Lehrer Wins Hands Down

Newsmax ^ | Sept 30, 2004 | Carl Limbacher

[pypo]

From Newsmax: "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."

[pypo]

Leyher, the stealth Bolshevik candidate, wins the debate hands down. Every decent American listening, asked themselves, why is my heart pounding. Why is my blood pressure rising. Why do I want to kick Leyher in the teeth. The answer, because this Bolshevik cannot ask an impartial question. His brain is wormed out by the disease called public funding. The Bolshevik makes us angry because he cannot ask a fair question, instead pounding our leader and Commander-in-Chief with the same thing over and over and over.

Well, Leyher won. But fortunately he cannot be elected.

In the meantime he did Kerry no good. People are now disturbed at both of them. You see, Americans are tired of dissention. They are tired of attacks. They do not want to hear could of, would have, or should have. Kerry did not provide meaning or substance to what he would do. Leyher could not win it for him.

Forget the spin. These two apes tried to embarass the President of the United States. And we don't fu

[Noachian]

"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."

This was a question I had expected Bush to address when Kerry mentioned the allies he would bring on board but he never did. That was a mistake.

Bush had a buch of openings to drill Kerry with and he passed them up in the name of "gentlemanly politics."

[JoeBob2004]

And how about that "Truth Squad" that came on at the end? I don't know that guy's name but he did a pathetic imitation of a left-winger trying say that Bush lied about the number of police and troops in Iraq by comparing Bush's numbers during the debate to those of the Iraqi Prime Minister last week in the US Congress. First of all, he couldn't even read one of the numbers right, but mainly he failed to show where the differences were and why they were significant. The anchor who followed him basically poo-pooed the issue.

"Truth Squad" indeed. Where was he when Kerry stood up there and lied about Bush lying - er, now it's "misleading the American people"?

[HardStarboard]

>>>From Newsmax: "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." <<<

Fine - but Bush should have brought that up. Lerher is a known lefty.....Bush missed many chances to put the ball in the corner where Kerry couldn't get it.

Over preparation?; too much time in Florida helping hurricane devastated folks today?; nervousness?.... take your pick. Bush now has some hard work to do to undo the damage Kerry inflicted tonight.

Kerry's positions conflicted with one another: example; he wants a bigger better coalition in Iraq (ie:France and Germany) but he would destroy a 5 party coalition we have constructed against North Korea in the talks by starting bilateral talks directly with Kim.

We all know, that would be a disaster. But dows the American public realize it?

[ClancyJ]

Bush looked tired and agitated. Of course, it is understandable - he was out working today and then has to face standing there being attacked and defending himself all night.

Kerry did nothing today and merely had to lob attacks at Bush.

A lot easier to attack than take attacks and defend your decisions.

[over3Owithabrain]

Bush may have had every right to be angry, but to show that in a debate was foolish. Doesn't he remember how he beat Gore, in part because of Gore's frustrated eye-rolling and sighing at Bush's comments in their debate? Don't know why W was so off-target tonight - he acted unprepared to be offended by Kerry. The format favored Kerry - speechifying without having the give-and-take with an audience or the other candidate.

[ClancyJ]

I'm beginning to wonder about that water Bush was drinking. We know how low barrel bottom draggin' the dems will go. Would someone have drugged his water?

[Dave S]

Go to bed and get some rest. Your full of shit.

[dead]

Lehrer was fine. His questions were pretty much what one would expect.

Bush was unprepared for too many of them.

I guess he's been busy running the country, but if wants to continue in that role, he better be better prepared for the next two debates.

He didn't make any major gaffs, but Kerry came across as more decisive and direct in his answers (which absolutely shocked me.) Bush was banking too much on rote phrases and cliches ("It's hard work... I know it's hard...gotta send the right message, not keep changing it")

I don't think the polls will move either way as a result of this debate, but Bush had a perfect opportunity to seal the deal tonight, and he flubbed it.

It would really help if Bush slams the "town hall" debate. He needs to adjust. Stop listening to the "pros" who invariably stress the need to "nuance" the message. Instead, state clearly exactly what he is up to in this WOT and why his positions are better. Speak the truth and stop worrying about the spin.

[lotex]

KERRY SPENT THE DAY OF THE DEBATE GETTING A MANICURE......OHHHH WE ALL WANT A "PRETTY" PRESIDENT..LIKE PAT CADDELL SAID..WHO IN THE HELL IS GOING TO SEE HIS HANDS.................I THINK IT WILL BE THE VP DEBATE THAT WILL KNOCK KERRY OUT...EDWARDS DOESN'T KNOW SQUAT AND CHENEY CAN'T WAIT TO GET AFTER HIM

[crushelits]

Lehrer on Defensive Over Biased Questioning. PBS host Jim Lehrer was challenged Friday morning on claims that he went easy on Sen. John Kerry during Thursday night's presidential debate, while tossing verbal hand grenades in President Bush's direction designed to keep him on the defensive. "I don't know what in the world you're talking about," Lehrer told radio host Don Imus, in his only post-debate interview. "I would argue that my questions were right down the middle. There were some hardball questions for each candidate. There were some softball questions for each candidate. But for the most part they were just terrific." The bias complaint, said Lehrer, was more of a commentary on his critics than a valid criticism of his own debate performance. Still, some observers noted that Lehrer's questions largely focused on negative aspects of Bush's decision to go to war in Iraq - while avoiding Sen. Kerry's waffling on the issue, not to mention the top Democrat's long record of opposing measures to strengthen U.S. intelligence and national security. At one point Lehrer claimed that over ten thousand U.S. soldiers had been killed in Iraq, before quickly revising that number to 1,052. At the end of the debate, the PBS anchorman shook Sen. Kerry's hand - with some debate watchers claiming he gave the top Democrat a knowing wink. In 1999, the president of Lehrer's network had to resign after admitting that 53 PBS affiliates had been sharing their donor lists with the Democratic National Committee for years. In 1997, then-White House aide George Stephanopoulos revealed that President Clinton's reelection team thought it was a major coup when Lehrer was chosen to host one of the presidential debates, boasting that "our moderator" had been picked.