Posted on 10/01/2004 6:59:00 AM PDT by kddid
PBS host Jim Lehrer was challenged Friday morning on claims that he went easy on Sen. John Kerry during Thursday night's presidential debate, while tossing verbal hand grenades in President Bush's direction designed to keep him on the defensive.
"I don't know what in the world you're talking about," Lehrer told radio host Don Imus, in his only post-debate interview.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
Anyone recall how Kerry answered this? This is a pretty tough question.
It seemed like it to me also as sKerry was able to get his replies in before the bell which was out of character for him...
The thing is .... if you ask Kerry... "Senator is it true that you are a flip-flopper? How do you explain being for the war on one date, and being against the war 3 months later". You know... he's just gonna weasle more. People know it. It just gives him a chance to say "I'm consistent. I voted for the war, but I wouldn't have rushed into war like that stupid Texan did". You're not going to pin him down with a question.
We all knew Leher would behave like a Kerry surrogate. It's up to Bush to re-frame the question and put Kerry on the defensive by attacking his record. He let the focus remain on him.
That’s it to a tee.
Michael Savage kept yelling to have that Bolshevik (Lehrer) arrested! That was great.
Good observation. Sure was creepy -- also unhappily for Kerry -- it messed up his "synch" with the watchers, the viewers. The listeners were still parsing the questuion and likely got a few steps behind in trying to follow Kerry's response. It made the Kerry part of the debate far more borr--rr-ii--innn-ggg. Kerry was unwatchable. Bush -- now he was interesting. Even when he stumbled. Likeable. A real person. Sympathetic.
I think Bush seemed tired..he had spent the day touring Florida's damaged areas, whereas Kerry was rested (manicure and all). It was nice that Bush cares about doing his presidential duties, but I hope he'll take it easier before his next debate.
Thq questions don't matter; only the answers.
I think Bush has lured Kerry into the briar patch.
Kerry was forced to be a bigger hawk than Bush, and he gains nothing by that.
No Bush voter is going to be converted by Kerry's blustering, but lots of Michael Moore voters are going to start thinking about Kerry's two extra divisions, and his doubling of the Special Forces, and his promise to go everywhere and fix all the problems of the world. Some will ask themselves which social programs will be cut to pay for all of this.
Some folks will wonder why it is best to go it alone in North Korea, but everywhere else requites a coalition.
Eventually someone will ask how the U.N. can be trusted after stealing kid's milk money.
Eventually someone will ask how the French and Russians can be motivated, since Kerry himself said they were too entangled in self interest.
Kerry fancies himself as a great military tactician, better than the generals on the ground. He could fight Tora Bora and Falujia better than the guys wo did it. This will be fun to watch. The last American presidents who diddled in tactics were LBJ and Carter.
And that is what our campaign is running on. Plain and simple.
***I also think that Kerry had the questions before hand, since his answers seemed to seque quite nicely into the next question.***
What you said! Kerry answered so fast that there was no question in my mind that he knew the questions in advance.
to eveyone that didnt protest Ron Reagan being on MSNBC as an analysist this is what you get today:
On MSNBC, Ron Reagan declared Kerry "the clear
winner" since he was "better informed, he was more presidential."
CNN's NewsNight featured a guest who called Kerry the winner and
charged that Bush "got his ass whooped."
I don't think Kerry had the questions ahaead of time, they were custom made for him. He didn't need them having anwered many of them in previous apperances. Lehrer could have given us a great debate but instead made a gift basket of questions for Kerry.
question to bush: why do you beat your wife??
question to skerry: why does george beat his wife.
You're never going to have a non-partisan debate. The real answer is to have two admitted partisans ask the questions -- one from the left and one from the right. Currently, all the debates simply have a liberal ask all the questions.
I feel that was the largest missed opportunity for Bush.
When Kerry was remarking about bunker-busting nuclear weapons and how he would "shut that program down", I was hoping Bush would come back and say something like:
'I'm not surprised my opponent would want to shut down that weapons program. Ever since he was elected to the senate he's been wanting to shut down weapons programs. In fact he wanted to shut down nearly every advanced weapon and delivery system program we've used for over a decade.'
He could have then gone down the list and asked 'My fellow Americans, try to imagine where this country would be now if our past leaders had followed my opponents advice?'
Thought you might be interested in this thread.
Though I would have preferred that the President hammer Kerry with the facts and make Kerry look like the buffoon he is, I have come to realize something about what happened last night.
The President took a defensive posture, probably aided by the way the questions were asked, and he let the opponent fire away. Kerry took his best shots, got all his DNC talking points in, and even sounded like Michael Moore. Yet Kerry accomplished nothing EVEN THOUGH the President did not fire back with the ammo we know he could have!
Kerry only proved to be very knowledgeable of debate technique but still couldn't present a point of view without contradicting himself at least twice.
In other words, W. took his punches and sweetly answered back, "Is that all you got?"
Very revealing debate once I calmed down and stopped wanting a brawl.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.