Finally Obama and McCain go head to head in the Presidential debate attacking and discussing issues such as the bailout, healthcare, the war in Iraq and finally why the other should not be the next president of the United States.
Aside from them both attacking each other saying the other does not know what the difference between tactic and strategy is, both also discussed complex issues such as education and families in the United States.
One quality that McCain has that the past presidents have is that he loves to hear himself talk. That is one of the most annoying qualities a president can have because that means he is not willing to listen to others around him only say how he feels on a situation and have that be the last word.
When Obama speaks he makes perfect sense. He uses intelligent words but doesn’t muddy up those words so that what his message is not completely lost. When McCain speaks it appears as though he is searching for the correct words to say, he almost looks unprepared.
Another interesting thing I noticed during the debate is the when McCain speaks Obama looks right at him and listens to what he has to say, when Obama speaks McCain looks down as if he does not know how to begin to rebut anything Obama has to say. This makes me think McCain is not prepared for the allegations against him or that he is lying to make himself look better.
Obama sounds hopeful for the future of our country and McCain seems pessimistic and doubtful. We cannot have someone in office who really does not see changes happening, we need someone like Obama who is excited to get in there and get things done.
Out of the entire debate I think McCain made one good point, but only just one. Obama talked about how he was against the war from the beginning and how back in 2003 he said he was against it, which was a bold thing to do. He also said that we should have gotten the troops out a long time ago since we did capture the one person we went there in the first place to find: Osama Bin Laden.
Then McCain said that it is not the future president’s job to say we should not have been in Iraq in the first place it is his job to figure out to clean up the mess Bush left. And this surprised me because for one that was the smart and obvious answer but it was also showed that yeah, we messed up bad over there but dwelling on the past really is not going to do us any good, which is very true.
In conclusion, Obama seemed to be the more prepared and honest of the two political scumbags, but what do I know?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Although I am not surprised to see bias in a column, I am not so sure I would fly the Obama flag so blatantly. If you are trying to swing others to your side, it would be more effective to take a balanced approach, laying out McCain's points and then counter them with Obama's. Let the reader decide.
Also...
Are you sure we went into Iraq to catch Osama bin Laden AND that we caught him?
He also said that we should have gotten the troops out a long time ago since we did capture the one person we went there in the first place to find: Osama Bin Laden.
Also, I don't recall McAin ever saying that "we messed up bad over there."
I would check those (and other) facts before publishing.
This column was written fast and under deadline, leaving off some very basic information - such as the first names of the debaters, where it was held and when the debate was held.
Three Ws missing out of five.
Ouch.
Second, this was, well, the second debate but from the writer's lead, it seems as if this is the first time they have met.
That's not good.
Also, I think that the writer needed to provide some evidence to support contentions about either competence or lack thereof.
For example:
"When Obama speaks he makes perfect sense. He uses intelligent words..."
Can the writer name one?
Likewise in criticisms of McCain, the writer needed to make some specific references.
And the last paragraph?
Any sympathy that the writer might have drummed up is lost in one word:
"Scumbags."
This goes back for a rewrite...
Post a Comment