and quite funny as well. SH LOVES SP. A journalist? KRAUTHAMMER IS A CONSERVATIVE JOURNALIST... FAIR ENOUGH... BUT sean hannity is a bad joke... fraud.

Posted by: BobGuthrie | September 27, 2008 9:31 PM | Report abuse

Could someone please check the tape and explain to me why McCain was referring to SecState Madeline Albright? Did he mean Condeleeza Rice or was this a historic reference? Was this a "senior moment"?

Posted by: ergeller | September 27, 2008 10:14 PM | Report abuse

So much of the McCain line against Obama relies on he isn't presidential, he isn't like "you", he isn't mainstream - all of this stuff falls apart when Obama actually stands up there. If the debate was a "win" for Obama, that's why. They may have tied debating the issues, but when it comes to intangibles, Obama has been hit harder and pushed back better against the negatives people have tried to pin on him.

Posted by: Adastra8 | September 27, 2008 11:34 PM | Report abuse

McCain represents everything that has gone wrong with America...the Republican party is run by the good ole boys, represent lobbyists & the wealthy. Those of us that work cannot afford homes, cannot afford health care, and are no longer safe with the insane gun violence ushered in by the gun industry.

Time to throw out the trash in our capitol. Our children's futures depend on it.

Posted by: MichelleH | September 28, 2008 12:04 AM | Report abuse


McCain showing signs of castration?
McCain is a weak man. he is full of the bravado that has sunk this country the

last 8 years. fake man. weak man. castrated man. just like bush. pathetic,

outrageous liar that is representing the rich to get richer. how could anyone

with an income of less than 250,000 a year support McCain? he is perhaps

smoother than obama but in my eyes he represents the castrated fake man that is

all bluster and no balls, no heart, no sensitivity...i don't trust him to lead

effectively in any way. he is too old, too full of himself. he disrespects the

common man of America..do not be fooled working man. he is a fake.

Posted by: rayreyns | September 28, 2008 6:53 AM | Report abuse

Should we all just settle on the fact that the rest is yet to come? Yes, rest not best. And let us hope that some issues and opinions will be clarified. As it is now, all of us are in a quagmire of preconceived opinions, biases. We are presently beyond any kind of reasonable dialogue.
Call me crazy and I'll agree. Crazy and desperately seeking sanity.

Posted by: moran1 | September 28, 2008 8:00 AM | Report abuse

Content: a draw. Style and presentation: Obama by a mile. McCain was tense, jerky all tactics and had memorably bad body language. In fact if there's one fact that will be taken away from this debate in the realm of watches and sighs which are the only things recalled from those long ago debates it will be the fact that McCain never once looked at Obama. Obama did look like the cool poker player while McCain looked like the excitable craps player. And a word for all those Democrats who were disappointed Obama didn't rip off McCain's face. He was quite capable of it but he's not there to act out your revenge fantasies on Bush. He's there to get elected president and he made a substantial step forward on Friday night.

Posted by: johnbsmrk | September 28, 2008 8:41 AM | Report abuse

Content: a draw. Style and presentation: Obama by a mile. McCain was tense, jerky all tactics and had memorably bad body language. In fact if there's one fact that will be taken away from this debate in the realm of watches and sighs which are the only things recalled from those long ago debates it will be the fact that McCain never once looked at Obama. Obama did look like the cool poker player while McCain looked like the excitable craps player. And a word for all those Democrats who were disappointed Obama didn't rip off McCain's face. He was quite capable of it but he's not there to act out your revenge fantasies on Bush. He's there to get elected president and he made a substantial step forward on Friday night.

Posted by: johnbsmrk | September 28, 2008 8:42 AM | Report abuse

I am waiting to hear an explanation of why Obama favored associates such as Rev Wright, Priest Pfleger, and Ayers all who teach that America is an oppressive and racial nation. While in Illinois Obama made it a point to support Ayers teachings and remarks that Obama and his wife have made since seems to follow these teachings. This has all been documented and I believe we deserve an explanation.

Posted by: fmhand | September 28, 2008 10:11 AM | Report abuse

Family Told Obama NOT To Wear Soldier Son's Bracelet... Where is Media?
By Warner Todd Huston
September 28, 2008 - 03:53 ET

Barack Obama played the "me too" game during the Friday debates on September 26 after Senator John McCain mentioned that he was wearing a bracelet with the name of Cpl. Matthew Stanley, a resident of New Hampshire and a soldier that lost his life in Iraq in 2006. Obama said that he too had a bracelet. After fumbling and straining to remember the name, he revealed that his had the name of Sergeant Ryan David Jopek of Merrill, Wisconsin.

