Despite thinking I would not, I did watch the last presidential debate. I knew it wouldn't change my mind. I suspect it didn't change anyone's mind. If you skipped it, there wasn't much you missed.
John McCain is still pouting that he didn't get ten town halls with Barack Obama. If he had, he said the campaign would have remained more civil. That doesn't make any sense to me, and I doubt it did to Obama but he didn't use it to attack McCain for being immature.
Goaded into it ahead of the debate, McCain brought up Ayers and ACORN which is what Obama clearly wanted as it gave him a chance to give the answers he has given so many times other places but maybe there would be some watching who wouldn't have watched him elsewhere. He has said he worked with Ayers. His connection to him was through education, a reputable committee who has helped Chicago's education system and he named who else was on that committee. He repeated that what Ayers did was despicable. He does not consort with terrorists as has been implied by Palin. He didn't bring up her close connection (sleeps with it) to the secessionist Alaskan group.
Obama did not attack McCain about his own praise of ACORN at one of their meetings only two years ago where McCain basically said all Americans should care as much as those people did about helping others. Now ACORN is being made the scapegoat if Obama wins because of them submitting paid registrations that clearly won't qualify for voting rights but did earn whoever collected them money.
Obama's answers had already been heard probably at least by anyone who does not carry around a Curious George stuffed monkey with Obama's name on it. I would have to assume McCain has not bothered to watch the videos of the kind of people who are attending those rallies. If he was, I don't think he'd have said he was so proud of his fans. Some of them have behaved in ways that won't help this country or themselves even if they think they are clever and are patting each other on the back for how clever.
There were times Obama could have attacked but he let it go as not worth it. One that comes to my mind was when they were asked if their Vice Presidential picks were good choices. McCain defended his pick ignoring everything that is negative, repeating all the false statements about her; and then saying yes, Joe Biden would be okay as president but he's been wrong about a lot and cited Gulf War I.
Well maybe Biden was and maybe he was not. Were there ways to resolve that without going to war? Might an administration that was better at diplomacy ahead of time, let Hussein know what would happen if he entered a neighboring country? I don't know the details of Biden's objection to authorization for that war; so can't say more about it but it was a perfect time for Obama to bring up issues about Palin's lack of knowledge, but he didn't do it.
It is possible that Obama really will have the ability to bring together the two parties when it is time to govern. If he doesn't feel a need to go for the gotchas, I don't think that's about lack of strength but more deciding where it matters enough to do it. Someone who can think ahead of time goes beyond the moment to where something leads. Clearly those arguments didn't lead to where he needed to go.
Watching the debate, I kept wondering why McCain kept referring to autism instead of Down's Syndrome when he was saying how much Palin knows about having a disabled baby. Claiming she is an expert based on having a four month old baby doesn't make sense. She hasn't begun to learn what that means from her own experiences. She might have done work with this cause previously, maybe the family has a history of such children (I don't know) but the fact she has a four month old baby certainly does not make her an expert even on Downs and from where did the autism come?
McCain showed his slim connection to reality when he discussed the campaigns and how they have been run and blamed Obama for what John Lewis said, thought he should have apologized for Lewis going too far. This was quite a disconnect to reality.You have a campaign that has people yelling out kill him and you think that Lewis saying what he did went too far? McCain never acknowledged that his fans were out of line and claimed he always stops them. He did twice but the rest of the time he and Palin appear to not hear what they don't want to hear. Palin has never rebuked any of them but nodded like yes, that's right.
There is no comparison to the difference in how these two campaigns have been run. There have been no threats on McCain's life at an Obama rally. Obama has never called him a liar. Obama has not stirred up emotions with suggestions that McCain is a traitor for picking a vice president who was connected to a group who wants to secede from this nation. When at Obama rallies, people even booed at McCain's name, something that is pretty mild in comparison to what we have heard coming from those McCain/Palin rallies, Obama has put out his hands and said we don't need that.
Obama doesn't go for the kill, but we are talking about our own country and people here who think they are being loyal to it. Some will never come around, but a need to get gotchas probably won't serve the next president well even if it might satisfy viewers of the debate who want some payback-- on both sides.
Hopefully all the viewers, who are still open to making a choice, saw the ideas and temperament from Obama that will persuade them of what I believe-- Obama is the right choice for our next president.
17 comments:
I guess I just find it harder everyday to believe anyone with even a quarter of a brain could or would vote for McCain. But then there are apparently a lot with no brains at all and they're probably all that is keeping McCain afloat. The thing that has impressed me about Obama is his civility -- we just don't see that in many politicians.
