Debate observations

When asked if a terrorist hit would be more likely under Kerry, I’m not sure that Bush reassured us he wasn’t claiming that.

When asked about how 9/11 could have been avoided, Kerry didn’t talk about "shaking the branches" of the intelligence community like Democrats did before the planned Millennium Attacks.

I understood Kerry’s explanation of his Iraq votes, but it seemed kind of long. It differed from the local commentary explanation I wrote about Sept. 8, that Kerry voted against additional funding because he wanted the rich ($200,000+/yr.) to pay for it.

When anyone disagrees with him on the war, Bush uses his "mexed missages" argument. He really shouldn’t bring the soldiers into it. Their job is to follow their marching orders, as retired general Wesley Clark pointed out.

(One thing I should point out is that Nader is immune to the flip-flop charge. He’s been against the war from the start, something I can’t claim personally.)

On the stump, Kerry has noted that you can’t hold an election in a "no-go" zone. Didn’t hear that point last night. Bush talked about his miscalculation, that they didn’t know what they would encounter after their "catastrophic victory." It’s called guerilla warfare.

Bush mentioned the cutting off of hands. Isn’t that more of a Saudi Arabian than an Iraqi tradition? And on the idea that Iraq is now a recruiting ground for new terrorists, because we’re making new enemies, Bush didn’t seem to get it. Bush did get irritable, something his handlers urged him to keep under control, and at times he looked like a deer in the headlights, though he was always able to recover after a long pause.

Bush defended on a couple issues, saying they trained 100,000 troops in Iraq, and that they increased nuclear proliferation containment funding by 35%. Didn’t hear Kerry press further on those issues. When Iraq Prime Minister Iyad Allawi’s name came up, there was no mention of his alleged involvement in car bombings as reported in the New York Times and alleged June murder of prisoners as reported in the Sydney Morning Herald and Age newspapers in Australia.

Bush got a little religious at the beginning of the debate. Toward the end of the debate, he talked about climbing a mountain and seeing a "valley of peace" below. This as he continually breaks the Sixth, Eighth, and Ninth Commandments.

Kerry made some good points about opium production in Afghanistan and U.S. forces guarding only the oil ministry in Iraq. The "colossal misjudgment" charge was one he was able to back up, and of course, the "enemy attacked us" distinction was well done.

On North Korea, Kerry wants bilateral talks, while Bush wants just multilateral talks. On Sudan, Kerry wants logistical aid, while Bush wants just humanitarian aid.

I would have liked debate moderator Jim Lehrer to follow up on some of the above issues. His questions may have seemed tough, but I think they could have been tougher. He didn’t ask about the CFR because he’s a member of it.

One of Kerry’s spinmeisters last night was his senior foreign policy advisor Rand Beers; the same man Reagan hired to replace Oliver North during the Iran-Contra scandal.

http://www.votenader.org/media_press/index.php?cid=233