I honestly expected President Bush to beat Senator John Kerry in the debate. In my opinion, this did not happen at least in the minds of reasonable person. At times, the President looked confused, sighed often, and appeared to run out of material. Senator Kerry finally looked like a Commander-in-Chief, he was more poised than Bush and his message finally had clear substance.

President Bush never defined his coalition. It seems to be made of England, Poland, Australia, etc? The President has a plan of action against terror that involves staying the course. Kerry was as strong as I have ever heard him. He talked about "Iraq not being the true center on the war on terror," and challenged Bush on dealing with nuclear proliferation in North Korea and Iran.

One thing that struck me in the debate is how Bush sounded like a philosophical drunk constantly repeating the same thing over and over. The President said, "Kerry sends mixed messages," basically how can Kerry be the leader of the free world if he criticizes our Allies, troops, and the Prime Minister of Iraq, "who is brave" according to Bush? The "mixed messages" rhetoric got old, real quick and was not effective as the "flip flop agenda" had been throughout this campaign. Senator Kerry scored a very key point, when he commented on the Bush's Administration continuance of building weapons of mass destruction and reversed dialogue with North Korea. What kind of message are we saying if it's okay for us and our Allies to make weapons of mass destructions, but nobody else can? How can you achieve peace, Kerry point was well taken, "end all nuclear proliferation." President Bush thinks talking to North Korea's President is a waste of time! Interesting, he expects China and several other surrounding countries keep President Kim of North Korea in check. Trust me, we will take a further look at the debate this is just an overview.

Politics

More Politics Articles