No way Kerry didn't have the questions ahead of time. Absolutely no way.
You're getting repetitious, just like Kerry.
Did you know that he was in Vietnam?
I'll reply to your second iteration :)
Yes I believe he had them, or at least a very solid "heads-up" on the way the questioning was going to go. I'll have to read the transcript to the debate, but one thing that cinched it for me (that Kerry at least had a "heads up" was when he replied something along the lines of "I'll cover that when we get to the homeland security issue/question -- however he phrased it.) So for me, at least, that was a flag that he knew what was coming.
I also believe the questions were slated to give Kerry as much play that he could shoot out answers shotgun style in order to stack the deck against W in his replies -- it's difficult to formulate a reply when a ton of garbage is thrown against the wall -- especially when a lot of Kerry's replies were along the lines of being prepped by Michael Moore -- my Lord, he even threw in Halliburton!.
I was hoping W would slam him on a lot of those replies -- but then I got to thinking: W could have turned this into a cat fight, but then he wouldn't look Presidential -- and that's what he is -- The President. Kerry, on the other hand, was throwing out so many re-hashed and tired points, that Pres Bush did not have to lower himself to responding to every bit of trash that Kerry was throwing out -- a lot of points that Kerry was making were so blatant in his support of the UN taking the lead it sounded like the "support" that he wants are the Allies in the UN, and then, as an afterthought, others like, oh ... France, Germany. As if those can supplant the 30 - 31 Allies we now have.
And the President was correct -- we've built a coalition, and he made it a point to talk to not only us at home, but to OUR ALLIES that Kerry was belittling them by his foolish prounouncements.
The way I see it, the only way Kerry can get a "bump" from this is from the kool aid drinkers out there who have a love affair with Michael Moore, or aren't going to vote.
I would have loved to watch W draw more blood ... but when someone is sitting in the bath tub with their wrists slit, why offer them another razor blade -- give them time -- they'll expire on their own.
I might as well get this out in one post so I'll blab a little more. I think W made a good point about Korea -- a lot of what Kerry is spewing sounds like so much Monday Morning Quarterbacking ... He doesn't take into account that once you begin a venture such as we have in Afghanistan and Iraq, you start shifting your position as the wind blows. It's an insult to those who have died, it's an insult to our Allies, and it's also a betrayal to those that we have liberated, thus far, and are working with so that they can be self-sustaining. I think W let him blab on about N Korea and then shut him down both in the issue of the "rods" and also when he brought China into play.
Again, I wish W had had drawn more blood -- but all in all I think our President did come across as responsible, taking the initiative in what he did and sticking to it until it is complete, and setting the stage that we will be responsible for our own security, not dependant on the UN or being swayed by foreign powers, and attacking the killers "over there" rather than waiting for another attack on our soil.
Kerry also mentioned adding, or creating (and I'll have to check the transcript for the phrasing) something like 2 more Army Units ... W, without refuted him by saying that we will have an all volunteer military. With the volunteer forces we have now you'd have to have a draft to get enought warriors to create "2 new whatever" ... Kerry said our forces are stretched out now -- and then he's going to create two new divisions or whatever? He has to be alluding to a draft.
OK all done now ... think I'll have some dinner, finally. </RANT>