Shockingly, however, Madison resident Brian Jopek, the father of Ryan Jopek, the young soldier who tragically lost his life to a roadside bomb in 2006, recently said on a Wisconsin Public Radio show that his family had asked Barack Obama to stop wearing the bracelet with his son's name on it. Yet Obama continues to do so despite the wishes of the family.

Radio host Glenn Moberg of the show "Route 51" asked Mr. Jopek, a man who believes in the efforts in Iraq and is not in favor of Obama's positions on the war, what he and his ex-wife think of Obama continually using their son's name on the campaign trail.

Jopek began by saying that his ex-wife was taken aback, even upset, that Obama has made the death of her son a campaign issue. Jopek says his wife gave Obama the bracelet because "she just wanted Mr. Obama to know Ryan's name." Jopek went on to say that "she wasn't looking to turn it into a big media event" and "just wanted it to be something between Barack Obama and herself." Apparently, they were all shocked it became such a big deal.

But, he also said that his ex-wife has refused further interviews on the matter and that she wanted Obama to stop wearing the reminder of her son's sacrifice that he keeps turning into a campaign soundbyte..

Posted by: DrRevere | September 28, 2008 10:27 AM | Report abuse

The Democrat Party is a Criminal Enterprise
Countrywide Mortgage CEO Angelo Mozilo offered sweetheart deals on loans to his “friends”, who just happened to be people who had oversight responsibilities on his business. People like Fannie Mae CEO/chair Jim Johnson, Senators Chris Dodd and Kent Conrad, and others got below-market-rate loans from Mozilo through a “Friends of Angelo” program at one of the main lenders at the heart of the subprime collapse. Now a federal grand jury wants to talk to Angelo’s circle of friends to determine whether indictments for corruption are in order:

Countrywide Financial Corp., the biggest U.S. mortgage lender, made large, previously undisclosed home loans to two additional executives of Fannie Mae, the government-chartered firm at the center of the U.S. credit crisis.

One of Countrywide’s previously undisclosed customers at Fannie was Jamie Gorelick, an influential Democratic Party figure whose $960,000 mortgage refinancing in 2003 was handled through a program reserved for influential figures and friends of Countrywide’s chief executive at the time, Angelo Mozilo. Ms. Gorelick was Fannie Mae’s vice chairman at the time.

Another Countrywide client was recently ousted Fannie Mae Chief Executive Daniel Mudd, though it isn’t clear whether he received special treatment on two $3 million mortgage refinancings he made when he was the company’s chief operating officer. …

Countrywide loans on preferential terms to influential figures are the subject of a federal grand jury investigation in Los Angeles, according to people involved in the inquiry. Prosecutors subpoenaed records of many of the so-called “Friends of Angelo” loans in August, lawyers and others familiar with the matter said. …

While Countrywide was developing a closer working relationship with Fannie Mae, the company also had created a special path to handle loan applications from influential figures. The “Friends of Angelo” program channeled loan applications from celebrities, public figures and sports stars — often singled out by Mr. Mozilo — to a department where the borrowers received special treatment, sometimes including lower interest rates and a reduction in fees.

It’s been a while since we’ve heard from Jamie Gorelick. The former 9/11 Commission panelist wound up being one of the focal points of the dot-connecting afterwards, as she pushed for further separation of law enforcement and intelligence efforts in the years prior to the 9/11 attacks, even while al-Qaeda attacked American embassies in Africa and the USS Cole. Now she turns up at Fannie Mae, taking the same kind of insider loans while having oversight responsibilities for the GSE and the manner in which its business got transacted with other firms, including Countrywide.

Gorelick claims she never knew she got preferential treatment. For that matter, Barack Obama’s campaign adviser Jim Johnson says the same thing. However, both got loans a full point lower than market value at the time, after going outside the normal channels to get their loans handled. Are we to believe that the CEO of Fannie Mae and a member of its board were completely ignorant of the going rate for residential loans at the time of their application? What business did they think they were in, anyway? The rate for residential loans is the center of Fannie Mae’s business.

The notion that they were ignorant of their preferential treatment insults both their intelligence and ours. I suspect that a federal grand jury will feel the same way if Gorelick and Johnson try to use that line in their testimony, assuming they don’t just take the Fifth when called.

Gorelick hasn’t had any role in the presidential campaigns, but Johnson has been a high-level adviser to Barack Obama — and still is. Chris Dodd has taken leadership on the bailout bill negotiations on Capitol Hill. With two Democrats this closely tied to a federal grand jury action, they’d better hope that the grand jury takes its time in assessing the evidence. This to me seems a lot more worthy of an investigation than a dismissal of a political appointee in Juneau.

Posted by: DrRevere | September 28, 2008 10:29 AM | Report abuse

What was McCain's point in mentioning that North Koreans are 3 inches shorter than South Koreans? I see a President that thinks like this a bit worrisome.

