Obama Schools McCain At Debate

New Republic: Democrat Shows Professorial Discipline Against Increasingly Cranky Republican

(The New Republic)  This column was written by Noam Scheiber:

This was one of Barack Obama's better performances of the campaign (possibly his best), and I thought it had a lot to do with the format. All summer long--really for several years now--we've heard how John McCain excels in townhall settings. But tonight he seemed old, cranky, and downright tired as he trooped around the stage. His movements were stiff and herky-jerky--surely a product of his brutal treatment in Vietnam, but nonetheless jarring to watch. Even his eyebrows seemed bushier than usual. My hunch is that McCain has benefited from having the stage to himself in past townhall meetings. Sharing the spotlight with a much younger, more vigorous and agile man really highlighted his physical liabilities in a way that hadn't previously been apparent.

By contrast, Obama really benefitted from his years as a law professor. He was fluent and very much at ease walking and talking at the same time. He had a professor's knack for making eye contact and maintaining it while he walked a questioner through a multi-step response. And his answers were much more concrete and intuitive than I'd ever heard them. It's as though it took fielding questions from ordinary people to remind him of this latent professorial talents.

On the question of health care, for example, Obama was effective at defusing McCain's cheap anti-government rhetoric with tangible evidence at every step of the way. He explained why healthcare should be a right by describing his mother's fight with insurers during the final months of her life. He explained that the reason he mandates coverage for children is that they're "relatively cheap to insure and we don't want them going to the emergency room for treatable illnesses like asthma." And he exposed the shallowness of arguments about government intrusion by pointing out that, without regulators, insurers don't always deliver on what you pay them for. There wasn't an abstraction in the answer. Which is to say, it was professorial in the best sense (a teacher), not in the sense (highbrow and windy) that's often been applied to Obama.

Possibly the best example of this came when the debate turned to Pakistan. The questioner seemed hostile to Obama's approach: "Should the United States respect Pakistani sovereignty and not pursue al Qaeda terrorists who maintain bases there, or should we ignore their borders and pursue our enemies like we did in Cambodia during the Vietnam War?"

In response to which Obama did a number of important things. First, he provided some critical context: We wouldn't even be having this discussion had Bush destroyed al Qaeda before invading Iraq. Instead, Bush allowed al Qaeda to escape to Pakistan, from which they're sniping at our troops and destablizing the region. Next, Obama explained that we'd first exhaust other options--giving the Pakistanis an incentive to do the job themselves--before launching a strike. Only at that point, he said, and only "if we have Osama bin Laden in our sights and the Pakistani government is unable or unwilling to take them out," would he give the go-ahead. It was about as far from gratuitously belligerent as you could get--and all thanks to Obama's soothing, professorial windup.

More importantly, I thought the Pakistan exchange was the moment when son overtook father in the Oedipal drama that's been a subtext of this campaign. After Obama gave his initial response, McCain pressed the absurd line that his opponent didn't understand talking softly while carrying a big stick--that he was, in other words, erratic.

Coming from a candidate whose name has been synonymous with "erratic" these last several weeks, it left McCain dangerously exposed, and Obama didn't miss with his counterpunch. "This is the guy who sang, 'Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran,' who called for the annihilation of North Korea. That I don't think is an example of 'speaking softly,'" he said. "This is the person who, after we had--we hadn't even finished Afghanistan, where he said, 'Next up, Baghdad.'" As if to add insult to injury, Obama nearly straight-armed McCain when he tried to interrupt, underscoring not only his intellectual advantages but also his physical ones.

For his part, McCain was as lacking in coherence as Obama was fluent. He mangled his explanations and stepped on his own canned punchlines. His diction was bizarrely geriatric at times, culiminating with his inexplicable reference to Obama as "that one"--language befitting a grandchild who refuses to eat his broccoli. Though McCain has traditionally been deft at larding his responses with anecdotes, tonight was mostly argument by cranky assertion. I counted over a dozen times (14, I think) when McCain began a sentence or clause with the phrase "I know"--as in "I know how to get America working again" and "I know how to fix this economy." Great, but a lot of voters don't believe you. How about an example or two next time?

McCain faced a tough choice coming into this debate: He could make a dramatic move, which might help close the gap but could also reinforce his unsteadiness. Or he could try to look mature and reassuring, which might ease his perception problem but wouldn't instantly affect the polls. Tonight McCain pulled off an impressive feat: He managed to do nothing particularly dramatic, yet still give the impression that he's old and unsteady. I see very little for him to build on.

[skysoldier75]

What exactly is a maverick?

Not a follower, but not a leader either. If people followed him, he would, by definition, be a leader, not a maverick.

A maverick is somebody who just doesn''t really fit in anywhere -- someone who''s off all on their own somewhere.

