Posted on 09/30/2004 7:48:13 PM PDT by wagglebee
Presidential debate moderator Jim Lehrer showed once again Thursday night why top aides to President Clinton used to call him "our moderator" when presidential debate time rolled around in 1996.
The questions, which Lehrer announced at the outset had been authored exclusively by him, were supposed to help the American people determine which candidate would be a better steward of U.S. national security in a post-9/11 world.
But there were no queries to Sen. Kerry about his long Senate record of voting against defense appropriations; or his sponsorship of a bill to cut CIA funding by 6 billion dollars a year after terrorists struck the World Trade Center in 1993; or Kerry's support of the nuclear freeze movement during the height of the Cold War.
Kerry wasn't asked about why he teamed up with Jane Fonda to protest the Vietnam War while his band of brothers were still on the battlefield, or why he met with enemy leaders in Paris, or why he accused fellow soldiers of being "monsters" and "war criminals."
Most Americans would consider the answers to those questions extremely relevant to the selection of any U.S. commander-in-chief during a time of war.
But not Jim Lehrer. Instead, he focused on Iraq with question after question that suggested Bush had blown it.
Here's a sampling:
"You said there was a miscalculation in Iraq," Lehrer asked the president. "What was it and how did it happen?"
"What colossal misjudgments, in your opinion," Lehrer asked Kerry, "has President Bush made in these areas [Iraq]?"
To Bush: "Mr. President, has Iraq been worth the cost in American lives -10,052 - I mean 1,052 up to today?"
To Kerry: "You've repeatedly accused President Bush of lying to the American people on Iraq. Give us some examples of the president being untruthful on Iraq?"
Despite his focus on Iraq, however, Lehrer never asked why Kerry voted to authorize the war, then turned around and voted against the legislation to fund it. Or why he voted against authorization for the first Gulf War, even though President Bush's father had amassed just the kind of coalition Kerry says the U.S. needs now.
Likewise, the PBS host declined to ask Kerry about comments in recent days from French and German officials who announced they have no intention of sending troops to Iraq, even if Kerry is elected.
That's quite a stunning development, given that Kerry's Iraq policy rests almost solely on the promise that he'll persuade Old Europe to pitch in and take some of the load off U.S. forces.
But not stunning enough, apparently, to interest Mr. Lehrer.
I used to like Lehrer.
Not anymore. I was stunned at how he stacked the deck. It was insane.
I guess Kerry held his own. The questions did seem stacked against the President as this article suggests (my wife thought they were just flat out unfair, in fact she was angry about it).
But, I don't think Kerry walked out with an advantage from this other then he probably didn't lose any ground he hadn't already lost before going into the debate. He flip flopped on whether Saddam was a threat. He made that stupid comment about the "world test" which Bush nailed him on. He lied a couple of times (Iran sanctions) and Bush called him on that.
I know the MSM will spin the heck out of this as a victory for Kerry, but what points specifically did Kerry really make tonight? I can't think of anything that he said that made me think any differently of him. Same old flip flops, kiss U.N. butt, more troops in Iraq (some might think that's a good idea, but Bush has stuck with the small footprint strategy for good reason imo), say the President misled, tax the rich, blah blah blah.
Certainly I had hoped that Bush would be able to put him away tonight, but I don't think that happened. One thing that I would have liked Bush to counter which he didn't was Kerry's assertion that the President had left "offers that were on the table" in regards to Iraq. Now I believe what he was referring to was that some of the nations who had refused to help us fight the war, like France and Germany, had offered to take some of those rebuilding contracts being payed for by U.S. tax dollars off of our hands. Yea, those were some offers. I'm glad the President didn't take them up on that.
But perhaps being the President he thought it better not to bring that up again. Same thing with regard to Russia. He made his point in regards to recent actions being taken by Putin without it sounding like an insult to an ally.
In summary, I thought the President had to answer a lot of tough questions tonight. There is no way that the questions directed towards Kerry were anywhere near as tough. A more careful analysis of the questions themselves will bear that out I think. Kerry was lobbed at, Bush was fired upon.
But what else should we have expected from a liberal like Jim Leher? A fair fight? No way!
I was stunned. Kerry said Bush needed to fight the WOT like Kennedy and Reagan fought the Cold War. He himself opposed Reagan's initiatives that won the Cold War! It was one of those things that was so over the top that nobody could predict it. Jim Lehrer should have asked Kerry in follow-up to explain what his record in the Senate during the Cold War was and why that record makes him a good Presidential candidate now.
