I completely disagree.  McCain showed how out of touch his is with America on a world stage.  He can talk about experience in foreign policy all he wants, but Obama spoke directly about what we need to do, and what he will do, to expand our foreign policy and get us moving in the right direction.

McCain wasn't using talking points??  That lamentation for the positive or negative segments being said on either side of the issues is quite useless.  They both had talking points to emphasize... it's how they bring people to their side.

I think Obama said it best....repeatedly.....

"You're absolutely right John. "

"I have to agree with John"

I wonder if he agrees that McCain won the debate? 

McCain looked and sounded much more Presidential than Obama did.

Did any notice how thin and gaunt Obama looked?  I didn't think he looked that good.  Or is it just me? 

Rat! I only managed to cath bits of it. But it was quite fun to watch.

I dunno about won. Maybe in this grandscale mudslinging match Obama wasn't throwing as much McCain?

But I only managed to watch a few bits on the War, healthcare and taxcuts. I missed the rest

Anyone know where I can watch the debate again? I want to watch it again later. more slowly and examine points a bit more (on that funky thing called the interweb that is )

I don't think there was a clear winner...no one really knocked it out of the park in my opinion.

I think the part I enjoyed most was how they avoided eye contact with each other for the first bit and didn't really want to talk to each other.

~Zoo

What debate did you watch last night?  You've got to be so blinded by bias for you to believe McCain won.

Obama certainly didn't 'knock it out of the park' but at least he didn't get lost in his own muddled answers.  I felt embarressed for McCain, who did come across as creaky and, maybe, unprepared. Obama simply won by default.

The real winner last night was Jim Lehrer who did every American citizen a public service by saying this:

But if I hear the two of you correctly neither one of you is suggesting any major changes in what you want to do as president as a result of the financial bailout? Is that what you're saying?

Thanks, and I agree with you, they were not direct or clear and did more dancing around the question then any thing else.

Do they actually have any serious thought out solutions to our nations ills or do they both 'just wanna' be President'?

Well if McCain wins (looking less likely based on the polls but still a possibility) I can't see the K...G...B comment doing much to enhance relations with Russia when he next meets Putin!

 As a Republican I was ashamed at the way that McCain turned a debate into a set of personal attacks and falsifications (see NPR.com for fact checking of the debate and the quote from Kissinger stating exactly what Obama said he did about negotiations). I was disappointed about his address of economical issues. He seemed to get stuck on earmarks and couldn’t get off it. I am wondering if he really has a plan. I like that he has military experience, but I wonder if it will limit his creativity in using other methods. His whole life has been military. He may make a good Secretary of Defense, but can he build relationships and alliances with other countries? He seems to be pretty set on winning at any cost( anyone seen the show Lions for Lambs). I fear that he parrots Bush in his belief that the rest of the world is inferior to the U.S.. I am proud to be an American, but I don’t believe in the bully philosophy that Bush has adopted. I am terrified that he will die and Palin will have to step into the role of president and if you want to talk about inexperience and not understanding. According to actuary tables there is a 1 in 3 chance that that could happen. He showed a lack of class and good sportsmanship in his refusal to address Obama directly and treated him as an enemy (last I checked we are all on the same side here). I found his remarks about Obama “Just not understanding” condescending and clearly untrue. I think anyone who is honestly evaluating the candidates would agree that based on the debate Obama certainly has a very good understanding. They may not agree with his strategy, but understand of the world doesn’t seem to be a problem for him. I have to say that I think it was a draw. McCain has more experience in military issues and time in congress, but Obama has a very clear understanding and intelligence about what we need.

. Marv KFC Kickin For Christ Wrote: On Sep 26, 2008 Reply Quote I think Obama said it best....repeatedly..... "You're absolutely right John. " "I have to agree with John" I wonder if he agrees that McCain won the debate? McCain looked and sounded much more Presidential than Obama did. Did any notice how thin and gaunt Obama looked? I didn't think he looked that good. Or is it just me?[/quote]

It is interesting that many people feel that agreeing with someone is a weakness. I like the fact that Obama can look at all sides of the issue and if he agrees he doesn't let his pride interfere with saying it. It shows open mindedness and a willingness to gather information and logic to form strategy. There is something very right about a candidate that gets up and really talks (even if that means saying he agrees if he does) and having a debate. A good leader knows that there is wisdom to be found anywhere and they aren't afraid to have a discussion about issues. They treat there oppobebts with respect instead of tryig to convice the people that the other opponent doesn't have a clue when its obvious he does. Let's be clear it doesn't take someone who has been in war to lead a war. It takes someone who can gather information, surround himself with good people and not be ashamed to explore all sides.

BTW, I have seen very few, if any, of the media disecting the debate so I guess you can say I have not been influenced by their comments.

JohnReed posts:

ENOUGH of this nonsense....I saw Fox News and heard former Sec. of State, Henry Kissinger say that he never said what Obama claimed he said. Kissinger said Obama was wrong and he agreed with McCain's position that it's both naive and dangerous for Presidents to speak with rogue dictators without pre-conditions.

JohnReed posts #18

Well, that's just it..... Obama is full of pride....take the issue of during the primaries.... in order to separate himself from what Hillary said she would have done, Obama said that as president he'd meet with dictators without pre-conditions. They bagged him on this point and being too proud to back down, or admit he made an error, it has now become his mantra; his personal doctrine of policy. Mybe you do, but I don't want the next president to speak to tyrants without pre-conditions. It's exactly as McCain said, it's naive and dangerous, and I'll add prideful and stupid.

On this, Obama was wrong then, and was wrong at the debate and still is too proud to say he is wrong about it today...IMO,  this indicates a very bad character trait.