I thought Lehrer was trying to start a fight! And that question to POTUS about "underlying character issues" was especially appalling!
After the first few questions, my wife and I both concluded that Lehrer had stacked the deck. To no avail however, Bush did well enough and regardless of the debates, Bush will win the election.
you win the Home Run Derby.
I thought for darn sure that Lehrer would have the integrity to ask Kerry to defend his Senate record after coming out guns a blastin' on Iraq. Just one question about 20 years as a Senator - ONE QUESTION about opposing Reagan during the Cold War, or cutting defense and intelligence, PARTICULARLY since Kerry had the unmitigated gall to use Reagan to imply that Bush isn't fighting the WOT correctly.
This was by far an even more loaded *debate* than anyone predicted.
Remember Bush wants the campaign to focus on the present. He doesn't care about the deep recesses of Kerry's past.
I guess Kerry held his own. The questions did seem stacked against the President as this article suggests (my wife thought they were just flat out unfair, in fact she was angry about it).
But, I don't think Kerry walked out with an advantage from this other then he probably didn't lose any ground he hadn't already lost before going into the debate. He flip flopped on whether Saddam was a threat. He made that stupid comment about the "world test" which Bush nailed him on. He lied a couple of times (Iran sanctions) and Bush called him on that.
I know the MSM will spin the heck out of this as a victory for Kerry, but what points specifically did Kerry really make tonight? I can't think of anything that he said that made me think any differently of him. Same old flip flops, kiss U.N. butt, more troops in Iraq (some might think that's a good idea, but Bush has stuck with the small footprint strategy for good reason imo), say the President misled, tax the rich, blah blah blah.
Certainly I had hoped that Bush would be able to put him away tonight, but I don't think that happened. One thing that I would have liked Bush to counter which he didn't was Kerry's assertion that the President had left "offers that were on the table" in regards to Iraq. Now I believe what he was referring to was that some of the nations who had refused to help us fight the war, like France and Germany, had offered to take some of those rebuilding contracts being payed for by U.S. tax dollars off of our hands. Yea, those were some offers. I'm glad the President didn't take them up on that.
But perhaps being the President he thought it better not to bring that up again. Same thing with regard to Russia. He made his point in regards to recent actions being taken by Putin without it sounding like an insult to an ally.
In summary, I thought the President had to answer a lot of tough questions tonight. There is no way that the questions directed towards Kerry were anywhere near as tough. A more careful analysis of the questions themselves will bear that out I think. Kerry was lobbed at, Bush was fired upon.
But what else should we have expected from a liberal like Jim Leher? A fair fight? No way!
Ping
Amazing stuff. Thanks for pointing these stacked questions out to us.
| SEN. JOHN KERRY |
PRESIDENT BUSH |
| Do you believe you could do a better job than President Bush in preventing another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States? |
Do you believe the election of Senator Kerry on November the 2nd would increase the chances of the U.S. being hit by another 9/11-type terrorist attack? |
| "Colossal misjudgments." What colossal misjudgments, in your opinion, has President Bush made in these areas? |
What about Senator Kerry's point, the comparison he drew between the priorities of going after Usama bin Laden and going after Saddam Hussein? |
| As president, what would you do, specifically, in addition to or differently to increase the homeland security of the United States than what President Bush is doing? |
What criteria would you use to determine when to start bringing U.S. troops home from Iraq? |
| Speaking of Vietnam, you spoke to Congress in 1971, after you came back from Vietnam, and you said, quote, "How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?" Are Americans now dying in Iraq for a mistake? |
You have said there was a, quote, "miscalculation," of what the conditions would be in post-war Iraq. What was the miscalculation, and how did it happen? |
| You just -- you've repeatedly accused President Bush -- not here tonight, but elsewhere before -- of not telling the truth about Iraq, essentially of lying to the American people about Iraq. Give us some examples of what you consider to be his not telling the truth. |
Has the war in Iraq been worth the cost of American lives, 1,052 as of today? |
| Can you give us specifics, in terms of a scenario, time lines, et cetera, for ending major U.S. military involvement in Iraq? |
Does the Iraq experience make it more likely or less likely that you would take the United States into another preemptive military action? |
| What is your position on the whole concept of preemptive war? |
Do you believe that diplomacy and sanctions can resolve the nuclear problems with North Korea and Iran? Take them in any order you would like. |
| Senator Kerry, you mentioned Darfur, the Darfur region of Sudan. Fifty thousand people have already died in that area. More than a million are homeless. And it's been labeled an act of ongoing genocide. Yet neither one of you or anyone else connected with your campaigns or your administration that I can find has discussed the possibility of sending in troops. |
Clearly, as we have heard, major policy differences between the two of you. Are there also underlying character issues that you believe, that you believe are serious enough to deny Senator Kerry the job as commander in chief of the United States? |
| If you are elected president, what will you take to that office thinking is the single most serious threat to the national security to the United States? |
It's a new subject -- new question, and it has to do with President Putin and Russia. Did you misjudge him or are you -- do you feel that what he is doing in the name of antiterrorism by changing some democratic processes is OK? |
I think James Baker is slipping a little if the rest of the debates have such one sided questions it's going to be tough but most people are totally aware of the liberal media bias thanks to Stan Lather.
Well, yeah. The debate was supposed to be about Iraq, not Vietnam.
Newsmax nailed that one
This was patently obvious to anyone with more than 3 working brain cells! I hope and pray that everyone saw through this;but I doubt that "everyone" did.
I agree. Lehrer allowed only one opening on character, and GW gave it a pass. The rest of the evening was open season on GW's record, no mention at all of Kerry's.
These slanted questions are my biggest beef about the debate. Yet no one seems to be talking about it on the spin circuit. It was an Ambush!
Where do we go to file a complaint against Lehrer. I'm outraged.
My take on the debate...
Not good.
It reminded me of The Caine Mutiny Court Martial Revisited.
I kept expecting to see the President reach into his pocket and bring out those little silver balls.
Bush was clearly out of his league up against kerry. He appeared frustrated, repeating his lines over and over again, as if pleading for understanding, etc., as kerry hammered him like a prosecuting attorney. Never bring a knife to a gunfight.
kerry is a bullsh!ttter; Bush is an honest man--I have watched this sh!t go down for over 50 years now--bvllsh!tters almost always win, good guys finish last. I hope I'm wrong. Hate to see the editorials in the morning.
Two more debates to go--no room for any more of this!
why does anyone expect anything different ... we all act so surprised when the left tries to undermine or undercut W and conservatives ... the leaders of godless liberalism will have to answer for their deeds in the hereafter... until then, we fight back with the knowledge that we won't get an even break ... let's let it go at that
All great points....