Posted by: airstream | September 28, 2008 11:28 AM | Report abuse

Thia is a comment posted by a McCain-Palin supporter:

Hey EJ Dionne put down that Toxic Obama
Kool Aid Pal,as Sen John McCain WON the
Debate and Kicked Messiah Barack Obama
Butt Good! Go John Go! All The Way To The
White House! Go Sarah Go! All The Way To
The White House too! McCain/Palin Rocks!
Obama/Biden Sucks! Face it EJ and Obamabots
your little pet Barack Hussein Obama and
Big Mouth Old Joe Biden Are TOAST! NOBAMA!

More Independent Voters 4 McCain/Palin 2008

Is there any further need to wonder what kind of people are supporting the McCain Campsign. Even the McCain official surrogates sound pretty much like this with a slightly more articulate style. If I were a Republican I would be truly embaraarassed, but apparently they have no shame

Posted by: isaacs359 | September 28, 2008 12:59 PM | Report abuse

Thia is a comment posted by a McCain-Palin supporter:

Hey EJ Dionne put down that Toxic Obama
Kool Aid Pal,as Sen John McCain WON the
Debate and Kicked Messiah Barack Obama
Butt Good! Go John Go! All The Way To The
White House! Go Sarah Go! All The Way To
The White House too! McCain/Palin Rocks!
Obama/Biden Sucks! Face it EJ and Obamabots
your little pet Barack Hussein Obama and
Big Mouth Old Joe Biden Are TOAST! NOBAMA!

More Independent Voters 4 McCain/Palin 2008

Is there any further need to wonder what kind of people are supporting the McCain Campsign. Even the McCain official surrogates sound pretty much like this with a slightly more articulate style. If I were a Republican I would be truly embaraarassed, but apparently they have no shame

Posted by: isaacs359 | September 28, 2008 12:59 PM | Report abuse

Sen. McCain's campaign has been anything but heroful. His inability to look Obama in the eye and talk to him man to man suggests he is not going to be able to do so with the leaders of other countries. He certainly isn't going to be helpful and honest with the Amnerican people. He will say anything to get elected. I am not impressed. Sen. Obama is a real Abe Lincoln kind of man.

Posted by: Mainegal | September 28, 2008 1:10 PM | Report abuse

Isn't it interesting that January 1977 and isaacs359 seem to have the exact same talking points. Instead of trying to scare people by making false suggestions about a candidate's religion, perhaps we could all (Republican, Democrat or Independent) try to post and debate about the issues that actually matter

Posted by: EAB1980 | September 28, 2008 1:37 PM | Report abuse

Sorry isaacs359, didn't read the bottom part of your post.

Posted by: EAB1980 | September 28, 2008 1:38 PM | Report abuse

Audacter calumniare semper aliquid haeret (talk about negative campaigning)

Asinus asinum fricat
(the ass rubs the ass)

Deficit omne quod nascitur
(nothing is certain, but death and taxes)

Non sibi sed patriae
(not for self but for country)

Venit summa dies et ineluctabile tempus

Posted by: HailCaesar | September 28, 2008 3:34 PM | Report abuse

Obama is a liar and a thief. Check out his criminal associates. You are judged by the company you keep. Johnson and raines embezelled Fannie Mae to the brink. They are his advisors. Obama is a poverty pimp. He is like a vampire embezzling from the Govt hand outs to the poor and he sends the majority of US TAXPAYER MONEY to ACCORN and a list of convicted thieves Rizko. Obama is a Marxist communist with friends like Bill Ayers Rev. Wright Farrakhan. His Hollywood image is like a bad dream. Facts not words speak living volumes. Of course if you shine the light on him he screams racist. He hires goon lawyers to scare and threaten people. All of the middle east dictators including Chavez and Castro endorse Him. Hello are you awake yet?

Posted by: DrRevere | September 28, 2008 7:19 PM | Report abuse

I have been a Democrat all my life, mostly because of being pro-abortion, but this election I am truely scared. I can't have my small business taxed any more than it is. I have a son in college and a mother with Alzheimer's, and I sweat each moment on how I will make ends meet. I'm not sleeping at night. When I see a government bailout giving billions to an organization like ACORN like in this deal which the media won't report on fully, my blood boils. Lowering taxes is the right thing to do. Obama is very misleading when he says only the rich will have taxes raised. He proposes to raise taxes on small businesses. I could go out of business. My family depends on me. I don't think I can vote for Obama or the Democrats this year. While people make much of McCain not looking at Obama, that didn't bother me nearly as much as how mad, rude and testy Obama got during the debate. People say McCain has a temper. I now think Obama has one. He's too sensitive and full of himself. It's just liberal authors like yourself refuse to report on anything negative. We really don't know who this man Obama is. I can't vote for him, even though, I've never voted even for a Republican dog catcher. This election is very disturbing to me. It's extremely upsetting.

