Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Alerts | Electronic edition | Advertise | Subscribe to the paper | Today's Extras

Breaking News:

Subscribe

A debate of substance

At last, McCain and Obama face off

Rocky Mountain News

Published September 26, 2008 at 9:59 p.m.

Text size  

More Editorials

More stories »

Now that is what we’ve been waiting for. A spirited engagement over substantive issues by two serious men.

And what a loss it would have been if Sen. John McCain had stayed behind in Washington as he had threatened to do if a financial rescue package wasn’t finished.

Fortunately, the first presidential debate in Oxford, Miss., took place last night, and was impressive. Republican McCain stressed his toughness, experience and decades-long knowledge of international affairs. He dispelled any notion that he was a hothead or lacked the temperament to be an effective president.

Sen. Barack Obama emphasized the value of diplomacy and mediation and offered a vision of how he would improve the way other nations view America. He largely held his own on a topic that is widely thought to be McCain’s strength.

They provided the sort of contrast the nation needed to see, along with some ideas of how each man is likely to govern: McCain the tough guy, Obama the healer.

The debate was supposed to focus entirely on foreign policy, but the financial crisis forced the topic to expand. Moderator Jim Lehrer of PBS wasted no time addressing the bailout talks in Washington, dedicating the first three questions to the candidates’ view of the proposed package, how they differed on strategies for economic recovery and how the crisis would force them to restrain their domestic agendas.

On the first two questions, both candidates relied largely on talking points from their economic blueprints.

On the final question, Obama was less persuasive. He didn’t volunteer to give up any of his expansive spending plans. McCain promised to veto earmarks and to impose an across-the-board freeze on spending for every program other than defense, entitlements and veterans benefits.

Those programs consume roughly two-thirds of the federal budget. McCain promised more fiscal discipline than Obama, even expressing a willingness to eliminate ethanol subsidies.

The real fireworks started when the debate moved to foreign policy. McCain contended that Obama was naive and didn’t fully appreciate the threats facing America. Obama was wrong about the surge in Iraq and would withdraw U.S. troops before the country was secured, he said.

Obama countered by citing a litany of cases where he said McCain had been wrong about Iraq. The invasion distracted the U.S. from the war on terror and from capturing Osama bin Laden and defeating the Taliban, he said.

Obama tried to tie McCain to the Bush administration, but McCain effectively countered by pointing out numerous cases where he had taken a contrary position.

The debates are key moments in the campaign. Based on the first, we’ve got a lot to look forward to in the next two, especially if this freewheeling format is followed.

Next we turn to the VPs. Now that should be an even more interesting contrast in style and substance, and a test of the judgment of both presidential candidates.

Comments

  • September 27, 2008

    10:42 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Faux_Noise writes:

    Who still wants to claim Obama can't speak without a teleprompter? Where have all the liars gone? Crawled back into their holes?

  • September 27, 2008

    11:21 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    masondav2004 writes:

    I've got to take issue with the implication that McCain's answer to the bailout question was somehow persuasive. Earmarks and spending, while legitimate issues in their own rights, really don't have much at all to do with the financial crisis. McCain may favor those positions, but they do nothing to address the current problem, which mainly has to do with shoring up failing mortgages, helping those who are on the verge of default stay in their homes, and addressing the freeze of credit markets.

    While I don't agree with the idea of a $700 billion, no-strings-attached bailout of Wall Street with no help for Main Street, and I have some problems with Obama's position on this issue (namely, whether or not he will support giving the first $350 billion essentially strings-free, a position McCain also seemed to support, if you caught it), McCain dodged the question by seguing into earmarks. At least Obama GAVE an answer to the question asked.

    And for John McCain to talk about taking care of veterans after opposing the new GI Bill and other VA legislation is hypocritical and cynical in the extreme. I'm a registered independent, but Obama has my vote after last night. He kept cool under pressure, and took the humble, and politically risky step of acknowledging areas of agreement between himself and Sen. McCain. I think this is the type of conciliatory leadership we need after the disasters of the last eight years... We don't need another go-it-alone type in the White House; we need somebody who can find common ground between the parties to address pressing issues like health care, jobs, and Iraq and Afghanistan.

  • September 27, 2008

    11:48 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    TW writes:

    What I found most enlightening in the debate and perhaps even frightening, is the anger and rage in McCain that bubbles just under the veneer of civility. It is one thing to have that mentality when one is a Senator with limited powers, but as President he would have far reaching global power. And that should concern anyone who cares about this nation.

    I can't help but wonder how John McCain would have handled the 1962 Cuban missile crisis had he been President and not John Kennedy. I was only 7 years old at the time but I recognized the fear on the faces of the teachers who had us practice the useless duck and cover drills. It took all of the patient reasoning skills of some very, very bright, experienced statesmen to navigate through the situation and avert a conflict that could have ended in nuclear war and the end of civilization as we know it.

