The Debate That Should Take Place Friday Night

So much self-serving spin attaches to modern presidential debates--especially since the hijacking of the organizational process by crudely-corrupt Commission on Presidential Debates--that it is almost impossible to clearly identify a winner.

Broadcast media long ago replaced serious analysis with the banter of paid partisans, all but guaranteeing that--now that John McCain has decided to participate--Republicans will mark it for McCain and Democrats will declare it for Barack Obama.

After a week of wrangling about domestic economic issues that got so intensely convoluted that the debate itself was jeopardized, the real challenge for both McCain and Obama has suddenly become one of balancing the announced theme of Friday's session--foreign policy--with the desired discussion of booms, busts and bailouts. If either candidate seems too inclined toward dialogue about Pakistan or Georgia, he will be accused of being unconscious of the current crisis. On the other hand, overly ambitious attempts to steer every answer toward talk of foreclosures and executive compensation will bring charges that the offending contender lacks the capacity for the sort of multitasking that is required of thoroughly modern presidents.

What to do?

Instead of engaging in the ridiculous conceit of having opposing candidates come up with "shared principles" for resolving the economic crisis--about which a conservative Republican and a progressive Democrat ought to disagree--McCain and Obama should agree, man-to-man, on a plan for a relevant debate.

Moderator Jim Lehrer has already signalled that economic issues will be on the table.

So why not agree to delay the necessary foreign-policy debate and go for it?

And why not adopt a format that allows for a serious discussion--as opposed to the political preening that has passed for presidential debating in recent decades.

Obama and McCain could borrow a page from the first broadcast debate between contenders for the White House.

No, not the 1960 televised debate between Republican Richard Nixon and Democrat John Kennedy, but the 1948 radio debate between a pair of candidates for the Republican presidential nod, New York Governor Thomas Dewey and former Minnesota Governor Harold Stassen.

That year, before a May primary in Oregon, Dewey accepted Stassen's challenge to debate.

The two candidates agreed to address a single question that at the time seemed rather pressing: Shall the Communist Party in the United States Be Outlawed?"

Dewey and Stassen agreed to a format that opened with the candidates making a twenty-minute statements outlining their divergent stances. They then had eight and one-half minutes each to rebut one another.

The debate was broadcast nationally and captured the imagination of the electorate far beyond Oregon, in no small measure because the two Republicans differed on the issue. Stassen argued for banning the party in those dawning days of the Cold War. Dewey countered that "this glib proposal to outlaw the Communist Party would be quickly recognized everywhere as an abject surrender by the great United States to the methods of totalitarianism."

(Dewey's appeal to reason may have helped him win the Oregon primary, and perhaps even the Republican nomination although, despite the Chicago Tribune headline of the following November, he did not ultimately defeat Truman.)

The debate was a huge success, attracting a massive audience and rave reviews.

"The radio program of the past week clearly was the debate between Gov. Thomas E. Dewey and Harold E. Stassen on the subject of controlling communism," wrote Jack Gould in the New York Times. "The lively if indecisive pro and con between two of the Republican candidates for president was far and away the most arresting political broadcast in many a day, one which conceivably could be copied with profit for the voter during the formal campaign this (year)."

But could it be copied with profit for the voter in 2008?

What would happen if Barack Obama and John McCain agreed to address a single topic Friday night?

What if each candidate was asked to: Outline the appropriate response of the federal government to the current economic downturn take?

What if the Democrat and Republican accepted a format that allowed each candidate to move beyond standard soundbites to deliver twenty-minute statements detailing their views, followed by rebuttals of eight-and-a-half minutes each?

It is doubtful, to be sure, that Obama and McCain – who are, after all, the CEOs of campaigns that take in and spend more money than most multinational corporations -- would have the flexibility required to even entertain the prospect of veering off script toward a serious economic discourse. But these are extraordinary times. And this is an extraordinarily unsettled presidential race. If either McCain or Obama was willing to be bold, it would be hard for the other to remain unmoved. And it might still be possible to give America a debate worthy of the moment, and of the republic.

Comments (44)

1. "Shall the Communist Party in the United States Be Outlawed?"

   Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

   sheesh.

   why debate that?

   Posted by frosty zoom at 09/26/2008 @ 02:29am

2. imagine trying to sell commercial slots for a debate talking about how sour the economy is.

   i suppose ads for budlite.......

   Posted by frosty zoom at 09/26/2008 @ 02:31am

3. i think they should have the candidates battle a few rounds of jeopardy.

   "i'll take subprime for $30 billion, alex"

   "these five gems in wall street's crown made the walls of main street come tumblin' down."

   "who are Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch, Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns?"

   "CORRECT!"

   Posted by frosty zoom at 09/26/2008 @ 02:38am

4. hey nation,

   do we REALLY need the java script letter counter?

   friggin' java heats up my computer, thus wasting energy.

   plus, who in the world watches boston legal?

   i don't care what my credit score is.

   i know you need the money, but the javaworld sucks.

   look, i know this guy in washington and he can set you up real sweet.

   how much debt you carrying?

   Posted by frosty zoom at 09/26/2008 @ 02:41am

5. " . . . where it is the taxpayers looking to bail out. But ultimately, what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the healthcare reform that is needed to help shore up our economy. Um, helping, oh -- it's got to be all about job creation too. Shoring up our economy, and putting it back on the right track. So healthcare reform and reducing taxes and reining in spending has got to accompany tax reductions, and tax relief for Americans, and trade, we've got to see trade as opportunity, not as a competitive, um, scary thing, but 1 in 5 jobs being created in the trade sector today. We've got to look at that as more opportunity. All of those things under the umbrella of job creation. This bailout is a part of that."

   Posted by frosty zoom at 09/26/2008 @ 04:05am

6. Gee, FZ, where'd ya get that brilliant densely worded hard to follow so surely profound exegesis on the bailout?

   Reads like Beckett.

   Could it be, could it possibly be that, as a result of her long experience with the supernatural, the divine Sarah is now channeling the great Nobel prize winning joker Samuel?

   Sounds that way.

   Krapp's Last Tape. Updated.

   Posted by sloper at 09/26/2008 @ 05:48am

7. "Moderator … has already suggested that economic issues will be on the table."

   You forgot to fill in the name of the moderator, Mr. Nichols. See, these are things you have to look up as soon as you think of them, or you risk leaving them open and forgetting about them later. Didn't they teach you that in journalism school? ;-)

   About the debate: if Obama shows up and McCain doesn't, we could be in for a hell of a show. Obama isn't a good debater because he often has difficulty getting to the point - at least according to one of my best friends, who should know because he's a former world debating champion - but he does know how to give a speech and how to connect with an audience. McCain might run from this debate because he dreads answering all of these tough questions about the economy, but in so doing he might actually shoot himself in the foot even worse because he'd be handing Obama the opportunity for giving a one-man show - the thing Obama does best.

   Posted by Amsterdam69 at 09/26/2008 @ 06:26am

8. One note about presidential debates on American crises - a current economic peril is certainly historic and scary and the future is uncertain, to say the least. But it''s not the first crisis to happen during the debate season. And nobody called off anything before.

   October 13th, 1960, John Kennedy and Richard Nixon debate after 33 people were injured when a bomb went off in Times Square marking the 3rd explosion in 11 days. October 28, 1980, Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter debate in the midst of the Iranian hostage crisis. October 17th, 2000, George W. Bush and Al Gore debate just 5 days after the devastating attack on the USS Cole.

   A crisis such as this crisis, is the time when Americans need to see their leaders lead, to hear them discuss our problem and how they fix them. Things are bad but it''s never stopped us before.

   Posted by throwin at 09/26/2008 @ 07:20am

9. NO to the bailout!

   STOP the bailout!

   SCREW the bailout!

   (It's better for Obama is there's NO bailout!)

   Say NO to the bailout!

   NO BAILOUT!!!

   Posted by bleedingheart at 09/26/2008 @ 08:47am

10. Or we could invite Cynthia McKinney, Bob Barr, Ralph Nader and a few other presidential candidates to...

    Ooops! I forgot. The founding fathers wrote a two-party system into the U.S. Constitution.

    Silly me!