Obama has kept his cool and maintained his dignity throughout the campaign and hasn't lowered his standards to John McCain's shoddy standards and I like that. Check out the video of Chris Buckley on my blog.
We watched every minute of the debate, well, except for those moments when I was screaming at the TV and trying to cover John McCain's face up with my hands! Obama is an inspiration in civility and composure. It is an amazing thing to watch him be so calm and self-assured.
I, too, wondered about the autism thing. What was that all about? It made me think that maybe one of her other kids is autistic, although I don't think that is so. Very weird.
My favorite moment was McCain's "health of the woman" using his fingers as quotes around the word health. Thanks, John.
I am not at all amazed by Obama's composure. Obama had a clear understanding of the situation our nation was facing long before he entered the race. He knew he was prepared to meet the challenge with effective leadership methods and skills. one example is being able to stand back from a situation and see the overall long term directions of actions. So he went for the presidency. He fashioned his whole platform on what we need. He might have been surprised that the crisis had come so soon but the direction of his proposals were already made in light of their importance in long term resolutions. for example making our educational system more effective is important to our eventual security. His leadership vision will unite us all.
Obama's entire campaign has been a class act. Obama took the high road while McCain took the low road. I am surprisingly pleased to find that the low road no longer works (except on the dolts who scream kill him).
Obama has been thinking ahead in another area also. He is already vetting his cabinet choices whle McCain dithers.
Back from France, unpacked, over jet lag and back in the groove of blogging. So I was anxious to visit you.
You hit it spot-on, Rain! All of your commentary said what I feel and felt watching that debate last night. My feelings exactly...on why Obama is the best person to lead this country forward, as you'll see in the blog entry I just did.
Took a break from travel entries for today. I needed to "voice" my thoughts and feelings.
Now I'll do some catch-up here.
Terri
http://www.islandwriter.net
This is funny on Joe the Plumber who the right wing has grabbed onto as a hero. This is so typical of how they look at one tiny part of something but don't follow it for the whole picture. So he's not licensed as a plumber, owes a lot of back taxes and doesn't understand the over $250,000 is net income, not gross.
I watched the debate and the analysis afterwards. I did think that McCain had a few focused answers, but very few. I agree with the pundits that McC started strong and Obama was more subdued but that shifted over time. McCain's body language, to say nothing of his facial expressions, make him look like someone I sure don't want leading the country. Can't you see him in some diplomacy situation?
I wondered about the autism remark myself knowing that the Palin baby is a Down Syndrome child, but I wondered if maybe one of the other children is autistic and we don't know that. Or that maybe one of her sibling's kids has autism and McC forgot who was who. Check out: http://momocrats.typepad.com/momocrats/2008/10/presidential-de.html
Now we wait and hope and pray nothing awful happens. I actually feel kind of sorry for McCain to have his career end America remembering him historically like he has portrayed himself these last months. I hate ageism; I experience it frequently and McC is a year older than me. In such a youthful culture, the RNC should sure have thought their choice over. Now even many of us "oldsters" are embarrassed to have our own aging process questioned because McC seems to have senility slipping in.
Think I'm going to take a news break; I got so damned anxious during last night's debate that I took a Xanax to go to sleep. Sheesh.
That is right out of the Clinton playbook Rain. Attack the person asking the question instead of the answer to the question.
Personally I do not care if Joe is in the pro democratic union or not, what concerned me was Obama's answer. That he wants to take money away from working people and give it to others.
It is like when Charlie Gibson talked to him about how higher tax rates decrease revenue to the treasury and Obama said "It is not about revenue, it is about FAIRNESS". Obama is a socialist.
And I liked how he parsed his words last night about how William Ayres is not advising "THIS" campaign and how "William Ayres will not advise him in the White House" because they wouldn't let a terrorist in the White House but he did not say about advising him when he was meeting somewhere else.
QUite frankly McCain seems a bit out of it and Obama seems to retain his composure well.
Ingineer, you are looking for an excuse to vote for McCain and you don't need to find one. You want to vote for him and if over half the voters feel that way, you will get him and Palin. The idea that what Joe said was ignored is not true. The idea that his question was not addressed is not true. Unless he makes over $250,000 net income (after deductions for those who read this blog and don't understand what net means), he would not pay more. IF he actually made more than that, he'd pay an increase of 4% back to what it was before Bush gave a tax cut in the middle of a war.
What Obama is talking about with spreading the wealth around is more about programs that benefit us all like education and infrastructure. I know right wingers believe education should all be private schools and let the people who a voucher won't give them access to such just stay where they are. It's their fault for being poor. I understand the right wing sees infrastructure as something for business to do and charge you to use it. That's how you avoid socialism
But your fear of socialism is almost funny given Bush just did it with full support of McCain. He didn't let certain banks fail and gave them money. He spread our wealth to them and it might not even help people like Farm Boss and me who have little investments but it'll protect those golden parachutes.
