OFFICIAL- Final U.S. Presidential Debate

reply to post by bknapple32

---

Hey bk.

Agreed ... McCain blew it with the Wade v Roe response.

He also blew it with Ayers.

He was better tonight than his last few performances but I have to give it to Obama.

The details of what these men were saying is always secondary to how they say it.

As you said bk, Obama won on style and as each candidates policies are clear enough for most voters and have been for a while, it is now all about who comes across as being the most Presidential. In essence, style.

Style, being Presidential, is what is important when it comes to the undecided voters at this point in the race.

That's why McCain's camp as been attacking Obama's character lately ... they know the only way to win is to paint Obama as being un-Presidential.

And the thing is that McCain, in comparison to Obama, does not cut it. He seems awkward, negative and angry.

So taking that into consideration, anything less than a home run for McCain is a win for Obama

edit - grammar



[edit on 16/10/08 by Horza]

reply to post by TheAgentNineteen

High Five.
Looks like we agree on some pretty complex issues here.

Peoples' rights to making their own decisions must be respected until it comes to a point where those decisions are adversely impacting other people or society in a serious way. Once the fetus is viable, it is another life, so its rights must be considered alongside the mothers'.

I agree. I haven't read the whole thread, but your post was very much the way I judged the debate.

Obama's answers were so clear. Agree with him or not, he has his ducks in a row and I have a really good idea of his opinions and plans, and agree with most of them.

We watched on CNN which had the split screen most of the time. I'm guessing McCain wasn't aware that he was on camera because I thought he was absolutely comical! His eye rolls and marked blinking, brow-furrowing and looking around made him come off as... well... erratic and angry. I know he says he's not angry, so it occurs to me that he may actually have a physical problem.

I'm sorry, if he's not in the beginning stages of an illness, the man clearly cannot control his anger. And when he talks during anger, he sometimes slips his tongue in and out like a snake. VERY off-putting! In contrast, Obama is calm, cool and collected. When I think about who I want talking to other world leaders (especially those with whom our relations might be strained) it's Obama without a doubt.

McCain's air quotes when talking about the "health" of the woman in late term abortions could really hurt him with women. I mean, I know what he meant. Women could claim to have mental health problems and therefore need to have an abortion, but McCain didn't make that clear and I'm not sure everyone knows what he meant.

Also, McCain talked about Troops to Teachers... people who were in the military to come back and be able to teach without certification? I'm not familiar with this program, but I would think teachers should be certified.

Transcript


Many say it was McCain's best debate... Maybe so. But in my opinion, that's not saying a whole lot. Obama has been dependable, trustworthy and very steady in every debate.

This one floored me. I really hope there is more to the story, I cannot believe McCain is suggesting it is a good idea to take military veterans and put them into a classroom with no training, testing or certification???

SERIOUSLY not a good idea...

That would imply, then, that you could take a teacher and drop them into a military situation with no training... also not such a good idea...

reply to post by Open_Minded Skeptic

---

This mission statement below is from the Troops to Teachers site and it looks like a pretty good program by the way they describe it. I think maybe Mr. McCain just misspoke, because it looks like the whole point of the program is to help military personnel get their teaching certificates.



Link

Wait, Obama said that it will take a lot governance (cf hatchet vs scalpel) and investment -- and not miracles. McPalin said that they will balance the budget during the first term in the office, which everyone knows is bull. Now, of the two men, I'd say John is the snake oil guy.

reply to post by round_eyed_dog

---

Thanks for the info...

I was hoping it was something like that; this does sound like a reasonable idea...

From the tone of his statement, he didn't misspeak - rather, he hadn't read the description of the program and had to improvise to portray it as something positive (which it is), and unfortunately distorted the facts. And he does think that certfication isn't a mandate...

reply to post by round_eyed_dog

Thanks for the link to the Troops to Teachers program. This is exactly what we need (IMHO), for one simple reason: the best teachers are those who thoroughly understand the subject matter.