Posted by: BettyM47 | September 28, 2008 8:50 PM | Report abuse

By the way, not looking at the other person is a debate tactic so you stay on point. The more important thing is what Obama said. He said we are hated overseas. Why is that? It's because we support democracy, are fighting Muslim terrorists and support Israel, which is the right thing to do, even if the rest of the world, hates us. Obama wants to talk to Syria and Iran, and he went to a church for 20 years that supports Hamas and Farakkhan. That may get us lots of friends if we want to make friends with Muslims, terorists and neo-Nazi's, but it's not the right thing to do.

Posted by: BettyM47 | September 28, 2008 8:55 PM | Report abuse

Eye contact? McCain led the debate--it's clear from how many times Obama agreed with him. Why should McCain acknowledge Obama--who would say anything to score political points? It's not surprising Dionne, an Obama supporter, would give an advantage to Obama in the debate. He's merely pushing his candidate. But it should be disturbing to Democratic leaders that many Democrats say they are not comfortable with Obama as a candidate. Why aren't they comfortable?...Because Obama is not credible.

Posted by: ttj1 | September 29, 2008 10:29 AM | Report abuse

Hey EJ Dionne put down that Toxic Obama
Kool Aid Pal,as Sen John McCain WON the
Debate and Kicked Messiah Barack Obama
Butt Good! Go John Go! All The Way To The
White House! Go Sarah Go! All The Way To
The White House too! McCain/Palin Rocks!
Obama/Biden Sucks! Face it EJ and Obamabots
your little pet Barack Hussein Obama and
Big Mouth Old Joe Biden Are TOAST! NOBAMA!

More Independent Voters 4 McCain/Palin 2008

Posted by: Jan1977 | September 27, 2008 1:12 AM


This is the clearest and most lucid argument for McCain I have heard yet.

McCain/08 Palin/10

Posted by: charliewewe | September 29, 2008 11:16 AM | Report abuse

So why should you and I pay for Chicago
Shake Down Artist ACORN Community Organizer
Con Man Wall Street Stooge Fake Democrat
Stooge Messiah Barack Hussein Obama's Pals
in Acorn,Freddie Mac and Frannie Mae,and
God only knows how many more Greed,Total
Mismangement,Screw Ups And Criminal Acts
and I sure as Hell also do not want to help
bail weasel face Leader of The Corrupt
Democrat Crooks Madame Speaker Nancy Pelosi
Failed AIG Stock since Nancy Pelosi and
her crooked husband already are rich and
have over $65 Million Dollars in Assests so
Let AIG Go Under And Take Nancy Pelosi With
It. NO DAMN BAIL OUT! Vote Every Crooked
Total Corrupt Do Nothing Democrat and Bush
and Cheney Republican Incumbent OUT! Call.
Fax, E-Mail and Write Your Senators and
Member of Congress and Tell These Crooks
NO BAIL OUT OR YOUR OUT OFFICE! NO BAIL OUT
And NO MONEY FOR OBAMA AND PELOSi Period!

Posted by: SherryKay2004 | September 29, 2008 11:17 AM | Report abuse

What debate were you people watching???? McCainn showed much more in depth knowledge by far!!! Obama sounded like he was reading his answers out of a book. Don't be fooled by presentation, Obama has never stood on principles in his political life. IMO he really is just a empty suit just as his little record verifies.

Posted by: 4darak | September 29, 2008 11:25 AM | Report abuse

Some things to ponder…………………

MAYBE I'VE GOTTEN THIS ALL WRONG - ME JUST BEING AN AVERAGE
MIDDLE CLASS GUY.

THIS MAN WANTS OUR VOTE FOR U.S. PRESIDENT - HIS FATHER WAS
A KENYAN, AND A BLACK- WE SAW ALL THOSE PICTURES OF HIS
NICE AFRICAN FAMILY.

HIS MOTHER IS KANSAN, ATHEIST, AND WHITE. SO - WHERE ARE ALL
THOSE PICTURES OF HIS NICE WHITE MOTHER AND HIS NICE WHITE
KANSAS GRANDPARENTS - THE ONES WHO RAISED HIM ALL THOSE
EARLY YEARS?

LETS SEE - HIS FATHER DESERTED HIS MOTHER AND HIM WHEN HE
WAS VERY YOUNG AND MOVED BACK TO LIVE WITH HIS FAMILY IN
KENYA.