It took Bush 8 years to become a politically isolated loner -- McCain is determined to be an isolated loner from day one.

It''s going to take an enormous amount of bipartisan support to fix all of our nation''s current problems. McCain doesn''t even seem to have the support of his own party, let alone within the opposition party.

Being a maverick during such tough political times really doesn''t sound like a big plus to me. It sounds a lot more like serious trouble down the road.

In order to receive a tax credit one must file something with the IRS. At the time of filing, the insurance company and its data will have to be entered on the tax form. A $5000 credit will be entered on line * and a subtraction will be made of the premium paid by the individual. The filer will then be entitled to a deduction from taxes in that amount and the balance will be forwarded, like any other refund, to the filer. Thus, the insurance company receives the money FIRST, but only because the filer has paid it and has a receipt. The rest of pretty easy to figure out. There is still, however, absolutely no incentive for the employer to continue paying for the insurance, and every incentive to quit in order to increase the employer''s bottom line profitablity and use said money for anything the employer sees fit. Once again, the Republicans find a way to take a idea that might benefit the people and turn it into a money making machine for business.

Obama doesn''''t seem to know that we did intervene in the Holocaust--it''''''''s called World War II.

Posted by magnetrack at 10:05 AM : Oct 09, 2008

...after Pearl Harbor was bombed and Germany declared war on us. Until then it was the CONSERVATIVES in the US who demanded we stay out of the war. joker1944
----
Obama''s conception is that the U.S. did not get involved with the European theatre, beyond Lend Lease, until Japan did its Pearl Harbor number on the U.S. Then, because the U.S. wanted help with defeating the Japanese, and Europe, being under constant attack, was in no position to help at the time. So the U.S. focused its main artillery on the European theatre, with Japan receiving full attention of both Europe and America after the defeat of Germany. His position is that we really didn ''t get all that bothered by the holocaust until after Japan attacked us and then only because it was necessary in order to free up European resources in the battle against Japan. At least that''s my take, and I see no reason to fault Obama for such an interpretation. His point, however, was that there are reasons to go to war beyond oil, beyond response to direct attack and beyond attack upon our allies. One of those is the moral imperative we witnessed with the holacaust, another with genocide in Darfur.
I personally prefer to see my President exercise great caution in throwing American lives at every conceivable slight imagineable.

[charmin1350]

Stupid stupid people. The media is liberal. They are quoting their own views and you are ready to hop on the bandwagon and agree and take their word as gospel. In my town there is rarely an Obama sign to be found. Most people I talk to would never vote for Obama. John McCain served his country honorably and now people are making comments about how he moves around. We have had Presidents in Wheel chairs, didn''t make them any less of a man or a President. I would expect nothing less from this news source. Try fair and balanced...maybe that will get your feathers ruffled

[joker1944-2009]

McCain and his campaign are becoming increasingly negative, thoughtless, impolite, and (appearing) desperate.

Posted by daffy64 at 10:47 AM : Oct 09, 2008

Can you blame them? It''s not like they can run on their record, or run away from the FACT that McCancient supported Bush 90%+ in senate votes.

The Karl Rove slime machine is in full meltdown. Too bad for the GOP but great news for the rest of the nation.

[daffy64]

McCain and his campaign are becoming increasingly negative, thoughtless, impolite, and (appearing) desperate.

Not very "Presidential".

[joker1944-2009]

Obama doesn''t seem to know that we did intervene in the Holocaust--it''''s called World War II.

Posted by magnetrack at 10:05 AM : Oct 09, 2008

...after Pearl Harbor was bombed and Germany declared war on us. Until then it was the CONSERVATIVES in the US who demanded we stay out of the war.

[joker1944-2009]

Why isn''t there ONE story on CBSnews about what''s going on with ACORN? Why?

Posted by proisrael at 10:35 AM : Oct 09, 2008

Perhaps because it''s nothing more thatn rightwing propaganda? It is amusing to hear the Republicans - of all people - crying about voter fraud and unfairness.

The Florida supreme court will not be able save you this year, nor will there be any swiftboating of Obama. Deal with it.

[magnetrack]

Did he school him in socialism, communism or terrorism. And BTW, Obama doesn''t seem to know that we did intervene in the Holocaust--it''s called World War II. Many great Americans stood up and many died to save the world from the kind of society that we risk facing again if Obama is elected.

[interobserv]

McCain will get limited mileage out of this "new" idea. Considering he stole it and actually criticized the same idea when Obama proposed it.

Desperate times call for desperate measures. And McCain/Palin are desperate indeed. From the "Hate Rally" in Tampa to the "Buy-out" idea, this campaign is getting more lame by the minute. Too bad. I really liked John McCain!