    Posted by Fidelio1948 at 09/26/2008 @ 08:54am

11. Can you imagine how poor Tom Dewey would get raked over the coals by the Right-Wing Spin Machine today?

    Limbaugh would call him a "com-symp", Hannity say "Dewey lacks the understanding of the fundamental threat posed to this country", and Glenn Beck would wonder aloud if "that moustache makes him look gay, doesn't it?"

    And these same idiots would never even GUESS that Communism would collapse under its own weight and not a serious shot fired between the US and Russia and for most of its history, the entire US Communist Party membership meeting could be held in a Hardee's in Oshkosh, Wisconsin.

    As for Mr Nichols' suggestion...of course, it isn't going to happen. These guys have been prepping for weeks for the topics planned for and neither side wants a "change up". More Nichols' silliness.

    Posted by Maskdelta at 09/26/2008 @ 08:57am

12. Posted by Fidelio1948 at 09/26/2008 @ 08:54am

    No...but it'd have the same impact as Ron Paul at a GOP primary debate...or Dennis Kucinich at a Dem primary debate...

    i.e. none and one of the top contenders would still be President, but we'd hear a lot LESS from them because one of the others took up so much time talking about ideas that would never become enacted into law.

    Posted by Maskdelta at 09/26/2008 @ 09:01am

13. com'on flippy mac! come out to play tonight! its friday night and barry o will be there. he's been working pretty hard on this bailout thing and campaigning himself...

    but i understand that grampa needs his rest and mrs. mooseburger needs to be hidden away again after sounding like a scarily unprepared soccer (oops - "hockey" mom...pit bull? with lipstick...hmmm...) mom from somewhere north of illinois...

    and oh the endless stream of semi-true and truthy talking point butt covering, faux patriotic crocodile tear outrage at whatever the latest rightwing silly crying point or claptrap non-issue is, and downright "honesty" maudlin acceptably patriotic drivel that will spew forth semi-coherently from flippy mac's piehole if he does dare show his carcinigous 72 year old face (but don't worry america...the lipsticked pit bull hockey mom who pursues personal vendettas from public office and recieves blessings from african christofascist witch hunters will be there and ready to step in...hoooweee!!!).

    i don't care what they debate about, but flippy's tummy ache better go away if he wants to tell his "i was a pow" story for the buzillionth time in an effort to disguise the almost complete lack of substance and knowledge he exibits on anything much beyond neocon foriegn policy orthodoxy as well as his decades long collusion with precisely the irresponsible satano-aynrando wannabe demigods who are most responsible for this mess...

    Posted by dexter666 at 09/26/2008 @ 09:08am

14. McCain doesn't have the background to engage in a debate on the economy, especially on short notice.

    He wasn't joking when he said the economy is not his strong suit, and that will be apparent if he agrees to debate the economy tonight.

    Congress will probably not agree to a deal today, so McCain will have to explain why he is showing up to the debate without a deal since he "promised" that he wouldn't do that.

    And if McCain does NOT show up, Obama will grab the presidential spotlight by himself at the debate and highlight his thoughtful approach to the economic challenge and "real" leadership on the issue.

    Posted by Metteyya at 09/26/2008 @ 09:44am

15. <B>SPIN CLASSIFICATION</B>

    One essential parameter for classification of particles is their "spin" or INTRINSIC angular momentum. Half-integer spin FERMIONS are constrained by the PAULI EXCLUSION PRINCIPLE whereas INTEGER SPIN BOSONS are not. The electron is a fermion with electron spin 1/2.

    The spin classification of particles determines THE NATURE OF THE ENERGY distribution in a collection of the particles. PARTICLES OF integer SPIN obey BOSE-EINSTEIN STATISTICS, whereas those of half-integer spin behave according to FERMI-DIRAC STAtistics.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 09/26/2008 @ 10:07am

16. Posted by Metteyya at 09/26/2008 @ 09:44am

    The outcome of a "McCain no-show" is still dicey.

    Obama might try to hold a press conference outside the debate auditorium or even a town hall (He probably shouldn't or couldn't hold it IN the auditorium since the Debate Committee would feel insulted and he'd seem a little grandstanding.)