HIS WHITE MOTHER THEN MARRIED AN INDONESIAN MUSLIM AND
TOOK HIM TO THE CITY OF JAKARTA WHERE HE WAS FIRST SCHOOLED
IN A MUSLIM SCHOOL .

HIS MOTHER THEN MOVED TO HAWAII AND HE WAS RAISED BY HIS
WHITE MIDDLE CLASS - AMERICAN GRANDPARENTS THERE.

UMMM..NOW HERE'S THE BEGINNING OF THE HARD PART FOR ME
(HELP ME OUT HERE, IF YOU CAN):

SOMEHOW, SUDDENLY - HE WENT TO THE BEST HIGH DOLLAR PREP
SCHOOLS IN AMERICA, AND NEXT HE GOT INTO A TOP IVY LEAGUE
COLLEGE , AND LATER, INTO HARVARD LAW SCHOOL - HOW? WHO
SPONSORED HIM? WHO PAID FOR ALL THAT SCHOOLING?

(HAVE YOU LOOKED AT TUITION EXPENSES TO ATTEND UNDERGRAD-
UATE YALE LATELY?

HOW ABOUT HARVARD LAW SCHOOL ? SOMEBODY PAID A LOT OF
BUCKS FOR THIS KID'S IVY LEAGUE EDUCATION.......)

WHO? HE APPARENTLY DID NOT HAVE SCHOLARSHIPS THAT PAID IT
ALL FROM WHAT WE READ.

HE ALSO DID NOT HAVE TO BORROW FOR COLLEGE , ALSO FROM WHAT
WE READ. SO???

THAT BRINGS US TO THE MORE CURRENT YEARS,

A U.S. SENATOR'S SALARY IS NOT THAT GREAT, BUT THIS YOUNG MAN
AND HIS YOUNG WIFE JUST RECENTLY BOUGHT A $1.4 MILLION DOLLAR
HOUSE THAT HE ACQUIRED THROUGH A 'DEAL' WITH A WEALTHY FUND
RAISER, A FUND RAISER WHO APPARENTLY IS A CRIMINAL LAW BREAKER
PER THE NEWS.

WHAT SORT OF 'DEAL'?
AND, RIGHT OUT OF HARVARD LAW, HE 'WORKED' AS A CIVIL RIGHTS
ACTIVIST IN CHICAGO . WHAT KIND OF PAY IS THIS, WE CAN ASSUME IT IS
LITTLE OR NOTHING PAY WISE! OR IS THERE OTHER KIND OF PAY INVOLVED??

HE THEN ENTERED POLITICS AT THE STATE LEVEL WHICH CERTAINLY IS A
LOW PAYING JOB, AND THEN MOVED RIGHT TO THE NATIONAL LEVEL. DID HE
"FUND RAISE" TO GET THE FUNDS TO GET ELECTED? WHAT KIND OF PROMISES
DID HE MAKE?

NOW, HE SCRAMBLES TODAY WITH A NICE SMILE BUT VERY MINIMAL
EXPERIENCE IN ANYTHING - WHILE OTHER PEOPLE WRITE HIS RAH-RAH
SPEECHES FOR HIM.

IN ALL HIS MINIMAL TIME IN THE STATE, AND NATIONAL LEGISLATURES -

HE'S NEVER LAUNCHED ANY IMPORTANT LEGISLATION, NONE WHATSOEVER.

MOSTLY, OF LATE FOR SOME TWO YEARS, HE'S BEEN OUT RUNNING FOR
PRESIDENT.

THEN COME THE ENDORSEMENTS FOR HIM FROM OTHER COUNTRIES, ONES
THAT ARE NOT EXACTLY USA FRIENDS, LIKE THE IRAN PRES, FRENCH PRES,
THE IRAQ MINISTER THAT WANTS USA OUT. HMMM WHAT DO THEY SEE IN
HIM THAT THEY LIKE?

HE CLAIMS TO BE 'PROUD OF HIS AFRICAN HERITAGE' -- NICE BUT -- IT
SEEMS THAT HIS ONLY CONNECTION WITH AFRICA WAS THAT HIS AFRICAN
FATHER GOT A WHITE AMERICAN GIRL PREGNANT AND THEN DESERTED HER.

UMMM....WHERE IS THE OUTSPOKEN PRIDE IN HIS WHITE HERITAGE?
AFTER ALL - IT WAS WHITE GRANDPARENTS THAT RAISED HIM!

HE IS PRESENTLY A MEMBER, OR WAS UNTIL POLITICS NECESSITATED A
CHANGE, FOR OVER 20 YEARS OF AN 'AFROCENTRIC' CHURCH IN CHICAGO
THAT SEEMINGLY HATES WHITES, HATES JEWS, AND BLAMES AMERICA FOR
ALL THE WORLD'S FAULTS.

