Originally posted by nyk537
That's what I'm really excited for. There was never a doubt in my mind that Obama couldn't go toe to toe with McCain and not look like a fool, and
the Saddleback forum proved it.
I think the first real debate will completely expose Obama for the empty suit that he is. Although I think more and more people are beginning to see
that for themselves already.
OK... I can't stay quiet any longer. I suppose I could find something I care less about than whether McCain cheated at this event, but I'd have to
What I don't understand, however, is why it is that the person who responded with pre-established, sound-bite answers to questions is considered as
having 'won' the debate (such as it was... not really a debate).
Yeah, Obama stuttered around, and did not deliver a smooth speech... so what? After nearly 8 years of W's mangling of English, does anybody really
care about that? Or only if it is a member of the "other team" that does it?
From my viewing of the event, Obama was putting actual thought into his answers... agree or disagree with his positions, he was providing, or
attempting to provide, actual answers to complex questions.
McCain, on the other hand, could have been replaced by any semi-intelligent 8 year old:
"When the nice man asks this, honey, you say this."
Big freaking deal. There was NOTHING of substance in McCain's answers... just more drivel. Of which both are plenty guilty.
And McCain's obvious pandering via his frequent use of "my friends"... to people he wouldn't give the time of day to if he wasn't whoring for
Has the US sunk so low that the thought-out, real answers to real questions are less valued than regurgitated pablum?
Note: While I'm quoting nyk537 here, this response is not necessarily directed at him/her specifically. This is merely the most recent example of a
puzzling trend I have observed.