[mswolfestock]

It was painful to watch poor old McCorpse dodder around the stage . . . . .

He is a physical wreck and mentally unstable.

I wish he''d just retire.

I can''t remember when I''ve been this terrified about anything. Call me crazy, but I''m more scared about old McCorpse in the White House than I am scared about both of my retirement accounts hemorraging. The money''s lost, gone. But McCorpse in the White House will ruin America in worse ways than I want to imagine.

[presjfk]

"McCain will NOT give everyone a $5,000.00 tax credit. That will go directly to the insurance companies. His plan suggests that employers be required to provide insurance coverage for their employees, although the employees may have to pick up the tab (he''''s not clear about that) and the employees will be taxed on any health care benefits provided. For some reason, I don''''t find this plan at all helpful. Posted by Kaelinda"

I hate the McCain plan but you do not understand it...McCain would would tax the employer paid potion of your health insurance as additonal income, while also charging income tax on what you pay directly from your paycheck. Currently the employer portion is tax free and your portion is paid with pretax dollars.

Those tax monies collected would go to insurers, a bizarre notion. The tax credit you would get would apply at the end of the year on your income tax return. Here in NJ a family plan is $1200+ a month.

McCain''s heath plan is proof positive that he is out of touch and doesn''t "get it."

[kaelinda]

McCain will NOT give everyone a $5,000.00 tax credit. That will go directly to the insurance companies. His plan suggests that employers be required to provide insurance coverage for their employees, although the employees may have to pick up the tab (he''s not clear about that) and the employees will be taxed on any health care benefits provided. For some reason, I don''t find this plan at all helpful.

[skysoldier75]

McCain seems to be totally obsessed with the words "victory" and "defeat" these days, as those terms relate to the conditions necessary for us to finally end our military occupation of Iraq.

As I soldier, I know that the actual meanings of terms such as "victory" and "defeat" are relative and arbitrary, at best. It really just depends on how you want (or choose) to look at it.

As I understood the mission, we were to rid Iraq of any WMD''s there - and secondarily we were to remove Saddam Hussein from power, so as to facilitate a regime change.

There were no WMD''s - so that part of the mission was instantly completed in a totally "victorious" manner, you could say.

The secondary mission, removing Saddam from power, was also completed. We can claim total "victory" there, as well.

Our original missions are complete, and we''re ready now to come home in "victory" immediately.

All we need is a Commander in Chief that is willing to give the order.

[dinslc]

In this time of crisis in America, we need someone who keeps his cool, is level-headed, rational, calm and calming.

That person is Barack Obama.

These last few years, and especially the last month, have been downright frightening. McCain was right last night when he said we need a "steady hand".

That "steady hand" is Obama.
We can trust Obama.

We can trust him to lead our country out of these dark times, by uniting our nation and reminding us of our greatness. Obama was right when he said that Americans can do anything, when we unite, and when we all take personal responsibility for our nation.

[winkiebum]

John McCain has sold his Soul to the Right Wing Republican Clan!! I used to respect him. He used to be honorable. Now he is just reciting lines his campaign handlers feed him. He is out of Ideas, Out of time, And soon..Out of Luck. Shame on you McCain/Palin.

[tallyman2008]

Poor ol John, God Bless Him



One of his ''handlers'' should teach him how to use a microphone

However, maybe it was just me - I do have an ear for these things

But, did you hear ?

Almost every time McCain took a breath to speak


Wheezing and geezing



Poor ol John, God Bless Him



****************


And yes, like spices, pronouns should be used sparingly and judiciously


Who that who says who that when I say who that ?

Or something like that

;-)

[noloyalisti]

People want Obama to win because he is smart (unlike pResident Bush) and represents change for the better that we need. He is cool and above the petty fray of name calling. He is sick and tired of corporations running the government as we all should be since there is very little in that for us.

Besides McCain is an old used up man who represents the old used up values of the extremist conservative Republican party.

[confused241]

Why does everyone want Obama to win? I dont understand why everyone likes him? I am very interested to know because I dont see it at all. What has he done? Can anyone name 5 things he has done in his political career? In his debates he says what McCain says or even what Bush would say in the same situation. I''m trying to be fair and honest and when push comes to shove I think either way there are going to be a lot of broken promises.

Calling someone you know and have served with in the U.S. Senate "That one" instead of Barack did it for me. McCaine with that remark shows that he doesn''t understand the people of this great nation. This remark will offend whites, blacks and Jews, Latinos and the rest of Americans alike because it brings memories of people that have crossed our path in life with the attitude that if they call you names or refer to anyone with a lesser term, they are in control. All it did for McCain was to reinforce what most people now believe, that he is from another era way too far back to be able to run our nation in a mature and tolerant way ..."that one", the next president of our great country.