    Looking around this morning at this beautiful city and its people, I wonder seriously if any of it would be here and if any of us would be here if someone like John McCain had been president during those fateful days in October 1962.

    McCain is a man driven by impulses. He has already shown that repeatedly in this campaign. His failure to vet Sarah Palin has led to her exposure in softball interviews with Katie Couric and Charlie Gibson as someone not worthy of the vice presidential nomination - even the conservative National Review thinks so. McCain's "Alice in Wonderland" moment where he demanded the firing of Christopher Cox, as if that would cure the ills of a reckoning long overdue, was roundly criticized and mocked, not the least by George Will, another conservative thinker. And lastly, there was his Chicken Little impression in the days leading up to this debate where he frantically tried to inject himself somewhere in the process so that he could boost his falling ratings. He looked like a silly old King Lear raging against the wind.

    Barack Obama, by contrast, kept his poise and equanimity throughout the debate in the face of McCain's "lack of experience" smears. Experience can be gained, but a lack of emotional control is not something that can be fixed at 72 years old.

  • September 27, 2008

    4:15 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    keithnewman writes:

    Obama won this debate by appearing the most presidential. McCain appeared childish always needing to get the last word in while Obama graciously was ready to move to the next question.
    McCain often scolded Obama saying he doesn't understand or was just naive, even when Obama agreed with Mccain. Obama displayed an ability to give credit where credit was due, something Mccain could not do. This made McCain look foolish.
    Obama was able to link China to Iran, a concept which befuddled McCain, truly portraying who the big thinker and wiser man is.
    Obama won due to his maturity, non-partisanship, and wisdom.

  • September 27, 2008

    7:32 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    tmack1526 writes:

    Clearly, when the media says it’s a tie, the Democrat lost big! Even Obama said eight times “McCain was right” during the debate. Obama stammered and stuttered his way through and didn’t answer any question directly but used well-prepared talking points. He gave zero details but big picture rhetoric like “we must do it for the children”. The most pathetic part was where he said “I have a bracelet too” like a little kid…but then had to look down at his notes to remember WHO’s bracelet he had on…that was a very big error…I know may veterans and they picked it up right away…but no on has even mentioned this big gaff! Also, Obama is keeping up the big lie…”McCain is like Bush”…anyone who has been breathing knows McCain is the anti-Bush and Neo-cons hate him for it. The Geobels like media keeps protecting the cult leader Obama and maintains the Big Lie.

  • September 27, 2008

    8:19 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    LFC writes:

    I thought it was interesting. But I just can't get this out of my head. McCain stated we have the 2nd highest corp tax in the world, and he wanted to lower that. Obama stated that although this was true, there are so many loopholes in the system that these US companies pay actually one of the lowest in the world.

    Instead of raising the Corp tax, capital gains and what not, how about closing those dang loop holes? Both of these guys talk about reforming washington! How about that, how about just make a flat tax of 15% right across the board! That is still lower than the current rate.

  • September 27, 2008

    8:29 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    casper writes:

    I was mostly disappointed in the debate, not in the subject matter or the answers, per se, but I thought that Obama failed to show a certain fierceness, that is to go for blood, and I thought that McCain, acted like a spoiled child who had just been scolded for stealing cookies. He failed to look his opponent in the eye and his tone was more pouting and surly than Presidential.
    Mostly, the two candidates restated old talking points from speeches that I've heard before. Nothing new, other than Obama did seem to finesse some of his old ideas with new words. McCain's talking points were even repetitious within the debate.
    If it was a draw, as some people are saying, I would be more amenable to giving it to Obama on presenting himself as Presidential if that is any consolation.

  • September 27, 2008

    10:33 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    JonWill writes:

    Despite his lack of any substantive foreign policy experience, the Obama campaign continues to bloviate that Senator Obama is best qualified to be Commander and Chief because “only he had the judgment to make the tough decision against the use of force in Iraq”. This argument is not only hackneyed, but blatantly inaccurate.

    Even if you believe in hindsight that the use of force against Iraq was the wrong decision, it’s a decision that Obama never had to confront. A decision implies one has the authority and information to make a choice which will affect an outcome. Barrack Obama had neither the authority nor the information necessary to make such a decision, let alone affect the outcome. He could not even cast one of his decisive votes of “present”, because he wasn’t! At the time, he was merely an inexperienced Illinois State legislator, representing a very anti-war district. His so called “difficult decision” was no more difficult than it was relevant.