HE REPEATEDLY COVERED UP FOR THAT PASTOR AND THAT CHURCH -
SAYING THAT HE CAN SEPARATE THE RELIGION FROM THE POLITICS, WHEN
HE HEARS A HATE-WHITEY SERMON.

HE CLAIMED THAT HE WAS SIMPLY UNABLE TO CONFRONT HIS PASTOR
OF 20+ YEARS ABOUT THE PASTOR'S DEMONSTRATED UN-AMERICAN BIAS.

BUT -- HE WANTS US TO BELIEVE THAT HE CAN CONFRONT NORTH KOREA
AND IRAN AND RUSSIA WHEN THE TIME ARISES TO TAKE AMERICA 'S SIDE.

YEAH - WITH HIS BACKGROUND AND EXPERIENCE, HE 'HOPES' THAT HE
COULD BE A "UNITER" AND BRING US ALL TOGETHER;

BUT - WE ARE LEFT TO THINK THAT THE REAL 'HOPE' IS, THAT HE REALLY
HOPES THAT NO ONE WILL PUT ALL THESE PIECES TOGETHER, AT LEAST
NOT UNTIL AFTER THE ELECTION.

Journalist need to start doing there jobs honestly in a non-partisan approach. Just to point out on the Palin interview CBS edited it to there (OBAMA advantage) which is truly pathetic!!!

Posted by: 4darak | September 29, 2008 11:29 AM | Report abuse

Hey EJ Dionne put down that Toxic Obama
Kool Aid Pal,as Sen John McCain WON the
Debate and Kicked Messiah Barack Obama
Butt Good! Go John Go! All The Way To The
White House! Go Sarah Go! All The Way To
The White House too! McCain/Palin Rocks!
Obama/Biden Sucks! Face it EJ and Obamabots
your little pet Barack Hussein Obama and
Big Mouth Old Joe Biden Are TOAST! NOBAMA!

More Independent Voters 4 McCain/Palin 2008

Posted by: Jan1977 | September 27, 2008 1:12 AM
-----------------------------------------
jan1977, what are you a fuukin moron? What debate did you watch? EVERY POLL SAYS OBAMA WON! I guess because you said it, then it must be true that McCstank won? Go Sarah? Hey everybody look!!!! Another one who thinks Palin is great!!!! LOLOLOLO I guess this dumbfuuk can see Russia from his her porch!!! LOLOLOL Another uneducated pea brain who can't think for herself! Hey, don't let the G.O.P tell you how to think... ooops too late! Another dumb puppet for McClame. You probably think that Palin will be Biden too!! LOLOLOLOLOOLO WHAT A FUUKIN RETARD!!! LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL Have you been reading the paper, watching the Tv, reading online..ANYTHING? Stupid azz neophite trying to sound intelligent about this election. Stick to prom king and prom queen contest you idiot.

Posted by: gabbamonkey | September 29, 2008 12:45 PM | Report abuse

Some things to ponder…………………

MAYBE I'VE GOTTEN THIS ALL WRONG - ME JUST BEING AN AVERAGE
MIDDLE CLASS GUY.

THIS MAN WANTS OUR VOTE FOR U.S. PRESIDENT - HIS FATHER WAS
A KENYAN, AND A BLACK- WE SAW ALL THOSE PICTURES OF HIS
NICE AFRICAN FAMILY.

HIS MOTHER IS KANSAN, ATHEIST, AND WHITE. SO - WHERE ARE ALL
THOSE PICTURES OF HIS NICE WHITE MOTHER AND HIS NICE WHITE
KANSAS GRANDPARENTS - THE ONES WHO RAISED HIM ALL THOSE
EARLY YEARS?

LETS SEE - HIS FATHER DESERTED HIS MOTHER AND HIM WHEN HE
WAS VERY YOUNG AND MOVED BACK TO LIVE WITH HIS FAMILY IN
KENYA.

HIS WHITE MOTHER THEN MARRIED AN INDONESIAN MUSLIM AND
TOOK HIM TO THE CITY OF JAKARTA WHERE HE WAS FIRST SCHOOLED
IN A MUSLIM SCHOOL .

HIS MOTHER THEN MOVED TO HAWAII AND HE WAS RAISED BY HIS
WHITE MIDDLE CLASS - AMERICAN GRANDPARENTS THERE.

UMMM..NOW HERE'S THE BEGINNING OF THE HARD PART FOR ME
(HELP ME OUT HERE, IF YOU CAN):

SOMEHOW, SUDDENLY - HE WENT TO THE BEST HIGH DOLLAR PREP
SCHOOLS IN AMERICA, AND NEXT HE GOT INTO A TOP IVY LEAGUE
COLLEGE , AND LATER, INTO HARVARD LAW SCHOOL - HOW? WHO
SPONSORED HIM? WHO PAID FOR ALL THAT SCHOOLING?