    Invite the kids at Ol' Miss to the Student Union or some other venue, along with reporters and any others that were going to be in the debate audience and hold a town hall.

    First, it would be "McCain's type of show" (remember the CW is that "he does best in town halls") and would show that Obama could hold his own in one as well.

    It'd also give him full range to push the line they're trying that "The American people have a right to hear from candidates, not see them rush back to Washington (where the problem is) and try to do PR stunts."

    Second, it would mean that McCain's only air-time would be whatever the networks would give him and he'd be forced to discusss ONLY the financial crises...and as noted above...economics is not his strong suit.

    Third, it would fully point out the "stunt"-like quality of McCain's manuever.

    MOST interesting would be if Pelosi got a deal out of Congress TOO LATE for McCain to get on the plane back to Oxford, MS. Again, he'd be forced to rely on whatever camera was around....and Obama would still be able to hold his town hall at Ol' Miss and McCain couldn't claim "foul" because the whole "March to Washington" thing was HIS idea.

    Posted by Maskdelta at 09/26/2008 @ 10:08am

17. McCain REMAINS undecided on just about everything except:

    Women... Will vote for Palin because...

    War... Will vote for / support and ANY WAR for as long as it takes...

    Vet Benefits... Will vote AGAINST EVERYTIME...

    For more information on John Double Talk McCain and sidekick Sarah 666 Palin visit:

    http://www.Ibelievethis.us

    Posted by voicewithin at 09/26/2008 @ 10:40am

18. imagine trying to sell commercial slots for a debate talking about how sour the economy is.

    i suppose ads for budlite.......

    Posted by frosty zoom at 09/26/2008 @ 02:31am | ignore this person | warn this person

    I thought how strange to see Washington Mutual advertising for business on network TV while programing was discussing the imminent demise (it happened yesterday apparently) of WaMu.

    On a side note...how about this Rob Emmanuel character saying that 80% of Americans want the government to do something to bailout WallStreet.....Bloombery reports that communications with Congress from constituents has been 99.99% negative, 50% of which is "adamantly" against any taxpayer money going to prop up the system.

    Stange confluence of politics, commercialism, corruption and greed, propaganda....who do you trust?,,,,,the stink test has always served pretty well.

    Posted by OneVote at 09/26/2008 @ 11:03am

19. Posted by Amsterdam69 at 09/26/2008 @ 06:26am

    How does one go about becoming a world debate champion? Sounds like something they'd slide into the olymics. Today at 3:00 we'll televise the world curling gold medal event followed by the gold medal debating event. This year's debators have debated everything under the sun, but neither side has conceded to the other side that they lost to the other.

    Kind of like what happens with the political debates we have. Fox will claim McCain the winner and MSNBC will claim Obama the winner...so, they both the Gold medal.

    Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/26/2008 @ 11:06am

20. Posted by voicewithin at 09/26/2008 @ 10:40am | ignore this person | warn this person

    i wonder from where sarah's voice comes...

    inside or out?

    maybe when she gets nailed for pursuing private vendettas from public office...

    she can claim the devil made her do it!!!

    but still...is that voice coming from outside or inside?

    i don't know...in my experience people are perfectly capable of all sorts of wickedness all on their own without any help from ol' sctatch whatsoever...

    especially wacked out religious fanatics...

    Posted by dexter666 at 09/26/2008 @ 11:06am

21. Hope this debate actually focuses on the issues rather than the political theater of the bailout. As both of these characters have unclean hands, perhaps this is what we will get....should be interesting........

    Posted by OneVote at 09/26/2008 @ 11:16am

22. I hope McBush doesn't show up. Apparently the Debate Committee is working on a Plan B which would be a town hall format with questions from the audience given to Jim Lehrer (sp?). In my humble opinion, if that happens, and Americans get to see Obama and hear his plan for this country, Obama puts the nail in the coffin of McCain's campaign. His political stunt is backfiring becuase a) there's ZERO evidence he contributed anything to the debate and b) after hearing there was a compromise, it is the House GOP (who I actually agree with on some points) who are holding this up - the same group McCain ostensibly went to DC to work with.

