The Debates Part 1

I have to concur with The Weekly Standard's Bill Kristol who said last night,
"If this were prize fight, the first round would go to Obama, and the rest to McCain with a couple of ties in the middle."

Now, of course I know you expected that I would give the debate to McCain. But, I didn't think I would in the first 15 minutes or so. I think Obama did very well. He was his usual elegant self, and this time I wasn't left scratching my head wondering just what the hell he was talking about. Usually after a speech, (or more accurately the day after a speech) Obama has had to clarify statements because of what I see as misstatements or half-truths. The reason I did was that I believe McCain put Obama on the defensive most of the night. It didn't help that Obama said McCain was right eight different times.

I think both men were, for the most part, calm and collected and both and made good points.
The only clear shot Obama gave, as I saw it, although it was in no way a knockout punch, was when he pointed out that he "has a bracelet too" referring to a bracelet that a deceased hero's mom gave to Obama asking him to "make sure no other mother has to go through" what she has. I don't think McCain saw that one coming.

However, as I've said the rest of the night belonged to Mccain, although there were a couple of times that I though McCain let Obama get away with statements that should have been forcefully rebuted. One such rebuke should have been on the opening question on the bail-out.
For the life of me, I don't know why McCain didn't make a point of informing the crowd and the television audience that Obama (as I've mentioned in another post) was a major recipient of Fannie May/Freddie Mac contributions. Also, I was waiting for McCain to fire back about the campaign contributions that Obama received from "big oil". Yes, McCain received about four million dollars, but Obama has received about two million. What was he waiting for?
and what about the Democrats that stretched this problem to the breaking point and said, basically, it was all much ado about nothing?
Democrats like Charles Rangel who said,
"I'd be amiss if I didn't mention that fears of riskiness of Fannie May were overblown."
Or Charles Schumer, who advocated legislation to allow Freddie Mac to increase their role in the mortgage market, as has Republican Mike Oxley.
Five years ago, Barney Frank vouched for the "soundness" of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and said "I do not see" any "possibility of serious financial losses to the treasury."
Earlier this year, Senator Christopher Dodd praised Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for "riding to the rescue" when other financial institutions were cutting back on mortgage loans. He too said that they "need to do more" to help sub- prime borrowers get better loans.


But back to the topic at hand.
What about that point that Obama keeps making throughout this campaign about McCain voting with Bush 90 percent of the time? I wish McCain would have pointed out, as Charles Krauthammer has, that about 65 percent of that 90 percent was to vote against the override to Bush's veto to eliminate earmark spending, pork and Democratic personal pet projects.

In closing, and you lefties will love this; but facts are facts, although I believe McCain won this debate, I also believe Obama came out on top overall because of it. He was leading in the poles (not by much and with the MSM covering his every fault-both personal as well as professional-he should be at least 15 points up) so all he had to do was hold his own, and as I've said, I believe he accomplished that.