(HAVE YOU LOOKED AT TUITION EXPENSES TO ATTEND UNDERGRAD-
UATE YALE LATELY?

HOW ABOUT HARVARD LAW SCHOOL ? SOMEBODY PAID A LOT OF
BUCKS FOR THIS KID'S IVY LEAGUE EDUCATION.......)

WHO? HE APPARENTLY DID NOT HAVE SCHOLARSHIPS THAT PAID IT
ALL FROM WHAT WE READ.

HE ALSO DID NOT HAVE TO BORROW FOR COLLEGE , ALSO FROM WHAT
WE READ. SO???

THAT BRINGS US TO THE MORE CURRENT YEARS,

A U.S. SENATOR'S SALARY IS NOT THAT GREAT, BUT THIS YOUNG MAN
AND HIS YOUNG WIFE JUST RECENTLY BOUGHT A $1.4 MILLION DOLLAR
HOUSE THAT HE ACQUIRED THROUGH A 'DEAL' WITH A WEALTHY FUND
RAISER, A FUND RAISER WHO APPARENTLY IS A CRIMINAL LAW BREAKER
PER THE NEWS.

WHAT SORT OF 'DEAL'?
AND, RIGHT OUT OF HARVARD LAW, HE 'WORKED' AS A CIVIL RIGHTS
ACTIVIST IN CHICAGO . WHAT KIND OF PAY IS THIS, WE CAN ASSUME IT IS
LITTLE OR NOTHING PAY WISE! OR IS THERE OTHER KIND OF PAY INVOLVED??

HE THEN ENTERED POLITICS AT THE STATE LEVEL WHICH CERTAINLY IS A
LOW PAYING JOB, AND THEN MOVED RIGHT TO THE NATIONAL LEVEL. DID HE
"FUND RAISE" TO GET THE FUNDS TO GET ELECTED? WHAT KIND OF PROMISES
DID HE MAKE?

NOW, HE SCRAMBLES TODAY WITH A NICE SMILE BUT VERY MINIMAL
EXPERIENCE IN ANYTHING - WHILE OTHER PEOPLE WRITE HIS RAH-RAH
SPEECHES FOR HIM.

IN ALL HIS MINIMAL TIME IN THE STATE, AND NATIONAL LEGISLATURES -

HE'S NEVER LAUNCHED ANY IMPORTANT LEGISLATION, NONE WHATSOEVER.

MOSTLY, OF LATE FOR SOME TWO YEARS, HE'S BEEN OUT RUNNING FOR
PRESIDENT.

THEN COME THE ENDORSEMENTS FOR HIM FROM OTHER COUNTRIES, ONES
THAT ARE NOT EXACTLY USA FRIENDS, LIKE THE IRAN PRES, FRENCH PRES,
THE IRAQ MINISTER THAT WANTS USA OUT. HMMM WHAT DO THEY SEE IN
HIM THAT THEY LIKE?

HE CLAIMS TO BE 'PROUD OF HIS AFRICAN HERITAGE' -- NICE BUT -- IT
SEEMS THAT HIS ONLY CONNECTION WITH AFRICA WAS THAT HIS AFRICAN
FATHER GOT A WHITE AMERICAN GIRL PREGNANT AND THEN DESERTED HER.

UMMM....WHERE IS THE OUTSPOKEN PRIDE IN HIS WHITE HERITAGE?
AFTER ALL - IT WAS WHITE GRANDPARENTS THAT RAISED HIM!

HE IS PRESENTLY A MEMBER, OR WAS UNTIL POLITICS NECESSITATED A
CHANGE, FOR OVER 20 YEARS OF AN 'AFROCENTRIC' CHURCH IN CHICAGO
THAT SEEMINGLY HATES WHITES, HATES JEWS, AND BLAMES AMERICA FOR
ALL THE WORLD'S FAULTS.

HE REPEATEDLY COVERED UP FOR THAT PASTOR AND THAT CHURCH -
SAYING THAT HE CAN SEPARATE THE RELIGION FROM THE POLITICS, WHEN
HE HEARS A HATE-WHITEY SERMON.

HE CLAIMED THAT HE WAS SIMPLY UNABLE TO CONFRONT HIS PASTOR
OF 20+ YEARS ABOUT THE PASTOR'S DEMONSTRATED UN-AMERICAN BIAS.

BUT -- HE WANTS US TO BELIEVE THAT HE CAN CONFRONT NORTH KOREA
AND IRAN AND RUSSIA WHEN THE TIME ARISES TO TAKE AMERICA 'S SIDE.

