[lilylangtree]

That last sentence said it all. Get rid of Lehrer.

[freestyle]

I like to stay away from conspiracy theories. If there was a wink, I'm not going to read into it too much.

I thought the questions were bland and not very challenging to either candidate.

Like the author in this article states though, there was nothing on comparing the records or past decisions. Nothing on Israel and Palestine.

I was actually looking forward to this being a broad foreign policy debate. I thought in that format Bush would have "surprised" the average Joe with his handle on all the issues as well as his consistent doctrine and philosophy.

EVERYONE has been saying that when they talk about IRAQ, it is bad for Bush (because of the casualties, be-headings and the MSM general portrayal of chaos). So yes, focusing this whole debate on Iraq only ***could*** have been a conscious decision by the moderator...

...but I doubt it. No harm done though. The worst thing that we'll see is some of the Bush supporters being a little depressed and Kerry voters being woken up a bit. That won't last... voters may vote on style over substance or substance over style, but the MAJORITY of the electorate will not elect a man with ABSOLUTELY ZERO SUBSTANCE. And that is what we have in John Kerry.

[hgro]

Lehrer's politics couldn't be more obvious if he was wearing a Kerry/Edwards tee shirt. The guy is a lefty as are all of his pals on PBS.

[epow]

Still, some observers noted that Lehrer's questions largely focused on negative aspects of Bush's decision to go to war in Iraq - while avoiding Sen. Kerry's waffling on the issue, not to mention the top Democrat's long record of opposing measures to strengthen U.S. intelligence and national security.

What did people expect?? Everyone on the planet except a few headhunters on the upper Amazon knows that Lehrer would not be the head "news" man at the most liberal network this side of the BBC if he were not a flaming left winger. If I had been in charge of Bush's debate planning team I would have refused to accept Lehrer as moderator.

[bray]

Just because 95% of the Stone-age press, including Lehrer are voting for Kerry, doesn't mean he's bias!

Pray for W and Our Troops

[wildbill]

"...gave a knowing wink." I've heard or read about this in a couple of places. Was this 'wink" something that could actually be seen on the camera or in a replay?

[BigDaddyTX]

Kerry was in the Senate?

[Loyal Buckeye]

Jim Lehrer - Not to be trusted.

[texasbluebell]

Listening to Michael Savage now.

He's firmly on the side of Lehrer's questioning being biased last night.

Saying Lehrer was throwing verbal hand grenades at the President.

Saying the sumo match was lost at the outset because of the way Kerry shook hands, holding on to the President's hand a bit too long, as a way of showing power.

[ladyinred]

Of course the questions were designed to attack the President. I also think Kerry had scripted responses to them because they were shared with his campaign. They think we are all stupid out here, and maybe some of us are.

[Libertina]

Some of these people honestly don't know. Asking President bush if there would be more terror attacks "when Kerry is elected President in November" seems reasonable to him! /s