I suggest you quit listening to right wing radio and Fox for awhile and see what the other side is saying. Joe got full coverage for the fact that he doesn't have a plumber license even though working in a city that has one, the fact that he owed what a million in back taxes, the fact that he was a republican and probably a set up for being used as he's been by the republicans. Oh he gets his moment of fame as he's torn apart for his questionable business practices but that's okay if he delivers a voter. When will you get it that Republicans don't care about people like Joe. They use him to hide what they are really doing. You are so worried about socialism, which is not what Obama said he'd bring, that they ignore fascism which will end your choices forever. But you keep watching fox and you won't even know when it comes along. You will still be concentrating on something that doesn't matter to your life at all.
What amazes me in all this is how do you conservatives figure to pay down that debt? $.22 of every tax dollar pays just interest and that was before the bailout for Wall Street. So how did you figure to get that down? That $19 billion a year that goes for earmarks? That's two months worth of the war in Iraq but can't quit that.
Do you know that bin Ladin did more damage to this country economically than he ever could have dreamed. He has destroyed our economic system because of people who ignore cause and effect, who support an administration that has ruined us and now will vote for another to carry it out and even worse if you look at Palin's record, her abilities in Alaska. I am shaking my head because it just amazes me but I do think it's because too many people get their news from one source, the only one they can trust because it says what they want to hear. Well, it's not helping you, my friend!
One addition to this. I read everything about either candidate. I don't just read the good stuff about Obama but the negative and the question marks. This article in Sullivan is a good example of the questions we all need to keep in mind if Obama gets elected which is a long way from done right now. [The Roots of McCain's anger]
I do not like Nancy Pelosi, have limited trust in democrats controlling the government for the next two years; so to me it's up to us, if Obama wins, to keep up our interest in what he does, to pay attention, to apply pressure. What we want to see is change, not more of the same only with Democrats doing to shady stuff. For now I give Obama the benefit of the doubt but I don't kid myself that he's just a person with foibles like any other.
As a country, we have tried throwing money at poverty; we have tried ignoring it; maybe there is a better way where we really make our education system work better not just design a series of tests to improve kids' abilities to take tests.
What Obama said at the end of their last debate was that it was going to take sacrifice to fix things. Nobody seems to want to hear that or do it.
Rain, I love your thoughts and perspectives - it is beyond me how anyone can't see the (for me and most people I know) the stark differences between the candidates. thank you for sharing your views with all of us.
John McCain's facial expressions and body language were just terrible - grimaces/eyerolling - ugh - the split screen really pointed out the differences in demeanor between the two. Obama composed/McCain behaving badly.
Thanks again - I miss it when I can't get my "Rain fix" :)
It ain't over yet...read this!:
Frank Luntz: Its time for Bush to get worried
IndiaDaily ^ | 10/15/2004
Its time for Bush to get worried
By Frank Luntz
October 15, 2004
The big story of the US presidential election up to Thursday was how few undecided voters there were. Now the final presidential debate is over, these voters have essentially made up their minds - and it is George W.Bush who should be worried. If John Kerry is elected the 44th president, it will be because of a single night in Miami, Florida, when he came to debate and Mr. Bush came to - well, no one is quite sure. The double-digit lead that Gallup polls, long considered an authority for presidential polling, gave Mr. Bush after the Republican convention was fully erased by that fateful 90-minute confrontation.
Step by step, debate-by-debate, John Kerry has addressed and removed many remaining doubts among uncommitted voters. My own polling research after each debate suggests a rather bleak outlook for the Bush candidacy: many who still claim to be “undecided” are in fact leaning to Mr. Kerry and are about ready to commit.
Can Mr. Bush turn the tide in just 18 days? Absolutely, but his candidacy must address voters who still harbour economic and national security concerns. But that requires a fundamental shift in the president’s strategy and message. Asserting that the economy is strong and Iraq a success is simply not credible to the majority of Americans or to the stubborn 5 per cent who remain uncommitted.
The first thing Mr Bush should remember is to forget about using statistics to prove the economy is on the right track. Uncommitted voters, who tend to fall below the US average in education and income, just do not buy it. They feel squeezed by reduced employee benefits and higher prices. The president must articulate their frustration and, in the words of Bill Clinton, “feel their pain”. But that is not enough. Mr. Bush has explicitly to outline his plan to improve voters’ daily lives.
