Debate Questions from Lehrer - unfair, but worth a glance

Random Transcript ^ | 9/30/2004 | Lehrer

[jrpascucci]

LEHRER: Good evening, Mr. President, Senator Kerry. As determined by a coin toss, the first question goes to you, Senator Kerry. You have two minutes.

Do you believe you could do a better job than President Bush in preventing another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States?

---

LEHRER: New question, Mr. President, two minutes. 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?

--

LEHRER: New question, two minutes, Senator Kerry. Colossal misjudgments. What colossal misjudgments, in your opinion, has President Bush made in these areas?

--

LEHRER: New question, Mr. President. Two minutes. What about Senator Kerry's point, the comparison he drew between the priorities of going after Osama bin Laden and going after Saddam Hussein?

--

LEHRER: We'll come back to Iraq in a moment. But I want to come back to where I began, on homeland security. This is a two-minute new question, Senator Kerry.

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?

--

LEHRER: New question, Mr. President. Two minutes.

What criteria would you use to determine when to start bringing U.S. troops home from Iraq?

--

LEHRER: All right, new question. Two minutes, Senator Kerry.

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?

--

LEHRER: New question, Mr. President, two minutes. 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?

--

LEHRER: New question. Senator Kerry, two minutes. 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.

--

LEHRER: New question, Mr. President. Two minutes.

Has the war in Iraq been worth the cost of American lives, 1,052 as of today?

--

LEHRER: Speaking of your plan, new question, Senator Kerry. Two minutes.

Can you give us specifics, in terms of a scenario, time lines, et cetera, for ending major U.S. military involvement in Iraq? -- LEHRER: Mr. President, new question. Two minutes. Does the Iraq experience make it more likely or less likely that you would take the United States into another preemptive military action?

--

LEHRER: New question. Two minutes, Senator Kerry.

What is your position on the whole concept of preemptive war?

--

LEHRER: New question, Mr. President. 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.

--

LEHRER: I want to make sure -- yes, sir -- but in this one minute, I want to make sure that we understand -- the people watching understand the differences between the two of you on this.

You want to continue the multinational talks, correct?

BUSH: Right.

LEHRER: And you're willing to do it...

(Kerry talks about multiway talks)

(To GWB) LEHRER: And you're opposed to that. Right?

---

LEHRER: New question, two minutes.

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.

Why not?

--

LEHRER: New question, President Bush. 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?

BUSH: That's a loaded question

--

LEHRER: New question, two minutes, Senator Kerry.

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?

--

LEHRER: Just for this one-minute discussion here, just for whatever seconds it takes: So it's correct to say, that if somebody is listening to this, that both of you agree, if you're reelected, Mr. President, and if you are elected, the single most serious threat you believe, both of you believe, is nuclear proliferation?

--

LEHRER: Well, but when he used the word truth again...

BUSH: Pardon me?

LEHRER: ... talking about the truth of the matter. He used the word truth again. Did that raise any hackles with you?

[jrpascucci]

This is not something that is going to be really noticible unless one takes a look at just the questions all in a row, with the responses edited out. They seemed almost all geared to keeping the President on the defensive.

I noticed it a little during the debate, but looking back on it, it's so palpable as to be unargueable.

[Cicero]

It has also been suggested that some of his questions seemed to pick up from Kerry's earlier responses.

For instance: "New question, two minutes, Senator Kerry. Colossal misjudgments. What colossal misjudgments, in your opinion, has President Bush made in these areas?"

Kerry had, just a minute before, accused Bush of "colossal misjudgments." Now, how on earth did Kerry know that Lehrer was just about to use that phrase in his next question? Lehrer assured the audience that he had not revealed the questions to either candidate.

Or was Lehrer lying when he said that he had prepared all the questions beforehand? Did he pick up the phrase from Kerry? In other words, is he helping kerry's attack on Bush by picking up his talking points from him?

[Sociopathocracy]

Lehrer is a piece of Leftist scum. For all his negotiating ability, couldn't Jim Baker have gotten Brit Hume for at least one debate?