I read the transcript at FOX NEWS and apparently I was mistaken in this -- at least in my thinking about it. Homeland Security was part of the issues in this debate, to be sure, and the way Kerry phrased his response -- it was not as I had thought (listening and reading the threads here sometimes you miss a word or two LOL). OK so I'll give him that -- but it still seems to me that he did have a general "heads up" of the types of questions that were going to be asked.
Ping
...For a real eye opener, Read Jim Lehrer's book...
Kind of an autobiography eh? Haha.
Amazing stuff. Thanks for pointing these stacked questions out to us.
I agree with you.
sure, x-republican.
Did you sign up just to post this?
| SEN. JOHN KERRY |
PRESIDENT BUSH |
| Do you believe you could do a better job than President Bush in preventing another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States? |
Do you believe the election of Senator Kerry on November the 2nd would increase the chances of the U.S. being hit by another 9/11-type terrorist attack? |
| "Colossal misjudgments." What colossal misjudgments, in your opinion, has President Bush made in these areas? |
What about Senator Kerry's point, the comparison he drew between the priorities of going after Usama bin Laden and going after Saddam Hussein? |
| As president, what would you do, specifically, in addition to or differently to increase the homeland security of the United States than what President Bush is doing? |
What criteria would you use to determine when to start bringing U.S. troops home from Iraq? |
| Speaking of Vietnam, you spoke to Congress in 1971, after you came back from Vietnam, and you said, quote, "How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?" Are Americans now dying in Iraq for a mistake? |
You have said there was a, quote, "miscalculation," of what the conditions would be in post-war Iraq. What was the miscalculation, and how did it happen? |
| You just -- you've repeatedly accused President Bush -- not here tonight, but elsewhere before -- of not telling the truth about Iraq, essentially of lying to the American people about Iraq. Give us some examples of what you consider to be his not telling the truth. |
Has the war in Iraq been worth the cost of American lives, 1,052 as of today? |
| Can you give us specifics, in terms of a scenario, time lines, et cetera, for ending major U.S. military involvement in Iraq? |
Does the Iraq experience make it more likely or less likely that you would take the United States into another preemptive military action? |
| What is your position on the whole concept of preemptive war? |
Do you believe that diplomacy and sanctions can resolve the nuclear problems with North Korea and Iran? Take them in any order you would like. |
| Senator Kerry, you mentioned Darfur, the Darfur region of Sudan. Fifty thousand people have already died in that area. More than a million are homeless. And it's been labeled an act of ongoing genocide. Yet neither one of you or anyone else connected with your campaigns or your administration that I can find has discussed the possibility of sending in troops. |
Clearly, as we have heard, major policy differences between the two of you. Are there also underlying character issues that you believe, that you believe are serious enough to deny Senator Kerry the job as commander in chief of the United States? |
| If you are elected president, what will you take to that office thinking is the single most serious threat to the national security to the United States? |
It's a new subject -- new question, and it has to do with President Putin and Russia. Did you misjudge him or are you -- do you feel that what he is doing in the name of antiterrorism by changing some democratic processes is OK? |
He's so transparent. A seminar poster. I'm sure he got the email with McAwful's marching orders.
"Kerry wrote the questions for Lehrer!"
BINGO!
All questions were designed to attack Bush.
Everything considered, Bush did remarkably well.
In the next debate they should have Rush Limbaugh as a moderator to make up for Lehrer.
Bush didn't mention once, all the military bills Kerry opposed while Reagan was winning the cold war. This is what made Zell Miller's speech so good.
Bush should have also mentioned how Kerry slimed fellow soldiers when he came back from Vietnam.
He should have mentioned how Kerry said he was against the wall Israel was building to an Arab audience.
Then told a Jewish audience he was for the wall.
No, I heard the response, but what Bush didn't do is drive home the comparison of Kerry wanting a coalition in Iraq while advocating demolishing one in North Korea. He missed a chance to demonstrate a massive flip-flop.
I hope you are right, I think Bush deliberately stayed away from engaging Kerry, that way Kerry could not take him down, but he stumbled and paused more than he should have and appeared to lack confidence at times.
I think James Baker is slipping a little if the rest of the debates have such one sided questions it's going to be tough but most people are totally aware of the liberal media bias thanks to Stan Lather.
This will be picked apart and the stupidity and lies in Kerry's comments will be brought out. Everyone already knows where Bush stands on the issues. Kerry is the one who will lose here. Someone needs to add up all the lies and misstatements. Hope someone does a thread on that tomorrow. His comments about shutting down the subway during the RNC was one I remember.
The next debate will be much more interesting and probably be to Bush's advantage.
Amen
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.