YEAH - WITH HIS BACKGROUND AND EXPERIENCE, HE 'HOPES' THAT HE
COULD BE A "UNITER" AND BRING US ALL TOGETHER;

BUT - WE ARE LEFT TO THINK THAT THE REAL 'HOPE' IS, THAT HE REALLY
HOPES THAT NO ONE WILL PUT ALL THESE PIECES TOGETHER, AT LEAST
NOT UNTIL AFTER THE ELECTION.

Journalist need to start doing there jobs honestly in a non-partisan approach. Just to point out on the Palin interview CBS edited it to there (OBAMA advantage) which is truly pathetic!!!


Posted by: 4darak | September 29, 2008 11:29 AM

-----------------------------------------
What you think if you type in all caps you sound more intelligent? Wrong, you still sound stupid azzlick.

What's wrong, he has such an interesting life that you're mad cause your life is probably shiit? What you didn't get to finish college?, you don't have a good job but Obama does? You sound like a jealous little biitch mad at the successful black man! lololo pathetic little bugfuuker. You want to call him a ni$$a so bad but you don't have the fuukin guts or balls you byotch! All those words with absolutely nothing behind them, just like you, nothing behind your words. Must suck to be such a fuukin nobody! LOLOLOLOL

Posted by: gabbamonkey | September 29, 2008 12:52 PM | Report abuse

If McCain is not capable of making eye contact or holding a respectful conversation with Obama now, is he capable of negotiating with potentially aggressive nations in the future? Hmmmmm.

Posted by: chitownjeff | September 29, 2008 12:55 PM | Report abuse

Obama's "but I have a braclet too!" moment was pathetic and showed us exactly what this guy is. An empty suit, self-centered and not ready to lead.

Posted by: luca_20009 | September 29, 2008 4:28 PM | Report abuse

Barack Obama was Presidential, poised, on point, respectful, has a clear vision and will be our next President.

John McCain is for Corporations, Lobbyists, Wealthy, deceiver, devious, old,
"double-talk" and Wrong for America.

No to McCain, No to Third Bush Term.
No to Palin

Barack Obama for President.

Obama/Biden 08

Posted by: michelle63 | September 29, 2008 7:15 PM | Report abuse

Real Brother here.

I really thought McCain was going to start a sentence with: "Fore score and seventy five years ago..."

But seriously, I have a different take on McCain's lack of eye contact. I think McCain was intimidated by a man who he knows is his intellectual superior. McCain has decided on a strategy of attracting rednecks and Racists and hard core White Supremacists and Lesbians all of whom are for lack of a better word DUMB.

McCain has written off intelligent voters. He was bracing for an intellectual assualt by Obama one in which never really came because its not Obama's personality to flaunt his intelligence like that.

He would never brow beat McCain with his intelligence although he could have easily done so.

TKCAL

Posted by: Realbrother0003 | September 29, 2008 10:42 PM | Report abuse

Real Brother here.

Luca, how in the hell does Obama having a bracelet too(the mother of the soldier killed in Iraq who gave it to him said she was pleased that Obama mentioned her and her late son in the speech) show he's an empty suit and not fit to lead?

McCain's the Idiot who brought up the braclet and is trying to spin death and trillion's of dollars in Spending(that he refuses to freeze)as an excuse to continue the wrong headed war.

Get a clue and take the Racist/White Supremacist/Black man hating lesbian blinders off.

TKCAL

Posted by: Realbrother0003 | September 29, 2008 10:48 PM | Report abuse

Real Brother here.

4darak, I don't have a problem with anything you said. Yes Barack Obama is Black, his father and Pastor and wife and children are Black. And yes, he was raised by Whites in a White(Racist and White Supremacist) Country.

These experiences made Barack Obama the most qualified and brilliant politician this Nation has seen in 100 years.

Other Nations including ones who don't like America's Racism and White Supremacy like Barack,what in the hell is wrong with that especially when his Candidacy will go to dispell the myth of White Racial, Social and Genetic Superiority?

As a Racist or White Supremacist (or Black man hating lesbian) you should welcome a Black man who embraces his Black Race and Culture and isn't trying to date White women(like OJ Simpson and Clerence Thomas and them).

Barack Obama's "experiences" are what makes him even more QUALIFIED for the office of president.

TKCAL

Posted by: Realbrother0003 | September 29, 2008 10:59 PM | Report abuse

Heads UP Nancy Pelosi Is Making The House
Vote Again On The Phony Bail Out On Thursday OCT 2 2008 Get Busy Calling,
Faxing, and E-mailing Congress All Over
Again! NO DAMN BAIL OUT! NO MORE VOTES!

Posted by: Ralphinphnx | September 30, 2008 2:08 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company