Arizona Senator John McCain squared off against Illinois Senator Barack Obama Friday night in a spirited debate. The event, held on the University of Mississippi ("Ole Miss") campus, was originally billed as a foreign policy only debate. Unfortunately nearly half the time available was spent on economic issues currently in the headlines. The format provided for a two minute answer to each question and then a five minute period for free discussion during which the candidates were permitted to address and question each other directly.
About ten minutes before the start of festivities, I surfed over to CSPAN2 to check out their raw feed. Moderator Jim Lehrer of PBS's "NewsHour" spent seven minutes sternly warning the audience about cheering, cell phones, and other possible disruptions. He repeatedly whined about how hard and important his job was going to be. Lehrer appointed Michelle Obama and Cindy McCain as persons in charge of enforcing silence in the audience, even telling them to "take names". Can anyone in America imagine Michelle or Cindy dragging an unruly protester down the aisle and out the door? It made me glad the Secret Service was nearby: you can't miss the guys with ear pieces and slight bulges in their suits. I don't think either lady could possibly be ready to muscle someone out of the hall.
The first forty minutes of the debate supposed to be about foreign policy at a time when America is at war were consumed by discussion of the bailout bill. All of sudden and thus allegedly requiring immediate action, the Bush administration has proposed a potential $700B bailout of failing mortgage lenders to prevent the collapse of large financial institutions and the credit markets. Never mind the outrageous concept of a wholesale government takeover of a significant portion of a private market, and please don't notice that the money required to do this will be borrowed from foreign investors, largely China. The whole thing smells like Sovietization of the American economy. Since when is it a good idea for the federal government to take financial responsibility for either poor business or poor personal decisions? The Democrats assert this is all the result of eight years of Bush policy to deregulate markets, ignoring the fact that the concept of offering mortgages to people who clearly couldn't afford them began under Slick Willie. Like all government money, once it began the program snowballed into a monstrosity too big to sustain. It was disappointing such a large portion of the evening was spent on blah economics. We won't be worried about Wall Street CEO salaries if America isn't secure. Dead people don't get new mortgages or invest in the stock market.
The first foreign policy question concerned the lessons of Iraq. Senator McCain pointed out his push for strategy change early on in Iraq, praised the "great" General Petreaus, and hung the potential bad outcomes had we failed around his opponents neck. Obama originally proposed a staged, sixteen month withdrawal of American forces from Iraq regardless of conditions on the ground, a policy clearly proven wrong by the success of the surge. The Illinois Senator also lauded Petraeus as "brilliant", odd praise from a man who didn't actually go to Iraq until the conflict was more than nine hundred days old. Obama was wrong about the surge and attempts to partially cover by jumping on the Petraeus bandwagon. Too late, Senator, you missed that train long ago. McCain brought the Iraq discussion into sharp focus by pointing out that Obama clearly doesn't understand the difference between a tactic and a strategy, something the liberal media glosses over almost as much as Democrat Vice Presidential candidate Joe Biden's verbal gaffes. Obama continues to claim that Al Qaeda is more powerful now than at any time since 9/11, a dubious assertion at best, and that Iraq distracted us from our fight against them and our search for UBL. Senator Obama apparently thinks the American military is incapable of multiple missions.
The question of more troops brought the candidates to the subject of Afghanistan. Senator Obama painted a gloomy picture of a resurgent Taliban and Al Qaeda running roughshod while U.S. forces are tied down in Iraq. He proposed an immediate boost of two brigades and warned of his willingness to strike at Al Qaeda safe havens in Pakistan if the Pakis are unwilling or unable to do so. Senator McCain reminded us that America had largely washed its hands of the entire region after the Soviet withdrawal and warned about the clear dangers of publicly threatening military action inside Pakistan. Obama accused the Bush administration of coddling former Paki President Musharraf, ignoring the fact that Pakistan was a failed Islamic state in possession of nuclear weapons when he took over. The candidates then conducted a "battle of the bracelets", both explaining why they wore one inscribed with the name of a U.S. soldier killed in action.
Moderator Jim Lehrer then moved the discussion to the threat of nuclear Iran. Both candidates stressed the danger to Israel and the potential nuclear arms race that would ensue throughout the region. Both gentlemen agreed that Iran with nuclear weapons would be unacceptable, but their ideas about how to get there differed sharply. Obama is sticking to his concept of direct talks. That's all well and good to sit down with whatever rogue world leader you can think of, but it lends legitimacy to them and their outrageous words and actions as well as diminishes the American presidency. Does anyone really want to see Cuba's Raoul Castro or Iran's Ahmadinejad strolling the Rose Garden or the media circus that would result from a meeting without precondition? McCain more sensibly proposed a league of democracies, an idea long overdue given the uselessness of the United Nations. No matter how many economic sanctions are proposed against Iran, Russia and China will kill them in the Security Council. Neither man was willing to unequivocally commit to military action at any point while simultaneously refusing to eliminate it as an option. The rest of the world, least of all Old Europe, will not help us with Iran, and pretending otherwise is foolhardy.
Russia was the next item on the agenda, fair enough considering the provocative military and economic actions they've taken lately. Resumption of Russian bomber flights off the U.S. coast, the occasional restriction of natural gas supplies to eastern Europe, and the invasion of Georgia have been on their hit parade recently. Obama seemed a little lost, digressing into economics and unbelievably ending his comment with a reference to global warming (huh?). Senator McCain called it like it is: Russia is a KGB-run Putin dictatorship fueled by petrodollars. McCain proposed adding Georgia and Ukraine to NATO and continuing programs to secure the "loose" nuclear weapons left from the former Soviet Union.
The final question was about the potential for another 9/11 on American soil. Both Senators claimed we are safer but not yet safe. McCain focused on border security and Obama on the danger of suitcase nukes being smuggled into the country. The question seemed like a liberal media trap to get McCain on record guaranteeing security or some such nonsense. Nice try, no bite.
McCain clearly won the foreign policy portion of the evening hands down. Whether voters clearly understand the economic issues discussed is another matter. McCain repeatedly and correctly referred to Obama as naive. The Illinois Senator shows his inexperience each time the use of American power abroad is discussed. Funny that tonight will be overshadowed by the Vice Presidential debate next week, featuring Republican Alaska Governor Sarah Palin versus Democrat Deleware Senator Joe Biden. Palin has become a political star and Biden is prone to make verbal mistakes. Should be fun.