The best teachers I have had have been those who were something else before becoming a teacher. The role of a teacher is to disseminate knowledge, and one must have the knowledge in order to disseminate it. Would you take a karate class from someone who studied to become a karate teacher? Or would you prefer someone who had already spent a life practising the art? I would choose the latter; no doubt this is the reason you rarely see such a teacher with any color belt other than black.

I also see great benefit in allowing our older citizens to semi-retire in order to impart their considerable life-long knowledge to the young. That is the natural cycle of life: we are taught when young by the elders among us, we take that knowledge and expand it ourselves throughout our life, then we become the teachers for a new generation of youth when our bodies have withered somewhat, but our minds are still active and loaded with information. And semi-retired citizens can live much cheaper than those actively involved in the 'rat race': they typically have no children at home to care for, and are typically better prepared financially than someone starting out in life. As such, the cut in pay would be offset by the reduction in needed expenses.

That is not to say that someone should be allowed to be certified to become a teacher without some training; obviously that would be folly. But the training could be motivated through programs like Troops to Teachers, to bring real-world knowledge to our children. I'm also not saying younger career teachers are useless. Especially in the younger grades, where the idea is to build a basis upon which to build, a young career teacher would no doubt do much better. But later on, high school, college, vocational, re-educational schools would do little but benefit from more worldly influences.

And the cost to society would be much much less than some silly 'teach to test' scheme that doesn't work.

There is a more partisan move to this as well, although I think it pales in comparison to the benefits (and may even be a benefit unto itself): a large percentage fo teachers today have a left-leaning political bias, and this bias is coming out more and more. The military traditionally leans right, which would serve (IMO) to even out any political bias in the school systems.

I consider this one of the best ideas I have heard in a long long while!

TheRedneck

im sorry, but you will never convince me that a troop, with no credentials, a simple high school diploma, is now somehow just as qualified as a teach with a masters degree. nope. sorry. not gonna happen. How does battling in Iraq make someone more able to teach math? Ridiculous. The most ridiculous proposal I have heard from a candidate in a while.

You want vets to come home and give speeches, fine. You want them to teach p.e? fine. but thats it. Leave teaching to teachers, leave fighting for out country to the troops.

You would think that the Repulicans could have picked a better actor its almost like they want for us to vote for Obama.

I didn't watch any of the other debates and decided to give it a go and saw a very savy Obama and an angry Mcain.

I will vote for neither and hope for the best since the PTB have already decided whom will win. I don't understand why people even think they have a voice after the last 2 elections and the bail out bill fraud.

At least we have the illusion of choice.

As an outsider looking in, I have watched the debates recently with interest. I must ask a question to whom it may concern, I understand you may not want Obama as president, its your opinion and your right.

But I can not work out for the life of me, why anyone would vote for John Mcain, he comes across as he would say just about anything to get elected.

He didnt appear to offer any solutions to your problems in the debates, only saying "I know how to fix it" on every subject. And when saying that exact same thing on your econemy, one wonders if thats true then why doesnt he help out his current president and fellow republican on that matter.



[edit on 16-10-2008 by Horus12]

reply to post by TheRedneck

---

That scares me. You want to give troops the job as teacher to a troop to even political bias. Sickening that you would use the education system to try and help out the republicans. Even more reason why its a bad idea. And no thanks, I dont want a professor in college teaching me, who's only experience is a war. I want someone qualified to teach the subject.

This debate made McCain look bad. He was not eloquent. Obama debated him in circles. I started to think McCain was on drugs because his eyes kept blinking furiously. Isn't that a sign of dishonesty or something?

I still think Ron Paul would have been a better Prez.

I bet Obamas really a sinister NWO croney in the bilderburgs pocket or something. He can't possibly be what he seems. Nobody in Washington is.

If Obama is the president and he actually brings all the reform to the education system and the healthcare system that he claims. That would be good.