From the “outsourcing” of US jobs overseas to rising budget deficits and spiralling costs of petrol and health insurance, America’s remaining uncommitted voters want more “solutions” and less rhetoric. The candidate who offers more of the former stands a very good chance of winning. Here, Mr. Kerry has the advantage. In the first two debates, he perfected an effective technique of agreeing with the president on the problems and the principles behind them but then disagreeing on solutions and execution. In all three debates, uncommitted voters preferred Mr. Kerry’s consensus-building style to Mr. Bush’s confrontational approach.
Mr. Bush, to recover the voters he lost in the debates, must put the domestic policy debate in the wider context of the war on terror where he is still more trusted than his opponent. He has repeatedly missed opportunities to pivot from Iraq to terrorism, and he never effectively drew the link between national security and economic security. If Mr. Kerry repeats his line that the president should not have chosen tax cuts over national security, Mr. Bush should counter by noting Mr. Kerry’s lacklustre 20-year record in the Senate. That is a proposition that swing voters could readily sign up to.
On the economy, Mar Bush cannot afford simply to defend his record. He must offer hope for the future. As statistics do not work, he must talk about the economy through stories of real Americans employees, small business owners and family farmers explaining how a second Bush term would boost the economy. Outsourcing, whether Republicans like it or not, is the key economic issue of 2004. The Bush administration got off to a bad start by appearing to defend the practice as a beneficial part of free trade. While that may be good economics, it is terrible politics. The president’s current response, to offer better education as the solution, is no solace to voters in swing states such as Ohio who have lost their jobs.
The president started well at articulating a Republican solution to outsourcing in his second debate when he said: “America must be the best place in the world to do business.” But without more detail, he is just not credible. Better education is a start, but he needs to talk about how oppressive taxation, regulation and litigation systems are sending jobs overseas and how he can fix that. Another big issue is healthcare. Here, Mr Bush repeatedly scored points by focusing on how rising medical liability premiums are driving up healthcare and health insurance costs. On certain key issues, Mr Bush would do well to position himself in contrast to the “special interests” in Washington who oppose reform. On education, on taxes, on energy as well as on healthcare, the president sits on the opposite side to such interests. If he outlines his plans for a second term, he could paint himself as the reformer to Mr Kerry’s defence of the status quo.
Mr Bush was right to stop the angry, dismissive facial gestures that hurt him in the first debate. But if he wants to be the speaker rather than spectator at the next presidential inauguration, he will need to turn in a perfect performance every day from now through the election perfection that has eluded him so far.
Reading that article, I really think McCain is gonna win. 18 days is a loooong time in politics and the media is now starting to reveal some of the shady characters in Obama's past. And after getting snubbed by the University of Nebraska, Bill Ayers is now saying he is gonna spill the beans on Obama. Stay tuned.
I don't know who will win, never take an election for granted having seen so many. Given the last 8 years, I never overestimate the American people for being easily duped by some last minute soundbite that cannot have time to refute or prove. Obama doesn't either.
As for Ayers, he's a jerk. He was back when he was a terrorist and he was when he said he should have done more, and he is today. If voters listen to him, anything he says, they get what they deserve. How would we trust him as anybody who wants more fame than he thinks he had?
If the media want to go into Obama's past though, they should also go into that of Palin (with her connection to secessionists and the militia movement) and McCain (with his to all the financial cheaters, some of whom got their money out but have led us to where we are).
Whoever wins, I hope we get someone good for our next president because this country cannot afford more of what Bush has done to us. We are in big trouble and it's growing. It is possible that whoever gets in next will be wishing they had lost because you can't fix this without doing things that are going to make a lot of Americans mad. I just hope if McCain wins, he lives out his full 4 years because Palin as president would make Bush look like a heavyweight mentally.
And I will be SO glad when it's over whatever happens. Americans need a country that is functioning again and elections like this one with the divisive tactics like those robo calls suggesting Obama is a terrorist are never good for that. Whoever gets in inherits a very divided country and for people who live in small towns and think they are all that count, most of our country is elsewhere-- even if those small towns get a lot of clout in an election, they don't create most jobs, they aren't where most money is generated, and most of the time their kids even have to go elsewhere to get higher paying jobs. Nothing against them because I live near some myself but they aren't the country and they aren't the only good part of America despite what Palin says. Somehow we need to put aside resentment and anger and whoever is the next president, watch what they do, keep an eye on them that they fulfill their promises, but hope that they do well because we can't afford anything but that.
No matter if some one searches for his necessary thing, so he/she desires
to be available that in detail, so that thing is maintained over here.
Post a Comment