SPECIAL DEBATE EDITION For the complete transcript...and it's worth the read go to: http://www.debates.org/pages/trans2004c.html
That WAS a face-off in St. Louis last night. If anyone is still "undecided" after that, then they fail the basic test of citizenship: being able to fog a mirror that is held under your nose. Clear distinctions were drawn between the candidates on how they would handle national security, on taxes, on domestic priorities, on abortion,and a number of smaller in-betweens.
STYLE: BIG WIN FOR W.
To the relief of Republicans, and Redstater himself, W showed up in fighting form. He was energetic in springing into his answers. He managed to turn his height disadvantage into a plus by appearing solid and athletic, like a defensive middle-linebacker waiting for the running back to come through the hole. I'm almost starting to like the blue tie! The roles were reversed - jfk was on defense, seemed programmed and in the cutaway shots he appeared to be smirking, overbearing and arrogant. As an old debater myself, one sure sign that your opponent is on defense is when he has to use time to address a prior question..."I'd like to answer your question, but let me first address what my opponent said in his last statement..." Edwards had to do frequently against Cheney and Kerry did it numerous times last night. Looking at body language, jfk actually managed to do an "AlGore" with the red line drawn between them! jfk's height advantage was erased last night as he Ichabod Cranely perched (http://www.schooltales.com/sleepyhollow/title.html ) on his stool and, dare I say it, scowled at the President. Those long, girlish, well manicured fingers wrap around the microphone like a talon...I know Halloween is approaching, but that was scaaary!
NATIONAL DEFENSE: BIG WIN FOR W.
Unless you are a multilateralist who wants to cede decisions on our safety to the EU, UN and any other alphabet soup that you think deserves a say-so, W won big. He hammered jfk on his indecisiveness and yes, flip-flopping: "I don't see how you can lead this country in a time of war, in a time of uncertainty, if you change your mind because of politics." He raised the good Senator's record (talk about Halloween horrors!) of voting for then against measures. W clearly laid out why we are fighting in Iraq...despite the Duelfer Report's findings that there were no WMD's in Iraq. W pointed out that Sadam was gaming the system...the coalition of the bribed was the UN Security Council.
W effectively pointed out the lunacy of jfk's position on coalitions:
"It is naive and dangerous to take a policy that he suggested the other day, which is to have bilateral relations with North Korea. Remember, he's the person who's accusing me of not acting multilaterally. He now wants to take the six-party talks we have -- China, North Korea, South Korea, Russia, Japan and the United States -- and undermine them by having bilateral talks."
And he rightly defended our allies like Great Britain and Poland who jfk seems to think are insignificant:
"You tell Tony Blair we're going alone. Tell Tony Blair we're going alone. Tell Silvio Berlusconi we're going alone. Tell Aleksander Kwasniewski of Poland we're going alone. There are 30 countries there. It denigrates an alliance to say we're going alone, to discount their sacrifices. You cannot lead an alliance if you say, you know, you're going alone. And people listen. They're sacrificing with us."
Redstater would have added that Kwasniewski publicly scolded jfk earlier this week and called W a "Texas gentleman."
Net, net, W has a vision for solving the terrorist problem: fight them over there and bring freedom and opportunity to them for a long range solution. jfk's response? "I have a plan" (which he said 14 times last night without ever offering specifics) and "let's get the UN, French and Germans to help." Great jfk moment last night that summed it up: Bush claimed if jfk had been the Prez, Saddam would still be in power..."Not necessarily in power..." came the reply.
TAX AND FISCAL POLICY: BIG WIN FOR W.
jfk looked squarely into the camera and said he wouldn't raise taxes on those making less than $200,000. Bush simply pointed out the Senator's record: over 200 times he's voted to raise spending caps and over 600 times he's voted to raise taxes. He also tagged our gangly Massachussetian with the "L" word. Slip up or purposeful mistatement: "Senator Kennedy has the most liberal voting record in the Senate."
The Medical debate was over when the subject of malpractice insurance costs came up:
W: "...you're now for capping punitive damages? That's odd. You should have shown up on the floor in the Senate and voted for it then. Medical liability issues are a problem, a significant problem. He's been in the United States Senate for 20 years and he hasn't addressed it. We passed it out of the House of Representatives. Guess where it's stuck? It's stuck in the Senate, because the trial lawyers won't act on it. And he put a trial lawyer on the ticket.
ETHICS 101: BIG WIN FOR W.
Stem cell research - W stood by his guns that Federal funds should not be used for embryonic stem cell research...it is not a ban, just your tax dollars can't be used for it.
Abortion - perhaps no place else was jfk's weakness exhibited:
"Now, I believe that you can take that position and not be pro- abortion, but you have to afford people their constitutional rights. And that means being smart about allowing people to be fully educated, to know what their options are in life, and making certain that you don't deny a poor person the right to be able to have whatever the constitution affords them if they can't afford it otherwise."
W responded with the zinger of "I'm trying to decipher what he just said..." and went into a passionate defense of life. He drilled Kerry with jfk's own vote against a ban on partial birth abortion.
CLOSING STATEMENTS: BIG WIN FOR W.
Peggy Noonan once noted that Democrats are great in press conferences and Republicans are better at giving speeches. The closing statement was an endorsement of that theory. jfk used the phrase "I have a plan" four times on a laundry list of items that seem small when you consider that we are at war. W didn't use the soaring rhetoric of a Ronald Reagan, but he painted a vision for the future and closed strong with his guiding belief:
"But our long-term security depends on our deep faith in liberty. And we'll continue to promote freedom around the world. Freedom is on the march. Tomorrow, Afghanistan will be voting for a president. In Iraq, we'll be having free elections, and a free society will make this world more peaceful."
This man has a core and deserves to be re-elected.
The press will try to spin it as a "tie," the CNN.com website will get swamped by DNC faithful voting on-line to say that jfk won. But at the end of the day, the man from Texas bested the man from Massachussets badly. Whatever loss of momentum his march back to the White House sustained last week has been replaced by a big, burly "MO" on his side. Thank you, Mr. President!