I wish he was more direct about ending the wars and not just dependence on foreign oil. Bush says he plans to start a war with Iran before the new president takes office. That's quite a turd to leave for the next man to clean up isn't it?

I also wish his economic plan demanded more transparency on wall street and in the banking system, and how about some punishment for the criminals who destroyed our economy. I want to hear about CEO's getting the electric chair not half million dollar spa visits, for what they have done.

edited to fix a typo

[edit on 16-10-2008 by guyopitz]

reply to post by bknapple32

Neither will anyone convince me of that. You apparently didn't read my post thoroughly. No matter, I can rephrase what I said here:

The lifetime experiences of someone who has worked outside the educational system will be of great benefit to teaching our youth. Part of the problem is that our educational system is separated from the reality of performing a real-life job, and does not therefore perform as well as it should. This experience in reality would have even more pronounced benefits in the higher grades and in secondary education (college, vocational, etc.).

Every person who wants to become a teacher after years of experience should definitely pass all the required higher education courses and certifications that any teacher today must pass. I am simply stating that the experiences of considering a teaching career later in life would benefit the children. From the article:

(Emphasis mine)

That sounds like nothing more than a program to help those who have served in the military (which by definition includes many high-tech fields) to make a smoother transition into a career as a teacher. No certifications are being ignored, and no education requirements are being bypassed.


Ah, perhaps you did read my posts. Are you unaware that there is a left-wing bias in many of our schools already? Are you OK with this, now that you have been told of it?

I did not endorse introducing political leans into the educational system. I stated it as a potential reason for the program, and mentioned that it has already been happening on the other side. You, on the other hand, were no doubt aware of the left-leaning bias that exists, and are now crying "foul" because you don't want to lose that advantage.

I would say your obvious agenda to maintain (and extend?) the present bias in our school systems is what is sickening. I can think of no other reason anyone with your record of debating would jump so harshly at an observation.

Pardon me, your bias is showing...

TheRedneck

reply to post by DreamTrekker

---

Agreed on their differences. But I personally believe that the only way to attract businesses in America for Capitalist reasons is to have a middle class that can both be able to work and afford to be "good" consumers.

McCain won't act as a capitalist, he will act as a blind corporatist in my opinion. Capitalism is not merely about individual wealth, if it were Adam Smith wouldn't have titled his book "Wealth of Nations". It is also about collective wealth, which is much different than "redistribution of wealth".

As an American, I want a strong capitalist economy. And it it requires that governement use some socialist tactics to enable the capitalism, then so be it. Any system which is extreme one direction or another will fail. Only those systems which hybridize the best of both systems will be strong enough to overcome the obstacles which lay before it.

Good post!

The thread seems to be ending, so perhaps a snapshot of the end of the debate would be appropriate.


Mod Edit: Removed photo.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 16-10-2008 by GAOTU789]

For those of us who have read each candidate's stand on the issues, thought them over and how they would relate to the future of our country, it's not a difficult choice to make at all. The real tragedy is that there's no true "conservative" in the Republican position, just a "conservative-type".

Possible description lines:

1. McCain recovers after swallowing a bug
2. McCain finds Obama's policies too hard to swallow
3. Obama really enjoyed the beans and hot sauce for dinner
4. McCain practices an on-stage heart-attack for Nov. 4
5. And you thought McCain didn't have a sense of humor!

Mod Edit:Removed Photo.

[edit on 16-10-2008 by GAOTU789]

reply to post by TheRedneck

---

Yet mccains own words stated that these troops would not need to pass any certification tests. I think thats very wrong. And as you might think there is a left wing bias, I think college students are smart enough to avoid it. We are not so easily manipulated. go to a website called ratemyprofessor.com On it, descriptions of most any prof from any college are recorded for students to pick their classes. A lot of them say that x teacher pushes their political views left or right and to watch out. We dont want a keith olbermann teaching us as much as we don't want a Sean Hannity.

[edit on 16-10-2008 by bknapple32]