[pipecorp]

Or did kerry already have the questions?

[xtinct]

Not only were the questions geared to keep President Bush on the defensive, Kerry's people probably helped Lehrer with the questions.

Additionally, Kerry more than likely approved his own questions in advance.

Regarding Kerry's discharge from the Navy in 2001, Lehrer should have ask Kerry if he was eligible to run for president. (It doesn't matter what his opinion is regarding foreign policy if we the people don't know if he is eligible to run for the most important office in the US)

Kerry should have been asked why he didn't sign the 180 form also.

I hope the Swiftboat Vets and the POW wives are at the town meeting next week.

[JOE6PAK]

Or did kerry already have the questions?

BINGO!

[ArmyBratCutie]

now, more than ever, we have to be on alert and dog every single talking point they try to make, and be positive...
Leher and Schiffler will clearly both, gear to Kerry... anyone that doubted it before , it was clear last night...

[ItsForTheChildren]

I caught a little of Lehrer's talk to the audience on C-SPAN before the debates began. If I remember right he said he might base some questions on how the candidates responded to a previous question.

Doesn't mean his questions didn't slant to the left, though.

[border bud]

Maybe he didn't tell either candidate in advance what questions would be asked.....(maybe)...but I notice he didn't say "OR A REPRESENTATIVE" of a candidate......

[Bearshouse]

I am very surprised at the tone that is set when you read just the questions asked. They appear to lead Kerry into attacks and then put Bush on the offense. I didn't catch it at the time.

[mtbopfuyn]

Not noticable? I noticied it in the first 2-3 questions. The first question was obviously a hit so I was waiting to see which way the second question was leaning. The real zinger was the 10,000+ lost American lives - sure, that was a booboo.

[Cicero]

By the way, I entirely agree with you. There is obvious bias throughout. Someone who does this sort of thing should do a close analysis of all the questions and write up a report.

[Jaidyn]

I went to bed before the debate was over because the questions had no real substance. Both men said exactly what they said at campaign rallies, though Kerry said it, then didn't say it, then said it again. Kerry is a congenital liar and doesn't have a sincere bone in his body. Even a halfwit could pick up on his bs, but most halfwits don't care. That's why they are liberals and will vote for him regardless of his rhetoric.

[satchmodog9]

And there you have it.

[EdJay]

"Leher and Schiffler will clearly both, gear to Kerry... anyone that doubted it before , it was clear last night..."

Do you really think Schieffer will be biased for Kerry? His brother is a close friend of the Bushes, was Bush's partner in the ownership of the RANGERS. Bush appointed the brother to a plum ambassadorship, the one to Australia, At lefty sites they worry he'll be slanted toward Bush. They don't like Lehrer either. I always figure if both sides hate you, maybe you are doing something right, LOL.

[gwbiny2k]

I have been watching Jim Lehrer for 25 years and I already
knew he is a shill for the socialists (aka democrats).
But he makes a huge effort to appear neutral. But he is not
good enough of an actor to conceal his facial expressions
from giving him away.

[paul in cape]

Noticed it last night, and brought it up here this morning.

HERE

[ladyinred]

I think it is clear from the questions and Kerry's well scripted answers to them that not only did Lehrer frame them to attack the President, but that Kerry knew them in advance. One example is that in the beginning, Kerry was answering a question and mentioned homeland security and said, "But we will get into that later.." They did get into that later, it was a question, but How did Kerry know that?

[ladyinred]

Lehrer was called "our moderator" by the Clinton administration. No way he isn't biased toward Kerry.

[late bloomer]

No doubt in my mind s%#tface had advance knowledge of the questions....Why should we be surprised???? IE: Rather etc.

Earlier before the debate Britt Hume had Susan Ostrich one on one for some beknighted reason and discussing the warning light box/system, Ostrich allowed as how this would not be a problem becacause in the preparation all his responses had come out under the time limit"
Shazam!