    Mr. Obama had no more information than did I, my butcher, the paperboy down the street, or any other typical American citizen on this issue. He was not in a position to receive intelligence briefings, or even debate the facts. Those who were, such as Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden, came to the same conclusion and made the same decision as John McCain. They each had the authority and the intelligence information that Obama did not, and each voted for the use of force against Saddam Hussein. Obama himself admitted as much. When asked how he would have voted on the Iraq resolution he said: "I'm not privy to Senate intelligence reports. What would I have done? I don't know." (The New York Times on July 26, 2004)

  • September 27, 2008

    10:35 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    JonWill writes:

    (Follow up)
    Once Obama was in fact in a position where he had both authority and information to make real decisions on Iraq, he failed in making the correct ones each and every time.

    After Obama claimed that he "Absolutely wants to make sure that the troops have sufficient support to be able to win, we must fund our troops” (CNN March 28, 2003), he cast his vote against the funding for our troops in the middle of the conflict. A vote that even Joe Biden, his “experienced” pick for Vice President, has chastised.

    During the most difficult times of the Iraq conflict, after public support had waned, Obama made the easy political choice. Only John McCain had the experience and the judgment to make the correct call. He went against Obama, Biden and the democrats (who seemed all too eager to lose the war in order to gain political advantage over the Bush Administration) and also the republicans (who rallied around the Administration and its failing “stay the course” policy). At his own political expense, John McCain called for the dismissal of the Secretary of Defense, Don Rumsfeld, and the very surge policy that has succeeded, while Obama and Biden called for retreat and defeat.

    After the surge had been implemented (despite Obama and Biden’s opposition), John McCain, traveling around Baghdad, proclaimed that things were in fact improving and that the surge was in fact succeeding. Senator Obama and his supporters in the mainstream media were ridiculing Senator McCain’s statements as fantasy. Although he will not admit to his failure of judgment, Obama has now stated: “The surge has succeeded in ways that nobody anticipated, including President Bush and the other supporters, it has gone very well. It succeeded beyond our wildest dreams.” (O’Reilly Factor September 4, 2008)

    The truth is that the success was indeed anticipated and even reported on by John McCain, months before Obama was willing to accept it. Not only did the surge succeed beyond Obama’s wildest dreams, it succeeded despite Obama’s political dreams and poor judgment.

  • September 28, 2008

    1:38 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    pamelalouise writes:

    Thank you for your measured remarks, and nonpartisan reporting...it's refreshing. I'm always looking for media bias; however, I have to admit that Jim Lehrer did a great job, as did both candidates. I thought that both had opportunities for harder-hitting shots which they apparently decided against. For instance, when Obama spoke of his "politically risky" vote against going to war against Iraq, I'm surprised McCain didn't remind viewers that Obama was a mere state senator in very liberal Chicago....hardly a courageous stance. Obama also spoke many times of the importance of focusing on Afghanistan, and that the roots of terrorism began there. Why no response from McCain about Obama's refusal to support going into Afghanistan?

    A great and relevant excerpt from the "The American Thinker," by William Staneski:

    In the late 1950's most Cubans thought Cuba needed a change, and they were right. So when a young leader came along promising Change, every Cuban was at least receptive. When the young leader spoke eloquently and passionately and denounced the old system, the press fell in love with him... They never questioned who his friends were or what he really believed in.

    He said he would help the farmers and the poor and bring free medical care and education to all, and everyone followed. He said he would bring justice and equality to all, and everyone said 'Praise the Lord!'

    The young leader said, 'I will be for change and I'll bring you change,' everyone yelled, 'Viva Fidel!' But by the time the executioner's guns went silent, the people's guns had been taken away. By the time everyone was equal, they were equally poor, hungry, and oppressed. By the time everyone received their free education it was worth nothing . By the time the press noticed, it was too late, because they were now working for him. By the time the change was finally implemented Cuba had been knocked down a couple of notches to Third-World status. By the time the change was over, more than a million people had taken to boats, rafts, and inner tubes fleeing to Florida .

    Luckily, we in America would never fall for a young leader who promises change without asking, WHAT change?

  • September 28, 2008

    6:52 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    HopiMedicineMan writes:

    Obama is using prosecutors in various parts of the country to squelch opinion against him where there's a difference in the facts. Of course there could be no agreement on facts when there's a basic disagreement in opinion.Yet no one twists the facts like the left. We're a moment away from the fairness doctrine where the left is suddenly deemed to possess no opinion and thus in need of no rebuttal. Required soon will be political correctness in party politics, such as racial quotas in Republican politics. All Democrats will be required to deliver the same set speech for the week as they seem to voluntarily now.
    ACORN registered one felon with 72 different names, as reported by NPR. We've entered the post-democracy era.

  • September 28, 2008

    8:42 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    titancain writes:

    Vote against Pian/Medication. Go ask Rush.....when he's ten feet tall.

Post your comment

Registration is required. Click here to create your free user account, or login below.

Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.




(Forgotten your password?)




News Tip

Know about something we should be reporting? Tell us about it.

Sponsored links



Reprints