[supercat]

Well that's a lousy rule. Charts and diagrams are helpful in explaining things. The politicos (including Bush) who created these debate rules obviously want to keep Americans dummied down.

The purpose of the "debates" is to show how candidates can do without such aids. While it puts excessive attention on certain candidate attributes that are in reality not all that important, there is some merit to seeing candidates on their own without aids or aides to help them.

If someone brings a crib-sheet to an SAT, they will be forbidden from taking the test at that time, and perhaps in future as well. Although the SAT testing facilities provide ample blank paper for people who wish to work out problems, I would expect that someone caught bringing in a blank sheet of paper would likely face sanctions just as surely as someone bringing a crib sheet (to ensure that people don't scheme to "test the system").

It seems very clear that Kerry broke the rules, and very likely that he broke the rules with deliberate intent (i.e. cheated).

[Kackikat]

Kerry could have pulled a white hankerchief from his pocket for hot lights, however it could have a few notes to remind him of points he needed to make during debate.

Both men had a white sheet of paper in front of them on podium and a pen if they needed to take notes.

The microphone for Bush was not positioned properly.

I am sure Kerry will have an explanation of some sort.

[Commie Basher]

The purpose of the "debates" is to show how candidates can do without such aids.

That may be, but it's a silly purpose. I don't care whether a candidate can memorize numbers and stats. In real life, he'll be surrounded by advisors. Reagan was famous for delegating, and he did great.

If someone brings a crib-sheet to an SAT, they will be forbidden from taking the test at that time,

Well, SATs test knowledge. The purpose of these presidential "debates" is not to "win" the debate, but to allow us to hear the candidate's policy positions, and perhaps discern their character, then compare them side-to-side.

These "debates" are so anal-retentive, so constricted and controlled, their purpose seems to be to hide the candidate, to prevent the candidate from making any slip-ups or allowing us to see the real person.

Is it clear that Kerry cheated? If so, I expect it will be all over talk radio and Fox News. I wonder if the undecideds and moderates will care?