    So while I don't think McCain's return to DC was legitimate, even if it was, he accomplished nothing. And now he won't face the American people.

    Posted by DGKusel at 09/26/2008 @ 11:23am

23. Posted by OneVote at 09/26/2008 @ 11:16am | ignore this person | warn this person

    the debate is a psychic duel. there is no time to get all the details out in the format of a standard debate.

    obama's website has gobs of issues related stuff and its but a few clicks away on this tubey webby internet thingy...

    last time i looked at flippy mac's site i just got a lot of aynrando ideology, talking points and stuff about fliipy mac's stay at the hanoi hilton...

    guess i'll have to re-check...

    Posted by dexter666 at 09/26/2008 @ 11:24am

24. the debate is a psychic duel. there is no time to get all the details out in the format of a standard debate.

    Posted by dexter666 at 09/26/2008 @ 11:24am | ignore this person | warn this person

    Count on it.

    Posted by OneVote at 09/26/2008 @ 11:33am

25. Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 09/26/2008 @ 11:26am

    Actually the minute-long TV ad was much more effective. Hit all the right notes and showed Obama as the candidate of both change and OPTIMISM.

    Posted by Maskdelta at 09/26/2008 @ 11:38am

26. Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 09/26/2008 @ 11:26am

    BTW, if Obama can even get within MoE in North Carolina...put it into play....it draws resources away from other "battlegrounds".

    It also increases the chances of him winning Virginia.

    If he won Virginia AND North Carolina....McCain could win Pennsylvania, even Ohio...and lose the election by virtue of what other states that would make less Red from 2004.

    Posted by Maskdelta at 09/26/2008 @ 11:40am

27. Ol' Johnny will drag himself down to Ol' Miss, having hogged the spotlight for days of distraction.

    Now, how to convince his running mate she should bow out for personal reasons, before the spotlight zeroes in on her again.

    Mitt's ready. So's his checkbook.

    Posted by sloper at 09/26/2008 @ 12:27pm

28. Hey, Since Johny McLiar is so busy saving the world, then why can't Sarah Palin step in and debate Obama? As David Letterman pointed out, isn't she the number 2 QB on the ticket? If John is sidelined, she's going to have to fill in, and no better test than to debate the number one guy on the dem side.

    Sloper, McCain will never go with Romney. Remember that he's a Mormon, which is the same thing as a Muslim to the 28% crowd.

    Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/26/2008 @ 12:52pm

29. No...but it'd have the same impact as Ron Paul at a GOP primary debate...or Dennis Kucinich at a Dem primary debate...

    i.e. none and one of the top contenders would still be President, but we'd hear a lot LESS from them because one of the others took up so much time talking about ideas that would never become enacted into law.

    Posted by Maskdelta at 09/26/2008 @ 09:01am

    How typical. You channel the voice of the party hack, the party machine, the party establishment. Instead of thinking like a citizen, you think like a campaign consultant.

    Heaven forbid we were exposed to other ideas, ideas supported by candidates who got hundreds of thousands of signatures to get on the ballot, ideas that might gradually take root in the electorate and eventually change a party and then a nation.

    Heaven forbid the major party candidates are challenged to justify unpopular positions by people who, "third party" though they may be, nonetheless better reflect the public mood on some issues than the big boys, such as the occupation of Iraq. Barr, McKinney and Nader are all closer to voters than McCain and Obama when it comes to staying in Iraq. And they'd force both of them to defend their dismissive attitudes towards civil liberties. Granted, the public may lean closer to the big boys on this, but at least we'd have a real debate on the issue.

    No, mustn't think in terms of real debates about real issues. Keep the club closed so no fresh ideas or perspectives can get in, ever. Keep your eye focused only on this election and ignore the future. After all, this kind of short-term thinking has worked so well on Wall Street.

    Posted by cka2nd at 09/26/2008 @ 12:55pm

30. Posted by cka2nd at 09/26/2008 @ 12:55pm

    MAY PINS HOPES ON OUTCRY

    Toronto Star, Canada - Sep 10, 2008

    In 1993, the Ontario Court of Appeal ruled in favour of broadcasters who excluded a Green party leader from the 1988 election debates. ...

    ¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢

    GREEN LEADER ALLOWED INTO DEBATES, NETWORKS CONFIRM

    CBC.ca, Canada - Sep 10, 2008

    After the NDP and the Conservatives expressed their concerns, the NDP in particular faced a public outcry in internet circles from many self-proclaimed New ...

    ¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢

    ELIZABETH MAY CREDITS PEOPLE 2 PEOPLE POWER

    p2pnet.net, Canada - Sep 11, 2008

    After a huge public outcry, the Broadcasting Consortium, comprising TV executives from the five main networks who'd caved in to ‘No Green Party' demands ...

    ¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢

    MAY GETS FIRST SAY AT ENGLISH LEADERS' DEBATE

    CBC.ca, Canada - Sep 19, 2008

    Elizabeth May first secured the Green party a spot in the leaders' debates. Now she has won the lottery to be the first to speak in the English debate. ...

    ¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢

    heheh.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 09/26/2008 @ 1:04pm

31. Posted by cka2nd at 09/26/2008 @ 12:55pm

    Yes, CKA, I apologize for living in the real world and the real world of politics.

    Here's how such a "debate" would play out-

    1. Nader attacks Obama more than McCain (because that's what he's been doing) and they spar and McCain looks like the "safe, rational one beside the wacky Lefties".

    2. McKinney attacks McCain and looks like the crazy old lady who punched a cop and makes McCain look good.

    3. Barr agrees with McCain on libertarian conservatism and defends tax cuts, MILDLY opposes the war and "begrudgingly agrees with McCain on certain national security policies they BOTH voted for in the GOP Congress"....which makes McCain look good to the more security/defense-minded Right and some of the hawkish Libertarians.

    4. Nader attacks McCain (for a change) and McCain defends himself and paints Obama as part of the Other Gang of wackamoles, linking him to fringe elements.

    5. The debate ends with McCain sounding calm, reasonable, MAINSTREAM, and virtually untouched. Obama either gets smashed for "not being pure enough" on progressivism or is MARRIED to the Far Left in the eyes of the electorate.

    6. McCain wins handily (where he shouldn't have) (Ralph, Bob, and Cynthia STILL get less than 5% of the vote) and we get four more years of THE WORST and not 4 more of "atleast somewhat better" and you guys get to cry and moan with the rest of us until 2012 when you insist that "Only a socialist can win against the Republicans, run anybody more centrist and it's a sell-out" and Ralph runs again to fulfill that destiny and you insist that whatever mainstream Dem wins slit their own throat by allowing anothe free-for-all debate...

    and even the inept and silly Sarah Palin wins the Presidency....and so it goes.

    Posted by Maskdelta at 09/26/2008 @ 1:12pm

32. It truly is a case of the world turned upside down. The Democrats are stumbling all over each other to ram through the Bush/Paulson Bailout Scam, an unprecedented example of anti-democratic corporate welfare combined with malevolent neglect of the American people, who are suffering tremendously and get absolutely nothing from their alleged representatives on Capitol Hill. Perhaps the Democrats are even more foolish than I thought--did they notice that this is Paulson's deal and that he is a minion of Bush, the president who lied his way into a disastrous war and has lied at every turn since? Even more likely, the Democrats are far more corrupt than we dared imagine.

    Thanks, Dodd and Frank and Pelosi and Reid (and yes McCain and Shelby and Boehner too) for driving yet another nail in the coffin of American democracy. Thanks $700 billion worth--or is that $1.5 trillion?

    Posted by feinfein at 09/26/2008 @ 3:38pm

33. and even the inept and silly Sarah Palin wins the Presidency....and so it goes.

    Posted by Maskdelta at 09/26/2008 @ 1:12pm

    Wasn't that pretty much how W got into office. Ralph Nader, a true democrat, took enough votes away from Kerry and Gore to push W into the Whitehouse. Now, we had Ross Perot to thank when it was Clinton, Bush Senior and "Just tell them Ross sent ya" Perot. Have you ever seen the old Saturday night live skit of Bush senior, Clinton and Perot debating? It's a riot.

    Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/26/2008 @ 3:41pm

34. Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 09/26/2008 @ 2:58pm

    Before you congratulate YOURSELF, Darin....

    got to National Review online and read Kathleen Parker's column on Saint Sarah.

    Posted by Maskdelta at 09/26/2008 @ 4:01pm

35. Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/26/2008 @ 3:41pm

    Oh, boy, WOLF....Can of Worms Alert!

    Nothing cheeses the Naderites more than to be blamed for Dubya winning in 2000!

    (2004 not so much Ralph got 0.34% of the vote....most folks wised up!)

    Posted by Maskdelta at 09/26/2008 @ 4:02pm

36. the debate we deserve would include ralph nader and chuck baldwin. this country is supposed to be about freedom of choice. what choice do we have that hasn't been made for us.

    Posted by pubguy at 09/26/2008 @ 5:35pm

37. sloper says:

    "Now, how to convince his running mate she should bow out for personal reasons, before the spotlight zeroes in on her again. "

    I made a posting on one of the other threads mentioning that blogging on this site is a waste of time, but I have got to tell you, if sloper and other libs tink somehow Sarah Palin will drop out of this race, you libs are wasting your time, big time!

    Ain't gonna happen!! Sarah Palin is the next Vice-President of the United States!! You libs are just going to have to learn to deal with it!!

    Posted by sjchermak at 09/26/2008 @ 6:02pm

38. what choice do we have that hasn't been made for us.

    Posted by pubguy at 09/26/2008 @ 5:35pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    fatalistic. u r a third partyer or an anarchist?

    right now, vote for obama and see what happens, cause he is as good as its going to get.

    unless you are hard core libertarian and anarchist, in which case the disintigration of the country may not bother you much...? or vote obama and see what happens...

    Posted by dexter666 at 09/26/2008 @ 6:05pm

39. <i>Sarah Palin is the next Vice-President of the United States!!

    Posted by sjchermak at 09/26/2008 @ 6:02pm</i>

    I generally consider myself a moderate conservative, but...that thought seriously concerns me.

    Posted by Thrawn at 09/26/2008 @ 7:48pm

40. Posted by sjchermak at 09/26/2008 @ 6:02pm

    Since SJ only gets his info from the radio...

    he's unfamiliar with "Natinoal Review" that bastion of liberal, left-wing thought!

    heheh

    Posted by Maskdelta at 09/26/2008 @ 8:01pm

41. Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 09/26/2008 @ 8:48pm

    "Mitt"?...as in Romney???

    1. He was so bad that with MILLIONS of his OWN money, he couldn't beat McCain who the GOP base hated (and still does).

    2. Ask LVLIB what some of his Religious Right friends think of Mitt.

    Posted by Maskdelta at 09/26/2008 @ 9:54pm

42. Hey Maskdelta,

    I just read Kathleen Parker's column on National Review about Sarah Palin.

    The article you have been touting so highly.

    It didn't really say anything of any significance. Nothing more than one person's opinion - and certainly there are tons of opinions about tons of things nowadays available to everybody in cyberspace.

    You are making a bigger deal out of it than it is. It really was nothing.

    Nice try. Try harder next time.

    Posted by sjchermak at 09/26/2008 @ 11:05pm

43. Well the debate is over and McCain pulled out all the stops. I am surprised he didn't weep outright over the vets even if he wants to retain them by denying them a strong GI Bill.

    Obama did fine though he really needs to tone down the vocab without dumbing down the debate. He also needs to articulate the advantage of a younger, quicker mind that is not too hidebound to encompass new ideas. Allowing McCain to dismiss him as naive without pointing out that the "maverick" isn't cutting anymore is a mistake.

    If you were raised right it is hard to be disrepectful of your elders, but Obama needs to realize that he is facing two junk yard dogs. They will chew him up if he doesn't whack them on the nose and mean it.

    Posted by Pogge at 09/26/2008 @ 11:24pm

44. Posted by sjchermak at 09/26/2008 @ 11:05pm

    I'll keep that for the next time YOU post "one person's opinion"!

    LOL

    Posted by Maskdelta at 09/27/2008 @ 09:35am